Most Equally Esteemed Comrades,

The idea of just tossing a few nuclear devices Iran's way is problematic for practical reasons.  Those items require a lot of maintenance to remain viable.  In the movies, someone can dig up a 20 year old warhead and the world shakes in fear.  That old warhead is a paperweight at that point.  A dirty bomb could be made using what's left of it, but it would never achieve fission.  

If a nuclear device were given to Iran, assuming it was of new manufacture, it would have a relatively short shelf life.  This would mean there would be a plan to use it.  No one wants their fingerprints on that.  Retaliation would be swift and sure.  Whomever supplied the device would pay a horrible price.  

Besides, if anyone planned on gifting Iran with nuclear weapons all along, why did we go through this Kabuki Theater for the past decades?  Why not cut to the chase?  

My suspicion is that NO ONE wants to see Iran with that kind of destructive force in their arsenal.  

Red Salmon

Iran-o-mite!

The only nukes worthy of delivery to Iran are those that detonate upon delivery… and free shipping with Amazon Prime.

Red Salmon wrote: ↑

6/23/2025, 11:21 pm

Most Equally Esteemed Comrades,

The idea of just tossing a few nuclear devices Iran's way is problematic for practical reasons.  Those items require a lot of maintenance to remain viable.  In the movies, someone can dig up a 20 year old warhead and the world shakes in fear.  That old warhead is a paperweight at that point.  A dirty bomb could be made using what's left of it, but it would never achieve fission.  

If a nuclear device were given to Iran, assuming it was of new manufacture, it would have a relatively short shelf life.  This would mean there would be a plan to use it.  No one wants their fingerprints on that.  Retaliation would be swift and sure.  Whomever supplied the device would pay a horrible price.  

Besides, if anyone planned on gifting Iran with nuclear weapons all along, why did we go through this Kabuki Theater for the past decades?  Why not cut to the chase?  

My suspicion is that NO ONE wants to see Iran with that kind of destructive force in their arsenal.  

Red Salmon

Yes, especially their Sunni neighbors.

Yo'sup Bro Tito wrote: ↑

6/24/2025, 12:26 am

Iran-o-mite!

The only nukes worthy of delivery to Iran are those that detonate upon delivery… and free shipping with Amazon Prime.

ЛОЛ!

Another radioactive bedtime story from the Kremlin - Dmitry Medvedev (former placeholder president, current discount Zhirinovsky) suggesting that Russia might “help” Iran acquire nuclear warheads. Classic Kremlin theatrics — a reminder to Western leaders they should be grateful for Putin, because everyone else around him is supposedly insane.

Make no mistake — this message comes straight from Putin. But it’s not about arming Iran. It’s a performance piece titled: “Look how crazy my friends are — better stick with me.”

The illusion that Putin is the only option in Russia didn’t happen by chance. It’s the result of a deliberate, decades-long purge of anyone with talent, charisma, or a functioning moral compass. What’s left is a political ecosystem of yes-men, cartoon villains, and strategically placed lunatics.

Putin’s biggest fear, insiders say, is ending up like Gaddafi in the wake of a color revolution — dragged from a drainpipe by his own people. But Gaddafi’s death came after decades of crushing political life, leaving no peaceful way out. Ironically, that’s exactly where Putin is steering Russia: a system with no exit ramp, no peaceful succession, just fear and repression in a feedback loop.

It’s like a paranoid snake chewing through its own tail, occasionally pausing to wave a nuclear warhead and remind the world to be afraid, be very afraid.