.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

Raging Tiger- Save $9.00
winSPMBT: Main Battle Tank- Save $5.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > Shrapnel Community > Space Empires: IV & V

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 25th, 2004, 03:16 AM
Combat Wombat's Avatar

Combat Wombat Combat Wombat is offline
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Minnesota/South Dakota
Posts: 1,439
Thanks: 3
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Combat Wombat is on a distinguished road
Default Re: OT: Election 2004

I am not old enough to vote yet but I still have very strong political opinions.

Here is the Iraq Situation Timeline in a nutshell
1. Sadam does alot of bad things
2. Iraq Invaded Kuwait
3. US Led Coalition Stops Iraq
4. UN Passes Resolutions for Iraq
5. Iraq half-*** complies
6. Sadam does alot more bad things
7. We know Iraq had weapons of mass destruction
8. US gives Iraq a boat load more time with Inspections
9. Sadam wouldn't explain what happend to the WMDs
10. Therefore they are no longer compling
11. We therefore revert back to a state of war
12. Even at the disapproval of the UN which is the one that passed the resolutions that gave Iraq a certin ammount of time to dispose of their WMDs(and show solid proof) or there would be military action taken
13. US led coalition frees the Iraqi people from a very evil dictator and will soon hopefully get a solid government setup and leave

Next:
Renegade 13: "And yep, we're only there to stop him from having weapons of mass destruction....but wait a minute...who has the most weapons of mass destruction of all the countries in the world...hmm lets think about that."

Yes the US has the most WMDs but unlike Iraq we have used them only once(outside of tests) and we used them to do the right thing which was end WWII and save possibly Millions of lives that would have been lost in a fight using conventional weapons through the Pacific. Also we were defending ourselves while Sadam liked to use his WMDs on his own innocent citizens.

Next:

The economy gone bad:
1. Bush had 9/11
2. Bush had major corperate scandles which started during the 90's with Clinton in office
3. Bush had .com boom gone bust

But:
Economy is picking up thanks to taxcuts and good old american optimism. We just had the biggest quarter of growth in something odd years. And no the taxcuts are not just for the rich like the Democrats would like you to believe. They help everyone.

Also some people complain about the current budget deficit. I am not happy about it either but sometimes there just isn't another way and I am happy that Bush kept his promise and did not raise taxes.

Enviroment:

Captiam Kwok: "Environmental record? Nothing but loosening up pollution regulations for big corps and exploiting protected wildlife areas for more fossil fuels."

Drilling for oil does not involve clear cutting entire forests and neither does logging. Also forests need to be logged a certin ammount to prevent situations like the massive forest fires that have plauged the west/south west. Also Bush put all that money(7 or 8 billion I think it was) into the development of Hydrogen Powered Cars, I sure he would have done that since all hes interested in is oil and destroying the enviroment

Abortion:

I am against it not only for the moral reasons but also because of common sense. Why kill innocent babies when there are alot of people struggling to find one to adopt because they cannot have one of their own, this includes gay couples whom I have no problem allowing them to adopt considering the alternative of killing the baby.

Gay Marriage:

I am against this because marriage is between a man and a women and its sad enough what our culture has done to the word marriage with an almost 50% divorce rate, there is no reason to degrade it any further than it has gone.

dogscoff:
"Vote for whoever you like, Bush will just rig the election again, I'm sure of it.

I really dislike Bush (as you may have noticed) and although I know next to nothing about the other guy I'm sure he couldn't possibly be any worse, but like I always say: "It doesn't matter who you vote for, a politician always wins."

With a very few notable exceptions, all politicians of all parties in all countries are corrupt, soulless, self-serving, bribe-taking, corporate-owned parasitic scum who will happily sell your Grandmother (not their own) to the dog-food factory for the price of a new Bentley and a seat on the board of some bull**** company or advisory board that they set up in office specifically so they and their old school chums could have a nice fat paycheque until retirement. We should burn the lot of 'em (with a few exceptions) and go live in self-sufficient anarcho-syndicalist communes."

That has got to be the most incredibly cynical view of the world I have ever heard. And how did Bush "rig" the election?

Well I guess this is a good spot to start my review of the canidates.

Canidates:
Bush: There is only 1 problem with basiclly anything he has done while in office and that is the Patriot Act. I find parts of this disturbing because of the power it gives the government and law enforcement and the Last thing this country needs is a government with more power.

Kerry:
Doesn't come off to me as a very nice guy, everytime I see him he has a weird cringe on his face, but this is not the main reason I dislike Kerry and the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party has no ideas anymore all they do is ***** and moan about everyting. Kerry also has switched back and forth on alot of key issues in a short ammount of time, he says what he thinks has the best chance of getting him elected and has no opinions of his own. Also The Democratic Party accused President Bush of being AWOL while he was supposed to be serving in the National Guard and had no evidence to back it up, these kind of unbackedup accusations from either side are unacceptable and sad.

Third Partys:

I don't know much about any third party canidates but I believe that Third Partys are a great thing because this country needs more that 2 choices. I live in Minnesota and enjoyed it when Jesse Ventura was in office, he didn't do to bad of a job and really shook up Minnesotas Political Foundation(in a good way).

Elections in general:
I think a canidates military service or lack thereof should not come into consideration in an election or at least the very high place that both sides have put it at.

Future Elections:
Voteing Kerry in 2004 will not stop Hillary from winning in 2008. Infact it might do the opposite.
Vote Bush in 2004

tesco samoa: "Also my bet is on the old rich white guy to win"

If you vote for Condoleezza Rice(current national security advisor) for president in 2008(I hope she runs, but all I have heard are rumors) we can have a very good chance to get a president that isnt a rich old white guy.

Another issue that has come up recently but I don't think will turn into one debated by our current presidential canidates is whether it is constitutional to have "Under God" in the pledge. My opinion on this is as long as you arent made to say it then there is nothing wrong with having it in there. I myself goto a school where it is not maditory and find that this solution works very well.

Ok well I think thats all I wanted to say for now but most likely I will have more later. And everyone this is a thread about politics, lets make sure it stays that way and not into a flame war as many threads like this do(I have seen this happen on other forums and highly doubt it could happen here but it doesn't hurt to be careful)

[ March 25, 2004, 02:35: Message edited by: Combat Wombat ]
__________________
You can give a man fire and he will be warm for a day but set him on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

A* Se+++ GdQ $? Fr! C* Css Sf-- Ai% Au M+++ Mp* S@ Ss++++ RNSHP Pw++ Fq+++ Nd++ Rp++ G++++ Mm++ Bb+++@ L+ Tcp--
Get the newest Version of Invasion! here: http://www.secenter.org/

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old March 25th, 2004, 04:29 AM

Phoenix-D Phoenix-D is offline
National Security Advisor
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 5,085
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Phoenix-D is on a distinguished road
Default Re: OT: Election 2004

Your timeline missed the part about our ultimatum to Saddam being exclusively about the WMDs..which again haven't been found.

Budget: They say there isn't another way..except every time there is a hint of surplus, the answer is tax cuts. Wasn't Reagans economic boom supposed to cancel out his deficits? It didn't, and if the pattern is followed the current plan will ALWAYS lead to sky-high debt because it will never be paid down but it will be allowed to grow.

Drilling for oil does involve enviromental damage, even if some of it is accidental (the oil pipline leaks quite a bit, for example). And any building of roads to get -to- the oil is inherent disruptive because of something called edge effects (the interior of a forest has different climate than the outside, different exposure to predators, etc)

Most forests do NOT need to be logged in a convential sense. Mianly because the best trees for logging are the old, large ones. Which are also the most fire-resistant.

The fires in California? Forget about preventing them. That habitat burns to the ground pretty frequently..IIRC the oldest stand is something like a decade old.

Abortion:

There are not a lot of people struggling to adopt, sorry. Actually the system is flooded and over-loaded.

Gay Marriage:

You're against it for sematic reasons. Hmm. Or maybe its because civil unions DON'T EXIST, and if they are created they will be able to be discriminated against that way. Seperate but Equal ring a bell?
__________________
Phoenix-D

I am not senile. I just talk to myself because the rest of you don't provide adequate conversation.
-Digger
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old March 25th, 2004, 04:38 AM
Atrocities's Avatar

Atrocities Atrocities is offline
Shrapnel Fanatic
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 15,630
Thanks: 0
Thanked 30 Times in 18 Posts
Atrocities is on a distinguished road
Default Re: OT: Election 2004

Bring the discussion back to point, who do you think is going to win the election this year?
__________________
Creator of the Star Trek Mod - AST Mod - 78 Ship Sets - Conquest Mod - Atrocities Star Wars Mod - Galaxy Reborn Mod - and Subterfuge Mod.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old March 25th, 2004, 04:49 AM
Combat Wombat's Avatar

Combat Wombat Combat Wombat is offline
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Minnesota/South Dakota
Posts: 1,439
Thanks: 3
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Combat Wombat is on a distinguished road
Default Re: OT: Election 2004

I changed what I wrote about gay marriages because what I posted in the first place wasn't how I really feel. Don't ask how I did this, I haven't been all together today but I realized it just 5 minutes ago while laying in bed and imiditely rushed down here to change it. I don't believe gay couples should have any of the rights a normal couple has. You can say this discrimination but they have the same oppertunity to marry a person of the oppsite sex and have all the same rights as anyone else does. If we let gay people get married where will it end, soon we will have two stright men that live together asking for the same rights or one guy and his 3 wives or even weirder situations.

The point is sadam had to prove that he got rid of them, he didnt, inspectors couldn't find them so we had to assume that he was hiding them which he wasn't supposed to do or even worse he sold them to some terrorist group.

edit: I think Bush will win

[ March 25, 2004, 02:53: Message edited by: Combat Wombat ]
__________________
You can give a man fire and he will be warm for a day but set him on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

A* Se+++ GdQ $? Fr! C* Css Sf-- Ai% Au M+++ Mp* S@ Ss++++ RNSHP Pw++ Fq+++ Nd++ Rp++ G++++ Mm++ Bb+++@ L+ Tcp--
Get the newest Version of Invasion! here: http://www.secenter.org/

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old March 25th, 2004, 05:00 AM

Lord Chane Lord Chane is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 58
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Lord Chane is on a distinguished road
Default Re: OT: Election 2004

Quote:
Originally posted by Combat Wombat:

13. US led coalition frees the Iraqi people from a very evil dictator and will soon hopefully get a solid government setup and leave
When did it become the responsibility of the US to "free" people from an evil dictator? Did I miss the announcement? And what sort of precedent does that set? Should the US now free folks all over the world from the "evil dictators" they live under? Do we have the right to impose our definition of who is good and who is bad on other coutries? What if the leader of another country woke up one day and decided that President Bush is an evil dictator and decided to free us from his rule? We'd call that a war of aggression. The only thing that keeps another country from doing that is our military power. So it boils down to "might makes right", and that's wrong. That's a bully mentality.

Quote:
Originally posted by Combat Wombat:

Yes the US has the most WMDs but unlike Iraq we have used them only once(outside of tests) and we used them to do the right thing which was end WWII and save possibly Millions of lives that would have been lost in a fight using conventional weapons through the Pacific. Also we were defending ourselves while Sadam liked to use his WMDs on his own innocent citizens.
What gives the US the right to decide who can and cannot have WMDs? I'm not in favor of all countries having them, but the fact is the US has no more right to dictate to other countries about what they can and cannot have than other countries have to dictate to us. The purpose of having the WMDs is immaterial. A soverign nation has the right to do anything it wants to do, much the same as I have a right to do anything I want to do until my exercise of that right infringes on someone else's rights. There is no international law prohibiting WMDs, at least not that I'm aware of. If Iraq uses WMDs on its own people, then that's a problem for the Iraqis. There are many more people killed with conventional weapons by repressive regimes every day. Are we to invade and save all of them?

Quote:
Originally posted by Combat Wombat:

Economy is picking up thanks to taxcuts and good old american optimism. We just had the biggest quarter of growth in something odd years. And no the taxcuts are not just for the rich like the Democrats would like you to believe. They help everyone.
The tax cuts are a placebo. Does anyone really believe that the $500 most Americans receive as their tax cut is going to do anything to boost the economy? It's a joke. And yes, the cuts are for the rich. Is it a coincidence that the Bush administration has so many millionaires in it? Or that so many members came from Enron, a company that was cooking the books and defrauding its stock holders and employees? Is it just happenstance that umpteen billion dollars in contracts went to Halliburton, the VP's former company, without the normal bidding process? Bush and his administration is all about money, power, and the rich.

Quote:
Originally posted by Combat Wombat:

Also some people complain about the current budget deficit. I am not happy about it either but sometimes there just isn't another way and I am happy that Bush kept his promise and did not raise taxes.
I believe Clinton left a balanced budget. The current administration has spent and spent and spent, and to what end? The budget deficit is less a problem for me. I'm older and won't be saddled with paying it off. That'll be left to the younger folk in this country. I wish them luck.

Quote:
Originally posted by Combat Wombat:

Drilling for oil does not involve clear cutting entire forests and neither does logging. Also forests need to be logged a certin ammount to prevent situations like the massive forest fires that have plauged the west/south west. Also Bush put all that money(7 or 8 billion I think it was) into the development of Hydrogen Powered Cars, I sure he would have done that since all hes interested in is oil and destroying the enviroment
There is more to life than money and business. It won't do businesses much good to make money if the planet dies and we go with it. Drilling in national parks, logging in national parks, repealing air pollution laws and treaties is about money and nothing else. It's about putting business before people. It's about paying off the political debts a candidate acquired on the way to the White House. Does it seem likely that businesses left to their own devices will do the right thing and take care of the environment? The only reason they behave at all right now is because of laws that force them to. As the Bush administration makes it easier for them to rape the enviroment, they most certainly will.

Quote:
Originally posted by Combat Wombat:

That has got to be the most incredibly cynical view of the world I have ever heard. And how did Bush "rig" the election?
I'd say Dogscoff's opinion is right on the money. Watch the news. We have representatives who speed through intersections and kill people and try to get off. We have senators who left a young woman to drown in their car to save their career. We have presidents who lie about sexual escapades. We have governors who take bribes. Need I go on? Someone please point out the noble politician who we can look up to. Where are the Lincolns and Washingtons today?

Quote:
Originally posted by Combat Wombat:

I think a canidates military service or lack thereof should not come into consideration in an election or at least the very high place that both sides have put it at.
I disagree. A candidate's military service comes into the picture for two reasons. First, a candidate who has served in the military and potentially put his life on the line for the country can certainly be viewed as more patriotic than the candidate who dodged the draft, got his/her rich daddy to pull strings to keep them out of harms way. People who really care about something are willing to fight in support of it. It sends a bad message when a person dodges their nation's call to sevice and then aspires to lead that nation. Second, a candidate who has been in the military and especially one who saw combat is going to be much more judicious about sending troops in harm's way. They have an appreciation for what it is to fight, kill, see friends killed and are much less likely to send others off to die in frivilous wars or police actions. They are also much less likely to allow a war to be drawn out because they know the cost in lives and suffering that entails. Bush used his dad's position to avoid having to go. Kerry risked his life while Bush partied. Bush is certainly better than Clinton on that point but both of them appear cowardly in the face of Kerry.

Quote:
Originally posted by Combat Wombat:

Another issue that has come up recently but I don't think will turn into one debated by our current presidential canidates is whether it is constitutional to have "Under God" in the pledge. My opinion on this is as long as you arent made to say it then there is nothing wrong with having it in there. I myself goto a school where it is not maditory and find that this solution works very well.
No, there is something wrong with it being there. It violates the separation of church and state guaranteed in the constitution. That aside, would you feel the same way if the pledge included something that was patently offensive to you so long as you weren't required to say it?

Quote:
Originally posted by Combat Wombat:

Ok well I think thats all I wanted to say for now but most likely I will have more later. And everyone this is a thread about politics, lets make sure it stays that way and not into a flame war as many threads like this do(I have seen this happen on other forums and highly doubt it could happen here but it doesn't hurt to be careful)
I love a good discussion. I appreciate your opinion, although I don't agree with it, and tried to stick with the issues and avoid any personal attacks.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old March 25th, 2004, 05:25 AM
Joachim's Avatar

Joachim Joachim is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 412
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Joachim is on a distinguished road
Default Re: OT: Election 2004

Quote:
Originally posted by Combat Wombat:
I am not old enough to vote yet but I still have very strong political opinions.

Next:
Renegade 13: "And yep, we're only there to stop him from having weapons of mass destruction....but wait a minute...who has the most weapons of mass destruction of all the countries in the world...hmm lets think about that."

Yes the US has the most WMDs but unlike Iraq we have used them only once(outside of tests) and we used them to do the right thing which was end WWII and save possibly Millions of lives that would have been lost in a fight using conventional weapons through the Pacific. Also we were defending ourselves while Sadam liked to use his WMDs on his own innocent citizens.

Ahh history is always forgotten when the rhetoric comes out. So Agent Orange, a chemical defoliant used in Vietnam was not a WMD?? What about its long Lasting impact on both Veterans and the Vietnamese still living there today? Lets not even consider WMDs like the Strategic Bombing campaign waged against Germany and Japan - Dresden or Tokyo anyone?
And if you can hide behind such farcical comments as 'we have only used them once' as a justification that is inhumane. The TWO atomic bombs dropped to test them on the Japanese have killed 100 000s of people - almost all civilians. There was no justification for their use, they did not end the war any earlier than it would have. As the only country to ever use atomic weapons surely the USA should not be allowed them still???
I have managed to avoid all previous debates like this, but sometimes things are said that just need commenting upon. So much for my five stars. At least we can debate these things.

As for the original point - Nader to win allthough he has a snowballs chance in a supernova. Otherwise Kerry, the USA cannot continue on this go alone foreign policy strategy, Kerry might just return to multilateral and UN actions.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old March 25th, 2004, 06:35 AM
Azselendor's Avatar

Azselendor Azselendor is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Gettysburg Sector
Posts: 785
Thanks: 7
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Azselendor is on a distinguished road
Default Re: OT: Election 2004

Sorry about not replying sooner.

Been busy at the courthouse. Those dimwits don't know thier left from thier right. Oh well.

Atrocities, I do agree Iraq was a possible threat, but bush's way of going about it was idiotic. The entire shock and awe campaign was a joke (I would prefered to see a MOAB go off just outside the city limits then a couple of cruise missiles). Of course, had the Iraqi army put up an actual fight....

Realistic threats are places like Somolia, Ethiopia, Syria, and Quebec (kidding on the Last one). And the Bush Administration turns a blind eye.

While bush cannot be held at fault for Clinton's mistakes, Bush has to be made accountable for not preventing it. In the Last year my income taxes have gone up by almost 500 dollars while my income itself has gone by nearly 9000. No one can say 'tax relief' helped me unless it was a relief from my income tax refund!


As for some of his laws, and this is also a fault of the Clinton Administration, are flat out unconstitutional. I understand the need to protect america, but tossing aside the highest laws of the land shows contempt for America itself. Laws of Ex Post Facto were forbidden because of thier usage during Colonial Occupation for a reason.

Kerry, I have to agree with. He's not totally the right man for the job, but he's better than bush. Kerry has been to war, unlike bush how got waivers to stay stateside, and seen what it does to people and families. Bush has not seen this with his own eyes and, imo, lacks the fortitude to properly direct our military.


Now if only both candidates could be reasonable enough to actually discuss thier platforms. Maybe a debate where bashing each other is forbidden and mentioning 9/11 is a foul. Then maybe we'll actually see the real candidates.

Kwok,
The two party system, no amtter how messed up it is, works because it's stable. That's why Nader, Perot, etc never have a chance. Multi-Party nations (more than 2 main parties) typically build coalition governments and that always seems to be a disaster in the making. One wrong move and the entire gov't goes to pieces. Then again, the politicans actually have to work in those systems...

Renegade 13,
Canada? Self Defense? what! Impossible!

eol,
I agree with you on the other threats. What is needed in Isreal is a democratic government, not a one-sided government. Give everyone equal represenation and a government mandate to remain religiously neutral and let's see what happens. Maybe instead of dividing people into different countries the US should try uniting them.

That is how you build a nation, Last time I checked.

However, keep in mind the loss of civil liberities here will effect you. I'll direct your attention to the Antiterrorism & Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. As a result of the actions of an american, tim mcvay, and his bombing of a federal building, immigrants to the US now face deportation from things as little as a littering fine, DUI, or even bad credit. Is that fair to people coming to the US for business, work, or pleasure? I think not. By turning low level crimes into felonies foreigners, people can unkowningly be arrested and held in the immigration deportation system for any number of stupid reasons. And if you think that's bad, they can use anything from the 20 years prior to the date of the law going into effect just to make sure. Then we got the Secret Evidence Act, guess what that is used for

Plus 9/11 is a reminder that jsut because it doesn't happen in my back yard now doesn't mean it won't happen in the future.

As for the skull and bones, it might be more surprising to learn that GWB's grandfather, Prescott Bush was fined a million dollars for aiding the Nazi's in WW1. It's funny how the California recall brought up arnold's father being a Nazi armyman, but no one ever mentions Prescott Bush. Then again, the Bush Family shares a line to King George the III and that's amusing because Powell's family does too.


Geo,
I'll bet you there isn't enough money in the world to pay the US to take Chirac.


Atrocities, David,
On my Last vacation abroad in 95, I found the easiest way to get through customs is to look exhausted and half awake and to have about 30 suitcases loaded on one trolly. Works best if you are entering at a Miami, LA, Texas, or Pheonix airport. The heat and the sweat will get anyone stinking up the high heaven and they'll wave you through with the air freshner can. lol

Wombat,
The tax cuts didn't help me. Don't assume everyone was helped just because the president keeps saying so. Myself and a number of my friends all got hit hard by the tax relief.

As for the debt, In real life, when someone runs up a huge debt and doesn't pay for it, it goes into collections. This is one way wars have started. I do recall Mexico was invaded once for not repaying thier debts. One of the causes of Hitler's rise was the fact Germany was placed into collections at the end of WW1. Going from a 5 trillion surplus to a 5 billion debt means a lot of money was lost real fast and someone wasn't keeping a tab on the account balance while writing bad checks.

Oil drilling does harm the enviroment. Of course, greenpeace using disel-powered boats doesn't help it. Take the tundra where it takes over a century for a footprint to fade in some places. What would oil drilling do to that ecosystem and all the frozen freshwater there? I like my ice without texas crude.

Forest fires are also a natural process of nature. By preventing them with logging operations we risk making the forest fires worse, or even speeding up growth of various deserts. A simply solution would be to make it mandatory that for every tree cut down, two or three saplings must be planted and left to grow.

Hydrogen fuel cells development, like Mars Mission and Moon Base and immigration visas for illegal workers are all fallacies produced for gaining votes. It simply won't happen. Gas prices can rise up to 10 bucks a gallon, and it still won't happen. Not until law makers get decisive.

Abortion, I can agree with you on. However, it should be allowed incase the mother's life is in danger and nother can be done to save the fetus. I have serious moral concerns about gay adoptions as it may hidner a child's emotional and social development.

Gay marriage I'm half and half, but not because it's supposed to be between a man and a women, but because it shouldn't be an issue. Leave it to the states to decide and the Full Faith and Credit clause of the constitution to enforce. Issue resolved. To me, civil unions is jsut a way of saying 'common law marriage' and de-politicalize it. Safe way out for bush.

Anyways, now my arm is gonna hurt because I typed too damn much in one sitting.

As for who will win, I say whoever takes Dixieville Notch in upstate New Hampshire. Last year was bush and the year before was clinton. Hopefully they are back into thier stride because up until 50 years ago, they always predicted the outcome of every election.
__________________
@Azselendor #BoldlyGoing
/ Space Empires // Orlando Pest Control
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.