Page 11 of 106 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 2107

Thread: The Trump impact on US policy

  1. #201
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    849

    Default To Outlaw 09 RE: Various (Part 1)

    1. Personally, I believe that political ideology is three-dimensional rather than two.

    2. I agree with you that rural voters have increasingly turned toward the GOP since the Great Recession began in 2007. I disagree that the 1920s is relevant, given that the surge in white supremacy was accompanied by religious fervor and occurred during a period of official and institutionalized racism. The support of the “Alt-Right” is immaterial compared to that of the mainstream media for Clinton. However, let’s look at the economic record for Obama’s tenure:

    • The same real GDP growth as Bush (half that of Reagan and Clinton)
    • The smallest US manufacturing sector as a share of GDP
    • A Labor Participation Rate not seen since Carter
    • Real median household income lower than Clinton on average
    • Real median household net worth set back a decade for whites and a generation for blacks


    Yet Hillary expected to campaign on the status quo?

    3. Trump is a politician who will take credit where credit isn’t due.

    4. I read The Art of War to be philosophically against war in a way that many martial arts are philosophically opposed to violence.

    The Russians have not altered the beliefs of American or European society. They have attempted to amplify popular doubts about the status quo, but the fact is that the establishment has been unable to put forth a compelling vision that Western nations can understand and support. The European Union was provoking ire among many Western Europeans in the early 2000s for its ideological bias and overreach, years before the Great Recession and rivalry with Moscow over Ukraine. On the whole, no new vision has been put forth since 1992’s The End of History. Yet Western faith that liberal democracy will triumph everywhere has been eroded over time and replaced with cynicism if not pessimism.

    As for Russia’s curious blend of Czarist and Soviet ideology as well as the Byzantine Caesaro-Papism of the Russian Orthodox Church, it is unsustainable in the long-term.

    Russia’s true contest is with China, and if history is any guide, Russia will have to ally with the West or find itself the Austria-Hungary or Italy to China’s Germany…

    5. First, Russia was accused of hacking the polling machines. Now, it is accused of hacking the DNC and leaking the correspondence to WikiLeaks, which I believe it did. But did it swing the election in Trump’s favor? No. The biggest blow to Hillary was her “basket of deplorables” remark (32 estimated electoral votes lost) and Comey’s letters to Congress (24 estimated electoral votes lost); in fact, the Podesta release was more than overwhelmed by the Access Hollywood one.

    The “vast right-wing conspiracy” of the late 1990s has transformed into a sprawling conspiracy that would baffle even Jim Marrs. Do you want to know the candidate that imitated Russian non-linear warfare? Hillary Rodham Clinton.

    Her response to the Server Scandal was reminiscent of Russia’s propaganda regarding MH17:

    • Hillary suffered a concussion and remembers nothing (did the security briefing occur after she had been Secretary for over 3 years?)
    • It was Colin Powell’s fault (he was in no position to approve or authorize it)
    • It was her aids’ fault
    • There was no classified material on the server
    • There may have been classified material but Hillary didn’t know what the “C” meant
    • The security protocols are too onerous
    • Stop asking questions
    • This is yet another right-wing conspiracy
    • All of the above


    Again, look at how her minions have responded to her loss:

    • It was a “whitelash” (despite Trump’s share of the white vote being within recent GOP norms)
    • It was white men
    • It was white women (betrayal!)
    • It was Comey (he is a secret GOP agent provocateur)
    • It was Obama (asking her to concede early)
    • It was the Electoral College (set-up to ensure GOP victory!)
    • It was Russia
    • All of the above

  2. #202
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    849

    Default To Outlaw 09 RE: Various (Part 2)

    1. You reside in Germany and are clearly not facing the adverse economic and financial conditions that prevail in the Rust Belt and for roughly half of Americans. This is not a criticism, but context...

    2. You wanted Hillary Clinton to be elected President because you expected her pursue a more confrontational foreign policy with respect to Russia and Iran, and toward the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and Syria. You also were aware that she would largely ignore domestic policy, knowing that any initiatives would be obstructed by Republicans in Congress. Clinton’s policy focus and ability to effect change were both in the area of foreign affairs, and Clinton had established herself as a hawk.

    3. You have accused Obama of ignoring Russian aggression in Ukraine and Syria, and Iran’s aggression in Syria and Yemen. In fact, you have argued that Obama has been complicit in Putin’s attempts to coerce Kiev into recognizing Putin’s puppets, and in Assad’s attempt to annihilate the moderate rebels. You have posted sources and articles suggesting that Obama is cooperating with Putin and Khamenei and is seen as their accomplice by many Sunni Arabs.

    Therefore, I have two questions for you:

    Question 1: If Obama has caved to Putin and Khamenei as you suggest, what could Trump do to make things even worse?

    Lift sanctions on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine? The Europeans are the least enthusiastic about maintaining the sanctions, Kerry has already tied them to Donbas rather than Crimea, and they show no signs of causing Russia to withdraw from either territory.

    Allow Russia to bomb the Free Syrian Army? That is already happening.

    Suspend aid to the rebels? That would only cause the Turks, Saudis and Qataris to increase aid without the CIA’s restrictions and would probably be a net benefit to the FSA.

    Cooperate more with the Iranians and their mercenaries? Actually, Trump would prove more confrontational as he cares little for the JCPOA. This would mean more arms sales and transfers to the GCC.

    Question 2: What could Hillary actually accomplish more than Obama?

    Create a NFZ in Syria? Doubtful unless you want war with Russia.

    More aid to the FSA? And suffer accusations of supporting Daesh and Al Qaeda…

    More sanctions on Russia? Not if the Europeans can help it.

    Lethal aid to Ukraine? In return for advanced weapons to Syria, Iran, the Houthis and others?

  3. #203
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    ALL Western leaders of all Western nations are now fully and completely complicit in the ongoing genocide in Aleppo...NOT a single word out of the entire UNSC...
    Really?

    I suppose then that the West is also responsible for:

    Yugoslavia
    Rwanda
    Sudan
    Congos
    Burundi
    South Sudan
    Somalia
    Algeria

    Right?

    You know that Russia has blocked UNSC action on Syria, despite various toothless resolutions being passed.

  4. #204
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azor View Post
    1. Personally, I believe that political ideology is three-dimensional rather than two.

    2. I agree with you that rural voters have increasingly turned toward the GOP since the Great Recession began in 2007. I disagree that the 1920s is relevant, given that the surge in white supremacy was accompanied by religious fervor and occurred during a period of official and institutionalized racism. The support of the “Alt-Right” is immaterial compared to that of the mainstream media for Clinton. However, let’s look at the economic record for Obama’s tenure:

    • The same real GDP growth as Bush (half that of Reagan and Clinton)
    • The smallest US manufacturing sector as a share of GDP
    • A Labor Participation Rate not seen since Carter
    • Real median household income lower than Clinton on average
    • Real median household net worth set back a decade for whites and a generation for blacks


    Yet Hillary expected to campaign on the status quo?

    3. Trump is a politician who will take credit where credit isn’t due.

    4. I read The Art of War to be philosophically against war in a way that many martial arts are philosophically opposed to violence.

    The Russians have not altered the beliefs of American or European society. They have attempted to amplify popular doubts about the status quo, but the fact is that the establishment has been unable to put forth a compelling vision that Western nations can understand and support. The European Union was provoking ire among many Western Europeans in the early 2000s for its ideological bias and overreach, years before the Great Recession and rivalry with Moscow over Ukraine. On the whole, no new vision has been put forth since 1992’s The End of History. Yet Western faith that liberal democracy will triumph everywhere has been eroded over time and replaced with cynicism if not pessimism.

    As for Russia’s curious blend of Czarist and Soviet ideology as well as the Byzantine Caesaro-Papism of the Russian Orthodox Church, it is unsustainable in the long-term.

    Russia’s true contest is with China, and if history is any guide, Russia will have to ally with the West or find itself the Austria-Hungary or Italy to China’s Germany…

    5. First, Russia was accused of hacking the polling machines. Now, it is accused of hacking the DNC and leaking the correspondence to WikiLeaks, which I believe it did. But did it swing the election in Trump’s favor? No. The biggest blow to Hillary was her “basket of deplorables” remark (32 estimated electoral votes lost) and Comey’s letters to Congress (24 estimated electoral votes lost); in fact, the Podesta release was more than overwhelmed by the Access Hollywood one.

    The “vast right-wing conspiracy” of the late 1990s has transformed into a sprawling conspiracy that would baffle even Jim Marrs. Do you want to know the candidate that imitated Russian non-linear warfare? Hillary Rodham Clinton.

    Her response to the Server Scandal was reminiscent of Russia’s propaganda regarding MH17:

    • Hillary suffered a concussion and remembers nothing (did the security briefing occur after she had been Secretary for over 3 years?)
    • It was Colin Powell’s fault (he was in no position to approve or authorize it)
    • It was her aids’ fault
    • There was no classified material on the server
    • There may have been classified material but Hillary didn’t know what the “C” meant
    • The security protocols are too onerous
    • Stop asking questions
    • This is yet another right-wing conspiracy
    • All of the above


    Again, look at how her minions have responded to her loss:

    • It was a “whitelash” (despite Trump’s share of the white vote being within recent GOP norms)
    • It was white men
    • It was white women (betrayal!)
    • It was Comey (he is a secret GOP agent provocateur)
    • It was Obama (asking her to concede early)
    • It was the Electoral College (set-up to ensure GOP victory!)
    • It was Russia
    • All of the above
    Azor..regardless of what you think the whole problem of the so called common man voting for Trump is traceable back to the total crash of the real estate market in 2006 which if one checks it out was triggered by the repeal of the Glass Siegel Banking requirements pushed by Bush and his privatization merry band.....

    Rural America and middle American suffered badly at the hands of the banks and real estate brokers....and it destroyed a vast amount of middle class wealth that has never been recovered.....AND no one went to jail.

    Check again why no one went to jail....RP revolted and threatened to block such actions when they took over control.....and look how long it took to get Dodd Frank for banks passed that now Trump wants to roll back....

    THEN we had McConnell stating openly on day one...I will make sure that Obama never serves more than once...and the RP went directly into blocking virtually anything which in then fed the common man's views that everything in DC was fake and doing nothing for them.....

    We can go on forever......

  5. #205
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azor View Post
    Really?

    I suppose then that the West is also responsible for:

    Yugoslavia
    Rwanda
    Sudan
    Congos
    Burundi
    South Sudan
    Somalia
    Algeria

    Right?

    You know that Russia has blocked UNSC action on Syria, despite various toothless resolutions being passed.
    IF you take it seriously then yes the US is just as complicit in those events as well...WHY....as the supposedly leader of the "free West" declared that by the Reagans and Bushes of this world ....then non action on the part of the US is in fact action in this case..being complicit.....the term complicit means one has knowledge of specific events and does nothing to stop it.....

    BUT here is the interesting act about the use of the Russian veto....
    1. there has never been a direct legal challenge as to the validity of Russia actually taking over for itself the UNSC seat that was reserved for the Soviet Union based on the existence of the Soviet Union in 1945...there are a number of international legal types that make a serious case that Russia illegally took the seat and the West looked the other way

    2. there is a little known internal UNGA procedure that allows the entire UNGA to override all UNSC decisions and was just used in the last week or so when they voted 122 to 12 to pass a Syrian Resolution.....they could have gone further and made it binding on the UNSC and then sanctioned any vetoing nation state for not following through..........BUT China...US and Russian maneuvered to kill that move as all three see it as a danger to their veto rights....so really we now have a the great example of how totally ineffective the UN has basically become in the 21st century....

    IF you take the comments by the US after Rwanda and Srebrenica and after say Kosovo....the US publicly stated to the world never again...and YET hear we are discussing genocide...war crimes....and starvation in 2016......

    You mentioned Yugoslavia...I wrote many years ago a thesis for a project that I was accepted for on Yugoslavia and how it would look after Tito...that was in 1985....if you layer it over the actual events I was 500% correct...and hate to say it .......brutally correct....

    AND again the US still remains quiet over Syria...hypocrisy is what that is called...

    WHY does the US not finally admit that it is driven FP wise largely by hypocrisy and move on...and drop all this secondary chatter of western values....rule of law...good governance and exceptionalism....as it is really nothing more or less than a smoke screen for blatant hypocrisy....

    BTW...you forgot the Biafran Nigerian civil war

    Charles Lister

    @Charles_Lister
    Take note - with near-daily war crimes being committed in #Aleppo & US-vetted assets left to die, President #Obama was *literally* silent.

    THAT Azor is complicity.....
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 12-13-2016 at 07:29 AM.

  6. #206
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    Azor..regardless of what you think the whole problem of the so called common man voting for Trump is traceable back to the total crash of the real estate market in 2006 which if one checks it out was triggered by the repeal of the Glass Siegel Banking requirements pushed by Bush and his privatization merry band.....

    Rural America and middle American suffered badly at the hands of the banks and real estate brokers....and it destroyed a vast amount of middle class wealth that has never been recovered.....AND no one went to jail.

    Check again why no one went to jail....RP revolted and threatened to block such actions when they took over control.....and look how long it took to get Dodd Frank for banks passed that now Trump wants to roll back....

    THEN we had McConnell stating openly on day one...I will make sure that Obama never serves more than once...and the RP went directly into blocking virtually anything which in then fed the common man's views that everything in DC was fake and doing nothing for them.....

    We can go on forever......
    BTW......for a historical lesson on American financial failures under Republicans I would suggest going back in time and studying the Savings and Loan debacle....also pushed by Bush Sr. under the concept of "privatization" of the billions being held by the banking requirements that were strictly for S&Ls....far different than banking requirements on what amounts of deposits had to be held in cash and bonds...

    THEN look how the criminals of that period were handled and how many went to jail...VS the real estate crash beginning slowly in 2006......

    NOW look at the Trump comments on Fannie and Freddie in the mortgage business...they want that privatized and their mortgage work tied to the banking industry benefitting say Goldman Sachs and company....

    Americans bailed out Fannie and Freddie to the tune of 188B USDs OVER the vast complaints of the Republicans......BUT they paid the 188B FULYL plus interest.....and now pump annually several Billion USDs back into the Treasury every year since then.....

    Americans have a very short memory of their own events...therein lies the main problem.....

    BTW....I do know the US internally as well as you do...was in the US from 1986 until 1997 and then again 2006 to 2012....

    BTW.....
    Anyone refusing to acknowledge democratic norms were/r violated is complicit in degradation of our republic
    http://nyti.ms/2hDuO6Y
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 12-13-2016 at 07:31 AM.

  7. #207
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Azor...this simply shot holes in the massive worker voter support for Trump who claimed he was going to stop jobs going to Mexico and he was going to create good paying manufacturing jobs......and goes to why I stated I could not move my company to the Rust Belt......

    This is interesting, some 85% of jobs in US manufacturing have been lost to automation not trade,
    https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brook...trade-policy/#

    Many US Trump voters would have a hard time understanding how it is possible that the Germans have a far higher average labor cost in manufacturing than the US does yet with all the higher costs the German export economy is growing and growing and growning....AND the first truly robot produced BMWs are now rolling off the assemble line....YET the economy is stronger than before 1991......

    How is that possible should be the shouts coming from the US Rust Belt....answer is simple...strong unionization....strong company management and strong government involvement in the process....AND a strong education system capable to producing qualified workers for the 21st century......

    YET all we hear from US workers is complaints...complaints and it's the fault of others.....easily exploited by Trump and company...

    BTW....a German study indicates that one robot replaces five workers....and the main builders of manufacturing robots with a global reputation for quality....are the Germans...

    Something that is typical for German and not for the US...how do you hold onto your older employees....meaning after 30-40 years of experience why lose them to retirement...so manufacturing looked at the processes and designed a new series of devices allowing older workers to continue doing what they have done in the past on the assembly lines and not hurting their health in the process..AND making it even easier for the younger workers in the process...THIS led to a whole new export market around the world....

    WHY hold onto the older workers....their experience cannot be replaced when they leave by the younger generation.....that experience is worth millions to manufacturers here....

  8. #208
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Trump already on path to extradite a man Turkish president wants and who is using blackmail on Trump biznes to get.
    http://www.newsweek.com/2016/12/23/d...s-531140.html#

  9. #209
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Trump administration's 1st #NATO decision could lead to US losing "its highest-ranking official in NATO"

    http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs...nato-official#

    The incoming Trump administration is looking to get rid of the No. 2 official at NATO, an American nominated by President Obama whom most Republicans don’t trust. But NATO’s Brussels leadership may not play along, setting up an early confrontation with President Trump.

    Two Trump transition sources told me that a representative of the transition team met late last month with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in Brussels and delivered a private but deliberate message: The incoming administration would like Stoltenberg to replace Deputy Secretary General Rose Gottemoeller. Gottemoeller, who was nominated for the post by Obama this past March, started her job in Brussels only in October and has a multi-year contract. She works for NATO, not the U.S. government.

    If NATO leadership agreed to remove Gottemoeller, it would set a new precedent for U.S. government control over American officials in top NATO positions. If the NATO leadership doesn’t agree, the incoming Trump administration could work to marginalize Gottemoeller and render her ineffective. Either way, her role is set to change when the new U.S. president comes into office....

    Trump transition sources told me that Stoltenberg agreed to look into how Gottemoeller might be removed. But NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu told me there has been no formal request from the Trump transition team for Gottemoeller to be let go and that no process for examining such a move is underway.

    “This is not a national appointment, and the selection is made in a competition, based on merit,” Lungescu said. “Deputy Secretary General Rose Gottemoeller enjoys the full support of Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and the North Atlantic Council....”

    Gottemoeller’s allies see the Trump transition team’s quiet move to replace her in NATO as a brazen, brute-force tactic to pressure the alliance to bend to Trump’s will.

    “This is a whispering campaign by schoolyard bullies to try to pressure an organization they have already disrespected,” said Ellen Tauscher, who served as undersecretary of state for arms control before Gottemoeller. “Do they really want to pick a fight with the first American woman who is in NATO leadership, somebody who was confirmed by the Senate more than once?”

    There is no formal mechanism for a member country to ask NATO to remove an official. Stoltenberg may rebuff the effort altogether. If the Trump administration can’t get Gottemoeller removed, it could just work around her, limiting contact to whomever Trump appoints as the U.S. permanent representative to NATO. Gottemoeller would stay in place, but without the backing of her home government and without access to any American officials....

    If Gottemoeller decides to step aside, there’s no guarantee an American would be chosen to replace her. Trump would be able to nominate someone for the job, but other countries would nominate their citizens as well. The United States might lose its highest-ranking official in NATO.
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 12-13-2016 at 05:27 PM.

  10. #210
    Council Member TheCurmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Woodbridge, VA
    Posts
    1,117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azor View Post
    1. You reside in Germany and are clearly not facing the adverse economic and financial conditions that prevail in the Rust Belt and for roughly half of Americans. This is not a criticism, but context...

    2. You wanted Hillary Clinton to be elected President because you expected her pursue a more confrontational foreign policy with respect to Russia and Iran, and toward the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and Syria. You also were aware that she would largely ignore domestic policy, knowing that any initiatives would be obstructed by Republicans in Congress. Clinton’s policy focus and ability to effect change were both in the area of foreign affairs, and Clinton had established herself as a hawk.

    3. You have accused Obama of ignoring Russian aggression in Ukraine and Syria, and Iran’s aggression in Syria and Yemen. In fact, you have argued that Obama has been complicit in Putin’s attempts to coerce Kiev into recognizing Putin’s puppets, and in Assad’s attempt to annihilate the moderate rebels. You have posted sources and articles suggesting that Obama is cooperating with Putin and Khamenei and is seen as their accomplice by many Sunni Arabs.

    Therefore, I have two questions for you:

    Question 1: If Obama has caved to Putin and Khamenei as you suggest, what could Trump do to make things even worse?

    Lift sanctions on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine? The Europeans are the least enthusiastic about maintaining the sanctions, Kerry has already tied them to Donbas rather than Crimea, and they show no signs of causing Russia to withdraw from either territory.

    Allow Russia to bomb the Free Syrian Army? That is already happening.

    Suspend aid to the rebels? That would only cause the Turks, Saudis and Qataris to increase aid without the CIA’s restrictions and would probably be a net benefit to the FSA.

    Cooperate more with the Iranians and their mercenaries? Actually, Trump would prove more confrontational as he cares little for the JCPOA. This would mean more arms sales and transfers to the GCC.

    Question 2: What could Hillary actually accomplish more than Obama?

    Create a NFZ in Syria? Doubtful unless you want war with Russia.

    More aid to the FSA? And suffer accusations of supporting Daesh and Al Qaeda…

    More sanctions on Russia? Not if the Europeans can help it.

    Lethal aid to Ukraine? In return for advanced weapons to Syria, Iran, the Houthis and others?
    Azor,

    This is no longer about Clinton or Obama. This is all about Trump. Trump won the election so the question is not about what ifs and more about what is to come. Based on his personality and exceptionally thin skin, his total lack of foreign policy experience, and his refusal to take advise from anyone (like the intelligence community), I think trepidation is in order.
    Last edited by TheCurmudgeon; 12-13-2016 at 06:15 PM.
    "I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."

    Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
    ---

  11. #211
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    849

    Default

    Outlaw,

    1. I completely agree that the Financial Crisis and Great Recession laid bare the increasing inequality of American society as well as the impacts of globalization, as lower-skilled and lower-earning Americans had relied upon real estate speculation to achieve the “American Dream”. As Thomas Friedman observed: “If you were born in Minnesota in the 1950s, ‘60s and ‘70s, you needed a plan to fail…today, you need a plan to succeed.”

    2. The Russian Federation became the successor state of the Soviet Union, and it would not make sense to either apportion the UNSC permanent seat among the former SSRs nor to transfer the seat to say Ukraine or Belarus. Without Russia on the UNSC, the UN will resemble the LON and start breaking down.

    3. The UPR has never been used by the GA to override a SC veto, nor can I see it compelling military action. The UN is a forum for diplomatic resolution of conflicts and a coordinator of international aid; it has no ability to coerce the great powers either diplomatically or militarily. I could write over 10,000 characters on its “failures” in the 20th Century…

    4. The fact that the United States deplores the mass murder and other crimes in Africa, the Balkans and the Middle East, does not mean that it is responsible for intervening. Was the United States also responsible for mass murder in China under Mao or in Afghanistan by the Soviet Union or in Chechnya by Russia? If the United States is to be the “world’s policeman” then it should receive compensation for this burden and the Chinese and Russians should disarm, no? Many feared ethnic and sectarian violence would break out as the Eastern Bloc crumbled, although the Soviet republics received more attention because of the reasonable possibility of nuclear-armed warlords springing up throughout Central Asia. As for Yugoslavia, you were dealing with a unitary authoritarian state imposed on a variety of ethno-religious groups that had been warring for centuries, and which had “unfinished business” left over from World War II.

    I find it difficult to reconcile your service during the Cold War with your naiveté with respect to American foreign policy. I am not trying to offend you, but you seem blind to shades of gray.

    • In World War I, the United States allied with four empires, including one that had committed genocide (Belgium)
    • In World War II, the United States allied with an aggressive and genocidal empire (Soviet Union)
    • During the Cold War, the United States supported or cooperated with many non-democratic anti-communist states, including ones that committed genocide (Pakistan, Indonesia) and ones that used WMDs on civilians (Iraq)


    During all three periods above, the United States was avowedly acting in its own national interests, on behalf of liberal democracy and against non-democratic aggression.

    Yet the United States government compromised its liberal and democratic principles in order to achieve its main objectives, and of course, no state policy can be pursued without a degree of corruption and selfishness by those tasked with executing it.

    After all, was Great Britain's World War II legacy the defense of liberal democracy against the worst barbarian to conquer Europe? Or was it heroic self-defense and ruthlessly preserving its Empire at the expense of its allies and those peoples it swore to protect (e.g. the Poles and Czechoslovaks)?

    Germany today is an instance where the American national interest and commitment to promoting liberal democracy have come together. Yet for Western Europe, Japan and to a lesser extent Taiwan and South Korea (initially authoritarian) to be priorities, other seemingly less important countries were sacrificed.

    5. Germany’s balance of trade surplus is not merely a product of its model of industrial relations, culture of consensus and embrace of automation; it is also derived from Germany having adopted the Euro, which is far lower compared to other major curries than the Deutsche Mark would be.

    Adversarial industrial relations in the United States and resistance on the part of workers to accept automation, were headwinds that were thoroughly documented in the 1970s and 1980s during the rise of West Germany and Japan, when the latter seemed poised to occupy a more powerful position in the world than in 1941.

    No American presidential candidate or sitting president can tell the people the truth about industrial or manufacturing jobs in the United States, nor do the term limits allow a lengthy and costly strategy of retraining and education to be implemented.
    Last edited by Azor; 12-13-2016 at 09:15 PM.

  12. #212
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheCurmudgeon View Post
    Azor,

    This is no longer about Clinton or Obama. This is all about Trump. Trump won the election so the question is not about what ifs and more about what is to come. Based on his personality and exceptionally thin skin, his total lack of foreign policy experience, and his refusal to take advise from anyone (like the intelligence community), I think trepidation is in order.
    Firstly, you are dismissing my reasonable questions about how Trump would be "worse" for those voters wanted a tougher line on aggression in Ukraine and Syria.

    Secondly, Obama had a very thick skin, and it only encouraged the Russians and Iranians to provoke him and put US servicemen and women at risk. Erdogan shot down a Su-24 that was in Turkish airspace for less than a minute, and nothing happened. Yet the Russian Air Force violates NATO airspace regularly and skirts it with nuclear-capable bombers.

    Thirdly, the Director of the CIA and his two Deputy Directors are all political appointees, and only the Director has relevant experience with the CIA, albeit from 2005. Therefore, we cannot regard information from the CIA released officially or by unnamed sources as merely the apolitical expert opinion of intelligence analysts.

    The CIA gave absurdly low numbers for Daesh's strength from 2014 on, which were up to ten times lower than the Peshmerga's estimates. To date, Operation Inherent Resolve has killed more Daesh fighters than were estimated in 2014 and 2015.

    Now we are seeing a regurgitation of the allegation that the Russians hacked the DNC, which I believe that they did. Yet the WikiLeaks release of July was only a temporary setback to Clinton's chances and Comey's letters as well as Hillary's "deplorables" remark had far more of an impact on her electoral chances, with the latter having by far the greatest (est. 32 seats lost).

    Trump understands that the CIA's claims and Obama's investigation are yet another attempt to question the legitimacy of Trump's victory, after the suggestions that Russia hacked paper-based booths and after Stein's failed recount bid.

    Lastly, many Republican officials associated with the CIA also denounced Trump's nomination by the GOP and publicly supported Clinton.

    So is it Trump's fault for tensions between the president-elect and the CIA, or the CIA's role in the scorched earth tactics by anti-Trump Republicans and the DNC?

    It was said that during Bill Clinton's presidency, that the DCI had to crash his helicopter into the White House to get a minute of Bill's time, and the lack of action on Al Qaeda is indicative of that. Now that the ODNI has publicly disagreed with the CIA's conclusions based on evidence from the Summer, it is incumbent upon the Agency to make music with the president-elect.

  13. #213
    Council Member TheCurmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Woodbridge, VA
    Posts
    1,117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azor View Post
    Firstly, you are dismissing my reasonable questions about how Trump would be "worse" for those voters wanted a tougher line on aggression in Ukraine and Syria.

    Secondly, Obama had a very thick skin, and it only encouraged the Russians and Iranians to provoke him and put US servicemen and women at risk. Erdogan shot down a Su-24 that was in Turkish airspace for less than a minute, and nothing happened. Yet the Russian Air Force violates NATO airspace regularly and skirts it with nuclear-capable bombers.

    Thirdly, the Director of the CIA and his two Deputy Directors are all political appointees, and only the Director has relevant experience with the CIA, albeit from 2005. Therefore, we cannot regard information from the CIA released officially or by unnamed sources as merely the apolitical expert opinion of intelligence analysts.

    The CIA gave absurdly low numbers for Daesh's strength from 2014 on, which were up to ten times lower than the Peshmerga's estimates. To date, Operation Inherent Resolve has killed more Daesh fighters than were estimated in 2014 and 2015.

    Now we are seeing a regurgitation of the allegation that the Russians hacked the DNC, which I believe that they did. Yet the WikiLeaks release of July was only a temporary setback to Clinton's chances and Comey's letters as well as Hillary's "deplorables" remark had far more of an impact on her electoral chances, with the latter having by far the greatest (est. 32 seats lost).

    Trump understands that the CIA's claims and Obama's investigation are yet another attempt to question the legitimacy of Trump's victory, after the suggestions that Russia hacked paper-based booths and after Stein's failed recount bid.

    Lastly, many Republican officials associated with the CIA also denounced Trump's nomination by the GOP and publicly supported Clinton.

    So is it Trump's fault for tensions between the president-elect and the CIA, or the CIA's role in the scorched earth tactics by anti-Trump Republicans and the DNC?

    It was said that during Bill Clinton's presidency, that the DCI had to crash his helicopter into the White House to get a minute of Bill's time, and the lack of action on Al Qaeda is indicative of that. Now that the ODNI has publicly disagreed with the CIA's conclusions based on evidence from the Summer, it is incumbent upon the Agency to make music with the president-elect.
    No one is questioning the legitimacy of the election. That is a discussion for elsewhere.

    Look, this thread is about Trump, not about Hillary Clinton, not about Obama, not about Bill Clinton. So I will ask you politely to please stick to the topic.

    What do you see Trump doing differently about ISIS? About al Qaeda?
    Last edited by TheCurmudgeon; 12-13-2016 at 09:53 PM.
    "I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."

    Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
    ---

  14. #214
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheCurmudgeon View Post
    No one is questioning the legitimacy of the election. That is a discussion for elsewhere.

    Look, this thread is about Trump, not about Hillary Clinton, not about Obama, not about Bill Clinton. So I will ask you politely to please stick to the topic.

    What do you see Trump doing differently about ISIS? About al Qaeda?
    Well, my responses were to Outlaw 09, who does question Trump's legitimacy, and were repositioned by the Moderator.

    For people that are opponents of Trump, it is important to ask what they think Clinton would have done differently...

    Trump is a showman, and I expect him to carry on Operation Inherent Resolve, albeit with a bit more flair:

    • Reduced ROEs
    • An emphasis on massive strike packages as opposed to smaller sorties
    • Use of Land-Attack Cruise Missiles and strategic bombers
    • More frequent and boastful updates on progress directly from the White House and SecDef


    Al Qaeda is more of a tricky situation, as it might be best to negotiate with the former Nusra and ignore those Sunni jihadists not focused on attacking the West. How he gets along with Iran will determine his priority on targeting Sunni jihadists, when they would prove useful proxies against the rampaging Shia militias.

  15. #215
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azor View Post
    Outlaw,

    1. I completely agree that the Financial Crisis and Great Recession laid bare the increasing inequality of American society as well as the impacts of globalization, as lower-skilled and lower-earning Americans had relied upon real estate speculation to achieve the “American Dream”. As Thomas Friedman observed: “If you were born in Minnesota in the 1950s, ‘60s and ‘70s, you needed a plan to fail…today, you need a plan to succeed.”

    2. The Russian Federation became the successor state of the Soviet Union, and it would not make sense to either apportion the UNSC permanent seat among the former SSRs nor to transfer the seat to say Ukraine or Belarus. Without Russia on the UNSC, the UN will resemble the LON and start breaking down.

    3. The UPR has never been used by the GA to override a SC veto, nor can I see it compelling military action. The UN is a forum for diplomatic resolution of conflicts and a coordinator of international aid; it has no ability to coerce the great powers either diplomatically or militarily. I could write over 10,000 characters on its “failures” in the 20th Century…

    4. The fact that the United States deplores the mass murder and other crimes in Africa, the Balkans and the Middle East, does not mean that it is responsible for intervening. Was the United States also responsible for mass murder in China under Mao or in Afghanistan by the Soviet Union or in Chechnya by Russia? If the United States is to be the “world’s policeman” then it should receive compensation for this burden and the Chinese and Russians should disarm, no? Many feared ethnic and sectarian violence would break out as the Eastern Bloc crumbled, although the Soviet republics received more attention because of the reasonable possibility of nuclear-armed warlords springing up throughout Central Asia. As for Yugoslavia, you were dealing with a unitary authoritarian state imposed on a variety of ethno-religious groups that had been warring for centuries, and which had “unfinished business” left over from World War II.

    I find it difficult to reconcile your service during the Cold War with your naiveté with respect to American foreign policy. I am not trying to offend you, but you seem blind to shades of gray.

    • In World War I, the United States allied with four empires, including one that had committed genocide (Belgium)
    • In World War II, the United States allied with an aggressive and genocidal empire (Soviet Union)
    • During the Cold War, the United States supported or cooperated with many non-democratic anti-communist states, including ones that committed genocide (Pakistan, Indonesia) and ones that used WMDs on civilians (Iraq)


    During all three periods above, the United States was avowedly acting in its own national interests, on behalf of liberal democracy and against non-democratic aggression.

    Yet the United States government compromised its liberal and democratic principles in order to achieve its main objectives, and of course, no state policy can be pursued without a degree of corruption and selfishness by those tasked with executing it.

    After all, was Great Britain's World War II legacy the defense of liberal democracy against the worst barbarian to conquer Europe? Or was it heroic self-defense and ruthlessly preserving its Empire at the expense of its allies and those peoples it swore to protect (e.g. the Poles and Czechoslovaks)?

    Germany today is an instance where the American national interest and commitment to promoting liberal democracy have come together. Yet for Western Europe, Japan and to a lesser extent Taiwan and South Korea (initially authoritarian) to be priorities, other seemingly less important countries were sacrificed.

    5. Germany’s balance of trade surplus is not merely a product of its model of industrial relations, culture of consensus and embrace of automation; it is also derived from Germany having adopted the Euro, which is far lower compared to other major curries than the Deutsche Mark would be.

    Adversarial industrial relations in the United States and resistance on the part of workers to accept automation, were headwinds that were thoroughly documented in the 1970s and 1980s during the rise of West Germany and Japan, when the latter seemed poised to occupy a more powerful position in the world than in 1941.

    No American presidential candidate or sitting president can tell the people the truth about industrial or manufacturing jobs in the United States, nor do the term limits allow a lengthy and costly strategy of retraining and education to be implemented.
    BTW....the Russian Federation is by even some Russian legal experts not the "real" inheritor of the SU..as the SU was comprised of 128 different SSRs....and the RF was just one of them.....

    Just as the Electorial College was the Founding Fathers check and balances on the common one man one vote of the masses....if at some point the UNSC becomes largely ineffective which it has shown itself to be in Syria...then the UNGA option is in fact a valid option.

    If you take the time and reread the statements just after Rwanda and Srebrenica which where led by the US who then had it anchored that in the UN by calling it the "protection of the population" agreements.....

    So basically I am sorry the US is on the hook for something they pushed and signed and shouted to the globe 10 years ago...what happened in WW1 and 2 or the Cold war in Africa..does not matter to me...WHAT does matter is what the US is on record to do pushed ten years ago....

    Which actually when you think about it....the US reneged on the 1994 Budapest Memorandum and had they adhered to it...we would not be seeing the Russian fighting in eastern Ukraine.....

    Actually viewing the world should be right now a true matter of black and white because IMHO...the concept of discussing and acting in the grey zones is what the Obama WH has been doing for 8 years as did Bush in his 8 years....I personally find working the black and white fields allows for clearer thinking and actions....BECAUSE grey just becomes another option if a strategy is actually being used...

    The military in their planning calls the grey zone 2nd...3rd...4th order of effects......

    BECAUSE Obama and Rhodes spun us so hard using the grey zone for their Iran Deal no one even knows any longer what is really black and or white....

    In some aspects this is exactly where Trump functions..he determines his own black and white and all others are in the grey zone and he pays no attention to them....

    Reference Germany....Germany works because they have adhered for years to what is called..."a social contract" which is now causing problems because under the former Schroeder SPD government they followed the US model and went for a loosening of this "contract" and it is now causing a negative impact overall.....in 2016.

    Secondly the Euro as it was envisioned was to be exactly equal to the USD...one to one....but surprisingly it jumped immediately to a level of about 20-40% higher than the USD....depending on the markets..right now it is 6% over the USD.....I know as my USD salary when the Euro came in was suddenly 25% less when I had my salary deposited in the French bank...

    The EU wanted the equal value in order to give them more export chances and eventually potentially surpass the USD as a global standard currency instead of the USD.......

    EVEN in the face of a Euro worth far more than a USD....still does not explain the success in their exports.....that means if anything they must produce at a range of 6-40% cheaper in order to compete with US goods using the USD....

    Will now give you a lecture on the Euro and how much it has changed to actually now a determinate to actual EU wide growth......

    When the euro came out in each country it was to be pegged to the then national currency....for Germany...2.5DM per euro...in France 10 Francs to the Euro...and so on...for each Euro member state.....which in the first five years was great....Germans were buying wine and cheese inside France far cheaper than it was in Germany and French were buying their construction materials and meats in Germany as it was cheaper there......

    BUT then globalization took over...actually the older term MNC...multi national corporations took over but I like the term TNC transnational corps....and figured out that they could actually demand a single price for a single product in all of the EU....and suddenly the cost of living rose by over 20%-50% in the last ten years in the countries of say France and Italy and remained stable in Germany...as they were high to begin with....

    AND not a single EU leader say a single thing about this development.....

    That is the true problem inside the Euro zone........
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 12-14-2016 at 11:35 AM.

  16. #216
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Azor....so for these Trump voters corruption and the possible enrichment in a political position ie the Presidency is not a single problem for them...BUT those emails and the Clinton Foundation and all those drain the swamp shouts were about exactly WHAT???????

    I would say those 73% are actually in the "grey zone themselves".......

    73% of Republican voters think it's a good thing that Trump will govern in the interest of his own businesses.
    https://morningconsult.com/2016/12/1...ct-governing/#

  17. #217
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Interestingly Chinese MSM which reflects the government's thinking called Trump a small kid and who knows nothing......

    Beijing isn't kidding here. This isn't a game or a reality TV show -- this is playing chicken with a nuclear power.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-38313839#

    And we have today a US Admiral stating he is ready to defend US rights in the South China Sea........is he channeling Trump as he knows what Trump has stated about China?????

  18. #218
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    REMEMBER both Trump and his selected natsec advisor shouting...."lock her up....lock her up......WELL maybe the Trump natsec advisor and Trump should not throw stones at a glass house.......

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world....2638cb2c605c#

    A secret U.S. military investigation in 2010 determined that Michael T. Flynn, the retired Army general tapped to serve as national security adviser in the Trump White House, “inappropriately shared” classified information with foreign military officers in Afghanistan, newly released documents show.

    Although Flynn lacked authorization to share the classified material, he was not disciplined or reprimanded after the investigation concluded that he did not act “knowingly” and that “there was no actual or potential damage to national security as a result,” according to Army records obtained by The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act.

    Flynn has previously acknowledged that he was investigated while serving as the U.S. military intelligence chief in Afghanistan for sharing secrets with British and Australian allies there. But he has dismissed the case as insignificant and has given few details.

    The Army documents provide the first official account of the case, but they are limited in scope because the investigation itself remains classified. Former U.S. officials familiar with the matter said that Flynn was accused of telling allies about the activities of other agencies in Afghanistan, including the CIA.

    The Army files call into question Flynn’s prior assertion that he had permission to share the sensitive information.

    During the presidential race, Flynn campaigned vigorously for Republican nominee Donald Trump and drew attention for his scalding attacks against Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified material. Clinton was investigated by the FBI for allowing classified information to be transmitted on her private email server when she ran the State Department.

    No charges were filed against the former secretary of state, but the issue dogged her for more than a year.

    At the Republican National Convention in July, Flynn called on Clinton to drop out of the race for putting “our nation’s security at extremely high risk with her careless use of a private email server.” He egged on the partisan crowd in chants of “lock her up,” adding: “If I, a guy who knows this business, if I did a tenth, a tenth of what she did, I would be in jail today.”

    Flynn did not respond to requests for comment.

    The office of the Army’s Judge Advocate General released a four-page summary of the investigation into Flynn in response to The Post’s Freedom of Information Act request for records of any misconduct allegations involving the retired three-star general.

    The U.S. military opened the investigation into Flynn in 2010 after receiving a complaint from an unnamed Navy intelligence specialist, according to the documents. The intelligence officer charged that Flynn violated rules by “inappropriately” sharing secrets with “various foreign military officers and/or officials in Afghanistan.”

    The documents do not reveal the nature of the information. But former U.S. officials familiar with the case said it centered on slides and other materials containing classified information about CIA operations in Afghanistan.

    “It was a general intelligence briefing that included stuff that shouldn’t have been on those slides,” said a former senior U.S. intelligence official, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the subject. The disclosures revealed “stuff the intelligence community was doing that had a much higher level of classification.”

    The agency has had an extensive presence in the Afghanistan since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Beyond gathering intelligence on al-Qaeda and the Taliban, the CIA has also assembled its own paramilitary networks in the country, paying warlords for cooperation and funding armed groups known as Counterterrorism Pursuit Teams.

    A second former U.S. official said Flynn failed to secure permission to reveal those secrets. “This was a question of whether or not information was put through proper channels before it was shared,” the second official said.

    The episode marked the second time in a year that Flynn had drawn official complaints for his handling of classified material.

    Former U.S. officials said that Flynn had disclosed sensitive information to Pakistan in late 2009 or early 2010 about secret U.S. intelligence capabilities being used to monitor the Haqqani network, an insurgent group accused of repeated attacks on U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

    Flynn exposed the capabilities during meetings with Pakistani officials in Islamabad. The former U.S. intelligence official said a CIA officer who accompanied Flynn reported the disclosures to CIA headquarters, which then relayed the complaint to the Defense Department. Flynn was verbally reprimanded by the Pentagon’s top intelligence official at the time, James R. Clapper Jr.

    Clapper subsequently became director of national intelligence and endorsed Flynn to become his successor as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. In 2014, however, Clapper forced Flynn out of that job over concerns with his temperament and management.

    The newly disclosed Army documents state that the 2010 investigation was ordered by the head of U.S. Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East and Afghanistan. Although the records do not say exactly when the case was opened, the commander at the time would have been Marine Gen. James Mattis.

    Mattis took charge at Central Command’s headquarters in Tampa, Fla., in August 2010. One month later, Flynn was ordered back to Washington from Afghanistan. He was assigned to a temporary job at the Pentagon as the special assistant to the Army’s chief of intelligence while the investigation unfolded, records show.

    Mattis was nominated this month by Trump to serve as secretary of defense. In that role, Mattis will work closely with Flynn; the retired generals are expected to be the most influential voices on national security in the Trump administration.

    The Army documents that summarize the investigation into Flynn do not specify which countries he was accused of improperly sharing secrets with. In an interview with The Post in August, Flynn said he was scrutinized for giving classified information to British and Australian officials serving in Afghanistan alongside U.S. forces.

    In that interview, Flynn defended his actions and said he did nothing wrong. “That was substantiated because I actually did it. But I did it with the right permissions when you dig into that investigation. I’m proud of that one. Accuse me of sharing intelligence in combat with our closest allies, please.”

    The Army documents, however, state explicitly that the Central Command investigation determined that Flynn did not have permission to share the particular secrets he divulged. The Defense Department’s inspector general, which conducted an independent review of the investigation, came to the same conclusion, the documents show.

    It is routine for the U.S. military to share intelligence in Afghanistan with NATO allies such as Britain, as well as other members of the broader international coalition fighting the Taliban and al-Qaeda, including Australia.

    But there are established mechanisms and guidelines that must be followed.
    Flynn was highly regarded within the Army for the key role he played in shaping U.S. counterterrorism strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pentagon officials had intended to promote Flynn in 2010 to the rank of lieutenant general and to make him assistant director of national intelligence, a job that would place him in charge of improving ties with foreign intelligence agencies.

    The Central Command investigation delayed his career advancement for a full year. He received his promotion and new assignment in September 2011.

    After being forced to retire from the military in 2014, Flynn became a vocal opponent of the Obama administration’s policies regarding Iran and al-Qaeda.

    At the same time, he gained a reputation for floating conspiracy theories on Twitter.

    Some Democratic lawmakers have criticized his selection as Trump’s national security adviser. The position is not subject to Senate confirmation.
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 12-14-2016 at 04:08 PM.

  19. #219
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Says Someone Who Should Know | Trump Is Using Our Old Putin TV Propaganda Playbook
    http://thebea.st/2gBulpV
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 12-14-2016 at 04:08 PM.

  20. #220
    Council Member TheCurmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Woodbridge, VA
    Posts
    1,117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azor View Post
    Well, my responses were to Outlaw 09, who does question Trump's legitimacy, and were repositioned by the Moderator.

    For people that are opponents of Trump, it is important to ask what they think Clinton would have done differently...

    Trump is a showman, and I expect him to carry on Operation Inherent Resolve, albeit with a bit more flair:

    • Reduced ROEs
    • An emphasis on massive strike packages as opposed to smaller sorties
    • Use of Land-Attack Cruise Missiles and strategic bombers
    • More frequent and boastful updates on progress directly from the White House and SecDef


    Al Qaeda is more of a tricky situation, as it might be best to negotiate with the former Nusra and ignore those Sunni jihadists not focused on attacking the West. How he gets along with Iran will determine his priority on targeting Sunni jihadists, when they would prove useful proxies against the rampaging Shia militias.
    I expect him to leave ISIS to the Russians outside of Iraq, or at a minimum, follow their lead. I also don't expect him to change the current policy much in Iraq. He will talk tough, but I don't think the policy will change much.

    He is going to have a divided cabinet on Iran. Russia is solidifying links with them, so I am not sure that he will do anything more than talk.

    There is also a much more interesting thought process coming from people like Tom Ricks, who believe that Trump will have little if anything to do with foreign policy. I offer this for your consideration ...

    http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/12/13/...-star-friends/
    "I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."

    Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
    ---

Similar Threads

  1. Germany (catch all, incl. terrorism)
    By DDilegge in forum Europe
    Replies: 355
    Last Post: 06-28-2019, 03:43 PM
  2. LG Hal Mcmaster, National Security Adviser (2017 onwards)
    By SWJ Blog in forum Politics In the Rear
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-05-2018, 01:35 AM
  3. Syria in 2016 (October onwards)
    By OUTLAW 09 in forum Middle East
    Replies: 2624
    Last Post: 12-31-2016, 12:32 PM
  4. The Army: A Profession of Arms
    By Chuck Grenchus, CAPE in forum Miscellaneous Goings On
    Replies: 160
    Last Post: 07-08-2014, 04:00 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •