Dude many countries spend billions dollars to have influence in other countries from colonialist Western countries to countries like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, etc... These money is a part defence budget and they are not comparable to the money that other countries spend to have influence in other countries
If Iran doesn't spend for her allies in her region it should fight against her enemies inside her boarders and it will lose her leverage and power against her enemies and rivals in her region
Spot on. Some people are too obtuse to acknowledge how Iran's backing of allies in the region serves her own security as much as that of the communities Iran is supporting therewith.
Simply put, the Islamic Republic's regional architecture of alliances is one of three or four paramount instruments of deterrence wielded against powerful existential enemies, on par with the nuclear program and the massive missile arsenal. Which is precisely why the USA regime always planned to negotiate follow-on deals to the JCPOA, in order to neutralize the effect of Iran's ballistic missiles as well as to have Iran end any and all meaningful support for partners throughout the region.
None of these individuals seems to have asked themselves the obvious question why Washington, Tel Aviv and Brussels have been so insistent in their demand that the Islamic Republic halt military assistance to its allies if said assistance was indeed nothing but a burden to Iran rather than a guarantee against foreign aggression.
You correctly pointed it out, had it not been for Iran's support to HezbOllah, to the Palestinian Resistance and so on, then the enemy wouldn't be confining its provocations to occasional hit and run attacks by terrorist proxies based across Iran's borders, nor to sabotage operations which have blatantly failed to alter the balance of power. No, they would have acted far more aggressively on the military front and would have been enabled to take a major step towards downright, full fledged military aggression. Then Iran would probably not be giving less than fifteen or so martyrs a year from among her border guards, but several times that number.
Simply put, Iranian backing of the Resistance is serving several simultaneous purposes, one of which undeniably is Iran's own security, stability and territorial integrity. Every person with basic observation and analytical skills ought to be readily discerning this. Instead, some prefer to invoke "Persian" versus "non-Persian blood" as factors of concern to the Islamic Republic, as if the Iranian leadership was motivated by racialist considerations like those who make these comments appear to be themselves. A classic case of projection.
As for the obligatory "armchair general" type of comments, they emanate from users who lack actual expertise in this area but speak based on anecdotal experience and/or on a viewpoint informed by political bias, restricted to a handful of cherry-picked, random elements but oblivious to scores of hypothetical alternate explanations. Which inevitably results either in emotive sloganeering ("the IR doesn't value the blood of Iranian citizens"), or in shallow commentary with a pretense of punditry.
Rest assured that the same users who asser Hamas are better equipped than Iranian forces, would be holding the exact opposite discourse had they claimed to be speaking for the Palestinians; i.e. they would be blaming Iran for not "sending enough military aid" to Hamas hence the latter's toll of martyrs at each new round of zionist military aggression (which for reasons stemming from the vastly different nature of the respective forms of conflict, exceeds losses of Iranian border guards, something that doesn't seem to have occurred to the users in question).
Likewise, some commenters seem to believe that the partial, incomplete knowledge a conscript may gain access to during his military service, is somehow sufficient to draw far reaching conclusions about the way Iran is policing her borders, the limitations and choices she is facing in this regard and so on and so forth. I also cannot but sense a tinge of disdain towards our border guards, who are practically portrayed as incompetent, naive adolescents structurally incapable of living up to the requirements of the task at hand. Of course the narrative is then spun so as to blame government and military officials, who are accused of eagerly sending these recruits to their deaths for some bizarre reason none of the users could offer a rational explanation for, but the deprecatory take on regular Iranian border troops remains an intangible subset of this discourse.
