Jump to content
Airbrush

The North Korea Problem

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

I'm not sure.

I highly doubt there will be a war between the U.S.A and China. They're too closely related to start a war. If there is a war, it'll be devastating to both of them. Even if the U.S.A managed to conquer all of China(or Vice versa, China conquers the U.S.A) it would be so devastating and destructive, that it would be beneficent to neither of them. Plus, I believe both of them would launch every nuke they had before they could be destroyed. Soon as they realized they were on a downward slope with no hope of winning, they'd be like an animal caught in a corner. They will do everything they possibly can to preserve themselves. Which would probably result in the nuclear annihilation. China is closely tied to North Korea, sure. But are they willing to risk everything for a country that would be wiped out with little impact on their economy and life style? I doubt it. 

My point point exactly.  Particularly your last two sentences.  China needs to be told explicitly that they can't stay out of a nuclear war started by their very close ally North Korea.  If Tokyo or Seattle disappear, so will Beijing and Shanghai.  It's unavoidable.  We shouldn't pretend that it is not.  Kennedy publicly made this point clear to the USSR.  Trump should do the same to China.  Pretending this is not so is foolish.

19 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

China knows that the U.S.A sure isn't gonna risk a war between China. So threats against China won't work.

China is risking this war right now by keeping the Kim's in power.  It's time for China to choose.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, waitforufo said:

My point point exactly.  Particularly your last two sentences.  China needs to be told explicitly that they can't stay out of a nuclear war started by their very close ally North Korea.  If Tokyo or Seattle disappear, so will Beijing and Shanghai.  It's unavoidable.  We shouldn't pretend that it is not.  Kennedy publicly made this point clear to the USSR.  Trump should do the same to China.  Pretending this is not so is foolish.

China is risking this war right now by keeping the Kim's in power.  It's time for China to choose.  

 

What is true today that wasn't true a year ago, 10yrs ago, 20yrs ago, etc? You say China is risking war but in my last post I outlined the challenge North Korea has posed to the U.S. for decades now. It seems that then only thing which has changed is the diplomatic experience and patience in White House. I don't think it is correct/fair to expect China to shift decades worth of policies over night because the new U.S. President only knows how to threaten. The position this White House finds itself in is not unique or new. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

What is true today that wasn't true a year ago, 10yrs ago, 20yrs ago, etc? You say China is risking war but in my last post I outlined the challenge North Korea has posed to the U.S. for decades now. It seems that then only thing which has changed is the diplomatic experience and patience in White House. I don't think it is correct/fair to expect China to shift decades worth of policies over night because the new U.S. President only knows how to threaten. The position this White House finds itself in is not unique or new. 

Perhaps you are not reading the news.  The new little Kim has new toys.  ICBMs topped with nukes capable of hitting much of the US.  You think this is insignificant?  All the previous presidents worked but failed to prevent this day from coming.  The North Korean regime exists at the pleasure of China.  It's actions are China's actions.  It's time for China to step up and remove Kim and his ICBMs and nuke weapons.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, waitforufo said:

Perhaps you are not reading the news.  The new little Kim has new toys.  ICBMs topped with nukes capable of hitting much of the US.  You think this is insignificant?  All the previous presidents worked but failed to prevent this day from coming.  The North Korean regime exists at the pleasure of China.  It's actions are China's actions.  It's time for China to step up and remove Kim and his ICBMs and nuke weapons.   

Perhaps little Kim hasn't received the memo that use of weapons of mass destruction against the US or it's allies will result in the obliteration of the attacker. Boisterous threats do little to impress anyone no matter what the cheeto in chief seems to think. Little Kim, if he is indeed insane enough to think he can seriously damage the US even using nukes without repercussions, needs to be reigned in by his allies who no doubt do understand this concept. At this point I think Russia and China are having a great time playing with our insane leader but they have to be smart enough to know this shit needs to stop before the two man children ignite the vat of gasoline we are all standing in.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, waitforufo said:

Perhaps you are not reading the news.  The new little Kim has new toys.  ICBMs topped with nukes capable of hitting much of the US.  You think this is insignificant?  All the previous presidents worked but failed to prevent this day from coming.  The North Korean regime exists at the pleasure of China.  It's actions are China's actions.  It's time for China to step up and remove Kim and his ICBMs and nuke weapons.   

Every new thing North Korea does is considered a step beyond the redline. You insist their current capabilities have finally put the situation at critical mass but we have been here before. Bush laid out the threat posed by North Korea as urgent in his Axis of Evil speech.  Simply possessing WMDs made North Korea an immediate threat to the U.S. and its neighbors was the claim. You say this time it is serious but such has always been said. In 93' when they conducted they first nuclear detonation test it was considered leaps beyond the redline. Perhaps you are too young or weren't following the news before and don't recall the rhetoric throughout the decades. Maybe this is the first time in real time you are reading headlines saying "this time" North Korea can do X, Y, and Z. It isn't new. This also is far from the first time the capability of a potential foe has been used to justify action. It is why we went into Iraq. Remember when headlines said Iraq was working on Nukes? How'd that turn out. 

 

Can you name a war started pre-emptively which in hindsight is not viewed as a mistake? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Moontanman said:

Perhaps little Kim hasn't received the memo that use of weapons of mass destruction against the US or it's allies will result in the obliteration of the attacker. Boisterous threats do little to impress anyone no matter what the cheeto in chief seems to think. Little Kim, if he is indeed insane enough to think he can seriously damage the US even using nukes without repercussions, needs to be reigned in by his allies who no doubt do understand this concept. At this point I think Russia and China are having a great time playing with our insane leader but they have to be smart enough to know this shit needs to stop before the two man children ignite the vat of gasoline we are all standing in.. 

America has never gone to war with a country capable of doing significant damage back to it.

If Kim has nukes, the ability to destroy one major city may be enough to bring in a stalemate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

America has never gone to war with a country capable of doing significant damage back to it.

If Kim has nukes, the ability to destroy one major city may be enough to bring in a stalemate.

The British did burn down the White House and fire the Capitol in 1812. Might that not be considered significant damage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Area54 said:

The British did burn down the White House and fire the Capitol in 1812. Might that not be considered significant damage?

Fair enough.

However, I meant more like modern times. But in truth, I did use "never". So you are very correct on that. Good job on your history.

However, in modern times, 1960's to present, America hasn't gone to war with any country capable of nuclear weapons.

And I'm fairly young, but if I remember correctly, no country capable of nuclear war has ever been attacked. Or attacked another country capable of nuclear war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Raider5678 said:

Fair enough.

However, I meant more like modern times. But in truth, I did use "never". So you are very correct on that. Good job on your history.

However, in modern times, 1960's to present, America hasn't gone to war with any country capable of nuclear weapons.

And I'm fairly young, but if I remember correctly, no country capable of nuclear war has ever been attacked. Or attacked another country capable of nuclear war.

I understood your emphasis was more 20th/21st century, but I couldn't resist a touch of British braggadocio.

During the cold war period America has fought proxy wars with the Soviets, but I agree they have not attacked any nuclear capable country directly.

I disagree with your last two sentences. Israel has likely had a deliverable nuclear weapons capacity since 1966. Egypt, Syria and Jordan planned to attack it in 1967, but Israel initiated hostilities and thuswon the Six Day War, so perhaps you can discount that occassion. However, Egypt and Syria did attack a nuclear-capable Israel in 1973.

Then we have the case of India and Pakistan, both of whom have nuclear weapons and both of whom have been engaged in intermittent hostilities in Kashmir since partition. You could reasonably argue that these did not constitute war, but lobbing shells into a neighbours territory and firing shots across the border meet my definition of "attacking another country".

I'm nit picking just for the sake of historical accuracy. (And while I'm at it, lets not forget the undeclared war along the Chinese-Soviet border in 1969 which was initiated, I believe, by the Chinese. Only US pressure on the Soviets prevented a nuclear attack on China, whose own nuclear arsenal was, at that time, not thought to pose a serious threat. The concern was over the strength of the Chinese conventional forces.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

America has never gone to war with a country capable of doing significant damage back to it.

If Kim has nukes, the ability to destroy one major city may be enough to bring in a stalemate.

So Germany and Japan were not capable of doing significant damage? If Kim has nukes, and he surely does, and he can do more than hit the ground in the general area he wants to hit doing so would bring about a massive retaliation that would obliterate North Korea. US Missiles are almost accurate enough to kill an individual, if we knew his location, without even an explosive warhead. In other words a warhead through your living room window is not too far from true. This makes US nukes far more dangerous and it's why we don't use 20 megaton warheads. Nuclear weapons have a mystique around them that is almost supernatural when in reality they are simply high explosives. admittedly very high explosives but one nuclear weapon is not going to destroy the world and unless you can deliver multiple warheads with a reasonable amount of accuracy you are not even going to destroy a major city. Little Kim does not have bombs powerful enough or accurate enough to do much more than destroy himself. Kinda like shooting a bald faced hornets nest with a BB gun. 

 

Yes one of Little Kim's little nukes could kill a lot of people but he would be killing himself and far more of his own people than he could ever hope to do to the US. In fact there is a pretty good chance we could shoot down any missiles NK could fire at us but a zero chance he could shoot down even one of the dozens of warheads we could shoot at him with one sub. Not to mention our warheads are about 100 times as powerful as his. It really is like going grizzly bear hunting with a 22 pistol, yeah you could really piss a grizzly off but you would still become bear shit... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

Fair enough.

However, I meant more like modern times. But in truth, I did use "never". So you are very correct on that. Good job on your history.

However, in modern times, 1960's to present, America hasn't gone to war with any country capable of nuclear weapons.

And I'm fairly young, but if I remember correctly, no country capable of nuclear war has ever been attacked. Or attacked another country capable of nuclear war.

Pakistan is a Nuclear Power. Didn't stop us (U.S.) from sending our teams in after OBL. Hasn't stopped us from using drones and special forces on Paksitan's side of the Durand Line. Our use of force in Pakistan without their permission could very easily be considered acts of of war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Moontanman said:

So Germany and Japan were not capable of doing significant damage? If Kim has nukes, and he surely does, and he can do more than hit the ground in the general area he wants to hit doing so would bring about a massive retaliation that would obliterate North Korea. US Missiles are almost accurate enough to kill an individual, if we knew his location, without even an explosive warhead. In other words a warhead through your living room window is not too far from true. This makes US nukes far more dangerous and it's why we don't use 20 megaton warheads. Nuclear weapons have a mystique around them that is almost supernatural when in reality they are simply high explosives. admittedly very high explosives but one nuclear weapon is not going to destroy the world and unless you can deliver multiple warheads with a reasonable amount of accuracy you are not even going to destroy a major city. Little Kim does not have bombs powerful enough or accurate enough to do much more than destroy himself. Kinda like shooting a bald faced hornets nest with a BB gun. 

 

Yes one of Little Kim's little nukes could kill a lot of people but he would be killing himself and far more of his own people than he could ever hope to do to the US. In fact there is a pretty good chance we could shoot down any missiles NK could fire at us but a zero chance he could shoot down even one of the dozens of warheads we could shoot at him with one sub. Not to mention our warheads are about 100 times as powerful as his. It really is like going grizzly bear hunting with a 22 pistol, yeah you could really piss a grizzly off but you would still become bear shit... 

 

You're right. Those nukes we dropped on Japan in WWII were just pin pricks. It's surprising the Japanese surrendered.  Seeing as you are likely out of North Korea's range in South Eastern North Carolina you will be able to tell people in Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, etc, that they are big sissies for complaining about getting hit by such a tiny nuke.  What is that cheeto man in the white house even worried about?  Right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the big show of missiles is a diversion by N.Korea if they were able to smuggle nukes into Seoul, Tokyo, Washington DC, etc, in cars or trucks.  They could do business with Al Qaeda or any terrorist organization to deploy nukes in major cities of the world.  Then N.Korea can hold the world hostage.

Maybe there is no way to take nukes away from a nation after they have them.  We just need to get used to N.Korea having nukes.

The best leverage over Kim Jong Un is to have Kim's supplier of his favorite foods (China or Russia?) cut it off.  Give N.Korea all the rice and beans they need, but Kim and his generals will only have rice and beans also.  Then he will realize China means business, and maybe halt the nuclear development.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

Maybe the big show of missiles is a diversion by N.Korea if they were able to smuggle nukes into Seoul, Tokyo, Washington DC, etc, in cars or trucks.  They could do business with Al Qaeda or any terrorist organization to deploy nukes in major cities of the world.  Then N.Korea can hold the world hostage.

Maybe there is no way to take nukes away from a nation after they have them.  We just need to get used to N.Korea having nukes.

The best leverage over Kim Jong Un is to have Kim's supplier of his favorite foods (China or Russia?) cut it off.  Give N.Korea all the rice and beans they need, but Kim and his generals will only have rice and beans also.  Then he will realize China means business, and maybe halt the nuclear development.

 

Has North Korea ever attacked any other nation, have they ever used WMDs against anyone, have they participated in the proliferation of WMDs? The U.S. has done all the above multiple times. We (USA) have pre-emptively invaded countries, used nuclear weapons, armed Saddam with gas and helped Pakistan get Nukes. To some extent action speak loudly as words. If we dispassionately look at our histories it seems more likely that we (USA) would act first. Even within the context of the strong rhetoric Kim Jong-un is not expressing a desire to attack us first. Rather Kim Jong-on is carrying on about how fiercely North Korea would retaliate. North Korea's red line is being attacked. Trump's red line looks like a rorschach test.

 

Can you explain what the Trump administration wants or would accept which would de-escalate the situation? The U.S. currently doesn't have an expressed goal. We are not asking for Kim Jong-un's regime to be removed, not asking for their military to disarm, not demanding they withdrawn troops from someplace, or etc. With Afghanistan the goal was Al Qaeda. We told the Taliban govt to hand over Al Qaeda leaders or else we'd come for Al Qaeda and them (Taliban). In Iraq the goal  was to remove Saddam from power and disarm the country of WMD's (something they didn't have). Agree or disagree with Afghanistan and Iraq wars or not at least there were stated goals known to all in advance. What is the goal in North Korea? State Dept, Rex Tillerson, said the U.S. is not seeking regime change. So what are we seeking? I will need to know they answer to that before supporting military action by my govt on my behalf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, waitforufo said:

You're right. Those nukes we dropped on Japan in WWII were just pin pricks. It's surprising the Japanese surrendered.  Seeing as you are likely out of North Korea's range in South Eastern North Carolina you will be able to tell people in Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, etc, that they are big sissies for complaining about getting hit by such a tiny nuke.  What is that cheeto man in the white house even worried about?  Right?

Compared to today's bombs they were just pinpricks, now days one Missile carries several warheads each of which is at least 100 to as much as 1000 times the power of the Nukes dropped on Japan. He would have to actually hit a target accurately as well and the US is more than capable of shooting down NK missiles. He doesn't have the numbers to overwhelm our missile defence systems nor the technology to accurately hit a target, there is some doubt about his ability to hit the ground with a working warhead. Add that to the Head Cheeto In Charge and Little Kim being man children hurling insults at each other over social media and anything can happen.

 

I have to ask, since you say I am out of range so my opinion doesn't count, would you rather kowtow to Little Kim or make it as plain as possible that his country would cease to exist if he uses weapons of mass destruction against us or our allies? We should just  make nice and allow Kim to dictate to us because he might be able to destroy a city? Hell unless it's a rather small city and his missiles are really accurate, he doesn't have the power to destroy a city. All he really has is a BB Gun to whack a hornets nest with.

Appeasement of dictators has worked so well in the past if we give Kim what he wants he might find Jesus and become a force for good in the world.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Appeasement of dictators has worked so well in the past if we give Kim what he wants he might find Jesus and become a force for good in the world.. 

What does Kim Jong-un want? What are we demanding? I don't think the question to either is currently known.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

What does Kim Jong-un want? What are we demanding? I don't think the question to either is currently known.

 

Unless he really is stupid he must know that a nuclear exchange with the US would be suicidal. Little Kim wants South Korea, we are demanding he stop his aggressive stance in that part of the world (along with all the other platitudes of human rights and such) NK has and does some really bad things to it's own citizens, from concentration type camps to starvation. Most of NK problems stem from them neglecting it's own people in favor of military might. Worshiping Little Kim as a god who has no rectum is just one of the odd things about gods I guess. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

 

Unless he really is stupid he must know that a nuclear exchange with the US would be suicidal. Little Kim wants South Korea, we are demanding he stop his aggressive stance in that part of the world (along with all the other platitudes of human rights and such) NK has and does some really bad things to it's own citizens, from concentration type camps to starvation. Most of NK problems stem from them neglecting it's own people in favor of military might. Worshiping Little Kim as a god who has no rectum is just one of the odd things about gods I guess. 

Can you provide of a link showing that the White House has made any clear demands regarding what is happening with regards to North Korean citizens or a link showing a clear threat against South Korea made by North Korea?

 

To my knowledge my govt's official position isn't demading anything specific:

"We do not seek a regime change, we do not seek the collapse of the regime, we do not seek an accelerated reunification of the peninsula, we do not seek an excuse to send our military north of the 38th parallel," said Mr Tillerson, referring to the border between the Koreas "

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40797613

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

Has North Korea ever attacked any other nation, have they ever used WMDs against anyone, have they participated in the proliferation of WMDs?

Without having to do any research, "Yes" on parts one and three. I don't remember them using WMDs against anyone but I'd have to do some research. I'll look later tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Can you provide of a link showing that the White House has made any clear demands regarding what is happening with regards to North Korean citizens or a link showing a clear threat against South Korea made by North Korea?

 

To my knowledge my govt's official position isn't demading anything specific:

"We do not seek a regime change, we do not seek the collapse of the regime, we do not seek an accelerated reunification of the peninsula, we do not seek an excuse to send our military north of the 38th parallel," said Mr Tillerson, referring to the border between the Koreas "

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40797613

Just one of many, from kidnapping Japans citizens to actual military action against south Korea this craziness has been going on a long time...

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-21710644

https://www.quora.com/Is-North-Korea-actually-a-threat-to-the-world-If-so-why

Google is so jammed with this subject it's difficult to pick but threats to the south, Japan (not to mention actually kidnapping Japanese citizens from japan), helping other nations acquire nuclear technology. The list of threatsa abd crimes committed by North Korea is long and depressing...   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Just one of many, from kidnapping Japans citizens to actual military action against south Korea this craziness has been going on a long time...

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-21710644

https://www.quora.com/Is-North-Korea-actually-a-threat-to-the-world-If-so-why

Google is so jammed with this subject it's difficult to pick but threats to the south, Japan (not to mention actually kidnapping Japanese citizens from japan), helping other nations acquire nuclear technology. The list of threatsa abd crimes committed by North Korea is long and depressing...   

I asked:

"Can you provide of a link showing that the White House has made any clear demands regarding what is happening with regards to North Korean citizens or a link showing a clear threat against South Korea made by North Korea?"

 

You responded with links regarding what a potential threat North Korea. Not what steps the Trump admin is demanding for de-escalation or direct threats North Korea has made against South Korea. What they are technically capable of and what they has threatened to do are not one in the same. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ten oz said:

 

"Can you provide of a link showing that the White House has made any clear demands regarding what is happening with regards to North Korean citizens or a link showing a clear threat against South Korea made by North Korea?"

 

Quote

North Korea has frequently employed bellicose rhetoric towards its perceived enemies. 

In 1994 South Koreans stocked up on essentials in panic after a threat by a North Korean negotiator to turn Seoul into "a sea of fire" - one which has been repeated several times since.

After US President George W Bush labelled it part of the "axis of evil" in 2002, Pyongyang said it would "mercilessly wipe out the aggressors".

In June 2012 the army warned that artillery was aimed at seven South Korean media groups and threatened a "merciless sacred war".

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-21710644

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ten oz said:

I asked:

"Can you provide of a link showing that the White House has made any clear demands regarding what is happening with regards to North Korean citizens or a link showing a clear threat against South Korea made by North Korea?"

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-21710644

Quote

"If you follow North Korean media you constantly see bellicose language directed against the US and South Korea and occasionally Japan is thrown in there, and it's hard to know what to take seriously. But then when you look at occasions where something really did happen, such as the artillery attack on a South Korean island in 2010, you see there were very clear warnings," Professor John Delury at South Korea's Yonsei university told the BBC.

The North consistently warned that military exercises being conducted in the area would spark a retaliation.

Mr Delury argues that misreading Pyongyang's intentions and misunderstanding its capabilities has kept the US and South Korea stuck in a North Korean quagmire.

 

4 hours ago, Ten oz said:

 

You responded with links regarding what a potential threat North Korea. Not what steps the Trump admin is demanding for de-escalation or direct threats North Korea has made against South Korea. What they are technically capable of and what they has threatened to do are not one in the same. 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-21710644

 

Quote

Is the US a real target?

South Korean tests carried out on fragments of the rocket fired in December 2012 indicated it would have had a range of more than 10,000km (6,200 miles), putting the US well within striking distance.

However, there is little evidence that North Korea has yet developed a guidance system to ensure an accurate strike, or the re-entry technology to bring an intercontinental ballistic missile back down to hit its target.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Ten oz said:

"Can you provide of a link showing that the White House has made any clear demands regarding what is happening with regards to North Korean citizens or a link showing a clear threat against South Korea made by North Korea?"

@ Zapatos, You can not provide a link showing that North Korea, "regarding what is happening", has made threats to South Korea. You listed things done years ago and mostly by Kim Jong-il. Currently North Korea is not threatening South Korea. Kim Jong-un even released a statement saying he would ONLY use nuclear weapons against the U.S. and no other countries if North Korea is attacked.

 

Additionally South Korea is scolding both sides for the language. Upset with both the U.S. and North Korea:

"After Mr. Moon talked with Mr. Trump on the phone on Monday, his office said he emphasized that “South Korea can never accept a war erupting again on the Korean Peninsula.” On Thursday, his office said the escalation of military tensions or an armed clash would “not help any country.”

Leaders of Mr. Moon’s governing Democratic Party had more pointed jabs for Washington.

“High-ranking American officials too should refrain from using excessive language,” said the party’s chairwoman, Choo Mi-ae, without mentioning Mr. Trump by name. “Their impromptu and not-carefully-thought-out messages only serve to worsen the situation and play into the hands of North Korea’s shrewd intentions.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/world/asia/trump-north-korea-threat.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, zapatos said:

Without having to do any research, "Yes" on parts one and three. I don't remember them using WMDs against anyone but I'd have to do some research. I'll look later tonight.

Yes to one and three; which nation did North Korea invade and which nation did North Korea give WMDs to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.