He's not alone. A number of kids are posting about "glass Iran" and the like.
There's a good reason why the age limit for POTUS/CIC is 35. I think even that is a decade too young, but that's based on comparing what I thought when I was in my mid-30's to what my old ass thinks now. Maybe I was just slow to mature. Kek!
Not on Tehran, too many innocents would die. A 'thing' we could do which might be beneficial wojuld be to take out the ragehead nuclear sites. Many of them are buried pretty deep but we can hit those with tactical nukes, drilling down with multiple labombas in the same hole until we get deep enough to keel it.
That we can do, and while people would die it would only be the ones working on the ragehead nukes.
Weird take. Lot asked God, "Lord, if there is one good man int the city will you destry it?" God said, "No, for the sake of one good man, I will not destroy it."
You think you know better? There are some good people in Tehran. They want to win. Let us help them!
lol, look weak after dodging 15 punches while iran manages to shoot down a plane with 80 iranians on it. No, it would look weak to pummel them when they are in such sad shape already, iran having killed thousands of protestors and etc already. I mean if they keep the threats up, we may have no choice but to pummel them.
Yeah I agree with many others in the comments that nuking them outright wouldn’t be the way to go since it would cause many innocent civilian casualties, and I’m a millennial/Gen X who plays video games but I still understand the implications of nuking a country.
we bombed the second most powerful man in iran. how the fuckkkk does that look weak you war mongrel. stfu you shill
He's not alone. A number of kids are posting about "glass Iran" and the like.
There's a good reason why the age limit for POTUS/CIC is 35. I think even that is a decade too young, but that's based on comparing what I thought when I was in my mid-30's to what my old ass thinks now. Maybe I was just slow to mature. Kek!
Not on Tehran, too many innocents would die. A 'thing' we could do which might be beneficial wojuld be to take out the ragehead nuclear sites. Many of them are buried pretty deep but we can hit those with tactical nukes, drilling down with multiple labombas in the same hole until we get deep enough to keel it.
That we can do, and while people would die it would only be the ones working on the ragehead nukes.
Weird take. Lot asked God, "Lord, if there is one good man int the city will you destry it?" God said, "No, for the sake of one good man, I will not destroy it."
You think you know better? There are some good people in Tehran. They want to win. Let us help them!
Minimal use of force. I like it.
Is this the Ghost of John McCain?
lol, look weak after dodging 15 punches while iran manages to shoot down a plane with 80 iranians on it. No, it would look weak to pummel them when they are in such sad shape already, iran having killed thousands of protestors and etc already. I mean if they keep the threats up, we may have no choice but to pummel them.
Yeah I agree with many others in the comments that nuking them outright wouldn’t be the way to go since it would cause many innocent civilian casualties, and I’m a millennial/Gen X who plays video games but I still understand the implications of nuking a country.