 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| What should we do about ISIS? |
| Withdraw all Western forces and hope for the best |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Deploy a large number of ground forces into Iraq and Syria to defeat them, then rebuild both countries |
|
41% |
[ 5 ] |
| Negotiate with ISIS to stop further attacks and expansion of the group |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Allow Middle Eastern countries and militia groups to deal with the problem |
|
8% |
[ 1 ] |
| It's too late! ISIS can't be stopped. |
|
8% |
[ 1 ] |
| Containment from the air but no ground force invasion in Iraq and Syria (current policy) |
|
8% |
[ 1 ] |
| Other (please explain) |
|
33% |
[ 4 ] |
| No Idea |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 12 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Morrigu 
Joined: 11 Aug 2001
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
 eejit pointless waste of time so I shan't bother
_________________
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” |
|
|
|
 |
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| pietillidie wrote: | There's no hope in hell of winding any of this in now without a radical break in the order of things, and that involves the biggest levers such as energy policy and China.
Those effwits spent all the money and goodwill during the 00s, and turned too many people into evangelical zealots. Now, there's no goodwill, no money, no control over tax revenue and policy, which has been handed to country-less billionaires, and no clear analysis of the economics at play.
In the light of the sheer number of people and places in chaos, trapped in deformed economies or displaced, the facebook-level dumbness of the Muslim obsession leaves me expecting a lot more time wasting to come.
What made anyone think locking up growing populations under the rule of demented dictators in monopoly oil economies *for decades* would result in everyone living happily ever after? The fact is no one gave a toss about all those people until the dysfunction made it into their backyards.
This is the tip of the ISISberg. |
Maybe these countries are the way they are because of the forces and players inside them ; their religion, their history, their patriarchy, their political battles over unearned wealth, and even their harsh climate. Maybe very little is our fault and our responsibility, despite some stupid things we did along the way.
Though I am sure it is not your intention, I think the mindset and narrative in your post plays to the Islamist agenda.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | ^ I repeat my post above.
Stui, I have absolutely no idea how I'd act in such a situation. At the end of the day, everybody fleeing a war zone leaves someone behind, whether it's their elderly parents, brothers and sisters or even (in a small number of cases) their wife and kids. I don't feel I'm in a position to judge people in a life or death situation, and I think if anyone in this thread had a dose of empathy or humility they'd admit the same. |
Really? Well I'll call it, gutless, coward,
I'd die before I left one of my daughters, you'd have to drag me away, and same for my husband, I have no doubt. I could not live knowing I left them to that fate.
As for not judging the hordes of men walking out on their wives (how many each) and kids, maybe if they had just an ounce of respect for women in general, they wouldn't just walk away and find another. Again, gutless, cowards, selfish,
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | pietillidie wrote: | There's no hope in hell of winding any of this in now without a radical break in the order of things, and that involves the biggest levers such as energy policy and China.
Those effwits spent all the money and goodwill during the 00s, and turned too many people into evangelical zealots. Now, there's no goodwill, no money, no control over tax revenue and policy, which has been handed to country-less billionaires, and no clear analysis of the economics at play.
In the light of the sheer number of people and places in chaos, trapped in deformed economies or displaced, the facebook-level dumbness of the Muslim obsession leaves me expecting a lot more time wasting to come.
What made anyone think locking up growing populations under the rule of demented dictators in monopoly oil economies *for decades* would result in everyone living happily ever after? The fact is no one gave a toss about all those people until the dysfunction made it into their backyards.
This is the tip of the ISISberg. |
Maybe these countries are the way they are because of the forces and players inside them ; their religion, their history, their patriarchy, their political battles over unearned wealth, and even their harsh climate. Maybe very little is our fault and our responsibility, despite some stupid things we did along the way.
Though I am sure it is not your intention, I think the mindset and narrative in your post plays to the Islamist agenda. |
There is no "Islamist" agenda, though. It's a detached media meme with no coherent earthly basis. Islamic extremist groups are as opportunistic as any other extremist groups in the midst of dysfunction in human history. No more brutal, no more patriarchal and no less subject to stability and the overwhelming desire of humans for security, jobs and housing.
No offence to you also, but you're being extremely gullible, and repeating the same failed pre-Afghanistan and Iraq thinking. This is exactly the sort of vague folk fear that leads to very bad decisions.
The literal "courage" trait of unknown other personalities in unknown other circumstances is being discussed in this thread as if it has technical merit, for goodness' sake. "Courage" is a folk category like "lazy", not a serious analytical category in any field except some areas of cognitive science where it looks nothing like this discussion.
It is stock standard behaviour in all hierarchical patriarchal societies to send young men to the better land on the family's behalf. Just such stock standard behaviour, documented all around us as we speak - even indirectly in economic discussions of remittances monies. Just ask Koreans or Mexicans or Indians or anyone you care to find.
Basic, global, everyday facts tossed out in the brain-eating din of Islamomania!
Then, as I keep emphasising, the demographics of these places are heavily skewed to younger cohorts, as is the massive unemployment which demographers have warned for years is a powder keg. Of course, it's also recognised as a powder keg in any country in *any* culture or religion.
Then, there's the social chaos freeing up people from their traditional family moorings, and the plain old suitability of the route for the younger and fitter.
It is embarrassing to skip over such basic facts used and understood in sober analyses for decades.
This is now the level of analysis you're counting on, contrary to decades of human geography, development economics and anthropology. Forget what was basic, sane knowledge and experience last week; this week Fox News is the authority.
Yep, that bodes well, and was surely a matter of enthusiastic discussion at the 973rd Central "Islamist" Congress held at the offices of the Daily Mail last Thursday! 
As I say, it's the Afghanistan and Iraq discussions all over again. Once more, I will back the sober analysis which ignores the white noise and focuses on the larger economic, demographic and sociological knowns and incentives.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| think positive wrote: | | David wrote: | ^ I repeat my post above.
Stui, I have absolutely no idea how I'd act in such a situation. At the end of the day, everybody fleeing a war zone leaves someone behind, whether it's their elderly parents, brothers and sisters or even (in a small number of cases) their wife and kids. I don't feel I'm in a position to judge people in a life or death situation, and I think if anyone in this thread had a dose of empathy or humility they'd admit the same. |
Really? Well I'll call it, gutless, coward,
I'd die before I left one of my daughters, you'd have to drag me away, and same for my husband, I have no doubt. I could not live knowing I left them to that fate.
As for not judging the hordes of men walking out on their wives (how many each) and kids, maybe if they had just an ounce of respect for women in general, they wouldn't just walk away and find another. Again, gutless, cowards, selfish, |
Hordes. What hordes? How many do you know for a fact have walked out on their families?
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ I don't necessarily disagree with the substance of what you wrote above, PTID - but I doubt that the "economic, demographic and sociological knowns and incentives" are primarily a Western creation, and it sounds as though you do.
In one sense, the history is the history and the calculus of blame in it is irrelevant, a schoolyard game. But it does matter insofar as it guides what we should do now.
Is forceful intervention of any kind in the ME by the Western powers liable to worsen the situation because it always has in the past ? Is this Islamist movement simply a Nazi-like dark force founded in revenge and hatred of the other, regardless of what the other really does ? Can it be defeated or neutralised by ignoring it ? Can you keep its violence out of our cities in a globalised world ?
he answer to all of these depends on your view of history, legitimacy and causation. I suspect these hatreds cannot be staunched by a policy of isolation or compromise or even active humanitarianism, as I suspect they are indigenous, not caused by us.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Morrigu wrote: | | eejit pointless waste of time so I shan't bother |
I wouldn't usually descend to that level, but I have to say I'm astounded by the thickness and prejudice on display in this thread at the moment. I think I'm actually being extraordinarily patient - even Tony Abbott would probably be cringing and asking you guys to dial it back a bit.
Cowardly refugees. For real. I mentioned this discussion to a co-worker tonight - you should have seen her jaw drop. If this is anything like mainstream discourse in this country, then we may as well just give up on civilisation now and go hunt some mammoths.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | ^ I don't necessarily disagree with the substance of what you wrote above, PTID - but I doubt that the "economic, demographic and sociological knowns and incentives" are primarily a Western creation, and it sounds as though you do.
In one sense, the history is the history and the calculus of blame in it is irrelevant, a schoolyard game. But it does matter insofar as it guides what we should do now.
Is forceful intervention of any kind in the ME by the Western powers liable to worsen the situation because it always has in the past ? Is this Islamist movement simply a Nazi-like dark force founded in revenge and hatred of the other, regardless of what the other really does ? Can it be defeated or neutralised by ignoring it ? Can you keep its violence out of our cities in a globalised world ?
he answer to all of these depends on your view of history, legitimacy and causation. I suspect these hatreds cannot be staunched by a policy of isolation or compromise or even active humanitarianism, as I suspect they are indigenous, not caused by us. |
Well, let me use that great term you reintroduced recently: The cause of these things is "over-determined". So, I certainly agree with you on that.
I only "blame" us (another folk term, BTW) insofar as I think we had sufficient knowledge to expect this and wedge against it intelligently, just as we had sufficient knowledge to expect disaster to flow from the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.
So, my concern is not even a moral blame. To take it back to basics, stupid is as stupid does, so let's start there. I just hate watching the fruits of reactionary, foolish thinking unfold before my eyes as if to a black version of Yakety Sax.
Certainly, we don't know enough or care enough about the problems in that part of the world to intervene fruitfully. People are only mentioning it as a proxy for lashing out in childish spite at the inconvenience of world stresses such as refugee overflows and terrorism threats, unstoppable world population and international transactions, and the decline of US power.
Fine enough reasons for serious concern, but there's no serious understanding or knowledge behind it, only a visceral lurching. Terrorism is the classic case in point. People fear terrorism, as any rational being should, but then they lash out and cause even more terrorism. This is the hopeless cycle of the addict who is trapped in a short-term (media) reward cycle.
The money in our economies is tight, too, so in the quiet of their minds people are extremely vulnerable to buying into a "war brings economic bounty and reform" meme, despite the last wars crashing the world economy rather than creating boom time.
People might also be tempted to throw their hands in the air thinking that the arms and fossil fuels companies will have their way, regardless, so they might as well roll the dice and back them to escape the stress of their wandering Islamomanic thoughts. The Islamic voices the Islamic voices! Someone stop the voices!
Pretty much all of that sub-rational response created the public conditions for the monumental institutional and public errors of Afghanistan and Iraq. It's a carbon copy, and it doesn't end well.
On intervention, to my (and everyone else's) limited knowledge nothing worthwhile seems like it can be done because the region is so fractured. Perhaps a very localised stability-focused containment can alleviate suffering here and there (under sane and trusted international general so-and-so who is not the latest neocon fanatic of the military world). But, let's face it; even that's more a vague media generalisation than an actionable insight of any merit.
Meanwhile, let's lay out a new Marshall-like Plan to transform the region and fossil fuels economy as part of post-oil deal international deal and security arrangement. As if the world couldn't actually, genuinely, sincerely do with a decent reorg; not a faux branding scheme, a Marshall-like Plan with teeth and vision that deals with a planet on its way to 10B people.
Aside from local counter-terrorism measures, which I'm sure we all agree on except for egregious tramplings of due process, that Marshall-like Plan has to be the greatest part of our intervention by far.
Hopefully, it will help focus the fractured local politics in the region on a future goal, bringing the serious contenders for future reform to the fore, as happened in Asia. This must be about jobs and homes and stability; bad ideas everywhere fall into line in the shadows of those three offerings. Engaging extremists in debate and reaction only spreads their virus; policing them while offering jobs and homes and safe streets is the only disciplined way of putting such toxic spores back where they belong deep down in the sub-soil of the river bed.
If war and chaos must reign a while longer, and sadly it seems that for historical reasons which include our own dirty actions it will, let it be directed under a regional and then wider economic transformation policy.
That whole region could be the next target for both low-cost and high-tech manufacturing, and China could be partnered in the process of supplying infrastructure and technology. This enables a new consensus to arise with China, helping guide relations with it to a more productive end.
China has a massive stake in energy and pollution issues and has its own western front issues. India would also be an ideal partner; unfortunately, it is still probably too unstable internally to contribute very much, but fingers crossed it things might start improving there soon.
Everything else is tiddlywinks. Do people really think that entire region from North Africa to Russia can be "contained", and that China can be "contained", and then Hindu India can be "contained" and then whoever looks at us funny can be "contained"?
The US can't even help Mexico contain its drug wars; the world is just too sophisticated and technologically complex and mobile to "contain" anything beyond the relatively minor.
The belief things can be controlled by force really is just fantasy-based evangelical religious thinking, rooted in the over-study of the European wars and recent memories of absolute US dominance at a time these other economic and demographic forces were strengthening at a pace but below the public radar.
Even those who disagree with a neocon agenda, such as yourself, will effectively be sanctioning arbitrary reaction due to the regrettably simple forces of domestic politics if no proper alternative is put on the table. Without an ambitious Marshall-like plan that comprehensively assuages the agitated pool of Jungian fears in people's heads, meanwhile dealing with the major forces at play such as dysfunctional oil economics, the debate will keep devolving into mob anger.
The forces are far too big here: We either help direct and shape them and create a better whole, or we get steamrolled by them while we marvel at the courage of early 20th century trench warfare and try to contain 3-4B "enemies", and waste time rousing anger by arguing which pedophiles, murderers and misogynists are worse: Christian, Islamic or Confucian.
Edits.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | Morrigu wrote: | | eejit pointless waste of time so I shan't bother |
I wouldn't usually descend to that level, but I have to say I'm astounded by the thickness and prejudice on display in this thread at the moment. I think I'm actually being extraordinarily patient - even Tony Abbott would probably be cringing and asking you guys to dial it back a bit.
Cowardly refugees. For real. I mentioned this discussion to a co-worker tonight - you should have seen her jaw drop. If this is anything like mainstream discourse in this country, then we may as well just give up on civilisation now and go hunt some mammoths. |
Leftist Melbournites astounded by mainstream opinion. More news at 6. |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | Listen to the middle-class Westerners lecturing refugees on bravery. What's the bravest thing any of you have done lately? Did you take a spider out of the shower?
If you guys are all such heroes, here's an idea: take a trip to the Kurdish provinces tomorrow and offer up your services. They could use a few more men, and I presume you support their struggle against IS. They'll give you a gun and everything.
You are willing to do that, aren't you? What's the matter, afraid of a few bullets? |
You're cute when your angry.  |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | | David wrote: | | Morrigu wrote: | | eejit pointless waste of time so I shan't bother |
I wouldn't usually descend to that level, but I have to say I'm astounded by the thickness and prejudice on display in this thread at the moment. I think I'm actually being extraordinarily patient - even Tony Abbott would probably be cringing and asking you guys to dial it back a bit.
Cowardly refugees. For real. I mentioned this discussion to a co-worker tonight - you should have seen her jaw drop. If this is anything like mainstream discourse in this country, then we may as well just give up on civilisation now and go hunt some mammoths. |
Leftist Melbournites astounded by mainstream opinion. More news at 6. |
It is indeed a mainstream view, Wokko, as you say. The fact that even deluded right-wingers like you and TP agree with me - an unreconstructed leftie of many years standing - on this demonstrates just how mainstream it is.
Notice how David has completely failed to find a rationale for his belief that brave people should put their own lives at risk in order to defend cowards. Hell, he hasn't even tried to justify it.
There is no comparison with WW1, by the way. There were genuine and reasonable grounds for not supporting the Allied war effort in WW1, including the belief that (for example) Australians should not be compelled to go to the other side of the world and fight for an empire they had no allegience to or stake in. I'm not saying that these grounds were sufficient or that those citing them were correct or justified - that's another question which we shouldn't attempt to address here. I'm simply saying that there were valid reasons worthy of consideration. Compare with the situation in the Middle-east. Here we have people with their own homes invaded who are unwilling to fight to protect themselves, who are happy to take shelter behind the military barriers of NATO, but not willing to contribute to the maintenance of that safety. Call them "safety bludgers" if you like, people letting other people do their fighting, though the traditional term is "cowards".
What can possibly excuse such behaviour? One thing I can suggest is lack of a clear cause to support. It's easy enough to see the bad military forces in the ME (e.g., ISIS, Assaad) that need to be toppled. It's not so easy to see the good ones (or even less-bad ones) which are worthy of support. The Kurds are doing great things; apart from them you have a confusing mish-mash of others, some of them tainted by close association with the Americans (who caused half of this trouble in the first place and can never be trusted not to rig things for their own commercial benefit), others by nasty sectarian associations. Nevertheless, with the likes of ISIS taking over your homeland and killing your family members, you have to do something better than just running away and leaving it up to someone else to protect you.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Good report on oil and the other assets which come along with it.
Of course, what they don't say is that it every other asset pretty much follows from the initial leverage of oil. Obviously, if you can fund an army it allows you to grab and enslave whatever else is laying around.
It will be interesting to watch the fossil fuels counter-propaganda. However, this article is basically underscoring the point, which is pretty hard to avoid if you live on the right planet:
| Bloomberg Business wrote: | Why ISIS Has All the Money It Needs: Its more than just oil.
...
The Obama administration misunderstood the [oil] problem at first, and then they wildly overestimated the impact of what they did, says Benjamin Bahney, an international policy analyst at the Rand Corp., a U.S. Department of Defense-funded think tank, where he helped lead a 2010 study on Islamic States finances and back-office operations based on captured ledgers. He says the radical revision on oil revenue came after Treasury officials gained new intelligence on Islamic States petroleum operationssimilar to the ledgers Rand used for its studyfollowing a rare ground assault by American Special Operations Forces this May. U.S. forces, operating deep into the groups territory in eastern Syria, targeted and killed an Islamic State oil emir, a man known by the Arabic nom de guerre Abu Sayyaf, Pentagon officials said at the time. (Treasury officials, who are charged with leading the administrations war on Islamic States finances, declined to comment specifically on whether Abu Sayyafs ledgers were at the root of their new estimates, but the agency has said the figures are extrapolated from the militant groups oil earnings from a single region in a single month earlier this year.)
Its not clear how the U.S. got it so wrong, Bahney says, but he suspects that the latest round of airstrikes are directly related to the administrations new math. You have to go after the oil, and you have to do it in a serious way, and weve just begun to do that now, he says. Yet even if the U.S. finally weakens the groups oil income, Bahney and other analysts in the U.S., the Middle East, and Europe contend, Islamic State has resources beyond crudefrom selling sex slaves to ransoming hostages to plundering stolen farmlandthat can likely keep it fighting for years. In any case, $500 million buys a lot of $500 black-market AK-47s.
Islamic State got into the oil business long before it captured global attention through barbaric beheading videos in the summer of 2014. It seized Syrian border crossings to profit from oil smuggling. And it tapped a network thats operated for decades, dating to at least the 1990s, when Saddam Hussein evaded sanctions by smuggling billions of dollars worth of oil out of Iraq under the United Nations Oil-for-Food program.
The terrorist army has diverse nonoil assetsranging from hostages to fertile farmsand a sizable cash surplus
Beyond oil, the caliphate is believed by U.S. officials to have assets including $500 million to $1 billion that it seized from Iraqi bank branches last year, untold hundreds of millions of dollars that U.S. officials say are extorted and taxed out of populations under the groups control, and tens of millions of dollars more earned from looted antiquities and ransoms paid to free kidnap victims.
The taxes bring in real money. One example: Islamic State allows policemen, soldiers, and teachers in its territory to atone for the sin of having worked under religiously inappropriate regimesfor a fee. Forgiveness comes in the form of a repentance ID card costing up to $2,500, which requires an additional $200 a year to renew, according to Aymenn Jawad al-Tami, a fellow at the Middle East Forum who closely follows the group.
Arguably the least appreciated resource for Islamic State is its fertile farms. Before even starting the engine of a single tractor, the group is believed to have grabbed as much as $200 million in wheat from Iraqi silos alone. Beyond harvested grains, the acreage now controlled by militants across the Tigris and Euphrates river valleys has historically produced half of Syrias annual wheat crop, about one-third of Iraqs, and almost 40 percent of Iraqi barley, according to UN agricultural officials and a Syrian economist. Its fields could yield $200 million per year if those crops are sold, even at the cut rates paid on black markets. And how do you conduct airstrikes on farm fields?
For his part, Bahney contends that the groups real financial strength is its fanatical spending discipline. Rand estimates the biggest and most important drain on Islamic States budget is the salary line for up to 100,000 fighters. But the oil revenue alone could likely pay those salaries almost two times over, Bahney says. He also believes theyve been running at a surplus. Bahney says that if the U.S. and its allies are going to diminish the threat from Islamic State, they must recognize that knocking out oil, while critical, isnt enough. Theyve built up quite a bit of excess cash flow in the last year, he warns. So theyre going to be able to keep this going for a while. |
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-19/why-u-s-efforts-to-cut-off-islamic-state-s-funds-have-failed
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Well, if you lot can get away from that really trivial topic of who is a coward and who is brave for five minutes; it's like primary school kids talking about whose dad is tougher. Another invasion won't work, anyhow, so it's wasted hot air.
The problem is overwhelmingly about decades of deformed economies and societies based on artificial monopoly oil revenues stopping natural competitive checks forming. Instead, there have only been corrupt, thuggish, socially disive and violent arrangements.
The fallout from this has more recently been turbocharged by demographics, cheap travel and technology, and our most recent insane interventions.
Focus on the big, important forces.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ PTID, I've enjoyed your posts on this though I am not really on board with your view. But a "Marshall Plan" - however adjusted - seems to me fanciful. This is not Germany 1945. The Marshall plan worked because you had a people with a living memory of democracy and freedom, totally demoralised and defeated, and with the skills and industrial know-how to recover. The closest thing we've seen to a Marshall plan in the Middle East was the reconstruction attempt by the US and Uk post 2003. We know how that ended.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Skids 
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
