There was also a three year old killed by anti-regime protestors which has heightened the sentiments of pro-regime protestors.
The Iranian anti-regime movement is very well established and is not the product of foreign intervention. It's actually not all that clear that foreign actors in the region favor regime change!
(I'm not holding out much hope that these protests will actually topple the regime, though it would be amazing if they did.)
> "Unverified reports indicate that at least several hundreds, and according to some sources, more than 2,000 people may have been killed," IHR said in a statement, adding that according to its estimate, more than 2,600 protesters had been arrested.[1]
> However, starting with reports from a handful of Tehran hospitals, an informal, expatriate group of academics and professionals calculated that protester deaths could have reached 6,000 through Saturday.[2]
> IHR said that "according to some estimates more than 6,000 may have been killed", but warned that the almost four-day internet blackout imposed by the Iranian authorities makes it "extremely difficult to independently verify these reports".[3]
[1] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-protests-us-trump-death-to...
[2] https://time.com/7345347/iran-protests-death-toll-estimate-t...
[3] https://www.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20260112-live-iran-...
They love to imagine that the suffering of a populace is some guarantee of both a revolution and the success of that revolution. For some reason the near-total destruction of Syria and ongoing conflicts in the MENA region don't seem to register. At this point I'm convinced that social media creates an environment that rewards wishcasting more than logical analysis based on precedent.
This doesn’t seem very different than the 2008 and Mahsa protests.
Most likely there will be an internal reorganization towards economic reform and moderate social policies.
This time, there's no calls for conciliation or change, it's outright "death to the tyrants" and an astonishing number of people hitting the streets. They're burning down mosques, tearing down statues, burning out police stations, lynching regime officials, going to officials houses and dragging them out, and so on.
Also, it's been going on for 16 days at this point, and for some reason, is noticeably absent from world media. That feels significant, somehow.
It might have been a possibility if Israel didn’t decide to start a war and assassination campaign against Iran.
I agree that these types of things galvanize a population.
Sometimes better to just let sleeping bears sleep.
1. The jamming/disruption is local to large cities most notably the capital, Tehran.
2. Even in Tehran it is not complete and my friends are able to send and receive messages. Uploading videos is harder.
3. The regime is now raiding homes that they suspect have Starlink terminals. I don't know how they identify them but I do wonder if they are using technology to locate them.
Interesting thing is that they say they never seen such a beautiful country with even more beautiful people. Also they said they filled up two full car tanks for ~5€.
Their conclusion is that people there live much better life(more fulfilling) then people in western countries.
It's my understanding Iran polices the ISPs, who aren't assigning IP addresses at this time. Iran could treat the dishes as contraband, but short of working with Starlink, is there a practical way for them to prevent satellite internet? You could flood all channels with packets like a jammer or something, but doing that at nation-scale still seems impractical to me? I'm not an expert in any of these fields, just asking really
Easiest way would be to fly drones or planes around and look for the dishes. Should be possible to receive and triangulate the signals.
The problem for Iran regime is that they are busy putting down the uprising.
A related question that someone here may be able to answer: Who wins the jamming game in principal? Is it $JAMMER or $COMMUNICATORS?
It seems like Starlink could distribute secret codes[0] on each device, where each code is used in some kind of spread spectrum scheme, and that jamming all of the codes would be difficult, the wider the spectrum? There must be some kind of energy/bandwidth tradeoff, but what I want to understand is if the game is easier for one side in principal.
(It's "in principle" BTW.)
It depends on the Jamming power and the satellite beamforming how close you would have to be to jam it.
This is not the case for GPS because GPS is receive-only and the satellite doesn't listen for user transmissions (although you could still try to jam the control uplink to prevent synchronization which would decrease accuracy over a few days, but then you would have to be close to the GPS control stations and you'll probably get arrested soon)
"Bitchat for Gaza – messaging without internet"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45929358 14-nov-2025 292 comments
Perhaps also other such apps like Briar, Birdy, Meshtastic/Meshcore ?
No, they're not.
... I mean, I'm not sure anyone cares _that_ much about the Director-General of the BBC.
Trump gonna declare himself president of Iran in Wikipedia.
The revolts in Iran are backed by US/Israel. They openly brag about it on every channel. They don’t care about Iranian‘s freedoms. They are the same who support every dictator in the region if and only if that dictator accepts Israel‘s dominance.
Edit: Yeah, let’s downvote instead if arguing.
Edit 2: https://x.com/ggreenwald/status/2010798811288133695
> Glenn Greenwald:
> Trump's former CIA Director and the largest newspapers of the Israeli media can state explicitly and clearly that the Mossad is all over the protests in Iran, and yet still people will deny it and say only a conspiracy theorist could believe such a crazy tale.
This, for the most part, is self inflicted by the Iranian regime.
For example, it's interesting that the US would declare Jolani a terrorist if they were in support of his regime.
There was a large bounty on his head until recently because of his atrocities.
Iran hasn't threatened to destroy, they have made it their stated mission to "annihilate" Israel. I doubt Israel would have any ill-will towards Iran if Iran didn't first say that about Israel.
1. Jolani was propped up by Turkey not Israel, their relations are still tense. E.g. Jolani has been massacring the Druze which are Israel's allies, while Israel-Turkey relations are only getting worse.
Unsure where so many get the idea Israel is excited about an ISIS veterans regime on its border that regularly massacres civilians including on-brand mass rapes, kidnappings, beheadings, cutting hearts out etc
The US had previously imprisoned Jolani and had a 10 million reward on his head until 2024, so, that also doesn't align with your narrative
2. Western governments make sure not to meet the crown prince in a state setting or using high dignities, as to limit their support
3. The Shah government was terrible in some respects but still arguably superior to the current one, in any case hopefully Iranians can find their own new way once they get rid of their current fascist theocracy
4. There is no real evidence that the local revolts are supported by the US or Israel. It is naturally the regime propaganda stance as authoritarian regimes usually turn the blame outwards rather than face their failures (environmental disaster, raging inflation, sanctions, complete regional defeat, unwanted religious laws)
5. Not many dictators in the region historically "accepted Israel's dominance" so I don't think you have many supporting points for your sweeping statements
Probably accurate, but I think if Israel sincerely objected to Jolani's leadership in Syria, a state visit to the White House would not have happened.
Read into that what you will.
Perhaps because they openly provided support to them for years: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/report-israel-treating-al-...
2) Nobody is asking to "accept Israel's dominance", but dropping the "Destruction of Israel" as one of the main goals of the state would be a quite welcome.
The world does not revolve around Israel, and the less bloody dictators it has (theocratic or not) the better.
I despise the Iranian regime, but knowing what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, I find it quite troubling that people are quite giddy about this as though it's not going to result in many lives lost (many more than what the regime is currently responsible for), and destabilisation of the country.
And given the USA's track record in regime changes, and the issues they have in their own country currently, I don't think the US - nor Israel - have any standing to be carrying out a regime change in another sovereign state.
Downvoted!
Criticism of Western liberalism is not one of them.
Please enlighten us with some of this easily verifiable information.
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cj691w2e840t?post=asset%3A8b0d...
"... there will be plenty of voices around Trump advising him to be careful if he does go down that route. The Trump administration would be careful, because the consequences of regime change would be extremely complex ..."
And I'm not talking about university. I'm talking about the hoards of kids that want to play Roblox. It's been a nightmare keeping my kids off of it but I continue to fight the online lifestyle! </sarcasm>
