Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 237

Thread: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

  1. #201
    Costin_Razvan's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    1,870

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    You want a shooting war with Russia over Ukraine? I'm fairly sure in a first strike we probable would knock out their entire land based nuclear rocket capability, and their command and control facilities to create a long enough delay for our attack submarines to sink most of their boomers before they reach launch depth.
    You're fairly sure based on what? Facts please? I can name a couple of reasons why your idea wouldn't work:

    Fact: Russia has the best land based AA/Balistic missile defenses in the world.
    Fact: They've got their land based nukes in hardened silos AND mobile vehicles like the Topol-M spread so far that trying to take them all out would be nigh on impossible.
    Fact: Russia would be able to detect any incoming attack with enough time to launch their own.

    A shooting war over Ukraine. Anyone wanting that is a cretin. I agree with Kissinger. You can't be foolish enough to expect Russia will ever accept Ukraine moving completely out of their sphere of influence. They would sooner launch a full scale invasion then let that happen.

    The west will not fight a war for Ukraine. Even McCain is not moronic enough to argue for it.

    Russia post Putin may be better or worse, but Putin post President would be in a pickle, so geographic containment and economic squeeze seems to be a better option. At some point, his electorate will get restless, and then either he'll resign or do something stupid that he'll get hammered for.
    At some point, some time, eventually, when the stars align and the chosen one is born the Russian people will turn against Putin over western sanctions. Until fantasy land becomes a thing we've got reality to contend with. Reality is that Putin's approval rating for all of December was 85%. Whether they feel about the way things are going or about lower ranked officials they do support Putin and will continue supporting him.

    A population will not rally against a leader when they blame the sanctions on the west while Oil prices, despite conspiracy theories, are not controlled by any one country.
    Last edited by Costin_Razvan; January 09, 2015 at 07:31 AM.
    "It's bizarre though. Donald Trump, an ageing, orange skinned reality TV star with a history of selling steaks and conning people, a trophy wife and one of the most fragile egos I've seen pretty much just destroyed the head of the interventionist faction in the US State apparatus, Victoria Nuland, after literally becoming President of the United states. We must live in one of the more interesting timelines."

    "The Powell Doctrine is the bible of every foreign policy thinker."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powell_Doctrine

  2. #202

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    Quote Originally Posted by Costin_Razvan View Post
    You're fairly sure based on what? Facts please? I can name a couple of reasons why your idea wouldn't work:

    Fact: Russia has the best land based AA/Balistic missile defenses in the world.
    Fact: They've got their land based nukes in hardened silos AND mobile vehicles like the Topol-M spread so far that trying to take them all out would be nigh on impossible.
    Fact: Russia would be able to detect any incoming attack with enough time to launch their own.
    Nice propaganda piece, in line with that Russian TV show where Russia was obliterating the U.S. unmolested.

    Quote Originally Posted by Costin_Razvan View Post
    A population will not rally against a leader when they blame the sanctions on the west while Oil prices, despite conspiracy theories, are not controlled by any one country.
    Actually the populations do rally against the leaders who caused the sanctions. The Russians are no different than the Iraqis, the Syrians, the Iranians or even the North Koreans. All it needs is for the standard of living to drop low enough. That is about to happen.

    From then on, all which matters is how good at repression is Putin's apparatus. While Russia is an oversized North Korea, Putin doesn't have the same type of control over the population. Which means he will be taken to a basement, his tie would be adjusted too tight, he would sleep for too long with a pillow on his face or he would have a hunting accident.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MareNostrum

  3. #203
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    16,794

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    despite conspiracy theories, are not controlled by any one country.
    And yet the House of Saud is showing it can (control oil prices) as long as it wants to pay the price (for low oil) and can hold together is close friends and comparable low cost producers in OPEC. Indefinably not really but in the reasonal political future they can.

    Fact: Russia has the best land based AA/Balistic missile defenses in the world.
    Well since you are not as far as I can tell recognized expert or have worked with all Ballistic missile defenses fielded by any nation now would be the time for a link or a dozen.
    Last edited by conon394; January 09, 2015 at 07:59 AM.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  4. #204
    Costin_Razvan's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    1,870

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    The House of Saud is only one piece on the chessboard. There's also other pieces like Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Russia, US etc. The Oil price drop is not just due to Saudi decisions.

    Well since you are not as far as I can tell recognized expert or have worked with all Ballistic missile defenses fielded by any nation now would be the time for a link or a dozen.
    Does one need to get into an argument as to why the S-300 is one the best missile system in the world? Here have a swing at it: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Grumble-Gargoyle.html

    Just a point the speed of S-300 missiles is greater then Patriot ones. Mach 5 vs Mach 6. The SM-3, that one missile that Russia always makes waves about when the US says it's going to deploy it on land in Europe, is faster at about Mach 8 and supposedly the best.

    Problem with that system is that outside of a couple examples in Europe ( including Romania, which solves one of our biggest issues that our missile defense is complete and utter trash ) that are land based, the vast majority of them are sea based and the US navy is spread around the globe and there's only a small number of launchers for them. Russia's also getting S-400s and working on S-500s
    Last edited by Costin_Razvan; January 09, 2015 at 09:16 AM.
    "It's bizarre though. Donald Trump, an ageing, orange skinned reality TV star with a history of selling steaks and conning people, a trophy wife and one of the most fragile egos I've seen pretty much just destroyed the head of the interventionist faction in the US State apparatus, Victoria Nuland, after literally becoming President of the United states. We must live in one of the more interesting timelines."

    "The Powell Doctrine is the bible of every foreign policy thinker."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powell_Doctrine

  5. #205
    Holger Danske's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    THE NORTH
    Posts
    14,490

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    Quote Originally Posted by Costin_Razvan View Post
    Fact: Russia has the best land based AA/Balistic missile defenses in the world.
    All of which will be saturated very quickly in a full out attack. On top of this the Russians have problems with integrated defense systems as their interoperability and C2 is still a work in progress. Sure, they have the most potent air defense ever presented to NATO, but it is imo way overrated and people tend to forget that NATO/US has a pretty good idea of it's capabilities and how to combat it.

    Also, having your strategic ABM system go naval is way smarter than having it on land, especially if you can use submarines as you can park it right next to your enemy half a world away, without him knowing were to look.

    Quote Originally Posted by Costin_Razvan View Post
    Fact: They've got their land based nukes in hardened silos AND mobile vehicles like the Topol-M spread so far that trying to take them all out would be nigh on impossible.
    Hardened silos aren't going to survive against bunker-busters. Their mobile Topols and Boomers will present a serious challenge though. So yeah, complete destruction of all nuclear weapons is implausible, but killing 90% of them will make it a lot easier for the ABM defenses - which kinda is the point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Costin_Razvan View Post
    Fact: Russia would be able to detect any incoming attack with enough time to launch their own.
    That is an assumption. Sure they'll detect strategic launches, but there are other delivery methods and ways of counducting an alpha strike and none of us here - for obvious reasons - knows about them.

    In any case I don't believe a shooting war between Russia and NATO would not involve nuclear exchange as the opening stage. It would be a confined skirmish with potential to spiral out of control. But I don't see it happening. The only reason for NATO to go to war with Russia is that it's members are being attacked by Russia, and I don't see Russia being that stupid.
    Last edited by Holger Danske; January 09, 2015 at 12:36 PM.

  6. #206
    I WUB PUGS's Avatar OOH KILL 'EM
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Nor ☆ Cal
    Posts
    9,149

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    Are we really discussing the United States of American going innto WWIII with the Russian Federation over anything short of an attack on our own soil?

    We had serious reservations about launching even limited nuclear attacks on Soviet soil in the event of all out war taking place between NATO and the Warsaw PACT. Losing the whole of Europe wasn't enough grounds to launch our weapons. Thinking Ukraine could trigger any sort of nuclear response is pure fantasy.

  7. #207

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    This thread and level of discussion here should go into some Fantasy Forum.
    American, French, Israeli and British government's ILLEGAL aggression against the Syrian people, without any proof for chemical attacks in Douma, and without waiting for OPCW to conduct their investigation..
    Sons of *******, leave that poor, war torn country in peace.
    If you are a citizen of one of these countries, then DO NOT ask any help from me on these forums, since, in protest against this aggression by your governments, I do not provide assistance/help anymore.
    Let Syria be finally in peace.

    A video of false chemical attack in Douma, Syria, which led to Western illegal attacks.

  8. #208
    Costin_Razvan's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    1,870

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    All of which will be saturated very quickly in a full out attack. On top of this the Russians have problems with integrated defense systems as their interoperability and C2 is still a work in progress. Sure, they have the most potent air defense ever presented to NATO, but it is imo way overrated and people tend to forget that NATO/US has a pretty good idea of it's capabilities and how to combat it.
    Saturated with what? Outside of cruise and ballistic missiles everything else would fail to get close enough to their targets to launch their paylods, bombs or missiles. Do you realize Russia has over one thousand S-300 missile systems along with hundreds of BUK and TOR systems?

    Also, having your strategic ABM system go naval is way smarter than having it on land, especially if you can use submarines as you can park it right next to your enemy half a world away, without him knowing were to look.
    Not so much in the case of Russia you can't hide your ships.

    Hardened silos aren't going to survive against bunker-busters. Their mobile Topols and Boomers will present a serious challenge though. So yeah, complete destruction of all nuclear weapons is implausible, but killing 90% of them will make it a lot easier for the ABM defenses - which kinda is the point.
    Bunker Busters are bombs, not missiles let alone ICBMs. Most of their arsenal is mobile either with mobile land or naval ICBMs. Good luck taking out their nuclear subs in the Northern Sea.

    That is an assumption. Sure they'll detect strategic launches, but there are other delivery methods and ways of counducting an alpha strike and none of us here - for obvious reasons - knows about them.
    Not an assumption. We're talking of a blown nuclear attack to overwhelm them with all you've got. They'd see that coming long before it hits. A few ICBMs being fired at them maybe but once those hit Russia throws everything it has at you.

    Thinking Ukraine could trigger any sort of nuclear response is pure fantasy.
    Pretty much. So is anyone arguing the west could just curb stomp Russian's nuclear arsenal and thus prevent them from retaliating.
    "It's bizarre though. Donald Trump, an ageing, orange skinned reality TV star with a history of selling steaks and conning people, a trophy wife and one of the most fragile egos I've seen pretty much just destroyed the head of the interventionist faction in the US State apparatus, Victoria Nuland, after literally becoming President of the United states. We must live in one of the more interesting timelines."

    "The Powell Doctrine is the bible of every foreign policy thinker."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powell_Doctrine

  9. #209

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    Quote Originally Posted by Costin_Razvan View Post
    A cold war politician who so happened to have helped mend relations with China and cemented the Sino-Soviet split that Obama's now taking the piss on? Yeah let's ignore THAT guy.
    Thats right, especially that guy.
    "Nobody is right, but historians are more right than others"



  10. #210
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    16,794

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    There's also other pieces like Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Russia, US etc. The Oil price drop is not just due to Saudi decisions.
    Wrong pieces. And sorry to say the drop is do very much to the fact the House Saud is one of the lowest cost producers, and reserves of cash and has made it explicit its not shutting down its taps (and its keeping the core other Gulf low cost producers on board) . Russia, Iran Iraq Venezuela are irrelevant since they cannot afford to not pump and are often not able to stop production in many cases.

    [QUOTE]Does one need to get into an argument as to why the S-300 is one the best missile system in the world? Here have a swing at it: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Grumble-Gargoyle.html[/QUIOTE]

    Fun article to read - kida like reading RT

    Can you provide a link to demonstration test where a battery of S-300s was subjected to an attack attack of ballistic missiles in the ICBM (not just some SCUDs) class and the data wand results were made public.

    In any case I WUB is right the US is never going to go shooting war over Ukrane, call in chips with the Gulf Arabs sure, help Kiev with cheap arms and such but I really doubt anyone in Moscow or DC wants to end the world or a backwater former Soviet Rebulic
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  11. #211
    Holger Danske's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    THE NORTH
    Posts
    14,490

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    Quote Originally Posted by ElvenKind View Post
    This thread and level of discussion here should go into some Fantasy Forum.
    Right along with your preposterous Su-25 theory.

    Quote Originally Posted by Costin_Razvan View Post
    Saturated with what? Outside of cruise and ballistic missiles everything else would fail to get close enough to their targets to launch their paylods, bombs or missiles. Do you realize Russia has over one thousand S-300 missile systems along with hundreds of BUK and TOR systems?
    Yes, Russia has around 1000 systems of unknown operational condition and readiness. All of which are a type that NATO has access to study and thus train against. These air defenses could be saturated by a combination of cruise missiles, air-launched expendable decoys (MALD) and the trusted HARP. Not to mention that the attacking air forces would first and foremost try to avoid the threats althogether and create temporary corridors where needed. That said, I'm sure the planners wouldn't underestimate the Russian air defenses. They'll cause casualties for sure, but they won't make Russia invunerable as many deluded people seem to think.

    Quote Originally Posted by Costin_Razvan View Post
    Not so much in the case of Russia you can't hide your ships.
    Thank you for the obvious input, captain. My point is that the US is properly more invested in mobile (and adaptable) ABM systems as it makes sense for them. Aegis is just a part of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Costin_Razvan View Post
    Bunker Busters are bombs, not missiles let alone ICBMs. Most of their arsenal is mobile either with mobile land or naval ICBMs. Good luck taking out their nuclear subs in the Northern Sea.
    Since Russian subs are louder than Americans I think the USN wouldn't have too much trouble in doing just that. And Bunker Busters will sure as hell destroy missile silos.

    Quote Originally Posted by Costin_Razvan View Post
    Not an assumption. We're talking of a blown nuclear attack to overwhelm them with all you've got. They'd see that coming long before it hits. A few ICBMs being fired at them maybe but once those hit Russia throws everything it has at you.
    Which is why I don't think an alpha strike would involve ICBM's untill Russia fires hers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Costin_Razvan View Post
    Pretty much. So is anyone arguing the west could just curb stomp Russian's nuclear arsenal and thus prevent them from retaliating.
    They likely can't be prevented from retaliating, but the amount of nukes they can throw back can be severly crippled to a point where ABM systems actually have a chance.

    You know what... Let's just agree to disagree on Russia's air defence capabilities.
    Last edited by Holger Danske; January 10, 2015 at 09:47 AM.

  12. #212

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    In any case I WUB is right the US is never going to go shooting war over Ukrane, call in chips with the Gulf Arabs sure, help Kiev with cheap arms and such but I really doubt anyone in Moscow or DC wants to end the world or a backwater former Soviet Rebulic
    Add to that the undeniable fact the West has already managed to make the Russian Empire smaller than what Peter the Great had left to his successors, without ever fighting the Russians on any battlefield.

    The West essentially wiped out 300 years of Russian expansion in just 45 years through a combination of sanctions, proxy wars and forcing the Russians into a ruinous arms race.

    All those things are happening again now, thanks to Putin's suicidal actions in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MareNostrum

  13. #213
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    16,794

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    Good luck taking out their nuclear subs in the Northern Sea.
    Yep looking really scary

    http://fas.org/blogs/security/2013/05/russianssbns/

    So Outdated subs, and maybe a few new ones the Cazr cannot afford anyway at $50/60 a barrel and with crews that hardly get to train (mind you that operational tempo was from back when oil was close to 3 time the price).
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  14. #214

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    Quote Originally Posted by Holger Danske View Post
    Right along with your preposterous Su-25 theory.
    And where did I post anything regarding SU-25 in this thread?
    American, French, Israeli and British government's ILLEGAL aggression against the Syrian people, without any proof for chemical attacks in Douma, and without waiting for OPCW to conduct their investigation..
    Sons of *******, leave that poor, war torn country in peace.
    If you are a citizen of one of these countries, then DO NOT ask any help from me on these forums, since, in protest against this aggression by your governments, I do not provide assistance/help anymore.
    Let Syria be finally in peace.

    A video of false chemical attack in Douma, Syria, which led to Western illegal attacks.

  15. #215
    Costin_Razvan's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Bucharest
    Posts
    1,870

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    That said, I'm sure the planners wouldn't underestimate the Russian air defenses. They'll cause casualties for sure, but they won't make Russia invunerable as many deluded people seem to think.
    You're arguing over nuclear war and yet add in conventional weapons? Here's a bloody hint: You can't get close enough to Russia's silos/Topol-Ms to actually wipe them out using ship attacks. Air attacks also aren't going to work because of Russia's wide air defense net unless you talk of things like the B-2s and there's only so many of those.

    Unlike some I never argued the invulnerability of a country's defenses, but somehow you want to believe the BS that America can destroy 90% of Russia's nukes. That's just laughable.

    So Outdated subs, and maybe a few new ones the Cazr cannot afford anyway at $50/60 a barrel and with crews that hardly get to train (mind you that operational tempo was from back when oil was close to 3 time the price).
    Has the Russia defense budget been lowered and we don't know about it? Point of fact it's actually gone up for 2015.

    As for Russia's nuclear submarines. They've got 12 of them active that are fully crewed ( beyond those they've got on skeleton crews just because they want to keep people on the payroll ). While America's Ohio submarines do have more missiles in them they still also have 14. It's treaty limitations really.
    "It's bizarre though. Donald Trump, an ageing, orange skinned reality TV star with a history of selling steaks and conning people, a trophy wife and one of the most fragile egos I've seen pretty much just destroyed the head of the interventionist faction in the US State apparatus, Victoria Nuland, after literally becoming President of the United states. We must live in one of the more interesting timelines."

    "The Powell Doctrine is the bible of every foreign policy thinker."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powell_Doctrine

  16. #216
    Holger Danske's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    THE NORTH
    Posts
    14,490

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    Quote Originally Posted by Costin_Razvan View Post
    You're arguing over nuclear war and yet add in conventional weapons?
    Actually, I'm arguing for conventional warfare as it would be far more likely. But don't let that get in your way now.

  17. #217

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    While allowing everything else to go to hell, the Russians have been carefully harbouring their submarine tech base, the Kursk being a painful reminder to their Navy, Defense department and Putin what happens when you let standards slip, not to mention how more intricate boomers are, and that submarines will play a greater role in the military and commercial spheres in this century. Especially since if they lose that tech base, it would take them two or three decades to recover.

    Last I heard the Russians were trying to cosy up to the Italians to get some of their tech in this field.
    Eats, shoots, and leaves.

  18. #218
    Garbarsardar's Avatar Et Slot i et slot
    Patrician Tribune Citizen Magistrate Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    20,615

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    Gentlemen, I suggest you calm down and steer clear of personal remarks.
    Thank you,
    Garb.

  19. #219
    YuriVII's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Texian Cossack Hetmanate
    Posts
    3,007

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    Quote Originally Posted by I WUB PUGS View Post
    Are we really discussing the United States of American going innto WWIII with the Russian Federation over anything short of an attack on our own soil?

    We had serious reservations about launching even limited nuclear attacks on Soviet soil in the event of all out war taking place between NATO and the Warsaw PACT. Losing the whole of Europe wasn't enough grounds to launch our weapons. Thinking Ukraine could trigger any sort of nuclear response is pure fantasy.
    Different times and different people in leadership positions. I doubt USA will go nuclear or even go to war with us over Ukraine. Name of the game is economic warfare.


    LOL @whoever was the guy that said Russia in oversized North Korea.

  20. #220
    Dr Zoidberg's Avatar A Medical Corporation
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,155

    Default Re: Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats

    Quote Originally Posted by Costin_Razvan View Post
    You're fairly sure based on what? Facts please? I can name a couple of reasons why your idea wouldn't work:

    Fact: Russia has the best land based AA/Balistic missile defenses in the world.
    Fact: They've got their land based nukes in hardened silos AND mobile vehicles like the Topol-M spread so far that trying to take them all out would be nigh on impossible.
    Fact: Russia would be able to detect any incoming attack with enough time to launch their own.
    Fact: Sticking 'fact' in front of a statement doesn't actually make it a fact.
    Young lady, I am an expert on humans. Now pick a mouth, open it and say "brglgrglgrrr"!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •