· 138 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events May 10, 2026 at 4:13 PM

Netanyahu: Iran war ‘not over’ until enriched uranium is removed | Watch

Posted by Force_Hammer


Netanyahu: Iran war ‘not over’ until enriched uranium is removed | Watch
ynetglobal
Netanyahu: Iran war ‘not over’ until enriched uranium is removed | Watch
PM tells CBS News’ 60 Minutes Tehran’s nuclear material must be taken out and its enrichment sites dismantled, but declined to say whether force would be used if diplomacy fails

🚩 Report this post

138 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
Force_Hammer 3 days ago +1021
I have a feeling this conflict isn't going to end soon 🤔
1021
CasinoNdnOk 3 days ago +279
Correct one of 2 things happened. Either A) Iran already removed the fuel and its now scattered across the country and this is the worst case scenario for several reasons. Or B) The bombings buried it and its under tons of rubble in a mountain. Both are most likely leading to boots on the ground to secure the material if we can even confidently find it. Warfronts on YouTube did a great episode exactly on this.
279
Responsible_Pizza945 2 days ago +82
You forgot C) Netanyahu and Trump fail to continue to stall their inevitable incriminations that they were using the war to hide behind, so they stop caring and withdraw.
82
[deleted] 3 days ago +59
[removed]
59
Glittering-Quote-635 3 days ago +102
There won’t be US troops on the ground, and the Israelis can’t mount an operation like that. The only way U.S. troops end up on the ground is if the Iranian regime totally collapses and whomever takes over invites us in. Even Trump isn’t stupid enough to put troops on the ground in a hugely unpopular war. Oil would go to 200/barrel over night.
102
sonic_couth 3 days ago +368
You give Trump too much credit.
368
Glittering-Quote-635 3 days ago +76
I wouldn’t give that d***** credit for taking a piss without peeing on himself. What I do think, based on his actions and words, is that he knows he got played, and wants this over as it’s killing him in the one thing he cares about - his popularity, his ego. Putting troops on the ground would make him even more unpopular than he is now, and he knows that.
76
IShitMyselfNow 3 days ago +65
> the one thing he cares about - his popularity, his ego I think that's the second thing he cares about. The first is money. And even if the war is disastrous for the economy, or the Americans people, or America in general, there's certainly an opportunity to make more money off it. So don't count it out IMO. He'll be happy to do it as long as he buys the right stocks in advance, or gets paid directly via bribes. As long as he can make a lot of money, he will be happy to.
65
Sure-Recording6151 2 days ago +18
Judging his actions and words in the past year or so. He worries a lot about his legacy. Even he knows he can't take his money with him and he's not long for this world. He is delusional though, so he seems to not have an accurate sense of what leaving a good legacy looks like. He seemed to think for awhile that expanding US territory or renaming things would give him a lasting legacy. He wanted Canada and Greenland for legacy. And legacy is ego trying to live on after death. Money is only part of the equation in understanding his actions. I think you get closer to his true psychology and motives when you understand he's become obsessed with living on after his death through a legacy of some sort.
18
Glittering-Quote-635 3 days ago +19
Nah, I agree with your point, but there are so many other grifts, he doesn’t need this one. He’s turned out to be shockingly good at stealing money and taking bribes, he can just move on to the next thing. Right now that looks like Cuba, so I suspect we will be seeing ‘Trump Cigars’ and Trump Resorts - Havana
19
Dahcchad 2 days ago +4
I suspect the first is power. The man compared himself to Jesus Christ. And i think he literally believes he is better. I fear a situation where he realizes being feared is as good as loved, as both offer extreme power over others.
4
Worshipme988 2 days ago +25
The same **Trump** that said, “I thought oil prices would go to $200, $250, and it's at $100 now. And I think you're surprised and I'm surprised. But even if it went to $200, it would have been worth it.” That guy?
25
Glittering-Quote-635 2 days ago +16
He thinks that fools people. He’s only saying that in retrospect. He had no clue what would happen because he thought the regime would collapse right away. He thought that because thats what BiBi told him. I can gurantee you that if he thought oil would have gone to $200 and we would still be dealing with this, he would not have done it. Don’t take this a defense of him, I’m basically saying he’s so dumb he didn’t think of the ramifications of what he was about to do. Now those ramifications are staring him in the face and he is looking for a way out, not a way to escalate.
16
blackcain 2 days ago +19
The thing is that Israel will not allow the u.s. to leave and neither will Saudia Arabia for different reasons. Which means that it will be a quagmire for some months until one or the other gives up.
19
Glittering-Quote-635 2 days ago +13
Well, yeh, this is kinda the definition of a middle east quagmire. To be fair, every republican president since Regan loves stirring shit up in the ME. It’s kind of their thing.
13
blackcain 2 days ago +16
But only Trump was stupid enough to listen to Bibi where every other president since Bush Jr was like "uh no..". But Bibi finally got his war with Iran.
16
Glittering-Quote-635 2 days ago +12
That is true. Kinda scary when you have to hold up Bush as the smart one.
12
94_stones 2 days ago +8
I should preface this by saying that I’m *not* arguing in favor of invasion, but rather observing the completely fucked situation that Trump has put himself in. I’d argue that from *Trump’s* perspective, a *massive* invasion is actually the *least bad* option at this point (emphasis on the “bad” part). Because in my opinion the Iranian’s goal is very clearly to either get rid of Trump or severely cripple his administration. They no longer trust him (nor should they have ever IMO), so they want him gone. Their apparent openness to negotiations is all a ruse, and if Trump calls that it won’t change anything. As such, if you’e Trump, there’s not really much point to negotiating anymore, though I’m not entirely sure that he knows that. In other words, the *only* path still open for Trump is to secure the strait using military force. **Which puts him in an impossible position** (of his own making lol), because there’s *only* ***one*** way we can secure the strait militarily without sending the price of oil through the roof and keeping it there indefinitely: a *massive* invasion of *at least* southeastern Iran, and what basically amounts to an occupation of the Gulf States to protect their oil fields. *Even if* the Gulf States contributed soldiers to the invasion (which admittedly they might), we would need to mobilize pretty much the entire military in order to have any chance successfully pulling it off. If we extend the invasion to all of southern Iran (let alone the entire country) we would need either conscription or *a lot* of desertion from Iran’s main army. Needless to say, a surprise attack would be out of the question. It would also cost trillions of dollars, would require either getting rid of the filibuster or more likely just breaking the law, the casualties and material losses would probably be massive, it wouldn’t bring down the price of oil immediately, even in the best case scenario it wouldn’t bring the price of oil back down to where it was, there’s a chance it might not even bring down the price of oil *at all* until Trump’s term is up, it would give China the perfect opportunity to attack Taiwan (though admittedly I don’t think the PRC is 100% prepared for that), oh and it would *at least* initially be the most unpopular war in US history. The *only* way it wouldn’t hurt Trump politically is if it all went *perfectly,* and that is not likely. The *only* reason why I say it’s the least bad option for him, is because there’s a tiny chance that it could go perfectly, and therefore wouldn’t harm him politically. Whereas if he does nothing then there is a 100% chance that *that* will harm him politically.
8
lurkANDorganize 2 days ago +11
If Iran was somehow able to significantly escalate their damage capability i think that would also bring boots in. So, like if they somehow managed to like sink a destroyer or an aircraft carrier, for instance. If they were able to cause a mass casualty event on US soil (terror cell style.) Whats very unique about this war in its current phase is that Donald Trump has zero true goal here anymore, now he has to be able to point at a fake victory. There will never be the 1. Regime change 2. Nuclear material removed 3. Iran is friendly to US in the strait. Hell, I bet if the strait of hormuz went back to operating how it had pre-war Donald would have taken that and made up some fake "beautiful" deal or some stupid shit. Iran knows that and they juuuuussssttt need to f*** with the strait enough for that option to never be viable. Bibi convinced Donald that this war would be quick and easy just like the attack last year. Bibi lied to Donald. Im curious if we start to see the cracks in that relationship come November.
11
BornWithSideburns 2 days ago +4
Just let them have the bomb at this point
4
voprosy 2 days ago +27
Enriched Uranium is the new Bin Laden… An illusive scapegoat that justifies war campaigns that last forever. 
27
InternationalWin2850 2 days ago +9
Nice to know that Trump takes his orders from Netanyahu.
9
jruegod11 2 days ago +2
Depends if 10 years would be considered soon or not
2
khrak 2 days ago +4
That's the point. Bibi is delaying his corruption trial.
4
babybirdingURgrandma 1 day ago +2
Turns out peace is the greatest threat of all
2
Major_Wayland 3 days ago +6
Bibi wants to remove Iran as a threat, as long as US are the ones doing it
6
ClammyHandedFreak 2 days ago +2
I think Trump is going to agree to one of Iran's "deals" and the entire world will suffer for it. He needs to make peace here so he can say he won the war and that Iran came crawling to him to end it. The actuality of where things are left off from there does not matter, his base doesn't care about the conflict improving the US geopolitically, militarily or as far as national security, they care about Trump "winning" and "making a deal".
2
skynetempire 2 days ago +1
Dont worry 20 years goes by quick
1
Altruistic_Koala_122 2 days ago +146
he's saying you have to remove him, if anyone is wondering.
146
ptoki 2 days ago +33
I agree with him. Israel should remove any nuclear materials from its possessions. The audacity of "I am better than you" in a form of "we have nuclear but you cant". That alone is sufficient for Iran to put all efforts to keep the nuclear potential if they have it.
33
UnstableMabel 2 days ago +63
I wish Congress was alive to see this.
63
Minimum_Name9115 2 days ago +16
You give up all yours too and your nuclear bombs. Choosen people of god my azz. More like the devil. 
16
AnalTinnitus 3 days ago +475
Netanyahu: My forever war "not over" until I have no chance of being imprisoned for fraud, war crimes and/or corruption.
475
SPQR-Tightanus 3 days ago +483
Or until Netanyahu is removed.
483
virtual_adam 3 days ago +120
Has there ever been an Israeli prime minister candidate or a major US presidential candidate who hasn’t insisted Iran can never be allowed to have what it takes to build a bomb
120
Leezeebub 3 days ago +85
If only there was a treaty in place to keep them from doing so.
85
DickelPick69 3 days ago +20
Well there is one who is under criminal investigation and needs to constantly engage in conflicts to stay in power and out of prison…
20
CucumberWisdom 3 days ago -3
It's not about the rhetoric but the action. So e leaders like Obama knew that you'd catch more flies with honey then vinegar. We just need an intelligent candidate again and not morons
-3
Feisty_System_4751 3 days ago +55
You'd be surprised by how many Israelis support the war. Bibi is not criticized for his cruelty over there.
55
Elendils_Bear 3 days ago +3
Maybe he enriched uranium is the netanyahus we made along the way
3
BasicMatter7339 3 days ago +193
Hasn't Iran been 2 weeks away from nuclear weapons for the past 2 decades?
193
Glittering-Quote-635 3 days ago +92
No that’s ridiculous. It’s been closer to 3 decades.
92
thenelil 3 days ago +50
Technically can always be true too because you can keep uranium enriched at 60%. It doesn’t take long. To finish a nuclear bomb if you have the material ready to go.
50
af_echad 3 days ago +37
Yup, people like to use this as a "gotcha". But it isn't at all. We're all always a pot of boiled water and like 10 minutes away from some pasta to eat. If a day goes by and I don't make any pasta... I'm still a pot of boiled water and 10 minutes away from pasta.
37
tellsyoutogetfucked 2 days ago +1
Hardly if they wanted it they would have had it by now. They have China and Russia in their corner, and after this war Iran will have nukes its just inevitable. Especially considering how hard this war managed to f*** everything up when it comes to destroying the regime.
1
af_echad 2 days ago +6
Any sign of them going imminently going for it would have resulted in a war that made this look like child’s play. That, along with continued sabotage by America and Israel (stuxnet, taking out their scientists, etc), is why they have not made that final leap despite wanting it.
6
DesecratedPeanut 2 days ago +5
Ignoring the nuclear deal that we had for a few years that stopped it perfectly well without killing anyone on either side.
5
af_echad 2 days ago +2
Nothing is being ignored. I think Trump leaving the jcpoa was dumb. But I also think people overhype what the jcpoa actually did and how effective it actually was. One can argue that it was the best non kinetic choice the world had at the time. But it doesn’t make it an amazing thing either without some pretty big flaws.
2
DesecratedPeanut 2 days ago +3
But compared to now and what comes after now, it was.
3
af_echad 2 days ago +4
Debatable. Especially from Israel's perspective. The deal gave Iran a lot of cash that helped them further prop up their proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah. The deal did nothing to stop Iran from building ballistic missiles. And the deal had a sunset clause that would allow them to continue going for a nuke. Now the argument agains the last point from the American/European perspective was that they could renegotiate as the sunset clause approached. But from the Israeli perspective, that was never a guarantee. And regardless of that, it allowed Iran to build up proxies surrounding them and as seen by October 7, that can do plenty of damage without a nuke.
4
Pale-Acanthaceae-736 2 days ago +3
Going on 3+ decades.
3
HendoEndo 3 days ago +9
“we’re lucky it’s taken them this long” - netanyahu, probably
9
uvero 2 days ago +2
No "two weeks" but "years to months", partially because (1) Israel and the US took actions to slow them (including both diplomacy, warfare and cyber warfare) and (2) Iran figures it has more leverage in negotiations when being *close to* nuclear weapons. This isn't weird of them - they want sanctions removed.
2
theevilphoturis 3 days ago +219
Then wage this war by yourself, m***********.
219
[deleted] 3 days ago +41
[removed]
41
Joe_Redsky 3 days ago +24
Why would he do that when he has a compliant stooge in the White House?
24
pinkfreude 2 days ago +15
Another hunt for WMD.
15
greatsleepingcat 2 days ago +8
How about we enriched your a******, sir satanyahu
8
WarmScientist5297 3 days ago +71
OK at least now we know who’s in charge of this shit show
71
EgoTripWire 3 days ago +12
But isn't he not supposed to say these things until after the market opens on Monday.
12
gizmozed 2 days ago +5
Well then go get it Bibi.
5
JarvisModeOn 3 days ago +14
At this point, it feels like every final objective in this war creates three more objectives. Hard to see how this ends for everyone involved.
14
--Van-- 2 days ago +6
How nice of BB to tell Cheeto when the war is over...
6
phillyd_ 3 days ago +9
Netanyahu could start a war with himself.
9
Kyr-Shara 3 days ago +71
the only enrichment he cares about is self-enrichment
71
SockPuppet-47 3 days ago +28
He and Trump have so much in common...
28
InvestigatorOk9354 3 days ago +12
two shit peas in a shit pod
12
alien_farmer1 3 days ago +5
I wonder what his children do, probably having good time on some beach in lifelong retirement.
5
Idiot_Savant_13 3 days ago +3
This reads like Bibi needs enriched uranium..?
3
o0_o_ 2 days ago +4
Something tells me that even if all the enriched uranium was taken out of all of Iran that Israel would still bully the US into wasting money and resources in committing international crimes there.
4
Undeadmuffin18 2 days ago +5
Go remove it yourself then
5
Kelynill 3 days ago +34
How bout we remove Israel’s nuclear material?
34
ptoki 2 days ago +12
Im with you on this. I had to go way down to see such comment!
12
ExtremeStatement1760 2 days ago +5
The conflict will be over when you are in prison for your war crimes and domestic criminal acts of which you are waiting to be sentenced...hence the war being prolonged in perpetuity.
5
Yarius515 2 days ago +4
Terrorist says what?
4
rmmcclay 2 days ago +4
Whose enriched Uranium?
4
SpudgeBoy 2 days ago +4
Nukes for me, but not for thee.
4
SvnSqrD 2 days ago +4
I bet Netanyahu is part of the Epstein Files
4
scrapy_the_scrap 1 day ago +3
He has till october lmao, then he is out by elections
3
brokeboipobre 3 days ago +16
Daddy Bibi is telling Trump, "It's not over, until I say it is."
16
KareenTu 3 days ago +6
It’s obvious that his statement is only addressed to Trump lol
6
hypnosquid 2 days ago +2
I mean, what's the point of amassing all that pedophile blackmail if you're not going to use it to start a war you've been dreaming about for 40 years?
2
No_Method5989 2 days ago +5
Does him and Trump have some sort of bet to see who can be the most hated internationally? because it seems like they are speed running that shit.
5
abeBroham-Linkin 3 days ago +5
Netinyahoo doesn't want his war to end.
5
stogie_t 3 days ago +5
What about his enriched uranium?
5
Slippery-ape 3 days ago +22
Well good for you Ben, go get it yourself.
22
Fomdoo 2 days ago +7
Can this guy be imprisoned for life already. Dude literally had his army kill babies. Imprison the lot of them.
7
Reddit_and_forgeddit 3 days ago +19
The commander of the US military has spoken!
19
YCMTSUNOW 3 days ago +8
Responsible for the worst security breach in Israeli history.
8
Halbaras 3 days ago +8
Also responsible for helping Qatar fund Hamas for years even though his own intelligence agencies warned against it. The most charitable interpretation is him being staggeringly naive and incompetent. But the bombing of Doha seems to have achieved it's goal, which was gaslighting Israelis into believing Qatar was always the enemy.
8
Professional-Race133 2 days ago +2
In that interview he didn’t answer the other part of the question which asked who decides. I suppose it’s implied that he’s making the decision on when the war ends and based on which objectives. Seriously, F this guy!
2
Carittz 2 days ago +2
Ok Trump, boss said you gotta start bombing again
2
bored_ryan2 2 days ago +2
Israel is in for a world of hurt once enough non-AIPAC funded American politicians get elected to federal office.
2
teebird_phreak 2 days ago +2
If that is his and the Trump regime’s goal, the only way to accomplish that is to send in a quarter million troops.
2
AlienScrotum 2 days ago +2
Wait isn’t that stuff buried under a mountain from a few months ago?
2
phoenix1984 2 days ago +3
“War not over until goal posts have nowhere left to go” IFIFY
3
filmguy36 3 days ago +5
The orange pedos master has spoken
5
Great_Revolution_276 2 days ago +5
Get rid of your nuclear weapons first.
5
Gold_Map_236 3 days ago +10
It’s like they say: Israel will keep fighting to the last American
10
zombiekoalas 3 days ago +13
Does he mean Israel's enriched uranium?  Dont see why they get to keep it if they dont want Iran to have it.
13
HandofWinter 3 days ago +2
What do you mean by 'get to'? They don't want Iran to nuke them, so they're saying they're not going to stop fighting until Iran can't nuke them. No one is fighting a war to prevent Israel from nuking anyone, so there's no one putting any conditions on them for those terms. They also afaik haven't actually acknowledged whether they have any nuclear weapons or not (they almost certainly do though).
2
Pale-Acanthaceae-736 2 days ago +8
For the past 30+ years we've been told to believe a scare story about Iran's nuclear program. We're told that If it builds a nuke it will fanatically drop one on Tel Aviv. Of course what would follow would be a massive response and guarantee the national suicide of a country of 90+ million people. Look, Iran's leadership is many things but stupid isn't one of them.
8
SockPuppet-47 3 days ago -8
I think the premise is that Iran would almost certainly use it to try to impress Allah by destroying Israel. It's not a weapon of last resort for defense. It's a tool that achieves their religiously motivated goals.
-8
Biggle_fuzz 3 days ago +22
No they wouldn't. Everyone fear-mongered Pakistan getting a nuke, zero people nuked. Everyone fear-mongered about North Korea getting nukes, zero people nuked. I'm tired of this played out narrative.
22
PedanticPerson 3 days ago +8
They did have to be given a massive bribe recently to not nuke India. North Korea and Pakistan having nukes isn’t great, it’s just too late to do much about it.
8
Sodaflag 3 days ago +3
It only takes one nuke to destroy Israel. Khamenei, in his jurisprudence, once declared a fatwa against the deployment of nukes, but a fatwa can always be revoked.
3
Leather-Ad-6294 3 days ago +3
What a stupid, stupid comment. This idea that all Muslims are not only fanatics, but that they have all the same type of fanaticism which is "i want to kill everyone for no reason" is precisely why the US's Middle East foreign policy is a complete disaster. Here's a tip: you need to understand your rivals if you want to beat them. Arrogantly believing that you know the motivations and ideals of your enemy without ever looking into them is the reason why America is losing this war. 1) the former Supreme leader in Iran which the US killed day 1 after the war was AGAINST nuclear weapons which he officially made haram under Islamic law. So tell me how the pursuit of nuclear weapons is a "religiously motivated goal" when it was specifically against the goal of the former regime? Of course, not anymore, since by launching this war it proved its replacement that nuclear weapons are necessary to survive in a US dominated world 2) Mutually assured destruction (MAD) is, in fact, one of the biggest stabilizers in the international system and the reason why US hasn't bombed China yet, or Russia hasn't bombed NATO directly, or why the Cold War didn't end with the US bombing the Soviets. We have papers from American foreign policy makers who themselves believed that letting Iran develop the nuclear weapon would help stabilize the middle east by taming down Israel. Of course, this will never happen, because Israel exists as a US proxy to be a bully in the ME, hence why it's not allowed. (I am not saying I support Iran developing nukes, but I don't oppose it either. It's not a black or white issue)
3
DrMacAndDog 3 days ago +6
It seems really unlikely that Iran would nuke Israel. It’s surrounded with Muslims and a missile would cross other Muslim states. Much more likely that Israel would nuke Iran, as none of those conditions would matter to them.
6
yuvaldv1 3 days ago +4
I doubt Iran cares about the safety and wellbeing of its Muslim neighbors considering it literally bombed almost every single one of them during the war.
4
Torodong 2 days ago +3
Wouldn't it be easier and safer to prevent Netanyahu enrichment?
3
copperblood 3 days ago +9
Does that mean Israel will commit their soldiers to the fight with Iran?? Or... just have US troops die for their cause? Oh.... right....
9
alkaliphiles 3 days ago +8
Why the f*** is he calling the shots?
8
hypnosquid 2 days ago +2
Gonna go out on a limb here and say that it *might* be because of the pile of Epstein blackmail material they've got on pedophile Trump.
2
kombiwombi 3 days ago +3
Because he appealed to the hubris of Trump after Venezuela. Trump thought the promised fast win for the US would move some of the Jewish vote from Democrat to Replublican in the mid-term elections. That would be a help as the Democrats would then have to spread their campaign time and money more widely.
3
NMe84 3 days ago +4
Iran war not over until Netanyahu is removed.
4
chezdistester 3 days ago +3
The Iran war will not be over until Netanyahu and Trump are removed. But seriously, if you were Iran you wouldn't have any choice because the minute they tell their armed forces to stand down, Trump and Netanyahu will come up with some reason to violate the ceasefire in order to expand their strategic advantage. Unfortunately, there are no faithful actors in this situation, and Iran knows that. So, why would they give up their leverage? (Straits of Hormuz)
3
Remote-Ad-2686 2 days ago +5
The US PRESIDENT HAS SPOKEN!!’
5
AbraKadabraAmor 3 days ago +5
Good to hear from the American leader.
5
wrestlingchampo 3 days ago +3
I have a solution. Iran gives up Uranium, and Israel gives up their Nuclear Weapons that "Don't Exist."
3
Trikeree 3 days ago +2
Good! Trash nut jobs that think they have to bring about the end of the world for their religion, have zero business with nukes.
2
Really_McNamington 3 days ago +9
Plenty of that in American politics right now.
9
SNTCTN 3 days ago +12
Which country are you talking about cause I can name three of them and they're all involved in the same war right now
12
yilmaz1010 3 days ago +2
Only one of them has publicly renounced nuclear weapons on religious grounds, and he was killed in the opening act of this latest episode.
2
outoftownMD 2 days ago +2
Let me guess… you get to have it, too?
2
SamuelYosemite 2 days ago +2
Yeah go ahead and just slide those goal posts
2
EasternCandle 2 days ago +2
thanks bitchyahu
2
Individual-Report 3 days ago +5
To be fair, let's remove Israel's nuclear capabilities as well
5
MsNatCat 2 days ago +2
You could remove every single milligram of uranium from Iran and it would not stop Israel’s bloodshed.
2
Boys4Ever 3 days ago +1
Attacking a country then asking them to remove the one item that keeps others from attacking rather foolish for them to do. Considering you might also later attack again. Notice no one attacking North Korea and they are just as bat chit crazy
1
GilbyGlibber 3 days ago +4
North Korea doesn't fund proxies like Iran. All they do is send trash balloons lol
4
otherwisepandemonium 3 days ago +2
Why don't we put Bibi in prison where he belongs and try the IDF for being the terrorists that they are?
2
duglarri 2 days ago +1
"Not over until the uranium is removed. And the centrifuges are destroyed. And all the nuclear experts who know how to make them are given jobs as janitors. And Iran agrees to eliminate the teaching of physics past the grade 10 level." That last one is a serious proposal for a red line by the Israelis. Iran cannot be permitted to have the knowledge required as a basis for nuclear research, and therefore teaching physics in Iran has to be verifiably banned in Iran, forever, or Israel will never be safe.
1
HollywoodJack500 3 days ago +2
After that, IDF will need to remove all the rocks in Iran that could be thrown at IDF liberators.
2
Mr_Magoo1969 3 days ago -1
Iran has been building that bomb for 3000 years.
-1
Dreamlion_Inc 3 days ago +1
Does anybody have that transcript about all the things Trump said about the Iran war? The one about the war being done but not really?
1
TurbulentWinters 2 days ago +1
I wish it wasn’t about enriched uranium and about the people of Iran wanting change.
1
Schuperman161616 1 day ago +1
America: "I'm done with this war!" Israel: "We are done, when I say we are done."
1
Affectionate_Idea662 1 day ago +2
What I don’t get is how can North African countries not see what’s happening? Go snipe netinyhau and be done with it.
2
← Back to Board