Dumbastheycome Posted May 26, 2019 Share Posted May 26, 2019 10 minutes ago, Morch said: I don't think Iran is a dog, or a rat. Iran's got a leadership, and that leadership makes decisions and sets policies. In the past, when faced with economic pressure, Iran's leadership changed both its tone and its policies. That's how the so-called Iran Deal came about. If you're looking for support of Trump's withdrawal from the agreement, you'll have to look elsewhere. As commented on multiple posts and topics - not a smart nor wise decision. The Trump administration cited other issues (for example, Iran's ballistic missile program and Iran's regional activities) as reasoning and support for the decision to withdraw from the Iran Deal. Granted, the Iran Deal does not actually cover these issues, and the reasoning offered is faulty - but it's not like this makes them go away. The discontent over said issues is shared by European signatories, even if their ideas on tackling them differs from Trump's. Try not to get too excited. No way do I support Trump's or his administration in the withdrawal from an International Treaty. I rarely support any of the policies of the US Administration in any aspect. At the same time I have reservations about the "attitude " of the Iranian Administration. Yet further to that I can believe that Iran has good cause to be defensive to the point of offensive given the chaos the US has connived throughout the ME. Iran certainly has a identifiable and rational Government which is obviously aware of the machinations involved to domesticate it again as was until the Shah was ousted. On principle they defend the right to sovereignty. The US finds renewed excuse to destroy it. On behalf of you and myself? Is Iraq resolved? Afghanistan? Syria? Libya? Palestine? Anywhere the US boot has been? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted May 26, 2019 Share Posted May 26, 2019 34 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said: Try not to get too excited. No way do I support Trump's or his administration in the withdrawal from an International Treaty. I rarely support any of the policies of the US Administration in any aspect. At the same time I have reservations about the "attitude " of the Iranian Administration. Yet further to that I can believe that Iran has good cause to be defensive to the point of offensive given the chaos the US has connived throughout the ME. Iran certainly has a identifiable and rational Government which is obviously aware of the machinations involved to domesticate it again as was until the Shah was ousted. On principle they defend the right to sovereignty. The US finds renewed excuse to destroy it. On behalf of you and myself? Is Iraq resolved? Afghanistan? Syria? Libya? Palestine? Anywhere the US boot has been? Wouldn't know what "excitement" you're on about, and there was nothing said about you being supportive of Trump's withdrawal from the Iran Deal. What does "defensive to the point of offensive" cover? Is it similar to "preemptive strike"? Isn't Iran itself well into "conniving" chaos (or put otherwise, promoting its interests) in the region? As for Iran "defending the right to sovereignty" - defending against what? Which current actions are being referenced? The inspections regime and further limitations included in the Iran Deal were a result of Iran breaching international agreements and obligations. And oh, the present Iranian regime would probably be against the one toppled by USA as well. Reservations? Can't really see any in your post. It's pretty much USA bad, Iran good stuff. Nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted May 26, 2019 Share Posted May 26, 2019 59 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said: Funny, that's almost exactly what General Curtis LeMay said about North Vietnam. I seem to remember that's not exactly how it turned out. Funny, I seem to recall North Vietnam taking quite a beating, economy stalled and whatnot. But guess all that suffering doesn't count, as long as one can "score" a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penicillin Posted May 26, 2019 Share Posted May 26, 2019 11 hours ago, cnxgary said: Many many years ago Russia gave Iran what is called Cavitating Torpedos that once fired releases a compressed gas to displace water and dramaticly increases the speed and distance ( 300 k an hour ) of the weapon. Being that the Straight of Hormus is some 25 miles wide these torpedos can hit any ship within a minute and a oil tanker takes how long to stop or veer off? Whoa! I sure hope someone in the US Navy reads the TV news and alerts everyone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surangw Posted May 26, 2019 Share Posted May 26, 2019 12 hours ago, bluesofa said: Must be using the wrath of Allah. his turbine to fowl the propellers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaiguzzi Posted May 26, 2019 Share Posted May 26, 2019 50 minutes ago, Morch said: Funny, I seem to recall North Vietnam taking quite a beating, economy stalled and whatnot. But guess all that suffering doesn't count, as long as one can "score" a point. I seem to recall that Vietnam had 3 odd million dead inc civilians, and America lost 52,000 dead, virtually all military. So, yes "Vietnam took quite a beating" inc stuff they still pay for today like UXO and Napalm birth defects, but, what exactly did those 52,000 dead American soldiers advance in the name of Freedom & Democracy? The "Domino Effect" never really happened, and i seem to recall that Vietnam is doing just fine under the same Commie govt that has run the country since 1975. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billd766 Posted May 26, 2019 Share Posted May 26, 2019 1 hour ago, Thaifriends said: Iranis must watch film Crimson Tide and learn how a chief of the boat could be crazy war monger and to give extra flavor, their POTUS needs a new war. These are fox threats from Iranians as they dont have anything especially economics is shattered. One dissapointing situation for the US, all its partners are on Iranian side due to economics. Since Trump became POTUS the USA doesn't have as many partners as before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted May 26, 2019 Share Posted May 26, 2019 27 minutes ago, thaiguzzi said: I seem to recall that Vietnam had 3 odd million dead inc civilians, and America lost 52,000 dead, virtually all military. So, yes "Vietnam took quite a beating" inc stuff they still pay for today like UXO and Napalm birth defects, but, what exactly did those 52,000 dead American soldiers advance in the name of Freedom & Democracy? The "Domino Effect" never really happened, and i seem to recall that Vietnam is doing just fine under the same Commie govt that has run the country since 1975. My post wasn't about how righteous the USA and its foreign policy are. You might as well save the sermons. One poster alleged that the USA can "sink Iran back to the stone age", another poster replied that this isn't exactly how things turned out with regard to North Vietnam. Millions dead and the county suffering great destruction doesn't sound like a great result - regardless of whether the USA lost or not. If you wish to praise the Vietnamese government, go right ahead. I don't think it was a great place to live in during the years following the war, and I'm not taking your "doing just fine" view seriously either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted May 26, 2019 Share Posted May 26, 2019 22 minutes ago, billd766 said: Since Trump became POTUS the USA doesn't have as many partners as before. This is correct. Then again, it doesn't seem to help Iran much. Unilateral sanctions laid by the USA seem to have an effect, with most country complying (differing degrees, for sure). Iran's threats about disengaging from the agreement weren't received well either. No effective economic resistance to USA sanctions, not much by way of effective diplomatic effort to solve the situation as well. And no military backup - other than in some posters' imagination. The Trump administration manage to alienate many allies and partners, but Iran doesn't seem able to capitalize on that so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptooyoo Posted May 26, 2019 Share Posted May 26, 2019 15 hours ago, Tom1959 said: Try it,and 24 hours later Iran will look like the surface of the moon! No, the moon has many small craters, Iran will have only a single massive one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GroveHillWanderer Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 16 hours ago, Uptooyoo said: After Iran sinks a U.S. aircraft carrier, sending 5,000 crewmen to a watery grave, a single Ohio-Class Submarine slides silently from under the polar ice-cap and launches one of its 24 missiles. Fifteen minutes later, Iran evaporates. 23 missiles to go with 17 other Ohio subs standing ready for any other nation wishing to intervene. Better think really hard before you strike at the U.S. Navy. And the fact that, depending on wind direction, the nuclear fallout could kill hundreds of innocent civilians on the territories of US allies such as Turkey, the UAE, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia (potentially also Israel) doesn't give you any pause for thought? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolboy Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 17 hours ago, Uptooyoo said: After Iran sinks a U.S. aircraft carrier, sending 5,000 crewmen to a watery grave, a single Ohio-Class Submarine slides silently from under the polar ice-cap and launches one of its 24 missiles. Fifteen minutes later, Iran evaporates. 23 missiles to go with 17 other Ohio subs standing ready for any other nation wishing to intervene. Better think really hard before you strike at the U.S. Navy. Your invocation of nuclear retaliation isn't exactly the product of thinking really hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elkski Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 I think most of you underestimate how few people it would take to develop a land based rail gun to penetrate a ship in the straight? At 22,000 mph there is no 100% defense. Correctly placed with modern gaiming algorithms and optics and the USN would not even know what happened for weeks. You guys who think one Nuke is all that's needed to solve problems are not informed. Do we want to be the country who begins the final days of darkness? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolboy Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 3 minutes ago, Elkski said: I think most of you underestimate how few people it would take to develop a land based rail gun to penetrate a ship in the straight? At 22,000 mph there is no 100% defense. Correctly placed with modern gaiming algorithms and optics and the USN would not even know what happened for weeks. You guys who think one Nuke is all that's needed to solve problems are not informed. Do we want to be the country who begins the final days of darkness? Well whatever sort of new weapon Iran may or may not have, the fact is that the Persian Gulf is a very bad place for a large navel ship - particularly a carrier - to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GroveHillWanderer Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 14 hours ago, Morch said: Funny, I seem to recall North Vietnam taking quite a beating, economy stalled and whatnot. But guess all that suffering doesn't count, as long as one can "score" a point. Vietnam's economy may have been set back somewhat but they were hardly "bombed back into the Stone Age." Or are you saying that a society with nothing other than rudimentary stone tools was still able to defeat the US? What does that say about US 'military might?' And any economic setback they might have had for a while seems to have been fairly comprehensively overcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billd766 Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 3 hours ago, GroveHillWanderer said: And the fact that, depending on wind direction, the nuclear fallout could kill hundreds of innocent civilians on the territories of US allies such as Turkey, the UAE, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia (potentially also Israel) doesn't give you any pause for thought? Probably not. They are only keyboard warriors anyway and simply don't care about anybody else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 32 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said: Vietnam's economy may have been set back somewhat but they were hardly "bombed back into the Stone Age." Or are you saying that a society with nothing other than rudimentary stone tools was still able to defeat the US? What does that say about US 'military might?' And any economic setback they might have had for a while seems to have been fairly comprehensively overcome. So which is it? If Vietnam's economy was only "set back somewhat", the USA maybe wasn't all that evil, eh? Picking on the "stone age" thing is hardly the point. Spin it however you like, Vietnam didn't come out from that conflict unscathed, but incurred heavy damage and loss of human life. And mending relations with the USA played a large part in the "comprehensively overcome" part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 13 minutes ago, billd766 said: Probably not. They are only keyboard warriors anyway and simply don't care about anybody else. The poster you responded to seems to think that the destruction visited on countries such countries as Vietnam isn't a big deal. Got to love keyboard warriors, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumbastheycome Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 19 minutes ago, Morch said: So which is it? If Vietnam's economy was only "set back somewhat", the USA maybe wasn't all that evil, eh? Picking on the "stone age" thing is hardly the point. Spin it however you like, Vietnam didn't come out from that conflict unscathed, but incurred heavy damage and loss of human life. And mending relations with the USA played a large part in the "comprehensively overcome" part. I do believe that most would attribute the comprehensive overcoming was not due to reparations made by the US or any "mending" of relations. The US promised assistance, but never gave it, instead the US introduced an embargo on them. It was the Russians who aided Vietnam. In typical US foreign "policy" it was not until the 1990's after Vietnam rebuilt that trade relations were "normalized" to take advantage of economic gains in trade. Spin it however you like the US has a legacy of destruction and /or suppression for sole advantage. Iran is a fly in the quack ointment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 5 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said: I do believe that most would attribute the comprehensive overcoming was not due to reparations made by the US or any "mending" of relations. The US promised assistance, but never gave it, instead the US introduced an embargo on them. It was the Russians who aided Vietnam. In typical US foreign "policy" it was not until the 1990's after Vietnam rebuilt that trade relations were "normalized" to take advantage of economic gains in trade. Spin it however you like the US has a legacy of destruction and /or suppression for sole advantage. Iran is a fly in the quack ointment. Do you actually bother to read and understand posts before commenting? There wasn't anything said about reparations made by the USA, nor was the "mending" bit presented as a USA thing. With all due respect to the Russians, I doubt they can be labeled as being responsible for the country's current (relative) prosperity. But thanks for acknowledging that improved relations with the USA have something to do with it. There was no spin, and no claims such as you imply regarding USA foreign policy. If anything, the poster I was replying to seemed to try and minimize the destruction visited on Vietnam by the USA. My point was that regardless of being right or wrong, countries entering a direct conflict with the USA come out of it in a bad shape. Some posters seem to feel that Iran can somehow withstand this, while displaying disregard for the lot of everyday Iranians under such conditions. For some posters this seems a small price to pay if there's some imaginary point to score vs. the USA. Your last line got about as much meaning as the rest of your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumbastheycome Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 7 minutes ago, Morch said: Do you actually bother to read and understand posts before commenting? There wasn't anything said about reparations made by the USA, nor was the "mending" bit presented as a USA thing. With all due respect to the Russians, I doubt they can be labeled as being responsible for the country's current (relative) prosperity. But thanks for acknowledging that improved relations with the USA have something to do with it. There was no spin, and no claims such as you imply regarding USA foreign policy. If anything, the poster I was replying to seemed to try and minimize the destruction visited on Vietnam by the USA. My point was that regardless of being right or wrong, countries entering a direct conflict with the USA come out of it in a bad shape. Some posters seem to feel that Iran can somehow withstand this, while displaying disregard for the lot of everyday Iranians under such conditions. For some posters this seems a small price to pay if there's some imaginary point to score vs. the USA. Your last line got about as much meaning as the rest of your post. lol. If you were to lower your sensitivity to my posts you would heed your own instruction as to comprehension. The US all but inflicted genocide on Vietnam, and neighbouring countries then absconded from agreed reparations as well as embargo. The Russians aided Vietnam to re establish itself to a huge degree. It was only when Vietnam was then able to resume more international capacity the USA then took best self interested advantage of that which they had previously destroyed according to their foreign policy. To date the US has made token effort to compensate those hundreds of thousands of Viet Citizens who have and continue to suffer congenital hereditory damage from the poisons poured on them in the form of chemical (weapons). In point of fact nor have they even made compensation to their own Veterans who also suffer same. Unlike the other Governments of nations that to this day still pay compensations to their own veterans of that stupid contrived war! Yes! The US dragged others into that conflict but most Americans seem to choose the same false perception that the USA is some solitary saviour! Did the USA win WW2 ? No ! It was an Allied effort that culminated in the US use of a weapon of mass destruction against a civilian population of a country that was already on the verge of capitulation. It disgusts me that in many parts of the world I have heard many red neck americans flippantly express"Just effin nuke em all" as the simplistic solution to any resistance to US aggression and domination ! At the same time I have come to know many younger expat Americans who after several years separated from the propaganda within the USA who are horrified by their more real world perceptions of US activity. Your own declared objection to the current POTUS obviously does not retract from your equally obvious defense of the assumed overall superior status of the USA. And that despite your tokenist apologies. Whilst Trump is definitely not suited to his personal perceptions of his role it is more than likely he is suitable to his hyena installers in that he is the agent for the retrenchment of the US into a isolationist nationality in the face of global economic disintegration. It is sad that in that process there is a covert militaristic emphasis on trying to control and collect and/or deny to others the worlds greatest asset of these times: oil Without compunction the US has repeatedly used its"allies" via the UN in support of it's domination and if deemed necessary dismissed them in defiance of the UN ! But the overall factor behind the induced paranoia about nuclear potentials is not to do with the destruction of innocents. Historically human genocide preceded Hitler by many hundreds of years. Wide spread utilisation of nuclear devices would obliterate virtually all effective electronic systems. The world would stop! Despite the humanitarian appeal of the horror of ensuing death by starvation or radiation the elite in the bunkers awaiting a slower and more appropriate death from that which they wreaked would more likely regret the loss of power and wealth ! Now in the face of the rejection of the assumption that as a "fair weather" friend the US is being taught what fair weather friends should understand. A "regime" is a regime and not one has demonstrably lasted forever. What ever ensues from the fall of the last may not be better but that is what humans have the unfortunate capacity for. Scratch the itch? Yes. No comprehension. lmfao ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 @Dumbastheycome Again, do you actually read posts before commenting or just make up imaginary arguments to address? It doesn't matter how you construe the mending of relations between Vietnam and the USA. The fact stands that it became a major driver with regard to Vietnamese economy. Being ignored, embargoed or boycotted by the USA is not a good place to be. Not making a moral judgement, just an observation. There wasn't anything in my posts which hails USA foreign policy or practices as righteous, you could stop beating that false drum now. Same goes for all that reparations and compensations bit - nothing to do with my posts or my point. I get it that you don't like the USA much, thanks. Once more - given said USA practices which you describe in dire terms, would it be advisable for Iran to risk such consequences? To what end and towards which goal? Plus, who makes the decision - the people? Their leadership? Some posters suggest Iran should stand its ground no matter what, and that Iran is both willing and able to take it. I say, that it can't and shouldn't. This isn't a view infused with how the USA is right, but more to do with how such things might pan out for your average Iranian. The superior status of the USA is a fact - not necessarily in terms of moral high ground, best behavior or bring righteous, but more to do with sheer power. I don't so much "defend" this, as state that it's there, regardless of how some may feel about it. I'm not sorry if it hurts your sensitivities, such is life. Wouldn't know what "tokenist(?) apologies" you're on about - unless by that you mean not engaging in fiery rants favored by yourself and others. Not my thing. That would be the rest of your muddled tirade - which still doesn't have a whole lot to do with my posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumbastheycome Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 4 minutes ago, Morch said: @Dumbastheycome Again, do you actually read posts before commenting or just make up imaginary arguments to address? It doesn't matter how you construe the mending of relations between Vietnam and the USA. The fact stands that it became a major driver with regard to Vietnamese economy. Being ignored, embargoed or boycotted by the USA is not a good place to be. Not making a moral judgement, just an observation. There wasn't anything in my posts which hails USA foreign policy or practices as righteous, you could stop beating that false drum now. Same goes for all that reparations and compensations bit - nothing to do with my posts or my point. I get it that you don't like the USA much, thanks. Once more - given said USA practices which you describe in dire terms, would it be advisable for Iran to risk such consequences? To what end and towards which goal? Plus, who makes the decision - the people? Their leadership? Some posters suggest Iran should stand its ground no matter what, and that Iran is both willing and able to take it. I say, that it can't and shouldn't. This isn't a view infused with how the USA is right, but more to do with how such things might pan out for your average Iranian. The superior status of the USA is a fact - not necessarily in terms of moral high ground, best behavior or bring righteous, but more to do with sheer power. I don't so much "defend" this, as state that it's there, regardless of how some may feel about it. I'm not sorry if it hurts your sensitivities, such is life. Wouldn't know what "tokenist(?) apologies" you're on about - unless by that you mean not engaging in fiery rants favored by yourself and others. Not my thing. That would be the rest of your muddled tirade - which still doesn't have a whole lot to do with my posts. "The superior status of the USA is a fact - ". And there we have it. Indisputable? Demonstrable? No. It is merely the blagging of a desciple to the propaganda ! Agreed is that the US has a military presence it has no reserve in demonstrating. Blanket bombing. Missile strikes against an individual with multiple civilian collateral waste. Etc etc ! And yet you offer " I don't so much "defend" this" ........! Wouldn't know what tokenist apologies I am "on about" ? You subscribe to the militaristic philosophy that might is right ? And therefore any challenge by even those in a defensive situation are illegitimate by reason of inferior to military suppression? You confirm you are an Americon. ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumbastheycome Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 9 hours ago, Morch said: The poster you responded to seems to think that the destruction visited on countries such countries as Vietnam isn't a big deal. Got to love keyboard warriors, eh? Is it that in this response you gloat the destruction visited on countries such as Vietnam is some illustration of validation for the "superior" demonstration of? When in fact the US cut and run from that particular contrived conflict due to the proper condemnation of it by it's own citizens. Offer some genuine rebuttal to wide opinion instead of snide misinterpretations of that opinion as being some incorrect "inference" to your own opinion. Or is it difficult for you to comprehend and consider there are aspects to opinion that are broader or amazingly narrower than your own personal perspective of a topic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 38 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said: "The superior status of the USA is a fact - ". And there we have it. Indisputable? Demonstrable? No. It is merely the blagging of a desciple to the propaganda ! Agreed is that the US has a military presence it has no reserve in demonstrating. Blanket bombing. Missile strikes against an individual with multiple civilian collateral waste. Etc etc ! And yet you offer " I don't so much "defend" this" ........! Wouldn't know what tokenist apologies I am "on about" ? You subscribe to the militaristic philosophy that might is right ? And therefore any challenge by even those in a defensive situation are illegitimate by reason of inferior to military suppression? You confirm you are an Americon. ! At present the USA is in a superior position on multiple fronts. Militarily, economically and by extension (even under Trump) diplomatically. The situation vs. Iran makes a good example of all three, discussed in detail on many posts, including this topic. You wish to go the easy way and call it propaganda, go right ahead, doesn't change reality. Kindly stop making things up, or work on them comprehension issues. Acknowledging how things are is not a "defense", nor an "apology" (not even a tokenist(?) one). Where did I subscribe to any philosophy? Whether you like it or not, might often decides the outcome. It ain't always pretty. It ain't always nice. It ain't always right. Ignoring reality doesn't make it go away, and posting emotional rants on tirades does not carry much weight either. Similarly, I don't think that there was any blanket argument offered with regard to Iranian "defense" (guess its an eye of the beholder thing) being illegal. I did say that the outcome of such actions will probably not be beneficial to the Iranian people, and that by doing so Iran would help fuel the Trump administration narrative. Other potential Iranian actions discussed (attacking third party countries, blocking the Strait of Hormuz, withdrawing from the Iran Deal) will almost certainly result in wider international reactions. There wasn't any full pledged endorsement of the Trump administration actions, or USA policy - other than in your mind. Quote You confirm you are an Americon. ! Not really. But do seek help. And a spellchecker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 6 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said: Is it that in this response you gloat the destruction visited on countries such as Vietnam is some illustration of validation for the "superior" demonstration of? When in fact the US cut and run from that particular contrived conflict due to the proper condemnation of it by it's own citizens. Offer some genuine rebuttal to wide opinion instead of snide misinterpretations of that opinion as being some incorrect "inference" to your own opinion. Or is it difficult for you to comprehend and consider there are aspects to opinion that are broader or amazingly narrower than your own personal perspective of a topic? Where did you spot any gloating? My point was quite opposite. The destruction inflicted by the USA on countries it had direct conflicts with is a serious matter. I wouldn't wish it on the Iranians, and hence I object to posts by those making light of it. Why would I need to offer a "rebuttal" of fake views which aren't my own? You keep insisting on things I haven't posted, implied or claimed. And as for your last muddled remark, guess you know what you're on about, I've no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaRoadrunner Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 On 5/26/2019 at 9:05 AM, Alan Michael said: Yes Iran can sink US ships, but the US can sink Iran back to the stone age too. Iran never left the stone age, just like those who follow the Quran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 Troll posts reported and removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.