What right do we have to tell Iran they can’t have nuclear bombs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What right do democrats have to tell me I shouldn’t be allowed to have an AR-15?

No one has obliterated your AR-15

I trust Iran more than I trust Trump and sycophants.

Of course you do. Not even the least little bit surprised to hear you say that.

You Progs hate other Americans far more than you’d ever dislike an enemy of our country. We know that. We’ve always known that. You’d rather see us dead instead.


We know.

+100
The PP is one of the most unsurprising, completely predictable responses in the history of DCUM.

You both need to take a Xanax. So much drama.

"You want to see us dead, dead, dead!!!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What right do democrats have to tell me I shouldn’t be allowed to have an AR-15?

No one has obliterated your AR-15

I trust Iran more than I trust Trump and sycophants.

Of course you do. Not even the least little bit surprised to hear you say that.

You Progs hate other Americans far more than you’d ever dislike an enemy of our country. We know that. We’ve always known that. You’d rather see us dead instead.


We know.

No one is trying to take away your rifle or pistol and Iran isn't shooting up our kids in schools or churches or grocery stores every other day. So weighing the bigger threat, it's 100% Americans with guns meant for war.

I love how libs always start posts like this one ^^^ with something like “nO oNe Is tRyInG tO tAkE yUr gUNz aWaY!”…. And then they proceed to explain why we should take everyone’s guns away. That’s some hilarious sh!t right there 😆

Wow. Talk about a lack of comprehension. We used to have an AR ban and mass shootings were down. ARs are directly connected to our mass shootings. Can we own bombs? What about grenades? Define "Arms"?

WELL REGULATED is a phrase that's a part of the 2nd amendment. But whatever, cling on tight to that machine gun. It's what Jesus would do, right?

Oh my comprehension is just fine, thanks.

Here’s a homework assignment for ya:

Look into what the phrase “well regulated” meant in the context of 1791 prose.

Hint: it doesn’t mean “subjected to lots of rules, laws, regulations or……. infringements.

1791 the US military was under 1000 people. Therefore the govt wanted militas as a backup plan made of citizens. Well regulated didn't mean red tape but it did mean rules, structure and training. Not to mention it took 30 seconds to reload a gun then, an AR can slaughter a classroom of kids in 30 seconds.

Fast forward to now, you have twisted it to desperately cling onto your machine guns and we have the largest and most robust military in the world. At the very least we should have background checks and training requirements and a limit on what type of weapon an average citizen can own.

You have failed.

That is not the period-correct definition of the word “regulated”.

Is this what brain on MAGA looks like?

+1
Let’s now define militia. Hint- it’s not you and your personal armory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What right do democrats have to tell me I shouldn’t be allowed to have an AR-15?

Bad analogy. What right would the US congress tell Canadians that they aren’t allowed to have any guns is a better example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given what Iran has consistently claimed to want to do, yes.

Go study up OP, did you just crawl out of a cave for 100 years?

More likely crawled out of an undergrad program from Oberlin or W&M 😆

LOL.
I think OP is very young and very naive. She needs to do a little dive into the history of Iran. She doesn't need to go too far back... She can start with the 1979 hostage crisis.

You need to start further back to show the damage the US did in Iran. The early 1950s is when the CIA and England created a coup and put the Shah in place of a democratically elected leader. In the 1950s and 60s the US assisted Iran in gaining nuclear power. It was called Atoms for Peace.

Right before the hostages taken there was a revolution against the US appointed dictator Shah and he had to escape. The formerly exiled Khomeini came into power. The US took in the Shah for medical treatment and that was one of the reasons the hostages were taken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What right do democrats have to tell me I shouldn’t be allowed to have an AR-15?

No one has obliterated your AR-15

I trust Iran more than I trust Trump and sycophants.

Of course you do. Not even the least little bit surprised to hear you say that.

You Progs hate other Americans far more than you’d ever dislike an enemy of our country. We know that. We’ve always known that. You’d rather see us dead instead.


We know.

No one is trying to take away your rifle or pistol and Iran isn't shooting up our kids in schools or churches or grocery stores every other day. So weighing the bigger threat, it's 100% Americans with guns meant for war.

I love how libs always start posts like this one ^^^ with something like “nO oNe Is tRyInG tO tAkE yUr gUNz aWaY!”…. And then they proceed to explain why we should take everyone’s guns away. That’s some hilarious sh!t right there 😆

Wow. Talk about a lack of comprehension. We used to have an AR ban and mass shootings were down. ARs are directly connected to our mass shootings. Can we own bombs? What about grenades? Define "Arms"?

WELL REGULATED is a phrase that's a part of the 2nd amendment. But whatever, cling on tight to that machine gun. It's what Jesus would do, right?

Oh my comprehension is just fine, thanks.

Here’s a homework assignment for ya:

Look into what the phrase “well regulated” meant in the context of 1791 prose.

Hint: it doesn’t mean “subjected to lots of rules, laws, regulations or……. infringements.

1791 the US military was under 1000 people. Therefore the govt wanted militas as a backup plan made of citizens. Well regulated didn't mean red tape but it did mean rules, structure and training. Not to mention it took 30 seconds to reload a gun then, an AR can slaughter a classroom of kids in 30 seconds.

Fast forward to now, you have twisted it to desperately cling onto your machine guns and we have the largest and most robust military in the world. At the very least we should have background checks and training requirements and a limit on what type of weapon an average citizen can own.

You have failed.

That is not the period-correct definition of the word “regulated”.

Is this what brain on MAGA looks like?

+1
Let’s now define militia. Hint- it’s not you and your personal armory.

Hint- Thomas Jefferson was asked this very same question, and he’s already defined it.

“It is the whole of the People”


So yeah, that indeed IS me and my personal armory.

And you, too. You can borrow one of my AR’s, if I think you’re responsible enough not to accidentally shoot yourself or someone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given what Iran has consistently claimed to want to do, yes.

Go study up OP, did you just crawl out of a cave for 100 years?

More likely crawled out of an undergrad program from Oberlin or W&M 😆

LOL.
I think OP is very young and very naive. She needs to do a little dive into the history of Iran. She doesn't need to go too far back... She can start with the 1979 hostage crisis.

Oh yes, i made Christmas cards in elementary supposedly "to send to the hostages."

You must support Israel. Only those guys think pulling up stuff from 50 years ago should be used to drive U.S. foreign policy in the 21st century.

DP.

How ‘bout Iran’s support for repeated attacks on US forces in Iraq over the last 15+ years?

How many Americans need to die before you’re convinced that the Iranian government is our enemy?

The US created a coup and installed a dictator, The Shah. This brutal dictator killed thousands of innocent Iranians during his reign until the revolution in 1979. You have to wonder what the country would be like if they were able to keep the democratically elected leader. Less violence, more freedom. But the US didn’t care. Its decision revolved around oil. US can stay out of everyone’s business and focus on US problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What right do democrats have to tell me I shouldn’t be allowed to have an AR-15?

No one has obliterated your AR-15

I trust Iran more than I trust Trump and sycophants.

Of course you do. Not even the least little bit surprised to hear you say that.

You Progs hate other Americans far more than you’d ever dislike an enemy of our country. We know that. We’ve always known that. You’d rather see us dead instead.


We know.

No one is trying to take away your rifle or pistol and Iran isn't shooting up our kids in schools or churches or grocery stores every other day. So weighing the bigger threat, it's 100% Americans with guns meant for war.

I love how libs always start posts like this one ^^^ with something like “nO oNe Is tRyInG tO tAkE yUr gUNz aWaY!”…. And then they proceed to explain why we should take everyone’s guns away. That’s some hilarious sh!t right there 😆

Do people in real life cross to the other side of the street when they see you coming? did you have some kind of spasm while you were typing this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What right do democrats have to tell me I shouldn’t be allowed to have an AR-15?

No one has obliterated your AR-15

I trust Iran more than I trust Trump and sycophants.

Of course you do. Not even the least little bit surprised to hear you say that.

You Progs hate other Americans far more than you’d ever dislike an enemy of our country. We know that. We’ve always known that. You’d rather see us dead instead.


We know.

No one is trying to take away your rifle or pistol and Iran isn't shooting up our kids in schools or churches or grocery stores every other day. So weighing the bigger threat, it's 100% Americans with guns meant for war.

I love how libs always start posts like this one ^^^ with something like “nO oNe Is tRyInG tO tAkE yUr gUNz aWaY!”…. And then they proceed to explain why we should take everyone’s guns away. That’s some hilarious sh!t right there 😆

Do people in real life cross to the other side of the street when they see you coming? did you have some kind of spasm while you were typing this?

It might be summer break, but it’s past your bedtime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given what Iran has consistently claimed to want to do, yes.

Go study up OP, did you just crawl out of a cave for 100 years?

More likely crawled out of an undergrad program from Oberlin or W&M 😆

LOL.
I think OP is very young and very naive. She needs to do a little dive into the history of Iran. She doesn't need to go too far back... She can start with the 1979 hostage crisis.

You need to start further back to show the damage the US did in Iran. The early 1950s is when the CIA and England created a coup and put the Shah in place of a democratically elected leader. In the 1950s and 60s the US assisted Iran in gaining nuclear power. It was called Atoms for Peace.

Right before the hostages taken there was a revolution against the US appointed dictator Shah and he had to escape. The formerly exiled Khomeini came into power. The US took in the Shah for medical treatment and that was one of the reasons the hostages were taken.

You'll upset people if you try to give context that disrupts their narrative.

And yes the western imposed Shah was brutal to his people for decades and allowed the pillaging of oil for the west.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given what Iran has consistently claimed to want to do, yes.

Go study up OP, did you just crawl out of a cave for 100 years?

More likely crawled out of an undergrad program from Oberlin or W&M 😆

LOL.
I think OP is very young and very naive. She needs to do a little dive into the history of Iran. She doesn't need to go too far back... She can start with the 1979 hostage crisis.

Oh yes, i made Christmas cards in elementary supposedly "to send to the hostages."

You must support Israel. Only those guys think pulling up stuff from 50 years ago should be used to drive U.S. foreign policy in the 21st century.

DP.

How ‘bout Iran’s support for repeated attacks on US forces in Iraq over the last 15+ years?

How many Americans need to die before you’re convinced that the Iranian government is our enemy?

The US created a coup and installed a dictator, The Shah. This brutal dictator killed thousands of innocent Iranians during his reign until the revolution in 1979. You have to wonder what the country would be like if they were able to keep the democratically elected leader. Less violence, more freedom. But the US didn’t care. Its decision revolved around oil. US can stay out of everyone’s business and focus on US problems.

PP here.

All true and all totally irrelevant. Today’s Iranian government presents a clear threat to America and Americans.

If they want an apology for Cold War meddling, fine. “Death to America” not fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given what Iran has consistently claimed to want to do, yes.

Go study up OP, did you just crawl out of a cave for 100 years?

More likely crawled out of an undergrad program from Oberlin or W&M 😆

LOL.
I think OP is very young and very naive. She needs to do a little dive into the history of Iran. She doesn't need to go too far back... She can start with the 1979 hostage crisis.

Oh yes, i made Christmas cards in elementary supposedly "to send to the hostages."

You must support Israel. Only those guys think pulling up stuff from 50 years ago should be used to drive U.S. foreign policy in the 21st century.

DP.

How ‘bout Iran’s support for repeated attacks on US forces in Iraq over the last 15+ years?

How many Americans need to die before you’re convinced that the Iranian government is our enemy?

The US created a coup and installed a dictator, The Shah. This brutal dictator killed thousands of innocent Iranians during his reign until the revolution in 1979. You have to wonder what the country would be like if they were able to keep the democratically elected leader. Less violence, more freedom. But the US didn’t care. Its decision revolved around oil. US can stay out of everyone’s business and focus on US problems.

PP here.

All true and all totally irrelevant. Today’s Iranian government presents a clear threat to America and Americans.

If they want an apology for Cold War meddling, fine. “Death to America” not fine.

DP no Iran’s government does not represent any threat to the US. You can say it but it is not true. Maybe Israel see Iran as a regional arrival but that’s about it.

Seriously your premise is preposterous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given what Iran has consistently claimed to want to do, yes.

Go study up OP, did you just crawl out of a cave for 100 years?

More likely crawled out of an undergrad program from Oberlin or W&M 😆

LOL.
I think OP is very young and very naive. She needs to do a little dive into the history of Iran. She doesn't need to go too far back... She can start with the 1979 hostage crisis.

Oh yes, i made Christmas cards in elementary supposedly "to send to the hostages."

You must support Israel. Only those guys think pulling up stuff from 50 years ago should be used to drive U.S. foreign policy in the 21st century.

DP.

How ‘bout Iran’s support for repeated attacks on US forces in Iraq over the last 15+ years?

How many Americans need to die before you’re convinced that the Iranian government is our enemy?

The US created a coup and installed a dictator, The Shah. This brutal dictator killed thousands of innocent Iranians during his reign until the revolution in 1979. You have to wonder what the country would be like if they were able to keep the democratically elected leader. Less violence, more freedom. But the US didn’t care. Its decision revolved around oil. US can stay out of everyone’s business and focus on US problems.

PP here.

All true and all totally irrelevant. Today’s Iranian government presents a clear threat to America and Americans.

If they want an apology for Cold War meddling, fine. “Death to America” not fine.

DP no Iran’s government does not represent any threat to the US. You can say it but it is not true. Maybe Israel see Iran as a regional arrival but that’s about it.

Seriously your premise is preposterous.

Sounds like Iranian loyalist need to pony up and send some billions to fund GOP and Dem politicians so that bombs can be dropped on their enemies. Gotta pay to play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Given what Iran has consistently claimed to want to do, yes.

Go study up OP, did you just crawl out of a cave for 100 years?

More likely crawled out of an undergrad program from Oberlin or W&M 😆

LOL.
I think OP is very young and very naive. She needs to do a little dive into the history of Iran. She doesn't need to go too far back... She can start with the 1979 hostage crisis.

Oh yes, i made Christmas cards in elementary supposedly "to send to the hostages."

You must support Israel. Only those guys think pulling up stuff from 50 years ago should be used to drive U.S. foreign policy in the 21st century.

DP.

How ‘bout Iran’s support for repeated attacks on US forces in Iraq over the last 15+ years?

How many Americans need to die before you’re convinced that the Iranian government is our enemy?

The US created a coup and installed a dictator, The Shah. This brutal dictator killed thousands of innocent Iranians during his reign until the revolution in 1979. You have to wonder what the country would be like if they were able to keep the democratically elected leader. Less violence, more freedom. But the US didn’t care. Its decision revolved around oil. US can stay out of everyone’s business and focus on US problems.

PP here.

All true and all totally irrelevant. Today’s Iranian government presents a clear threat to America and Americans.

If they want an apology for Cold War meddling, fine. “Death to America” not fine.

DP no Iran’s government does not represent any threat to the US. You can say it but it is not true. Maybe Israel see Iran as a regional arrival but that’s about it.

Seriously your premise is preposterous.

If anything the parasitic relationship with Israel has been the biggest threat to the US. Because we have been enabling and supporting all their war crimes, genocide, and ethnic cleaning, the US has long had a target on its back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What right do democrats have to tell me I shouldn’t be allowed to have an AR-15?

Given that the only use for an AR-15 is to mow down many humans at a high rate of speed, if you intent is to kill humans, then, no, you should not have one.

Wrong. An AR-15 is considered the best home defense gun. It’s much easier to hit a target with an AR-15 than a smaller gun. Most mass shootings and shootings are done with a smaller handgun, not an AR-15.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What right do democrats have to tell me I shouldn’t be allowed to have an AR-15?

Um…we are part of the same country and thus get to pass laws according to majority vote.

Um…Are Iran and the US not part of the same planet?

But OP thinks Iran should be able to have nukes, while telling her neighbor she shouldn’t be allowed to own a gun.

It’s a curious inconsistency to me. I’d like one of you to try to explain it, but you’re unable to.

Actually the analogy is, if the US can have nukes, so can Iran. If you can have a gun, so can I. If Iran cannot have nukes, neither can the US. If you cannot have a gun, neither can I.