|
|
|
|
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/12/2009 1:32:09 AM | | ^^^Whatever you say, pal--you've got all the answers. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/12/2009 6:47:31 AM | Skooch I don't think the acide test is whether our country is safer during the FIRST 9 months, our concern is if it will be safe in the last 9 months of Obama. Of course it is safe now, Bush put mechanisms in place the DEAR LEADER is disassembling.
As always Skooch I'm here for ya man. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/12/2009 12:22:18 PM | the DEAR LEADER is disassembling
More like "lieber Führer."
 | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/12/2009 4:44:16 PM | It's ridiculous to claim that Obama has made us safer.
There would be no way to quantify such a thing.
Even Homeland Security wouldn't be able to comment on this one way or the other.
I don't see that much has changed at all.
Obama promised to get us out of that mess and obviously he hasn't made good on that.
You know guys...push come to shove the President is just ONE guy you know. Much of what goes down has nothing whatsoever to do with the POTUS.
Presidents take credit for the good times and catch hell for the bad, when in fact we have the House, and Congress, and the special interests who REALLY run the show.
The President is a lightning rod for partisans to either claim and admire on one side, or criticize and detest on the other.
Ben Bernanke actually has more power over our daily lives. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/13/2009 7:06:44 PM | So now the Russians are backing off of the idea of consequences/sanctions in Iran balks during negotiations and making the Obama administration look weak and foolish in the process. How stupid and short-sighted can they be? Do they honestly think that by undermining Obama they're weakening us?
Don't they understand what our next administration is likely to be if the Obama kumbaya approach fails? All those people who are saying let's take care of business and who gives a shit about world opinion will be totally vindicated. Actions like these can only confirm the Bush doctrine that these so-called world leaders claim to so bitterly hate.
But if it comes to that, if Obama's efforts do fail for lack of international suppot, I can think of three places where a barrage of penetrators would make the point quite well that cooperating with the supposedly weak liberals among us is preferable to underestimating our resolve. Hit them all the same day and have done with it. After the initial shock and our expression of terrible regret over doing what seemed necessary, it will blow over. No one wants rogue nukes floating around.
How can people be so stupid!
Dammit Match, I really hate it when you appear to be right. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/13/2009 7:17:44 PM |
All those people who are saying let's take care of business and who gives a shit about world opinion
But Ace.... It isn't that some of us don't care about world opinion.... The world has been dragging their feet on everything.... I wish the world would stand up and be tough with those who laugh at them and think they will do nothing.... But Iran knows they will do nothing... just like Iraq knew...
While the UN just keeps spinning on their merry-go-round... Those who do not think they have the Ball$ to back up anything will just keep doing what they want.
I wish Russia decided to get on board.. and China... and Iran would just give up their nuclear plans.... But we know that won't happen... unfortunately.
I wish we could be bringing all our troops home from around the world... and that it was safe to travel anywhere in the world... It isn't America that has done this... Unless you want to say that America didn't roll over like most of the rest of the world to fanatics that are willing to die... to kill the infidels. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/13/2009 8:42:35 PM | I saw footage recently of one of President Kennedy's last speeches. He was saying that none of us want to live this way, in conflict, but we haven't been given any choice. I think the same is true today. And one sure way to invite trouble is to show your adversaries you're afraid of them.
England and France didn't have much heart for stopping Germany in the mid-1930's, but each of them had had hundreds of thousands of men killed just 20 years before. What's our excuse now? If the Cuban Crisis had gotten out of hand, 47 years ago now, the U.S. and the USSR each had enough nuclear weapons to kill 100 million people, or even more. It would have been the end of civilization on earth. Compare that to what Iran could do now--which is next to nothing. And yet this government acts as if using force, or even threatening it, is unthinkable.
When Kennedy first saw proof of Soviet missiles in Cuba on Oct. 16, he didn't ask to talk to Khrushchev. Instead, he ordered everything to be brought up--yesterday--and it was. By the time he addressed the nation six days later, the U.S. had moved five carriers and 100 other ships and submarines into position for a blockade, brought 1,000 aircraft within range, and moved up 100,000 troops to bases in the Southeast. 5,000 Marines were also landed to reinforce Guantanamo. That sort of thing makes an opponent tend to believe you're dead serious. But try to imagine it happening now.
It should be no surprise that by showing he's anxious for diplomacy to work, Mr. Obama is guaranteeing it won't. It's like imagining that by doing everything you can to show how badly you want to buy a particular house, you'll make the owner more flexible about his price. He recently cancelled plans to build a missile defense against Iran in eastern Europe, which made Ukraine and Georgia a lot more vulnerable to pressure from Russia. In return, we got an agreement to consider sanctions against Iran. And now Russia has put off any talk of sanctions for another week. If a baseball GM traded away so much for so little, people might start to wonder whose team he was representing.
The threat of a nuclear Iran tends to keep oil prices high, and as a net exporter, Russia benefits from that. Doing nothing to stop Iran also benefits it in other ways. Russia only backed off from selling advanced air defense missiles to Iran (which would have made an Israeli attack almost impossible) because Saudi Arabia insisted on it, as a condition of buying even more of the very latest version. Russia and Iran may also see a common threat in the Sunni jihadists in Chenya, Dagestan, and other areas near Russia's southern border. But the Russian leadership would reluctantly have to write all those advantages off, if a U.S. president made clear the U.S. would never allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/13/2009 8:47:00 PM | But Ace.... It isn't that some of us don't care about world opinion.... The world has been dragging their feet on everything.... I wish the world would stand up and be tough with those who laugh at them and think they will do nothing.... But Iran knows they will do nothing... just like Iraq knew...
All I'm saying is that the surest way to evoke the harshest possible response from us is to snub us when we ask nicely. Where I disagree with some around here is in my view that it is still necessary and appropriate for us to ask nicely first. If that fails, we do what needs doing, no further questions. But without that fair shot, we can't honestly say we're in it for the right reasons now can we? Nope. It could just be our own prejudice and corrupt influences foolin' us.
Still, no one should mistake our courtesy and desire for fairness for weakness--certainly not the tribal elders near the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan. The fact that we let ourselves get side-tracked in Iraq is on us. That was a bad strategic mistake with respect to the apprehension of Al Qaeda. As a result, we might have to regroup and wait a decade or more until the Afghan population is once again sick of the Taliban's oppression. That would be very unfortunate, but as our dilly-dallying with Iraq so easily proved, we don't have to defeat the Taliban_now._ Let them take out all the feckless warlords first and we'll only have to fight one enemy there when the time comes. We don't have to spend a lot of money on troops that can't win in the current situation. We just have to be ready to strike when the time is ripe. With people as restive as the Afghans, we shouldn't have to wait long.
As far as the border region is concerned, any tribal leader who willingly harbors Al Qaeda is welcome to the well-earned martyrdom such a choice entails. Of course they hate our drones. Who wouldn't? We hate their suicide bombers. I'd call that an even fight. Wouldn't you? Perhaps we should just wait and see which tactic proves to be more effective in the long run.
Is that how nasty y'all out there want us to get, 'cuz we're quite capable of it. We didn't whallop Germany or nuke Japan because we were scaredy cats.
Do remember that I'm the wimpy liberal of the bunch here. Those contard blowhards might all be talkin' out their asses to get their daily jolt of adrenaline and the applause of their lunkhead hawknosed buddies, but what possible gain could I have for saying things like this when they completely undercut my standing as a liberal?
Listen up, idiots! The main strategic error that Bush made was to jump the gun on Iraq and not plan it out through the occupation. We won't be making that mistake again any time soon. If I were on the Obama team I'd be gaming it out for at least 15 years. There is no statute of limitation on war crimes, so we have no need to hurry, now do we? We waited almost 30 years for Polanski. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/13/2009 9:42:14 PM | I don't understand why everybody is getting their panties all bunched up.
Push come to shove, Israel will just go and take it out.
Russia has no business interfering in this, but Putin is a hard ass and Obama isn't. YET.
But like I said before, Obama's stance is all show. Obama and company are not going to allow Iran to get out of hand.
Obama said that he was going to "change" a lot of things.....but then he got in there....and got schooled....and he's seeing that it's not so easy.
I agree that there is no rush.
I know one thing for sure. If we get hit again on our soil, Obama is toast. And he knows this better than anybody. He's probably not quite the pu**y everybody thinks he is. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/13/2009 10:32:27 PM | The center of the fight right now seems to be Pakistan. One big problem is that the government wants to keep *its* Taliban, while attacking other Islamists. But they are just one of a complex mix of jihadist groups in the western territories. The attack on the isolated American base a week or so ago was a cooperative effort among several of them. And since then, there have been big suicide bombings in Peshawar, at the Indian Embassy in Kabul, at a U.N. building in Islamabad, and the attack on the national defense HQ in Rawalpindi.
One reason for these attacks is that the army has gone into Waziristan, right in the kitchen of the jihadists. I only hope the U.S. is giving them technical support, or maybe more. The trouble with Pakistan is that Zia al-Haq did a lot to encourage Islamist extremism, and the country's riddled with it. Of course they believe Hindus have no right to live, either, so they stage things like the Bombay attack earlier this year.
I hate to say it, but I don't think this "hearts and minds" war will work. I don't believe most Muslims in Afghanistan, for example, want democratic rule, individual rights, and all that. Gen. McChrystal and the others who think we can train them to be a trustworthy ally are kidding themselves. Let them, the Pakistanis, and whoever else live like they want, but watch them very closely. And promise their governments that if they ever help anyone attack the U.S., it will come to finish them, and their countries.
I'm not sure Pakistan could survive being blockaded, for a start. Not that they could do anything to prevent it. Look at the geography--there aren't too many other ways to get things in and out. But that's not for now. We should be helping the present government to whip these people and bring the whole country under control. That would go a long way toward solving the problem in Afghanistan, also. The rats might go to Somalia, but they'd be a lot easier to destroy there. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/13/2009 11:49:23 PM | Here's a liberal analysis that comes to a similar conclusion:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/11/opinion/11rich.html | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/14/2009 12:23:29 AM |
All I'm saying is that the surest way to evoke the harshest possible response from us is to snub us when we ask nicely. Where I disagree with some around here is in my view that it is still necessary and appropriate for us to ask nicely first.
Ace.... There is asking nicely... then there is turning the other cheek... and than there is being stupid and playing their game... on their terms... delaying while behind in the dark of night they have a knife to our throat.
How many times do you have to ask nicely.... How many decades will it take before those on the left realize... we are past that... the rest of the world is not on board... and something needs to be done... or no more Israel.
Do you think Obama smiling and saying how great he is... and how nice he wants to play with the rest of the world... will make those who intended to do evil change their minds? I wish that was the case.... then I wake up!
Listen up, idiots! The main strategic error that Bush made was to jump the gun on Iraq and not plan it out through the occupation. We won't be making that mistake again any time soon. If I were on the Obama team I'd be gaming it out for at least 15 years. There is no statute of limitation on war crimes, so we have no need to hurry, now do we?
Wait... tell Israel there is no hurry... the clock is ticking... you better believe it.... wish it wasn't... but those who think they have all this time to play this wait and see game... won't like what they see.
It will only take a little to destroy Israel... It may not be easy... but a couple nukes making there way to Jerusalem.... and just think about it. GAME OVER | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/14/2009 12:49:07 AM |
but a couple nukes making there way to Jerusalem.... and just think about it. GAME OVER
That's why it's so dangerous for Iran to get the bomb. If it used Hizbollah, say, to set one off in Tel Aviv, Israel would know where it came from. And I don't have any doubt it would counter by using some of its 150-200 bombs to destroy Tehran, and maybe more. That would be the end of Iran, for sure, and possibly Israel too. It's hard to see how the U.S. could stay out of it--how could we afford to let a broken country become a huge cesspool for jihadists? | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/14/2009 7:47:46 AM | | If we're looking for the nightmare screnario, it could be Israel suffering a nuclear attack that causes them to respond by launching it's 195 of it's 200 nukes at every large Muslim city from Morocco to Indonesia, and saving 5 for Paris, Madrid, Berlin, Moscow, and Rome for their contributions in ondoing the Jewish state for political posturing in the UN over th past 60 years. The middle east oil fields would be radioactive for 10,000 years causing Europe to die shivering in the cold. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/14/2009 8:11:22 AM | Well at this point, if that's the scenario they all insist on playing out, perhaps we should just let them. Maybe they're all so used to our knee-jerk reaction to just ride in and save the day whenever and wherever that they figure they can push it as far as they want to with no consequences. It's worked so far for them but at what cost to us?
We have zero influence on Israel. They don't listen to us on anything. They don't help us keep them safe in any way. Their extremists provoke animosity at every turn because they don't want peace, they want the whole enchilada, and they'd just as soon put the entire world at risk than give up a square inch of their "entitlement."
If our friends in Europe really are pursuing a suicidal strategy, at a certain point we can no longer save them from themselves. Same with Israel. Same with the Palestinians. There's a European Union now. Let them figure out a coherent policy that will keep them in oil. Why are we arguing with individual Eurpean states about Mideast policy at all? Tell Europe to settle up on what they want among themselves and then we'll talk.
Mutually assured destruction is an ugly thing, but maybe we just need to let all these people stare it in the eye for real. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/14/2009 9:45:37 AM |
they'd just as soon put the entire world at risk than give up a square inch of their "entitlement."
Are you claiming that the victor isn't entitled to territory it acquires in a war to defend itself? Israel owns the West Bank and Gaza because in 1967, it defeated a coalition of Arab states that was trying--for the third time--to destroy it. Israel already returned most of the Sinai to Egypt after the 1973 war, in exchange for Egypt's promise not to attack it again.
I don't believe Israel is putting anyone at risk. The Palestinian Arabs' refusal of every reasonable offer by Israel convinced me long ago they're not acting in good faith. Hamas is dedicated to Israel's destruction, and that leaves nothing to discuss. Iran and Syria have subverted Lebanon through Hizbollah, which three years ago attacked Israeli civilians with hundreds of artillery rockets supplied by Iran. It now has between 10 and 15 thousand, some of which can probably reach Tel Aviv.
Islamist extremism would be just as malignant--maybe more so--if there were no Israel. The old Arab selling oranges in Gaza may be a good guy who just wants to live in peace, and so may most of his friends and neighbors. Most Germans were lukewarm about Nazism, too. That's always the tragedy, that fanatics and murderers can make a territory or a country a menace, even if most people who live there are not.
As long as peaceful Arabs allow jihadists to speak for them, they can't expect Israel to do nothing about these jihadists, both in Gaza and the West Bank. If Israel were really the tyrannical country of Islamist propaganda, it would have done for every Arab in both areas a long time ago. Israel's restraint has caused thousands of its people to be killed or maimed. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/14/2009 10:32:45 AM | I believe Israel has, and would, make any number of concessions for real peace. For any number of reasons, their opponents under several names and guises are not sincere, and seem to be fixated on their definition of an end game which would include the destruction of the state of Israel as currently understood.
I believe Bush and his team understood the problem in this context, lefty fantasy dwellers would imagine our doe-eyed, smooth talking, forgot how many states in America, charm boy could persuade these characters to drop ancient hatreds. Silly childlike thinking that is increasing the dangers by the moment, not the least for which by planting the idea America will not act.
I'm once again (after a 30 year interval) viewing "The World At War", the 50 plus hour documentary on the rise of Hitler to power, to the end. I'm through the first 4 hours and the parallels of the 1930's to today's news are unsettling. Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini are played in the current version by Putin, A-jad and Kim Jung Il. Neville Chamberlain is played by Ozero in a rare piece of central casting. Gordon Brown is playing the part of the French surrenderer, Sarkozhy nicely cast as FDR. In any case generally as large a group of mediocrities as ever been mustered up to meander into global disaster. Thank you lefty appeasers everywhere. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/14/2009 11:33:35 AM | Personally I think something happened in 06... It was around this time, Bush lost his bite... Even though I believe he tried to use the UN before going into Iraq... and just lost patience with them because the UN didn't back up any of it's strong talk... Just like it won't today against Iran... Bush acted... not everyone liked it, but he acted.... Since 06 he too decided to sit on the fence... with North Korea and Iran... just sitting there watching... as Iran and North Korea kept laughing and developing.
06... what happened then... Oh yes... Washington became Liberal... except for the White House. Bush seemed to have gone into hiding... and no wonder how everyone turned on him. Slowly disappearing in 07.... gone in o8
What real sanctions have the UN upheld... back against Iraq... with North Korea... and Iran. What did the UN do with Hizbollah in Lebanon a few years back? Nothing to help Israel... Nothing to help Lebanon... Only helped Hizbollah gain a stronghold on Lebanon, helping Iran and Syria in the long run.
Those that want to jump on Israel for defending themselves is like getting mad at a small kid on a play ground at school getting picked on by all the bullies.... after running to the teachers for help and not getting it... finally decides to grow teeth and fight back... And then the teachers turn away when the bullies strike, but yell at the little guy for hitting back.
America is like the kid on the playground who sticks up for those who get picked on... Maybe sometimes we pound the bullies rather than pull them off the little guy... But it's because you think that will keep them from picking on the little guy later... (But other students look at us as being bullies ourselves) So now... we too have decided to hang out with those other students who want to just look away... and not get involved... thinking the bullies will just get tired of bullying... rather than realizing they won't tire... until that little guy is dead. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/14/2009 11:42:06 AM |
I don't believe Israel is putting anyone at risk. The Palestinian Arabs' refusal of every reasonable offer by Israel convinced me long ago they're not acting in good faith. Hamas is dedicated to Israel's destruction, and that leaves nothing to discuss. Iran and Syria have subverted Lebanon through Hizbollah, which three years ago attacked Israeli civilians with hundreds of artillery rockets supplied by Iran. It now has between 10 and 15 thousand, some of which can probably reach Tel Aviv.
Islamist extremism would be just as malignant--maybe more so--if there were no Israel. The old Arab selling oranges in Gaza may be a good guy who just wants to live in peace, and so may most of his friends and neighbors. Most Germans were lukewarm about Nazism, too. That's always the tragedy, that fanatics and murderers can make a territory or a country a menace, even if most people who live there are not.
As long as peaceful Arabs allow jihadists to speak for them, they can't expect Israel to do nothing about these jihadists, both in Gaza and the West Bank. If Israel were really the tyrannical country of Islamist propaganda, it would have done for every Arab in both areas a long time ago. Israel's restraint has caused thousands of its people to be killed or maimed.
These are very good points that bear repeating. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/14/2009 12:32:22 PM | One similarity I notice is the unwillingness even to threaten the use of force, when the risks are small. The result then was to invite much more dangerous aggression.
Churchill cited Italy's 1935 expedition to invade Ethiopia as a golden opportunity to prevent the war that England missed. The League of Nations threatened sanctions. But when Mussolini hinted sanctions would mean war, the League diluted them enough for Italy to tolerate. England reinforced its fleet at Alexandria, right next to the Suez Canal the Italian troop ships had to pass through, and it looked at first like it meant to do something serious.
The Royal Navy could have assembled a much stronger naval force than Italy had guarding its troop ships. It could also have positioned this fleet within range of its air bases in Egypt--and out of range of Italy's land-based aircraft--blocked the way, and dared Mussolini to try to pass. Churchill said Italy would have had such a slim chance of winning a large naval battle under those one-sided conditions that he was sure Mussolini would never have dared it. He also thought that the blow a retreat would have dealt to Mussolini's prestige might easily have cost him his power. Without a shot being fired. But nothing was done, and Churchill notes that the lesson that England wouldn't risk war was not lost on Hitler. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/14/2009 3:57:46 PM | Israel now has three German-made diesel subs, with two more being built. These are supposed to be the quietest, most capable conventionally powered subs in the world. One unusual feature: four oversized torpedo tubes that would just fit a cruise missile Israel makes. It would only make sense to have so few if they carried nuclear warheads, and that's what the experts believe.
These are probably very powerful--maybe 200 kilotons. (The U.S. had a 200 kiloton warhead for its sub-launched cruise missiles that fit through a standard 21-inch torpedo tube and weighed less than 300 lbs.) So even if Israel's land-based missiles were destroyed, it would still have enough to finish the attacker.
But how to get from Israel's bases on the Mediterranean to the Arabian Sea or the Gulf? You strike a deal with Egypt--which doesn't like what Iran's doing either--to let your subs pass through the Suez Canal. Which one of them did this summer. When there are five, they may try to keep two of them outside the Med. That would be enough to obliterate Tehran and several other large cities. Maybe Oman could offer them a base to use--they've got no use for Tehran, either. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/14/2009 4:23:21 PM | It will take a nuke to dent the nuke plant at Qom and based upon Russia's adamancy at no sanctions on Iran it could come sooner than later. No sense at all in talking sanctions if Russia is not on board. There will be a UN inspection mission on October 25, unless Iran stands this plant down Israel will strike before I find Miss Right and pick out the towels.
More bad news. Russian leaders reserved the right to premptively strike Russian enemies and specifically mentioned the US and NATO as targets.
Anyone notice how the Putin didn't/wouldn't meet with Hillary when she came negotiating? I think rather than actually negotiating she gave a speech to some school kids about the importance of abortion rights or some other critical state business.
You libs had it right, we just needed a happy-faced, accessible, reasonable guy and the world would get all cooperative. They wouldn't be pulling this schoolyard bully stuff on Bush. I can only hope really bad things happen to the western Europeans (not Poland and Czechs, they understand leftist evil) for trashing Bush and supporting this clueless charm boy. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/14/2009 9:35:38 PM | You all seem to think the cold war is actually over, just new forms of proxy war, cold or hot. New allies same old story:
Venezuela just bought 2 billion in arms from Russia.
Russia needs petrol dollars from Iran.
The push for South America is on again.
Korea is selling technology to Iran.
Saudi Arabia is buying Russian air defense systems.
The Geo political landscape is changing and Obama is to smart for his or our own good.
The Chinese are buying up resources world wide.
Obama believes he is the post America President and that American superiority is at its end.
Just check the agreements that were signed at the last G20 meeting.
He believes in internationalism and will sell our sovereignty down the river.
Read his books, he told us who he was, before the ignorant masses voted for him. | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/14/2009 10:17:17 PM | The thing is Obama supporters will defend him to the end... even if someone was pointing a gun at their heads... they would blame Bush some how.
I just don't get it.... How can so many people be asleep? 
I mean come on... The writing on the wall couldn't be any bolder.
Than again.... maybe some of us can't read? | |
|
| Our New President
Posted: 10/15/2009 12:27:20 AM | That's exactly what Mr. Obama's about. Charles Krauthammer just had an outstanding article on how Obama sees this country. Hits it right on the head--he *wants* the U.S. to decline, as a kind of penance for its "arrogance," and for past "sins" like slavery. I'll only be ashamed of my country if people buy that bilge, after they figure it out. I doubt that many will. I don't think the 27,000 who fell in a single day in 1862 at Antietam, or all those crosses in the cemeteries in Normandy, spell "arrogance" to most of us.
Feigned cosmopolitanism and disillusionment with this country is quite the thing these days. "Why, oh why, can't we be like the Eur-o-pee-ans??" We have a whole subculture of dopes who never tire of telling anyone who will listen about America's faults. Of course, these faults aren't so bad they want to leave for Finland anytime soon. They're the jihadists' "useful idiots" and fifth columnists, but even so I believe almost all of them would be ashamed, if we were attacked here again, to realize some of the blood was on their hands. With few exceptions, they've been duped by a much smaller number of real traitors.
They are the same kind of people, mostly young, who cheered President Reagan when he went on TV in 1986 to tell the country about the air strikes he'd ordered on Libya. It had sent terrorists to bomb a Berlin disco where it knew U.S. servicemen hung out, killing several of them. Mr. Reagan wasn't having any of that. I remember that at one point he paused, and then said something like: "They started this fight--and we finished it." Everyone where I was clapped, and whistled, and pumped their fists. Some started to chant "U-S-A! U-S-A!"
It was a nice feeling, to see so many other Americans so proud of this country, and not afraid to show it. Not much of that feeling around today--but then look who's managing the team. | |
|
|
| Page 70 of 78
|
38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78 |
|
Home
login 
