logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!

> Welcome to the America's Debate Archive!

Topics that have had no new replies in the last 180 days are moved to the archive.

New replies are not accepted once a topic is moved to the archive, and new topics cannot be started in the archive.

> The Gaza Pullout
Sleeper
post Aug 18 2005, 02:01 PM
Post #1


********
Who dat!

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,692
Member No.: 386
Joined: January-17-03

From: Florida
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Independent



I am surprised this has not been mentioned here on ad.gif as a debate topic so I will start one based off of today's events.

To protest the order by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza Strip after almost 4 decades of settlers living there many took up hold in a synagogue to protest the pullout. Israeli troops entered the synagogue and began removing the protestors one by one. (This is actually happening live as I type this)

Link to story

Questions for debate:

Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?

This post has been edited by Sleeper: Aug 18 2005, 02:01 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
psyclist
post Aug 18 2005, 02:18 PM
Post #2


******
Senior Contributor

Sponsor
September 2005

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 352
Member No.: 4,200
Joined: January-5-05

From: Dayton, Ohio
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



Questions for debate:

Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people? I say yes. Gaza is basically a waste land, the West Bank is where the resources and water is. So Sharon makes nice and pulls out of Gaza and then continues to build setttlements in the West Bank. When the Palestinians claim their right to the West Bank and Hamas goes nuts and starts shelling Israel, Sharon is able to say: "look we gave you some land" and it paints the Palestinians in a bad light. Sharon got a lot of flak for pulling out of Gaza until the Israeli's became wise that is was a land grab.


Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?

Of course. The people in Gaza knew they were going to be kicked out, they were given plenty of warning.

The idea of this being a land grab may upset a few...I did start a debate about the withdrawal here so feel free to take the debate there.

This post has been edited by psyclist: Aug 18 2005, 02:21 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
loreng59
post Aug 18 2005, 02:55 PM
Post #3


*******
Five Hundred Club

Group: Members
Posts: 835
Member No.: 2,830
Joined: March-31-04

From: Monterey, California
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Republican



Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?
No it was the single worst possible decision that moron has ever made. He forced his decision through the Knesset by firing anybody that disagreed with him, bribe other political parties with public monies & political favors, lied, and blocked all protests against his decision by anybody. His stupidity has encouraged terrorism with has risen to it's highest level in the last 18 months, violated international treaties and pretty well destroyed democracy in Israel.


Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?
No this was way beyond any acceptable level. The police are acting very much as the Chicago police did in 1968. One senior member of the police has been arrested for advocating that his officers 'beat the excrement' (to use an acceptable term though incorrect as to what he really said) out of people protesting this decision. That was caught on tape. Children as young as 12 years old have been arrested and held in prison for more than a month for handing out flyers on the sidewalks.

The Israeli police have over reacted and have been aided by a court system that feels that it can make it's own laws without regard to the Knesset or the people.

The backlash will be felt for a very long time. The fallout from this episode will taint the Israeli government, police and court system for decades.

This post has been edited by loreng59: Aug 18 2005, 02:57 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DaytonRocker
post Aug 18 2005, 03:18 PM
Post #4


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 2,521
Member No.: 547
Joined: February-26-03

From: Dayton, Ohio
Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Republican



This doesn't happen often in this subject, but I have to disagree with loreng59.

I think it was the right thing to do over the long term but sucks major butt in the short term. Israel did take that land (rightfully so) when it was used as a staging area prior to an imminent attack just before the 6 day war. Since then, it's become a justification to blow up Jewish babies and their mommies supported by half the world and most of the Arab world.

As painful as it is, Sharon is effectively nueturing Hamas and Hezbolla. The only thing left as a reason to blow up Jews is the real one - because the Palestinians want them all dead. Now when the Pals attack (which is as much a certainty as the sun coming up tomorrow), there is no other reason except hatred of Jews. This would seem to leave Sharon many more options in dealing with the Pals and quell the bitterness towards Jews in the Arab world. Will it work? Of course not. But neither is anything they are doing now. He's forced something to change and forced the Pals to change as well.

I'd declare the land occupied by the Pals as "Palestine", make them a state, and wait for an act of war by that state to resolve this conflict once and for all.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dontreadonme
post Aug 18 2005, 03:37 PM
Post #5


Group Icon

**********
I think, therefore I am an enemy of the State....and Fox News

Sponsor
October 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,452
Member No.: 359
Joined: December-25-02

From: Nestled in the Shenandoah
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Libertarian



QUOTE(DaytonRocker @ Aug 18 2005, 10:18 AM)

As painful as it is, Sharon is effectively nueturing Hamas and Hezbolla. The only thing left as a reason to blow up Jews is the real one - because the Palestinians want them all dead. 

I disagree with this point of yours in an otherwise agreeable post. Quoting an Aug 13 MSNBC report:
QUOTE
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - For the first time in a decade, the founders and top political leaders of Hamas gathered on the same stage Saturday, vowing to go on fighting Israel and claiming victory for its impending withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

I don't think that this will deter Hamas, Hezbollah or Al-Asqsa in committing more terrorists acts. I believe they see this as a victory and are emboldened by it.

For there to be peace, Israel really must pull out of the so called occupied territories, but until pro-palestinian terror groups are eliminated, there will never be any peace, nor a stable palestinian state.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
psyclist
post Aug 18 2005, 04:01 PM
Post #6


******
Senior Contributor

Sponsor
September 2005

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 352
Member No.: 4,200
Joined: January-5-05

From: Dayton, Ohio
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Dontreadonme @ Aug 18 2005, 11:37 AM)
QUOTE(DaytonRocker @ Aug 18 2005, 10:18 AM)

As painful as it is, Sharon is effectively nueturing Hamas and Hezbolla. The only thing left as a reason to blow up Jews is the real one - because the Palestinians want them all dead. 

I disagree with this point of yours in an otherwise agreeable post. Quoting an Aug 13 MSNBC report:
QUOTE
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - For the first time in a decade, the founders and top political leaders of Hamas gathered on the same stage Saturday, vowing to go on fighting Israel and claiming victory for its impending withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

I don't think that this will deter Hamas, Hezbollah or Al-Asqsa in committing more terrorists acts. I believe they see this as a victory and are emboldened by it.

For there to be peace, Israel really must pull out of the so called occupied territories, but until pro-palestinian terror groups are eliminated, there will never be any peace, nor a stable palestinian state.
*



I agree that Hamas and Co. will be emboldened by the withdrawal and claim it as a victory, however the PA has tried to make it clear to the people that they (the PA) and diplomacy are responsible. Had Israel worked with the PA on the withdrawal instead of going about it unilaterally, I think it would've given more weight to the PA's claims.
I think most Palestinians recognize that the PA were responsible for the withdrawal and not Hamas, but Hamas is making more noise about it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Erasmussimo
post Aug 18 2005, 04:05 PM
Post #7


*******
Five Hundred Club

Group: Validating
Posts: 886
Member No.: 4,853
Joined: April-12-05

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?
Absolutely. The Israeli people have proven beyond any doubt that the policy of occupation results only in intifadah. Occupation doesn't work. They must find another solution; establishing a Palestinian state appears to be the most promising option at this point.

Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?
It would have been more tactful to simply starve them out, but I see nothing wrong with entering the synagogue to remove them. Neither the USA nor the Israelis have any reservations about enterting a mosque that they suspect is being used for terrorist purposes. Besides, the Israelis inside the synagogue weren't there to pray.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sleeper
post Aug 18 2005, 05:00 PM
Post #8


********
Who dat!

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,692
Member No.: 386
Joined: January-17-03

From: Florida
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Independent



Although I don't like seeing people taken from their homes of almost 40 years, in the long run this will show what groups like Hamas are all about as well as the intifadah against Israel.

If they continue with terrorist strikes against the Israeli people it will be impossible for those who once supported to make any claims about occupation.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Julian
post Aug 18 2005, 05:21 PM
Post #9


Group Icon

*********
Every day, when I wake up, I thank the Lord I'm Welsh

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 2,943
Member No.: 496
Joined: February-14-03

From: Swindon, UK
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Other



Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

Yes, I believe it is, whether one takes it at face value OR sees it as a strategic move to hamstring Palestinian terror groups and pain the Palestinian Authority into a corner where it's (legal and reasonable) claims to the West Bank and other "occupied territories".

If it's the former - by any non-Biblical measure the settlers have no right to be there (it's not like they paid the previous landowner) - then the security forces as simple enforcing the law, and the protestors are peacefully but vocally expressing their opposition to that law. Nobody on either side has anything in particular to be ashamed of.

And if it's the latter, the important people in the world (i.e. the American public) are being presented with "shocking" pictures that seem to demonstrate Israel's bona fides in the peace process.

A cynic could argue that this is simply misdirection away from the orchestrated land-grab going on in the West Bank, where the barrier being built is going well outside the 1967 borders to enclose settlements, water sources, and other desirable geography inside Greater Israel, so that when the inevitable Palestinian protests (and yes, probably terror attacks too) are directed at that area, Israel can act with wounded pride and point to Gaza.

More optimistically, it could be the first steps in a long process that ultimately leads to peace. I hope this is the case.

Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?

Well, for one thing, this isn't a "routine" operation for the Israeli security forces, since they have never before done anything like this to other Jewish Israelis.

And I'm not sure how much force has actually been used, either by the settlers or by the security forces in Gaza. The soldiers and polce have made sure that they are unarmed before they enter the synagogue, and are allowing protestors voices' to be heard by the world's watching media. They didn't have to do either, and they certainly don't do that "routinely" with Palestinian protestors (and are using water cannon to disperse crowds of them as I type).

On the protestors side, settlers are often well-armed and willing to use force to defend themselves against aggressors (which, in what is a dangerous part of the world, is reasonable), yet not so much as a stone has been thrown at the security forces so far. Nobody is being beaten up or shot at on either side, which given the strength of feelings involved is something to be quietly celebrated, I think.

This post has been edited by Julian: Aug 18 2005, 05:29 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
psyclist
post Aug 18 2005, 05:35 PM
Post #10


******
Senior Contributor

Sponsor
September 2005

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 352
Member No.: 4,200
Joined: January-5-05

From: Dayton, Ohio
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Julian @ Aug 18 2005, 01:21 PM)
On the protestors side, settlers are often well-armed and willing to use force to defend themselves against aggressors (which, in what is a dangerous part of the world, is reasonable), yet not so much as a stone has been thrown at the security forces so far.
*



Not to nit-pick but CNN is reporting that some protestors have thrown acid onto police officers. But i would agree that has otherwise been peaceful. thumbsup.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hobbes
post Aug 18 2005, 05:43 PM
Post #11


Group Icon

**********
No More Mr. Nice Guy!

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 5,343
Member No.: 1,155
Joined: September-8-03

From: Dallas, TX
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

Don't want to get too deep into this one at this point in time...there are arguments both ways. The one overriding statement, though, is that time will tell.

Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?

I believe the police retrieved the Torah from the synagogue, essentially removing its status as a religious establishment. This renders this question moot. However, I would add that if it were an issue, those in error would be the ones that turned it into a fort, not those who removed them from it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
loreng59
post Aug 18 2005, 07:44 PM
Post #12


*******
Five Hundred Club

Group: Members
Posts: 835
Member No.: 2,830
Joined: March-31-04

From: Monterey, California
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Republican



QUOTE(Julian @ Aug 18 2005, 01:21 PM)
If it's the former - by any non-Biblical measure the settlers have no right to be there (it's not like they paid the previous landowner) - then the security forces as simple enforcing the law, and the protestors are peacefully but vocally expressing their opposition to that law. Nobody on either side has anything in particular to be ashamed of.
*


Julian I think that maybe a correction is in order. Number one yes they did pay for that land. The largest of the towns was established in 1946 (two years before Israeli Independence) on land that was purchased. Second the rest were built on waste land, that was government owned.

According to the San Remo Treaty of 1920, yes they do have a right to live there and yes it was part of Biblical Israel as well
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kalabus
post Aug 18 2005, 08:02 PM
Post #13


******
Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 279
Member No.: 2,117
Joined: January-3-04

From: Illinois
Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Independent



Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

Though I usually defer to Loreng in Israeli debate I have to say yes. Palestinian breeding habits in the long run are going to threaten Israeli sovereignty from within. The Arab league has not stopped wanting to crush Israel and I suspect that they never will stop. By creating a seperate state for Palestinians I think that Israel has prevented the inevitable takeover that would have happened as the muslim population explodes all around them and resentment festers. I think this is a long run move. It takes away any excuse reason for the arab league to invade again and if they do the world bodies will in the name of law have to step in rather then sit idle as they once did.



Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?

What else should they do? This is a pullout not a sting operation.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
loreng59
post Aug 18 2005, 09:36 PM
Post #14


*******
Five Hundred Club

Group: Members
Posts: 835
Member No.: 2,830
Joined: March-31-04

From: Monterey, California
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Republican



QUOTE(kalabus @ Aug 18 2005, 04:02 PM)
Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

Though I usually defer to Loreng in Israeli debate I have to say yes. Palestinian breeding habits in the long run are going to threaten Israeli sovereignty from within. The Arab league has not stopped wanting to crush Israel and I suspect that they never will stop. By creating a seperate state for Palestinians I think that Israel has prevented the inevitable takeover that would have happened as the muslim population explodes all around them and resentment festers. I think this is a long run move. It takes away any excuse reason for the arab league to invade again and if they do the world bodies will in the name of law have to step in rather then sit idle as they once did.
*


kalabus - Most kind. It is not that I am against Israel getting out of Gaza, just the opposite as a matter of fact. I have always hated that place personally.

No what I am against is how it was forced through without any outside input. Also I hate the fact the Sharon got nothing for it.

As for the world bodies, well they have done nothing for 57 years, what makes you think they will now? Israel withdrew to the international lines from Lebanon, the result hundreds of attacks and murders. Who does those world bodies blame - Israel of course. Nothing ever changes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eeyore
post Aug 18 2005, 09:50 PM
Post #15


Group Icon

********
Thaaaaanks for noticin' me

Sponsor
February 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 2,498
Member No.: 365
Joined: December-28-02

From: Nashville
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

I think it is in the interests of the Israeli people. Israel is going to need to end in a two-state solution. Israel has had an effective foreign policy with its neighbors in the sense that its combination of hard-line negotiations and force have led to multiple victories against its neighboring countries.

Yet at some time the chips have to be cashed in and good faith moves will have to be made. The Labor Party was ready to go that way in the 90s and Netanyahu and Sharon slowed the process down.

There is a reality that there are two active groups inside Palestine. One group is dedicated to the complete destruction of Israel. They are in the minority but their actions at times seem to speak for all of the Palestinian people. The other group wishes for peace and stability to move on with their lives. I think Abbas has shown enough to be able to be a political voice for the latter faction. The Gaza pullout will give him the chance to grab the credibility for the act. Gaza will not become Israel proper and it will be a test area to see if law and order can be mustered from within the PA or if Gaza will move to become a base for Hezbollah, Hamas et al.

The Israeli settlement have been a part of the diplomacy. When the Arab nations, the PLO, or the PA have failed to act in the way Israel has wanted, the Israel policy has often times been to punish to continued delay in a two-state solution by expanding settlements. The settlers of the Sinai were effectively compensated, I believe the Gaza settlers will also be justly compensated.



Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?

Israel policies have routinely avoided sentimentality. The order was announced and the policy was enforced. It is a difficult situation for the Israeli people and for the Israeli military and police forces involved. They have accrued tremendous good will in this effort and there really is not that much being sacrificed in this good will gesture.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bucket
post Aug 18 2005, 10:04 PM
Post #16


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,259
Member No.: 1,459
Joined: October-14-03

Gender: Female
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: None





Well I am not so sure how I feel about the likelihood that a two state solution will in fact bring about a solution to this conflict. Everyone says this is what they want or need..but I have my doubts.

Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

I do believe so. I think Israel was being asked to support or further a policy that was now benefiting only a tiny itty bitty minority of their citizens and in return harming the entire nation.



QUOTE(loreng59)
Also I hate the fact the Sharon got nothing for it.

I happen to disagree with this if anything I think Sharon has gained legitimacy because he has shown that he and for the most part all Israelis want peace. Unfortunately there are far too many people who seem to not believe this. I think this decision has shown the world ..with actions..that Israel is willing to inflict pain on herself and make sacrifices in order to put an end to this conflict.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sleeper
post Aug 18 2005, 10:24 PM
Post #17


********
Who dat!

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,692
Member No.: 386
Joined: January-17-03

From: Florida
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Independent



I am just wondering if those who have supported the Palestinian Authority in the past, will continue to do so if they continue to incite violence again the Jewish people in Israel.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
psyclist
post Aug 18 2005, 11:17 PM
Post #18


******
Senior Contributor

Sponsor
September 2005

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 352
Member No.: 4,200
Joined: January-5-05

From: Dayton, Ohio
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Sleeper @ Aug 18 2005, 01:00 PM)
Although I don't like seeing people taken from their homes of almost 40 years, in the long run this will show what groups like Hamas are all about as well as the intifadah against Israel.

If they continue with terrorist strikes against the Israeli people it will be impossible for those who once supported to make any claims about occupation.
*



Just because Israelis are leaving Gaza and 4 settlements in the West Bank does not mean this is a full withdrawal. Parts of the West Bank will still be under occupation as well as, debatably, Gaza. Again check here.
Members of the PLO, Hamas, are already trying to make it clear that this is not the end of occupation.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Eeyore
post Aug 18 2005, 11:47 PM
Post #19


Group Icon

********
Thaaaaanks for noticin' me

Sponsor
February 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 2,498
Member No.: 365
Joined: December-28-02

From: Nashville
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Sleeper @ Aug 18 2005, 05:24 PM)

I am just wondering if those who have supported the Palestinian Authority in the past, will continue to do so if they continue to incite violence again the Jewish people in Israel.
*



I am not sure that I have per se supported the Palestinian Authority in the past. I have tried to gain the Israeli and Palestinian Arab perspective of this situation as I have followed this story with some detail in the past ten years and with less detail the fifteen or so before that.

What I like about the two-state solution is that once Palestine is granted full statehood it can be held accountable for its actions and the actions conducted from its borders. I would support an aggressive policy by Israel against an independent Palestine should attacks be launched from outside its borders.

If Mexico allowed its citizens to launch paramilitary attacks against us I would supported an aggressive response and I would in the case of ISrael against Palestine.

I want Palestine to have the chance and I want Israel to gain an opportunity to get off of the tiger's back it climbed onto when it occupied predominantly arab territories in 1967.

It is a risk for Israel, but not doing anything is a greater risk for that country. Given a chance the more moderate element in Palestine may be able to take the appropriate actions to keep their country free of an Israeli invasion.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aquilla
post Aug 19 2005, 04:50 AM
Post #20


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,148
Member No.: 421
Joined: February-3-03

From: Missouri
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



Was the decision by Sharon to pull out of the Gaza strip in the best interest of Israeli people?

As tragic a decision as it is, I think it is Sharon's last best chance for a workable peace solution. The Israeli settlers in Gaza have in many cases been there their entire lives and this is a horrible sacrifice they are being forced to make. Still though, they served as a constant target for hate-filled terrorists like Hamas and the PA who used them to deflect from the corruption in the so-called "leadership" of the Palestanian people. They also served as a symbol on which the jew-haters that seem to pervade so much of Europe could focus. I'm afraid that this was a necessary step, and a last step. This must be made clear to all. If the violence against Israel continues from Gaza, then Israel will be legally and morally justified to solve the Gaza problem once and for all with military force. I hope that doesn't happen, but it must be made crystal clear to the current PA that such an option is in play. It is now up to them.


Routinely in the US we do not enter religious establishments in the name of surveillance or for tactical reasons. Is the Israeli's use of force in this instance acceptable?

I don't know, the Israeli government really had no choice in this instance. It is just a bad situation all the way around.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: January 29th, 2022 - 01:35 AM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.