China: we have absolute right to work with Iran

I see that Frank is... once again... back to wishing and hoping... for the terrorists to win out.

Frank talk:

View attachment 1226808

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Rubio dressed as a pool cue shot Iran's balls from pocket to pocket.
Of course you’d get it wrong

I wanted America to stay far, far away from yet another ME cluster**** that can only mean I’m an antisemitic neoNazi
 
I gassed up right after Operation Epic Cluster started was $2.99, today $3.39, another 2 weeks probably over $4. Many items at the grocery store also spiked higher

This is what we voted for, amiright?
 
Iran is responsible for thousands of American deaths .they're all so responsible for the October 7th attack ,responsible for Hamas , for Hezballah they responsible for the houthis..... Snap out of your delusions you look like a fool

Exactly....He said Ukraine was supposed to easily defeat Russia ..... You're confused 🤔
Antisemitic neoNazi protest Israeli Zionism

 
Antisemitic neoNazi protest Israeli Zionism



Whatever you've been taught is wrong Jews don't wish for the death of other Jews nor do we kiss ass to survive anymore

1000080113.webp
 
No, you asshole.

Clearly, you are unfamiliar with the modern age ability to look things up.

I had previously posted on this very same topic.

Summary: 3 to 5 percent enrichment needed to use uranium to generate power.

About 20% for scientific research purposes.

Current level of Uranium enrichment by Iran is 60%. Here’s a quote and link:


— excerpt from https://www.reuters.com/world/middl...underground-site-iaea-report-says-2026-02-27/

Well established level of uranium enrichment to make nuclear weapons is still ~90%. (If you pretend to need a link for that particular, you’re a complete lying idiot.)

Riddle us this, fuckstick: if not for further enrichment specifically to create nuclear weapons, why on Earth would Iran’s leadershit need to enrich the uranium above maybe 20%, at most?
ran has formally defended its enrichment of uranium to 60% purity in a public statement, insisting the activity is not prohibited under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

The explanatory note, released ahead of a key meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors, criticized the agency’s latest report for relying on “unverified” and “politically influenced” sources, saying the findings reflect a “departure from the principles of impartiality and professionalism.”

“Enrichment to 60% is not banned by the NPT, and all related activities are declared and verifiable,” said the statement published on the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran's website.

To be honest who could blame Iran for getting a nuclear weapon? if they had one they wouldn't have been attacked like Libya and Iraq, how about Isreal opening up their sites for inspection? it's thought they have hundreds of nuclear weapons.
 
I see that Frank is... once again... back to wishing and hoping... for the terrorists to win out.

Frank talk:

View attachment 1226808

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Rubio dressed as a pool cue shot Iran's balls from pocket to pocket.
Hegseth is a evangelical Christian extremist who has Crusader tattoos all over his body, he is as mad as a box of frogs who believes they are engaged in some Religious war and wants to kill as many Iranians as possible, with his Amalek pal Nuttenyahu.
 
Hegseth is a evangelical Christian extremist who has Crusader tattoos all over his body, he is as mad as a box of frogs who believes they are engaged in some Religious war and wants to kill as many Iranians as possible, with his Amalek pal Nuttenyahu.
:itsok:

It's a litmus test and as long as he continues to piss those of your ilk off it's gotta be a good thing.
 
ran has formally defended its enrichment of uranium to 60% purity in a public statement, insisting the activity is not prohibited under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Their claim is trivially true. The NPT does not expressly forbid enrichment to 60%. However, that still begs the question:

Unless for making nuclear weapons, what other legitimate use would any nation have to enrich it to 60% or more?

The only truthful answer is “none.”
The explanatory note, released ahead of a key meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors, criticized the agency’s latest report for relying on “unverified” and “politically influenced” sources, saying the findings reflect a “departure from the principles of impartiality and professionalism.”
So what? Them making that claim doesn’t make it a valid one.
“Enrichment to 60% is not banned by the NPT, and all related activities are declared and verifiable,” said the statement published on the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran's website.
The NPT says that Non-nuclear-weapon states (NNWS) agree not to manufacture or acquire nuclear weapons (Article II).
But since there is no other “reason” to enrich uranium to that percentage level, Iran’s quibble is of no genuine weight.

Face reality, someday at least. I swear it could help you. The reality remains, that since there is absolutely no possible purpose of enriching uranium to 60% other than to thereby further enhance it to ~90%, only a simpleton would accept the Iranian position. It is false on its face.

To be honest who could blame Iran for getting a nuclear weapon?
Intelligent people.
if they had one they wouldn't have been attacked like Libya and Iraq, how about Isreal opening up their sites for inspection? it's thought they have hundreds of nuclear weapons.
Even if we were to accept your dubious claim about Israeli nukes, that hardly justifies what Iran was seeking to acquire.
If Israel has had nuclear weapons for however long they are said to have had them, one thing is known. They haven’t used them.

By contrast, the Iranians promise the death of Israel and have also threatened the U.S.

Now, maybe some imbecile would trust Iran not to use them when they acquire them. But rational people don’t believe that for a split second.
 
15th post
They way he treated the people he lead.
How is that? Because I thought Gaddafi was a highly divisive figure, often condemned as a dictator who used his power to silence dissent, engaged in severe human rights violations, and built a massive cult of personality. Is that wrong?
 
Back
Top Bottom