85%: “Japan Should Possess Nuclear Weapons”


85% of Japanese asked whether Japan should possess nuclear weapons agreed, whilst only 22% believed their American allies would really come to their aid if their nation was threatened.

The results:

1. Should Japan possess nuclear weapons?

Yes: 85%

No: 15%

2. Should there be public debate on the matter?

Yes: 96%

No: 4%

3. In the event of an emergency, do you think the USA would protect Japan?

Yes: 22%

No: 78%

The survey was conducted by Sankei, the most right-wing of Japan’s major rags (in fact it is doubtful the other papers would even allow the topic to be discussed) and although not conducted with the same relative rigour as a telephone opinion poll, its results are nonetheless telling.

Sankei presents some of the comments from respondents:

“Russia, China, North Korea – our nation is surrounded by nuclear powers. At best we can say they are not friendly. Acquiring a deterrent with which to protect our people and territory should be discussed.”

“Why is discussion about this a taboo in Japan? If there was an incident, would the people suppressing debate about it take responsiblity?”

“The time has come for us to consider the US security guarantee. Nuclear arms are required for us to become truly independent. Being dependent on the US for our safety and being constantly treated with contempt by China are both undesirable.”

“We should not have nuclear weapons, we should invest money in conventional forces rather than ones we can never use.”

“America won’t let us have them, and  it will only encourage neighbouring countries to place sanctions on us and increase their own armaments. We should however have a healthy debate on the subject and be ready to acquire nuclear weapons if needed.”

“We should avoid acquiring them. But if the situation with our neighbouring countries remains unchanged, this debate is only going to continue.”

The overt hostility of their neighbours and the notorious duplicity of American foreign policy seems to be persuading many Japanese that the only hope they have for freedom from foreign coercion is a credible deterrent of their own, in the process eroding their carefully constructed victim mentality when it comes to nuclear weapons.

    Post Comment »
    Sort by: Date | Score
    Avatar of Misakite
    Comment by Misakite
    08:20 17/12/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    Fuck Nuclear. Build the Gundams already.

    Avatar of Homu Improvement
    Comment by Homu Improvement
    08:30 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Build Gundams with nukes or screw that build evas.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:33 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    But gundams or mobile suits (if my memory serves me right) particularly the first generation is powered by nuclear reactors. Therefore they should have nuke as a prerequisite. And its double purposed. Imagine, the new "kamikaze squad" (if the gundam takes too much damage and wont be able to make it back) packs the punch of a freakin nuke. Scary if you ask me.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:30 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    and the energy source of these are what? gas/ hydroelectricity/solor power/hamster power...

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:06 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Spiral energy!!

    Avatar of T.O.M. Morrow
    Comment by T.O.M. Morrow
    08:15 17/12/2010 # ! Quality (+0.9)

    Wow. I'm surprised. Knowing how dangerous Nukes are and having experienced the only 2 attacks in history (in Hiroshima and Nagasaki), I would think that they would be reticent to add arms proliferation to their litany of troubles!

    Avatar of Riiku
    Comment by Riiku
    08:29 17/12/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    I think that, instead of acuqiring nukes, the money and huge effort should be invested in developing an effective counter measure against nukes, with obligatory secrecy, of corse.

    The modern technology allows wonders, I'm pretty confident their brilliant minds can come up with a sure way of intercepting incoming nuke missiles.

    Avatar of PewPewPew!
    Comment by PewPewPew!
    08:33 17/12/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    Well, they're the only country so far to be the recipient of a nuclear attack so it makes some sense if they're the 1st one to come up with something that will neutralize a nuclear warhead's fusion/fission capability.

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:13 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.4)

    or they could both just grow up and stop being so petty

    and shouldnt japan be more worried about it's economy than nukes?

    Avatar of Bigall
    Comment by Bigall
    18:30 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yeah, effectiveness of the Missile defense system is 20% and considering the range of a nuke.

    Avatar of TheBeast
    Comment by TheBeast
    08:57 18/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    although you are correct, you can't ignore a threat like that. you have to dig the garden before you can pick the fruits. in other words you have to procure your countries safty before you can grow it's economy.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:49 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    This isn't Gundam you dumbass.
    There will be no N-Jammers....

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:49 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Something like a F.L.E.I.J.A. Eliminator from code geass? ;D

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:22 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Maybe something like Fleiya eliminator from code geass? ;D

    Comment by Anonymous


    Theres something called a Missile Defense System (intercepts missiles DURRR).

    you living under a rock?

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:02 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    The most recent railgun tests by the US Navy seem to be promising. ICBMs travel at subsonic speeds so a shot going Mach 7 should easily destroy any incoming missiles. See http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/13/32mj_railgun_test_onr/ if you don't know what I'm talking about.

    Avatar of Artefact
    Comment by Artefact

    The only reason this is an effective doctrine is because there would be a counterstrike... can you see the problem here?

    Comment by Anonymous
    16:21 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    That is why the country who shoots first won't give the other country a chance at surviving the first strike. 100+ nukes at each major city.

    Avatar of Bigall
    Comment by Bigall
    18:33 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    And that's why anytime there are suspicions of a probable launch and just suspicion, everyone ready's to launch of there own nukes.
    The problem is that, if someone launched, OMG, we are good as dead...

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:51 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yup, it is indeed promising. Having the capability to survive the first strike is the key in a world with several nuclear powers. This capability will make enemies think twice before using nuclear weapons and is part of the basic principle in nuclear deterrence.
    In fact, they are the only nation that are making real process in this field.

    Comment by Pyrolight
    08:24 17/12/2010 # ! Quality (+0.8)

    It has more to do with the realization that if China truly felt like rolling over Japan, it would be a coin flip if the U.S.A. would really get involved.

    Avatar of PewPewPew!
    Comment by PewPewPew!
    08:30 17/12/2010 # ! Quality (+0.8)

    It's like Japan is being sheltered under a heavy downpour(its troubles with its neighbors) with a paper umbrella(which represents the protection offered by the US).
    The umbrella is slowly crumbling under the pressure of the rain water and that Japan may soon want an umbrella of its own.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:45 17/12/2010 # ! Quality (+1.0)

    What if the poles shift and Japan sinks into the sea?

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:06 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.4)

    "It's like Japan is being sheltered under a heavy downpour with a paper umbrella.
    The umbrella is slowly crumbling under the pressure of the rain water and that Japan may soon want an umbrella of its own."

    Sadly, The last monsoon was caused by Japan, in which they savagely beat their neighbors with it's umbrella. Then America and the rest of the world said they're not allowed to have umbrellas anymore.
    Because that's what happens when you're a total dick to people, then get bitch-slapped. People give you a golden shower.

    Comment by Anonymous
    05:03 18/12/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    And that's not how it works either.

    The economy of the world today is a Mexican standoff, where everyone is still polite and cheerful. The United States owes more than FOURTY TIMES the TARP value in debt, and China is the largest single holder of it, but Japan is still #2..

    If China ever called in that debt, they could bankrupt the United States... but all the US has to do is default on it, like most South American countries did/have done several times in the last 30 years. The United States is also China's largest MARKET for all the shit it pumps out, by about a 30% margin. By defaulting, they throw a quarter of China's wealthy little fascists out of work too.. and THAT'S what the Communist Party fears most - as Hu Jintao said, what frightens him the most in the world is the necessity to create 10% more jobs every year.

    Unemployed illiterate chinks are angry, shiftless, revolutionary chinks.

    Comment by Anonymous
    18:11 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    In other news, 90% of the Japanese population is MAD.

    Nukes are not weapons. They are disasters capable of wiping out squishy life forms like humans off the face of the world.

    Comment by Anonymous
    20:28 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Alidan, that's not how it works. If America is in debt to China 1 to 2 trillion and the American government dicks around, China, as the largest owner of American debt, will say give me that money immediately. That effectively fucks the American economy entirely and may cause some awful shit-storm global-economic chain reaction. If all those banks that were bailed out were "too big to fail", what do you think happens when the American government has to repay more than double the money it used for TARP immediately? Even if the American government refuses to pay the debt, that basically fucks the entire global economy since that statement will influence the economies of all of America's other major debt holders which will fuck the global economy up.

    Comment by Anonymous
    17:44 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Wow really no one thinks the US would protect japan if they were attacked?

    Id say were pretty obligated to protect you since we disallowed japan to have a anything but a defensive military.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:10 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    They should have them i supose considering how close to china they are and their dislike for eachother for that matter north korea aswell...as to wether or not america would help them if the were attacked i think it would depend on who
    North Korea america definetly would
    China i doubt it
    Russia unlikley.
    The only other one i could se america jumping in to attack would be iran but i doubt iran would attack japan.

    Avatar of alidan
    Comment by alidan
    10:08 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    well lets see here.

    america is in debt to china, what 1 or 2 trillion, if china wants to ever see that, they cant openly attack a good nation.

    china wants a piss ass island, with next to no redeeming qualities. should the us attack them for something relitivly minor?

    now here is a truth, if japan was ever hit with a nuke, there is about a 10% chance that they wouldn't be able to fire the nuke back, for something that would gain alot of hate. i mean is japan smart enough to use the nuke right?

    and a flip of a coin? america would have to move all its plants over to india, and unless there was anything short of an real invasion or war between the two, america wont get involved.

    Avatar of dreadx6
    Comment by dreadx6
    08:55 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I think they should get however there are risks in obtaining them and one must weigh both sides.
    (If Japan created an army of actual working and armed mecha no one would want to mess with it =P)

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:33 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    another thing to consider is china's reaction to them obtaining it , i don't see them letting anyone have leverage against them.

    and though i'm sure it wouldn't happen if u.s. does have to go to war against china they would be absolving any obligation to pay back that debt, and we all now what we will do for money.

    Comment by Anonymous
    14:40 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    100% votes:
    "Japan Should Possess Real Gundam and Evangelion units”

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:31 17/12/2010 # ! Good (+0.8)

    As a strategic base yes the US would most likely get involved and as for nukes you think our nuclear subs aren't already in that part of the world. whales aren't the only thing in the sea of Japan

    Comment by Anonymous
    03:53 19/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    The only reason USA would protect Japan is because Japan's basically the USA's meatshields for those eastern superpowers. If they get a foothold on Japan then the only thing in the way would be the vast ocean.

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:37 23/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Japan is one of a very short list of non NATO countries that I believe the united states would throw all it's resources into protecting.

    Comment by Anonymous
    03:21 18/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    USA would jump in and protect Japan in no time flat. There aren't many places we would do that for, but Japan is definitely one of them. The others include England, Canada, probably Taiwan, probably France, probably South Korea, and probably Mexico if it was a real war (not just some drug cartel stuff)

    Comment by Pyrolight
    08:43 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Don't even try to imply that the U.S. would even for a half a second think about using nukes. Japan is not worth having China make large holes in the U.S.A. The war would be conventional.

    Also a strategic base that is two feet from a superpower and an ocean away from your own forces quickly changes it's relative strategic value.

    The U.S.A. getting involved in a shooting match with China directly over Japan is as I say nothing more then a coin flip.

    If China attacked today the general population of the U.S.A. would never support it and the fact of the matter is that the U.S. military is in no shape to hop into a war of the scale that it would be with China atm.

    Comment by Anonymous
    14:50 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    These events are becoming increasingly similar tho those of the Fallout universe. China VS USA? Nuclear war? Probably. Some time around 2077.
    ...so get your vault jumpsuits ready, children...

    Avatar of Inkydog
    Comment by Inkydog
    10:27 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Its astonishing how little you seem to know about warfare and US politics.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:33 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.4)

    I agree they deserve nukes,but the minute nukes are involved I think the US would help,I mean its a world problem after all.I think they should get some form of military,but nukes are always a last resort(against aliens or possibly demons).

    Avatar of BlaqCat
    Comment by BlaqCat
    13:00 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    It's sad to say that under the current circumstances, they're probably right. The U.S. would probably not take direct action to protect Japan from China.

    Avatar of bluecarrot
    Comment by bluecarrot
    14:29 17/12/2010 # ! Good (+0.4)

    Yeah I doubt the US would get involved til china has taken over the whole of eastern Asia and heads for the middle east...btw what does the world think nukes are keep out signs....

    Avatar of T.O.M. Morrow
    Comment by T.O.M. Morrow
    08:39 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Good point. They are still asking for trouble though...China and North Korea would not just sit back and "let" Japan become a nuclear power. Also, with the way the Japanese government has reacted (i.e. spinelessly) to the whole Senkaku affair, I don't even think that possessing nuclear weapons would make the government more bold or courageous in their international dealings.

    Comment by Anonymous
    09:28 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    "China" says it all.

    Avatar of TheBeast
    Comment by TheBeast
    14:22 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (-0.2)

    america would come to their aide. end of story. but i would like to think the political figures would arrange a meeting to maybe settle differences with diplomacy rather than war.

    Avatar of bluecarrot
    Comment by bluecarrot
    14:30 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    Uwaah thats a really optimistic outlook... Thats probably the least likely thing to occur

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:26 19/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    The real problem is that the economic ties America has with China is pretty strong. Trying to siphon all the companies and investments out of China in a fortnight is next to impossible simply because there is too much that could be saved. The debt is just the icing on the cake. The point is that both sides will suffer immediately from reckless moves.

    Avatar of TheBeast
    Comment by TheBeast
    08:53 18/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)


    america would not go to war? are you serious? although it is not an image we americans like, it is that we are war mongers. i think america would use any excuse to conquer china and as a truce they would excuse our staggering debt.


    just because you would be afraid or too selfish to help another in need after giving your word to help, i don't think america would back out of our agreement.

    i don't think that something could be worked out with diplomacy, but it would be worth a shot, just to save lives on all 3 fronts.

    Comment by Anonymous

    So you have actually met with US leaders, and they told you personally that they would help Japan? the US would not go to war period. end of story.

    Comment by Anonymous
    08:33 17/12/2010 # ! Good (+0.6)

    and they certainly will not forget about hiroshima and nagasaki any time soon...
    however, if somebody smacks you over your skull with a plank you will probably dislike planks and still want your own for when the next plank wielding dude comes around - especially when he lives right across the street and makes no effort hiding that he hates your skull more than anybody else

    Avatar of PewPewPew!
    Comment by PewPewPew!
    08:38 17/12/2010 # ! Good (+0.4)

    Yeah, you'll definitely want the planks yourself with that going on.
    Though the Japanese have this thing about improving what they got recently.
    So I guess the plank's gonna have some nails and barbed-wire sticking out of it?^^

    Comment by Anonymous
    15:32 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Isn't that the main problem with all this? Being a nuclear nation comes with a fairly large set of problems, and at this point unless Japan is willing to build a massive arsenal they've got a weapon that's too terrible to be used but useless as a deterrent. They're better off just bolstering their ties with countries that already have a large nuclear stockpile and try to stop beefin' with China.

    Avatar of Chiaki H
    Comment by Chiaki H
    16:59 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Japan tends to fail at learning from the past, like any nation full of hubris.

    The price for going nuclear is often higher than the security it can buy.

    In any case, I think it's foolish to want to arm a country with nuclear weapons today. Short of raising international tensions, it really doesn't do much. Considering the nuclear bomb was stockpiled en-amass during the cold war, wanting to arm a nation with some now is like attempting to revive the same scenario.

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:40 19/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Of course we'd come to their aid, it would give us an excuse and the "backbone for allies" so we could take care of our only obstacle left in the world, China.

    But in that same vein, we don't even let Japan even have a real military still, they have no say in the matter and will not be allowed to have them.

    Avatar of Sareed
    Comment by Sareed
    13:54 23/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    That is not entirely untrue the Japanese Defense forces as it stands now could defeat a attempted invasion by either china or N. Korea. Also it's important to not it's only 3 more years before the USA removes all remaining restrictions on the JDF and fully returns control of the military forces of japan to the nation it self.

    Avatar of King Tiger
    Comment by King Tiger
    09:32 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    1. Should Japan possess nuclear weapons?

    Yes: 85%

    No: 15%

    2. Should there be public debate on the matter?

    Yes: 96%

    No: 4%

    3. In the event of an emergency, do you think the USA would protect Japan?

    Yes: 22%

    No: 78%

    well there you have it folks they don't need the U.S. over there

    (Japan gets occupied by China 6 months after U.S. troops pull out this in-turn leads to a nuclear war on the asian pacific)

    Avatar of Tuor
    Comment by Tuor
    07:49 18/12/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)


    Don't worry. I don't know what their polling methodology was, but I doubt it was remotely objective.

    China wouldn't directly attack Japan, anyway. They'd let their rabid dog NK do it, and we would not allow that to happen. We keep our Pacific Fleet headquarters in Japan for a reason, after all.

    If China ever moved into a position where an attack on Japan was likely (this isn't something that they could disguise from us), then we'd build up our presence there as well. Our navy is still way better than China's navy, and will be for the forseeable future.

    As for a nuclear strike: the first country that resorts to that is going to be in a world of hurt: the rest of the world wouldn't stand for an offensive use of nuclear bombs -- what we used on Japan was an *atomic* warhead; the strategic nukes of today are way, WAY more powerful than that.

    All in all, this is a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing. A right-leaning newspaper trying to stir up jingoism, IMO. It's nothing to worry about.

    Comment by Anonymous
    01:26 19/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)


    A bit of a one sided argument.

    Firstly, the Pacific Fleet is in the Asian region mainly for America's own interests. The U.S. (like any other nation) will put their own interests ahead of others.

    - "If China ever moved into a position where an attack on Japan was likely"

    Can you provide an example where China has moved their military towards Japan? Can you provide any examples of global powers fighting a war since WW2 even?

    - "As for a nuclear strike: the first country that resorts to that is going to be in a world of hurt: the rest of the world wouldn't stand for an offensive use of nuclear bombs."

    A bit of contadiction there. I don't remember U.S. being in a world of hurt after using an atomic bomb. Possibly something to do with them possessing the biggest gun?

    - "what we used on Japan was an *atomic* warhead; the strategic nukes of today are way, WAY more powerful than that."

    That's your rationale for nuking so many innocent civilians?! So let's say if we were to obtain more sophisticated weaponary in future, then what would stop the U.S. using this reasoning again for today's Strategic Missiles?

    Avatar of Sareed
    Comment by Sareed
    13:50 23/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    The USA projections for a amphibious invasion of Japan came in at a total of more than three and a half million Japanese soldiers and civilians and more than one and a half million American service men so yes I would have to agree with US cent. Com. in that a few ten thousand dead civilians was a light price to pay, But I suppose I'll leave it to your vaulted opinion that we could have just did to japan what we did to islands leading to japan.

    Avatar of Sandalphon
    Comment by Sandalphon
    10:20 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    It's not like the Japanese ever wanted US troops over there either, it's the US that doesn't want to pull out due to its interests in the region.

    And Japan isn't quite in the same position as South Korea where they love Americans for keeping Evildoer Korea at bay.

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:00 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    dont they got gundam already???

    Comment by Anonymous
    10:39 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    This horse has already been beaten to death. Please stop.

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:40 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    and revived,with shocks and killed again, and shocked alive again..repeating

    Avatar of Carrot_Glace
    Comment by Carrot_Glace
    09:54 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yes, but, you know... They won't use them with themselves.

    Comment by Kudeh
    08:32 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Having been nuked, Japan is in the unique position of knowing what can happen when your opponents have nukes and you don't. Japan was completely helpless and its conventional forces were no use at all when their enemy was able to destroy whole cities with a single bomb.

    There's no way the US would have nuked Japan if the Japanese could have returned fire. China would be a little more hesitant to mess with them if they had nukes and we've seen how the Russians are much more diplomatic when they know the other side can defend themselves.

    NK is a loose cannon, but there really isn't anything that can be done about them. The regime probably doesn't have much time left, anyway.

    Avatar of Sandalphon
    Comment by Sandalphon
    08:46 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I would want to have them too if I had North Korea and China as neighbours. But I think opinions 4 and 5 are quite prudent.

    It seems to me that having nuclear weapons would only cause them more trouble than they're worth. Were Japan to be attacked, nukes could only be used as retaliation and not as a defensive measure. In such a scenario, it becomes too easy to think "I'm just one red button away from getting payback".

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:49 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I think having been the nation which experienced the only two nuclear attacks in history would make them amongst the most responsible owners of them.

    They understand the terrifying amount of damage that these things could inflict, especially in terms of human cost and collateral damage. In addition I'd say that Japan is probably among the most responsible nations when in the grand scheme of things.

    To try to make an analogy, it would be like giving a kid who'd been burned before a lighter and saying "be careful with this and only use it if you need to", whereas North Korea having nukes is like giving an 8 year old attention deficit pyromaniac w/ a streak of compulsive lying a bunch of fireworks and all the tools to set them off and then leaving them unsupervised.

    Which would you trust more in that situation?

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:58 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    One chinese NEUTRON bomb over tokyo and the ENTIRE city is free to move into with little to no lingering radiation. Thank America for giving up that technology while you're at it!

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:57 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    We can only pray that the rockets they used are made of cheap plastic, foam, and sewage-for-oil.

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:08 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    You know if japan starts arming themself it will only gives china north korea more reason to arms themself with more powerful weapon as you know what happens in WWII.

    Before you know it next china will wage war against japan because of that same reason.

    Avatar of Renzo
    Comment by Renzo
    10:48 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    I'd prefer Japanese develop chemical and biological weapon to nuclear weapon ( which is its effect totally visible )

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:59 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    great, you want zombies

    Comment by Anonymous

    Zombie army HOTD hmm

    Comment by Anonymous
    21:40 17/12/2010 # ! Neutral (0)

    Great, Unit 731 already tried that before... don't give the Chicoms any more excuses for their rabid ultranationalism...

    Post Comment »


Recent News

Recent Galleries

Recent Comments