Utopia Talk / Politics / Those wild and crazy Russians!

McKobb Member	Mon Nov 26 01:49:34 Why don't they just invade already? Quit pussyfooting around and shit or get off the pot!
jergul large member	Mon Nov 26 02:58:07 Ukraine is its own deterrent. If you invade the Ukraine, you have the Ukraine. And who in God's name would want that? Nothing untoward occurred. Norway has quite regularly shot hole in Russian trawlers. There is a procedural way of doing everything that went down.
McKobb Member	Mon Nov 26 03:19:28 Like how they proceeded to take Crimea!
jergul large member	Mon Nov 26 04:43:43 If you want to cheese cut, then the border areas including parts that would give Russia land access to Crimea is quite valuable. Arguably even the rest of the black sea coast zone. So if you meant that Russia should take that and leave a rump Ukraine, then sure. Maybe Poland wants the North back too.
jergul large member	Mon Nov 26 04:44:36 I would however recommend Poland not to do it. It would mean it would have a northern chunk of Ukraine.
Average Ameriacn Member	Mon Nov 26 08:51:03 http://www...ng-test-set-russian-aggression West is once again failing test set by Russian aggression 26 November 2018 Author(s): Edward Lucas Edward Lucas is Senior Vice President at the Centre for European Policy Analysis (www.cepa.org) Imagine that it is 1 September 1939. German troops have just attacked Poland. Should the outside world a) call for calm b) denounce Hitler’s aggression c) help Poland? Seen from a modern perspective, the answer is clear. Pre-war Poland, although far from perfect, was the innocent party in the dispute and protected by international defence agreements with Britain and France. Germany had a record of aggression. It would be absurd to ask both sides to de-escalate the conflict, when only one side is escalating it. Nor would it make sense to try to broker an agreement. German troops should withdraw from Poland; Germany should pay compensation for damage and injuries. Then we can try talking. The only real question, from today’s standpoint, is what kind of sanctions should be imposed on the Nazi regime in Berlin, and what kind of military assistance could practically be offered to Poland. This framework is useful in assessing Russia’s attack on Ukraine in the Sea of Azov. At the time of writing, some details are still unclear. But the big picture is straightforward. Ukraine has the right to navigate freely through these waters, not only under international law, but under a treaty signed with Russia. The Kremlin, after months of escalating harassment and other mischief, blocked Ukraine’s access to the sea. Russian border patrol vessels fired on and seized three Ukrainian ships. Several crew members were wounded. Blocking the Sea of Azov to Ukrainian ships is part of a bigger Russian plan. One element is to isolate the port of Mariupol, crippling the economy of Ukraine’s south-eastern region. It turns up the heat in Ukrainian politics. But more importantly, it is a diplomatic gambit. It tests not Ukraine’s resolve, but the West’s. Here Russia has already enjoyed an easy win. Although some countries—notably Canada—responded with pitch-perfect words, straightforwardly condemning Russian aggression, others equivocated. Germany’s foreign minister, Heiko Mass, urged both sides to de-escalate. NATO and the European Union also mixed supportive words for Ukraine and criticism of Russia with calls for “restraint and de-escalation” (NATO secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg) and “the utmost restraint” (EU foreign affairs spokeswoman Maja Kocijančič). Most worryingly of all (for us, and most pleasingly for Russia) there was no early response from the US. (The State Department did issue a routine condemnation of Russian aggression a few days earlier, in a statement marking the Holodomor). It may get better. There is talk of more sanctions. In the US, Congress will have something to say, increasing the pressure on the administration. Russia has to explain itself at the UN Security Council. But this is probably too little, and certainly too late. The lesson is clear for the Kremlin. The West is divided and slow to react. It does not regard Ukraine as an ally. Instead it puts Europe’s biggest and bravest victim of Kremlin aggression on the same page as its tormentor. The right response would have combined kinetic, symbolic and financial measures. A NATO naval flotilla in the Black Sea would pay a friendly visit to Mariupol. Bilateral military assistance to Ukraine would be stepped up. The EU would send its tongue-tied foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, to Kyiv. Western countries would announce a temporary ban on official and business visas for Russians. Countries like Britain would announce forthcoming legislation to restrict the rights of anonymously-owned “shell” companies to buy property or access the financial system. That would signal seriousness. Russia’s ability to escalate and provoke should be no surprise to Western decisionmakers. Yet we fail the test time after time—and the bill is paid by our allies.
Rugian Member	Mon Nov 26 09:40:35 Putin's getting cocky. Might not be long before we see Russian military hardware getting obliterated.
jergul large member	Mon Nov 26 09:47:59 Ruggy Yah. Most def. We should send in the Norwegian Navy.
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Mon Nov 26 10:36:46 Ukraine Declares Martial Law As Russia Refuses To Release Captured Ships http://www...refuses-release-captured-ships
Rugian Member	Mon Nov 26 10:55:02 Jergul, You needn't worry about it. When the time comes, we'll send actual men to take care of the Russians.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Nov 26 11:16:36 how soon til Trump states Russian talking points?
hood Member	Mon Nov 26 11:54:03 There are good people on both sides.
Paramount Member	Mon Nov 26 11:55:53 If Israel can run a blockade on Gaza, why can’t Russia run a blockade on the straight? And if Israel can capture civilian ships on international waters why can’t Russia capture ships too?
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Mon Nov 26 12:51:44 Atlantic Council‏Verified account @AtlanticCouncil Follow Follow @AtlanticCouncil More If the West does not react—and if Western media facilitate this by focusing on sideshows like "Martial Law"—then Putin will have won another gamble, says John Herbst, a former US ambassador to Ukraine. 8:02 AM - 26 Nov 2018
jergul large member	Mon Nov 26 13:28:48 Para That is actually the precedent. Does an occupying power have rights and duties in the waters off the land it occupies? I would give that a tentative yes. It does indeed have rights and duties in waters off the land it occupies. This does not extend to blockading Maripol of course. ST Martial law is rather a big deal. Arresting ships and closing off a sea route is not such a big deal (though Russia would need to release them and open up navigation quickly as the big deal factor is a function of time). We will see how it plays out. Arresting naval vessels indefinitely is an act of war as Aeros would say. As would a defacto blokade of Maripol be.
jergul large member	Mon Nov 26 13:29:40 Ruggy Lay off the kewl-aid.
Rugian Member	Mon Nov 26 13:35:53 Jergul, If and when the time comes, nobody will need or expect Norway to help out in any meaningful way. You guys can stick to what you do best, namely letting your women open their legs to the occupiers. It's probably the only way you'll ever achieve a sustainable birth rate anyway.
jergul large member	Mon Nov 26 13:38:25 Ruggy Kewl.
Rugian Member	Mon Nov 26 13:40:01 I look forward to that day in 2065 when your adopted grandson Achmed al-Nurwiggi will be defending the apology your country gives to the sluts who couldn't resist those handsome blue and white striped uniforms.
Rugian Member	Mon Nov 26 13:42:45 I mean, for fucks sake. Who here would ever seriously believe that if WWIII broke out wed be turning to fucking NORWAY to step up.
jergul large member	Mon Nov 26 13:47:25 Ruggy I was alluding to how much the Norwegian navy sucks. Like I said. Lay off the kewl-aid. It is making you stupid.
Rugian Member	Mon Nov 26 13:50:43 Jergul, You're really going to have to explain how a sarcastic quip about sending in the Norwegian Navy to obliterate Russian hardware was supposed to have been interpreted as "lol Norway sucks." Time for you to move to a warmer climate, the Arctic isolation is driving you mad.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 14:40:30 Ukraine to begin Martial law on Wednesday.
werewolf dictator Member	Mon Nov 26 14:56:21 what was ukraine military doing entering russia anyway but i guess by removing remaining ukrainian freedoms with martial law.. ukraine can now defeat russian warships jets helicopters and missiles when sending warships into sea of azov.. because one logically follows the other
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 16:13:56 Ukraine had every right to be there. Their country borders the Sea of Azov.
jergul large member	Mon Nov 26 16:22:07 HR Yepp, every right to access the Sea of Azov (the ships got nowhere close and were arrested in occupied Ukrainian waters). But if you think an occupying power has duties and responsibilities, then ships using the occupied waters have to obey the instructions given by the occupying power. The narrative here is that Russian had shut the passage short term due to security concerns. The passage is open again, so the short term holds. In sum. We know Russia has occupied Crimea. It has duties and responsibilities that follow from that. Following instructions in the waters does in no way entail recognizing the Russian annexation (the occupation however is a fact).
jergul large member	Mon Nov 26 16:26:48 SIMFEROPOL, November 25. /TASS/. Three Ukrainian warships have illegally crossed Russia’s state border entering its territorial waters, and are carrying out dangerous maneuvers, the Federal Security Service’s Border Service in Crimea said on Sunday. "This morning at around 7:00 a.m. Moscow Time three ships of Ukraine’s Navy violated Articles 19 and 21 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which define the right of a coastal state to ensure maritime security, crossed the Russian state border and illegally entered the temporarily closed waters of the Russian territorial sea," the statement said. The Ukrainian warships continue heading to the Kerch Strait, where the traffic is regulated under a schedule approved by the captain of the Russian sea port. A source in Crimea’s maritime authorities said the vessels are expected to reach the Kerch Strait in an hour and a half. The Ukrainian warships are conducting dangerous maneuvers and are failing to meet the requirements, the Federal Security Service’s Border Department in Crimea said. "Until now the requests have not been sent in due order, the vessels have not been included in the schedule of passage. The vessels are carrying out dangerous maneuvers and are disobeying the Russian authorities’ demands," the statement said. The Border Service is taking all steps to ensure security of navigation and regulation of maritime traffic in the waters of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait. More: http://tass.com/emergencies/1032402 ========= The narrative on how it started.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 16:30:59 jergul - But if you think an occupying power has duties and responsibilities, then ships using the occupied waters have to obey the instructions given by the occupying power. I don't think the occupying powers have any rights if they are the belligerents.
Pillz Member	Mon Nov 26 16:50:29 Lmao the irony
Y2A Member	Mon Nov 26 17:13:11 "If you invade the Ukraine, you have the Ukraine. And who in God's name would want that?" Used to work with a Ukrainian girl, they are hot. I would take the Ukraine.
Y2A Member	Mon Nov 26 17:19:28 "Putin's getting cocky. Might not be long before we see Russian military hardware getting obliterated." Lol, the clown is going to do NOTHING.
McKobb Member	Mon Nov 26 17:37:43 This is the perfect time for the EU to man up and take swing.
jergul large member	Mon Nov 26 17:51:17 HR You mean aggressor. Its fine to have an opinion, but anarchy does not follow from an occupation. Russia has the right and duty to police the territories it occupies for example. Civic society has to be sustained. If Russia was indeed rightless, then it would not have responsibilities either. For example, it would be under no obligation to allow shipping into the Sea of Azur (which in turn would bankrupt Ukraine even more. 25% of its exports leave from Maripol). It would simply boil down to might making right.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Nov 26 18:52:21 "We do not like what’s happening either way. We don't like what's happening, and hopefully it’ll get straightened out. ~ T-Rump tough words... tough meaningless words
McKobb Member	Mon Nov 26 20:42:16 It's hard for Traump to talk with that Russian cock in his mouth.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 22:10:37 jerul, aggressor and beligerent are synonymns. As for Putin, if he could afford it he would shut down the Sea of Azur. The only rights he gas come from the barrel of a gun. If Ukraine were stronger the would squash Russia.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Mon Nov 26 22:11:05 fighter noun. person engaged in hostile encounter GI aggressor antagonist assailant battler belligerent boxer
jergul large member	Tue Nov 27 03:50:14 HR The US was a beligerent party in ww2. The US was a boxer in world war 2. You meant aggressor. Ok, your position is that no standards apply to Russia.
Paramount Member	Tue Nov 27 06:11:11 Russia claims that the Ukrainan ships violated Russian territorial waters. That would explain why Russia seized them. Yes? Trump only needs to state that and tell people that Russia has a right to protect its territories, and then this will calm down a bit.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 07:05:25 jergul - HR The US was a belligerent party in ww2. The US was a boxer in world war 2. FYI, The Japanese bombed our Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, which gave FDR the right to declare war. Hitler declared war on us a few days later. And yes, I know we had no business having an oil embargo against Japan, but they had no business in China.
jergul large member	Tue Nov 27 07:12:10 For my information? That is common knowledge. I am just pointing out that belligerent means simply fighting in the war. It makes no call on who started it. Para The Russian annexation is not internationally recognized. So it does not follow that the waters are Russian. What we know for a fact is that Russia occupies Crimea and by extention the waters surrounding Crimea. It has rights and duties as an occupier.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 07:12:34 Aggressor noun a person, group, or nation that attacks first or initiates hostilities; an assailant or invader. belligerent adjective warlike; given to waging war. of warlike character; aggressively hostile; bellicose:
jergul large member	Tue Nov 27 08:21:40 HR For example. The US is belligerent and given to waging war, but has not been an aggressor since the Libyan intervention.
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Tue Nov 27 09:13:25 http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ds_0F6bWsAA7nDc.jpg
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 09:19:13 And the Russians are...?
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Tue Nov 27 09:58:59 trump's lords and masters.
jergul large member	Tue Nov 27 10:44:37 Ach, the Waffle-SS, Ost branch. HR The Russians are going full retard (never go full retard). So are preparing sanction relief for companies inevitably targetted by whatever new sanctions crop up and have transferred the seamen to civic courts for trial. The charges relate to border transgressions, so you may want to take notes for your paper wall.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 13:27:51 Do you think that it is a tad bizarre that Russia is going to try Ukraine's seamen in a Russian court for "violating the waters" that Russia has taken from their country by force? It seems to me that, at least, Russia should return the enlisted seamen to their country. They had nothing to say about which waters they operate in. Especially when you consider Russia's character which makes me doubt that Ukraine's ships did anything wrong. Hell, it's Deja Vue all over again.
Paramount Member	Tue Nov 27 13:33:46 "Do you think that it is a tad bizarre that Russia is going to try Ukraine's seamen in a Russian court for "violating the waters" that Russia has taken from their country by force?" It is as bizarre as Israel who shoots at and jails Palestinians who "violates the border" that Israel has taken from the Palestinian by force.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 13:54:14 Who started the use of force? There is the difference.
jergul large member	Tue Nov 27 15:42:53 HR The problem with your position is that it does not provide any leeway for expectations on what Russia should do. The Russia you see in your mind should obviously do whatever it likes and continue to do whatever it likes until it decides it wants to do something else that is also likes. The Ukrainian ships did a number of things wrong. It is common practice to penalize the ship owners, not the crew. Hence my comment on "full retard".
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 27 15:51:57 Putin wants to be either the Czar or the Premier of Russia. Not sure which. BTW, America does not go looking for war. As the only remaining Superpower, the wars come to us.
jergul large member	Tue Nov 27 17:41:51 Definately neither. Party secretary would have been a better guess. I think a superpower should have two theater war capability. By definition. But you are certainly one of the greatest - if not the greatest - major power.
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Thu Nov 29 13:54:21 Петро Порошенко‏Verified account @poroshenko Follow Follow @poroshenko More Петро Порошенко Retweeted Donald J. Trump This is how great leaders act! Петро Порошенко added, Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump Based on the fact that the ships and sailors have not been returned to Ukraine from Russia, I have decided it would be best for all parties concerned to cancel my previously scheduled meeting.... Show this thread 10:14 AM - 29 Nov 2018
Seb Member	Thu Nov 29 18:02:24 Jergul: Interesting where they put the arch on the bridge huh. Duties as an occupying power to restrict access to the shipping lane is a stretch.
McKobb Member	Thu Nov 29 18:49:48 Slowly I turned...step by step...inch by inch...
Pillz Member	Thu Nov 29 20:38:50 Poor Seb
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu Nov 29 21:11:24 McKobb, LOL.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Thu Nov 29 21:11:50 Niagra Falls.
jergul large member	Fri Nov 30 04:54:25 Seb The Russian have let similar ships through for as long as they followed procedure (the passage is highly regulated by the responsible port authority. Which makes sense. Bottom conditions are spawned in hell and the waters are both shallow and shifty). My point is that Crimea is occupied and the occupation does include the territorial waters. The outcome was hardly surprising and not following procedure is not something vessel masters would have done without instruction. Ukrainians on the street view the incident as domestic politics. 4 local elections were just cancelled due to the declaration of martial law and the current president is up for election next year. He is running single digit approval ratings and is ranked 5 of 5 candidates (with 50% of those polled saying they would not vote for him under any circumstance). Does it matter? Sort of. The confrontation seems constructed. But Ukraine is in dire straits. Its not something a country with something to lose would try.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Nov 30 08:03:22 I can't tell from the map I have, but it looks like Ukraine has ports on the Sea of Azur.
jergul large member	Fri Nov 30 11:33:34 It does.
Seb Member	Fri Nov 30 11:35:30 The ships were seized in international waters after retreating jergul And building a bridge across a straight that forces the transit of the straight through territorial waters and limits the size of the ships that may pass is incredibly dodgy. Can you imagine the stink if the Turks did that to the bosphorous, building a bridge too low for the larger Russian cargo and war ships? Russia doesn't consider itself an occupying power, having annexed it. You seem to be bending over backwards over again to accommodate a favourable policy to Russia.
jergul large member	Fri Nov 30 13:44:51 Seb Oh goodness. It would not matter that the boats escaped to international waters if crimes were commited in territorial waters. The bridge was originally a joint Russian-Ukrainian venture. Passage is within territorial waters of either Ukraine (occupied) or Russia because the straight is very narrow. The bridge had a tanker parked under it. 35 m clearance is substantial ( http://www...gationCharts/ILW/AppendixB.pdf ). Russia is an occupying power. Fact. Unless you want to recognize the annexation. Pretending the occupation does not exist is anti-factual. What favourable policies are on any Western tables? The incident should be viewed in its proper context. Russia has already been penalized for occupying Crimea. Its management of Crimean territorial waters are part of that occupation. Now, its fine to slap on more sanctions on Russia. But you should be careful in letting Ukraine dictate the narrative. Where do you think it will stop provocative measures if they lead to anti-Russian reactions. Or you better be willing to put troops on the ground if you feel following the Ukraines lead is the thing to do.
Seb Member	Sat Dec 01 17:09:52 What crimes, exactly? The Russians have accused them of entering Russian waters. (Waters that are not recognised as Russian). The Russians appear to accept that the Ukrainians had informed them of the transit to the sea of azov, which is shared, but that this wasn't with enough notice (though as I understand it there is no stipulation on what is required in terms of notice). So at best this looks procedural. They then left. And then the Russians later pursued then into international waters and sized the vessels, and injured the crew. I think we all know who has the track record of amplifying Russian narratives jergul. Remember the ridiculous nonsense you put out around the whole Salisbury incident.
jergul large member	Sat Dec 01 19:29:22 Seb My goodness. Yes. lets make this all about me. Why not? In reverse order: The "nonsense" could easily have been avoided if the UK government had been more forthcoming, transparent, and credible. Elements in the Russian regime (GRU off its leash. Turns out the head was busy dying from a brain tumour at the time) attempted to assasinate someone with sanctuary on British soil. Russians are citing numerous charges. But the clear big deal is not heaving to when ordered to stop. Are you at all doubting this was a planned political provocation? Be very careful of following Ukraine's lead. Its current leadership has absolutely nothing to lose.
Seb Member	Sun Dec 02 07:40:43 Jergul: You are the one that brought up narratives so it's germane to examine your appalling track record. "The "nonsense" could easily have been avoided if the UK government had been more forthcoming, transparent, and credible." Many people thought the UK's case credible. Credibility is in the eye of the beholder and the fact you concluded it as not-credible, only to eventually have to reverse your position as more and more information came into the public domain is precisely the point here. For some reason you have a tendency to assign higher credibility to Russian claims than is really sensible. "But the clear big deal is not heaving to when ordered to stop." They did leave however, as they were seized in international waters, using force. "Are you at all doubting this was a planned political provocation?" I am deeply skeptical of that (if you mean by the Ukrainians) particularly given the footage of events and recording of Russians indicating the reverse. It could equally have been a Russian ambush of a pre-notified transit of a straight which Ukraine and Russia have previously agreed joint access through. But it is good to know that treaties of this nature are so easily viable, and that Turkish ships back by Nato can seize Russian ships on international water should they ignore a Turksih warning to not transit. "Be very careful of following Ukraine's lead. Its current leadership has absolutely nothing to lose." As opposed to the Russian leadership?
jergul large member	Sun Dec 02 08:50:45 Seb I used the word "narrative" to cover what the Russians were saying without committing to making a value statement its merits. Germane? Sure. Whatever. Lets make it about me. Why not? Many people voted for Trump. My point was lack of transparency made its statements impossible to gauge on their merits. And there is a track record of spurious beleifs presented as absolute fact. Norway arrest ships in its economic zone all the time. And it has put shots through the bows of Russian vessels in "international waters" in recent history. Anti-piracy efforts take place in international waters. They are not the sanctuary you think they are. Ships should be arrested if they attempt to pass the straits when instructed by Turkish authorities not to do so. Case in point: If you believe Russia is occupying Crimea, then Ukrainian vessels should have followed Russian instructions. I have no doubt that Russia can be obtuse in terms of transit at times. But the trigger for the incident was Ukraine not following instructions. That was pretty clearly on instructions from shore. So, yah, a provocation. Were you in any danger of following Russian leadership?
Seb Member	Sun Dec 02 09:14:14 Jergul: So your position is Russia can close the straights to Ukrainian shipping?
jergul large member	Sun Dec 02 10:39:35 Seb Of course not. Nor is the strait closed to Ukrainian shipping. It can however regulate passage and shipping must abide by those regulations. This is not uncharted waters. Thankfully, we have Israel. Occupation comes with rights, duties and responsibilities. The correct response is boycotts and a degree of political isolation. Honoured more by breech in the case of Israel, but I had formulated what I think is appropriate policy decades ago. That I know tons about maritime practice and practical law is just a bonus in this context (though of course it also applies to Israel's management of the waters off Gaza). This is not whataboutism as the argument is independent of what is actually done. Its more an example of nothing new under the sun.
Seb Member	Sun Dec 02 11:42:22 jergul: If it can order ships not to pass, then in what way is that different from closing the straits?
Seb Member	Sun Dec 02 11:43:02 "oh, it's totally open. We just won't let you transit at this time. Ask us again later."
jergul large member	Sun Dec 02 12:53:18 Seb The difference would be between directions from traffic police and the highway being blown up. Russia is being outragous, but that is in regards to charging seamen with criminal offences. It is generally understood that the shipowner is held responsible, not employees acting on its behalf. The correct response would be a hefty fine with the ships held in arrest until the fine was paid. The Ukrainian FSB fellows are a different case as they are not crew. I would have framed that as if the FSB had chartered the vessels for purposes of responsibility. Meaning that land rules would apply to the FSB fellows. Its not rocket science seb. The rules were designed while barbary pirates were still a concern. Elaborated on, sure. But the basic principles are quite old and design to deal with all manner of ruffian behavior. The Ukrainian vessels should have followed the instructions they were given.
Pillz Member	Sun Dec 02 13:47:58 You give Ukrainians too much credit
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sun Dec 02 14:38:36 And you give the Russians too much credit.
jergul large member	Sun Dec 02 15:01:10 Pillz Could you elaborate?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sun Dec 02 15:18:25 Not sure if he is calling them ignorant or stupid. My post is both.
jergul large member	Sun Dec 02 15:39:02 Putin will surely be hurt by your biting commentary.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sun Dec 02 15:39:51 I certainly hope so, Ollie.
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Tue Dec 04 09:15:47 Ukrainian court refuses to release detained Russian tanker More: http://tass.com/world/1034096
Pillz Member	Tue Dec 04 09:53:24 In assuming they'd be able to follow simple instructions
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: