The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Orange Mane Discussion > Orange Mane Central Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-15-2011, 06:26 PM   #1
Chris
Millenium Scrooge McDuck
 
Chris's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,557

Adopt-a-Bronco:
OrlandoFranklin
Default Crazy photos coming out of Libya

Crazy photos coming out of Libya

http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2...nflict/100021/

Warning - some of these are very graphic
Chris is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 03-15-2011, 06:33 PM   #2
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 21,929

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

There's nothing like destroying your own country in order to save it...
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 06:41 PM   #3
El Minion
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,748
Default

Shocking Photos and Video From Libya

These are “EXTREMELY GRAPHIC,” as the warnings often say, but given their matter of historical importance, they are now evidence to a brutal crackdown. Please continue viewing this post with caution. The most graphic photos and videos are posted on page two.
El Minion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 06:44 PM   #4
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,476
Default

Wow those rebels haven't a chance. Without USA, Germany, Russia, China deciding to get involved those rebels are dust. Look at them? I haven't been trained but wouldn't be stupid enough to fire off ammunition with no chance of hitting a jet. It's a waste. Laying on your back resting AA gun on foot? Sounds like a way to kill yourself or a fellow rebel to me.

I really can't say if we should have finished Gaddafi off. Obama has shown his weakness in dealing with it, but maybe that was his plan on this one so he could let Saudis put troops in Bahrian. We really never know the inside dealing of a white house.

For sure though Bush would have led they way, got on board with UK and France, and pushed through a no fly zone. Also though Bush probably also would have let Saudis put troops in Bahrain. Clearly the usa will say what leaders get to say and what ones they will let fall.

The revolution in Libya looks to be a long drawn out blood bath. But without supply the rebels will fall.

What happens if Venezula decides to supply the govt forces? Someone on the radio said Chavez said he would give him any support he needs. He didn't say military but read between the lines.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 06:54 PM   #5
Archer81
Optimum Homo
 
Archer81's Avatar
 
Tactical Neck.

Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 22,457
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post

For sure though Bush would have led they way, got on board with UK and France, and pushed through a no fly zone. Also though Bush probably also would have let Saudis put troops in Bahrain. Clearly the usa will say what leaders get to say and what ones they will let fall.

I tend to agree. The UN or NATO would have applied a nofly zone over Libyan rebel positions and gave Qadafi/Khadaffi/Whateverthe**** an ultimatum. Step down or be removed. Our media would hate it, and if representative government (republic or democracy) is the stated aim of US foreign policy this is a chance to take out a major sponsor of terror and remove a burr from the region. The longer this drags on, the higher the chance of radical elements gaining influence or taking the country outright.

Archer81 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 07:00 PM   #6
gyldenlove
Ring of Famer
 
gyldenlove's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Næstved, DK
Posts: 10,888

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Spencer Larsen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Wow those rebels haven't a chance. Without USA, Germany, Russia, China deciding to get involved those rebels are dust. Look at them? I haven't been trained but wouldn't be stupid enough to fire off ammunition with no chance of hitting a jet. It's a waste. Laying on your back resting AA gun on foot? Sounds like a way to kill yourself or a fellow rebel to me.

I really can't say if we should have finished Gaddafi off. Obama has shown his weakness in dealing with it, but maybe that was his plan on this one so he could let Saudis put troops in Bahrian. We really never know the inside dealing of a white house.

For sure though Bush would have led they way, got on board with UK and France, and pushed through a no fly zone. Also though Bush probably also would have let Saudis put troops in Bahrain. Clearly the usa will say what leaders get to say and what ones they will let fall.

The revolution in Libya looks to be a long drawn out blood bath. But without supply the rebels will fall.

What happens if Venezula decides to supply the govt forces? Someone on the radio said Chavez said he would give him any support he needs. He didn't say military but read between the lines.
I don't get why NATO have been dragging their knuckles on this one, they had a country trying to throw off an oppressor, it is an oil producing country to boot, all they had to do was enforce a no fly zone, something a single carrier group could easily do as well as blockade all harbors, something that is easy to do considering the libyan navy.

Once the smoke cleared they could clean up the rubble, send in repair crews to fix the oil wells like they did in kuwait and help get rid of the existing military and set up a police force.
gyldenlove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 07:06 PM   #7
Inkana7
Ring of Famer
 
Inkana7's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,341

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Derek Wolfe
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gyldenlove View Post
I don't get why NATO have been dragging their knuckles on this one, they had a country trying to throw off an oppressor, it is an oil producing country to boot, all they had to do was enforce a no fly zone, something a single carrier group could easily do as well as blockade all harbors, something that is easy to do considering the libyan navy.

Once the smoke cleared they could clean up the rubble, send in repair crews to fix the oil wells like they did in kuwait and help get rid of the existing military and set up a police force.
Easy as pie! Just like Iraq!
Inkana7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 07:07 PM   #8
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gyldenlove View Post
I don't get why NATO have been dragging their knuckles on this one, they had a country trying to throw off an oppressor, it is an oil producing country to boot, all they had to do was enforce a no fly zone, something a single carrier group could easily do as well as blockade all harbors, something that is easy to do considering the libyan navy.

Once the smoke cleared they could clean up the rubble, send in repair crews to fix the oil wells like they did in kuwait and help get rid of the existing military and set up a police force.
There is only one reason. Obama decided he didn't want to do it. With tepid support from USA Germany was motivated to squash it. Things like this always have some resistance, from Russia, Germany, China, and usually France. Not this time though France acted strongest of all.

I think Bush would have asked CIA, what would make Libya stable fastest, then probably done that. But then again Bush is sort of predictable that he will say once we support in one country, we show same values in the neighboring country.

I don't want to come out right now and say Obama blew it. But I will say he acted in a weak way. Perhaps though that was his intention to have the no fly zone not happen without supporting Gaddaffi.

The rebels are in trouble because now world focused on Japan and revolution in yesterdays news.

One question are most Obama supporters digging how he handled this? Or are you as confused as the rest of us are as to what he wants to happen in Libya?
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 07:10 PM   #9
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,476
Default

With the Arab League supporting intervention it's possible Obama could have push the no fly zone, supported rebels from the air, and then had arab league peacekeepers go in when it was over.

I think he just decided he was scared of the whole deal. Obama sort of in over his head i think.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 07:12 PM   #10
Tim
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

rebels and libyan's go to the same hospitals? Seems stupid
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 07:21 PM   #11
TheReverend
www.PatrickTurley.org
 
TheReverend's Avatar
 
Not. Too. Shabby.

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 36,571

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mike Shanahan
Default

I refuse to comment until Gaffney explains to me how this is the US's fault
TheReverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 07:28 PM   #12
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim View Post
rebels and libyan's go to the same hospitals? Seems stupid
Just how doctors do business.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 07:30 PM   #13
gyldenlove
Ring of Famer
 
gyldenlove's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Næstved, DK
Posts: 10,888

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Spencer Larsen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inkana7 View Post
Easy as pie! Just like Iraq!
The difference here is that the large majority of the country wants to get rid of the dictator and are actively trying to do so, we don't have to invade to achieve anything here, we just have to give them a helping hand, very few foreign lives would be lost and we could leave them to pick up most of the pieces afterwards.
gyldenlove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 08:16 PM   #14
STBumpkin
burnin' it at both ends
 
STBumpkin's Avatar
 
Livin' The Dream

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bowie, MD
Posts: 753

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Rod Smith
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gyldenlove View Post
I don't get why NATO have been dragging their knuckles on this one, they had a country trying to throw off an oppressor, it is an oil producing country to boot, all they had to do was enforce a no fly zone, something a single carrier group could easily do as well as blockade all harbors, something that is easy to do considering the libyan navy.

Once the smoke cleared they could clean up the rubble, send in repair crews to fix the oil wells like they did in kuwait and help get rid of the existing military and set up a police force.
It's easy to say a CSG (carrier strike group) can come in to save the day when you don't know the responsibilities and commitments of the navy. We are stretched thin as it is. The govt budget cuts don't only concern civilian govt employees. We are getting slashed like a M***** ******. We can barely fly training missions because our fuel budget is cut and you want us to increase our operational tempo? If we keep going as is we will be a husk of broken planes and exhausted aircrew. Don't commit us because you're sad about the pics you see on TV.

Last edited by STBumpkin; 03-15-2011 at 08:30 PM..
STBumpkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 08:28 PM   #15
strafen
Karma
 
strafen's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 7,253

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Elway
Default

That's a tough part of the world. People killing themselves for a cause.
It's hard to imagine these things can still happen in today's world...
strafen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 09:12 PM   #16
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by STBumpkin View Post
It's easy to say a CSG (carrier strike group) can come in to save the day when you don't know the responsibilities and commitments of the navy. We are stretched thin as it is. The govt budget cuts don't only concern civilian govt employees. We are getting slashed like a M***** ******. We can barely fly training missions because our fuel budget is cut and you want us to increase our operational tempo? If we keep going as is we will be a husk of broken planes and exhausted aircrew. Don't commit us because you're sad about the pics you see on TV.
Carrier doesn't have enough planes. But NATO or anyone suggesting that is the problem is not being honest. NATO has Italian and French air bases they could launch from. The USA could already have flown a bunch of planes into Italy and be ready to go had they wanted to do it.

But I agree telling some carriers to just mosey over there and take care of it wouldn't probably be a smart way to do it.

Cmon though. Anyone who argues that France alone couldn't go in there and shoot down those jets, bomb his ammo dumps, hell maybe even drop one right on his ass, is kidding themselves.

France, Italy, could both kick the crap out of Lybia's Airforce.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 09:30 PM   #17
STBumpkin
burnin' it at both ends
 
STBumpkin's Avatar
 
Livin' The Dream

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bowie, MD
Posts: 753

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Rod Smith
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Carrier doesn't have enough planes. But NATO or anyone suggesting that is the problem is not being honest. NATO has Italian and French air bases they could launch from. The USA could already have flown a bunch of planes into Italy and be ready to go had they wanted to do it.

But I agree telling some carriers to just mosey over there and take care of it wouldn't probably be a smart way to do it.

Cmon though. Anyone who argues that France alone couldn't go in there and shoot down those jets, bomb his ammo dumps, hell maybe even drop one right on his ass, is kidding themselves.

France, Italy, could both kick the crap out of Lybia's Airforce.
France and Italy probably (but not certainly) could act but won't. The Air Force is hardly better equipped than the Navy. The armed forces of the US are stretched to their limit. There is a reason we pulled/are pulling out of Iraq. It's because we can no longer be effective in both Iraq and Afghanistan, period. Don't get me wrong, we can and will respond to a threat on our nation's integrity decisively, but we have forces in Africa, Europe, South America and Asia that are all crying for assets. We can't be expected to solve all the worlds problems at the beck and call of everyone who has a cause. If we were to receive more funding, several top projects (to repair or replace necessary equipment) wouldn't have been dropped recently. The military needs money if we're going to maintain our supremacy. The American population, mirrored by the current administration, is unwilling to provide that money.

Last edited by STBumpkin; 03-15-2011 at 09:41 PM..
STBumpkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 11:14 PM   #18
mkporter
Ring of Famer
 
mkporter's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,675

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
There is only one reason. Obama decided he didn't want to do it. With tepid support from USA Germany was motivated to squash it. Things like this always have some resistance, from Russia, Germany, China, and usually France. Not this time though France acted strongest of all.

I think Bush would have asked CIA, what would make Libya stable fastest, then probably done that. But then again Bush is sort of predictable that he will say once we support in one country, we show same values in the neighboring country.

I don't want to come out right now and say Obama blew it. But I will say he acted in a weak way. Perhaps though that was his intention to have the no fly zone not happen without supporting Gaddaffi.

The rebels are in trouble because now world focused on Japan and revolution in yesterdays news.

One question are most Obama supporters digging how he handled this? Or are you as confused as the rest of us are as to what he wants to happen in Libya?
The problem we have with leading the way is how it plays with the rest of the region. The US is already pretty well disliked as much of the region sees us imposing our will on them (iraq and afghanistan), or supporting oppressive regimes in the name of stability (egypt, suadi arabia, etc). Providing support to the rebels can actually hurt their cause by allowing their opponents to cast their movement as driven by imperialistic western forces. That can turn popular support the other direction, and frequently does.

Every time you see a protest anywhere in the region, the local governments PR response is to declare that the protests have been stirred up by foreigners, and the foreign media. This rhetoric always shows up in Iran, and was prominent in the recent developments in Egypt and Libya as well. The reality is that our best move is probably to sit on the sidelines, and play our part in internationally agreed on actions, ideally with Arab support.

Decades of middle eastern policy promoting stability instead of democracy has tied our hands here. I'm not saying stability wasn't in our best interest, but it creates a difficult situation for us, now. As an Obama supporter, I feel he's played the hand he has. Treading lightly is the order of the day, and that's what we've done. Treading lightly is not really our thing, so it feels kinda weird. Ultimately, this is a Libyan matter, and a matter for the peoples of the middle east. As these oppressive regimes fall, I hope we reach out to the democratic institutions that replace them, and encourage them to embrace the values we care about (freedom, etc).
mkporter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2011, 11:26 PM   #19
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkporter View Post
The problem we have with leading the way is how it plays with the rest of the region. The US is already pretty well disliked as much of the region sees us imposing our will on them (iraq and afghanistan), or supporting oppressive regimes in the name of stability (egypt, suadi arabia, etc). Providing support to the rebels can actually hurt their cause by allowing their opponents to cast their movement as driven by imperialistic western forces. That can turn popular support the other direction, and frequently does.

Every time you see a protest anywhere in the region, the local governments PR response is to declare that the protests have been stirred up by foreigners, and the foreign media. This rhetoric always shows up in Iran, and was prominent in the recent developments in Egypt and Libya as well. The reality is that our best move is probably to sit on the sidelines, and play our part in internationally agreed on actions, ideally with Arab support.

Decades of middle eastern policy promoting stability instead of democracy has tied our hands here. I'm not saying stability wasn't in our best interest, but it creates a difficult situation for us, now. As an Obama supporter, I feel he's played the hand he has. Treading lightly is the order of the day, and that's what we've done. Treading lightly is not really our thing, so it feels kinda weird. Ultimately, this is a Libyan matter, and a matter for the peoples of the middle east. As these oppressive regimes fall, I hope we reach out to the democratic institutions that replace them, and encourage them to embrace the values we care about (freedom, etc).
Arab league is asking for a no fly zone, the rebels on the ground pleading for it. Even Syria is backing it. Only really Germany, China, Iran, Russia are coming out against it.

If it is a matter for the people then why did Obama ok the Saudi invasion of Bahrain. I'm not saying I know what is best, or that it's a mistake yet. I'm only saying that Obama's signals are very confusing and remind me of a President not quite sure what he should do.

He talked tough, now seems to be backing down. I will keep an open mind but I think he may be blowing it.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2011, 12:20 AM   #20
mkporter
Ring of Famer
 
mkporter's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,675

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Arab league is asking for a no fly zone, the rebels on the ground pleading for it. Even Syria is backing it. Only really Germany, China, Iran, Russia are coming out against it.

If it is a matter for the people then why did Obama ok the Saudi invasion of Bahrain. I'm not saying I know what is best, or that it's a mistake yet. I'm only saying that Obama's signals are very confusing and remind me of a President not quite sure what he should do.

He talked tough, now seems to be backing down. I will keep an open mind but I think he may be blowing it.
The Saudi's didn't ask our permission, so I'm not sure what you mean by Obama "okaying the invasion." His administration only went as far as saying that they didn't believe the troops moving into Bahrain constituted an invasion. That is not the same as approving it. The Obama administration stressed that the protesters in Bahrain should be heard and that the kingdom should address their concerns through political dialogue and not suppression. Pretty much their standard response for the mideast now. The Saudi's are fairly pissed with Obama for not supporting Mubarak, and for encouraging countries to respect the voice of their protesting populace. Given how tightly coupled we are to the Saudis, this isn't insignificant.

Obama's style is to be deliberative, and generally pragmatic, sometimes to a fault. I'd prefer it if he did a little more leading, as he has the capacity to be inspirational and motivating. I'd rather he err on the deliberative side, however, as we have enough **** on our plate to deal with right now.
mkporter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2011, 12:40 AM   #21
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,476
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkporter View Post
The Saudi's didn't ask our permission, so I'm not sure what you mean by Obama "okaying the invasion." His administration only went as far as saying that they didn't believe the troops moving into Bahrain constituted an invasion. That is not the same as approving it. The Obama administration stressed that the protesters in Bahrain should be heard and that the kingdom should address their concerns through political dialogue and not suppression. Pretty much their standard response for the mideast now. The Saudi's are fairly pissed with Obama for not supporting Mubarak, and for encouraging countries to respect the voice of their protesting populace. Given how tightly coupled we are to the Saudis, this isn't insignificant.

Obama's style is to be deliberative, and generally pragmatic, sometimes to a fault. I'd prefer it if he did a little more leading, as he has the capacity to be inspirational and motivating. I'd rather he err on the deliberative side, however, as we have enough **** on our plate to deal with right now.
IMO when it comes to reading between the lines, the USA statement and response to the Saudis putting 2000 troops into Bahrian was a tactic endorsement of the plan. In fact even though it is said they didn't ask permission, I wouldn't be surprised if they did. I think Obama underestimated what letting Mubarak fall would lead to. Now he wants to stop the flood gates because he is sort of afraid of Shia uprisings in Sunni dominated monarchy's that have been American puppets for yrs.

If I was President I would endorse the no fly zone, but then say America can only put in like 40 planes. Make the Saudis, French, Syrians, UK, anyone in Arab League with an airforce etc etc, Italy, Germany. The countries in the region to come up with the rest.

I'm not saying USA does it, pays for it all. I think if Obama wanted he get a big coalition on this one. It's not because we would have to go alone, it's because he wants the revolutions to help.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2011, 02:32 AM   #22
elsid13
Lost In Space
 
elsid13's Avatar
 
Bóg, Honor, Ojczyzna

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 19,709
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gyldenlove View Post
I don't get why NATO have been dragging their knuckles on this one, they had a country trying to throw off an oppressor, it is an oil producing country to boot, all they had to do was enforce a no fly zone, something a single carrier group could easily do as well as blockade all harbors, something that is easy to do considering the libyan navy.

Once the smoke cleared they could clean up the rubble, send in repair crews to fix the oil wells like they did in kuwait and help get rid of the existing military and set up a police force.
It far as easy as you make it out to be. SECDEF Gates testimony in front of the SACs explained why it is difficult and could be deadly for US and NATO forces.

To effectively enforce you are talking about massive logistics effort to reposition assets into the region and to sustain them to start. Then a 2 to 3 week air campaign to suppress Libyan air forces, C3 capabilities, anti -ship and air units and navy. After that you would need 200-300 aircraft (from fighters, AWACS, refuelers, SARS) to maintain 24 X 7 cap.
elsid13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2011, 08:34 AM   #23
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 21,929

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Hey Barry, how's Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton working for you now? What a joke this administration is.

The UN is a joke and the EU is a joke. Again, this is a trouble spot in Europes back yard and they aren't doing anything but standing around and watching. Why can't the EU enforce a no fly zone over Libya?
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2011, 09:07 AM   #24
gtown
Perennial Pro-bowler
 
Hoya Saxa!!

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: DC
Posts: 921

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Juggernaut #46
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
Hey Barry, how's Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton working for you now? What a joke this administration is.

The UN is a joke and the EU is a joke. Again, this is a trouble spot in Europes back yard and they aren't doing anything but standing around and watching. Why can't the EU enforce a no fly zone over Libya?

Simple, mom (Europe) wants dad (US) to do the spanking. The only thing mom is gonna do is make a big fuss.

This is actually a test to see if Europe has the balls to back up their rhetoric, which they don't. Germany is a pacificist country now given its history, the UK has a fiscal crisis which has sapped the strength of its military, and France and Italy are unwilling to get their hands dirty.
gtown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2011, 09:09 AM   #25
HAT
I think, therefore I ham.
 
HAT's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,764

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Adam Weber
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by STBumpkin View Post
The American population, mirrored by the current administration, is unwilling to provide that money.
Not to worry....We will have a new administration soon. Thanks for all you do.
HAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:22 AM.


Denver Broncos