Anonymous ID: d60b05 Aug. 5, 2020, 9:17 p.m. No.10196516   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>6555

>>10196466

I don't understand your line of thinking then. My first instinct is to assume the direct opposite of what I am told. You even say you don't agree. So why even call out that anon for speculating about nukes? I thought that was the whole point. Mass speculation that covers all angles like a fine net. The truth is sifted through that process