Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
What to Do with North Korea
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  

How should we handle this?
Stay the course, and allow #1 to happen.
15%
 15%  [ 2 ]
Do #2 now and get it over with.
15%
 15%  [ 2 ]
Do #3 now.
23%
 23%  [ 3 ]
Other (please post).
46%
 46%  [ 6 ]
Total Votes : 13

Author Message
John-Boy
Guru
Guru


Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 440
Location: Desperately seeking moksha in all the wrong places

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 2:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wswartzendruber wrote:
we can cause China's economy to collapse.


You really don't want that to happen.
_________________
Like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1247
Location: Idaho, USA

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 2:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

John-Boy wrote:
wswartzendruber wrote:
we can cause China's economy to collapse.


You really don't want that to happen.

It won't happen. They do Kim Jong-un before that happens.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 3:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BonezTheGoon wrote:
wswartzendruber wrote:
. . . He knows the U.S. will fuck his shit up beyond all comprehension. . . .


I wish I agreed with you on this point!

I believe if he truly understood the world he lives in and the powers that will fuck him up that he wouldn't be doing the dumb shit he is.

He is delusional. He's basically a cult leader at this point drunk on his perceived power.

Isn't he doing the rational thing at this point? Once he has nuclear ICBMs, he is pretty much safe from US invasion. Before he gets them, he is at risk of being the next Saddam or Ghadaffi or Al Asad. Given his options, the most logical thing is to throw everything into nuclear strike capability.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
o'bogamol
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 90
Location: Detroit, Michigan - The Home of Rock and Roll

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 6:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wswartzendruber wrote:
John-Boy wrote:
wswartzendruber wrote:
we can cause China's economy to collapse.


You really don't want that to happen.

It won't happen. They do Kim Jong-un before that happens.


Unless it does happen, in which case, um, now what?
_________________
"History began on July 4,1776. Everything before that was a mistake." -Ron Swanson
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5467
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 8:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I thought of something this morning...
NK... fatboyslim is a narcissist... wanting to be "significant". Silence for ages then suddenly threats to america, missile tests etc... all in direct violation of UN resolutions and all towards either RoK or America.
Now RoK makes sense as N & S are still at war and each poke each other, but the threats to America make zero sense. ONLY now does NK have means to possibly reach American terrority and then more than likely only with a conventional warhead. This is assuming
1) an actual strike successfully launches
2) makes the complete distance (they seem to be missing a re-entry vehical)
3) all the defenses of America cannot shoot it down (anti-missile tech, F15 etc...)

America have been training for a SATURATED ICBM strike & I am 100% certain a single missile would be stoppable, even 10 of NK technology.




Now China... The existence of NK strategically helps China and Russia & any pre-emptive strike on NK will result in China and/or Russia supporting NK via supplies and military equipment and possibly directly getting involved.. Its is a Dr Strangelove situation. Cut NK out of all communications...


"North Korea's continued provocation in the region is bringing the region closer to conflict. China are the only trading partner with NK, China have been supplying NK in direct violation of UN resolution. In accordance with the One China policy, NK can only be viewed as a proxy state of China.

China's action in the region are a disestablishing force. The recent ICBM launch is condemned. The threat by china to the democratic nation of the RoK is condemned, the threat of missile strikes by China on Japan is condemned"



So any further action by NK should be attributed to China. NK do not get the press they so desired, China then have PR to deal with
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1375
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo

PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 2:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
Given his options, the most logical thing is to . . . .


. . . play nice with the other kids who are bigger than he is so they don't kick his teeth in.

You know he doesn't HAVE to be a total douche. Right? You do know that just because he inherited a shit-idea government doesn't mean he is required to continue such concepts. Right? His options are not just "fight or be overthrown". Right? He could at least pretend to be civilized. Right? C'mon now. Use the space between your ears.
_________________
mcgruff wrote:
I can't promise to be civil.


pjp wrote:
The greater evil is voting for the "lesser evil."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5147
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 11:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wswartzendruber wrote:
It would also make you look something other than totally naïve.
Ah, self-insight.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3343

PostPosted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wswartzendruber wrote:
Naib wrote:
...

That raving lunatic already has a shot at Anchorage. What part of this are you not understanding?

He needs to be taken out of the equation. Somehow.
Why? China has nukes
_________________
"Sex: breakfast of champions" - James Hunt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 11:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BonezTheGoon wrote:
richk449 wrote:
Given his options, the most logical thing is to . . . .


. . . play nice with the other kids who are bigger than he is so they don't kick his teeth in.

You know he doesn't HAVE to be a total douche. Right? You do know that just because he inherited a shit-idea government doesn't mean he is required to continue such concepts. Right? His options are not just "fight or be overthrown". Right? He could at least pretend to be civilized. Right? C'mon now. Use the space between your ears.

Uh, I'm pretty sure his options are fight or be overthrown. That tends to be the way authoritarian dictatorships work, at least if you define fight loosely enough to include intrigue and backstabbing.

But that is beside my point. All I am saying is that that if he acting rationally in his own self-interest, the best move for him is to focus on developing long range nuclear strike technology, to deter a US invasion. Once he has it, he is pretty much eliminates the risk of the US starting a way to depose him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sugar
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand

PostPosted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
Uh, I'm pretty sure his options are fight or be overthrown. That tends to be the way authoritarian dictatorships work, at least if you define fight loosely enough to include intrigue and backstabbing.

But that is beside my point. All I am saying is that that if he acting rationally in his own self-interest, the best move for him is to focus on developing long range nuclear strike technology, to deter a US invasion. Once he has it, he is pretty much eliminates the risk of the US starting a way to depose him.


huh. I never thought of that.

So, NK is like Cuba, but they don't really have the Soviets to back them up?
_________________
He who calls for full employment calls for war!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sat Jul 08, 2017 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sugar wrote:
richk449 wrote:
Uh, I'm pretty sure his options are fight or be overthrown. That tends to be the way authoritarian dictatorships work, at least if you define fight loosely enough to include intrigue and backstabbing.

But that is beside my point. All I am saying is that that if he acting rationally in his own self-interest, the best move for him is to focus on developing long range nuclear strike technology, to deter a US invasion. Once he has it, he is pretty much eliminates the risk of the US starting a way to depose him.


huh. I never thought of that.

So, NK is like Cuba, but they don't really have the Soviets to back them up?

Well at some level they have the Chinese to back them up, but I think the situation is different, and the Chinese goals are very different than the Russians during the cold war.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://amp.businessinsider.com/why-us-didn-t-kill-kim-jong-un-icbm-test-july-4-2017-7?utm_content=bufferb0878&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1247
Location: Idaho, USA

PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
https://amp.businessinsider.com/why-us-didn-t-kill-kim-jong-un-icbm-test-july-4-2017-7?utm_content=bufferb0878&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

What, did John Kerry write that? I haven't had anywhere near enough saké to think that either Donald Trump or James Mattis actually believe they can alter Kim Jong-un's behavior simply by doing nothing.

Making a reasonable attempt to appeal to Kim Jong-un's senses is simply a checklist item before blasting his pathetic little ass to pieces along with the rest of the DPRK military. They know he won't see reason.

EDIT: May God (whether you believe in Him or not) have mercy on the South Koreans in big cities.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1247
Location: Idaho, USA

PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, I can actually get drunk on saké! Whenever I try drinking this much beer, I just get ill instead. I wonder what it is about rice...

Anyway, I'm off to execute my uncle.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 17452

PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wswartzendruber wrote:
richk449 wrote:
https://amp.businessinsider.com/why-us-didn-t-kill-kim-jong-un-icbm-test-july-4-2017-7?utm_content=bufferb0878&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

What, did John Kerry write that? I haven't had anywhere near enough saké to think that either Donald Trump or James Mattis actually believe they can alter Kim Jong-un's behavior simply by doing nothing.

Making a reasonable attempt to appeal to Kim Jong-un's senses is simply a checklist item before blasting his pathetic little ass to pieces along with the rest of the DPRK military. They know he won't see reason.

EDIT: May God (whether you believe in Him or not) have mercy on the South Koreans in big cities.
++ to SK.

But it seems more than plausible that this occurred. I doubt Mattis would have insisted that moment or never. Regardless, it isn't his call. And while Trump may Tweet a lot, I don't think he's got a twitchy trigger finger. Which is demonstrated if the story is true.
_________________
Slowly I turned. Step by step.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sat Jul 29, 2017 7:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BonezTheGoon wrote:
richk449 wrote:
Isn't he doing the rational thing at this point? Once he has nuclear ICBMs, he is pretty much safe from US invasion. Before he gets them, he is at risk of being the next Saddam or Ghadaffi or Al Asad. Given his options, the most logical thing is to throw everything into nuclear strike capability.


. . . play nice with the other kids who are bigger than he is so they don't kick his teeth in.

You know he doesn't HAVE to be a total douche. Right? You do know that just because he inherited a shit-idea government doesn't mean he is required to continue such concepts. Right? His options are not just "fight or be overthrown". Right? He could at least pretend to be civilized. Right? C'mon now. Use the space between your ears.


https://theintercept.com/2017/07/29/dan-coats-north-korea-nukes-nuclear-libya-regime-change/
Quote:
What isn’t mentioned in any of these stories is how we got to this point — in particular, what Dan Coats, President Donald Trump’s Director of National Security, explained last week at the Aspen Security Forum.

North Korea’s 33-year-old dictator Kim Jong-un is not crazy, said Coats. In fact, he has “some rationale backing his actions” regarding the country’s nuclear weapons. That rationale is the way the U.S. has demonstrated that North Korea must keep them to ensure “survival for his regime, survival for his country.”

Kim, according to Coats, “has watched, I think, what has happened around the world relative to nations that possess nuclear capabilities and the leverage they have and seen that having the nuclear card in your pocket results in a lot of deterrence capability.” In particular, “The lessons that we learned out of Libya giving up its nukes … is, unfortunately: If you had nukes, never give them up. If you don’t have them, get them.”

This is, of course, blindingly obvious and has been since the U.S. helped oust longtime Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi’s regime in 2011.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flysideways
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 151

PostPosted: Sat Jul 29, 2017 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
BonezTheGoon wrote:
richk449 wrote:
Isn't he doing the rational thing at this point? Once he has nuclear ICBMs, he is pretty much safe from US invasion. Before he gets them, he is at risk of being the next Saddam or Ghadaffi or Al Asad. Given his options, the most logical thing is to throw everything into nuclear strike capability.


. . . play nice with the other kids who are bigger than he is so they don't kick his teeth in.

You know he doesn't HAVE to be a total douche. Right? You do know that just because he inherited a shit-idea government doesn't mean he is required to continue such concepts. Right? His options are not just "fight or be overthrown". Right? He could at least pretend to be civilized. Right? C'mon now. Use the space between your ears.


https://theintercept.com/2017/07/29/dan-coats-north-korea-nukes-nuclear-libya-regime-change/
Quote:
What isn’t mentioned in any of these stories is how we got to this point — in particular, what Dan Coats, President Donald Trump’s Director of National Security, explained last week at the Aspen Security Forum.

North Korea’s 33-year-old dictator Kim Jong-un is not crazy, said Coats. In fact, he has “some rationale backing his actions” regarding the country’s nuclear weapons. That rationale is the way the U.S. has demonstrated that North Korea must keep them to ensure “survival for his regime, survival for his country.”

Kim, according to Coats, “has watched, I think, what has happened around the world relative to nations that possess nuclear capabilities and the leverage they have and seen that having the nuclear card in your pocket results in a lot of deterrence capability.” In particular, “The lessons that we learned out of Libya giving up its nukes … is, unfortunately: If you had nukes, never give them up. If you don’t have them, get them.”

This is, of course, blindingly obvious and has been since the U.S. helped oust longtime Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi’s regime in 2011.


Are they just giving the Norks some more rope?

It has never been stated that Libya had any nuclear weapons, or did I miss something?

Dan Coats did actually mention Ukraine in the Aspen Institute link in your article, but somehow a nation that actually surrendered nukes was scrubbed. urinalism ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5467
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Sat Jul 29, 2017 8:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

flysideways wrote:
richk449 wrote:
BonezTheGoon wrote:
richk449 wrote:
Isn't he doing the rational thing at this point? Once he has nuclear ICBMs, he is pretty much safe from US invasion. Before he gets them, he is at risk of being the next Saddam or Ghadaffi or Al Asad. Given his options, the most logical thing is to throw everything into nuclear strike capability.


. . . play nice with the other kids who are bigger than he is so they don't kick his teeth in.

You know he doesn't HAVE to be a total douche. Right? You do know that just because he inherited a shit-idea government doesn't mean he is required to continue such concepts. Right? His options are not just "fight or be overthrown". Right? He could at least pretend to be civilized. Right? C'mon now. Use the space between your ears.


https://theintercept.com/2017/07/29/dan-coats-north-korea-nukes-nuclear-libya-regime-change/
Quote:
What isn’t mentioned in any of these stories is how we got to this point — in particular, what Dan Coats, President Donald Trump’s Director of National Security, explained last week at the Aspen Security Forum.

North Korea’s 33-year-old dictator Kim Jong-un is not crazy, said Coats. In fact, he has “some rationale backing his actions” regarding the country’s nuclear weapons. That rationale is the way the U.S. has demonstrated that North Korea must keep them to ensure “survival for his regime, survival for his country.”

Kim, according to Coats, “has watched, I think, what has happened around the world relative to nations that possess nuclear capabilities and the leverage they have and seen that having the nuclear card in your pocket results in a lot of deterrence capability.” In particular, “The lessons that we learned out of Libya giving up its nukes … is, unfortunately: If you had nukes, never give them up. If you don’t have them, get them.”

This is, of course, blindingly obvious and has been since the U.S. helped oust longtime Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi’s regime in 2011.


Are they just giving the Norks some more rope?

It has never been stated that Libya had any nuclear weapons, or did I miss something?

Dan Coats did actually mention Ukraine in the Aspen Institute link in your article, but somehow a nation that actually surrendered nukes was scrubbed. urinalism ...
Gadaffi went full disclosure to come back into the international community. Sold out the Pakistani scientist that sold nuclear weapon technology to libya, S.Africa, Iran (iirc) and NK. They didn't possess one but they had a relatively mature program.

This is the shit we can blame for Libya,Iran and NK w.r.t. nuclear weapons yet nothing has ever been done to punish him or Pakistan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Qadeer_Khan
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king


Last edited by Naib on Sat Jul 29, 2017 8:29 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 747
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Sat Jul 29, 2017 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

flysideways wrote:
It has never been stated that Libya had any nuclear weapons, or did I miss something?

Dan Coats did actually mention Ukraine in the Aspen Institute link in your article, but somehow a nation that actually surrendered nukes was scrubbed. urinalism ...


Libya gave up its nuclear weapons program after the invasion of Iraq. He got scared and decided to play nice.

Then Obama, the UK, and a bunch of European leaders decided it would be best to get rid of a guy who was already playing ball, and replace him with a terrorist regime.

Great idea~! (morons)

Not only did the West increase active terrorist nations by 1 with that stupid war on Libya, but they also showed how wise it would be to have nukes in cases where the West gets a hard on to attack your country.
_________________
People Of Love

Kindness Evokes Kindness

Peace Emits Positive Energy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5467
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Sat Jul 29, 2017 8:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muso wrote:
flysideways wrote:
It has never been stated that Libya had any nuclear weapons, or did I miss something?

Dan Coats did actually mention Ukraine in the Aspen Institute link in your article, but somehow a nation that actually surrendered nukes was scrubbed. urinalism ...


Libya gave up its nuclear weapons program after the invasion of Iraq. He got scared and decided to play nice.

Then Obama, the UK, and a bunch of European leaders decided it would be best to get rid of a guy who was already playing ball, and replace him with a terrorist regime.

Great idea~! (morons)

Not only did the West increase active terrorist nations by 1 with that stupid war on Libya, but they also showed how wise it would be to have nukes in cases where the West gets a hard on to attack your country.
++
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flysideways
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 151

PostPosted: Sat Jul 29, 2017 11:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry, my response to rich was about the butchered quote.

If North Korea does ever take an ICBM shot at the continental United States from within their territorial boundaries it will be passing over China then Russia. I hope they don't feel too nervous about a NK nuclear warhead errantly re-entering on top of them. Bejing isn't too far from the direct flight path.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 17452

PostPosted: Sun Jul 30, 2017 12:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
This is, of course, blindingly obvious and has been since the U.S. helped oust longtime Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi’s regime in 2011.
Blindingly obvious, but seemingly glaringly incorrect.

According to wikipedia:
Nuclear states:
- US
- Russian Federation (formerly part of the Soviet Union)
- UK
- France
- China
- India*
- Pakistan*
- Israel**

* Claimed ** Believed

Former nuclear states:
- South Africa
- Belarus
- Kazakhstan
- Ukraine

And there's some 200 or so countries. So, really not a sane concern.
_________________
Slowly I turned. Step by step.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Jul 30, 2017 3:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
Quote:
This is, of course, blindingly obvious and has been since the U.S. helped oust longtime Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi’s regime in 2011.
Blindingly obvious, but seemingly glaringly incorrect.

According to wikipedia:
Nuclear states:
- US
- Russian Federation (formerly part of the Soviet Union)
- UK
- France
- China
- India*
- Pakistan*
- Israel**

* Claimed ** Believed

Former nuclear states:
- South Africa
- Belarus
- Kazakhstan
- Ukraine

And there's some 200 or so countries. So, really not a sane concern.

How do you think this list from wikipedia contradicts the claim?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1606
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 30, 2017 3:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

We get Monsanto to give genetic therapy to the South Koreans, then spray the North Koreans with Round Up. Metaphorically speaking, of course.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 17452

PostPosted: Sun Jul 30, 2017 3:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
pjp wrote:
Quote:
This is, of course, blindingly obvious and has been since the U.S. helped oust longtime Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi’s regime in 2011.
Blindingly obvious, but seemingly glaringly incorrect.

According to wikipedia:
Nuclear states:
- US
- Russian Federation (formerly part of the Soviet Union)
- UK
- France
- China
- India*
- Pakistan*
- Israel**

* Claimed ** Believed

Former nuclear states:
- South Africa
- Belarus
- Kazakhstan
- Ukraine

And there's some 200 or so countries. So, really not a sane concern.

How do you think this list from wikipedia contradicts the claim?
How many non-nuclear countries have this "survival problem"? He needs nukes precisely because he's unstable.
_________________
Slowly I turned. Step by step.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum