Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Bush in Europe to mend relations


Talon

Recommended Posts

so? this is an ideological war, something you don't seem to understand, these terrorists in iraq aren't there fighting under the Free Saddam banner, they are there under the Islamic Fascists Unite banner.

Exactly, because you got rid of Saddam, the one who was crushing them with Iraq's border and now given them free access to the country.

and? they would still face a buffer with the khurdish controlled north, i could also point out they could travel to syria or iran...and then get a plane to Canada or Mexico and get into the US...proximity doesn't really mean much.

Multiple planes are far harder to get onto undedicted and a border spanning miles. And I doubt the Kurds are wandering the north shooting any southerns they see.

So they'll help out what i would imagine they consider a greater enemy to spite turkey?

I don't know how you think the world works, but the most people do not forget one enemy just because they're fighting another, particularly with evens in Turkey still as they are.

and your evidence of them having no thought for the region is where? Ass u me

There are many other cases of countries being left to rot. And at least I'm making a case on something that may well happen, not maing the conclusion that the last 2 years are a perfect example of the next fifty.

The International community is already pressuring Iran, we are in no place to guess what may happen simply because we don't know what course of action is going to be taken about Iran. Last i checked, the fundamentalist side wasn't particularly popular in Iran.

Doesn't matter if its popular in Iran, its Iraq we're talking about.

Osama lol, i do believe the bigger fish are the state sponsors, killing osama isn't going to change anything. Yup insurgents swarmed in...the majority of the insurgency are bathists, with a smaller sample being islamist nutjobs. I am unaware of the state of the iraqi police force and army prior to their disbanding (couldn't have been terribly good, and would have been quite full of saddam loyalists)

Half those insurgents are most likely to be former military and police who got fired by the coalition. If we hadn't broken up their army, then we'd have a functioning law enforcement which could be protecting the borders from foreign insurgents. And if Osama isn't that much of a threat, then what the hell was all that invading Afghanistan to get him about.

not at all, the fight is ultimately against islamofascism. To do so one would have to remove state sponsors, Saddam being a state sponsor, this gives the US a foothold in the middle east and enables it to apply pressure on the other known state sponsors. Yes its a big plan, and probably played a part in chosing iraq, it would be possible to get the bulk of it done in one term. So no, you are wrong, Iraq is the first stage of something greater

How many times do we have to tell you this. Saddam was fascist dictator, but he was not over extreme when it came to religion. He did not a sponsor of groups like Al'Quada, instead he slaughtered them because they were a threat to his power. If the US is so worried about dictators then it should have taken out Saddam a long time ago so he couldn't have killed so many people. All taking out Saddam and his army is allow the real Islamic fascists to swarm into Iraq and start causing chaos, and spread the argument that this is a war against Islam and Arabs and not terrorism.

The Iraq war has done nothing to stop this war. Its instead opened a second front, when we barely have the resources and information to cover our original enemy. This whole war has been the greatest propaganda and recruitment tool extremist could have wished for after losing Afghanistan.

And as for Joc, NOWHERE in that post does it prove that the Iraqi war hasn’t been a complete ****up in relation to this war. All it proves it a group of right-wing Capitalists profited from a dictator, and as you should be well aware by now, I hate capitalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 127
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Talon

    52

  • joc

    23

  • warden

    9

  • bathory

    8

Top Posters In This Topic

Exactly, because you got rid of Saddam, the one who was crushing them with Iraq's border and now given them free access to the country.

he stifled them within the borders, however he did provide support for such groups outside his borders.

Multiple planes are far harder to get onto undedicted and a border spanning miles. And I doubt the Kurds are wandering the north shooting any southerns they see.

sorry, but your cries of proximity to europe are plain silly

There are many other cases of countries being left to rot. And at least I'm making a case on something that may well happen, not maing the conclusion that the last 2 years are a perfect example of the next fifty.

oh right, so you are assuming?

Doesn't matter if its popular in Iran, its Iraq we're talking about.

yes, in relation to pressure being put on Iran and the Shiite reaction in Iraq...Pressure is already being put on Iran, i think the Iraqis would be a little more concerned about things homeside at the moment

Half those insurgents are most likely to be former military and police who got fired by the coalition. If we hadn't broken up their army, then we'd have a functioning law enforcement which could be protecting the borders from foreign insurgents. And if Osama isn't that much of a threat, then what the hell was all that invading Afghanistan to get him about.

do you realise how ludicrous that sounds? yup lets keep the bath party loyalists. Its quite simple the Bath party loyalists went off on their little insurgency, i'm pretty sure that regardless of whether or not they were recieving their paycheck, they would have still happily shot american and british pig dogs (oops i forgot poland) and blown up Shia and Khurds!

As for afghanistan, you don't honestly believe Osama was the only reason for going into Afghanistan? who cares about afghanistan being the hub of all things alqueda, lets forget about the support and aid given by the taliban. Bin Laden IS a good target, capturing him would be great, but you kid yourself if you think that al queda and other fundimentalist groups will just pack up and give in.

How many times do we have to tell you this. Saddam was fascist dictator, but he was not over extreme when it came to religion. He did not a sponsor of groups like Al'Quada, instead he slaughtered them because they were a threat to his power.

he had plenty of ties to various islamic terrorist groups, i do recall him having one of the guys responsible for the trade center bombing on his payroll.

If the US is so worried about dictators then it should have taken out Saddam a long time ago so he couldn't have killed so many people.

Yeah, the US should have stopped listening to the UN a long time ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All it proves it a group of right-wing Capitalists profited from a dictator, and as you should be well aware by now, I hate capitalism.

Whoa, you live in a fantasy world dude. Capatilism is responsible for the computer you are using. Capitalism is responslible for the Internet. Capitalism is responslibe for the ability you have to get off your duff, go down to the store and buy food and clothes. Capitalism is responsible for BA having the ability to make T shirts and sell them. What system would you prefer to live under? If not capitalism, then what. How can you be so smart in books, and so dumb in common sense?! geek.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly, because you got rid of Saddam, the one who was crushing them with Iraq's border and now given them free access to the country.

So what were the likes of al-zarqawi doing there while Saddam was there? Why did the ones fleeing Afghanistan go to hospitals in Bagdad while Saddam was there?

and? they would still face a buffer with the khurdish controlled north, i could also point out they could travel to syria or iran...and then get a plane to Canada or Mexico and get into the US...proximity doesn't really mean much.

Multiple planes are far harder to get onto undedicted and a border spanning miles. And I doubt the Kurds are wandering the north shooting any southerns they see.

There are times I think you don't even know what you're responding to, and then there are times I'm positive of it. Do you remember the context... the jibing comment about Australia and Cars?

So they'll help out what i would imagine they consider a greater enemy to spite turkey?

I don't know how you think the world works, but the most people do not forget one enemy just because they're fighting another, particularly with evens in Turkey still as they are.

I know you think you know how the world works, but there are no permanent alliances, only permanent interests.

and your evidence of them having no thought for the region is where? Ass u me

There are many other cases of countries being left to rot. And at least I'm making a case on something that may well happen, not maing the conclusion that the last 2 years are a perfect example of the next fifty.

There's pragmatism, there's realism, and then there's pessimism and defeatism and then there's some that just have this blind hope that things will not work out so they can be right and feel intellectually superior.

The International community is already pressuring Iran, we are in no place to guess what may happen simply because we don't know what course of action is going to be taken about Iran. Last i checked, the fundamentalist side wasn't particularly popular in Iran.

Doesn't matter if its popular in Iran, its Iraq we're talking about.

See, you don't know what you're responding to again. Where'd Iran come from in all this?

'Dealing with Bigger fish'? What do you guys actually think your Shia friends in Iraq are going to do when you start pressuring Shia controlled Iran?

Osama lol, i do believe the bigger fish are the state sponsors, killing osama isn't going to change anything. Yup insurgents swarmed in...the majority of the insurgency are bathists, with a smaller sample being islamist nutjobs. I am unaware of the state of the iraqi police force and army prior to their disbanding (couldn't have been terribly good, and would have been quite full of saddam loyalists)

Half those insurgents are most likely to be former military and police who got fired by the coalition. If we hadn't broken up their army, then we'd have a functioning law enforcement which could be protecting the borders from foreign insurgents. And if Osama isn't that much of a threat, then what the hell was all that invading Afghanistan to get him about.

Why were they fired? Because they were working with the insurgency? Because they were killing other law enforcement in Iraq and coalition forces? Because they were giving info? Now you want to talk about Afghanistan and Osama? Care to stay on one topic? I mean, we can cover all the topics, the rest of the posters seem to be able to handle it well, but I can see you have trouble keeping up.

not at all, the fight is ultimately against islamofascism. To do so one would have to remove state sponsors, Saddam being a state sponsor, this gives the US a foothold in the middle east and enables it to apply pressure on the other known state sponsors. Yes its a big plan, and probably played a part in chosing iraq, it would be possible to get the bulk of it done in one term. So no, you are wrong, Iraq is the first stage of something greater

How many times do we have to tell you this. Saddam was fascist dictator, but he was not over extreme when it came to religion. He did not a sponsor of groups like Al'Quada, instead he slaughtered them because they were a threat to his power. If the US is so worried about dictators then it should have taken out Saddam a long time ago so he couldn't have killed so many people. All taking out Saddam and his army is allow the real Islamic fascists to swarm into Iraq and start causing chaos, and spread the argument that this is a war against Islam and Arabs and not terrorism.

was not over extremem when it came to religion, he just slaughtered al-quada?? are you serious? He never made payments? Never sheltered any leaders? do you ever read anything other than that socialist propaganda over there?

The Iraq war has done nothing to stop this war. Its instead opened a second front, when we barely have the resources and information to cover our original enemy. This whole war has been the greatest propaganda and recruitment tool extremist could have wished for after losing Afghanistan.

We lost Afghanistan? Original enemy? Are you talking about the embassy thing back in the 70's?

And as for Joc, NOWHERE in that post does it prove that the Iraqi war hasn’t been a complete ****up in relation to this war. All it proves it a group of right-wing Capitalists profited from a dictator, and as you should be well aware by now, I hate capitalism.

Bunch of people pushing socialism on their people while getting rich off of capitalism yeah I hate that. It was the capitalism remark the only thing that made me want to respond or I'dve just kept sitting here rolling my eyes. Capitalism > Socialism in the real world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

looks like bush is gearing up to get the european countries on our side so he can go invade iran this summer. looks like the media is already starting to lean that way and hint at it. so it must be right around the corner. this is sad.

oh and capitalism is fine as long as the markets are free. when government gets involved and controls it like it does now...or some would say big business controls government...then bad things happen. this is the only time when a monopoly can develop, when the government grants a company one.

Edited by I am me
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bush is doing a fine job according to our news here. original.gif He must be pretty darn smart... he became president of the the greatest country on earth. bounce.gifbounce.gifwavey.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honstly think Bush should look closer to home for mending relations. Many latin and south american countries whom nearly do all there business with america are starting to look at Europe and asia as new markets.

And babs you might wanted to put in your eyes on the end of that. Some might have found that offense.

Edited by Deception
Link to comment
Share on other sites

he stifled them within the borders, however he did provide support for such groups outside his borders.

Your proof?

oh right, so you are assuming?

Bathory, your surrounded by an Ocean, of course you wouldn't understand border problems. The Americans should though, with Mexico to their south, although considering Celumnaz seems to be in agree with you, I guess all that illegal imigrant stuff is just a US Urban myth. rolleyes.gif

yes, in relation to pressure being put on Iran and the Shiite reaction in Iraq...Pressure is already being put on Iran, i think the Iraqis would be a little more concerned about things homeside at the moment

Em, hate to break it to you. Religious loyalty does not equal logic. rolleyes.gif

do you realise how ludicrous that sounds? yup lets keep the bath party loyalists. Its quite simple the Bath party loyalists went off on their little insurgency, i'm pretty sure that regardless of whether or not they were recieving their paycheck, they would have still happily shot american and british pig dogs (oops i forgot poland) and blown up Shia and Khurds!

ludicrous? What are you talking about? These people will fight for anyone with pay. And I rather give the new Democracy a functioning infrastructure and then worry about weeding out the bad weeds when its stable. And you can complain all you want, but the Coalition already admitted themselves that dismantling the army was a mistake. rolleyes.gif

As for afghanistan, you don't honestly believe Osama was the only reason for going into Afghanistan? who cares about afghanistan being the hub of all things alqueda, lets forget about the support and aid given by the taliban. Bin Laden IS a good target, capturing him would be great, but you kid yourself if you think that al queda and other fundimentalist groups will just pack up and give in.

Of course I don't, but its the argument your beloved Bush used. So it should be what you stick to. Since you've changed your mind, does that mean you agree Bush was lying. tongue.gif

he had plenty of ties to various islamic terrorist groups, i do recall him having one of the guys responsible for the trade center bombing on his payroll.

As I recall, the US went to war over 9/11, not the car bomb. And Bush's best buddies Saudi Arabia had no connection with the terrorist?

Yeah, the US should have stopped listening to the UN a long time ago.

So they should come a law unto themselves? Well at least we are in agreement as to what Bush is up to.

Whoa, you live in a fantasy world dude. Capatilism is responsible for the computer you are using. Capitalism is responslible for the Internet. Capitalism is responslibe for the ability you have to get off your duff, go down to the store and buy food and clothes. Capitalism is responsible for BA having the ability to make T shirts and sell them. What system would you prefer to live under? If not capitalism, then what. How can you be so smart in books, and so dumb in common sense?! 

Joc, why did you post the article if you can't take the evidence it proves.

And as for stores, they're just markets and have existed since feudal times also, and believe it or not the left can have them, they're called Co-ops. As for the computer, that’s technology and science (the ones you mock for believing in evolution) and was made to control missiles in wars between capitalist nations. However, a left-wing system does ban science as you seem to claim, although you beloved Christianity banned science for 700 years. And as for T-shirts, believe it or not, Socialism does not avocate walking around o-natural. For someone who loves insulting the intelligence of others, its me who's questioning why someone as 'dumb' as we can logically get those answers, yet you couldn't. rolleyes.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are times I think you don't even know what you're responding to, and then there are times I'm positive of it. Do you remember the context... the jibing comment about Australia and Cars?

Yes, I argued that despite what Bathory was saying terrorists can travel from one side of the country to the next. Are you denying this? Or denying that people can cross borders? If you are, you don't want you mention the word illegal Mexican immigrant ever again.

I know you think you know how the world works, but there are no permanent alliances, only permanent interests.

Yes, permanent interests. Like the one Kurdish wish to create Kurdistan and Turkey's wish to keep it just a day-dream. Which is what I'm talking about, long term interests... so what are you trying to put across. huh.gif

There's pragmatism, there's realism, and then there's pessimism and defeatism and then there's some that just have this blind hope that things will not work out so they can be right and feel intellectually superior.

This would be you we're talking about? huh.gif

The International community is already pressuring Iran, we are in no place to guess what may happen simply because we don't know what course of action is going to be taken about Iran. Last i checked, the fundamentalist side wasn't particularly popular in Iran.

Doesn't matter if its popular in Iran, its Iraq we're talking about.

See, you don't know what you're responding to again. Where'd Iran come from in all this?

Well... if you bother to read what you quoted you'll see the words 'Iran', and get a rough idea. rolleyes.gif

Why were they fired? Because they were working with the insurgency? Because they were killing other law enforcement in Iraq and coalition forces? Because they were giving info? Now you want to talk about Afghanistan and Osama? Care to stay on one topic? I mean, we can cover all the topics, the rest of the posters seem to be able to handle it well, but I can see you have trouble keeping up.

For claiming that Osama and Afghanistan are off topic, are you completely forgetting your beloved Bush started this middle eastern campaign over Osama and his groupees,or is that just slipped your mind. And that the first stop in this war was in fact Afghanistan. huh.gif How quickly people forget. blink.gif

was not over extremem when it came to religion, he just slaughtered al-quada?? are you serious? He never made payments? Never sheltered any leaders? do you ever read anything other than that socialist propaganda over there?

I don't read 'Socialist propaganda' but you sure seem to come off as collecting all your information from the Republican manifesto. rolleyes.gif

We lost Afghanistan? Original enemy? Are you talking about the embassy thing back in the 70's?

............ how many times do I have to ask people to READ before they post. rolleyes.gif

Bunch of people pushing socialism on their people while getting rich off of capitalism yeah I hate that. It was the capitalism remark the only thing that made me want to respond or I'dve just kept sitting here rolling my eyes. Capitalism > Socialism in the real world.

Celumnaz, will you stop giving us lectures on how ignorant you are when it comes to politics. laugh.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the computer, that’s technology and science (the ones you mock for believing in evolution) and was made to control missiles in wars between capitalist nations.

Let me back up for a second. I insulted your intelligence. I meant to. Now that I have said that which is the truth...I have rethought the entire matter and retract all statements about your common sense or lack thereof...and that goes for Seraphina as well. I like you people alot and it just isn't right to approach your friends in that manner. I do consider both of you friends...we have our disagreements, but insults such as I have been throwing at you should not be part of the mix. I apologize.

Now...a fresh start. blink.gif

There is only one reason you have a personal computer. Capitalism! I don't mock evolutionists....you are confusing me with Ashley Star Child I think....Computers ...the one's you and I use...were developed by the Capitalist entrepenuers of Apple and Microsoft, etc. My point about the markets is that it is capitalism which drives the economic train of the world. Your markets are full of goods, not because of Co-ops...but because of capitalism. thumbsup.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is only one reason you have a personal computer. Capitalism! I don't mock evolutionists....you are confusing me with Ashley Star Child I think....Computers ...the one's you and I use...were developed by the Capitalist entrepenuers of Apple and Microsoft, etc. My point about the markets is that it is capitalism which drives the economic train of the world. Your markets are full of goods, not because of Co-ops...but because of capitalism

and the russians , who put the first man in space , where renowned capitalists, hell yuri gagarin was the founder of modern capitalism , joc mate really when it comes to history come on give it a rest my friend we all know how this ends lol..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The computer I own was made by a capitalist company only because I live in a capitalist society. If we lived in a socialist society they would have been developed also, but for the benifit they can do for society, not for profit. In the end science and technology advances no matter the society.

Also, most of our modern technology was developed in war (even super-glue was designed to glue wounds together), so war advances technology more than political ideology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and the russians , who put the first man in space , where renowned capitalists, hell yuri gagarin was the founder of modern capitalism , joc mate really when it comes to history come on give it a rest my friend we all know how this ends lol..

I don't believe personal computers had been developed then Wun. no.gif Should be understood that most of Russia's technology was a result of theft not development.

  The computer I own was made by a capitalist company only because I live in a capitalist society. If we lived in a socialist society they would have been developed also, but for the benifit they can do for society, not for profit. In the end science and technology advances no matter the society.

The greater point is that personal computers would not have been developed at all were it not for capitalistic endeavours. original.gif In a socialist society they would not have been developed at all.

Edited by joc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Security Council agreed to US requests to censor 8000 pages -- including sections naming western businesses which aided Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program.

The five permanent members of the security council -- Britain, France, Russia, America and China -- are named as allowing companies to sell weapons technology to Iraq

Yeah that's the way to go; give a lunatic all sorts of goodies with which he can terrorize his own people and his neighbors for a number of years, and then when the poop comes out just try to cover it up using muscles. And this is the behaviour of some of the supposed civilized and democratic nations on earth. ohmy.gif No wonder then that the terrorists behave the way they do having been given this kind of model for civilized behaviour! rolleyes.gif

edit:

language please

BurnSide

Edited by BurnSide
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The computer I own was made by a capitalist company only because I live in a capitalist society. If we lived in a socialist society they would have been developed also, but for the benifit they can do for society, not for profit. In the end science and technology advances no matter the society.

Also, most of our modern technology was developed in war (even super-glue was designed to glue wounds together), so war advances technology more than political ideology.

502589[/snapback]

War must be good for something, then....

Hey, the map.......I don't get it? huh.gifblink.gif Gol-darn it, Talon, you need more colors! w00t.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol laugh.gif

Well acording to Charlotte church when she told him she was Welsh, he asked which state it was in. So it would seem he doesn't even rate it high enough to be a state, huh.gif probably got it written off as a little village in Alaska.

494792[/snapback]

laugh.gif This is good! Makes you feel like you're not important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe personal computers had been developed then Wun.  Should be understood that most of Russia's technology was a result of theft not development.

erm... where do get that from?

Oh just like the fact that americas technological advances were the result of GERMAN scientists afetr the war lol.

The greater point is that personal computers would not have been developed at all were it not for capitalistic endeavours.  In a socialist society they would not have been developed at all

care to provide proof?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should be understood that most of Russia's technology was a result of theft not development.

I'm sorry, at what point did Russia even become a acuarate example fo a left-wing state?

The greater point is that personal computers would not have been developed at all were it not for capitalistic endeavours.  In a socialist society they would not have been developed at all.

Nonsense, where are you making these conclusions? Personal Computers serve a lot more purposes than just making profit which the capitalists were after, for socialists would find a use for them.

Hey, the map.......I don't get it?  Gol-darn it, Talon, you need more colors! 

Well I had intended it for your President. I didn't actually expect they'd be someone whose level of map-reading ability was even poorer than being limited to having countries differentiated by colours.

This is good! Makes you feel like you're not important.

How do you come to that conclusion? huh.gif All it tells me is you elected a leader who knows nothing about other countries. rolleyes.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nonsense, where are you making these conclusions? Personal Computers serve a lot more purposes than just making profit which the capitalists were after, for socialists would find a use for them.

You hate capitalism, I think because you don't 'understand' capitalism. The fact is that the first computer was invented in Germany in 1936. Many people took the knowledge and expanded on it. IBM coined the term PC in 1981. It was capitalist companies that developed the PC. It is capitalist companies that are responsible for the internet explosion. You should give credit where credit is due. Perhaps a socialist country might have developed it...the facts are that none did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could it be that Talon hates capitalism because he is smack dab in the middle of that europe map. w00t.gif Maybe his upbringing and programing has something to do with it? wink2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joc,

1. I study politics and live in a Capitalist Country, I know fine well what Capitalism is

2. You can go on about the internet and IBM all you want. So what?! Oh, a capitalist made this, that means that a socialist would never have! How do you come to such a rediculious conclusion, you have absolutely no idea what a Socialist society could have produced.

3. You mention 'none did', but thats a unfair claim given that no strong Socialist Soceties ever existed. All we had was a bunch of half-industrialised, authoritarian messes which didn't even have the economies to implement the system. Marx wrote that a system needed to have capitalist industry to go Socialist, yet despite what you may claim those societies which claimed to be communist were all argricultural not industrial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Babs, if you saw Scotland on that map of as being in the middle for Europe, your even worse at geography than I thought.

Now go away, me and Joc are trying to have an adult conversation about computers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thats a unfair claim given that no strong Socialist Soceties ever existed. All we had was a bunch of half-industrialised, authoritarian messes which didn't even have the economies to implement the system.

Well, there you go. What else needs to be said? Socialism doesn't work. Capitalism does!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, just because something hasn't existed, doesn't mean it doesn't work. Thats like a fuedalist system 900 years ago saying Capitalism wouldn't work. How could they make that claim when they hadn't seen it. Socialism is a prediction, and cannot be said not to work until its come and gone, which it hasn't. However, we're getting there. The increasing interest in welfaire in captalist states (to a varying degree) etc is the frist sign that Socialism is comming. There wont be a Revolution it seems, just a slow transaction from profit orientated to people-orientated societies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There wont be a Revolution it seems, just a slow transaction from profit orientated to people-orientated societies.

Want to know what is really coming? Commusnism! Chinese style. Care to know why? Because what you just said is true. And when all these capitalist countries, The US included, become Socialist societies...the whole thing will crumble and the Chicoms will come rolling in and clean up. Socialism doesn't work Talon. It looks good on paper but it just doesn't work. You are leaving one main ingredient out of the mix and that is desire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.