World Politics

Page 699 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jul 24, 2011
2,053
12
11,510
This report is about the cause and has some recommendations. A later report will focus on who did it, where did it exactly come from.

Blames the Ukrainian government for not closing the airspace. Some recommendations about how to deal with this in the future.

According to the report it's a BUK missile of the type 9N314M. However, the Russians claim it's an older type of the BUK, 9M38. (http://cdn.onderzoeksraad.nl/documents/appendix-v-consultation-part-a.pdf)

The report, and also video's, pictures and animations can be found here: http://mh17.onderzoeksraad.nl/
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
4
0
Re: Re:

Bustedknuckle said:
wendybnt said:
I'm not leaving the thread, nor do I think anybody wants me to. that isn't what I was saying. I'm saying that if people respond to an analysis of US military interventions by saying (which is effectively what BN did) that "civilians" views are worthless, and they can only hold them because people like him are prepared to murder powerless brown people for their oil then they can get stuffed. I won't be bothering with them. End of 'animus and everyone is happy.

BTW-China making serious inroads in the NZ sphere of influence, Russia doing the same from Eastern Europe moving westward...you ready for that? A group hug while singing KumBayYa won't cut it. 'Maybe' the US won't be there either.

Russia moving westward... Are you sure about that? Exactly where do you think they're moving? All the news coming out of Russia is that they want to integrate economically with the rest of Europe. It's one of the best options to counter NATO's expansion eastward. You know, the military that *is* on the move and is currently parked in the buffer states that historically have protected Russia from invading forces.

Berlin to Moscow: 1500 km <--- Poland gets used as a buffer
Vilnius to Moscow: 800 km across flat land with no mountains, rivers, lakes, etc. <--- Russia is defenseless

John Swanson
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Re:

python said:
as i type, the dutch are holding a press conference on the final investigation report re mh-17...

i tried to find a full pdf to read for myself, bzzzz, not yet available, perhaps later. .. i found a summary that the report is NOT putting a definitive blame on anyone, yet concluding it was a buk missile likely launched from the rebel-held area. also, i came across an almost concurrent press-conference by the missile manufacturer with a summary in english agreeing it was a buk, but concluding it was launched from a govt held territory. one can find a whole bunch of neat pictures and diagrams attached to the manufacturer's release, unfortunately, i found none in english :mad: the manufacturer allegedly conducted several real explosion tests and used a supercomputer modelling to project an initial launch point. all materials they claim were rejected by the dutch investigators when offered, but, they say, will be passed over to the international court they are seeking.

i also just found out from a dutch blog that ukraine had a veto power on what goes in the report.

....that is one of the more head-scratching aspects of the report procedure considering The Ukraine is potentially one of the perps...which would lead one to believe that The Ukraine may well have been pre-judged to be innocent which is really not a good thing...

Cheers
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Re:

l.Harm said:
Source? Cause they didn't include everything proposed by the Ukrainians.

"There are only two suspects in the shoot-down of the MH-17 Malaysian airliner over Ukraine on July 17th: the separatist rebels, whom the Ukrainian Government charge had shot it down mistaking it for one of the Ukrainian Air Force bombers that routinely drop bombs onto the separatists and their families and indiscriminately onto everyone else in that region; or otherwise the Ukrainian Air Force itself, as a means for President Obama to be able to win increased international sanctions against Russia for Russia’s support of those blamed rebels.

That’s it, and that’s all.

One of these two suspects, the Ukrainian Government, was granted by the other three member-states of the official MH-17 ‘investigating’ commission, a veto-power over anything that’s written into that ‘investigating’ report.

In other words, basically what exists is this:

The Ukrainian Government gets to write the official ‘investigation’ report on that ‘accident.’ The other three Obama-allied nations will place their signatures onto it — or else there simply won’t be any such ‘final report.’

This agreement on Ukraine’s veto-power was signed on August 8th, by Ukraine, Australia, Belgium, and Netherlands, the four member-nations of the official ‘investigation."


http://www.globalresearch.ca/why-does-the-west-allow-the-ukrainian-government-to-write-the-official-report-on-the-shoot-down-of-mh-17/5415312

....and...

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/08/mh-17-investigation-secret-august-8th-agreement-seeps.html

Cheers
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Re: Re:

blutto said:
python said:
as i type, the dutch are holding a press conference on the final investigation report re mh-17...

i tried to find a full pdf to read for myself, bzzzz, not yet available, perhaps later. .. i found a summary that the report is NOT putting a definitive blame on anyone, yet concluding it was a buk missile likely launched from the rebel-held area. also, i came across an almost concurrent press-conference by the missile manufacturer with a summary in english agreeing it was a buk, but concluding it was launched from a govt held territory. one can find a whole bunch of neat pictures and diagrams attached to the manufacturer's release, unfortunately, i found none in english :mad: the manufacturer allegedly conducted several real explosion tests and used a supercomputer modelling to project an initial launch point. all materials they claim were rejected by the dutch investigators when offered, but, they say, will be passed over to the international court they are seeking.

i also just found out from a dutch blog that ukraine had a veto power on what goes in the report.

....that is one of the more head-scratching aspects of the report procedure considering The Ukraine is potentially one of the perps...which would lead one to believe that The Ukraine may well have been pre-judged to be innocent which is really not a good thing...

Cheers
sorry, it took me so long to reference the dutch blog ( i was in a hurry early morning)....
the link also provides an image of the official ozzy letter certifying the fact of ukraine' veto.

“The letter to which you refer is authentic. Australia, The Netherlands, Belgium and Ukraine have signed a non-disclosure agreement with respect to the criminal investigation into the downing of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17.

This agreement requires consensus among the parties before information regarding the investigation can be released. The non-disclosure of information is important to avoid jeopardising the investigation or prejudicing a future judicial proceeding arising from the investigation.

The Joint Investigation Team non-disclosure agreement was communicated in confidence by foreign governments, and, as a result, cannot be made public.”
https://sandervenema.ch/2014/12/ukrainian-veto-mh17-report-will-not-reveal-truth/
 
Aug 4, 2011
3,647
0
0
1EFpqs-19Zu-275x150.jpg
 
Jul 23, 2009
5,412
19
17,510
Re: Re:

ScienceIsCool said:
Bustedknuckle said:
wendybnt said:
I'm not leaving the thread, nor do I think anybody wants me to. that isn't what I was saying. I'm saying that if people respond to an analysis of US military interventions by saying (which is effectively what BN did) that "civilians" views are worthless, and they can only hold them because people like him are prepared to murder powerless brown people for their oil then they can get stuffed. I won't be bothering with them. End of 'animus and everyone is happy.

BTW-China making serious inroads in the NZ sphere of influence, Russia doing the same from Eastern Europe moving westward...you ready for that? A group hug while singing KumBayYa won't cut it. 'Maybe' the US won't be there either.

Russia moving westward... Are you sure about that? Exactly where do you think they're moving? All the news coming out of Russia is that they want to integrate economically with the rest of Europe. It's one of the best options to counter NATO's expansion eastward. You know, the military that *is* on the move and is currently parked in the buffer states that historically have protected Russia from invading forces.

Berlin to Moscow: 1500 km <--- Poland gets used as a buffer
Vilnius to Moscow: 800 km across flat land with no mountains, rivers, lakes, etc. <--- Russia is defenseless

John Swanson

Ukraine, Moldova, other relatively 'weak' states who will be 'influenced' by Russian 'economics', backed by the military. Not saying Russia is going to march across the central planes of Europe ala Soviet Unon days but expect Russia to exert 'infuence' in Europe. Hope NATO is up to the task. Same for NZ and China.
 
Jul 23, 2009
5,412
19
17,510
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
4
0
Re: Re:

Bustedknuckle said:
ScienceIsCool said:
Bustedknuckle said:
wendybnt said:
I'm not leaving the thread, nor do I think anybody wants me to. that isn't what I was saying. I'm saying that if people respond to an analysis of US military interventions by saying (which is effectively what BN did) that "civilians" views are worthless, and they can only hold them because people like him are prepared to murder powerless brown people for their oil then they can get stuffed. I won't be bothering with them. End of 'animus and everyone is happy.

BTW-China making serious inroads in the NZ sphere of influence, Russia doing the same from Eastern Europe moving westward...you ready for that? A group hug while singing KumBayYa won't cut it. 'Maybe' the US won't be there either.

Russia moving westward... Are you sure about that? Exactly where do you think they're moving? All the news coming out of Russia is that they want to integrate economically with the rest of Europe. It's one of the best options to counter NATO's expansion eastward. You know, the military that *is* on the move and is currently parked in the buffer states that historically have protected Russia from invading forces.

Berlin to Moscow: 1500 km <--- Poland gets used as a buffer
Vilnius to Moscow: 800 km across flat land with no mountains, rivers, lakes, etc. <--- Russia is defenseless

John Swanson

Ukraine, Moldova, other relatively 'weak' states who will be 'influenced' by Russian 'economics', backed by the military. Not saying Russia is going to march across the central planes of Europe ala Soviet Unon days but expect Russia to exert 'infuence' in Europe. Hope NATO is up to the task. Same for NZ and China.

Exerting influence with neighbours on your *borders* is somehow menacing? Lookout! Russia has a trade delegation in the Transdniester!! Fire up those tanks, boys. <NATO puts on its serious face> Seriously, what exactly is the threat? What exactly is NATO going to do except build more bases in Latvia?

Maybe, just perhaps, Americans such as yourself could stop and look around for a few moments. Take time to consider that *all* nations have interests that they need to protect and that they should be respected.

Having the CIA crap all over the Ukraine is not exactly a respectful consideration of Russia's vital national interests.

John Swanson
 
Jul 17, 2015
774
0
0
As a general rule (and not just the Americans or the Brits) people aren't well informed enough to even realise that the spin they are given is spin.

The Ukraine issue is reminiscent of the Cuba Crisis. Remember that one? The one where the US parked nuclear missiles right on the border of the USSR, in Turkey, and then were prepared to take the world to the brink of nuclear when the Russians reciprocated?

(By the way, contrary to the story spun in the West, the Russians won that one. The missiles were quietly pulled out of Turkey ;) )

I find the rhetoric in the UK (and the US) about Iran to be hilarious. if people were a bit better educated they would understand that Iran's hostility to the US and UK is entirely understandable. The US and UK were behind a coup to overthrow Iran's democratically elected prime minister and install their dictator, the Shah. When he was ousted by the Iranian people Iran was declared a pariah state by the US. And they wonder why Iran doesn't trust the US and wants to buffer itself in the region?

Likewise, the rhetoric on Russia, a country taken to the brink of extinction in living memory. And you are surprised they want to buffer themselves against hostile encroachment from the West?
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Re:

wendybnt said:
As a general rule (and not just the Americans or the Brits) people aren't well informed enough to even realise that the spin they are given is spin.

The Ukraine issue is reminiscent of the Cuba Crisis. Remember that one? The one where the US parked nuclear missiles right on the border of the USSR, in Turkey, and then were prepared to take the world to the brink of nuclear when the Russians reciprocated?

(By the way, contrary to the story spun in the West, the Russians won that one. The missiles were quietly pulled out of Turkey ;) )

I find the rhetoric in the UK (and the US) about Iran to be hilarious. if people were a bit better educated they would understand that Iran's hostility to the US and UK is entirely understandable. The US and UK were behind a coup to overthrow Iran's democratically elected prime minister and install their dictator, the Shah. When he was ousted by the Iranian people Iran was declared a pariah state by the US. And they wonder why Iran doesn't trust the US and wants to buffer itself in the region?

Likewise, the rhetoric on Russia, a country taken to the brink of extinction in living memory. And you are surprised they want to buffer themselves against hostile encroachment from the West?
All those target specific missiles that were staged in Turkey - those were seriously hi-speed gear.

True about us propping up the Shah. Just weird how you glossed over the Hostage's.
 
Jul 17, 2015
774
0
0
Which hostages? The ones tortured in Abu Graib or the ones rotting in Guantanamo without trial or justice for 12 years?
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Re:

wendybnt said:
Which hostages? The ones tortured in Abu Graib or the ones rotting in Guantanamo without trial or justice for 12 years?
You have some inside information about the citizens that were "in Abu Graib" and "rotting in Guantanamo" were Iranian? What a scoop.
 
Jul 17, 2015
774
0
0
Re: Re:

Glenn_Wilson said:
wendybnt said:
Which hostages? The ones tortured in Abu Graib or the ones rotting in Guantanamo without trial or justice for 12 years?
You have some inside information about the citizens that were "in Abu Graib" and "rotting in Guantanamo" were Iranian? What a scoop.

You know why I mentioned that. Just pointing out that your country takes hostages too.

But you are right, let's talk about the hostages. But of course if we talk about the hostages we'll have to talk about Oliver North and the Contra affair. You know...that US plot to try and overthrow the Sandinistas who in turn had rid their country of the Somoza dictatorship? Sure you want to go down that path? Hmmm?

:)
 
Apr 15, 2014
4,254
2,341
18,680
An interesting read about Harper, his tricks/fraud, and Canadian politics:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/15/stephen-harper-master-manipulator

Amazing that this guy isn't behind bars and has still a chance to keep on governing.

Extract:
"The following year, Harper clashed again with the rights of parliament. In July 2010, he announced that his government would buy 65 F-35 fighter jets, costing a total of $15bn – the most expensive military purchase in Canadian history. The new Liberal leader, Michael Ignatieff, reckoned the real price would be even higher and accused Harper of deliberately understating it. Harper refused to hand over the paperwork that would disclose the truth about the F-35s and about the cost of a clutch of other policies. In March 2011, the speaker of the House of Commons ruled that this was a contempt of parliament, and the House then passed a vote of no confidence in Harper’s government. There was an election (involving the robocalls), which Harper won. Ignatieff quit. And 11 months later, it emerged that the true cost of the F-35s was nearly twice what Harper had claimed. In 2007, his second year in office, the National Post disclosed that Team Harper had drawn up a guidebook for the Conservative chairs of parliamentary committees, advising them how to use delays, obstruction and confusion to block difficult inquiries. In opposition, Harper said he would reform the Senate, so that its members would be elected. In office, he changed his mind, kept the power to select them himself and appointed 59 new senators so that he had a built-in majority in the upper house. The House of Commons found itself being swamped with omnibus bills, which included dozens of contentious proposals that could not be properly debated in the time available. At the daily Question Period, when ministers traditionally provide information, Harper’s parliamentary secretary, Paul Calandra, gave answers so obstructive that, after a volley of complaint, he ended up apologising to the house, in tears.

Harper clamped down hard on senior officials whose job was to monitor the behaviour of the state. A report by the auditor general found that defence officials had misled ministers and parliament, and whitewashed cost overruns and delays in a determined effort to ensure Canada purchased the F-35 jet. Kevin Page, parliamentary budget officer, reported experiencing “significant amounts of intimidation” and that his office budget was cut by 30%. Linda Keen, head of Canada’s Nuclear Safety Commission, challenged Harper over the safety of the Chalk River nuclear site: she was denounced and sacked. Peter Tinsley, chair of the Military Police Complaints Commission, attempted to investigate the torture of Taliban prisoners who had been detained by Canadian forces: he lost his job. Beverley McLachlin, chief justice of the supreme court, blocked Harper’s choice for a new high court judge: she was denounced in terms which caused a wave of complaint that Harper was interfering in the independence of the judiciary."
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
i like to read about military technology and gear...syria thus is an engaging source of news.

just saw this nyt piece about tentative conclusions of some western military professionals re vlad weapons, soldiers and their performance in syria. clearly, a lot more has been learned by the west's spooks, but whatever could be relieved to public, impressed them. considering that a lot of russia's actions were for-show, demonstrative it is likely they will deliver more tricks. i wont mind :)

Russian Military Uses Syria as Proving Ground, and West Takes Notice

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/15/world/middleeast/russian-military-uses-syria-as-proving-ground-and-west-takes-notice.html?_r=0
a ship-based cruise missile fired more than 900 miles from the Caspian Sea, which, according to some analysts, surpasses the American equivalent in technological capability.
“What continues to impress me is their ability to move a lot of stuff real far, real fast,” Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, the commander of United States Army forces in Europe, said in an interview.
“Conducting night strikes, with damage assessments by drones, is a tangible leap for Russia into a mix of 1990s and even current Western combat ability,”
Russia’s aviation is “often painted in the West as some sort of Potemkin village, which is not the case.

He and others said that the biggest surprise so far has been the missile technology on display.....
“This is an amazingly capable new weapon,” he added.
 
Jul 23, 2009
5,412
19
17,510
Re:

wendybnt said:
As a general rule (and not just the Americans or the Brits) people aren't well informed enough to even realise that the spin they are given is spin.

The Ukraine issue is reminiscent of the Cuba Crisis. Remember that one? The one where the US parked nuclear missiles right on the border of the USSR, in Turkey, and then were prepared to take the world to the brink of nuclear when the Russians reciprocated?

(By the way, contrary to the story spun in the West, the Russians won that one. The missiles were quietly pulled out of Turkey ;) )

I find the rhetoric in the UK (and the US) about Iran to be hilarious. if people were a bit better educated they would understand that Iran's hostility to the US and UK is entirely understandable. The US and UK were behind a coup to overthrow Iran's democratically elected prime minister and install their dictator, the Shah. When he was ousted by the Iranian people Iran was declared a pariah state by the US. And they wonder why Iran doesn't trust the US and wants to buffer itself in the region?

Likewise, the rhetoric on Russia, a country taken to the brink of extinction in living memory. And you are surprised they want to buffer themselves against hostile encroachment from the West?

Are you sure you aren't in Finland?? Yup, the Shah was not a great guy, but that happened how many decades ago? How many on the steps of the embassy are still around and if they are, 36 years later...

Yup, we won that war...should have marched to Moscow...
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Re:

Jagartrott said:
An interesting read about Harper, his tricks/fraud, and Canadian politics:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/15/stephen-harper-master-manipulator

Amazing that this guy isn't behind bars and has still a chance to keep on governing.

Extract:
"The following year, Harper clashed again with the rights of parliament. In July 2010, he announced that his government would buy 65 F-35 fighter jets, costing a total of $15bn – the most expensive military purchase in Canadian history. The new Liberal leader, Michael Ignatieff, reckoned the real price would be even higher and accused Harper of deliberately understating it. Harper refused to hand over the paperwork that would disclose the truth about the F-35s and about the cost of a clutch of other policies. In March 2011, the speaker of the House of Commons ruled that this was a contempt of parliament, and the House then passed a vote of no confidence in Harper’s government. There was an election (involving the robocalls), which Harper won. Ignatieff quit. And 11 months later, it emerged that the true cost of the F-35s was nearly twice what Harper had claimed. In 2007, his second year in office, the National Post disclosed that Team Harper had drawn up a guidebook for the Conservative chairs of parliamentary committees, advising them how to use delays, obstruction and confusion to block difficult inquiries. In opposition, Harper said he would reform the Senate, so that its members would be elected. In office, he changed his mind, kept the power to select them himself and appointed 59 new senators so that he had a built-in majority in the upper house. The House of Commons found itself being swamped with omnibus bills, which included dozens of contentious proposals that could not be properly debated in the time available. At the daily Question Period, when ministers traditionally provide information, Harper’s parliamentary secretary, Paul Calandra, gave answers so obstructive that, after a volley of complaint, he ended up apologising to the house, in tears.

Harper clamped down hard on senior officials whose job was to monitor the behaviour of the state. A report by the auditor general found that defence officials had misled ministers and parliament, and whitewashed cost overruns and delays in a determined effort to ensure Canada purchased the F-35 jet. Kevin Page, parliamentary budget officer, reported experiencing “significant amounts of intimidation” and that his office budget was cut by 30%. Linda Keen, head of Canada’s Nuclear Safety Commission, challenged Harper over the safety of the Chalk River nuclear site: she was denounced and sacked. Peter Tinsley, chair of the Military Police Complaints Commission, attempted to investigate the torture of Taliban prisoners who had been detained by Canadian forces: he lost his job. Beverley McLachlin, chief justice of the supreme court, blocked Harper’s choice for a new high court judge: she was denounced in terms which caused a wave of complaint that Harper was interfering in the independence of the judiciary."

....that is what happens when you bring in Wrong Wing political consultants from south of the border to help you define your governmental operating procedures....

....a version of this also happened in Ontario when Mike Harris was premier....

Cheers
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Re: Re:

wendybnt said:
Glenn_Wilson said:
wendybnt said:
Which hostages? The ones tortured in Abu Graib or the ones rotting in Guantanamo without trial or justice for 12 years?
You have some inside information about the citizens that were "in Abu Graib" and "rotting in Guantanamo" were Iranian? What a scoop.

You know why I mentioned that. Just pointing out that your country takes hostages too.

But you are right, let's talk about the hostages. But of course if we talk about the hostages we'll have to talk about Oliver North and the Contra affair. You know...that US plot to try and overthrow the Sandinistas who in turn had rid their country of the Somoza dictatorship? Sure you want to go down that path? Hmmm?

:)
Sure we can go down that path but maybe that belongs in US politics thread - considering that Oliver North Chain of Command was up to the Commander in Chief.

That is some High Speed gear no doubt. Not sure why but it is not a secret you have some serious hate for the USA. No worries here though.
 
Jul 23, 2009
5,412
19
17,510
Re:

wendybnt said:
Which hostages? The ones tortured in Abu Graib or the ones rotting in Guantanamo without trial or justice for 12 years?

Or the ones in Russian gulags or Chinese labor camps?

I'm glad you have such admiration for Russia and China, but they have a few 'current' skeletons right now. Syria and N Korea, just like the US. Plenty of mistakes to go around.
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Re: Re:

Bustedknuckle said:
wendybnt said:
As a general rule (and not just the Americans or the Brits) people aren't well informed enough to even realise that the spin they are given is spin.

The Ukraine issue is reminiscent of the Cuba Crisis. Remember that one? The one where the US parked nuclear missiles right on the border of the USSR, in Turkey, and then were prepared to take the world to the brink of nuclear when the Russians reciprocated?

(By the way, contrary to the story spun in the West, the Russians won that one. The missiles were quietly pulled out of Turkey ;) )

I find the rhetoric in the UK (and the US) about Iran to be hilarious. if people were a bit better educated they would understand that Iran's hostility to the US and UK is entirely understandable. The US and UK were behind a coup to overthrow Iran's democratically elected prime minister and install their dictator, the Shah. When he was ousted by the Iranian people Iran was declared a pariah state by the US. And they wonder why Iran doesn't trust the US and wants to buffer itself in the region?

Likewise, the rhetoric on Russia, a country taken to the brink of extinction in living memory. And you are surprised they want to buffer themselves against hostile encroachment from the West?

Are you sure you aren't in Finland?? Yup, the Shah was not a great guy, but that happened how many decades ago? How many on the steps of the embassy are still around and if they are, 36 years later...

Yup, we won that war...should have marched to Moscow...

....which particular war was that....?....

Cheers
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Re: Re:

blutto said:
Bustedknuckle said:
wendybnt said:
As a general rule (and not just the Americans or the Brits) people aren't well informed enough to even realise that the spin they are given is spin.

The Ukraine issue is reminiscent of the Cuba Crisis. Remember that one? The one where the US parked nuclear missiles right on the border of the USSR, in Turkey, and then were prepared to take the world to the brink of nuclear when the Russians reciprocated?

(By the way, contrary to the story spun in the West, the Russians won that one. The missiles were quietly pulled out of Turkey ;) )

I find the rhetoric in the UK (and the US) about Iran to be hilarious. if people were a bit better educated they would understand that Iran's hostility to the US and UK is entirely understandable. The US and UK were behind a coup to overthrow Iran's democratically elected prime minister and install their dictator, the Shah. When he was ousted by the Iranian people Iran was declared a pariah state by the US. And they wonder why Iran doesn't trust the US and wants to buffer itself in the region?

Likewise, the rhetoric on Russia, a country taken to the brink of extinction in living memory. And you are surprised they want to buffer themselves against hostile encroachment from the West?

Are you sure you aren't in Finland?? Yup, the Shah was not a great guy, but that happened how many decades ago? How many on the steps of the embassy are still around and if they are, 36 years later...

Yup, we won that war...should have marched to Moscow...

....which particular war was that....?....

Cheers
Here in FREEDOM LAND aka MERIKAH we call dat derr war da COLD one. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.