MERGED--> all Israel/Lebanon conflict discussion, Pt. II - Page 13 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-13-2006, 11:51 PM   #181
Rock n' Roll Doggie
trevster2k's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,330
Local Time: 11:54 AM
Another POV

Seeking Invulnerability

By Gwynne Dyer

The three most ill-considered (and probably doomed) political
enterprises on the international political scene today are the Israeli
assault on Lebanon, the US campaign to force Iran to renounce its alleged
nuclear weapons programme, and the similar campaign that has been mounted
against North Korea. What common theme unites these three enterprises?
The quest for invulnerability for one side, at the expense of total
vulnerability for the other.

Between 1945 and about 1970, the United States went through one of
the most difficult intellectual and emotional transitions in history. The
US began that period as the home of almost half the world's surviving
industrial capacity and the sole possessor of the ultimate weapon, the
atomic bomb. It was unchallengeable and invulnerable. Yet by 1970 it was
ready to concede nuclear weapons parity to the Soviet Union, an openly
hostile totalitarian state, and was negotiating arms-control agreements
that limited missile numbers but guaranteed the Soviets the ability to
destroy the United States.

That was logical and necessary, because you couldn't stop the
Russians from building more and bigger nuclear weapons. America's military
thinkers had grasped the essential fact that no number of nuclear weapons
on their side, however large, could stop an enemy with the ability to
deliver even a few hundred nukes from effectively destroying their country.

The enemy would also be destroyed by US retaliation, of course, so
let's work with that fact. Let us stabilise the US-Soviet relationship by
accepting this unavoidable situation of mutual vulnerability -- Mutual
Assured Destruction (MAD), as one critic of the policy named it -- and even
enshrining it in international treaties. It made good strategic sense, and
it may well have saved the world from a nuclear war.

Accepting America's vulnerability was so emotionally repugnant that
many leading politicians and generals spent the rest of their careers
promoting new technologies like "Star Wars" that they hoped might restore
US invulnerability, but most of the US political and military elite had the
wisdom and maturity to support the policy. America could use their like
today. So could Israel.

Israel's period of invulnerability began later, after the 1973 war,
and has lasted far longer. No combination of Arab armies can defeat Israel
in war, or even inflict major casualties on it. And should Israeli
generals ever prove so incompetent that Arab armies did make a little
headway, Israel still has its regional nuclear weapons monopoly forty years
after developing the things. (America lost its own nuclear monopoly after
only four years in its confrontation with the Soviet Union.)

Israel faces a bigger "terrorist threat" than the US, but it is
still a pretty marginal concern. Hezbollah's activities on Israel's
northern borders were an occasional nuisance, but until Israel's quite
deliberate over-reaction to its hostage-seizure operation on 12 July --
bombing targets all across Lebanon -- it had not fired rockets at Israeli
towns in years. Hezbollah had the capability to do that, so Israel was
theoretically vulnerable (though not very, since the rockets hardly ever
hit anyone), but it wasn't actually doing it.

In one sense, this war is an absurd attempt to eliminate that last
little vulnerability by grossly disproportionate means. In a more serious
sense, it is driven by the Israeli military's desire to "reestablish
deterrence": that is, to demonstrate anew that Israel can respond with
grossly disproportionate violence to any provocation, spreading death and
destruction far beyond the location of the original offence.

But that is another way of saying that it wants to show that
everybody else in the region is completely vulnerable to its power,
completely insecure. There is no stability in such a relationship, as the
past forty years have amply demonstrated, and in any case, this time
deterrence will not be reestablished. Israel is unable to eliminate
Hezbollah, and its attack merely highlights the limitations of Israeli
military power when deployed against non-state opponents.

Now come to the United States and its flailing pseudo-diplomatic
attempts to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons -- or, indeed, its
equally ham-fisted attempts to force North Korea to give up the nukes it
claims to have already built. The tactics it has adopted are as ignorant of
the opposing side's psychology as they are revealing of its own.

The US has made blocking the nuclear weapons ambitions of these two
countries an absolute priority in its foreign policy, because it will no
longer accept even the slightest vulnerability to countries or forces it
sees as hostile. In these two cases, it may well be an achievable goal,
since their putative bombs are probably just bargaining chips. You can't
be sure, but it's certainly worth finding out.

The US is not negotiating with 75 million Iranians or 25 million
North Koreans. It is (or rather, it should be) negotiating with the senior
clerics around Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Tehran, and with the senior people
around Dear Leader Kim Jong-Il in Pyongyang, both of whom are primarily
interested in regime survival, not in nuclear weapons. Yet the Bush
administration seems oblivious to the fact that THEY feel insecure.

America's vulnerability is tiny; theirs is almost total. It would
be worthwhile to offer both of them a commitment that the US will stop
trying to overthrow their regimes, and leave their fate in the hands of
their own peoples, in return for renouncing their nuclear weapons
ambitions. It worked with Libya's Gaddafy, after all. What is truly
astonishing is that this approach has simply not been tried with either
North Korea or Iran.
To shorten to 725 words, omit paragraphs 4 and 11. ("The enemy...war"; and
"The US...finding out")
Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist whose articles
are published in 45 countries.

Link to Gwynne Dyer's columns

trevster2k is offline  
Old 08-14-2006, 06:35 AM   #182
Rock n' Roll Doggie
maycocksean's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,886
Local Time: 10:24 AM
Originally posted by nbcrusader
We've already seen how the poverty leads to terrorism idea is a fallacy.
I must have missed the thread where this "fallacy" was resoundingly disproved.

It seems to me that middle class security, if not great wealth, tends to do a pretty good job of muting radical tendencies. Radicalism tends to be destabilizing, and the middle classes tend to have too much to lose to want to rush out and change the world by violence.

maycocksean is offline  
Old 08-14-2006, 06:42 AM   #183
Rock n' Roll Doggie
maycocksean's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,886
Local Time: 10:24 AM
Originally posted by yolland
Interesting article from Sunday's New York Times about the social role of Hezbollah (as opposed to its military or political role) in South Lebanon. I'm pretty sure you need registration there to read a 2-day old article, so I'll post a chopped-down version of it (mostly what I cut out were personal anecdotes).
Interestingly, Yolland, it seems the article you posted would lend credence to Israel's approach to dealing with Lebanon. It seems to suggest that there is quite a bit of sympathy for Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, and that it is very hard to seperate the civilian from the Hezbollah fighter. If indeed Hezbollah is the people and the people are Hezbollah, from "little child to the old man" then, indeed Israel would be justified in attacking the people, no?

On the other hand, I think, ironically, we Americans forget the romantic appeal of the ragtag band of fighters representing the common man fighting against the powerful, mechanized, and "evil enemy." It's such a classic "American-style story" it's amazing that we can't see how other people might buy into it, rightly or wrongly. Hezbollah has done a good job of burnishing its image in Lebanon it would seem.
maycocksean is offline  
Old 08-14-2006, 09:40 AM   #184
Blue Crack Supplier
Irvine511's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,887
Local Time: 11:24 AM
Originally posted by maycocksean

I must have missed the thread where this "fallacy" was resoundingly disproved.

It seems to me that middle class security, if not great wealth, tends to do a pretty good job of muting radical tendencies. Radicalism tends to be destabilizing, and the middle classes tend to have too much to lose to want to rush out and change the world by violence.

i think it wasn't so much that poverty = terrorism was a "fallacy," but that there isn't a one-to-one correlation.

i think it's quite clear that the presence of a middle class with an investment in the continued security and stability of a society is an excellent deterrant to many of the conditions that can radicalize a population, not least because a middle class provides a bit of "incentive" (so to speak) for the lower classes; as in, you might never be a member of the aristocracy, but you might be able to ascend to the middle class (and this is why the flight of the Iraqi middle class is so troubling). the lack of a middle class is certainly destabilizing for a country, and certainly can contribute to domestic strife/civil wars and the temptation of religious radicalism, which can down the line contribute to terrorism, but people don't blow themselves up because they are poor.

the blow themselves up because their nations are occupied by a foreign power.
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 08-14-2006, 11:58 AM   #185
Blue Crack Addict
deep's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,507
Local Time: 08:24 AM
Lebanon - a Neo CON JOB?

US gave green light to Lebanon attack: Seymour Hersh

[This is the print version of story]

The World Today - Monday, 14 August ,
Reporter: Eleanor Hall

ELEANOR HALL: A month into the war and one of the top investigative journalists in the United States has published dramatic allegations about the genesis of the conflict.

The New Yorker's Seymour Hersh has alleged that Israel had planned a military strategy to take on Hezbollah in Lebanon, and shared that strategy with the Bush administration well before the kidnappings last month that triggered the current war.

Seymour Hersh, who in the past exposed the Abu Ghraib scandal and Vietnam's My Lai massacre, also wrote that the United States gave the green light to the attack on Hezbollah because of its own plans for Iran.

I spoke to Seymour Hersh in Washington a short time ago.

SEYMOUR HERSH: Once Israel indicated it was ready to go, it was getting ready, it had had it with Hezbollah and they, you know, it was a target of opportunity. They thought they could do it with air, the Israeli Commander in Chief, General Halutz is an airman and believes in strategic bombing.

And the White House, the more they heard about it, the more they began these discussions. Eventually, what I say in the article is that Richard Cheney the vice-President, and everything always seems to come to him and his immediate office, the neo-conservatives if you will. I mean, what a good idea. Let the Israelis do it. It's a no-brainer.

One, we're having a tremendous fight inside our own military with our own plans for bombing Iran and the White House is very eager for the Air Force to come up with a very tough plan to take out the Iranians.

And the other services in America - the Army, the Navy, the marine corp, are all have been saying - for a year, I've been writing about it - are you nuts? We can't do it. If you start bombing what'll happen is you'll need troops and we don't have the troops.

So here you have a chance to show that bombing can work against a tough, dug in target. Hezbollah is underground, its missiles are underground. It's been digging for years. Nobody digs like the Iranians. The Persians have been digging holes since the 11th century.

So you go in and the Israeli Air Force blast Hezbollah, knocks it out of the park, that's a plus, you get rid of a terrorist.

Two, if you're going to go to Iran, one of the deterrents is Hezbollah has missiles. We can't attack, the United States cannot attack Iran as long as Hezbollah can attack Haifa and Tel Aviv with missiles. We have to get rid of those. So that gets rid of those.

And three, we show everybody, all those sceptics in the military, look, bombing can work.

That was the unassailable thought of the White House.

ELEANOR HALL: And what are your sources telling you about when the Israelis came to the White House with this plan? How long has the planning been going on?

SEYMOUR HERSH: We don't know. I mean, the best I could get is Spring. Actually the Air Force came first. The American Air Force went to the Israelis first because the American Air Force has been, as I say, it's been getting its head handed to it inside the Pentagon every time they stick their head up and say, let's bomb.

And so here's the Israelis who are great navigators and great pilots, great bombers. And so the American Air Force began to share notes. And then the idea percolated. And again, let me stress, Israel doesn't need America to go after Hezbollah.

But there were also... another element was, after the Israelis invaded Gaza, if you remember an Israeli soldier was captured June 28th, a man named Shalit by, we think, Hamas.

And then Israelis punched into Gaza very hard. We occupied part of it, shot it up. At that point there was a lot of signals traffic that the Israeli intelligence community picked up in which Hamas, which is interestingly a Sunni organisation, and the Shi'ite Hezbollah were talking to each other, and one of the things being said is, maybe it's time to warm up the north.

And so at this point, this is June/July, at this point it was decided that next time Hezbollah does something... and what you've had in the last five, six years between Israel and Hezbollah since the Israelis were driven out of southern Lebanon by Hezbollah in 2000, you've had nothing but back and forth cross-border stuff. You could be sure that in a month or two somebody was going to do something.

ELEANOR HALL: If this is a dry run for an attack on Iran, what lessons will the White House have drawn? Will it now be putting off a military confrontation?

SEYMOUR HERSH: Well, you know, normally, you'd think that there is a learning curve, but not in this White House. My own belief is that some of the people talking to me are also very nervous about the fact that they believe this White House is incapable of learning what it doesn't want to learn.

Right now intelligence is being cooked just the way it was cooked before the war in Iraq. There's intelligence about Iran and its ties to Hezbollah, which are certainly deep, but not as deep as the White House would believe from the intelligence it's getting. A case is being dealt in the intelligence community against Iran that may not be accurate.

ELEANOR HALL: What is in it for the United States to give a green light for the bombardment of infrastructure in one of the countries that it points to as a shining example of democracy in the region?

SEYMOUR HERSH: (Inaudible) actually thought that one of the things you want to do is you want to increase the power of the civil government, the Lebanese Government, which is pro-American right now, now that we've gotten rid of the Syrians - they've been kicked out under UN resolution 1559.

So one of the thoughts was, let's increase the power of the central government, let's decrease the power of Hezbollah which has been operating as a sort of separate armed entity, although it's certainly part of the Government right now. Hezbollah has members of Parliament, Cabinet members are Hezbollah, they provide a lot of services, incredible services - hospitals, schools - to their people.

But still, the American idea, one aspect of it, the bombing would be good because it would diminish Hezbollah and make the Government stronger. Yeah, duh! Another bad call.

ELEANOR HALL: Now, you don't name a number of your key sources...

SEYMOUR HERSH: I name none of them!

ELEANOR HALL: ...How reliable are they?

SEYMOUR HERSH: Well, look, I've been around, as you know, I'm long of tooth, I've been doing this stuff from My Lai to Abu Ghraib and writing stories for a long time. You know when you take a bite of the Israelis, you know you're going to get a lot of heat.

ELEANOR HALL: But you're absolutely certain?

SEYMOUR HERSH: (Laughing) I don't think I'd put 40 years on the line if I wasn't certain. No, I'm certain and I know from where the offices where it comes from and I know where the people work. I just can't name them.

ELEANOR HALL: That's Seymour Hersh the investigative journalist from The New Yorker speaking to me from New York a short time ago.
deep is offline  
Old 08-14-2006, 12:18 PM   #186
Forum Moderator
yolland's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 04:24 PM
This doesn't strike me as all that surprising; many in the Israeli media (and elsewhere) have expressed suspicions all along that the broad outlines of this campaign had been waiting in the wings for awhile, though given some of the more painfully obvious Israeli miscalculations (especially on the ground), relatively few seem to think a comprehensive strategy had been mapped out. Nor would it be surprising if the neocons gave the general idea a thumbs-up.

That said, since this article is directly pertinent to the topic "Israel/Lebanon conflict," I think I'm going to merge it into that thread.
yolland [at]

μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 08-14-2006, 12:22 PM   #187
Blue Crack Addict
deep's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,507
Local Time: 08:24 AM
i think it is a different topic

Israel had to respond to Hezbollah

but the Bush Admin dishonest way of doing foreign policy

is the focus of this thread
deep is offline  
Old 08-14-2006, 07:25 PM   #188
Blue Crack Addict
nbcrusader's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 07:24 AM
Originally posted by maycocksean
I must have missed the thread where this "fallacy" was resoundingly disproved.

It seems to me that middle class security, if not great wealth, tends to do a pretty good job of muting radical tendencies. Radicalism tends to be destabilizing, and the middle classes tend to have too much to lose to want to rush out and change the world by violence.
Actually, it is occurred in a series of threads. The theory is floated as fact. The inconsistencies with the theory are presented (both non-poor terrorists and peaceful poor) and the issue dropped – until the next convenient time to re-present it in a thread.
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 08-15-2006, 03:47 AM   #189
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tel-Aviv, Israel
Posts: 1,300
Local Time: 03:24 PM
I will be the first one to admit that Israel has lost this round to Hezbollah.

The fact that we were forced into this farce of a cease-fire really brought the incompetence of our prime minister and defence minister to the surface in a very catastrophic way.

The Israeli government (very reluctantly) accepted the cease-fire -I really don't understand why.....We haven't achieved ANY of our objectives and our not being able to finish what we started means that all those soldiers and civillians died in vain (not that I'm pleased that they were killed AT ALL). Hezbollah is still in south Lebanon and we are still going to be living in the shadow of their missiles........GREAT deal, right?......

Make no mistake, the ONLY reason that Hezbollah hasn't been wiped off the face of the earth is because we were only using about 5% of our fire power. Believe me, if Israel had gone in with full force from the beginning - the only trace you would have of Hezbollah would be the white cloths from which they will fashion their flags of surrender.

I'm usually not this militant but I, personally, have no faith in this travesty of a cease fire that only serves the Hezbollah.They now have time to regroup, re-arm and move their long range missiles closer to ME while preparing themselves for their next attack - which WILL come.

When Hezbollah breaks the cease-fire, as we know they will, I hope our so-called defence minister will get his head out of his ass and do what has to be done - mainly wipe the grin off Nasrallah's stupid face.

As for the UN, this resolution says nothing about disarming Hezbollah or returning our soldiers that they kidnapped (which started this whole thing in the first place).

What can I say? Kofi Anan is the best friend Hezbollah could ever hope for.

So, to summarize:

Round 1 -
Hezbollah = 1, Israel = 0

See you in round two.
AchtungBono is offline  
Old 08-15-2006, 03:55 AM   #190
love, blood, life
A_Wanderer's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 01:24 AM
the blow themselves up because their nations are occupied by a foreign power.
Makes sense, Shiites occupying Iraq with their mosques, schools and markets
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 08-15-2006, 08:26 PM   #191
The Fly
JCR's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Higley, Arizona (it's a chunk of land in Gilbert AZ)
Posts: 79
Local Time: 03:24 PM
I don't want to be redundant, so AchtungBono, if you're (or anyone else is) interested, check my post in the TURK/Lebanon thread.
I'd like to personally wipe the grin off of Nasarallah's face and I'm pretty much a Quaker-style pacifist. AchB., are you worried that Palestine's Hamas will attack from the other side like Al-Jazirah is predicting/hoping?
A-Wanderer, Have I missed something here, I thought they blew themselves up for jihad and the hopes of becoming a martyr for allah. Are you saying that the only thing stopping them from doing so earlier was the heavy hand of Saddam? Seems that way to moi.
deep, informative interview. Nothing the neocons and the bush/ cheney regime do or are secretly doing would surprise me.
JCR is offline  
Old 08-15-2006, 09:53 PM   #192
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 04:24 PM
Originally posted by nbcrusader

(both non-poor terrorists and peaceful poor)
There are also non-poor drug addicts and clean poor people.
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 07:25 PM   #193
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,435
Local Time: 03:24 PM
Hey AchtungBono! Glad to see you are safe....did you spend a lot of time the past month in a bomb shelter? Sorry but I'm curious.

A curious tidbit I read about Kofi Annan in a book about the world's response to the Rwandan Genocide the other day. He was the genius who was in charge of overseeing UN deployments at the time. Or something like that. (trying to remember the exact title of the office.) It was largely he who determined that UN troops could not somehow be found in time to prevent even a fraction of the slaughter. Of course the lack of response from the West--most of the blood is, in the end, on our hands. But he still was directly involved in the lack of UN military response. So have fun dealing with an Annan-led deployment in your neighborhood. (Sorry, but I had to say it, AB. ) And what was remarkable in reading this book was how much I found out what I did not know before: the amazing resemblance to the waffling and bitching and moaning and "um..oh....well.....maybe we should attempt to do SOMETHING" and arguing over pointless logistics--the complete lack of a sense of URGENCY that masks the world's very real RELUCTANCE TO SAFEGUARD JEWISH LIVES--that characterized the West's response to the Rwandan tragedy, and responding to Israel's requests for perfectly legitimate ptotection now. In fact, the language uttered by Western leaders then, about protecting the lives of Africans, is remarkably similar to the language being used now to make excuses not to treat this situation (the lives of Israelis, but esp Israeli Jews)with the comparable urgency it requires. It is absolutely chilling. If this were not the truth, you would be seeing that there would be just as concern about Hizbollah's long-term danger to Israel as a nation as the immediate danger and suffering of Lebanese civilans now. Anyone would have to see that the traditional "David vs Goliath" portrayal by most people of the factions--with Israeli as the military "Goliath" of the area--has to be at least temporarily altered, and as such, morew concern for the Jews should be expressed in the media and among world leaders. But no. I listen to the BBC (thank God in my little corner of the USA--(Albany, NewYork) we get it)and you KNOW whose side they're on....

AB, I personally hope your "Defense" minister is not around for the next attack, or there won't be an Israel to defend. Has Ha'aretz told the Tale of the Missing Bunker-Busting Bombs yet? A great big deal is being made of it over here. It seems that Israel has its very own Donald Rumsfeld. Personally, I couldn't think of a bigger military disaster to hit a country than Donny Boy, the genius who said that a measly 130,000 troops could wrap up Iraq like a piece of meat, with our fancy shmancy technology doing the rest--he was the leading advocate for as little ground troops as possible in a conflict. Well, it seems that Bush offered you folks the technology that could have perhaps fatally crippled Hizbollah--powerful new "bunker-busting" bombs (different form the ones that were used in Beirut this month--these were brand-new state of the art things, much more powerful ) in 2002. Your Danny Boy said No thanks, we don't need them, Israel has top-notch technology, thank you very much. Well, three weeks into this war, Danny Boy was shocked into doing an about-face and asked Bush to speed up dilivery of some of these babies, pronto. The IDF knew exactly where the rocket launchers were, there were only 38 of them, and if they'd had the new bombs, they could have knocked out Hizbollah's capacity to fire rockets the first day of the war. Halutz found out too late that his stuff just didn't work . This was a New York Times cover story., and also a Newsweek article.

Curiously, the flurry of diplomatic activity at the UN began right about this time. Coincidence? Are you angry yet? When is this bastard of an excuse of a "Defense" Minister going before the Knesset? I think it's tomorrow? I hope they build a glass cage for him for him to stand in...I'm that angry.

Please let us know what is happening in Israel, politically, but give us the mood on the streets, too, AB. We know perfectly well what is happening in Lebanon.....too well. The coverage is deserved, but not enough foreign media people seem to be on the ground, aqssessing the effects and aftermath in Israel....

PS. Let me personally say, AB, I hope Israel suffers no real long-term effects from this, other than her (temporary) loss of miltary prestiege...I hope past history does not repeat itself and have people immigrate and leave the country, etc. I really have lost sleep over this. Also, I must say that I am ethnically Armenian, have interviewed and gotten on tape my grandfather's childhood experiences in 1915-18 during the Genocide, before he died. I lost 70% of my family in 1915 and can relate in a way to Israel's experience. At least, while I condemn some of her actions, I understand the uphill struggle you face in staying a nation. While praying for all the innocent, I still understand.....

~T~ Hope to hear from you soon.
Teta040 is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 07:31 PM   #194
Blue Crack Addict
anitram's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,441
Local Time: 11:24 AM
Israel is just not able to win a war of public relations. It's lost every single war/skirmish this way in the court of world opinion.

Hezbollah are a bunch of violent, uneducated thugs and they have better PR than Israel, the US and the entire western world. There they are, clearing rubble today with Iranian money, promising to pay people's rent for a year, buying furniture and moving bulldozers to help the poor clear their villages. The people of New Orleans are probably wondering WTF.

And now their king thug Nasrallah is some kind of hero in the Arab world.

It would be comic if it wasn't so tragic.
anitram is offline  
Old 08-16-2006, 07:56 PM   #195
Rock n' Roll Doggie
trevster2k's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,330
Local Time: 11:54 AM
^remarkable ain't it!!

trevster2k is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:24 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright ©