WI No Iranian Revolution

Lordroel

That's a possible POD that could have some interesting effects. If the Soviets still occupy Afghanistan, while the latter is largely Sunni possibly a moderate and forward looking Iran is the main ally and condurate of arms to the rebels rather than Pakistan? Which could moderate the spread of extremism in that country as well.

Iran is still likely to have problems with religious extremists and people like Khomeini will still seek to seize power but a reformist Shah could gain a lot of support from popular and commercial elements who were the back-bone of the movement to overthrow the Shah OTL until they were effective couped by Khomeini when he established his dictatorship and personality cult.

If Saddam tries a clash with an Iran in the midst of reform that could be very hairy as the Soviets might feel they need to support him while the US [and probably UK] are likely to support Iran. [Especially with the Soviets in Afghanistan as it might seem that the west's major Muslim ally is threatened by the Soviets and their proxies]. I suspect it wouldn't come to a major shooting war and also Syria is likely to support Iran against its old enemy so Iraq would be highly vulnerable, let alone the question of its Shia majority in the south.

This could lead to the west and the main Shia populations becoming closely linked so whether you get an unholy counter-alliance of the Soviets and the Saudis?

Without reaction taking charge in Iran and the resulting hostage crisis and especially if there is tension in the ME over Soviet threats to Iran might that mean Reagan is defeated in 1980? At the very least his victory is likely to be much closer. Defeat would probably mean better government for the US in the 80's and a much smaller debt probably, especially if it butterflied the latter Bushs and his even greater debts. That could substantially boost America's position economy. Or you could still have the same mentality come along a bit later? Britain is still likely to have a Thatcher period but possibly if the Falkland's conflict is avoided or even lost then that could be a lot shorter and less destructive.

Steve

I think the Iran-Iraq War would be avoided, while there were some disputes Saddam would be wary of attacking a stable, strong Iran that is allied with the US. Only when Iran had lost its US alliance and was going through a period of instability did he feel comfortable to attack, and even then he was probably the loser of the war, failing to achieve his goals and getting huge debts and losses. So probably Saddam would not attack Iran TTL. That would probably mean he's still in power today.

Yes, and the Americans probably continue to have an uneasy but positive relationship with Saddam. So no Iraq War. The Arab Spring might come to Iraq but given Saddam's brutality(or that of his sons) any uprising could well be stifled. 

As for Iran I think they'd be very close to the US and would have modernized/Westernized even further. Iran already had a nuclear program, and while they were doing actual nuclear power(the Shah reasoned the oil would run out so better have a backup) there were already rumors Iran was moving to get a nuclear bomb and without international sanctions and opposition to their program they may get a bomb by the 1990s or 2000s. 

What would be the fate of Syria TTL? Would Iran still support the assad regime or would it be toppled? How would an Iraq still run by Saddam Hussein react to the civil war there? Or would butterflies make the situation vastly different? Any ideas on what happens in Syria TTL?

  I'm wondering, since the dominant Alawites are generally aligned with the Shias and since the two Baathist regimes in Iraq and Syria hated each other's guts whether Syria would side with Iran?  This would probably mean scaling down its hostility towards Israel, although that could be reduced to a token activity and is unlikely to have any purpose other than internal consumption since Egypt has made peace with Israel.  It would also mean a break with Russia as their main external supporter but possibly if say Iran arranged some compromise between the US and Syria, perhaps including a Israeli presence.  This might be tempting to the west since it would isolate Iraq as the sole Soviet satellite in the region, although it would upset the Sunni states, most noticeably the Saudis and possibly Egypt.

  If Saddam attacked an Iran in some turmoil due to reform in the government Iran might seek and gain Syrian support possibly even to the level of some form of partition of Iraq.  Although that presents problems for Iran, gaining a lot of Sunni Arabs and possibly far more so Syria gaining probably many more Sunni Arabs and Kurds.  Especially if Iran is also worried at the Soviet presence in Afghanistan at the same time and feeling somewhat be-leagued.