Intervention in Libya?

Previous page 1 23 4 ... 6 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
- deusvult
- O......O
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #30 - March 19, 2011, 11:28 PM

Libyans would have more ammo imo if they would stop shooting it off in front of cameras.

So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
My political philosophy below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
Just kidding, here are some true heros
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
- deusvult
- O......O
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #31 - March 19, 2011, 11:31 PM

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 19, 2011, 10:29 PM
The people of Bahrain have taken the protests to the US embassy ASKING the US to support their rights:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110307/wl_mideast_afp/bahrainpoliticsunrestus_20110307180421

This request for help/support has been clearly ignored:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/14/us-bahrain-usa-invasion-idUSTRE72D6RB20110314

All Aphrodite is asking is some consistancy is American impearlism. If you're going to invade one country for a reason, you need to invade all of them, or none at all. Its like what your mom tells you. Play fair, or not at all. This willy nilly impearlism as got to go.

So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
My political philosophy below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
Just kidding, here are some true heros
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
- billy
- Pub Regular
- Tripitaka ~ Closet Juice
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #32 - March 19, 2011, 11:33 PM

Quote from: deusvult on March 19, 2011, 11:28 PM
Libyans would have more ammo imo if they would stop shooting it off in front of cameras.

"we can smell traitors and country haters"

Quote from: arX on May 01, 2011, 03:33 AM
God is Love.
Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.
- L2PK
- function makeEpic(Post) { return Post.addMeme('COOL STORY BRO'); }
- Restricted
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #33 - March 19, 2011, 11:34 PM

Nigga please, this isn't imperialism, at least it doesn't seem like it from the facts we have at present. Its being done in response to a request for help by libyans, and is backed by the arab league as well as the U.N.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=L2pk
--
Previously donatelo
--
Watch Ishina lie and then try to squirm her way out of it like a worm
- deusvult
- O......O
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #34 - March 19, 2011, 11:35 PM

Quote from: Mount A Bison on March 19, 2011, 08:06 PM
The spectre of military humanism stirs anew. America’s devotion to liberty proves as sincerely felt as the enthusiasm of a prostitute on her tenth client of the night. The man who can bring himself to believe that the same White House gang that backed Mubarak to the bitter end as he mowed down hundreds of Egyptians is now tearing its hair out with abject worry about the welfare of the poor widdle things in Libya, who can imagine that the administration which stands by the despots in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia is now suddenly hot for democracy has my deep admiration. Such a leap of faith is impressive. But some of us cheap barroom cynics like to salt our politics with evidence.

The fact remains that every foray into militarism is couched in soothing benevolent terms. To help the poor benighted natives, to export democracy, to civilise the barbarians. Every single one. That’s standard interventionist rhetoric. Nothing to be marvelled at. Got to dig deeper. The United States is not the armed wing of Amnesty International. It is a self-interested empire like every other with imperial ambitions. A successful NATO strike against Gaddafi will serve only to rekindle the dying embers of the discredited idea of humanitarian interventionism at a historical juncture when it’s been roundly disgraced in Eye-raq and Afghanistan. Polls show that approval ratings for the wars are low. What a better way of rehabilitating the credibility of NATO than a quick painless war against a very weak power. Bam! And up soar the polls. Everybody likes a winning war. No, keep us the hell out. By all means give arms to the rebels (about whom we know little it should be noted) and freeze the assets of Gaddafi. But no foreign entanglements. This ain’t about Libya. It’s about the health of military humanism.

I’m just a country boy who is intellectually barefoot but can someone tell me why it is that NATO, an alliance formed ostensibly to battle a now defunct enemy, is still around if not for aggressive war-making? By whom is Europe menaced after the collapse of the Soviet Union (if at all it ever was)? Sez me: Disband the international criminal syndicate NATO. Beyond the Cold War its sole mission has been to provide an international fig leaf for Uncle Sam’s perpetual war for perpetual peace. Plague take it! The Europeans can protect themselves perfectly on their own. Gaddafi is no better or worse a tyrant than a dozen other despots whom the US enthusiastically backs. Unluckily for the ol’ playboy his relations with Sam have not been as smooth as other more plaint dick-tators. Lesson of the day kids: JustSayNo2War.

I didn't know Chomsky got cloned. I always liked that NATO should be disbaned, except it would lead to a fracturing of the rifle and ammo markets. Which seems to be a tad selfish even to me.

So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
My political philosophy below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
Just kidding, here are some true heros
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
- deusvult
- O......O
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #35 - March 19, 2011, 11:37 PM

Quote from: donatelo on March 19, 2011, 11:34 PM
Nigga please, this isn't imperialism, at least it doesn't seem like it from the facts we have at present. Its being done in response to a request for help by libyans, and is backed by the arab league as well as the U.N.

no fly zones, UN mandates, blah blah, its all imperialsim. The important thing is to highlight the hypocrisy, fear the impealist cog machine, and if time allows care for human beings getting killed.

So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
My political philosophy below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
Just kidding, here are some true heros
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
- Kenan
- Cultist
- Pub Regular
- Hwee cap-toored eet fohr kay-ohss !!!
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #36 - March 19, 2011, 11:52 PM

Quote from: IsLame on March 19, 2011, 11:18 PM
I never quite understood why the Arab league backed military action, although I have posted why I think they did.

link?

Quote from: IsLame on March 19, 2011, 11:18 PM

Whats your opinion?

I lack an in-depth understanding of the motives of Arab League countries but it seems that Egypt took a firm pro-rebel stance. On top of that it would be a PR disaster for the Arab League if they were to simply watch as Gaddafi continues to rape his own people.

Quote from: deusvult on March 19, 2011, 11:31 PM
All Aphrodite is asking is some consistancy is American impearlism. If you're going to invade one country for a reason, you need to invade all of them, or none at all. Its like what your mom tells you. Play fair, or not at all. This willy nilly impearlism as got to go.

Oh but there always is consistency in imperialism. Dictated by one's own interest such as force projection or commercial interests.
- deusvult
- O......O
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #37 - March 19, 2011, 11:58 PM

Quote
Oh but there always is consistency in imperialism. Dictated by one's own interest such as force projection or commercial interests.

Sounds like my life.

So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
My political philosophy below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
Just kidding, here are some true heros
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
- L2PK
- function makeEpic(Post) { return Post.addMeme('COOL STORY BRO'); }
- Restricted
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #38 - March 19, 2011, 11:58 PM

Quote from: deusvult on March 19, 2011, 11:37 PM
no fly zones, UN mandates, blah blah, its all imperialsim.

Because you say so, huh?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=L2pk
--
Previously donatelo
--
Watch Ishina lie and then try to squirm her way out of it like a worm
- deusvult
- O......O
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #39 - March 20, 2011, 12:04 AM

.

So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
My political philosophy below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
Just kidding, here are some true heros
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
- Aphrodite
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #40 - March 20, 2011, 12:06 AM

Quote from: donatelo on March 19, 2011, 11:12 PM
Its not about me believing it, you posted that bahrainis were calling for US to pressure their government, I've posted quotes from US admin doing just that. Do I really have to break down everything to the simplest possible words so you can understand it?
Quote mining is all you know how to do, you did that in your last post about the 'invasion' and now you're doing it again, even though you know quite well that my point was: The U.S has never intentionally killed a civilian in Pakistan. As in: it hasn't sent anyone to a crowded market to blow up himself and kill civilians, which is a favorite of the taliban, for whom you harbor sympathies. Get it now?
So you're suggesting that U.S is giving gadhafi his weapons right now while it blows up his air defences?
Typical, you run away/leave the argument when its shown how clownish your ideas are, just as you ignore the posters that know your B.S and call you out on it.

Doing that by saying the same BS they have been for decades? Yes yes, launching missiles at villages full of civilians isn't intentional at all The "taliban" foot soldiers that I harbour sympathy for are the ones across the border who are fighting for their right for self-determination. I have no sympathy for the likes of mullah omar (only interested in power) I was talking about the weapons used by bahraini and saudi forces! The US never got pally enough with gaddafi to supply him with weapons, although his forces were being trained by HM SAS:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/onthefrontline/6176808/SAS-trains-Libyan-troops.html

Quote from: donatelo on March 19, 2011, 11:26 PM
(Clicky for piccy!)

Is that your chacha?

Quote from: donatelo on March 19, 2011, 11:28 PM
(Clicky for piccy!)

If you think its a 'conspiracy' then you really have no clue about ME politics and should stick to posting memes.
- Aphrodite
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #41 - March 20, 2011, 12:08 AM

Quote from: deusvult on March 19, 2011, 11:37 PM
no fly zones, UN mandates, blah blah, its all imperialsim. The important thing is to highlight the hypocrisy, fear the impealist cog machine, and if time allows care for human beings getting killed.

The UNSC is prolly the biggest organisation of Imperialism! I mean the biggest arm manufacturing nations dictate global peace and wars?
- Aphrodite
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #42 - March 20, 2011, 12:10 AM

Quote from: donatelo on March 19, 2011, 11:34 PM
Nigga please, this isn't imperialism, at least it doesn't seem like it from the facts we have at present. Its being done in response to a request for help by libyans, and is backed by the arab league as well as the U.N.

As said above the UNSC is imprealistic because of its members. And the arab league is full of dictators so what they say or do doesn't influence my views. Btw, the UN never supported any action. The UNSC did---big difference between the two.
- deusvult
- O......O
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #43 - March 20, 2011, 12:14 AM

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:08 AM
The UNSC is prolly the biggest organisation of Imperialism! I mean the biggest arm manufacturing nations dictate global peace and wars?

You're right. Probably should have put The UNHRC in charge of the vote for the Libyian no fly zone. That way human rights would have been the paramount importance.

So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
My political philosophy below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
Just kidding, here are some true heros
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
- L2PK
- function makeEpic(Post) { return Post.addMeme('COOL STORY BRO'); }
- Restricted
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #44 - March 20, 2011, 12:14 AM

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:06 AM
launching missiles at villages full of civilians isn't intentional at all

Was the U.S's intention to kill civilians, if what you allege has happened?

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:06 AM
The "taliban" foot soldiers that I harbour sympathy for are the ones across the border who are fighting for their right for self-determination.

You want drone attacks to be stopped. That will result in TTP having even more of a safe haven than it already does, and result in increasing terrorist attacks in the cities of Pakistan, threatening people like me and my family. Effectively, by asking drone attacks to be stopped, you're supporting TTP.

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:06 AM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/onthefrontline/6176808/SAS-trains-Libyan-troops.html

Its your favorite tactic to pull out random facts out of context to try to make yourself seem right, I see that now.

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:06 AM

Is that your chacha?

No, he is the guy your parents have chosen for you.

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:06 AM

If you think its a 'conspiracy' then you really have no clue about ME politics and should stick to posting memes.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=L2pk
--
Previously donatelo
--
Watch Ishina lie and then try to squirm her way out of it like a worm
- deusvult
- O......O
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #45 - March 20, 2011, 12:16 AM

Quote
You want drone attacks to be stopped. That will result in TTP having even more of a safe haven than it already does, and result in increasing terrorist attacks in the cities of Pakistan, threatening people like me and my family. Effectively, by asking drone attacks to be stopped, you're supporting TTP.

No. This is not true.

So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
My political philosophy below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
Just kidding, here are some true heros
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
- L2PK
- function makeEpic(Post) { return Post.addMeme('COOL STORY BRO'); }
- Restricted
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #46 - March 20, 2011, 12:17 AM

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:08 AM
The UNSC is prolly the biggest organisation of Imperialism! I mean the biggest arm manufacturing nations dictate global peace and wars?

Forgetting easily that they're also the most democratic nations, give asylum to thousands of refugees from all over the world, and have the best track record of human rights in their countries.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=L2pk
--
Previously donatelo
--
Watch Ishina lie and then try to squirm her way out of it like a worm
- L2PK
- function makeEpic(Post) { return Post.addMeme('COOL STORY BRO'); }
- Restricted
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #47 - March 20, 2011, 12:17 AM

Quote from: deusvult on March 20, 2011, 12:16 AM
No. This is not true.

How?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=L2pk
--
Previously donatelo
--
Watch Ishina lie and then try to squirm her way out of it like a worm
- L2PK
- function makeEpic(Post) { return Post.addMeme('COOL STORY BRO'); }
- Restricted
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #48 - March 20, 2011, 12:19 AM

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:10 AM
As said above the UNSC is imprealistic because of its members. And the arab league is full of dictators so what they say or do doesn't influence my views. Btw, the UN never supported any action. The UNSC did---big difference between the two.

U.N secretary general Ban Ki Moon is in support of it.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=L2pk
--
Previously donatelo
--
Watch Ishina lie and then try to squirm her way out of it like a worm
- deusvult
- O......O
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #49 - March 20, 2011, 12:20 AM

One could support alternative methods for removing the threat from the numbskulls out there. Its a false dicotomy to say if you do/don't support X, you automatically support Y. For instance if you don't support the invasion of Iraq you support terrorists.

So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
My political philosophy below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
Just kidding, here are some true heros
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
- L2PK
- function makeEpic(Post) { return Post.addMeme('COOL STORY BRO'); }
- Restricted
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #50 - March 20, 2011, 12:20 AM

Quote from: deusvult on March 20, 2011, 12:14 AM
You're right. Probably should have put The UNHRC in charge of the vote for the Libyian no fly zone. That way human rights would have been the paramount importance.

That thing is a joke. It has Iran in its human rights commission? And until recently it had Libya in there as well.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=L2pk
--
Previously donatelo
--
Watch Ishina lie and then try to squirm her way out of it like a worm
- Aphrodite
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #51 - March 20, 2011, 12:21 AM

Quote from: donatelo on March 20, 2011, 12:17 AM
Forgetting easily that they're also the most democratic nations, give asylum to thousands of refugees from all over the world, and have the best track record of human rights in their countries.

China and Russia are democratic? Many Americans and Brits (including myself) would argue that we're far from democratic.
- Aphrodite
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #52 - March 20, 2011, 12:22 AM

Quote from: donatelo on March 20, 2011, 12:19 AM
U.N secretary general Ban Ki Moon is in support of it.

Unless all member nations on the UN vote for it, its not a UN thing. But I have no doubt almost all would vote for in favour of the no-fly zones.
- billy
- Pub Regular
- Tripitaka ~ Closet Juice
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #53 - March 20, 2011, 12:23 AM

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:21 AM
Many Americans and Brits (including myself) would argue that we're far from democratic.

Why?

"we can smell traitors and country haters"

Quote from: arX on May 01, 2011, 03:33 AM
God is Love.
Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.
- L2PK
- function makeEpic(Post) { return Post.addMeme('COOL STORY BRO'); }
- Restricted
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #54 - March 20, 2011, 12:24 AM

Quote from: deusvult on March 20, 2011, 12:20 AM
One could support alternative methods for removing the threat from the numbskulls out there.

The Pakistani gov. doesn't show any signs of doing/allowing a ground invasion into the tribal regions where the terrorists have a safe haven. In the absense of that drone strikes are the best option, at least they're keeping TTP disorganized to some degree, and restricting their ability to do terrorist attacks in Pk cities.

Quote from: deusvult on March 20, 2011, 12:20 AM
Its a false dicotomy to say if you do/don't support X, you automatically support Y. For instance if you don't support the invasion of Iraq you support terrorists.

But that isn't true, Iraq barely had any terrorists, and it was invaded under the pretense of finding WMDs. Asking for drone attacks to be stopped in the absense of any other strategy and willingness of PK gov to disrupt TTP is clearly supporting TTP by giving them a safe haven. If there had been any better options I won't support drone strikes either.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=L2pk
--
Previously donatelo
--
Watch Ishina lie and then try to squirm her way out of it like a worm
- L2PK
- function makeEpic(Post) { return Post.addMeme('COOL STORY BRO'); }
- Restricted
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #55 - March 20, 2011, 12:25 AM

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:21 AM
China and Russia are democratic? Many Americans and Brits (including myself) would argue that we're far from democratic.

With the exception of those 2, all other countries seem to be. (I don't know the full membership list). And I would say to those americans and brits, 'cool conspiracy bro'.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=L2pk
--
Previously donatelo
--
Watch Ishina lie and then try to squirm her way out of it like a worm
- Aphrodite
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #56 - March 20, 2011, 12:29 AM

Quote from: donatelo on March 20, 2011, 12:14 AM
Was the U.S's intention to kill civilians, if what you allege has happened?
You want drone attacks to be stopped. That will result in TTP having even more of a safe haven than it already does, and result in increasing terrorist attacks in the cities of Pakistan, threatening people like me and my family. Effectively, by asking drone attacks to be stopped, you're supporting TTP.
Its your favorite tactic to pull out random facts out of context to try to make yourself seem right, I see that now.
No, he is the guy your parents have chosen for you.

(Clicky for piccy!)

I don't think its their intention to kill as much as civilians as they can (they could just carpet bomb the whole region if they wanted to) but to say they don't intend to harm civilians when firing at villages is BS. Please remind me of the TTP existing say before 2003? So wait, by opposing the drone strikes I'm supporting the TTP? I guess that means the UN (the very organisation you claim to like) also supports the TTP as well as human rights organisations huh?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/2/us-drone-strikes-come-under-un-fire/

LOL, I ain't gonna marry no freshy. And I hope no girl has to marry you, dipshit.

*ignored from now on*
- Aphrodite
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #57 - March 20, 2011, 12:33 AM

Quote from: billy on March 20, 2011, 12:23 AM
Why?

Protests against the Iraq war, student protests regarding the uni fees increase, amount of millionaires in Cameron's cabinet etc. all indicate to me we don't live in a democracy. I was gonna vote lib dems but my mum didn't let me (out of religious reasons ) but now I'm glad I didn't vote.
- billy
- Pub Regular
- Tripitaka ~ Closet Juice
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #58 - March 20, 2011, 12:43 AM

Well, there is no such thing as a perfect democracy. Democracy isn't a state you arrive at, and then reach utopia, democracy is a process and a constant struggle to refine and defend it and perfect through institutions, free elections and liberal, individual rights priveliged over the collective. So I'd say, you have degrees of democratic societies.

"we can smell traitors and country haters"

Quote from: arX on May 01, 2011, 03:33 AM
God is Love.
Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.
- L2PK
- function makeEpic(Post) { return Post.addMeme('COOL STORY BRO'); }
- Restricted
- offline
Re: U.S Involvement in Libya?
Reply #59 - March 20, 2011, 12:44 AM

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:29 AM
to say they don't intend to harm civilians when firing at villages is BS.

So you agree that their intention is not to kill civilians. At most their intention is to ignore any civilian casualties that happen while they take out the terrorists which threaten the civilians in their country, but its not to kill civilians. Hence my point which you quote mined.

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:29 AM
Please remind me of the TTP existing say before 2003?

How is that relavent to our 'discussion'?

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:29 AM
So wait, by opposing the drone strikes I'm supporting the TTP? I guess that means the UN (the very organisation you claim to like) also supports the TTP as well as human rights organisations huh?

Yea, by opposing drone strikes, they're indirectly supporting giving safe haven to TTP.

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:29 AM
LOL, I ain't gonna marry no freshy. And I hope no girl has to marry you, dipshit.

Smd

Quote from: Aphrodite on March 20, 2011, 12:29 AM
*ignored from now on*

Typical

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=L2pk
--
Previously donatelo
--
Watch Ishina lie and then try to squirm her way out of it like a worm
Previous page 1 23 4 ... 6 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »