I've heard many different explanations for the differences, the simplest being the older generation were more moderate and the younger more hardline.

But I think that's oversimplifying it.

One of the more compelling explanations I've heard from an Irianan academic is the difference in the wars each generation of leaders were forged in.

Basically his explanation states that the older generation were veterans of the Iran-Iraq war, which was the largest conventional war since WW2.

And that was the lens they viewed a potential conflict with America through, purely conventional.

Whereas the new generation were forged in Iraq and Syria, fighting with asymmetrical warfare.

Note that this war, while not quite over, has been waged mostly asymmetrically.

Sure, they used their conventional forces to attack America's conventional forces, but their primary thrust was exerting asymmetric economic pressure through oil and gas infrastructure and closing off the straight.

I'm looking forward to reading the historical accounts of this conflict in the hopefully not too distant future.