Added: 5 years ago
From: WWWpunkblogORG
Views: 149,551
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (948)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Nukes aren't good anywhere.  They kill or severly damage every living thing.

  • @wwwtotalitaerde Please excuse his mental illness. Martin Bott (wwwtotalitaerde) is suffering from a psychosis that makes him believe the government is after him, controlling minds everywhere etc. >_> His allegedly murdered brother even went to court against him because he didn’t want him to use his name for that nonsense. Now he sticks to defaming my country in Youtube videos. He’s a madman and wants to make his shitty conspiracy-homepage look important, nothing else.

  • Author doesn't know ANYTHING about underground nuclear detonation!

  • Looks like Iran just jerked off on the neighbors to me.

  • The newly formed CIA overthrew their democratically elected Prime Minister in 1953 and put in a puppet dictator-the Shah of Iran. They took their country back in 1979 and we have constantly fucked with them. Funny when they had their empire as the Persians they never fucked with us...I bet if we left them alone and be came peaceful that this would stop...

  • @itchyparts1 Since the U.S. didn't exist until about 250 years ago, and since the Persian Empire hasn't existed for 2300 years,I assume that by "us" you mean the west. As far as that goes, messing with the west was the last thing the actual Persian Empire ever did. The got beat pretty badly by out numbered Greeks and then, about 100 years later, got destroyed by Alexander the Great.

    But you're still right: We should be selling them Coke-Cola and McDonalds, not fighting them.

  • Why couldn't you pour lava or liquid hot magma down the entrance and exits?

  • The only country that I cared about that would be exposed to the fallout is India.

  • @redelman43199 Typical retarded youtuber

  • They'd probably have to use tactical nukes against the deeper sites, right?

  • I've heard many times that Iran is supporting terrorism, but it always turns out to be the British (mortars in Iraq) or Israelies (RPGs in Sudan) etc. It turns out (if you'll do a little research) the U>S> is the biggest supporter of terrorism around the world. (we've had Delta force in Iran for years now blowing stuff up,started under GW)

  • its a good point about not using nukes against iran. We should have investigators there, and stop their weapons that way.

  • classic propaganda voice..lol

  • implying they wouldn't have backup exits.

    and make a new video called why Nuclear weapons in the hands of isreal is MADNESS!

  • As a VETERAN with over 15 yrs service- we have no right in getting involved in every conflict world wide. It will kick us in the ass one day when some one nukes us

  • shit nuke em ittl solve all our problems fuckers are blowin themseleves up anyway lets jst help em out right

  • @slim420d813 Lol youre not the brightest bulb in the bunch

  • In a hypothetical scenario a terrorist detonates a nuclear device in some US city, US will be compelled by public opinion to retaliate. Suppose the terrorist was trained and armed in Pakistan, still Pakistan will say it was done by terrorist and it had nothing to do with it. So whom to punish in this/similar case?

  • Very useful informative video.

  • Shocking! Stop Iran now! 

  • @ChristiansofAsia iran dosnt have a nuke, the video is only saying what if iran had a nuke. iran is only building nuclear power plants. America only wants to destroy iran to get to that pipeline. the richest oil in the region.

    iran is likely being pushed to make nukes because of threats from isreal and the united nations. Russia is backing up Iran.

  • America won't make friends even in the most liberal countries.

  • so, it's ok if the terrorists get a nuke, which they'll quite likely use, but we gotta play by the rules?

  • @117smeagol iran is not a terrorist nation you fucking inbred!, i bet you believe every country in the middle east is a terrorist country!

  • @903harman that's a bet you'd lose. and yes, iran actively supports terrorisim, so yes it IS a terrorist nation :P "inbred"? seriously, was that the best insult you could come up with? and name-calling as well? sad, very sad.........

  • Comment removed

  • A very interesting video. Just doing what leftists advocate, sitting back and letting Iran develop its own nuclear arsenal, would trigger off a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. So, if you oppose any military measures to halt Iran's nuclear ambitions that's fair enough. But don't then turn round and say that you are opposed to nuclear proliferation.

  • puuleassse

  • omg fuck off.

  • By proceeding with its nuclear program, Iran invites attack.

  • Such a sad piece of liberal propaganda

    US Presidents can only launch unclear attacks in retaliation.

  • @krisish00d actually that incorrect. US Nuclear Posture Review signed by Bush in 2005 (i think) now allows use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon states.

  • @blackstars56

    Nukes can only be used in retaliation to weapons of mass destruction. Chemical and Biological weapons count as weapons of mass destruction as well.

  • @krisish00d ohh plzzz, the destruction caused by chemical weapons do not even remotely compare to the destruction a nuclear weapon can cause. sure you can be technical and classify them as WMD's, but that will be like comparing a grenade to a thermobaric vacuum bomb (huge conventional bomb).

  • @blackstars56

    Quite frankly does it matter? Thousands of lives or millions? Either is an attack on US soil, and they would be dealt with appropriately with force.

    Are you trying to insist it would be better to sit, do nothing, and kiss other countries' asses?

  • @krisish00d of course it matters. thousands were killed in 9/11 so why didn't the US respond with a nuclear attack? i thought so. now your twisting words because you don't know what to say. who said the US should "kiss ass" and not respond? there are a million and one ways to respond to non-nuclear WMD's with conventional forces, which in fact can even be much more effective than nuclear weapons.

  • @blackstars56

    Al-Qaeda does not represent a country, nor does a terrorist attack qualify for retaliation using WMDs.

    I don't believe you understand the concept of mass destruction. Mass destruction means a massive loss of life or disabling our power grid.

  • How about Americunts nuke themeselves and stop pissing off the entire freaking world?

  • @sanguinarius2 LOL! 

  • BS!

  • "Bush will test a 700 ton explosive to determine how large a nuke the Neo-Cons can possibly use against Iran...Watch this video from the non-partisan Union of Concerned Scientists..."

    Pretty much blew your "non-partisan" cred in the first sentence there. Morons.

  • Idiot bloggers.

    We've had nuclear bunker-busters since the '70s...and so did the Soviets (who developed them in order to attack highly-dug-in sites like Cheyenne Mountain).

  • no No NO NO!!!!!!!!!! NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!­!!! nukes dont go off on impact only in emergancys they are detanated and there are hundreds of bunkers ment for nuclear bombs and fallout and if there are many on the edge of the blast radius theyll definetly survive

  • I think this may be the point of it!

  • i dont think the usa will care..

  • listen to you all? i think if it was up to the people and not the governments of as all we would never have wars people dont start was governments do !!and then they say its for the people?? if we all had guns there would be peace soon !!thats becuz all the ass holes would be killed sooner or later !!!

  • @BrcCmplfan no to defend them against israel

  • iran is entitled to have nuclear weapons.

  • @zobielamouche1 No country is entitled to have nuclear weapons. They are all shit heads.

  • LOL mercenaries 2

  • Comment removed

  • Why not just use a dirty bomb if they want to get bunkers?

  • good american = dead american!

  • death to islam

  • Penetrator deep subsurface warheads are a very useful weapons technology. Countries who build underground installations can dig through the debris of a caved in entrance to a stockpile. Going underground to a stockpile location that has been nuked...redundant.Using conventional smart bombs on these facilities at the doorway so that you can 'echo locate' the subsurface stockpile would be a good thing to do?

  • false flag usa make me sick. i am so glad other countries have nuclear power and nuclear arms in the world. latin america, africa and asia unite and destroy false flag usa once and for all. jews will also be finished once and for all. usa and jews, BABY KILLERS OF THE WORLD.

  • Use the Nukes that way the radiation will prevent them for ever going back to the sites. end of story.

  • @gtc1961 Have you heard about the 'worm virus' that screwed irans' nuke plans? Way to go Israel & America! Personally, I think nukes would be better used in saudi arabia, where all the terrorists get thier funding. Even better, let's use the neutron bomb, then "rescue" the oil fields!

  • who made this video? The Royal Iranian dept. of propaganda? They're thinking to themselves...yeah, let's put out a video to arouse all those guillible americans that nuclear bunker busters won't work....

  • nuclear bunker busters are total bullshit... just a civillian killing machine

    Remember Sedan test crater? this is just a Sedan maker! just spreads irradiated dirt in the air

  • @enomis9393 what dept. of the Iranian govt. for?

  • A 1 megaton warhead for a bunker buster? What exactly are they smoking? Most of of America's warheads designed for use against cities don't have a yield that high, bunker busters are at most, a few kilotons. Granted there'd still be horrible collateral damage, but not nearly as bad as the video's simulation.

  • There are key points that are more conjectured about failed bunker busters than there are in how this program is supposed to work. Precision surgical striking is great; but like all weapons technology advances. The figures on fallout are a baseline...with worse case scenario. I'm skeptical about a lot of the criticism put on US weapons research? Feasibility based on petroleum jet-guns and rapid thermal tungsten ablation tunneling technologies makes the program realistic.

  • well, the US has never really been good with its nukes.

  • @AceofDiamonds0 they made the nukes and no one else would of made them for a long time if the US never made them first

  • @z50wheely

    and that would have been preferable. are you saying the world is a better place with nuclear weapons?

    just because the US was the first to have nuclear weapons doesnt make them responsible with them. answer me this; which contry was the first and only country ever to actually use a nuclear device, and on civilians no less? 

  • @AceofDiamonds0 the US and who ended the war

  • @z50wheely

    you curse terrorists for murdering 3000 of your civilians, but you try to justifiy the same murderous behavour by your government on a much larger scale?

    but i do understand if we had not bombed them the war would have dragged on forever and many more lives would have been lost. but that way of thinking basicly boils down to; "war is hard, i do not want to play anymore, so i will just flip the table."

  • @AceofDiamonds0 Sun Tzu once said, "Seek Instant Victory, not Endless Battle".

    Should we have wasted more lives fighting an enemy who was too proud to surrender?

    Watch the Monty Python skit about the Black Knight, the good guy sliced off both arms and a leg, and the Black Knight, said, "Let's call it a draw!"

    It's not a DRAW if one side is clearly losing, they just need a reminder that they're losing, not "stalemate"!

  • @AceofDiamonds0 yes, that's the whole purpopse of war...if you start one, you get it back 10 times worse. It discourages more wars or aggressors from doing the same thing. That's why the soviets and americans never went to war, directly. Ever wonder why the Germans and Japanese are so peace-loving now?

  • @gtc1961

    i am not mad about us using the atomic bomb to win the war. i am mad about how we used it.

    the japanese attacked our citizens and we retalated with force, because any one who attacks civilians to get an edge up in war is evil. that was our thinking.

    but when america kills civilians its always for a good cause. schools, hospitals, nurseries, men, women, children. i mean why have armies if we are just going to destroy their cities

  • @AceofDiamonds0 are you kidding me? Do you know how much money the US has invested in precision weapons? Didn't you see all those videos of bombs going through windows and air shafts? Why do you think we invested all that money? TO REDUCE CIVILIAN CASUALTIES!! It would be MUCH easier and MUCH cheaper to simply carpet bomb a city and kill/destroy everything. We put our people in extreme harm to pick out strategic targets not to kill innocent people. Do you know what you're talking about?

  • @gtc1961

    "It would be MUCH easier and MUCH cheaper to simply carpet bomb a city and kill/destroy everything."

    that is exactly what the U.S. thought in WWII. you know when we dropped atomic bombs on cities.

    but yes, we have gotten better at precision. but that is only with smart bombs, not nuclear weapons. with nuclear weapons it doeesnt really matter if you derectly hit the target or not. the atomic bomb we dropped on hiroshma had a blast radius of 7 miles.

  • @AceofDiamonds0 we dropped the first nuke we have the most accurate missiles we have enough nuclear missiles to cover every 20 square miles of Russia... and you say the U.S. has never been good with are nuclear missiles?!?!?!? thats what the cold war was about fear that the to most nuclear power countries would nuke each other THE U.S. AND RUSSIA

  • @vvulcann101MW2 that is exactly why the U.S. is not good with its nuclear weapons.

    1. we are quick to use them

    2. we have more than anyone else on the planet

    3. and we surpress any country that wants nuclear weaponry, thinking that the U.S. is the only country responsible and trustworthy enough enough to even have them.

  • @AceofDiamonds0 we don't suppress any countries that want nuclear weapons we suppress the countries that want to use the weapons on us or any other countries. also i think knowing that we have the most accurate missiles and we are quick to use them and we have the most on the planet is showing that the us is pretty good with its nuclear missiles

  • @vvulcann101MW2

    1. youre comment proves that the US is paranoid and a control freak.

    2. it also proves you and the US cannot remember basic history.

    3. accurate doesnt really matter when it comes to nuclear weaponry. the atomic bomb dropped on hiroshima (which pales in compairision to the nuclear weapons of today) had a blast radius of seven miles. so even if you miss your target, it probably will still do its job. not to metion the nuclear fall out after the initial explosion.

  • @AceofDiamonds0 the US is not a control freak japan Russia are just like the US plus the reasons why we nuked japan was they had plans to nuke all of California but they didn't have smart enough scientists to develop nuclear weapons so you can dis on the US all you want but north Korea Iran Iraq Afghanistan Libya Kazakhstan Domenic republic french of Giza all of those countries have been wanting to nuke the us china and Russia so they can get there nuclear weapons

  • @vvulcann101MW2

    yes the us had better scientists to develop nuclear weapons, proving that the US will always be on top when it comes to finding new and interesting ways to kill people.

    well then why dont we just invade those other countries? cause isnt that what the US does when it thinks another country has weapons of mass destruction?

  • @AceofDiamonds0 well there is still civilians that we don't want to hurt so we are invading Iran and Iraq because the civilians asked for help: Iraqi freedom

  • @vvulcann101MW2 this is all irrelevant though. my only point is americans are hypocrites. they condemn other countries for having nuclear weapons and think their dangerous or pose a threat for having them. but when someone says america should get rid of their weapons of mass destruction, everyone flips out.

  • @vvulcann101MW2 they didn't plan on nukeing california.... they planned to invade california... but the only reason why they didn't was because of the 2nd amendment. the saying "their's a gun behing every blade of grass" didn't come out of nowhere...

  • @AceofDiamonds0 "the US is paranoid and a control freak" have you ever even been to germany?

  • @AceofDiamonds0 Question? Since when? The only nuke I've heard of being used was on Japan, and we ended the war and saved American lives from the brutal Island-Hopping campaign.

  • @011QuikSilver

    yes, as long as american lives were saved who cares who dies. whether it be men. women, children, senior citizens, infants, fetuses, house pets, zoo animals. all of them can die as long as it saves american lives.

  • @AceofDiamonds0 I didn't say that at ALL. Way to be mature and instantly go on the offensive, it was an honest question. I mean that was 65 or so years ago now, I figured maybe there was another time.

  • @011QuikSilver just the two in japan. one in hiroshima and one in nagasaki.

  • @AceofDiamonds0 I know what you mean about Japan though, Victory came at a high moral price... Plus Japan is just a tiny island, I bet fallout screwed 'em bad...

  • So nukes in iran cause death in (islamic(terrorist)) afganistan & pakistan; what's yer point?

  • @jimbocidman exactly my point! Do you know how much we spent on developing those bombs??? Today we have complete air supremacy, no one can touch us so carpet bombing would be a piece of cake, unlike in WWII. Also, do you realize we killed more people in one fire bomb raid on tokyo in march of 1945 then we did with the atom bomb? The bomb wasn't used as a tactical weapon, it was more political that military.

  • uhh. 30 killstreak

  • @bailyfilms

    oh - you think this is some sort of videogame? you think this is something to joke about?

    conflict is not a videogame...or a joke.

    Grow up.

  • Bomb all entrances, and Iran's military facilities. Then, get the hell out.

    Go back again sometime when they are rebuilding them and bomb more of them.

    If you can bomb faster than they build you're good

  • how about we bomb both ways

  • how about we don't use nukes.

  • @dclaver2 Do not count on it.

    Take a look at USA Nuclear Posture Review. Tic tac tic tac >:)

  • @dclaver2 Are you kidding? We need to nuke Iran immediately.

  • @dclaver2 because they cant fight in the battleground. losers. that why ur country use bombs and nuclear bombs. also usa is weak and pathetic army.

  • @jojo1ukuk The UK doesn't even have an army. They only have 175,000 troops, in fact, they have more in reserves than actual active because they are too much of pussies to actually hold a gun.

  • @dclaver2 i live in uk and work in the UK. do not care about the uk army and corrupt uk government. they are just another american puppet army. i was born in pakistan and move to UK in the 90's just saying.

  • @jojo1ukuk So show a little nationalism. That's like me moving to pakistan saying Mohammad is the devil.

  • @jojo1ukuk . lmao. you have got to be fucking kidding me. Talk about cowards. who are the mother fuckers who wont even put on a uniform and fight face to face. I tell you what lets put all the toys away and see who has the balls to fight face to face. i dought very highly you will find ANY middle east nation who is willing to come out and fight a real fight. Bitches.

  • The scarier thing is the Iran wackjob leader with nukes. 

  • they are small nucleor charges not a full charge as this video suggests.....so false assumptions here....

  • @urbanguerrilla64 apart from that not making much sense I can say that Iran etc are 3rd world as it is. If they even touched Russia uk USA etc they will be send back to caveman days.

  • So it would go to Pakistan Afghanistan AND India? WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU WAITING FOR THEN!

  • @jamesingtonthethird They know that the next target will be your city and you and your children will be incinerated - bet you dont like it so much now eh?

  • use 1 of these and iran will wipe out israel . thats no bullshit

  • @omg0641 Then Iran would be destroyed by Isreals allies.

  • @omg0641 I don't think Iran CAN wipe out Israel. Israel has whooped that ass before, and while Iran is trying to build nuke Israel HAS them.

  • 253 people want to kill 30,000,000 innocent people and get more terrorist enemys to fight.

  • @jerryjerry92 Well said. Im glad to see there is someone on youtube who can understand how the world works.

    Ever considered becoming a politician?

  • I wouldn't put it past the americans to nuke it anyway...

  • Oh shit mgs4 all over again lol

  • useless nuke lol

  • middle east sucks............

  • That's what lack of education leads to. Three million people? It's so stupid, it's not even funny. Just check how many people were killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki where (admittedly smaller) bombs were dropped directly on cities - not in the middle of a desert like in this scenario. The Chernobyl cloud which was probably more radioactive than the cloud a 1 M ton bomb would produce didn't kill 3 Million - far from it. Apart from that, bunker-busters are not supposed to carry Megaton warheads.

  • sane human would not wage any kind of war..its a living hell on earth..call me a coward

  • you guys are retarded....fallout would not spread like that from a 1 MEGATON yield...this is anti nuclear/anti war/anti weapon scare tactics from hippy pieces of shit....do your homework and learn for yourself the true potential and power of nuclear weapons...on top of that, fall out does not spread underground the way it was depicted here...

  • Obama said openly that he intends to use nukes against Iran. People need to understand that this is necessary and will save more lives than in a conventional war. Iranian people themselves wants to be attacked. They are victims of a dictatorship.

  • @WarmongerWW3 thats bulshit and you know it

  • @knelledkismet hell yes that's FUckn right

  • @WarmongerWW3 Ye go gay captain america go!Dickwipe...

  • @Armadarecs  captin america is constipated

  • This is total bullshit. No single nuclear weapon (at least none in our inventory) is going to kill 3 million people unless it's detonated directly over a very dense city (even with fallout). Besides, the nuclear bunker buster was supposed to be a very low-yield weapon (sub-kiloton), not the 1 megaton device described here. Doesn't matter though, the program was canceled because low-yield weapons are stupid.

  • ww3 thanks to Israeli zionists

  • I got to meet an iranian engineer recently, he said the reason why iran is so confident is because the already have nukes, they bought a some nukes from khazaghistan after the fall of the soviet union... any attack on Iran will start a WW3 and thats what we humans are waiting for, the end of our planet, i believe we are of the last generations to live....

  • so in other words trap everyone in there and demolish it on top of them

  • This is a hopelessly dated submission.

    Obama will never authorize a first strike, At least that much is plain.

  • One megaton? Politics aside, "bunker busters" are supposed to have "low-yield" warheads (for a nuclear weapon), not "fifty Hiroshimas" strength.

  • Your a f'cking strange, and probably gay usiing a voice changer to mask your voice...! If they (The CIA and/or FBI want to know who you are dimwit all they have to do is aquire your email through you-tube, then your ISP, and finally they will be kicking your door down, however you aren't as smart as you think you are, in fact I think your as dumb as they come posting this crap and for what ? Trust me they have kids smarter than you.

  • but it doesnt stop the hate and revenge.. you blame usa... but its all about revenge and hatred.. if ppl could just get over the past and see the future maybe.. they would shut the fuck up and get over it

  • I still can't believe we live in a materialistic world. So sad.

  • So forget destroying the bunker. Kill all the people that know where the bunker is and then the bunker can sit there undisturbed for 1,000 years.

  • @ 2:11 "A more sensible way to deal with the military challenge posed by underground bunkers is to" remind the entire human race what happened on August 6th 1945 and August 9th 1945 and then inform them all that there are more than 2,000 more of these weapons "on the ready line" even now.

  • attacker's and being attacked which 1 is real teror? it is gud for def... nobody want their country being invade

  • Iran is a threat because Iran is trading their oil and gas in Euro just like Iraq did before the invasion.People were misled in believing that Iraq had WMD.Now they doing the same with their propoganda.

  • @TheAngelAbandoned True, they are not even a little more creative to invent some other lame excuse.

    They have already used the "nuclear wmd" to justify the criminal invasion against the Iraqi people. I want to see what excuse they will use to invade Venezuela...

  • Whut in tarnation evah th' Israelis does it will be sumpin surprisin'. Like Cruise missiles fired fum Submarines. Or comman'o raids by lan', o' some other ways t'hit th' facko'ies. All yo' need is t'mess up one part an' th' whole system is down fo' a fine long time. Eff'n yo' kin git their brains in th' attack—it will does a lot t'derail their plans.

  • All that shit about Iran (OPEC country) reminds me that shit about Iraq (another OPEC country) before the invasion. Remember "Iraq has nuclear wmd " that were never found?

    Another war for oil is coming...

  • @apresesco Iraq had wmd. You just not patriot enough to believe that! Patriots don't question their leaders! Our leaders don't sleeps at nights thinking how to make us prosperous. Besides wars run our economy.

  • I love seeing a bunch of motherfuckers that HAS nuclear wmd, telling to other countries to not have. hahaha fucking hypocritical shit!

  • Where in the fuck is this guy in the video getting his info from? I highly doubt the Pentagon released information about radiation engulfing Iran or anything east of it, like the author claims.

  • @b1gr1g. Have some problem with that??? -_-

  • lol.. It took 2 bombs to bring Japan to it`s knees during ww2, and todays nukes has 60 times the power of one sinlge Hiroshima-bomb. Usa has over 10.000 of these babies so I don`t really think it matter much if they should "loose" target with one of them. Fucking nuke that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Khamenei faggots to hell!!!

  • @unlyckystrike Think about the innocent people that will be killed by those bombs? It would not only cause Iran to retailate with thier nukes (if they do have some), it would make the USA look like the bad guys.

  • @Johnfalcon99977 I know and that`s probably why their hesitating. But Iran has chanted death to usa, the intire west and Israel in particular which they very litterally has stated they would "wipe of the map.." so either usa or israel might be forced to nuke`em, sad but true. Let`s not hope so, but... :(

  • @unlyckystrike "the intire west "

    Take a map and see. Your concept of the West is wrong. 

  • @apresesco Ahmadinejad says not only the, west but in fact the intire world will be "conquered by islam.." That`s a decleration of war. Search up this video here on youtube called exactly "Ahmadinejad: islam will conquer the world" and see for your self, it`s his own words, not mine....

  • @unlyckystrike It's just a guy talking a lot. I worry about real actions. The U.S. is a threat to the world more than any other country on the planet. They spend more on military and make more wars than any country. And they have nuclear missiles pointed at our head. This is a suspicious act, not just words.

  • @apresesco I know the th us han`t always been a "good boy" and I never said so either, but that doesn`t mean we should support a nuclear iran!

  • @unlyckystrike So how Iran will defend itself against the foreign invaders oil thieves, who clearly has lots of nuclear wmd, are the only ones to have used it, and support a country that has not signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) ?

  • @apresesco I don`t know why, you should ask him why. I just know hs treathning everyone all the time. Did you know that pedophilia and stoning of women also is supported by this man..?

  • @unlyckystrike You did not answer: HOW Iran will defend themselves against the foreign invaders oil thieves, who clearly has lots of nuclear wmd and want control over the iranian oil reserves ?

  • @apresesco You`ve got it all completely wrong! How many times do I have to tell you that it is Iran who are the agressor that the rest of the world need to defend them self from it? You`ve totally missed all about the fact that Iran has treathed the entire world many times, especially USA and Israel. If you stil l don`t get this I realize I`ve been wasting my time. Goodbye. And get well soon.

  • @unlyckystrike How many countries Iran is invading right now? How many countries USA is invading right now? How many nuclear weapons the U.S. has pointed to my head? How many nuclear weapons the Iran has pointed to my head? Iran’s military spending is less than 2% of the US military spending. Nobody trusts nobody with nukes. And I have much more reasons to fear the U.S.

  • @unlyckystrike Why is iran a threath??? I ghess they are a threat because they changed sellling oil from doller to euro same as iraq. venezuela will be after iran then somalia then so on... so believe all the zionist bullshit you want .

  • @Johnfalcon99977 We don't care how do we look! We are supernation. Most democratic one!

  • usa protecting israel because of theire zionist jews.