News is the news, facts are the facts, as of right this moment, popular media outlets are saying more than 2500 deaths have occurred amidst the protesting that have been going on in Iran over the past few weeks.
In addition, a U-Haul truck (we'll circle back to that shortly) mildly drove into a crowd of protestors in Los Angeles, California near a federal building on Veteran Avenue last Sunday about 3:30pm, supposedly that were in tune with the current large and popularly known about protests and protestors in Iran; although no one was injured, it may signify a number of dimensions of the current, the past, and what may become of the future.

Now let's discuss some of the underpinnings, philosophies, history, and concerns. Making this quick, because this write-up is not intended to be a template/boilerplate for either more developments, or to maintain unwanted strife.

Concept one, is that media might portray that Iran is comprised of a simple 2-sided dichotomy (redundancy left). Whereas, one side are Shiite hardliners, and the other side an easier going perhaps some Sunni, some remnants of Sufiism claimed, but altogether not depicted as hardliners and extremists.

Obviously in a nation as old as Iran, that sort of simplicity, Shia vs anti-Shia, or Shia vs Sunni, can't possibly exist.

A next big question could be, what is all the protesting in Iran currently about, or really about?
Is every protestors on the same page, especially given the incidence or frequency of protesting over the years?

The Big Beautiful Bill was written up in the US, which incidentally, had a number of reiterations, was long in word length, but when all the redundancies are deleted, possibly, the wordage could be markedly shorter; there were a lot perceivable references to fight readiness in the Middle East, months before the protesting going on in Iran right now.

Problems may exist in Iran insofar higher, but not the highest, layers of government strata, whereat there appear to be some individuals generally monopolizing the situation for their own benefit, like padding their pockets; worst, drug money and power.

The rule that as in any government, after a while, there are bad apples that go corrupt, and spoil the bushel.

Basically at this point, the US in the day of the President at the helm, and Commander in Chief of the military, is seriously considering intervention and possibly military action in consideration of the escalated level of protest violence, death toll, and perhaps discomfort at some of the political positions taken up by the government now in charge, in Iran.

This is where matters start getting murky.

At a far extreme, if the current regime (of Iran) is completely completely removed, if such a thing could conceivably exist, would it solve the worst that protestors are protesting against? The part about -if complete removal of every iota and individual from government and future government, might be impossible, a willow of the wisp,- might have given away or at least a clue to what is being alluded to here. There is the concept of what can briefly be called the pool if qualified people, such as to lead, direct, etc.

In a very small village comprised if a hundred people and ten families, often the pool of qualified and thus prospective leaders are the elders of the village, but not so old they can't function. Qualities such as certain amount of education, mental stability or certain to have sanity for at least the time in government seat, financial prowess, in leveraging positions with the village's neighbors so the village people can eat from trade and food imports, and plausibly the people are familiar enough with the leaders they know who to reach out to. Trust.
So, whether the leaders are Democrats, Republicans, mainly Sunni or mainly Shia, at the end of the day, if only a handful of qualified people are available, the qualified people more often than not, fill the referent seats. The other personal aspects of their religious practices, government philosophies, schools of thoughts, and so forth,  will have to be worked with or worked around.

Neighbors of the village know, not to completely eradicate the qualified pool of people of their neighboring village, from the old days, or these days, nation, as if the only people that remain to lead or chaotic incompetent inexperienced individuals, then there is a high likelihood that the whole village or nation is going to be a corrupt danger to them and all their neighbors, plus, if they have a good or resource, like food or raw materials that the neighbors need to eat, they won't survive or seriously risk losing access to those needed resources.

Perhaps the real story, in Iran, is who are the individuals that should stay, and who should go or be moved to a different position, in an individual by individual, case by case basis.

2500 plus persons dying, clustered in a close timeframe, these days can be a sign of failure. The failure might not just be on the part of those local to the country where it is happening.

The world has been a witness in recent decades enough to bring it up, of people killing their own people to drag other nations into a war with them.
Frankly, nations today, even the people in large are aware of the gambit, russ, scheme, and do not like it. 

While the situation of loss of life due to protesting in Iran is going on, what are the numbers of loss of life due to situations like hunger, in Sudan, 30 million?, loss of life in Ukraine and Russia, and boots on the ground with a flag on the sleeve isn't happening there to common knowledge; so why the hot toward Iran?

It's an ugly question.

Part of the reason it's an ugly question, is the long-standing notion that some people out here are about nothing more that the destruction of Islamic civilization and cradles of Islamic civilization. Some people are looking for the fodder for hums trafficking, rife prostitution, rife pornography, no wife belongs to their husband, no daughter minds any respect to their parents, nudity in the big screens and entertainment centers, and that's just the beginning. Destroying the constructs, the books and book holdings, they think, will help in the process of making way for the things they enjoy, referring to ignorant boys. The stalking.

Unfortunately, some people think that the US, along with fine other locations, are hotbeds from where those boys emerge from. So when mass destruction tools start looking like they are about to aimed at an Islamic area, while there's tons of other baloney going on in the rest of the world, it's starts simmering up in the blood as an issue.

In no particular order, these words, an order not all that necessary, get the points out there.

The savior matter. Back in 1978 1979, when the current regime, or regime change took place, pretty much Shia with the Ayatollah Khomeini as the hallmarks, took place, it was perceived by some, maybe not all, as a way to 'save' Iran. Some that may have accepted the change understood that there may be aspects they disagreed or were uncomfortable with, but willing to move forward with it, a sacrifice of some sort for the larger accomplishment.
Let's face it, Iran and Persia have or has been around a long time, perhaps since the start of civilization. There's been at least 88,000 Prophets. 1 or 2 individuals the political party since civilization started until now, may not have been the practicality. Eventually, things might change. 100 ft man is hard to fit at the desk at the government office designed for a 6 ft man.

At the start of 2026, the savior, to woes or disagreements, or to a return to 'paradisical aspects' that may have been or perceived to have been in Iran slightly before Khomeini, may be a case of the grass appears greener on the other side of the fence.

The Shah, referring to the days slightly before Khomeini, had security forces, military forces, spy mitigation methods, crackdowns on uprisings, as is expected in any nation or regime. (There's no guarantee that the old regime re-installed is not going to have crackdowns, that could be more severe than the ones now, on people that try to usurp or disrupt the government.)

The Shah is reported to have discussed the prospects of there are smart moves, and there are smarter moves, where the former may have appeared on the orima facie more appealing, but the latter more viable in the long term. For example, loosely translated, he told one official, 'you're not going to be happy until Russia has taken us over, or we are lost to Russia', and that's why such and such a move is not as smart as you think it is.


Both regimes Shah and Khomeini, had bright aspects, smart moves, smart people, but each may not have been an exact carbon copy of the other.

Does one correct aspect mean that one government should stay and not let the other one in, and vice versa?

With 2500 persons dead, everybody has to pay attention.
There is a popular math formula, known as the law of proportionality, when one aspect increases, if it increases, ipso facto, so does the other aspect, ie y=kx. Today, typically the higher the death toll, especially if those missing are going along with similar policies, the more media attention the situation gets.

It is understood that in the undercurrents of affairs pertinent Iran, are international relations with respect to Palestine and Israel. Unfortunately In today's era, sequences having to go with how to settle things in the Middle East often dwindle down to bomb dropped here, responded to by bomb dropped in another spot, then another bomb or missile strike, responded to by more of the same, over and over. The constructive methods of reaching peace, like having high levels meetings with everyone at the table seems rare and overshadowed.

There is the subject of how the big demon works- through being sneaky, in the little things, and ways that are hard to see. A few weeks ago the toll from protesting in Iran went from 20 persons, to over 2500 as of the end of the second week of January. What happened to the gradations on the way, 100 persons, 300 persons, 500, 1000, 1500, 2000?

U-Haul trucks have been used at other times in the recent past to carry out messages on matters where there may be political/ religious/philosophical disagreements.

Holding a, protest, near a federal building, over another government or nation's situation, regardless of which side of the dichotomy one is on, brings up some questions. It is as though the government is being asked to get involved with another nation's affairs. Why would a group be doing that?, really be doing that. If the US gets involved, ie in a conflict zone, it has dangers, it means potential loss of life of US soldiers is almost inevitable. So why stir the motivation? Why not ask or stir someone else?
We the US are not trying to send our teenagers into war zones where we know they will get hurt. We've already been through the War known as Vietnam, and went through experiences in the surrounding region, Laos, Cambodia, et al, and lost many, and done are still healing, of those that are alive. Intervention in recent Middle East conflicts have also taken their tolls, the new Vietnam is getting older now, with folks in their 60s now, still dealing with psychological trauma. Starting up with Iran is not really a fit for today's times.
Iran is a pivotal nation, sitting at the crossroads of just about every philosophy and religious practice in the Middle East. Making odds with Iran or the people within it, indelible scars, and the rest of the sequences commonly associated with intervention, is almost automatically going to start a can of words slithering out all over the place lasting for years and years, danger after danger, with no fruit gained. In sum, it's not healthy, especially when there are other ways to solve the problems in Iran.

Arguably, protesting of the kind in Los Angeles recently, up on the federal building, is not allowable by homeland security protocol. As an illustration, what could occur did occur, the opposing viewpoint shows up and does something extremely dangerous. What if a truck were to go awry, lose a tire and crash into a federal building, and federal employees get hurt inside?, then both sides of the protest are liable, and law enforcement is liable to, for failure to disperse and preempt potential hazards.

U-Haul is a company designed to help people move their belongings from house to house, a resource that helps make America great.
Free speech, free to gather, to make or makes America great.
Streets and highways, that are actually paved, assists and facilitate making America great, not solely just the place to ride vehicles en route acts of terror or protest. 
The same lines apply for trains and their stations, and airplanes and their airports.

Conjecturably there might be a range of small time politicians jumping up and down saying they condemn the actions on protestors in Iran; with chance that some of them are nearly clueless to the background of Iran. Typically, as long as there is a pro such and such policy that is in sync with preponderant policy views, it can be real easy for a politician to make his or her way to to the media and pander for some votes, on issues salient. Rarer though is sincere genuine effort to go through the pains involved with what really brings about betterment, which might not be standing around on a social media platform in a flashy suit yacking.