The author refers the Iranian leadership as "mullas", which is a common term used to disrespect an Islamic scholar in todays age. He also claims that the leadership have little or no expertise, referring to the Iranian leadership he writes—"they have little or no expertise in many other matters: scientific, political, economic, educational, military, etc.". He says this audaciously for a nation who has ranked 2nd in stem cell, 4th in nanotechnology, 17th in science production, reverse engineered RQ-170 in mid air and bought it down, detected and shot down the RQ-4A, swept out ISIS and US sponsored terrorists and made the Iranian people prouder and safer than ever before.
No nation is perfect and Iran is no exception. In March 1979, 99.3% of Iranians voted for an Islamic republic in a referendum, even today the people are overwhelmingly in support of the Islamic republic which cannot be seen through the lense of the corrupt western media outlets which have become an important source of our information.
I would like to encourage the author to continue his research on Iran and I whish him luck.
The Iranian nation is governed by Islamic principles—no man is above law.
It is true that Iran is lead by a supreme leader, but he too is accountable to law. If the leader ceases to be just, he ceases to be the leader.
Inadvertent shooting down of the plane is more likely to occur in countries with a fog-of-war. The author needs to eloborate on how he has linked a human error with a political system, and how he has concluded that one is better than the other to avoid such situations.
Iran is a republic, has an elected prime minister and above all have the right to choose a political system that they deem fit for them. A mixture of theocracy and democracy is what explains the Iranian system, not autocracy.
The author needs to explain which type of democracy he has to offer and if it is any different from the western-style.