Iran prior to the revolution was still seen by Salafis/Sunnis as a Muslim country and part of the Muslim world. It just had a secular tyrant leader in the Shah who was a rafidee but not an extreme rafidee who wanted to expand rafidee ideology to neighbouring Sunni states. The Shah was concerned with global diplomacy, secularism and progressiveness and developing Iran on the World Stage, but did not necessarily subjugate Sunni Muslims. And he didn't have a Shia expansionist ideology.Since the Iranian Revolution there is no Salafi/Sunni who considers Iran to be a Muslim country. It is viewed as a Rafidee priesthood that seeks to oppress and forcibly convert Sunni Muslims both inside and outside of Iran. Iran's actions across the Arab world only enforce this truth. Iran at one time occupied 4 Muslim countries (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen) 5 if you include Ahwaz and its meddling in Bahrain and it's ambitions to overthrow the Saudi custodians of the Haramayn are well known. So while Whites and Iranian diaspora are constantly referring to an "Islamic revolution" the truth is that in the Islamic heartlands there is nothing that is Islamic about the revolution and Iran was seen as nominal Muslim country under the Shah but is now seen as a rafidee crypto-Zoroastrian priesthood having nothing to do with Islam by Sunni Salafis from as far as Indonesia to Morocco.
>>18589514Unironically there’s evidence to suggest that if the shah was never overthrown, religiosity in Iran wouldn’t have declined so much and the country would be far more Muslim than it is in our timeline.
>>18589514Twelves are kafirs since their beginning, Ismail the butcher was a creature of shaytan straightly sent from hell
>>18589543But cultural rafidees like the Shah who don't practice it are less problematic by far.
