Bharat Rakshak

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 01:54**

Trump in a new post confirms and thanks Iran for giving early notice of the Missile Attack against US base in Qatar.

Thanks “highly respected” Emir of Qatar for all he has done in seeking peace for the region.

NOT MAKING IT UP:

Trump indirectly calls the end of Iran-Israel conflict? Israel won’t be too pleased with it. Let’s see what tomorrow holds.
""I want to thank Iran for giving us early notice:

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 01:55**

Jay wrote: ↑23 Jun 2025 23:59
Vayutuvan wrote: ↑23 Jun 2025 08:15 @chetak garu, I agree 100%. But mine was a semi-rhetorical question for poster @Jay who is given to smart two liners, mostly.

Vayu ji, I do not know how you managed to construe my post saying Indian nuclear program is also in their sights as me being a wiseacre, but this argument is between you and you brain, I'll stay out of it.
...

OK. Now that is out of the way, I thought you were saying that Indian nuc bomb making facilities will be bombed same as the Iranian ones. That is the problem with one line responses. Either they misrepresent what you have in mind or they can be construed as ati telivi(I am presuming you know Telugu, if not it means being "too clever by half"

)

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 01:57**

I am not ruling out sabotage, subversion, bullying, technology denial, and all those tricks in the US' bag.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 01:58**

Amber G wrote:

Let’s just say the “breakout time” is now measured in days, not months.

So it was even shorter prior to the military action. So it was an emergency, POTUS could legally act to degrade the breakout time, and then go to Congress to get authorization to complete the job.

Though Trump won’t do that, I think you must concede the above, unless you take the view that US action advanced Iranian capabilities.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 02:04**

A_Gupta wrote: ↑23 Jun 2025 10:20 It would be like after India put the IWT in abeyance, India having a right to punish Pakistan for Pakistan now violating the IWT.
( coming to think of it, I would like India to have that right )

JCPOA-IWT is a false equivalence. US pulled out of JC(whatever). India put IWT only in abeyance. So, yes India has the right to punish shittistan if they violate IWT.

They are still a signatory so are we. If they pull out of it, then it is different matter. Let them goto intl tribunals and intl courts to litigate India's abeyance.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 02:12**

1. Illegal, maybe. That will be debated in the coming weeks, months, and even years.
2. Unethical? Certainly, especially after US pulling out from JCPOA.
3. But immoral it is not.

That said, it is a fait accompli. All this talk about illegality is moot unless somebody who has credentials and experience in international law (or even ethics) is commenting.

Decency is a concept that works at individual level.

Folks, disabuse yourselves of the notion that all wars today are fought like mahaabhaarata war. dharma yudhha was over when abhimanyu was killed.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 02:27**

The stated goal of the West and Israel is no nuclear weapon for Iran. This is the objective and has been the main focus for decades with Iran. JCPOA tried to formalize the above and Obummer gave Iran some money which they promptly used to fund Hamas, etc. Israel has more real time intelligence on Iran's nuclear activity than anyone else has, maybe the US has but interpretation of intelligence is best with the Israelis. Prior to IAEA public visits and reports, Israel has a damn good picture of what is happening within Iran, their spy people are embedded in many places in Iran, they even managed to create a drone factory within Iran. Given the close cooperation Israel and US have in many spheres, the strike of B2 MOAB on nuclear facilities is totally justified since Iran's avowed stance officially is that they are only pursuing things for peaceful purposes. The enrichment level of uranium is a dead giveaway of true intentions. Also in the backstage are actors like China and North Korea aiding and abetting all kinds of nuclear activity. What Israel and US DJT have done, despite the polemics of rhetoric/grandiose stmts to the press, is good for the world at large and especially good for India. The alternatives are a nightmare for the world to deal with fundamentalists with nuclear bombs.

BTW I am seeing some reports that China has extending close to 400 B into Iran, don't know how accurate that number is and whether that is down payment for continued oil supply to China.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 02:35**

If Iranian breakout time was days, not weeks, then POTUS action is not illegal.

Yes, I’ve changed my mind, but my previous assumption was that there was no emergency, Iran would still take many weeks.

—-
The US House and Senate have introduced many resolutions over the years that Iran with nuclear weapons is unacceptable and then they send the resolutions to committee to die there. This is the height of irresponsibility.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 02:52**

A_Gupta wrote: ↑23 Jun 2025 10:20
The US has a right to strike Iran for violation of JCPOA.
The US has no right to strike anyone for an agreement that the US walked out of. The other JCPOA signatories have a greater right, if any.

It would be like after India put the IWT in abeyance, India having a right to punish Pakistan for Pakistan now violating the IWT.

( coming to think of it, I would like India to have that right )

It’s actually more like Pakistan saying it will drop the Shimla Accord in response to India suspending the Indus Waters Treaty. The initiator (Trump’s US) broke the deal first—and then complains when the other side no longer honors it? Worse, that withdrawal accelerated Iran’s nuclear capabilities, not slowed them. Actions have consequences.

(Trump action was really foolish but like many times there are people who will worship him)

Removing JCPOA constraints accelerated enrichment, reduced breakout time, and gave Iran both material stock and technical know-how that can’t easily be undone.

Iran breached limits (2019–2021) Gradually increased enrichment to 20%, then 60%
Breakout narrowed sharply From ~12 months to weeks/days
Trump’s exit “pushed Iran closer than ever to the bomb”

A_Gupta you talked about the break-out time: Here it is (Any reputable source will agree - Trump's tweet and MAGA propaganda excluded)
(Assuming Iran decided to build)
Pre‑JCPOA (2013): Breakout time estimated at 1–2 months, based on ~370 kg of 20% uranium + LEU
Under JCPOA (2016–2018): Restrictions extended breakout to ~12 months
iPost‑2018 (Trump withdrawal): Breakout shrank to a few months by mid‑2019; by early 2021, with 60% stock, reduced to weeks .
Mid‑2025: With existing 60% stock (~408 kg), breakout to 90% could take just 7–12 days

Facts matter!

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 03:21**

williams wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 00:01
Jay wrote: ↑23 Jun 2025 22:10

They have always been.
That is one of the reasons we put our top priority on our AD infrastructure and second strike capability.

It works against opponents like pakis and chinis. My concern is with US, if and when it goes rogue and decides that no one other than 5 NWS states should hold any nukes and puts in a military option for disarmament. Are we in a position to stop the B's2, and their bunker busters from dismantling out nuke infra? trump is saying to the world "never say NEVER" and we should take steps to protect ourselves from this.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 03:43**

===============
please make your points without being abusive

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 03:47**

A_Gupta wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 00:17 "In fact, we actually believe they stored more of it in Fordo because they believe Fordo was impenetrable," said Mullin, an Oklahoma Republican.

As I said before in this very thread. So Fordow is finished then. But @OSInt613 was laughed at.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 04:05**

Amber G. wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 02:52 (Trump action was really foolish but like many times there are people who will worship him)
...
Facts matter!

Yes, facts do matter. Trump is the legally elected POTUS as per the US Constitution. He also got popular vote. Simply accepting the fact that he is the POTUS is not tantamount to "worshiping" him. There are some fringe elements who are like that. But please stop insulting the intelligence of BRF posters and suspecting their motives.

(fixed to quote the @Amber G. instead of @A_Gupta)

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 04:09**

bala wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 03:43 Actually for Israel it worsened things since Iran used the Obummer's money and sanctions relief to fund Hamas, Hezbollah and others.

Total of USD 1.7 B out of which (iirc) USD 700 M in small bills of different currencies. That kind of cash can buy a lot of terror and terrorists.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 04:19**

Amber G wrote:

Mid‑2025: With existing 60% stock (~408 kg), breakout to 90% could take just 7–12 days

Facts matter!

We are not prosecuting here the Trump withdrawal from the JCPOA. That was ill-advised, but don't keep shifting the context. Put our shared dislike of Trump aside and be objective. So I'll speak of POTUS, not Trump.

The question was - was POTUS's bombing of Iran without Congressional authorization legal/constitutional per US domestic law/constitution?

My initial answer was it was illegal. I had not realized that there really was no time for a lengthy Congressional debate.

If the breakout was 7-12 days, then it was an emergency. POTUS does have the authority to act to degrade the breakout time (of course, your estimate previously provided was that the US strikes did not really change the breakout time, which is incredible to me) and then ask Congress for authorization to complete the job.

And to repeat, and I won't say anymore after this - to believe that Iran had a breakout time of 7-12 days and it remains the same after Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan are rather comprehensively hit is (a) to believe in miracles and (b) means that Iran has sufficient undeclared capacity which puts it in violation of the NPT, I would think. This latter is enough to justify war.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 04:37**

Trump announces Israel-Iran ceasefire

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-ea ... 025-06-23/

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 05:05**

Jay wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 03:21
williams wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 00:01

That is one of the reasons we put our top priority on our AD infrastructure and second strike capability.
It works against opponents like pakis and chinis. My concern is with US, if and when it goes rogue and decides that no one other than 5 NWS states should hold any nukes and puts in a military option for disarmament. Are we in a position to stop the B's2, and their bunker busters from dismantling out nuke infra? trump is saying to the world "never say NEVER" and we should take steps to protect ourselves from this.

Jay — totally get the concern, especially with unpredictable leaders like Trump around. But India–US ties are strong right now, and it’s hard to see the US going rogue against a friendly nuclear power like India.

That said, MAD still applies — any country, even the US, knows that striking India would invite massive retaliation. That’s exactly why India’s building up credible second-strike capability. It’s about keeping all options covered, even against irrational actors.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 05:25**

July 19, 2024:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/19/politics ... %20program.

The Biden administration engaged in more than a year of indirect negotiations with Iran aimed at reviving the Iran nuclear deal, from which the US withdrew in 2018 under the Trump administration.

Those efforts collapsed in late 2022, as the US accused Iran of making “unreasonable” demands related to a probe by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a UN nuclear watchdog, into unexplained traces of uranium found at undisclosed Iranian sites. In the months that followed, the administration maintained that the Iran nuclear deal was “not on the agenda.”

Iran’s new president has suggested they are open to engagement with the West. However, a senior State Department official told CNN that they no longer believe that there can be a return to the nuclear deal because Iran has engaged in too many escalatory acts in the years since talks broke down.

“We’re in a very different world, a lot of time has elapsed, Iran has done a lot of things that make a return to JCPOA non-viable,” the official said.

The State Department also said that there is no anticipation that the recent election in Iran will change the country’s behavior.

“We have no expectations that this election will lead to a fundamental change in Iran’s direction or its policies,” State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said earlier this month. “At the end of the day, it’s not the president that has the ultimate say over the future of Iran’s policy; it is the supreme leader, and of course we have seen the direction that he has chosen to take Iran in. Obviously, if the new president had the authority to make steps to curtail Iran’s nuclear program, to stop funding terrorism, to stop destabilizing activities in the region, those would be steps that we would welcome. But needless to say, we don’t have any expectations that that’s what’s likely to ensue.”

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 05:30**

A_Gupta wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 04:19 Amber G wrote:
Mid‑2025: With existing 60% stock (~408 kg), breakout to 90% could take just 7–12 days

Facts matter!
We are not prosecuting here the Trump withdrawal from the JCPOA. That was ill-advised, but don't keep shifting the context. Put our shared dislike of Trump aside and be objective. So I'll speak of POTUS, not Trump.

The question was - was POTUS's bombing of Iran without Congressional authorization legal/constitutional per US domestic law/constitution?

My initial answer was it was illegal. I had not realized that there really was no time for a lengthy Congressional debate.

If the breakout was 7-12 days, then it was an emergency. POTUS does have the authority to act to degrade the breakout time (of course, your estimate previously provided was that the US strikes did not really change the breakout time, which is incredible to me) and then ask Congress for authorization to complete the job.

And to repeat, and I won't say anymore after this - to believe that Iran had a breakout time of 7-12 days and it remains the same after Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan are rather comprehensively hit is (a) to believe in miracles and (b) means that Iran has sufficient undeclared capacity which puts it in violation of the NPT, I would think. This latter is enough to justify war.

Excellent question. Let me answer this and share my perspective:

it's essential to separate the legal framework from the urgency narrative.

Breakout time wasn’t a sudden emergency.

Yes, the 7–12 day breakout estimate is correct as of mid-2025, but it's important to note:
This was not new intelligence or a sudden shift. According to IAEA data and multiple independent assessments:

Breakout time had already shrunk significantly since Trump withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018.

By mid-2019, it was down to a few months.

By early 2021, with 60% enrichment ongoing, breakout time was already measured in weeks — same as now.

So, unless there's specific, time-sensitive intel indicating an imminent move to 90% or weaponization (which hasn't been presented publicly), it’s hard to classify this as a true emergency requiring unilateral executive military action.

On constitutionality and legality (domestic law):

Per the U.S. Constitution and the War Powers Resolution:

The President can use force unilaterally only in case of an actual or imminent threat to the U.S.

Congressional authorization is required for sustained or preemptive military strikes.

Was the Iranian nuclear program an imminent threat to the U.S. homeland? That’s the crux. And many, including former military, intel officials, Nuclear experts who advised US in the past, (brfoldies:)) and even political allies (e.g., Tulsi Gabbard) have questioned that.

Furthermore:

U.S. allies didn’t back the action.

Scientists and nonproliferation experts didn’t consider the strikes decisive or necessary.

Even after the strike, Iran's technical capability and material stockpile remain largely intact.

So the legal case for an emergency constitutional strike is quite weak, unless backed by classified intel that changes the public assessment — and thus far, none has been provided.

The nuclear breakout clock didn’t suddenly start ticking — it’s been ticking for years, ever since the JCPOA unravelled.

Legally, this looks far more like a policy choice than an emergency national defense action.

And from both a scientific and legal standpoint, many remain deeply skeptical of the justification and strategic outcome.

(Happy to dive into War Powers Act precedents or IAEA timelines if you’d like.)

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 05:52**

Okay Okay...
Give a Nobel!

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 07:04**

I thought the orange man would have added "god bless me"

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 07:07**

Amber G. wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 05:05
Jay wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 03:21

It works against opponents like pakis and chinis. My concern is with US, if and when it goes rogue and decides that no one other than 5 NWS states should hold any nukes and puts in a military option for disarmament. Are we in a position to stop the B's2, and their bunker busters from dismantling out nuke infra? trump is saying to the world "never say NEVER" and we should take steps to protect ourselves from this.
Jay — totally get the concern, especially with unpredictable leaders like Trump around. But India–US ties are strong right now, and it’s hard to see the US going rogue against a friendly nuclear power like India.

That said, MAD still applies — any country, even the US, knows that striking India would invite massive retaliation. That’s exactly why India’s building up credible second-strike capability. It’s about keeping all options covered, even against irrational actors.

Yes that's what it is. Also same reason why NATO and. Us taking pot shots at Russia from behind Ukraine

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 08:09**

That there is a huge debate about POTUS authority to act shows that it isn't cut and dried.
That a previous POTUS did not choose to act does not change the urgency or need to act.

In any case, this dates to June 12, 2025:
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/iae ... 025-06-12/
IAEA board declares Iran in breach of non-proliferation obligations

Over and out.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 11:53**

Israel & Iran came to me': Trump makes new claim on ceasefire!

On the other hand, Tehran claimed that the US leader had "begged" it to accept truce.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 11:58**

Meanwhile: Trump allows Iran to bombard Israel and kill 4 innocent civilians this morning and not allowing Israel to respond. Trump asks Israel and Iran to not violate the ceasefire.
He says "Ceasefire is now in effect"!

(His orders VIA Social Media!!

)

---
People are asking what’s going on after noticing fresh Iranian Missile strikes against Israel even after Trump announced ceasefire.

Remember India-Pak ceasefire announcement by Trump? And how Pakistan fired at India even after ceasefire.

That’s what is playing out.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 19:05**

From DJT, taking Q&A from media: Israel, Iran are faltering on ceasefire. DJT is claiming that both are violating ceasefire and he is not happy. DJT still feels that nuclear sites in Iran were demolished by US Airforce and only the fake (CNN, MSNBC, etc) news is making a big deal about the strike (the power of 12 MOABs). DJT used the F word on media - "we basically have two countries that were fighting so long and so hard that they dont know what the F they are doing. Do you understand that?".

watch at your leisure: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mCQHeXq1Mg

// DJT is serious about wanting to stop the war. Compared to that undeserving fluff called Obummer, DJT is sincere and wants an end. IMO, That is leadership at its best. With "what is my name" Bidenwa who forgot about Ukraine war and let autopen sign the checks, DJT is trying his best to stop conflicts worldwide. Hope he succeeds and brings peace to a world in turmoil.

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 20:42**

bala wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 19:05
// DJT is serious about wanting to stop the war. Compared to that undeserving fluff called Obummer, ..... Hope he succeeds and brings peace to a world in turmoil.

Iran & Israel "don’t know what the F.... they’re doing",

says US President Donald Trump

< video clip>

Definitely ..Deserves ..

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 23:24**

^^ This is like NeverWho awarding himself Bharat Ratna

Posted: **24 Jun 2025 23:26**

bala wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 02:27 China has extending close to 400 B into Iran, don't know how accurate that number is and whether that is down payment for continued oil supply to China.

One even can't make this up .. "It was my great honor

"

Posted: **25 Jun 2025 00:33**

You think DJT manages his own truth social account?

Posted: **25 Jun 2025 00:51**

If Iran managed to spirit away bulk or some of the enriched Uranium then where did it disappear??
How safe is it??
Where is it kept and who is guarding it??
More importantly can a 60% enriched U be used for a Dirty Bomb??
A Dirty Bomb is a dangerous scenario isn’t it??

Posted: **25 Jun 2025 00:59**

SRajesh wrote: ↑25 Jun 2025 00:51 If Iran managed to spirit away bulk or some of the enriched Uranium then where did it disappear??
How safe is it??
Where is it kept and who is guarding it??
More importantly can a 60% enriched U be used for a Dirty Bomb??
A Dirty Bomb is a dangerous scenario isn’t it??

But that region is full of depleted U anyway. What will a few more atoms of U235 do that U238 doesnt?

Posted: **25 Jun 2025 01:01**

Amber G. wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 20:42
bala wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 19:05
// DJT is serious about wanting to stop the war. Compared to that undeserving fluff called Obummer, ..... Hope he succeeds and brings peace to a world in turmoil.
Iran & Israel "don’t know what the F.... they’re doing", says US President Donald Trump < video clip>

Definitely ..Deserves ..
[img...]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GuNVokHbIAA ... ame=medium[/img]

I hope Trump gets impeached soon. Otherwise we at BRF have to suffer from this kind of childish immature posts for 3+ years.

Brutum fulmen

Posted: **25 Jun 2025 01:01**

vera_k wrote: ↑25 Jun 2025 00:33 You think DJT manages his own truth social account?

It is managed by Donakd.

Posted: **25 Jun 2025 01:06**

JD Vance reposts:

Posted: **25 Jun 2025 01:12**

Amber G. wrote: ↑24 Jun 2025 00:55 - And about detection — here's the uncomfortable truth:

Uranium, even weapons-grade, is not easily detectable with standard border or cargo gamma counters. It’s an alpha emitter (which doesn’t penetrate) and gives off only weak gammas. Unless you have specialized neutron or active interrogation systems, or the uranium is unshielded (which it wouldn’t be), it can pass unnoticed.

This is precisely why smuggling of HEU is a nightmare scenario for nuclear security experts — it’s the hardest material to detect and the easiest to weaponize once enriched.

As a thought exercise, I expect every Pakistani general visiting anywhere is scanned for possibly carrying HEU along.

What tools may be used for such detection?

Posted: **25 Jun 2025 01:15**

https://nationalsecurityjournal.org/ira ... ant-match/

Key Points and Summary: Iran’s Hoot supercavitating torpedo, believed to be a reverse-engineered version of the Soviet Shkval, is a key asset in its asymmetric naval strategy. The US Navy, at present, does not have such a weapon.

-By creating a gas bubble around itself to dramatically reduce water resistance, the Hoot can reportedly travel at speeds of around 200 knots (370 km/h), making it nearly impossible for US or Israeli naval vessels to evade or counter.

-While its range is limited (10-15 km) and its straight-line attack path makes it difficult to guide, its sheer speed provides a powerful deterrent and a means to strike high-value targets like aircraft carriers in the constrained waters of the Persian Gulf.

Posted: **25 Jun 2025 01:20**

SIPRI:
Facts and myths about nuclear materials trafficking: A Q&A with Robert Kelley
https://www.sipri.org/commentary/topica ... ert-kelley

Posted: **25 Jun 2025 01:30**

SRajesh wrote: ↑25 Jun 2025 00:51 If Iran managed to spirit away bulk or some of the enriched Uranium then where did it disappear??
How safe is it??
Where is it kept and who is guarding it??
More importantly can a 60% enriched U be used for a Dirty Bomb??
A Dirty Bomb is a dangerous scenario isn’t it??

All that 60% enriched uranium? Even 400+ kg , as I said before, of it could fit in a small carry-on bag. (volume about 40 l). Could be anywhere—basement, bunker, or behind someone’s bookshelf. It’s “safe” as long as no one steals it (so… fingers crossed it's not next to someone’s cat food stash).

Now, dirty bomb? Yeah, sounds scary. But it's mostly psychological. U-235 gives off alpha particles—they can’t even get through your skin. Swallowing it? Still bad, but mostly like ingesting heavy metals. A regular explosive is way more dangerous.

So yeah, not great if it’s missing—but not Chernobyl either.

(Seriously I have talked about this (dirty bombs) in great details many times over years in other threds ... but any good textbook, or internet resource , you can see how dangerous dirty bomb (using just U or Pu etc) is (or is not)..(like cesium-137 or cobalt-60, which are gamma emitters and far more radioactive material for dirty bombs but even they are less dangerous than what people think).
You can start with source like "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium?" and look for 'dirty bomb scenario" or ask Chatgpt or other AI)

Posted: **25 Jun 2025 02:05**

Meanwhile:
The recent 88-hour India-Pakistan conflict was much more limited than the 12-day Israel-Iran conflict, but in terms of messaging there’s a strong parallel.

In both cases, some credible neutral observers that one side (India, Israel) crossed previously uncrossed red lines, and inflicted much more damage than the other. But they can’t prevent the losers (Pakistan, Iran) from pretending to their people that they somehow scored a great victory.

Bharat Rakshak

Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War

Re: Israel-Hezbollah-Iran War