Browsing this Thread:
4 Anonymous Users
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
Joined:
2008/6/5 10:12 Last Login : 2016/11/8 21:51 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
704
 |
Posted on: 2014/2/3 16:15
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
brewster wrote: No, not 1.7B, now you are making an error in the opposite direction, - it is 1.7T, where T stands for Trillion. And that is the full cost of war. So, as you can see you claim that DOD wasted trillions (plural) of dollars if a physical impossibility. I agree that supporting your arguments with numbers is a good idea. However, it is implied that those are not just some random numbers! Quote: brewster wrote: First, this is not a true statement. greenville accused DOD of fraud, and here I responded, saying that fraud is irrelevant to the topic of discussion. Here you interjected, and said that no, it is relevant. Second, this was not an "adventure of Mr Bush", it was a war declared by the US Congress in full accordance with the US Constitution. If you want to label something as "adventure" you should take a closer look at the next President after Bush. Third, if you want to argue that the war was a bad idea, - you should paint us a picture of how the world would have looked like now, - if Bush didn't go to war. You must have that picture ready, - otherwise how can you possibly say "this is wrong", - if you have nothing to compare it to?! In particular, I am very interested to learn your take on Saddam's WMD. According to the US commissions that worked in Iraq after the war, Saddam kept enough to fully restore all his WMD programs in two years. So, without war, that would have been 2005. Then what? Quote: brewster wrote: Which part exactly? When Powell quoted US and British Intelligence, or when he quoted Hans Blix?
Posted on: 2014/2/1 23:56
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
The lowest estimate I've found for the cost of these wars is $1.7B http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/pres ... price-tag-of-the-iraq-war Mother Jones says $6B. I did not mean trillions in corruption, I mean the money spent on these adventures of Mr Bush. As for the UN, they trusted the false info given them by the Bushies. Read this contemporary summary of the evidence. It was all bullshit. http://www.wnd.com/2003/02/17117/
Posted on: 2014/2/1 5:37
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Boris, don't forget that Monroe also specifically cited to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441, which Pebble completely ignored when giving into his temptation to engage in name-calling
According to Wikipedia, that resolution was unanimously adopted by the Security Council in a 15-0 vote. It stated that Iraq was in "material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687." "Iraq's breaches related not only to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, [and] the purchase and import of prohibited armaments." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_N ... y_Council_Resolution_1441 Obviously this resolution was based on incorrect information. But contrary to Pebble's name-calling, it is certainly evidence that backed up Monroe's argument. Pebble provided some links that merely contend certain people claim (he said/she said) that one person in Iraq (granted, a high up one) said Saddam did not have WMDs and Bush ignored it. So what, no one knew what the actual facts were at the time. And that guy's account clashed with other intelligence. What is Bush believes that guy and then it turns out he's lying? FYI I am no Iraq War supporter and in fact was against it from the beginning. But this is about the accusations Pebble is throwing around, and he's 100% wrong.
Posted on: 2014/2/1 5:20
Edited by JCMan8 on 2014/2/1 5:42:38
Edited by JCMan8 on 2014/2/1 5:43:46 |
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
brewster wrote: First of all, it is irrelevant even if it were true. When you decide to call 911 you do not base your decision on whether the local police precinct has a history of embezzlement. Second, trillions? Really? How do you expect I should react? Imagine you discuss the economy of running a restaurant with someone who are not sure how much beef franks may cost. If he is mistaken by a factor of 2, well, may be he didn't check lately. If he is off by a factor of 10, - you should probably not take his advice on how to run a food buisiness. And, if he is off by a factor of 100, if he thinks that a pound of beef franks may cost five hunderd dollars, - that probably means you should not take anything that he says seriously. Quote:
First of all, no, this is not how "proving" works. I see you are very strict with a standard of proof when it comes to others, but you go really easy on yourself. In order to claim that Monroe is a PROVEN liar, you need to, well, PROVE that what he said is not true, and second that he knew that it was not true. Unless you do that, you are just engaged in the name-calling. Second, I believe that he offered you a bunch of quotes, including the Chairman of the Senate Committee on intelligence Sen Graham, and members of the same Levin and Rockerfeller. Those are not just some random politicians like the others that he mentioned, - Hillary, Gore, Kerry, etc. Those were the people who we hired specifically to check upon the Government and specifically in the field of intelligence. If any western agency had any doubts, surely those people would have known. And, if they knew, surely they would have told us. Yet, they did not. Of course, you may retort that Graham, Levin and Rockefeller are not reliable witnesses. I do not know why, by you may want to question their honesty, or qualifications, or whatnot. That, however, doesn't mean that you were not presented with proofs, - since a testimony of an witness does count. P.S. BTW, I read some articles that you linked to. One can sum them all up like this: "some intelligence assets claimed that Saddam had WMDs, and few others claimed that Saddam had nothing. Since we now think that the latter was telling the truth, it follows that Bush knew it even then". Yeah, right. Because - logic! Also, it seems that you reasoning goes: "we didn't find a lot of WMDs, so it can only be explained by the fact that they do not exist". If so, what's your take on what happened to those WMDs? After the 1991 there were some WMDs left, correct? And the whole point of doing the inspections was to make sure they are destroyed, right? So, did we find the place where that happened? I presume that Saddam didn't have any technology that would allow him to destroy the WMDs without leaving a trace (oh, I wish he did, - it would have solved so many problems with disposal of various nasty things!)
Posted on: 2014/2/1 2:57
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2008/6/5 10:12 Last Login : 2016/11/8 21:51 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
704
|
Pebble,
I always find your responses highly intelligent. I'm curious; how do you find the time to respond to some of the garbage that you have to respond to? You are my hero.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 20:10
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
It amuses me to point out hypocrisy. Like the Bush haters who ignore the hawkish Iraq stands of their own Democrat icons before Bush became POTUS.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 20:02
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
What do you mean? He clearly cited to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 to back up his claims. Did you read it? I don't agree with the Iraq War but Monroe presented proof for his claims.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 20:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I have to ask, what exactly is the goal of any of your arguments? None of you will ever convince the other side. And, anyone who actually matters in any of these discussions is too important to give half a sh*t what us peons think.
No proof/source/example/quote is good enough for Pebble without being called strawman/empirical/blah blah and Monroe does tend to tow party lines a little too closely. Most of the other commentators are just flat out morons (atsushi, etc.). So, I ask, what exactly are you trying to prove Pebbles, Monroe, etc?
Posted on: 2014/1/31 19:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
You can't back up your claims so you talk about Clinton, Pelosi and Kerry. You have proven my point. Thank you.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 19:56
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I'm sure you're upset with President and Madame Clinton, Madeline Albright, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi-all of whom must've lied before President Bush became President Bush about Iraq and wmd's. And I'll update my statement-all the Western countries who rely upon their intelligence agreed through the UN that Saddam possessed WMD's. Hence the myriad resolutions, that Saddam ignored that led to our actions. Ergo, to disagree with some of the brightest stars in the world of the Democrats, and the often anti-US UN, over Saddam Hussein and his weapons program makes you a proven idiot.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 16:48
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
Here: Quote:
I bolded your portion in which you are making a claim. I have asked for evidence to back it up. You have provided none. The only links provided were by me and they state the complete opposite of what you are claiming. Until you provide evidence backing up your argument, you are a proven liar.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 16:33
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998. "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998. "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998. "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998. "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998. "Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999. "There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001. "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002. "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is using and developing weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002. "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002. "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002. "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002, "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do." Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002. "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ... Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003. NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMD'S AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES??? Right!!! No, he just did what the Democrats had been asking for since the Clinton administration.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 15:59
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
What are you talking about? Let's see some proof that Bush lied about Iraq first. I guess you're not voting for Mrs. Clinton because she agreed with him? Because she was working with the same information that Bush had available. Sometimes the intel changes over time. Are you denying that Hussein had and used weapons of mass destruction, and defied UN Sanctions? Because he did, and did, and did. The UN, not Bush.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 15:53
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
In short, you lied in your post. You were called out for it. So the best you have is to shift the goal posts. Why can't you just own the fact that you used a blatant lie to bolster an argument?
Posted on: 2014/1/31 15:49
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
You're confusing a radical, far left opinion piece with reporting. Do you consider Rush Limbaugh reporting?
Posted on: 2014/1/31 15:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2008/6/5 10:12 Last Login : 2016/11/8 21:51 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
704
|
I too had thought that right wings hate bi-racial couples. I guess I was wrong.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 14:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2008/6/5 10:12 Last Login : 2016/11/8 21:51 From Jersey City
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
704
|
Iraq war did not have to happen. Bush and Chaney misled this country to that war.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5FaMbnINwc Excellent reporting. MSNBC (and most of its contributors) has my great respect.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 14:31
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
It's not irrelevant. the DOD made trillions of our dollars vanish, some of it literally, like $1B in cash misplaced. Without a war there would have been no blank check party for them. There was a frenzy of investing in military vendors before the invasion of Iraq. Remember the 18 year old kid who got a multimillion dollar contract to supply antique Czech surplus ammo to "our"Iraqis? And your belief in 1st verifying it's a just war? Jeez, how naive are you! EVERY AMERICAN WAR IS A JUST WAR! THAT'S WHO WE ARE! Or at least they seemed just at the time. In retrospect a large number of our military actions were about a land grab to line the pocket of some tycoon or to smack one of "our SOB" dictators who got uppity (read Confessions of an Economic Hitman). Sometimes I think we just like to have a war every decade or so because if we didn't we'd have a generation of "unblooded" officers, and we can't have generals who've never lustily personally led men in combat, it would be unseemly.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 3:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
So, let's review. 1. First, about "they do not want democracy". You see, "democracy" means equality of the political rights. If there is no democracy, it means that some part of the population usurped the power and violates the rights of the rest. In this situation the usurpers surely would not want democracy. Your position, in its essence, is to proclaim that to you the usurpers represent the whole People, and to take their side. 2. I believe that our involvement in a war should be decided first and foremost on whether the war is just. If it is just, our second consideration should be the cost/benefit analysis, - what do we gain, what do we lose. Your idea that our decision should be based purely on "drone's ok, troops are not", - is ludicrous. 3. If you think that the decision to depose Saddam was wrong, you should offer us an alternative scenario, - of how it should have been handled, including the explanation of how the World would look now if we had chosen your approach. If you do not have any plausible alternatives you can't possibly claim that the decision was wrong. If you do, please remember that the commissions that worked in Iraq after the war discovered that Saddam kept materials, documentations and teams of scientists and needed about two years to restore all his WMD programs. I.e. without a war, - by early summer 2005. 4. You final statement about the fraud in the DOD is neither here nor there in this discussion. It seems that you just got rolling and went through the list of talking points one point further than planned.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 2:27
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I don't disagree with much you say; but the fact is that many of the looney left feel the Iraq war II was created to benefit Bush and Cheney friends, which is nonsense. A better case would be that the almost zero interest government money now is to benefit Obama's friends on Wall Street-because it sure hasn't helped income inequality and those without 401Ks and stock portfolios. Be we digress. The SOTU address has turned out to be at best a big yawn, especially since House Republicans already had an illegal alien immigration platform crafted.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 1:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
We are not world police, we shouldn't be messing in other peoples business. Drones okay, sending troops in to try to change a country to a democracy when the people dont want it NO! And from my experience the only people who benefit from this are defense contractors. The amount of fraud in the DOD is so disgusting I'm leaving leaving it soon and moving to the private sector.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 1:47
|
|||
|
ಠ_ಠ
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441.
The fact is that Hussein had possessed weapons of mass destruction, used weapons of massed destruction, defied many UN resolutions about his possession of weapons of mass destruction, and tried to deceive his enemies about his weapons of mass destruction capability. At the end, when his capability and access diminished, he fooled the world. But, as we've seen during the Obama Presidency, despots in the Middle East haven't hesitated to use weapons of mass destruction. And, like Hussein, Assad is trying to pull the same shell game with disarmament, in case you haven't read the news lately.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 1:16
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
Prove it. Show your work. According to a quick google search, your post contains a flat out lie: Salon.comWashingtonsBlog
Posted on: 2014/1/31 1:04
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Of course, don't let the fact that MSNBC apologized for the most recent tweet, and the Romney grandchild incident, and forced Bashir and Baldwin into resigning blur your thoughts about Michelle Malkin. Because it's a dodge. The looney left MSNBC'ers admitted their bias, with or without Malkin, no?
Posted on: 2014/1/31 1:02
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
You mean the war against Saddam Hussein, who used weapons of mass destruction against Kurds, and who defied dozens of dozens of UN actions over weapons of mass destruction-because he wanted us to think he had?? And that ALL of the Western World intelligence thought he had wmd's? But in any case, if the case you're trying to make is that Obama is no better than Bush, feel free. Many would agree with you. Bu bu bu Bush!
Posted on: 2014/1/31 0:59
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
I'm not sure where you're going with this but quoting a Michelle Malkin website gives you about as much credit as a hobo outside Journal Square.
Posted on: 2014/1/31 0:55
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
What happens when that investment goes sour?
Posted on: 2014/1/31 0:54
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
December 30, 2013:
Racism is hilarious! MSNBC panel mocks, belittles Romneys? adopted grandson Janurary 4, 2014: Tearful Melissa Harris-Perry addresses mockery of Romney baby January 29, 2014: Despicable MSNBC pounded by reality after saying ?right wing will hate? biracial family MSNBC claims its conservative-smearing tweet ?isn?t who we are? 75 tweets from biracial families who smacked down MSNBC ?Busiest people in cable news?: @MSNBCApology parody account offers tomorrow?s apologies today #BoycottMSNBC? Viewers angry that network president apologized for bigoted tweet
Posted on: 2014/1/31 0:21
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: The State Of The Union 2014, predictions
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Hey M, I'm having a lapse of memory. Could you remind me which high ranking Bushies got fired for dragging us into the Iraq war on false evidence and then completely bungling the occupation. You know, the war that cost the public thousands of lives and trillions of dollars, but made Bush cronies billions?
Posted on: 2014/1/30 23:28
|
|||
|
||||