guys staph. . File . 231x215. ) my ppn' THE Eu HAP syou an motw.' : l In ' rng hourai, har, "rhough ruffies to Inlet draugrs EH o! Slurms EAR " . S ARSENAL'S ME
Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

guys staph

File . 231x215. ) my
ppn'
THE Eu HAP
syou an motw.' : l In ' rng hourai, har, "rhough ruffies to Inlet draugrs EH o! Slurms
EAR " . S ARSENAL'S
MEET
bkt. an
forest.
...
  • Recommend tagsx
+1517
Views: 38590
Favorited: 159
Submitted: 09/02/2012
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to thatonetyler Subscribe to 4chan E-mail to friend submit to reddit
Share image on facebook Share on StumbleUpon Share on Tumblr Share on Pinterest Share on Google Plus E-mail to friend

Comments(93):

[ 93 comments ]

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Show:   Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#6 - anonymous (09/03/2012) [+] (3 replies)
or the fact that a whole huge populated city is only a little dot on the map of the earth so yes the u.s can fire a nuke at every populated city on the planet, why would anyone bomb the forest and the ocean ?
#19 to #6 - Cookiez (09/03/2012) [-]
Because there are 80000 spiders per acre of green land.
User avatar #5 - firinmalazor (09/03/2012) [+] (3 replies)
forgot to account for nuclear fallout (which is the main destructive property of atomic weapons), which would kill most of the people.

lrn2 science, anon
#35 - pineappleninja (09/03/2012) [+] (11 replies)
Comment Picture
#9 - mynameisnightwolf (09/03/2012) [+] (3 replies)
Yes. Because a nuclear blast has no effect on anything beyond 3.5 miles.
#55 - hardyhs (09/03/2012) [+] (3 replies)
Comment Picture
#67 to #55 - trapitrapeit (09/03/2012) [-]
its worth it
its worth it
User avatar #54 - superunclesam (09/03/2012) [+] (2 replies)
Implying the radiation and fallout wouldn't be enough to destroy what's left of the surrounding- wait, that the **** am I doing?
#7 - bouncyhd (09/03/2012) [+] (4 replies)
stahp*



it'd be pronounced 'staff' the way you spelled it
User avatar #46 - metajunky (09/03/2012) [-]
well golly i wonder if the debate continued in the comment sect-

AND IT ******* DID. congrats FJ, way to prove your retardation
#85 - waffies (09/03/2012) [-]
Always love this post.
#65 - littlenish (09/03/2012) [-]
There's alot of 4chan on frontpage today. Too much in fact.
User avatar #47 - MythBuster (09/03/2012) [+] (4 replies)
that guy is a dumbass, most nukes have a deadly diameter of around 40-60 miles because of all the radiation. we could easily wipe out china, even if the initial blast doesn't kill them all, there is still over 50 years of deadly radiation that contaminates soil, water, weather. the wind would blow all that **** around and **** everyone up. not to mention that we probably have way more nukes than that
User avatar #48 to #47 - BowChickaBowWow (09/03/2012) [-]
He was talking about the blast range, not the fallout zone.
#43 - pinkiepieisacock (09/03/2012) [+] (1 reply)
Funnyjunk-
Hehe you sure are funny 4chan! We're bros right 4chan?

4chan-
Yeah whatever, piss off.

Funnyjunk- Hehe 9gag sucks right! Yeah! Reddits for fags! haha you're so funny 4chan, hehehe
#26 - maxoverderp (09/03/2012) [-]
Comment Picture
+1
#13 - excallibur **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [+] (2 replies)
User avatar #20 to #13 - bananarchy (09/03/2012) [-]
This is /a/
Not all of 4chan /b/
#95 - theoriginaltyson (09/03/2012) [+] (1 reply)
pic related
I capped this because I thought it was hilarious
User avatar #31 - jinchuuriki (09/03/2012) [+] (2 replies)
Um there's enough nuclear weapons on the planet to wipe out every life form 10 times over
User avatar #68 - DmOnZ (09/03/2012) [+] (8 replies)
******* WRONG! THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA HAS A COMBINED TOTAL OF 8500 NUCLEAR WEAPONS (http: // www . bbc . You need to login to view this link (don't get your facts from wikipedia dumbass)) THAT HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO BE FIRED. AND WHEN NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARE DISCUSSED, ONLY AN IDIOT WOULD ONLY TALK ABOUT THE BLAST RADIUS WITHOUT OTHER FACTORS! A 8500 300Kt NUCLEAR WARHEADS HAS MORE THAN ENOUGH FIREPOWER TO DECIMATE AN ENTIRE COUNTRY LIKE CHINA! YOU CAN THINK OF IT THIS WAY, WHEN SOMEONE THROWS A GRENADE, IT IS THE SHRAPNEL THAT KILLS PEOPLE, NOT THE ACTUAL EXPLOSION! THE SAME APPLIES TO A NUCLEAR WARHEAD. YOU WATCH ANY BOMB TEST AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THE WHILE THE FIREBALL IS ONLY A CERTAIN SIZE, THE BLAST CAN STILL CARRY DEADLY CHEMICALS AND DEBRIS MUCH FARTHER! IN FACT, IN A TEST MADE BY THE US DURING THE COLD WAR, DEBRIS FROM A NUCLEAR BOMB TEST WAS FOUND UP TO FIFTY KILOMETERS AWAY FROM GROUND ZERO! THAT BEING SAID, THOSE NUCLEAR WEAPONS WERE NO WHERE NEAR AS STRONG AS THE ONES CURRENTLY BEING STORED, AND THE RADIATION PLUS DEBRIS AND FALLOUT THAT WOULD ENSUE THE DETONATION WOULD KILL PEOPLE ALMOST INSTANTLY WITHIN A CERTAIN RANGE! NOT TO MENTION THAT HIS LOGIC IS GREATLY SKEWED, WHEN WE DISCUSS DESTROYING THE WORLD OR A COUNTRY, WE ARE REFERRING TO THE HUMAN OCCUPIED PARTS OF THE WORLD! WHY WOULD A COUNTRY NUKE THE MIDDLE OF THE HIMALAYAS WHEN PRACTICALLY NOBODY LIVES THERE! IF YOU ATTACK THE MAJOR CITIES (AND BY MAJOR I MEAN ANYTHING THAT HAS THE ABILITY TO SUSTAIN LIFE AND GROW FOOD) YOU EFFECTIVELY WIPE OUT AN ENTIRE NATION! IF A COUNTRIES CITIES ARE GONE, THERE IS NO-ONE LEFT TO DISTRIBUTE FOOD AND CARE TO REST, AND FURTHERMORE WHOEVER IS LEFT WOULD DIE OF STARVATION, RADIATION OR INFECTION/DISEASE! THAT AND THE FACT THAT MORE THAN HALF OF THE WORLD CAN BE EXCLUDED FROM NUCLEAR FIRE BECAUSE NOBODY LIVES IN THOSE PARTS PROVES THAT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA HAS MORE THAN ENOUGH NUCLEAR WEAPONS TO TURN THE WORLD INTO A COMPLETE AND UTTER DEATH FACTORY!
User avatar #70 to #68 - mattmanhemi (09/03/2012) [-]
if you want people to take you seriously, why do you post with CAPSLOCK RAGE
User avatar #15 - welshdrag (09/03/2012) [+] (4 replies)
Forgot about fallout, which is more than 3.5 miles, and also if we bombed a country, we would spread out the nukes, they wouldn't be within 1 inch of each other
[ 93 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)