Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer your questions if you have any...


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer your questions if you have any... Page: <<   < prev  32 33 [34] 35 36   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 4:54:19 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

So NO, Iraq was NOT a huge diversion. Under asymmetrical warfare, you do not need to use your own military to attack another nation. You do not even need to send a military over to be an imminent threat. Iraq under Saddam was an asymmetrical threat to the United States. Al-Qaeda had the manpower. They had the martyrdom brigades willing to send suicide bombers to the United States. What is missing is WMD.

I take it back. You aint even a fuckin private.


You've never been in the military, so can it with your claims of what I was, or wasn't.

mnottertail: reread the white paper presented by the chinese colonels. hey, you brought the fucker up.

I've read the book twice, and both times I saw what I explained here. Even your attempts to cherry pick the book in the last debate failed to indicate that they were communicating something other than what I was arguing.

mnottertail: we are fighting a war on terrorism where the terrorists aint in Iraq,

Wrong. Even the 9/11 report acknowledged that there were at least two terror groups in Iraq that were a part of Al Qaeda. Then we had Salman Pak, terror training camp in Iraq, that trained terrorists to do things, like hijact aircraft. The last Iraqi commander in charge of that post admitted to training Al Qaeda. So there were terrorists in Iraq. The Iraqis call Saddam, "the grandfather of terrorism." The terrorists are in Iraq today, albeit with a lesser presence than before thanks to our efforts.

mnottertail: bankrupting our country

"For his policies, Bush risks the fall of the dollar, huge amounts of additional national debt and a massive and persistent burden on the American economy--because everything is at stake." -Mathias Dopfner

mnottertail: by sending our goods and services out of country for what?

This is an unrelated topic, dealing with economic forces that work between countries.

mnottertail: while the people who fund terrorism are making oil money off us as well....

The terrorists have their own fundraising efforts, which doesn't involve selling us oil. And if that's an issue with you, you could always stop using oil based products, and encourage your friends to do the same.

mnottertail: we kill and maim more Iraqis than Saddam ever could, thus insuring our enmity with them for several more generations, all the while the terrorist are not being dealt with.

Not true.

The terrorists, that you claim doesn't exist in Iraq, are responsible for more Iraqi deaths than the coalition is. I don't know where you got your numbers from, but they're wrong. The Iraqis recognize the fact that we're selective, and that if a coalition soldier killed someone, it's because that someone was firing at the coalition soldier.

Countries around the world are going after the terrorists. Where have you ben when they were coming up with reports of terror cell busts from around the world?

mnottertail: In addition, we have seriously destabilized that part of the middle east, will be bogged down there for eons to come, and blah blah blah blah blah.

WRONG. That's not the Iraq that I saw when I was there. Iraq is progressing. Its move to westernization, and being a strong democracy with sound economic policies, is accelerating. What we're doing in both, Iraq and Afghanistan is having a stabilization effect in the Middle East. I saw that when I was there.

mnottertail: We are not fighting an asynchronous war, they are.

WRONG. We're fighting an asymmetrical war.

mnottertail: Again 'threat' is ideology, not a concrete action.

It includes both. We're not just fighting a radical element, but an ideology. Our pushing that region closer to what we have in the west is a move to take the steam out of the radical ideology driving the terrorists.

mnottertail: You need to understand what you research and glean the real from the asswipe, something you are not at all apt at.

Despite all the years you've had access to my posts, and to the link that I provided in that post, you still don't get it. Are you even capable of getting that information dumbass? No matter how many times I look at the material that I linked you to, I still see what I've argued here.

I highly doubt that you read what you claimed you read.

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 661
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 4:56:07 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: subtee

I like those analogies. None of us can hide who we really are for long, so I'm guessing "the others" already have an opinion not much divergent from what he has cultivated here.


It was an analogy that had absolutely nothing to do with me, or what I'm doing on this thread. It was ideologically driven garbage spewed against me for what I stand for. As far as the opinion that people have on me here, it's not different from what it was the last time I debated on this message board. I'm getting pretty much the same drivel and vitriolic attacks that I got the last time.

My ONLY guilt here is daring to do two things: One, to voice an assessment that goes against the belief held by the majority of the posters that post here. Two, I have the audacity to not only stay in the fight, but to give people a taste of their own medicine. This isn't exactly what you guys expected from the opposition.

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 662
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 4:56:08 PM   
SohCahToa


Posts: 563
Joined: 3/17/2006
Status: offline 		They say that military personnel don't get enough R and R these days. I'd guess that spending time being baited on a BDSM site doesn't count as R or R.

33 pages is quite good if you've nothing else you'd rather be doing with your time, say spending it with the family etc.


< Message edited by SohCahToa -- 5/13/2010 4:58:38 PM >

_____________________________

ڪ০મ໒คमՇՕΔ
- Pax vobiscum -

"Come ride with me through the veins of history. I'll show you a God who falls asleep on the job." - Muse

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 663
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 4:57:10 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

Isn't there anyone, one single person where you live that you would like to spend time with before you get blowed up?


I've spent allot of time with my family, in addition to posting on these forums. I've done pretty much everything here that I wanted to do before going back. And no, I'm not going to get blown up dumbass.

(in reply to SohCahToa)
Profile   Post #: 664
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 5:00:23 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline 		vincentML: Excuse me. I have read your rant and I do not see where you answered my questions.

What you mistake as a "rant" is my answer to your two questions. Go back, read through it, this time without your horseblinders, and without your bias. You'll find the answers there.

vincentML: I would like to have direct answers to my questions as you have demanded of other posters.

And I've given you direct answers to your questions. As I've told you in that explanation, this is asymmetrical warfare. You're expecting a symmetrical warfare response to an asymmetrical warfare question. My answers are asymmetrical warfare in nature, as that's what Iraq under Saddam was... an asymmetrical threat.

vincentML: They are really quite explicit questions, simply asked. I would appreciate answers on point without so much obfuscation. I will ask them again. More directly if I can.

And I'm going to give you the exact same answers again. My answers are on point. What you need to do is quit categorizing this conflict the same you'd categorize World War II. Unlike World War II, which was symmetrical, or black and white, the War on Terrorism is grey, it's asymmetrical in nature.

Your questions don't capture that fact. My responses do. I've been right on target, and those are the exact same questions you're going to get every time you ask them.

I had this same exchange 3 ½ years ago on this forum; where the person asking the question asked it in a symmetrical warfare context, when what they were asking dealt with asymmetrical warfare, and required an asymmetrical warfare response. I'm going to do the same thing with you that I did with her.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

REPEAT POINT

1. What was the imminent threat posed by Iraq that justified our preemptive assault?

2. In what way did the removal of Saddam justify the lives lost by 4500 + young American/UK men and women?

Please try to answer without bullshitting me. Thank you.
REPEAT POINT


I DID answer your questions without bullshitting you. They address both questions through the asymmetrical warfare aspect. You need to THINK about what I'm saying, and apply it to what's going on today.

I've lost count of how many times the people I've debated with, over the past few years, have asked this question. The wording is different, but the questions are the same.

So I'm going to post a copy and paste of one of my responses. This one was targeted to one person, not you, but the concepts are sill applicable.

1. The War on Terrorism is not confined to Afghanistan or Al-Qaeda.

2. If Osama Bin Laden leaves Afghanistan, there is nothing any amount of troops INSIDE of Afghanistan can do to

Let me run this to you again.

Our troops in Afghanistan are limited to that country's boundaries. So, it does not matter if we have 1 million boots on the ground in Afghanistan, or just 10. If Bin Laden is OUTSIDE of Afghanistan, there is nothing any amount of boots on the ground INSIDE Afghanistan would be able to do to secure his capture.

3. Iraq was not a huge division on the war on terrorism. Anybody that claims such fails to understand the true nature of the war we are involved with.

"Whether it be the intrusions of hackers, a major explosion at the World Trade Center, or a bombing attack by Bin Laden, all of these greatly exceed the frequency bandwiths understood by the American military....This is because they have never taken into consideration and have even refused to consider means that are contrary to tradition and to select measures of operation other than military means" Col. Qiao Lian and Col. Wang Xiangsui, Unrestricted Warfare, 1999.

In the book Unrestricted Warfare, these two Colonels interchange the U.S. military with the United States and the West.

You've proven these two colonel's point - "to the letter".

Means other than tradition.

The fact that you would label Iraq as a "big diversion" proves that you failed to see "outside of tradition". Actual and potential alliances of hostile nations and organizations against the west.

So NO, Iraq was NOT a huge diversion. Under asymmetrical warfare, you do not need to use your own military to attack another nation. You do not even need to send a military over to be an imminent threat. Iraq under Saddam was an asymmetrical threat to the United States. Al-Qaeda had the manpower. They had the martyrdom brigades willing to send suicide bombers to the United States. What is missing is WMD. Something that Saddam HAD and was working on.

Connect the dots . . . I dare you to.

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 665
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 5:02:20 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:



My posts here indicate that I'm in the Army. Doesn't matter which branch you were in. With your back ground, you should've had the common sense to use the Army names for the ranks I have to work for. This is basic knowledge to most people that have been in the military.


I think I may have mentioned that I was never in the army and had no desire to ever be a soldier.
I have been out of the military for more than 40 years.
When I was in the military "my kind" thought that "your kind" were amatures and consequently we did not associate.
What the rank structure is in your amature organization makes less than no difference to me.


No, what you've said on this thread argues against you're claims of having served in the military. You haven't served in over 40 years, but many of the same concepts still apply... IE, referencing platoon sergeant rather than a name that someone would commonly use on the TV.

You come across as the type of person that my dad knocked to the ground when he was serving in Vietnam.

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 666
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 5:03:22 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline 		SohCahToa: You are talking to someone that sees the Iraq war as a victory. That was the funniest thing I'd read in a long time and left me wondering what losing would have felt like.

We did win the Iraq War. I've seen that first hand, but even those who haven't been there could tell by what we're doing politically. We wouldn't be talking about troop withdrawals if it weren't for our victory out there. The drawdown is contingent on conditions on the ground. And, right now, the conditions on the ground dictate that we pull.

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 667
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 5:07:53 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline 		This may be my last batch, until I get to Iraq. If this is the case, I'll continue the thread fight there. To the posters wanting me to go away, not happening; to those wanting me to get blown up, still not happening.

To those complaining about me not doing anything else, well, you’re wrong. I’ve done many of what you’d normally do while on leave… except drink. I don’t care for that anyway. Even managed to live up to my username while here.

Thanks to those who thanked me for my service... and meant it. I know who you are. I look forward to meeting one of you after I get back… you know who you are.

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 668
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 5:12:40 PM   
SohCahToa


Posts: 563
Joined: 3/17/2006
Status: offline 		Perhaps you've seen you've won but this is irrelevant because the rest of us haven't and so our ignorance counts as your loss. The world, no matter the actual reality, will always look back on Iraq as a loss. A lot of time and resources spent there, a lot of civilians dying there due to the opposition and no clear indication that what we have now is going to last beyond when you leave.

There was this saying floating about 'You've got to win the propaganda war to win the war.' This war you lost before even the actual war started.

War is perception because after all the death, one side says it has won and we have no real idea how losing would have changed the world because it didn't happen. So did we even win, did it need to actually happen,? If the world wasn't going to be drastically different without such a war fought. Modern wars don't seem to be as clear cut as the purpose of historical wars.

< Message edited by SohCahToa -- 5/13/2010 5:18:54 PM >

_____________________________

ڪ০મ໒คमՇՕΔ
- Pax vobiscum -

"Come ride with me through the veins of history. I'll show you a God who falls asleep on the job." - Muse

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 669
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 5:16:12 PM   
LaTigresse


Posts: 26123
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline 		Ahhhhhhhyup.

_____________________________

My twisted, self deprecating, sense of humour, finds alot to laugh about, in your lack of one!

Just because you are well educated, articulate, and can use big, fancy words, properly........does not mean you are right!

(in reply to SohCahToa)
Profile   Post #: 670
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/13/2010 8:02:05 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

I think I may have mentioned that I was never in the army and had no desire to ever be a soldier.
I have been out of the military for more than 40 years.
When I was in the military "my kind" thought that "your kind" were amatures and consequently we did not associate.
What the rank structure is in your amature organization makes less than no difference to me.

No, what you've said on this thread argues against you're claims of having served in the military. You haven't served in over 40 years, but many of the same concepts still apply... IE, referencing platoon sergeant rather than a name that someone would commonly use on the TV.

sonny boy I was long gone from the service before you were shitting yellow. You have no clue as to what things were before you were born.

You come across as the type of person that my dad knocked to the ground when he was serving in Vietnam.

Oh my aren't you the proxy bad ass.
If your father would have been that foolish, after the corpsman got done with him he would be facing an article 128.


< Message edited by thompsonx -- 5/13/2010 8:05:09 PM >

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 671
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/14/2010 4:36:04 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

REPEAT POINT

1. What was the imminent threat posed by Iraq that justified our preemptive assault?

2. In what way did the removal of Saddam justify the lives lost by 4500 + young American/UK men and women?

Please try to answer without bullshitting me. Thank you.

REPEAT POINT

I DID answer your questions without bullshitting you. They address both questions through the asymmetrical warfare aspect. You need to THINK about what I'm saying, and apply it to what's going on today.


You dance in circles in your tub of bullshit and bob and weave to avoid facing the reality of the human tragedy you have inflicted. Pathetic. I, for one, am not grateful for your enthusiasm for the savaging of Iraq. May you reap nightmares when you realize the nightmare you are defending.

"Oh, the humanity, the humanity!"

~~ Apocalypse Now

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 672
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/14/2010 5:13:39 AM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair
Unlike World War II, which was symmetrical, or black and white, the War on Terrorism is grey, it's asymmetrical in nature.


yeh we already know its fraud but thanks for admitting it.


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 673
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/14/2010 5:35:25 AM   
rulemylife


Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

I bet she's making meatloaf and a nice apple pie for dessert.


Put the bong down guy, my mother's been dead for 29 years. If you honest to God could claim that, then whatever it is you're smoking must be some good shit.


It has to be some good shit for me to have listened to 30+ pages of your relentless fabrications.

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 674
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/14/2010 6:32:33 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Also, in the Army, warrants are either called "sir" or "chief." I've done both, and haven't gotten into trouble for it. Your research needs more working.

Were the Iraqi Survey Group, and Kimmitt, lying and telling half truths in that MSNBC article? YES [X ] NO [ ] 
 
 

Warrant officers
Grade of rank: Chief Warrant Officer, Five
Pay grade: W-5
Title of address: Mister (Mrs./Miss/Ms.)
Abbreviation: CW5
Grade of rank: Chief Warrant Officer, Three
Pay grade: W-3
Title of address: Mister (Mrs./Miss/Ms.)
Abbreviation: CW3
Grade of rank: Chief Warrant Officer, Four
Pay grade: W-4
Title of address: Mister (Mrs./Miss/Ms.)
Abbreviation: CW4
Grade of rank: Chief Warrant Officer, Two
Pay grade: W-2
Title of address: Mister (Mrs./Miss/Ms.)
Abbreviation: CW2
Grade of rank: Warrant Officer, One
Pay grade: W-1
Title of address: Mister (Mrs./Miss/Ms.)
Abbreviation: WO1

AR600-20 (current) and yes, agreed Chief is ok, its like calling Top Top, or Sarge Sarge.......so, same as gunny or psg......but it ain't something you do to someone you dont know well.

since you want to mince words and think it conveys correctness
REPEAT POINT REPEAT POINT REPEAT POINT REPEAT POINT
you are completely wrong AGAIN!!!!!!
REPEAT POINT REPEAT POINT REPEAT POINT REPEAT POINT
and using your same inference illogic, not in the military, a dipshit, an unamerican commie bastard, and a drooling imbicile.
REPEAT POINT REPEAT POINT REPEAT POINT REPEAT POINT
 

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 5/14/2010 7:05:54 AM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 675
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/14/2010 6:46:13 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		insurgents do not equal terrorists, you are no more than an everyday garden variety simpleton.

go back to pounding your pud. 

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 676
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/14/2010 7:19:46 AM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline 		look at the length of you responses directed to people that don't give a shit whether you live or die. What a worm.

Go outside, kiss a girl, give your mom a sponge bath. Do something with someone who cares.

_____________________________



(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 677
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/14/2010 7:22:19 AM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline 		Col. asschair, what exactly is a "short time" You have already been out here nine days....When you going back?

lol.

_____________________________



(in reply to domiguy)
Profile   Post #: 678
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/14/2010 12:41:13 PM   
lally2


Posts: 2621
Joined: 4/16/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

REPEAT POINT

1. What was the imminent threat posed by Iraq that justified our preemptive assault?

2. In what way did the removal of Saddam justify the lives lost by 4500 + young American/UK men and women?

Please try to answer without bullshitting me. Thank you.

REPEAT POINT

I DID answer your questions without bullshitting you. They address both questions through the asymmetrical warfare aspect. You need to THINK about what I'm saying, and apply it to what's going on today.


You dance in circles in your tub of bullshit and bob and weave to avoid facing the reality of the human tragedy you have inflicted. Pathetic. I, for one, am not grateful for your enthusiasm for the savaging of Iraq. May you reap nightmares when you realize the nightmare you are defending.

"Oh, the humanity, the humanity!"

~~ Apocalypse Now


there was no imminent threat, that was BS - there are all sorts of postulations on that, my favourite is that Bush promised the US Bin Laden, couldnt deliver so kicked saddams ass as a show of strength.  its as good as any.

but in the end, getting rid of saddam was worth doing and i get a bit ticked off when people start questioning the people who died as soldiers, it belittles what they did and why they did it.  for them they died in active service, doing the job they were trained to do.  to say they died for nothing is an insult to their integrity as service men and women.

saddam hussein butchered millions, committed genocide,  all but wiped out the Marsh People, made the kurdistans existance intolerable.  Bush elder was asked why he didnt remove hussein when he had the chance, his response was that a strong policy would need to be in place before such an action occurred.  a strong policy was not put in place and bedlam occurred. 

but Iraq is a success story, victory for the Iraquis came as peace was eventually achieved between the warring factions.  those men and women who died in active service gave their lives to achieve that peace and they should not have that taken away from them postumasely.

_____________________________

So all I have to do in order to serve him, is to work out exactly how improbable he is, feed that figure into the finite improbability generator, give him a fresh cup of really hot tea ... and turn him on!

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 679
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/14/2010 1:47:17 PM   
juliaoceania


Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline 		I scanned this thread... and here are the questions i have

Do you think that all of us object to the invasion on the grounds it wouldn't be successful?

I could give a rat's ass if we were successful, I object to invading and occupying Iraq because it was WRONG. I am not interested in spreading democracy (meaning neoliberalism) to all parts of the globe, it is not my job, it is not YOUR job, and basically I do not know where you get off thinking it is your job to do so.

Iraq was never a threat to us. We have killed 100s of 1000s of Iraqis, that is not success

Same in Vietnam, we had no business in Vietnam... we murdered millions of Vietnamese... we were not freeing anyone in that country, we were intervening in a civil war

I do not want to pay taxes to support empire. I do not want our troops all over the world working for corporate interests. If we were attacked tomorrow, you could not defend me because you would be in Iraq, so what the fuck good is it having a military if they are defending everyone else but me and mine? Why exactly are my tax dollars being spent this way?

Now you can go back to Iraq.... I know you are just a soldier, you get orders, and that is what you do... but I pay you and your bosses, and I do not approve of the job your bosses do, they suck...They are derelict in their duty to their country, otherwise they would bring you all home and defend what is here... instead of parking your asses everywhere else BUT here.





_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 680
Page:   <<   < prev  32 33 [34] 35 36   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer your questions if you have any... Page: <<   < prev  32 33 [34] 35 36   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109