Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Should US & Nato step in to defend Ukraine against this Vladman?

Should US & Nato step in to defend Ukraine against this Vladman?

  • 1 Yes, it's clearly the right thing to do

    Votes: 19 28.8%

  • 2

    Votes: 1 1.5%

  • 3

    Votes: 2 3.0%

  • 4

    Votes: 4 6.1%

  • 5 Maybe, it depends. If so, only up to a point (which you'll please describe in a post)

    Votes: 7 10.6%

  • 6

    Votes: 1 1.5%

  • 7

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 8

    Votes: 1 1.5%

  • 9 No, history teaches it could escalate into WWIII - with nukes

    Votes: 31 47.0%
  • Total voters
    66
  • Poll closed .
kenny

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
33,751
Yes or no?

I've set up this poll so your vote is private, so feel safe to be honest.
 
Last edited:
nine no, just not because of the nukes, it is not our war.
 
Hi,

When I look at the situation in Ukraine and I see this extraordinary man , Zelensky, who gives me hope that courage and decency still can grow in this world. I want to help, I want to help him. Where have we seen a people work for 30 yrs to build their democracy only to have the bully on the block take it away.

VP is myopic, and won't stop invading to bring the Russian empire back to glory. I don't think he will let go of Ukraine. If we choose to help with more than what we have done, we had better geta move on, because he is relentless in his focus.

I see the horror, but the picture of the strollers left at the train station by the Polish mothers stays with me. Gosh, what a mess one man can create.

Annette
PS I am old and have lived my life. I would opt for more help given. Bomb the Russians
 
Annette, I am one hundred percent in agreement with you. Putin will not stop with Ukraine. We watched an excellent program on public tv last night, a profile of Putin. He is absolutely insane, power hungry, with no regard for human life. He scared the hell out of Bill Clinton when he went to Russia to try to establish some sort of relationship with the guy. We should have been taking steps to remove him then. We should have given Ukraine more weapons and more military assistance when Obama was in office. Now , here we are, faced with a big ol’ scary mess and still debating what to do. Perhaps we should let Putin keep getting his way ( and bombing maternity hospitals in the process) and everyone in Europe start learning to speak Russian PDQ!
 
If the news reporting that the Russian army is vastly underperforming, and the resistance is far more than anticipated ( hopefully not a big if)...maybe, I hope against hope for negotiated settlement....

I have wondered why we need to announce to the world that we were giving Mig fighters to Ukraine....why broadcast this stuff???
 
Give them lots of weapons and planes and let them fight for their country, as they are already doing so valiantly.
I don't want us being drawn into WW III.
 
I think the current situation makes everyone’s guts churn. It is so disturbing to see such mass destruction and loss of life. I have thought about WW2 and how we really didn’t want to get involved until our own shores were attacked. Is that is what is yet to come? Would Putin be satisfied with Ukraine? Doubtful. He has lost all credibility now so there is really nothing to stop him from forging ahead - except for his own lack of military might. He has the Russian people fighting a fight that they don’t even believe in so their enthusiasm wanes by the day. However, if China enjoins him in any way you can hear the war bells toll. Scary, scary stuff.
No humane country wants to push the buttons of another to possibly unleash nuclear warfare so I understand the reluctance to intervene. The money that we are infusing in the situation might as well be burned in our own yard - save for money going for humanitarian cause. Putin will not stop until Ukraine is his in my opinion. At that point he might have to stop and regroup but he will be on the move again as soon as he is able.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Throwing money at any situation seldom solves it so I don’t have much hope in our money making a huge difference. I can only hope that there are things going on or being discussed that we don’t yet know about. I don’t see a clear cut right answer to all of this so I guess we go day by day and reassess as events unfold. I am just so sorry for all of the lives lost, homes and lives destroyed and future hope dashed for the Ukrainian people. We can’t bring that back but we would certainly be able to stop it in its tracks right now - but at what cost? Is America collectively ready to make that call? Apparently not yet.
 

Maybe, it depends. If so, only up to a point (which you'll please describe in a post)​

I said this. I feel like if he starts using chemical weapons, he won't stop at that and maybe we could stop him before he turns nuclear. I don't want WWIII and I don't want nukes going off, so if we have to intervene to somehow stop him before that happens, I think I'd agree with that. We can't wait for it TO happen before we get involved.
 
The bottom choice - "It may escalate to WWIII", I think we're already riding that train, and I'm scared to death and feel so bad for the Ukrainian people as well.

"Vladman" either has an incompetent army, or he really is a madman. Cases in point: Russian drones crossed over into Romanian airspace. Romania is a NATO Country since 2004. Also, he fired missiles into Belarus from Ukranian soil, and tried to say it was the Ukrainians who did it.

I hate to be saying this, but he needs to be overthrown by his own people or taken out, for the sake of the Ukrainian people and the whole Northern Hemisphere, before we face total annihilation.

I am in fear for my life right now, and moving to South America toot sweet has suddenly become appealing.
 
At this point, I wish Ukraine would surrender. Save lives. Buy the rest of the world time to strategize. We can’t just step in bc we fear what may happen. We see what is happening—to Ukraine. Stop the bleeding. Now. If after surrendering the bloodshed continues, then it’s time to take action.
 
Last edited:
No. NATO has neither responsibility for nor jurisdiction over non-NATO countries.

If Putin lays one hair on a NATO nation - all bets are off. And he knows it. But until that moment… No.
 
Rockdiamond said:
I have wondered why we need to announce to the world that we were giving Mig fighters to Ukraine....why broadcast this stuff???
Click to expand...

I agree with the rest of your post -- but not this part. I think telegraphing our moves has strategic and tactical significance. Just like how VP keeps lowering the bar for what US action would constitute a de facto declaration of war. Soon it will be "If you guys call me names!" It's nuclear brinksmanship. It is all he has at this point. He will need some way to save face. Which I assume is why he was (reportedly) rounding up his intelligence officers.

He can not be "stopped," imo; he must decide to stop on his own.

I also think he has taken a page from his buddy TFG's playbook (and North Korea's playbook) and knows that the world will tiptoe around him if we think he may *actually* be crazy. (In TFG's case, it was of course not an act.)
 
It’s a disgusting, disgraceful and devastating situation.
That “creature” needs to be taken down and taken out. There is no negotiating with insane maniacs.
 
nala said:
At this point, I wish Ukraine would surrender. Save lives. Buy the rest of the world time to strategize. We can’t just step in bc we fear what may happen. We see what is happening—to Ukraine. Stop the bleeding. Now. If after surrendering the bloodshed continues, then it’s time to take action.
Click to expand...

?

Could you please elaborate?

Ukraine is a large ( the largest European country by area, larger than France (Texas for your reference) with over 40 million people.

"Just surrender" is a bit nonchalant.


If you truly think that that means anyone can grab anything as long es he's stronger and bloodshed will cease after surrender?
Good to know. Any country is up for grabs then?
 
MaisOuiMadame said:
?

Could you please elaborate?

Ukraine is a large ( the largest European country by area, larger than France (Texas for your reference) with over 40 million people.

"Just surrender" is a bit nonchalant.


If you truly think that that means anyone can grab anything as long es he's stronger and bloodshed will cease after surrender?
Good to know. Any country is up for grabs then?
Click to expand...
I think it’s nonchalant to guilt other countries like the USA into
Fighting for a country that has over 40 million people. The leader of that country made a choice and still has a choice but is trying to drag others in. Meanwhile his own people have fled. And to assume that the same will happen to other countries is speculation and fear mongering. Let’s all dive in and destroy this world bc you know, just in case… nope. We don’t jump in to solve other nation’s conflicts. This one is no different—except some people are being convinced it is for several emotional reasons. We are not the world police.
Also. I am entitled to my opinion in a thread that is asking for an opinion. Sorry not sorry that it disagrees with yours. I’m putting American lives first.
 
Last edited:
Putin needs to be stopped by whatever means necessary.
We can do it without starting WWIII if we are smart and careful.

If he is indeed a war criminal it is our duty to stop this madman. He won't stop with Ukraine. So even if you don't feel it is our obligation to help Ukrainians (more than we are helping currently) think about what happens if Putin continues unchecked? Reminds me of that famous quote by Niemoller.

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.





From Bloomberg dot com:


"
President Joe Biden said the U.S. would send Ukraine drones as well as thousands of anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles, a pledge of a robust new package to fight Russia’s invasion that followed an emotional appeal by Ukraine’s leader, Volodymyr Zelenskiy. Biden accused Vladimir Putin’s forces of committing “atrocities” including attacking civilian areas. Hours earlier, Russian forces bombed a theater in Mariupol sheltering hundreds of civilians, according to the city council there. The Kremlin denies targeting civilians. “Putin is afflicting appalling, appalling devastation and horror on Ukraine,” Biden said Wednesday at the White House, adding “it’s god awful.

” Biden later called Putin a “war criminal.”


The daughter of Rostyslav Romanchuk stands by his coffin during a funeral for him and three other Ukrainians on March 15 in Lviv. The men were killed in a Russian airstrike on the International Center for Peacekeeping and Security, just a few miles from the Polish border. Photographer: Alexey Furman/Getty Images Europe
Russian soldiers reportedly killed Ukrainian civilians waiting in a bread line in the encircled city of Chernihiv, though the Kremlin denied it. Rockets hit a convoy of civilians who were trying to evacuate from Mariupol to Zaporizhzhia, according to Ukrainian officials who said children were among the casualties.

mail

Rubble covered a street in Kyiv on March 15 after another night of attacks by Russian forces. Millions have fled and hundreds of civilians are confirmed to have been killed, though the actual number is likely higher. Photographer: SOPA Images/LightRocket
In his speech to Congress, Zelenskiy urged the U.S. to close its ports to all Russian goods and provide Ukraine with fighter jets, something western officials have rejected in part to avoid broader escalation by Moscow. After showing lawmakers a graphic video of Ukrainian casualties, including children injured and killed by Russian soldiers, Zelenskiy addressed Biden directly in English: “Being the leader of the world means to be the leader of peace.”

mail

Members of the Ukrainian military take part in tactical exercises near the western city of Lviv on March 16. Photographer: Yuriy Dyachyshyn/AFP
Russian forces continue to strike infrastructure targets on Wednesday while the overall military situation is largely unchanged, Ukraine said. Russia’s Defense Ministry said its forces are advancing through urban areas in the Luhansk region. After three weeks of war with no major cities captured, Putin’s forces continue to pound cities and residential areas already decimated by earlier strikes. In Moscow, Putin threatened to cleanse Russia of “scum and traitors” he accuses of working covertly with western allies. With sanctions biting and Putin’s war effort hampered by strong resistance, the Biden administration warned him against using weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical and biological agents. Analysts worry though that the potential for nuclear conflict, while small, may become greater as Moscow’s losses mount. —David E. Rovella

"
 
Crimes against humanity have taken place.
I am not alone in thinking this.

From WSJ March 17th, 2022

"

What Are War Crimes? What to Know as Biden Accuses Putin​

Russian President Vladimir Putin faces allegations and investigations related to the invasion of Ukraine​




Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has brought allegations of war crimes against President Vladimir Putin and his army, raising the question of whether he or his commanders will ultimately be charged. It is a complex legal issue, compounded in part by the fact that Russia, like the U.S. and China, isn’t a party to the International Criminal Court, which usually hears war-crime cases at its headquarters in the Netherlands.

ICC prosecutor Karim Khan four days in to the invasion said he would begin an investigation into violations, based on Ukraine’s previously agreeing to the court’s jurisdiction. Mr. Khan traveled to western Ukraine and Poland on Wednesday, and held a virtual meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. He said he was also seeking to meet with Russian officials.
Mr. Khan said he was working “to establish the truth and ensure that individuals responsible for international crimes are held accountable in a court of law.”
President Biden said on March 16 that he thinks Russian PresidentVladimir Putin is a war criminal. But it is easier to try commanders on the ground for alleged war crimes than the political leaders who ordered them into the field. If Mr. Putin were to be charged, he would first have to be arrested in a country that accepts the jurisdiction of the court—something he could easily avoid. Moscow has rejected war-crimes allegations, including accusations that Russia has targeted civilians.

​




What constitutes a war crime?​

War crimes are broadly defined and include willfully killing or causing suffering, widespread destruction and seizing of property, deliberately targeting civilian populations, in addition to other serious violations of laws applicable in armed conflict. The ICC also prosecutes three other offenses: crimes against humanity, genocide and the crime of aggression. Mr. Khan, the ICC prosecutor, said there was already a reasonable basis to believe that both war crimes and crimes against humanity had taken place in Ukraine.
im-502035

A man carrying his child away from a damaged maternity hospital in Mariupol, Ukraine.​

PHOTO: EVGENIY MALOLETKA/ASSOCIATED PRESS

What crimes has Russia been accused of?​

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has zeroed in on what he says is Russia’s decision to target civilian populations after Ukrainian forces delayed the Russian battalion’s initial advance on the capital, Kyiv. He described an attack on Freedom Square in the eastern city of Kharkiv as a war crime and has called on the West to help stop “the crime Russia is committing” in Ukraine.
“Atrocity! How much longer will the world be an accomplice ignoring terror?” Mr. Zelensky tweeted after a Russian strike hit a maternity hospital in Mariupol on March 9.
“I think he is a war criminal,” President Biden said of Mr. Putin at the White House on March 16.
Mr. Biden was “speaking from what he has seen on television, which is barbaric actions by a brutal dictator through his invasion of a foreign country,” said White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki. The State Department is conducting a legal review of the matter, she said. White House officials had previously declined to accuse Russia of war crimes, saying that they were reviewing the issue.
Vice President Kamala Harris had previously said that Russia should be investigated for possible war crimes. “We are clear that any intentional attack or targeting of civilians is a war crime. Period,” she said.
Legal experts said it would have to be proved that Russian forces were systematically selecting civilian targets.

Who has the authority to take action?​

The International Criminal Court in The Hague hears war-crime cases and related matters, including genocide. Though Ukraine isn’t party to the 1998 Rome statute that established the court, it has previously accepted the court’s jurisdiction. That means that while Ukraine can’t refer any alleged crimes to the court, the ICC can investigate on its own initiative and charge Mr. Putin or other Russian leaders, though it can’t try them in absentia. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has already rejected the ICC’s investigation, noting that Russia isn’t a party to the court, having withdrawn in 2016.

Ukraine has been seeking an ICC investigation since 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea. The court’s prosecutor in 2018 said it found a reasonable basis that war crimes—including torture, rape and the intentional targeting of civilians—had taken place in eastern regions of Ukraine, where Russian-backed separatists were fighting the central government. The investigation was put on hold because of the Covid-19 pandemic and other cases.

What are the Geneva Conventions?​

The initial Geneva Convention was adopted in 1864, and four additional treaties were introduced in 1949 after World War II. Further protocols were adopted in 1977 and 2005. The conventions provide for: the protection of the sick and wounded along with medical and religious personnel; care for the wounded sick and shipwrecked at sea; the humane treatment of prisoners of war; and the protection of all civilians.


In addition, more than 100 nations have signed an international treaty called the Convention on Cluster Munitions prohibiting the use of such devices, which can be scattered over a large area. Ukraine has accused Russia of using cluster bombs.

Will Putin be prosecuted for war crimes?​

The short answer: Unlikely, or at least not while he is still in power.

Cases at the International Criminal Court tend to revolve around the individual actions of commanders in the field, not their political masters. In addition, for Mr. Putin to be tried he would have to be arrested and handed over to the court. That seems improbable while he is in the Kremlin. Moreover, Moscow formally withdrew in 2016 after the ICC published a document describing its annexation of Crimea as an occupation, though this was a largely cosmetic move: it had never ratified its membership in the first place.

Russia could also veto any U.N. Security Council move to refer a war-crime case—specifically the crime of aggression—to the ICC.

The dynamic could change radically if Mr. Putin were no longer in power and a new Russian leadership decided to hand him over.

Some national courts, meanwhile, could move to prosecute Mr. Putin if they have what are known as universal jurisdiction laws. Germany did this in January when a court there sentenced a former Syrian intelligence officer to prison in relation to crimes against humanity committed during the civil war there.

Again, the problem would be how to arrest and try Mr. Putin.

Corrections & Amplifications
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has zeroed in on what he says is Russia’s decision to specifically target civilian populations. An earlier version of this article incorrectly spelled the president’s name as Volodymr Zelensksy. (Corrected on March 16)

"
 
Devastating on all levels.
:cry:

From the NYT today.
"

Mariupol — in southeastern Ukraine, near the Russian border — has been under siege for more than two weeks. It is the city where Russia last week bombed a maternity hospital and yesterday attacked a theater that hundreds of civilians were using as a shelter. It was unclear how many of those sheltering survived, according to a Ukrainian official.​
Since the war began, two of the few working journalists in Mariupol have been Mstyslav Chernov and Evgeniy Maloletka of The Associated Press. My colleagues and I were deeply affected by their dispatch, and we’re turning over the lead section of today’s newsletter to an excerpt from it.​
The bodies of the children all lie here, dumped into this narrow trench hastily dug into the frozen earth of Mariupol to the constant drumbeat of shelling.​
There’s 18-month-old Kirill, whose shrapnel wound to the head proved too much for his little toddler’s body. There’s 16-year-old Iliya, whose legs were blown up in an explosion during a soccer game at a school field. There’s the girl no older than 6 who wore the pajamas with cartoon unicorns and who was among the first of Mariupol’s children to die from a Russian shell.​
They are stacked together with dozens of others in this mass grave on the outskirts of the city. A man covered in a bright blue tarp, weighed down by stones at the crumbling curb. A woman wrapped in a red and gold bedsheet, her legs neatly bound at the ankles with a scrap of white fabric. Workers toss the bodies in as fast as they can, because the less time they spend in the open, the better their own chances of survival.​
“Damn them all, those people who started this!” raged Volodymyr Bykovskyi, a worker pulling crinkling black body bags from a truck.​
More bodies will come, from streets where they are everywhere and from the hospital basement where the corpses of adults and children are laid out, awaiting someone to pick them up. The youngest still has an umbilical stump attached.​
​
mail
An apartment building in Mariupol.Evgeniy Maloletka/Associated Press​
Each airstrike and shell that relentlessly pounds Mariupol — about one a minute at times — drives home the curse of a geography that has put the city squarely in the path of Russia’s domination of Ukraine. This southern seaport of 430,000 has become a symbol of the drive by Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, to crush a democratic Ukraine — and also of a fierce resistance on the ground. The city is now encircled by Russian soldiers, who are slowly squeezing the life out of it, one blast at a time.​
The surrounding roads are mined and the port blocked. Food is running out, and the Russians have stopped humanitarian attempts to bring it in. Electricity is mostly gone and water is sparse, with residents melting snow to drink. People burn scraps of furniture in makeshift grills to warm their hands in the freezing cold.​
Some parents have even left their newborns at the hospital, perhaps hoping to give them a chance at life in the one place with decent electricity and water.​
Death is everywhere. Local officials have tallied more than 2,500 deaths in the siege, but many bodies can’t be counted because of the endless shelling. They have told families to leave their dead outside in the streets because it’s too dangerous to hold funerals.​
Just weeks ago, Mariupol’s future seemed much brighter. If geography drives a city’s destiny, Mariupol was on the path to success, with its thriving iron and steel plants, a deepwater port and high global demand for both.​
By Feb. 27, that started to change, as an ambulance raced into a city hospital carrying a small motionless girl, not yet 6. Her brown hair was pulled back off her pale face with a rubber band, and her pajama pants were bloodied by Russian shelling.​
Her wounded father came with her, his head bandaged. Her mother stood outside the ambulance, weeping.​
As the doctors and nurses huddled around her, one gave her an injection. Another shocked her with a defibrillator. “Show this to Putin,” one doctor said, with expletive-laced fury. “The eyes of this child and crying doctors.”​
They couldn’t save her. Doctors covered the tiny body with her pink striped jacket and gently closed her eyes. She now rests in the mass grave.​
​
mail
Anastasia Erashova with her child in a hospital in Mariupol.Evgeniy Maloletka/Associated Press​
This agony fits in with Putin’s goals. The siege is a military tactic popularized in medieval times and designed to crush a population through starvation and violence, allowing an attacking force to spare its own soldiers the cost of entering a hostile city. Instead, civilians are the ones left to die. Serhiy Orlov, the deputy mayor of Mariupol, predicts worse is soon to come. Most of the city remains trapped. “People are dying without water and food, and I think in the next several days we will count hundreds and thousands of deaths.”

"​
 
nala said:
I think it’s nonchalant to guilt other countries like the USA into
Fighting for a country that has over 40 million people. The leader of that country made a choice and still has a choice but is trying to drag others in. Meanwhile his own people have fled. And to assume that the same will happen to other countries is speculation and fear mongering. Let’s all dive in and destroy this world bc you know, just in case… nope. We don’t jump in to solve other nation’s conflicts. This one is no different—except some people are being convinced it is for several emotional reasons. We are not the world police.
Also. I am entitled to my opinion in a thread that is asking for an opinion. Sorry not sorry that it disagrees with yours. I’m putting American lives first.
Click to expand...

You're mixing up two things: you don't want to put American lives in danger. You don't think other countries should get dragged in. That's one thing. And yes, absolutely that's the question of this thread.

But:
Just telling someone to surrender and give up to not shed more blood is totally different and is victim blaming.

("She should shut up so her husband doesn't get angry again ... That's what's landing her in the hospital every single time" - same logic).

Also:
"His own people have fled" is is not factual.

Please look it up. Women flee with their children to protect those. Able bodied men stay to fight. And those who don't WANT to stay HAVE to stay. Since the beginning men 18-55 are not allowed to leave the country. The nearly 2 million displaced people are in vast majorities children, women, elderly.


I didn't call out a simple vote: " no, let's not get dragged in there"
I point out that it's not the responsibility of the victim to stop fighting & surrender to stop bloodshed after having been attacked.
 
Last edited:
MaisOuiMadame said:
You're mixing up two things: you don't want to put American lives in danger. You don't think other countries should get dragged in. That's one thing. And yes, absolutely that's the question of this thread.

But:
Just telling someone to surrender and give up to not shed more blood is totally different and is victim blaming.

("She should shut up so her husband doesn't get angry again ... That's what's landing her in the hospital every single time" - same logic).

Also:
"His own people have fled" is is not factual.

Please look it up. Women flee with their children to protect those. Able bodied men stay to fight. And those who don't WANT to stay HAVE to stay. Since the beginning men 18-55 are not allowed to leave the country. The nearly 2 million displaced people are in vast majorities children, women, elderly.


I didn't call out a simple vote: " no, let's not get dragged in there"
I point out that it's not the responsibility of the victim to stop fighting & surrender to stop bloodshed after having been attacked.
Click to expand...

We. Are. Not. The. World. Police. And to liken them to an abused woman—not sure how these men who are not allowed to flee would feel about your analogy. Finally. Do your own research about why so many people are being swayed by their emotions when it comes to this war yet conveniently overlook all of the other global conflicts and atrocities. It’s called you identify with them bc they look like you.
 
Last edited:
Putin will be checked the moment he sets foot into NATO territory. He’s not going to be able to go round gobbling up all of Russia’s neighbours - much as he clearly wants to. He targeted Ukraine specifically because Ukraine is not a NATO member.

The stories are horrifying. But let’s be clear: They’re no more horrifying than the bloodshed that’s been a constant in our lives in other parts of the world since the beginnings of our lives - no matter how old we are. The US/NATO didn’t get involved in most of those affairs. It didn’t even occur to most of us to even consider that they should. The double standards that this conflict has unearthed are worth considering.

Ditto @nala: We - the US - are not the world police. And neither is NATO. We have neither practical jurisdiction nor moral obligation to try to be the world police. No more than we did in all those other conflicts that we didn’t get involved in. Our responsibility starts and ends at NATO borders. I found the realpolitik explanation articles posted earlier very helpful and astute, personally… Emotions and actionable foreign policy don’t walk hand in hand, and for good reason.
 
Last edited:
Not one drop of US blood, period.
They are accepting volunteers gather all your young relatives and go fight.
Do not send other peoples kids to do it.
Not our war.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top