It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Go Hezboulah! Go Hamas!

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 05:30 PM
link   

posted by Souljah

Does anybody remember the Crusades? When Crusaders from all over Europe came down to Middle East to take the Holy City of Jerusalem? They also created many smaller enclaves - strongholds, cities, which they used to control the region. For a Time it was Good.
[Edited by Don W]


Good? Good for who? Certainly not for the inhabitants. But yes, good for the Crusaders.



But the stupid Crusaders made a tiny mistake - upon arrival to Jerusalem, they slaughtered EVERYBODY; Jews, Muslims even Christians living in the City. They pissed off pretty much everybody around. And the more they attacked the Muslims, the more they united them . . then it happened - All of the Muslim tribes united under ONE BANNER and they struck back. They took Jerusalem back deflected every new Crusade, which were getting weaker and weaker. Slowly the Crusaders were pushed out of the Middle East. And what Israel and USA with the "Coalition of the Willing" is doing today in the Middle East is similar to the historical events, which I just pointed out. So how long do you think it will take for Muslims of the Middle East - or of the WORLD - to Unite against the Occupiers? Looking the way things are going, it will not take much longer now. [Edited by Don W]


You’re Right on Target, Souljah. Notice your Neo Con FOX News types. Three years ago they were boasting about the WMDs. Then they had to boast about regime change. Last month they boasted about killing Zarqawi. Now, if you listen to the talking heads, the discussion is how can the US get out of Iraq and save some face? Those of us who know when we are beat, say what is wrong with “Cut and Run?” Do you not recall the narrow “escape” off the roof of the US Embassy in downtown Saigon? I mean is that not “cut and run” in its worst manifestation?” We overstayed our welcome there and we are overstaying our welcome in Iraq. Guests and fish begin to smell after 3 days. Or is it 3 years?

Some dum-dums we call leaders were talking yesterday how we can leave and still have a good image amongst the Iraqis. Sweet Jesus. Where are the holes those guys have their heads stuck into?

When you have screwed up things, royally, and made a total mess out of a half decent place, and then sit around in your Green Zone, bull-crapping each other, what do you expect to be the outcome?

They may as well sell that $7 billion US Super Embassy under construction to Disney for a Disney-East. He’ll pay about $50 million, 2X what its worth. Say hello Halliburton. You did it to us again.



[edit on 7/16/2006 by donwhite]




posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite

The incessant urging of Israel that Lebanon clean its house is wholly disingenuous. The agreed propaganda for America. Only Bush43 among world leaders believes that trite.


What about the UN Security Council are they believing that "trite" as you call it.

UN Security Council Resolution 1559

Forgive me if I am mistaken, but has Hezbollah helped implement parts from this resolution:


3. Calls for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias;
4. Supports the extension of the control of the Government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory.


The excuse that Lebanon is too weak to take control of it's own territory is pretty disturbing to me. Maybe the UN should bring in a large peace keeping force to help disarm the militias and help the central government of Lebanon assert it's authority throughout the country. If the Lebanon or the UN don't disarm Hezbollah, I can think of someone in the region that will.



posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 10:21 PM
link   

posted by pavil

What about the UN Security Council are they believing that "trite" as you call it. Forgive me if I am mistaken, but has Hezbollah helped implement parts from this resolution: [Edited by Don W]


Here’s my problem. Hezbollah is a movement. It has more than one operating arm. The arm that serves the social and health needs of a very needy population in Lebanon gains favor with the majority of people who live in Lebanon.

Another arm of Hezbollah resists the intrusion of the Jewish state of Israel into the region. This is a popular movement also but for different reasons. I understand some of Hezbollah have been elected to the Parliament in Lebanon. I am positive they do not form the government.

I do not know how the Parliament of Lebanon is divided. Unless the Muslims of Lebanon hold 2/3rds of the seats, the parliament is not representative. It would be skewed in one direction or another. I do not know if there are other armed movements in Lebanon other than the Hezbollah. I am not sure how the Army of Lebanon “stacks” up in this whole scenario. Where are the Army’s loyalties?



The excuse that Lebanon is too weak to take control of it's own territory is pretty disturbing to me. Maybe the UN should bring in a large peace keeping force to help disarm the militias and help the central government of Lebanon assert it's authority throughout the country. If the Lebanon or the UN don't disarm Hezbollah, I can think of someone in the region that will.


Yes, I know. Israel. They did it from the mid 1980s onward but still they did not fix the problem either. So why would they do a better job this time? This reminds me of the US in Iraq. Its all mucked up and we want to stay to unmuck it. That is not logical.

I don’t think it is an excuse that Lebanon is”too weak” to take control of its own territory. It must be apparent to anyone that Lebanon is not fighting back against the unlawful attacks on civilians by the IDF. Lebanon is not at all a strong nation in the military sense.

You cannot speak to a people about disarming when they still remember the Sabra and Shatila massacres. If Israel did not approve the massacres before hand, they positively delayed entering the camps until the Maronite Christian Phanges had done their dirty work.

Israel is acting a a mad dog. A wild man. This is no source of comfort or sense of security to anyone.



UN Security Council Resolution 1559
Resolution 1559 (2004) Adopted by Vote

Of 9 in Favour, to None Against, with 6 Abstentions

The Security Council this evening declared its support for a free and fair presidential election in Lebanon conducted according to Lebanese constitutional rules devised without foreign interference or influence and, in that connection, called upon all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon.

By a vote of 9 in favour (Angola, Benin, Chile, France, Germany, Romania, Spain, United Kingdom, United States) to none against, with 6 abstentions (Algeria, Brazil, China, Pakistan, Philippines, Russian Federation), the Council adopted resolution 1559 (2004), reaffirming its call for the strict respect of Lebanon’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and political independence under the sole and exclusive authority of the Government of Lebanon throughout the country.

In a related provision, the Council called for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias. It also called upon all parties concerned to cooperate fully and urgently with the Council for the full implementation of all its resolutions concerning the restoration in Lebanon of territorial integrity, full sovereignty and political independence.


Good words. No follow through. Makes the words empty!



[edit on 7/16/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite

I understand some of Hezbollah have been elected to the Parliament in Lebanon. I am positive they do not form the government.


The do have two ministers in the cabinet in Lebanon. They are in some small way part of the official government. I don't imply that they are the government. In fact I feel bad for the official government of Lebanon to have a small member party of it's own government draw it into a conflict with a neighboring country especially without the say so of the central government. That in my book would get them automatically kicked out of the government. Maybe that's just me though.



I don’t think it is an excuse that Lebanon is”too weak” to take control of its own territory. It must be apparent to anyone that Lebanon is not fighting back against the unlawful attacks on civilians by the IDF. Lebanon is not at all a strong nation in the military sense.


Lebanon has not really made any attempts to remove Hezbollah from the border areas and I think that everyone agrees that the status quo in southern Lebanon is unacceptable to both Israel and Lebanon in the future. All the more reason to either have the UN step in now or Israel will change the reality on the ground and then the UN can play the buffer-zone while Lebanon regains control of southern Lebanon.



UN Security Council Resolution 1559
Good words. No follow through. Makes the words empty!


Surprisingly I find ourselves in agreement with that. Now we see the results of empty words and half steps.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 10:25 AM
link   


posted by pavil


posted by donwhite
I understand some of Hezbollah have been elected to the Parliament . . [Edited by Don W]


They have two ministers in the cabinet. I don't imply that they are the government. I feel bad for the official government of Lebanon to have a small member party draw it into a conflict without the say of the central government. That in my book would get them automatically kicked out of the government. Maybe that's just me though. [Edited by Don W]



Mr P, do you know which ministries the Hezbollah hold? Do you know if the current constitution gives Maronites preference?

I hold the opposite view on “kicking them out.” Why purposely “blind” yourself? How can you pretend to want to talk your way out of the current crisis but then to intentionally shut out of the debate the very people on who you lay the blame? I see that as our first hurdle.

The next hurdle for the US, we (say Bush43) constantly - in relation to Iran, NK and now Israel - begins by declaring, “ ‘If you will . . . ‘ then we will talk with you.” The demand we make as a prior condition is the very issue over which there are different opinions. If the adversaries comply with our prior demand, there is nothing left to debate. Hmm? Is that what you learn in MBA school?
Sort of like Ken Lay-style?



Lebanon has not really made any attempts to remove Hezbollah from the border areas; I think that everyone agrees that the status quo in southern Lebanon is unacceptable to both Israel and Lebanon in the future.


Au contraire! If “ . everyone agrees . ” there would not be a conflict which periodically spills over into Lebanon. Sooner or later everyone must admit the Israeli-Palestinian problem is the prime underlaying problem in the Middle East. Sooner I hope, later it looks like.



All the more reason to either have the UN step in now or Israel will change the reality on the ground and then the UN can play the buffer-zone while Lebanon regains control of southern Lebanon.


Buffer zone? Why should it be in Lebanon? Why not make it 10 miles into Lebanon and 10 miles into Israel? If buffer zones are good for one side, they must be equally good for the other side. Oh, the UN has been ready to come in for 2 generations but the US and Israel prefer the current scenario. Each for its own reasons. No conspiracy, just a convergence of interests.



[edit on 7/17/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Simple formula to explain why Hezbollah is winning at the moment.

1) Rile up Israel by kidnapping their soldiers.
2) Cause Israel to launch attacks into Lebanon.
3) Attacks always lead to casualties who now hate Israel more than ever.
4) Hezbollah membership increases.

Anyone who can't see that is simply not looking.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite

Mr P, do you know which ministries the Hezbollah hold? Do you know if the current constitution gives Maronites preference?


Not that this really has anything to do with the current situation but. No I am not sure which cabinet positions they hold.
Lebanon's Cabinet
Lebanon Constitution



I hold the opposite view on “kicking them out.” Why purposely “blind” yourself?


What right does Hezbollah have making international policy decisions for the nation of Lebanon? You would just let that little point slide by when your nation is about to get whacked again.


Hmm? Is that what you learn in MBA school?
Sort of like Ken Lay-style?

Everybody makes preconditions when entering negoations, why is that sinister to you? For example Hezbollah and Hamas will not release the Israeli soldiers till Israel releases prisoners.



Au contraire! If “ . everyone agrees . ” there would not be a conflict which periodically spills over into Lebanon. Sooner or later everyone must admit the Israeli-Palestinian problem is the prime underlaying problem in the Middle East.

By everyone I mean the UN, the US, Israel and the central government of Lebanon. All want the central Lebenese government to take control of South Lebanon and disarm Hezbollah.

Sure the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is central. When will all parties in the region accept the two state solution? If I'm Israel why should I bother to negoiate with someone who does not even acknowledge my right to exist? What do they ultimately gain from that?



Buffer zone? Why should it be in Lebanon? Why not make it 10 miles into Lebanon and 10 miles into Israel?


Primarily because Lebanon is not in control of it's territory at the Israeli/Lebanon border, Israel is in control of it's border. You don't see rocket attacks from Israeli terror groups into Lebanon do you?



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Exerted from Lebanon’s Constitution. Link furnished by Mr P, all comments are my own.


Constitution
Article 1, Part h. The abolition of political confessionalism is a basic national goal and shall be achieved according to a gradual plan.
Article 22. With the election of the first Parliament on a national, non-confessional basis, a Senate is established in which all the religious communities are represented. Its authority is limited to major national issues. This is to establish equality between Christians and Muslims as stipulated in the Document of National Accord [The Taif Agreement].


OK, Mr Pavil. The 3 operative words here are “confessionalism,” “non-confessional” and “equality” between Christians (the confessionals) and Muslims. Note: “Confessional” and other similar words are a polite way of saying Maronite Catholic Church.

We see here the incorporation by reference of another document into Lebanon’s Constitution. Unless we have the "Document of National Accord,” at hand, we don’t know all that is in the Constitution. This is an old device, IMO, done for “cover.” You can accomplish by subterfuge what you cannot do in the open. Or don't want to do in the open.

I take it this - equality - means 50/50. Usually a “good” word. But not always or necessarily. It depends on what it means in the context. And the outcome of its application. So if the Catholics number 33% of the population, why should they have 50% of the votes?


Constitution
a. The confessional groups are to be represented in a just and equitable fashion in the formation of the Cabinet . . However, Grade One posts and their equivalents are exempt from this rule, and the posts must be distributed equally between Christians and Muslims without reserving any particular job for any confessional group . .


We still have a religionist's controlled country - Lebanon - and it is for this reason the Lebanese Government cannot disarm Hezbollah. Simple. Until the Lebanese government is a “one man one vote” government, it will remain in this quagmire of religion inspired fervor and inter-community rancor. Say Thank You, France. You screwed this up in 1922 and it has not been unscrewed yet.

Q. Why is it harder to unscrew something than to screw it up in the first place? We can’t fix Lebanon until we bring in the Vatican, which nobody wants to say out loud.


Constitution
“There is no constitutional legitimacy for any authority which contradicts the 'pact of communal coexistence.' This Constitutional Law shall be published in the Official Gazette . . It also guarantees that the personal status and religious interests of the population, to whatever religious sect they belong, is respected . .


Again, we see the 'incorporating by reference' of yet another document, into the Constitution, the fundamental document. It makes the Constitution incomplete in one place. A no no in good constitution writing. Again, unless we have the “Pact of Communal Conscience” at hand, we don’t know all that is in the Constitution. This old device, IMO, is done for “cover.” You can accomplish by subterfuge what you cannot accomplish openly or at least without incurring a cost you don’t want to bear.


Constitution
Education is free insofar as it is not contrary to public order and morals and does not interfere with the dignity of any of the religions or creeds. There shall be no violation of the right of religious communities to have their own schools . .


I don’t mean to be unkind to anyone’s personal faith, but it was Catholic dogma in Europe for a millennia that “Jews were Christ killers.” You can say what you want about the Holocaust, but I assert those teachings made the Holocaust possible! If not probable.


Constitution
The officially recognized heads of religious communities have the right to consult this Council only on laws relating to personal status, the freedom of belief and religious practice, and the freedom of religious education.

The President of the Republic shall be elected by secret ballot and by a two-thirds majority of the Chamber of Deputies.

Executive power is entrusted to the Council of Ministers to be exercised it in accordance with the conditions laid down in this constitution.

The Prime Minister is the Head of Government and its representative.


END


[edit on 7/17/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 01:55 PM
link   
GO ISRAEL! KICKING SOME AS*! I hope they completely take out them idiots over there. I believe this is all hezbollah's fault anyways. They are terrorist no different than al quida, well one difference they have an entire country held hostage pretty much



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 03:06 PM
link   


posted by pavil



posted by donwhite]

Mr P, do you know if the current constitution gives Maronites preference?


Not that this really has anything to do with the current situation but, No I am not sure which cabinet positions they hold. [Edited by Don W]


I OTOH, believe it is of utmost consequence. Religion based discrimination was begun in 1922 by France. It is a constant thorn in the side of the Muslims. And more than a thorn, because of the massacre at Sabra and Shatila, they cannot afford to trust the Maronites whose own militia killed 3,500 Arab refugees. That was not all that long ago. It was under Ariel Sharon as IDF Minister. You have not overlooked that have you?




What right does Hezbollah have making international policy decisions for the nation of Lebanon? You would just let that little point slide by when your nation is about to get whacked again.



Technically speaking Hezbollah has not made policy for Lebanon. That is pure Israel-speak and is an argument technique known as the missing middle. All the facts have been conveniently left out of the discussion. You can see it is working by reading the posts here. But it does not make it so.




For example Hezbollah and Hamas will not release the Israeli soldiers till Israel releases prisoners.



Well, Mr P, that is called a quid pro quo and not a pre-condition.




By everyone I mean the UN, the US, Israel and the central government of Lebanon. All want the central Lebanese government to take control of South Lebanon and disarm Hezbollah. Sure the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is central. When will all parties in the region accept the two state solution? If I'm Israel why should I bother to negotiate with someone who does not even acknowledge my right to exist? What do they ultimately gain from that?



Peace.




Primarily because Lebanon is not in control of it's territory at the Israeli Lebanon border, Israel is in control of it's border. You don't see rocket attacks from Israeli terror groups into Lebanon do you?



The fairness of dividing the rocket-free weapons free guerilla free zone half and half seems so logical to me I cannot offer any more justification. Fairness. Equal burden for equal reward?



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 03:25 PM
link   
All of this is a suprise to me. So some people here are saying that hamas started this? How? Israel fired a shell onto a beach that killed I think 7 civillians, so Hamas went in and killed two soldiers and captured one. Seems fair to me they said they would retaliate :

"JERUSALEM (CNN) -- An Israeli navy gunboat fired shells onto a northern Gaza beach Friday, killing at least seven people and prompting the military wing of Hamas to call off a 16-month-old cease-fire with Israel. "

www.cnn.com...



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Janus,

I think that the comparison between the Crusades and the events happening today are very much alike - once it Holy City used to be the Grand Prize; today it's Natural Resources and Profit. If you look at it from the Global Elite point of View - which have Established their own little Protectorate of Israel and took over Jerusalem - then they are the Todays Crusaders. Or at least the Masters of Puppets. Once Crusaders had Jerusalem in their Hands - today it's the same old story repeating itself. Once Crusaders had many other Enclaves in their Hands - today there is the Protectorate of Iraq in the hands of US Corporations, yet again ruled by the Global Elite.

And when Saladin did Conquer Jerusalem, he let everyone go; not only Christian Civilans, who do not want to remain the in the newly occupied Muslim Jerusalem - but he let go all the SOLDIERS too.


Moley,

Can you please point out a Single Muslim Country that has their own Miliary and Soldiers on Foreign, CHRISTIAN Land? I would love to hear about that. Thanks!

[edit on 16/7/06 by Souljah]


The West isn't christian anymore. Its secular. Science is the new religion There is no such thing as 'Christian Land'. The only real christian land being the holy land.

Bush isn't Christian (occult rituals in bh, PLease.), Rove isn't Christian. They've simply tapped into the patiotism and nationlism in America, prevelant amongst Christian communities in the US

[edit on 17-7-2006 by Peyres]



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Everything that happens in the world from say, March 1, 2006, must be weighed in the light of November 7, 2006, election day in America. The “War Trumps Everything” strategy which worked in 2002, and 2004, is being re-run. In times of crisis the voters are reluctant to turn out the incumbents. The devil you know is better than the devil you do not know. And etc.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Islamist
All of this is a suprise to me. So some people here are saying that hamas started this? How? Israel fired a shell onto a beach that killed I think 7 civillians, so Hamas went in and killed two soldiers and captured one. Seems fair to me they said they would retaliate :

"JERUSALEM (CNN) -- An Israeli navy gunboat fired shells onto a northern Gaza beach Friday, killing at least seven people and prompting the military wing of Hamas to call off a 16-month-old cease-fire with Israel. "

www.cnn.com...


and hezbollah have been firing rockets into Israel continously for the last sixth months.....whats your point?



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 04:12 PM
link   


posted by Peyres

The West isn't Christian anymore. Its secular. Science is the new religion There is no such thing as 'Christian Land'. The only Christian land being the Holy Land. Bush isn't Christian . . They have simply tapped into the patriotism and nationalism in America, prevalent amongst Christian communities in the US. [Edited by Don W]


I wish I could agree with your religious evaluation Mr. P. Karl Marx was right-on when he called religion the opiate of the people. For all too many Americans it is the “drug of choice.” You’d think with our many scientific achievements and our advances in high technology, we’d have put God to rest several decades ago. But alas, God is enjoying a revival!

You may share my view that high religionist are scam artists of the first order. Beginning with the ex Wehrmacht’s Benedict XVI and down to Pat Robertson and all the flourishing mega-church pastors and ministers. In the 1980s a survey of seminarians found that 10% did not believe in God. The seminaries did the right thing - they banned further surveys. My hometown is the site of what was once a leading Southern Baptist seminary.

The Right Wing finally took over the SBC - Southern Baptist Convention - and they installed a hand picked youthful man who had a lot more faith than knowledge. He promptly promulgated a “loyalty oath” which was a must-do for any professor to remain on the teaching staff. The oath said they affirmed the inerrantcy of the original manuscripts of the New Testament. Notwithstanding everyone knew none were extant. Nor has one been so for more like 1700 years. Of course, this begs the fact a seminary is not a place for learning, but is a place for acquiring the ritual and particular dogma.

Maybe next year.


[edit on 7/17/2006 by donwhite]



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 08:01 PM
link   

I OTOH, believe it is of utmost consequence. Religion based discrimination was begun in 1922 by France. It is a constant thorn in the side of the Muslims. And more than a thorn, because of the massacre at Sabra and Shatila, they cannot afford to trust the Maronites whose own militia killed 3,500 Arab refugees. That was not all that long ago. It was under Ariel Sharon as IDF Minister. You have not overlooked that have you?



So what are you exactly saying? That you don't think the breakdown of the Lebanese government is a fair representation of the demographics. You seem to imply that Muslims should be the dominant group and only voice in Lebanese politics even though they are:

religious affiliation: Muslim 54% [of which Shî'î 34%, Sunnî 21%]; Christian 23%; Orthodox 11%; Druse 7%; other 3%
[www.library.uu.nl...

barely a majority group. I have seen estimates of 65% Muslim as well, only did a quick google. Lebanon has always been a dominant Arab country but had a mixture of various religions in it's government and is one of if not the only place in the middle east where some form of religious tolerance thrives. Don't confuse being Arab as being Muslim when it is Lebanon we are talking about. If the Lebanese see fit to change their form of government then they can descend into Civil war once again to try and resolve it. Seems they have decided not to go that route, can't you accept their solution to their own country's problems?




Technically speaking Hezbollah has not made policy for Lebanon. That is pure Israel-speak and is an argument technique known as the missing middle. All the facts have been conveniently left out of the discussion. You can see it is working by reading the posts here. But it does not make it so.


In this particular instance yes, Hezbollah has made policy for Lebanon or should I say involved Lebanon, from Lebanese soil without consulting the Lebanese government or people. What exactly is the difference if you are a Lebanese suffering from the consequences that Hezbollah has decided for you? They chose to start hostilities with Israel, another nation in the region, without consulting the Lebanese government.







/Peace.



Does Israel ultimately gain peace from entering into agreements with parties that refuse to recognize Israel or the two state solution for the Israeli/Palestinian problem? I think they would only gain a reprieve until they attack for the finale. Please explain the logic of that to me once again. Someone says "I'm gonna kill you, then they say "Let's make a deal and shake on it , but I'm still gonna kill you someday" That is peace to you?

I can see a framework would work if both parties would acknowledge the other side's right to exist. Has Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and Syria ever acknowledge Israel's right to within the middle east? Please give me direct quotes from their leadership which are unambiguous and direct in its stating of Israel's right to peacefully coexist in the middle east as part of a two state solution. Don't make me hold my breath too long ok?




The fairness of dividing the rocket-free weapons free guerrilla free zone half and half seems so logical to me I cannot offer any more justification. Fairness. Equal burden for equal reward?


What a bunch of crock, Lebanon is not in charge of regions of it's own country for God's sake. I see you included "rocket-free weapons free guerrilla free zone half and half", where are you going with that? The legitimate governments of both nations have the responsibility to control their countryman or others from waging cross border attacks. Again, please give me your support that Israel has allowed cross border attacks by it's countryman or others, other than the legitimate armed forces of the nation. Equal burden for equal reward you say, Israel has kept it's side of the border clean from what we are talking about. The burden is on Lebanon to control it's own south, not Hezbollah controlling it. If Lebanon can't do it, Israel will and then the UN can step in and play policeman.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join