Pandemonium in Venezuela.

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Tom Kirkman said:

 

Jan, please note Glenn's earlier comment:

 

It is a start, but will not do enough.  Need multiple hospital ships in multiple ports.  And vast amounts of food aid, and none is on the horizon.  Maduro has to be arrested and taken to Guantanamo prison. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Jan van Eck said:

It is a start, but will not do enough.  Need multiple hospital ships in multiple ports.  And vast amounts of food aid, and none is on the horizon.  Maduro has to be arrested and taken to Guantanamo prison. 

We agree on something  : )

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

They can [fall lower], and they will.  You are headed for mass starvation. 

The "Maduro diet" brings mass death soon enough.  A population so weak that it cannot eat, also cannot make revolution. 

Unless the OAS and the USA step in, with military force and vast amounts of free food, Venezuela will become a catastrophe of mass death.  That is what Mr. Maduro brings to his people, in his psychotic trance. 

If you are talking military action that worked well in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya didn't it.

Probably the best outcome would be a military overthrow by a General interested in Venezuela rather than his own ego and self interest with a commitment to return the country to fair democratic processes.

Reasonable examples of this type of action in the past would include.

Sisi's overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood (Egypt)

Musharrafs coup in Pakistan

In both cases the coup's stopped the countries turning into even bigger s**tholes than they already are.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Jon’s Van Eck’s logic concerning U.S. Military intervention in Venezuela, which he fleshed out in a similar thread a couple of weeks back, was solid.  Although I’m loathe to commit us to a conflict that will definitely cost American lives, the situation in Venezuela is dire and will become worse. From a humanitarian standpoint, we should go.

Strategically speaking, I have often wondered why we will travel to the other side of the world to intervene in the sandbox but rarely committ so completely in our own hemisphere.   The fact that Cuban thugs are on the ground in Venezuela supporting the thug Maduro and China and Russia are trying to influence and horn in on the action there makes the idea of U.S. intervention there elementary.

Why would we not want to help ease human suffering, hamdicap socialism/communism and develope a strong relationship with the new government of a country sitting on one of the largest known oil reserves in the world?

We have sacrificed our kids and indebted our grandkids on much larger gambles that have paid significantly less elsewhere, why not in our own neighborhood.  Or do we need to see Chinese and Russian military bases built in Venezuela, other south and Central American countries before we decide to act.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks so much for your interest in Venezuela guys, much appreciated. i would not want an intervention from the U.S. but definitely another strategy, tougher and one that could inflict a check mate a definitive one to these corrupted thugs. But also we need another type of government. One completely different from the past definitely one not linked neither with the opposition nor with the government. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Jose, the answer to your question is no, Oilprice is not erasing your topics.  The only thing we erase is spam, scams, advertising, and deliberately abusive comments about other members. Forum guidelines are here, and you certainly have not broken any forum decorum.

Perhaps some bug, I'll alert the site admin about this.

@CMOP to the white courtesy phone please.

thank you Tom, already been clarified on this misunderstanding, thanks much appreciated. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets pray this situation doesn't get any worse really.. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, jose chalhoub said:

Lets pray this situation doesn't get any worse really.. 

Jose, I really hate to tell you, it is likely to get much worse.  Not a darn thing I can do about it

< *sigh* >

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, jose chalhoub said:

thanks so much for your interest in Venezuela guys, much appreciated. i would not want an intervention from the U.S. but definitely another strategy, tougher and one that could inflict a check mate a definitive one to these corrupted thugs. But also we need another type of government. One completely different from the past definitely one not linked neither with the opposition nor with the government. 

Jose, these questions are for my edification.  Short of an intervention, what strategy could deliver the checkmate you seek?

Freedom is not free.  Do the Venezuelan people have the stomachs, the drive, the grit to take up arms against Maduro and his thugs?  

Is there a contingent and plausible leader among Venezuelans that understands freedom and the costs associated with winning and maintaining it, that could come forward?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reports of fleeing Venezuelans into Brazil and Colombia are a bit distressing. Brazilian protestors tried to stop them at the border beating and robbing them and burning what few possessions many had (this was just last week). The whole region is feeling the stress and something has to give. Venezuela isn't an isolated island like Cuba and the effects of failed Chavez-Madueo policies are being felt by its neighbors. Change will have to come either from inside or by external forces.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Maduro has to be arrested and taken to Guantanamo prison.

I just want to clarify this wonderful point made by Jan.  To clarify: when a socialist seeks to put socialist policies into action, not only are they allowed to run for office, but many of them actually get elected!  

But when socialists actually succeed in putting those policies into action, then they deserve the worst prisons the US can offer.  

...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Epic said:

I just want to clarify this wonderful point made by Jan.  To clarify: when a socialist seeks to put socialist policies into action, not only are they allowed to run for office, but many of them actually get elected!  

But when socialists actually succeed in putting those policies into action, then they deserve the worst prisons the US can offer.  

...

I wouldn't go that far.  -  Some classically Socialist policies are fine by me and if made workable remain fine by me.  One example is Worker's Compensation (although I disagree with the private insurance industry getting involved and jacking up the costs).  Another is "universal" or single-payer health care.  That one is likely the most contentious, yet single-payer lowers the temptation for Big Pharma to focus on third-party-payer medical devices.

One good example is the insulin pump.  Diabetes has become the scourge of the West, mostly due to genetic breeding and diet.  I forget the numbers but it is headed for some 1/3 of the population, as non-carriers of the diabetes gene breed with carriers, thus spreading the dominant gene through the population.  Now Big Pharma has two possible routes for treating the disease: the single-use insulin application, with a small injection, or a large reservoir pump with a permanent connection to the body, typically installed in the belly area.  The Pump system uses a battery for power, and administers doses according to demand.  The pump is vastly expensive, and provides vast profits to the manufacturer (Big Pharma), while the single-use device earns but a fraction of a penny per dose.  So Pharma pushes the Pump, as the costs are not directly borne by the user, but by the third-party payer.  

Would that change under single-payer?  But of course.  Single-payer would blacklist the Pump, as an obscene waste of resources. In that sense, single-payer would provide better health care at much lower costs.  A Socialist program that would actually work  (assuming you can fire the health insurance executives and keep them out of the single-payer system, which they would instantly contaminate).  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

8 hours ago, Black Blade said:

The reports of fleeing Venezuelans into Brazil and Colombia are a bit distressing. Brazilian protestors tried to stop them at the border beating and robbing them and burning what few possessions many had (this was just last week). The whole region is feeling the stress and something has to give. Venezuela isn't an isolated island like Cuba and the effects of failed Chavez-Madueo policies are being felt by its neighbors. Change will have to come either from inside or by external forces.

Jon, Your comment is trenchantly accurate.  Venezuela is not going to change by internal dynamic: a starving population cannot do Revolution, plus the Army has a total monopoly on heavy weapons.  While there are lots of guns in Caracas, those are in the hands of criminals, who are parasites on the population.  Parasites do not make Revolutions, they have no pure ideology.  The conflicts on the Border, including the disgraceful burning of the few tatters of possessions of the refugees and the beatings and forcing them back over the Border, to sit and starve, is just unreal.  It is quite apparent that massive amounts of food has to be brought in and distributed by outside troops.

Now the concern posted here by others is that (1) the USA gets sucked into another Iraq or Afghan mission, costing American dead; and (2) any mount of rescue mission will be met by civilian violence.  I don't think so.  What you don't do is barge into Caracas; instead, take over the port cities to the East, which are hardly defended.  You simply roll in with the ferry-boats loaded with supplies, pull into the slip, and I will walk off the plank as first man ashore, unarmed, go up to the nearest Chavista guard, and offer him employment with the USA at $100 a week, in US Dollars, and he joins the Americans.  Now, what is he going to do: shoot me, or take the money?  I am betting he takes the money.  There is no ideological loyalty to Maduro any more, other than the Cuban communists, for the Venezuelans, it is all about the money and what they can garnish for themselves.  Once you co-opt the small "security forces" out there and the marines take over, the food distribution and hospital ships do the rest.  If that Guard shoots me instead, well, at least I die with a clean conscience. I'll take that chance.

Even with Iraq II the invasion cost the US 146 lives, and half of that were driving accidents (i.e. that tank that ran off the bridge into the Tigris River).  And that was in a hot war with soldiers actively shooting back.  I suspect that, carefully planned, Venezuela would be completed without a shot being fired. Once the Army soldiers turn, Maduro is all done.  Incidentally, this take-over by a madman cannot happen in the US simply  because the US population is armed to the teeth.  Example:  the govt in left-wing Connecticut passed a Law criminalizing the possession of unregistered  "assault rifles"  (basically, an AR-15) and demanded the owners register them.  Over 100,000 owners refused to register, making them instant felons and subject to gun confiscation.  Total number of "SWAT raids" attempted by the State Police to enforce:  precisely zero.  Nobody wants to get shot at by an otherwise peaceful gun owner in some futile effort to arrest him for having that AR-15.  Total number of gun owners causing trouble with those rifles since law passage outlawing them:  zero.  (And I am not in favor of gun ownership, just that I know better than to go out inciting peaceable owners who, after all, have them for their protection.) 

Edited by Jan van Eck
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, TXPower said:

Jose, these questions are for my edification.  Short of an intervention, what strategy could deliver the checkmate you seek?

Unfortunately, Tex, there isn't any. 

Freedom is not free.  Do the Venezuelan people have the stomachs, the drive, the grit to take up arms against Maduro and his thugs?  

They probably do, but they have no guns, and the Cubans are quite prepared to shoot at and mow down civilians staging a general strike.  The Army might not participate, but the Cubans have no such qualms, they are Communist thugs of the worst order.  And therein lies the problem, when you have an unarmed civilian population.  If the civilians had the same level of gun ownership as is in the USA  (at least 32% of households own private guns), then Maduro would be gone in an instant. 

Is there a contingent and plausible leader among Venezuelans that understands freedom and the costs associated with winning and maintaining it, that could come forward?

At this point, probably not. The opponents are either dead or buried in a prison, and would be dead within moments of any civilian conflicts with the Army.  The Cubans will simply kill them. That is the reality of the Cuban "intelligence services."  You are dealing with ideological killers. I have stared these guys straight in the eye and can assure you those are men with no souls.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

15 hours ago, TXPower said:

From a humanitarian standpoint, we should go.

From a humanitarian standpoint, we should stand aside.  

After all, this is precisely what the Venezuelans voted for.  If the US intervenes, even with only medical aid and food assistance, it will dampen the effect of socialism in action.  The people of this world need to see those effects with their own eyes.  They need to understand the dangers of socialism so they will understand why it is so vital that they fight against it.  Most people I speak with do not even know there is anything wrong with Venezuela, let alone why it went wrong in the first place.  

Does anyone remember Naomi Klein?  In 2004, she signed a petition headlined, "We would vote for Hugo Chavez." Three years later, she lauded Venezuela as a place where "citizens had renewed their faith in the power of democracy to improve their lives."

Democratic political spokes person David Sirota said the Venezuelan ruler, with his “full-throated advocacy of socialism,” had “racked up an economic record that the American president could only dream of achieving.” 

Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the British Labor Party, in March 2013, said, "Thanks Hugo Chavez for showing that the poor matter and wealth can be shared." 

Diane Abbott, 2012, now Shadow Home Secretary in the UK, said: “I think the importance of Venezuela is it shows another way is possible."

The economist Joseph Stiglitz, a recipient of a Nobel Laureate, said, “Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez appears to have had success in bringing health and education to the people in the poor neighborhoods of Caracas.  It is not only important to have sustainable growth, but to ensure the best distribution of economic growth, for the benefit of all citizens.”  It is also important to note that Stiglitz served as an adviser to Hillary Clinton on economic and trade issues.

After Chavez died in 2013, Sean Penn said, “Poor people around the world lost a champion, but Venezuela and its revolution will endure under the proven leadership of vice president Nicolas Maduro."

Richard Burgon, Memeber of Parliment, in 2013 said, “Victory for the Labour Movement in Venezuela: bus driver, trade unionist and socialist Nicolas Maduro elected as President of Venezuela.”

In 2011, Bernie Sanders (yes, that Bernie, the one who probably would be the current POTUS had Hillary not cheated) said that “the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina.”  

Compare that with the current president of the US: In September, 2017, President Donald Trump said in an address to the U.N. that Venezuela’s problem “is not that socialism has been poorly implemented but that socialism has been faithfully implemented.”

The Chavez/Maduro “Bolivarian revolution” has meant economic death, just like every other Marxist “revolution” from Lenin’s Russia to Kim Il Sung’s North Korea to the Castros’ Cuba to Pol Pot's Cambodia.  By shredding property rights, dictating prices, and trying to control supply and demand, socialist regimes eventually make everything worse and turn people into corpses.   This happens every time.  AND EVERY TIME AFTER IT HAPPENS, THE REST OF THE WORLD FORGETS!  

And it happens again...

So I say, allow socialism to run its course.  Guards should be posted on the borders to turn back those who try to flee while drones with cameras should live-stream the entire show 24/7.  The entire world needs to watch in horror as the Venezuelan people are forced to eat each other to survive.  

Maybe then voters will finally wake up.  

Venezuela should be a warning for the rest of us.  But if we send in humanitarian aid now, that warning won't be heard, and one day not long into the future, the American voter will elect a Hugo Chavez of their own.  When that happens, no one will come to bail out the Americans, and 300 million people will start to fight each other for the right to eat the other for survival.  

When this happens, many countries in this world will look on in horror, and they will say that no one could have possibly seen this coming.

Meanwhile, other nations will celebrate at the fall of the US.  Then, not long after, those who looked on in horror will be invaded and enslaved by those who celebrated.  

So, from a humanitarian standpoint, let the Venezuelans have what they asked for.  After all, they too had plenty of warnings from their predecessors.  

Edited by Epic
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Epic said:

 

After all, this is precisely what the Venezuelans voted for.  If the US intervenes, even with only medical aid and food assistance, it will dampen the effect of socialism in action.  The people of this world need to see those effects with their own eyes.  They need to understand the dangers of socialism so they will understand why it is so vital that they fight against it.  Most people I speak with do not even know there is anything wrong with Venezuela, let alone why it went wrong in the first place.  

 

So I say, allow socialism to run its course.  Guards should be posted on the borders to turn back those who try to flee while drones with cameras should live-stream the entire show 24/7.  The entire world needs to watch in horror as the Venezuelan people are forced to eat each other to survive.  

 

So, from a humanitarian standpoint, let the Venezuelans have what they asked for.  After all, they too had plenty of warnings from their predecessors.  

Chad, I am horrified by what you say.

You are saying that millions should suffer starvation and cannibalism in order for outsiders to be "instructed."  

That is Calvinism at its far worst, an extreme horror put on millions who did not vote, or did not vote for this result.  Did the children vote?  You would allow them to starve and be eaten?  Did the people who were sick in the hospital vote?  Did the political prisoners vote?  Who voted for this?  Did the "regular people" vote for this result?  Everyone submits the last election was rigged, opponents shot, arrested, beaten, their parties destroyed.  The Venezuelans voted for this?  No chance. 

Your approach condemns millions of children to death - just to make a point.  I shudder.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Chad, I am horrified by what you say.

You are saying that millions should suffer starvation and cannibalism in order for outsiders to be "instructed."  

That is Calvinism at its far worst, an extreme horror put on millions who did not vote, or did not vote for this result.  Did the children vote?  You would allow them to starve and be eaten?  Did the people who were sick in the hospital vote?  Did the political prisoners vote?  Who voted for this?  Did the "regular people" vote for this result?  Everyone submits the last election was rigged, opponents shot, arrested, beaten, their parties destroyed.  The Venezuelans voted for this?  No chance. 

Your approach condemns millions of children to death - just to make a point.  I shudder.

Jan, you are right. 

I was trying to weigh the highly probable but only potential deaths of half of the world's population against the actual and immediate deaths of roughly 27 million people.  As an individual, the unnecessary death of even one person should make anyone shudder, but as a collective, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.  It was for the sake of the collective that I said what I said.

And it needed to be said.

However, we are not collectives.  We are individuals.  And as individuals, we must act according to a different set of moral codes.  Those moral codes, in turn, must always be diligently sought after by asking ourselves the most important question that anyone can ever ask him or herself:

"What would Batman do?"

Obviously, he would risk everything to save as many as he can. 

We individuals should do likewise.

...

Lady Liberty says it best:

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

 

I promise you, Jan, that the USA has lost her way.  But she can be restored.  Have faith.  There is yet time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's socialism for you. Stupid Maduro hasn't learnt a bit in economics after all these years, he's ready to go against the reality because he's not brave enough to admit that his childhood ideology is wrong, doesn't work and creates weakness.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you all for the discussion... all i gotta say is that definitely one needs to live an experience like this to grasp the whole thing and my conclusion now after 20 years of this mess is that some foreign intervention could be needed but not militarily, but some other ways, some smarter ways. Venezuela does not count with a caring government nor with an opposition. And this is because the country seems to collapse soon. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, jose chalhoub said:

thanks so much for your interest in Venezuela guys, much appreciated. i would not want an intervention from the U.S. but definitely another strategy, tougher and one that could inflict a check mate a definitive one to these corrupted thugs. But also we need another type of government. One completely different from the past definitely one not linked neither with the opposition nor with the government

Chad, Jan, as I expressed earlier from the Starvation in Venezuela thread, I agree that help is needed, and I think we could help, but we should not.  

Because I bet the majority of The population there feel the same as Jose.  

If you walk in my house, un-invited, I don't care why, I am going to be offended. Wouldn't you be offended?  So please ring the bell, I'll answer the door.

I believe it was Beowulf who mentioned a binding agreement with real checks in place via UN or some other international agency.  (Please set aside any arguments about the corruption in such organizations, for the moment assume we can hold them accountable)  I applaud the thought, because with out the agreement and acceptance of the help up front before we pull up to the docks it will feel like an intervention from an un-welcomed rich neighbor.   ...the problem is who signs on behalf of Venezuela?

4 minutes ago, jose chalhoub said:

thank you all for the discussion... all i gotta say is that definitely one needs to live an experience like this to grasp the whole thing and my conclusion now after 20 years of this mess is that some foreign intervention could be needed but not militarily, but some other ways, some smarter ways. Venezuela does not count with a caring government nor with an opposition. And this is because the country seems to collapse soon.

^ Seriously, please everyone, how can we implement Jan's plan but first "get permission".  That is the way to proceed.  As I was writing my reply Jose has changed his mind, and that's a great sign.  

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Mike Marcellus said:

Chad, Jan, as I expressed earlier from the Starvation in Venezuela thread, I agree that help is needed, and I think we could help, but we should not.  

Because I bet the majority of The population there feel the same as Jose.  

If you walk in my house, un-invited, I don't care why, I am going to be offended. Wouldn't you be offended?  So please ring the bell, I'll answer the door.

I believe it was Beowulf who mentioned a binding agreement with real checks in place via UN or some other international agency.  (Please set aside any arguments about the corruption in such organizations, for the moment assume we can hold them accountable)  I applaud the thought, because with out the agreement and acceptance of the help up front before we pull up to the docks it will feel like an intervention from an un-welcomed rich neighbor.   ...the problem is who signs on behalf of Venezuela?

^ Seriously, please everyone, how can we implement Jan's plan but first "get permission".  That is the way to proceed.  As I was writing my reply Jose has changed his mind, and that's a great sign.  

 

 

i mean i dont want more suffering for my country and any military intervention will cause definitely that, although i think there's no other way to take out these thugs from power. They are pretty sure they will cling to power for long time, that's the worse. They think they are eternal. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nationalize your oil industry and you get the first steps to full government control.  When Chavez put in his "so called" energy people they couldn't tell a pumpback from a Christmas tree.  Their infrastructure is a mess, their production is dropping like a rock and their people are running for help from starving and dying.  Energy is Venezuelas lifesblood and its bleeding out.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jo Mack said:

Nationalize your oil industry and you get the first steps to full government control.  When Chavez put in his "so called" energy people they couldn't tell a pumpback from a Christmas tree.  Their infrastructure is a mess, their production is dropping like a rock and their people are running for help from starving and dying.  Energy is Venezuelas lifesblood and its bleeding out.

thats correct. and now we are running out of oil and gas ... 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Now the concern posted here by others is that (1) the USA gets sucked into another Iraq or Afghan mission, costing American dead; and (2) any mount of rescue mission will be met by civilian violence.  I don't think so.  What you don't do is barge into Caracas; instead, take over the port cities to the East, which are hardly defended.  You simply roll in with the ferry-boats loaded with supplies, pull into the slip, and I will walk off the plank as first man ashore, unarmed, go up to the nearest Chavista guard, and offer him employment with the USA at $100 a week, in US Dollars, and he joins the Americans.  Now, what is he going to do: shoot me, or take the money?  I am betting he takes the money.  There is no ideological loyalty to Maduro any more, other than the Cuban communists, for the Venezuelans, it is all about the money and what they can garnish for themselves.  Once you co-opt the small "security forces" out there and the marines take over, the food distribution and hospital ships do the rest.  If that Guard shoots me instead, well, at least I die with a clean conscience. I'll take that chance.

Some things to consider:  Whether Jan goes in first or not (and I say "Vote for Jan"), the American boats full of troops, doctors, nurses, logisticians, truckers, mechanics, engineers, volunteers and everybody else, WANT to be there for the express purpose of wanting to help.  Not charity, not pity, not to take over and steal what they will, but because the WANT to help, they are wildly capable and they get tremendously fast and excellent results.  Do a little Googling about those hospital ships and how many surgeries, dental procedures, x-rays, bone resettings, and pharmaceutical drug distributions they can carry out per day.  It's absolutely miraculous.  The troops would indeed be needed to: maintain order, to make sure that when any idealogue jumps up with a gun or a molotov cocktail they are dealt with immediately, to direct traffic, to make sure that people are given their fair shares of goods (many of the folks who've had nothing for any length of time might try to get more than their share because they have been lied to so consistently that they will have a very hard time believing there will be more tomorrow), but since they are there on a humanitarian mission in the main, I think Jan is right and there would be few that would oppose them.  It only takes the first hundred or so doctors, mothers and fathers stepping forward to get the food and medicines they need for their patients and families to get the whole city on board.  Then word spreads across the country.  The sooner the better, I say.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mike Marcellus said:

If you walk in my house, un-invited, I don't care why, I am going to be offended. Wouldn't you be offended?  So please ring the bell, I'll answer the door.

Mike, I submit that arriving at the port with supplies and personnel, not only soldiers armed for war, as Jan has suggested, is ringing the bell and is not barging in.  Just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor