Iran Update...

Jointsmith · Mar 10, 2009

To be fair, I'm British and I'd be too tired to meet Gordon Brown....he's a douche.

He's a poor representative of our country.... but then again we didn't vote him in as PM.... he just kind of inherited it.

joepro · Mar 10, 2009

Jointsmith said:
To be fair, I'm British and I'd be too tired to meet Gordon Brown....he's a douche.

He's a poor representative of our country.... but then again we didn't vote him in as PM.... he just kind of inherited it.

your post pretty much sums up america

Jointsmith · Mar 10, 2009

joepro said:
your post pretty much sums up america

Good Parallel, you meant GWB right?

CrackerJax · Mar 10, 2009

Since you are an ordinary citizen, Gordon wouldn't care if you didn't meet with him. I guess you must have missed your country's outrage about the incident. All of England just received a slap in the face, and a big one at that. Good luck on your own over there...it's pretty apparent you just lost your flank.

out. :blsmoke:

medicineman · Mar 10, 2009

joepro said:
lol obama just shun your PM like he was a tourist. If anything I feel sorry for the UK. The once might of the world has become a third tier party at best. It reminds me of an old fighter whos just a shadow of his former self.
You have no resources other then zinc,copper and beer farts.
Please don't feel sorry for the alpha omega.

USA!USA!USA!

I think the USA is well on it's way to being a 2nd or 3rd rate country. The new boss, China. Maybe not militarily, but for sure economically. Heck, they already own a pretty good size chunk of the USA.

CrackerJax · Mar 10, 2009

medicineman said:
I think the USA is well on it's way to being a 2nd or 3rd rate country. The new boss, China. Maybe not militarily, but for sure economically. Heck, they already own a pretty good size chunk of the USA.

China has only agreed to buy up short term debt, no long term. That say something right there. Obama will hand it to them it seems. we are going the wrong way.

out. :blsmoke:

CrackerJax · Mar 10, 2009

Here's a bit of an update... hopefully Obama isn't this naive... we'll see.

Some Obama advisers have a dubious strategy to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran: Present "a common front" including Russia and China and "demonstrate U.S. respect" for the Islamofascist regime.
It may be judged the most astonishingly naive analysis of Tehran's nuclear ambitions ever unveiled.
Last week, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) — a think tank founded by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), and which should know better — released a report titled "Preventing a Cascade of Instability: U.S. Engagement to Check Iranian Nuclear Progress."
Among the paper's signatories: Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind.; House Middle East foreign affairs subcommittee chairman Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y.; Dennis Ross, a former Bill Clinton Mideast envoy and current special adviser for the Persian Gulf to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; and Nancy Soderberg, a foreign policy adviser to Bill Clinton, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Soderberg's 2005 book "The Superpower Myth" argues that U.S. foreign policy be based on internationalism and humility.
WINEP has often been accused of being part of the Israel lobby, so it is odd indeed to find it playing into the hands of Islamists.
The paper views the gathering nuclear storm in Iran as an opportunity "to demonstrate U.S. commitment to multilateral diplomacy," while "even a successful strike" by Israel destroying Iran's nuclear facilities could be seen internationally "as both a failure of and a setback for the treaty-based nonproliferation system."
The goal of the Obama administration should be "convincing Iran that its nuclear program is bringing it little strategic advantage at an increasing cost."
At the heart of this thinking is a false premise: that the mullahs' Islamofascist, apocalyptic regime in Tehran views geopolitics the way we do, or even the way, say, the Saudi royal family does.
The reality is that these are fanatics who only in the last week or so called the state of Israel a "cancer," who held a conference for commentators who deny the Nazis' genocide of the Jews and who await the arrival of a Muslim messiah who will lead a holy war to impose Shiite world rule and relegate Western civilization to museum exhibits. Their idea of "strategic advantage" is an eventual mushroom cloud over Tel Aviv, London or New York.
The WINEP report focuses on the importance of "strong international support for diplomatic initiatives" as "perhaps the single best way to increase the prospect that Iran will accept a compromise." It repeatedly insists that "Iran does not want to be isolated."
But who can deny that staunchly uncompromising Iran already is isolated, has been for years and seems to be enjoying its solitude immensely?
The paper recommends that "ways should be found to demonstrate U.S. respect . . . ." But can anyone really imagine Iranian President Ahmadinejad bringing the good news to Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei: "The Great Satan respects us now, your holiness. So with your permission the Revolutionary Islamic Republic of Iran will now start being friendlier to the infidels."
Then there's the assertion that "a common front presented by influential members of the international community, including Russia and China, is particularly important for affecting Iran's willingness to compromise, but looks quite difficult to achieve."
No kidding; impossible is more like it.
"Any offer on the nuclear issue" to Tehran should come from Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany, not just the U.S., the report emphasizes.
"Progress at the U.N. Security Council would be easier," it suggests, "if Washington could convince China that Iran's nuclear program is a strategic threat to its own interests and could persuade Russia that its interests are best served by cooperating fully with the West on this problem." Doing so "will require skillful diplomacy."
It might require alchemy, truth be told. Has it escaped the authors' notice that Russia and China, the former especially, have for years been instrumental in facilitating Iran's nuclear program? Or that these two murderous regimes might want a nuclear 9/11 courtesy of an Iranian-built bomb, because it could hasten the fall of the free West and the rise of the totalitarian East?
There is one solitary nugget of insightful value in the WINEP analysis. It notes that Israel sees a limited window for the bombing of Iran's nuclear sites "over the next one to two years." By then Russia will have delivered its S-300 surface-to-air missile system so this terrorist client state can protect its nuclear program from attack.
We hope President Obama isn't naive enough to take advice like this report seriously. If not, we may be saddled with the most geopolitically illiterate administration since Jimmy Carter.

out. :blsmoke:

Anotheroldephart · Mar 10, 2009

If folks thought that we were in trouble with GWB, I wonder what they think now...
They want to hang out the new "Welcome to the U.S.S.R..United States Socialist Regime.

i was SO happy to here that due to OB's incompetence, at l;east 1 segment of business is booming..Those of gun sales...Myself included...

PadawanBater · Mar 11, 2009

OK, I have some time, I'll respond to this one...

Some Obama advisers have a dubious strategy to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran: Present "a common front" including Russia and China and "demonstrate U.S. respect" for the Islamofascist regime.

This right here automatically makes me think wherever you found this article, they're already pretty biased. They call Iran an "Islamofascist REGIME!" to scare the simple folk reader, what's wrong with calling it what it actually is... Islamic Republic... What if they called the US a "Capitalist REGIME!!"... makes us sound kind of shitty right...

...and what don't you agree with in that statement, what's wrong with presenting a 'common front' and 'demonstrating U.S. respect' for Iran? (again, please don't assume I automatically agree with it because I'm asking you what's wrong with it... I simply want your own opinion why you think it's wrong.)

It may be judged the most astonishingly naive analysis of Tehran's nuclear ambitions ever unveiled.

Biased speculation

Last week, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) a think tank founded by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), and which should know better released a report titled "Preventing a Cascade of Instability: U.S. Engagement to Check Iranian Nuclear Progress."
Among the paper's signatories: Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind.; House Middle East foreign affairs subcommittee chairman Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y.; Dennis Ross, a former Bill Clinton Mideast envoy and current special adviser for the Persian Gulf to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; and Nancy Soderberg, a foreign policy adviser to Bill Clinton, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Soderberg's 2005 book "The Superpower Myth" argues that U.S. foreign policy be based on internationalism and humility.
WINEP has often been accused of being part of the Israel lobby, so it is odd indeed to find it playing into the hands of Islamists.

"...playing into the hands of the Islamists." ??? What exactly does that mean? What do you assume this to mean CJ?

The paper views the gathering nuclear storm in Iran as an opportunity "to demonstrate U.S. commitment to multilateral diplomacy," while "even a successful strike" by Israel destroying Iran's nuclear facilities could be seen internationally "as both a failure of and a setback for the treaty-based nonproliferation system."

Completely agree.

The goal of the Obama administration should be "convincing Iran that its nuclear program is bringing it little strategic advantage at an increasing cost."
At the heart of this thinking is a false premise: that the mullahs' Islamofascist, apocalyptic regime in Tehran views geopolitics the way we do, or even the way, say, the Saudi royal family does. The reality is that these are fanatics who only in the last week or so called the state of Israel a "cancer," who held a conference for commentators who deny the Nazis' genocide of the Jews and who await the arrival of a Muslim messiah who will lead a holy war to impose Shiite world rule and relegate Western civilization to museum exhibits. Their idea of "strategic advantage" is an eventual mushroom cloud over Tel Aviv, London or New York.

(sounds a little like western Christianity if you ask me..)

Where's the reporter get all these facts? Sounds like a shit load of ignorance and fear to me...

...they claim the numbers have been exaggerated, not that the holocaust didn't happen. If they claim the holocaust didn't happen, they're fuckin' idiots, you're right. Again, I don't support the president of Iran and everything he does...

The WINEP report focuses on the importance of "strong international support for diplomatic initiatives" as "perhaps the single best way to increase the prospect that Iran will accept a compromise." It repeatedly insists that "Iran does not want to be isolated."
But who can deny that staunchly uncompromising Iran already is isolated, has been for years and seems to be enjoying its solitude immensely?

Biased speculation.

The paper recommends that "ways should be found to demonstrate U.S. respect . . . ." But can anyone really imagine Iranian President Ahmadinejad bringing the good news to Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei: "The Great Satan respects us now, your holiness. So with your permission the Revolutionary Islamic Republic of Iran will now start being friendlier to the infidels."

Pffft!! Seriously?! Did Bobby Jindal write this report!? Who does this idiot think is reading this, a 5th grader?!

Then there's the assertion that "a common front presented by influential members of the international community, including Russia and China, is particularly important for affecting Iran's willingness to compromise, but looks quite difficult to achieve."
No kidding; impossible is more like it.

"Impossible!!" huh?! Damn, I guess that just sums it up then, lets not even bother with this idea, this reporter has already concluded it's "IMPOSSIBLE!", guess it must be...

"Any offer on the nuclear issue" to Tehran should come from Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany, not just the U.S., the report emphasizes.
"Progress at the U.N. Security Council would be easier," it suggests, "if Washington could convince China that Iran's nuclear program is a strategic threat to its own interests and could persuade Russia that its interests are best served by cooperating fully with the West on this problem." Doing so "will require skillful diplomacy."
It might require alchemy, truth be told. Has it escaped the authors' notice that Russia and China, the former especially, have for years been instrumental in facilitating Iran's nuclear program? Or that these two murderous regimes might want a nuclear 9/11 courtesy of an Iranian-built bomb, because it could hasten the fall of the free West and the rise of the totalitarian East?

"Be AFRAID, Be VERY AFRAID!!"

See man, it's writing like this that'll keep a guy from getting anywhere, this reporter needs to take a few more junior college journalism courses if he plans on writing for O'Riley or Hannity one day.. Shit sounds like it's coming right out of a sci fi book, again, completely biased SPECULATION, not to mention stupid fuckin' statements...

There is one solitary nugget of insightful value in the WINEP analysis. It notes that Israel sees a limited window for the bombing of Iran's nuclear sites "over the next one to two years." By then Russia will have delivered its S-300 surface-to-air missile system so this terrorist client state can protect its nuclear program from attack.

So the entire report talks about how we can establish some sort of peace or common ground over the middle east with mutual respect and legitimate trade, etc, and the one thing this reporter can find in the entire thing that's good is that WINEP figured we've got two more years that we can successfully bomb Iran (start a war) before they can protect themselves from attack... nah, that's not unbelievably biased right there...

We hope President Obama isn't naive enough to take advice like this report seriously. If not, we may be saddled with the most geopolitically illiterate administration since Jimmy Carter.

And if he ignores it, shit we might be 10 TRILLION dollars poorer, 5K of our best and brightest shorter, or worse...thanks W.

:hump:

Jointsmith · Mar 11, 2009

CrackerJax said:
Since you are an ordinary citizen, Gordon wouldn't care if you didn't meet with him. I guess you must have missed your country's outrage about the incident. All of England just received a slap in the face, and a big one at that. Good luck on your own over there...it's pretty apparent you just lost your flank.

out.

Ever heard of the European Union Dipshit?

The best thing about being British, apart from being able to talk correctly, is being able to live and work ANYWHERE in the wealthiest (top GDP in the world), most Diverse, part of the world there is (The European Union).... so no, we're not on our own.

Britains had a good run all things considered, ever wondered how a country a 1/5 of the size of Texas managed to take over the world?

Here's a bit of an update... hopefully Obama isn't this naive... we'll see.

Some Obama advisers have a dubious strategy to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran: Present "a common front" including Russia and China and "demonstrate U.S. respect" for the Islamofascist regime.
It may be judged the most astonishingly naive analysis of Tehran's nuclear ambitions ever unveiled.
Last week, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) a think tank founded by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), and which should know better released a report titled "Preventing a Cascade of Instability: U.S. Engagement to Check Iranian Nuclear Progress."
Among the paper's signatories: Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind.; House Middle East foreign affairs subcommittee chairman Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y.; Dennis Ross, a former Bill Clinton Mideast envoy and current special adviser for the Persian Gulf to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; and Nancy Soderberg, a foreign policy adviser to Bill Clinton, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Soderberg's 2005 book "The Superpower Myth" argues that U.S. foreign policy be based on internationalism and humility.
WINEP has often been accused of being part of the Israel lobby, so it is odd indeed to find it playing into the hands of Islamists.
The paper views the gathering nuclear storm in Iran as an opportunity "to demonstrate U.S. commitment to multilateral diplomacy," while "even a successful strike" by Israel destroying Iran's nuclear facilities could be seen internationally "as both a failure of and a setback for the treaty-based nonproliferation system."
The goal of the Obama administration should be "convincing Iran that its nuclear program is bringing it little strategic advantage at an increasing cost."
At the heart of this thinking is a false premise: that the mullahs' Islamofascist, apocalyptic regime in Tehran views geopolitics the way we do, or even the way, say, the Saudi royal family does.
The reality is that these are fanatics who only in the last week or so called the state of Israel a "cancer," who held a conference for commentators who deny the Nazis' genocide of the Jews and who await the arrival of a Muslim messiah who will lead a holy war to impose Shiite world rule and relegate Western civilization to museum exhibits. Their idea of "strategic advantage" is an eventual mushroom cloud over Tel Aviv, London or New York.
The WINEP report focuses on the importance of "strong international support for diplomatic initiatives" as "perhaps the single best way to increase the prospect that Iran will accept a compromise." It repeatedly insists that "Iran does not want to be isolated."
But who can deny that staunchly uncompromising Iran already is isolated, has been for years and seems to be enjoying its solitude immensely?
The paper recommends that "ways should be found to demonstrate U.S. respect . . . ." But can anyone really imagine Iranian President Ahmadinejad bringing the good news to Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei: "The Great Satan respects us now, your holiness. So with your permission the Revolutionary Islamic Republic of Iran will now start being friendlier to the infidels."
Then there's the assertion that "a common front presented by influential members of the international community, including Russia and China, is particularly important for affecting Iran's willingness to compromise, but looks quite difficult to achieve."
No kidding; impossible is more like it.
"Any offer on the nuclear issue" to Tehran should come from Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany, not just the U.S., the report emphasizes.
"Progress at the U.N. Security Council would be easier," it suggests, "if Washington could convince China that Iran's nuclear program is a strategic threat to its own interests and could persuade Russia that its interests are best served by cooperating fully with the West on this problem." Doing so "will require skillful diplomacy."
It might require alchemy, truth be told. Has it escaped the authors' notice that Russia and China, the former especially, have for years been instrumental in facilitating Iran's nuclear program? Or that these two murderous regimes might want a nuclear 9/11 courtesy of an Iranian-built bomb, because it could hasten the fall of the free West and the rise of the totalitarian East?
There is one solitary nugget of insightful value in the WINEP analysis. It notes that Israel sees a limited window for the bombing of Iran's nuclear sites "over the next one to two years." By then Russia will have delivered its S-300 surface-to-air missile system so this terrorist client state can protect its nuclear program from attack.
We hope President Obama isn't naive enough to take advice like this report seriously. If not, we may be saddled with the most geopolitically illiterate administration since Jimmy Carter.

No wonder you are so ignorant if you take all your info from biased right wing propaganda.

I don't blame Iran for wanting to defend itself from America, your country is a Liability.... starting wars for profit, Killing unarmed Civilians, and exporting your greed and corruption through corperate rule.

It's not like they need to look very far to see the fucked up things your country does.

CrackerJax · Mar 11, 2009

A political regime is a set of political structures that make up a state. A political regime may also be known as a form of government, a state system, or a political system. The term political regime may also sometimes refer to a specific ruler or set of rulers within a political system.
There are many different types of political regime in the modern world, and many more have existed historically. These range from the directly-democratic political regime of Anarchism to totalitarian regimes such as Military Dictatorships or Fascism. It is an accurate statement.

It MAY be the most.... again accurate.

Paying into the hands of.... Well, since the Iranians have been using negotiations as a stall tactic to deliver the bomb, and since the AIPAC is with the Israeli lobby, the author finds it a bit strange as do I. They certainly should know better. Of course there may be many levels at work here behind the scenes and Israel may be simply covering all the bases.

Since 5 years of UN negotiations have yielded only enriched uranium, I disagree.

As for the holocaust denial, I am glad you admit it happened...whew. :lol:

They do not admit it and guess what, they are in control over there. These are the people who are building a bomb.

How is it biased for the reporter to say that Iran has already been isolated? they are and they do seem to be content with it until the master plan can be executed. If they have ANY friends (Iluse the term friends loosely here) it would be the Russians who are helping them build the bomb. This is one reason why Obama's olive branch to Russia is naive at best.

Jindel... :lol:

No, and I'm pretty sure a 5th grader would grasp that the Iranians take the satan bit VERY seriously. It does not matter whether you do. You are an infidel.

The write say, impossible more like it...and as I have already said, we have been in negotiations for over 5 years with this exact formula....and the bomb is almost here. That's called a pattern fella. The groping at the same failed ideas is what is alarming. Hitler would have loved this think tank.

So you don't think russia and china would just play patty cake if a nuke went off and western power waned? What do you think the cold war is son? A game of jacks? What do you think TOTALitarianism is? Now who is being naive...

I noticed you skipped the part about the Russians supplying the Iranians with an air missile defense system. Sort of points out the folly of Obama playing nice with the Ruskies... :lol:

Not to mention that Iran will have a missile defense system...and YOU won't. The US has one...the Russians have one.....the Chinese have one...the Iranians will have one shortly.... gosh the missile defense systems are popping up...but not for you. Nothing to worry about there right? :lol:

uh huh. Patterns son, patters. Follow the action and not the words.

No, if Obama takes it to heart it may be the beginning of the end, for either London or Israel. Iran's two prime targets as they have stated on numerous occasions.

So as the world bulks up its military and religious fanatics build a bomb... it's Neville Chamberlain time all over again for the west. Remember him? So you want to take the high moral road Padawan....fine. When the bully walks the street, just sit there and be one with ghandi. Just be prepared to get the sh*t knocked out of you. The bullies of the world smell the weakness and they are correct. they will act accordingly, and they are already doing so. :peace:

out.

CrackerJax · Mar 11, 2009

Jointsmith said:
Ever heard of the European Union Dipshit?

The best thing about being British, apart from being able to talk correctly, is being able to live and work ANYWHERE in the wealthiest (top GDP in the world), most Diverse, part of the world there is (The European Union).... so no, we're not on our own.

Britains had a good run all things considered, ever wondered how a country a 1/5 of the size of Texas managed to take over the world?

No wonder you are so ignorant if you take all your info from biased right wing propaganda.

I don't blame Iran for wanting to defend itself from America, your country is a Liability.... starting wars for profit, Killing unarmed Civilians, and exporting your greed and corruption through corperate rule.

It's not like they need to look very far to see the fucked up things your country does.

I guess you are unaware of the EU report which came out a few months ago saying they don't have enough money for their own defense? :lol:

Uhh, get ur head out of the sand...without the US defense umbrella, you are at the mercy of others.... This is pretty basic stuff and you seem to be grossly misinformed.

out. :blsmoke:

Jointsmith · Mar 11, 2009

CrackerJax said:
I guess you are unaware of the EU report which came out a few months ago saying they don't have enough money for their own defense? Uhh, get ur head out of the sand...without the US defense umbrella, you are at the mercy of others.... This is pretty basic stuff and you seem to be grossly misinformed.

out.

Awww Crackers has the FEAR!! Crackers has the FEAR!!!

Keep typing Crackers, although I don't quite know what you're trying to acheive. If you're trying to scare someone the only person it seems to be working on is yourself.

Ever been so Irrational you start to believe your own bullshit? (thats rhetorical.... we can all see you are)

Jointsmith · Mar 11, 2009

The only country anyone needs defending from is the US of shitty A.

TheBrutalTruth · Mar 11, 2009

Jointsmith said:
Ever heard of the European Union Dipshit?

The best thing about being British, apart from being able to talk correctly, is being able to live and work ANYWHERE in the wealthiest (top GDP in the world), most Diverse, part of the world there is (The European Union).... so no, we're not on our own.

Britains had a good run all things considered, ever wondered how a country a 1/5 of the size of Texas managed to take over the world?

No wonder you are so ignorant if you take all your info from biased right wing propaganda.

I don't blame Iran for wanting to defend itself from America, your country is a Liability.... starting wars for profit, Killing unarmed Civilians, and exporting your greed and corruption through corperate rule.

It's not like they need to look very far to see the fucked up things your country does.

The EU is a Joke..

And Britain...

Well it's nice to see that the British still haven't lost the Hubris that cost them their Global Empire...

The Sun has Set on the British Empire

How's it feel to be the backwater province of Germany. What's more impressive is they did it with out firing a shot...

CrackerJax · Mar 11, 2009

Jointsmith said:
Awww Crackers has the FEAR!! Crackers has the FEAR!!!

Keep typing Crackers, although I don't quite know what you're trying to acheive. If you're trying to scare someone the only person it seems to be working on is yourself.

Ever been so Irrational you start to believe your own bullshit? (thats rhetorical.... we can all see you are)

You keep bringing up fear, not I. I'm just stating plain facts. You cannot defend yourself. You haven't for 60 years son. Here's hoping you become more informed about the realities of the world...

out. :blsmoke:

joepro · Mar 11, 2009

Jointsmith said:
The only country anyone needs defending from is the US of shitty A.

I wish this to be true. I want nothing more then to leave everyone to defend themselfs. If attacked, so be it.
it's just to bad your not using a german to engish dictionary as you type this.

So brush your teeth, your stinkin up this web site will your foul breath.

CrackerJax · Mar 11, 2009

joepro said:
I wish this to be true. I want nothing more then to leave everyone to defend themselfs. If attacked, so be it.
it's just to bad your not using a german to engish dictionary as you type this.

So brush your teeth, your stinkin up this web site will your foul breath.

Considering the cold reception and basic insult Obama just hit the Brits with, it is not out of the realm of possibilities that we may withdraw from Europe. I have been to Europe over a dozen times and have many friends over there, so the only thing I would have to adapt to is learning anew language to get around...Russian. I do love Borscht (it's awesome!) so it might not be so bad. Sweet!!!
:lol:

Obama may very well indeed do some cost cutting in Europe. Simply removing our defense will cause their bankruptcy however.

out. :blsmoke:

joepro · Mar 11, 2009

They seem not to mind if we leave Europe.
I don't mind, they don't matter.....
lol speaking russian while only able to practice Islamic teachings.

CrackerJax · Mar 11, 2009

Europe cares deeply. These guys are completely out of step with their govt's positions. It's not hard to fathom. They are fed home spun news to keep them calm. It's not us, it's them .... most folks are easily misled. I will say padawan makes an attempt tho. :clap:

Unsuccessful, but still, he seems to have a noggin.

out. :blsmoke:

Iran Update...

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

PadawanBater

Guest

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member