Anonymous cheese_of_the_world_unite 12w

Someone died from a bomb during wartime? That never happens

-1

Anonymous #2 12w

It wasn’t wartime in Iran until Isra-hell dropped those bombs on her.

3

Anonymous cheese_of_the_world_unite 12w

The loss of life during military conflict is sad, however, I think it’s fair to assume that if the number one supporter for global terror possessed nuclear weapons, there could be far greater loss of life

-1

Anonymous #2 12w

The number one supporter of global terror isn’t Iran, and they do have nuclear weapons. In fact, they invented them.

1

Anonymous #2 12w

Iran is only the “number one supporter for global terror” if you think the State Department list of terror organizations is accurate, which its not. There’s plenty of US-backed terrorists, we just call them “rebels” and “guerrillas” because they’re on our side. If you do the same shit as those rebels and guerrillas, but outside of US interests, you guessed it, terrorism.

1

Anonymous #2 12w

Also, being nuclear-armed statistically makes a country much less likely to go to war. Look at India and Pakistan, they used to fight all the fuckin time, they both got nukes, and now they hesitate to go to war with each other, even when tensions reach the hottest point they have in decades between them.

1

Anonymous cheese_of_the_world_unite 12w

Rebellion in support of overthrowing a dictatorship government seems different than killing innocent civilians in the name of Jihad and to cleanse the world of infidels somehow🤔

1