not always what?
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ten US Sailors released in Iran!
- Thread starter JimH52
- Start date
alpine
Gold Member
- Sep 13, 2012
- 3,535
- 809
- 130
Not always.
In essence, they are the same, both fighting for islam
the difference is, mujaheddin would be fighting to defend islam, jihadist would fight to conquer for islam...
no, they really don't.The pictures say otherwise . you terrorist sympathizers make me Illsince there wasn't an attack on us attacking iran would be monumental in its stupidity.Obama is not man enough to do that... he is to much a pussy like fakieWhat Reagan Did When Iran Assaulted a Navy Ship
“They must know that we will protect our ships, and if they threaten us, they will pay a price.”With those words, President Ronald Reagan justified his approval of Operation Praying Mantis, a day-long engagement in which U.S. Navy and Marine forces delivered a powerful response to the Iranian assault of the USS Samuel B. Roberts. A hidden Iranian mine had struck the frigate in the open waters of the Persian Gulf on April 14, 1988. No sailors died, but several were injured and the ship was severely damaged.
Operation Praying Mantis remains the largest surface battle engaged in by the U.S. Navy since World War II, and its outcome was decisive. According to official reports released afterward, using a combination of anti-ship missiles, naval gunfire, and aircraft launched from several ships, including the aircraft carrier the USS Enterprise, the Navy destroyed two oil platforms used by Iran for intelligence collection, sank 4 small Iranian Navy boats, sank an Iranian frigate, and severely damaged another Iranian warship.
But that was all on April 18, 1988. Back when the United States believed in delivering swift, decisive responses to enemy provocations.
[FONT=Roboto Slab, serif]What Reagan Did When Iran Assaulted a Navy Ship[/FONT]
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
obama is too smart for that schoolyard bullshit
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
you just can't stand that blood wasn't shed
i agreeNot always.
In essence, they are the same, both fighting for islam
the difference is, mujaheddin would be fighting to defend islam, jihadist would fight to conquer for islam...
+ jihad isnt just fighting for islam
i dont know sunni.but this people doing jihad too in shia
because they are building home ... without money for poor people
thanatos144
Gold Member
Must turn you on to see Americans subjected to that humiliation.no, they really don't.The pictures say otherwise . you terrorist sympathizers make me Illsince there wasn't an attack on us attacking iran would be monumental in its stupidity.Obama is not man enough to do that... he is to much a pussy like fakieWhat Reagan Did When Iran Assaulted a Navy Ship
“They must know that we will protect our ships, and if they threaten us, they will pay a price.”With those words, President Ronald Reagan justified his approval of Operation Praying Mantis, a day-long engagement in which U.S. Navy and Marine forces delivered a powerful response to the Iranian assault of the USS Samuel B. Roberts. A hidden Iranian mine had struck the frigate in the open waters of the Persian Gulf on April 14, 1988. No sailors died, but several were injured and the ship was severely damaged.
Operation Praying Mantis remains the largest surface battle engaged in by the U.S. Navy since World War II, and its outcome was decisive. According to official reports released afterward, using a combination of anti-ship missiles, naval gunfire, and aircraft launched from several ships, including the aircraft carrier the USS Enterprise, the Navy destroyed two oil platforms used by Iran for intelligence collection, sank 4 small Iranian Navy boats, sank an Iranian frigate, and severely damaged another Iranian warship.
But that was all on April 18, 1988. Back when the United States believed in delivering swift, decisive responses to enemy provocations.
[FONT=Roboto Slab, serif]What Reagan Did When Iran Assaulted a Navy Ship[/FONT]
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
obama is too smart for that schoolyard bullshit
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
you just can't stand that blood wasn't shed
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
PaintMyHouse
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #466
Humiliation?Must turn you on to see Americans subjected to that humiliation.
News for ya, don't stray into the territorial waters of other nations when you are in the military. You are subject to arrest, if not much worse.
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,519
- 2,165
- Banned
- #467
Only you get excited that way our military's suffering.Must turn you on to see Americans subjected to that humiliation.no, they really don't.The pictures say otherwise . you terrorist sympathizers make me Illsince there wasn't an attack on us attacking iran would be monumental in its stupidity.Obama is not man enough to do that... he is to much a pussy like fakieWhat Reagan Did When Iran Assaulted a Navy Ship
“They must know that we will protect our ships, and if they threaten us, they will pay a price.”With those words, President Ronald Reagan justified his approval of Operation Praying Mantis, a day-long engagement in which U.S. Navy and Marine forces delivered a powerful response to the Iranian assault of the USS Samuel B. Roberts. A hidden Iranian mine had struck the frigate in the open waters of the Persian Gulf on April 14, 1988. No sailors died, but several were injured and the ship was severely damaged.
Operation Praying Mantis remains the largest surface battle engaged in by the U.S. Navy since World War II, and its outcome was decisive. According to official reports released afterward, using a combination of anti-ship missiles, naval gunfire, and aircraft launched from several ships, including the aircraft carrier the USS Enterprise, the Navy destroyed two oil platforms used by Iran for intelligence collection, sank 4 small Iranian Navy boats, sank an Iranian frigate, and severely damaged another Iranian warship.
But that was all on April 18, 1988. Back when the United States believed in delivering swift, decisive responses to enemy provocations.
[FONT=Roboto Slab, serif]What Reagan Did When Iran Assaulted a Navy Ship[/FONT]
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
obama is too smart for that schoolyard bullshit
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
you just can't stand that blood wasn't shed
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
WildBillKelsoe
Silver Member
- Dec 23, 2015
- 3,201
- 421
- 90
Humiliation?Must turn you on to see Americans subjected to that humiliation.
News for ya, don't stray into the territorial waters of other nations when you are in the military. You are subject to arrest, if not much worse.
Our servicemen were used as propaganda pawns. That's a crime.
PaintMyHouse
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #469
Nope, and we don't obey the rules of war so big fucking deal if they were.Humiliation?Must turn you on to see Americans subjected to that humiliation.
News for ya, don't stray into the territorial waters of other nations when you are in the military. You are subject to arrest, if not much worse.
Our servicemen were used as propaganda pawns. That's a crime.
- Mar 16, 2012
- 59,165
- 17,463
- 2,180
Get over it, these are Mujahedeen that is for sure. Several legit sites have confirmed it.Exactly, so why did your friends make the claim that these guys were the Taliban? They are Mujahedeen who were fighting the Islamists and were able to repel the Soviets from Afghanistan with the help of the Reagan administration. Shah Massoud was the Mujaheddin leader, regardless of whether he was in this picture or not.Was that "The Taliban" or not? You first.
There was no Taliban back then moron. These are the founders of Taliban, thanks to the US foreign policies....
"That's Shah Massoud in the brown jacket on the right, dumbass:"
These are your own words, now time to eat them.... or optionally, you can shove it up your arse...
Because this is not Shah Masood(as you claimed), this is not the Mujaheddin that the US should be supporting in this picture, but the religious extremist Haqqani people (Haqqani himself later joining in, his photos with Reagan is also available), who later found Taliban and started a war against US.
Why don't you just accept you did a mistake?
We are not gonna act like some kids in school and circle around you and point fingers at you till you cry...
Just be honest about it, accept your mistake and fix it like an adult...
Do you even know what the meaning of mujaheddin is?
Mujaheddin: person who fights for islam
Of course they are mujaheddin, just like OBL and Taliban. What the fuck is your point?
The question here is; are these the mujaheddin US was supposed to be funding or not. Since these are the guys who founded the Taliban right after the war, obviously, they were not... You said it was Shah Masood in this picture, the mujaheddin US should have supported. But that was wrong, you don't even know what he looks like. Shah Masood NEVER, let alone white house, been to the US, EVER...
Do you even know what you are talking about?
You haven't confirmed jack shit. You are just making claims that are not just wrong, but also moronic. And when we call those out, you just run.
Run Roudy run, mujaheddin gonna get you, little boy..........................
Bzzzz wrong. Mojahedeen simply means "Muslim guerrila fighter" or simply "fighter". Then when you add for example "Mujahedeen al Islam" it means Islamic fighter. The men in that picture with Reagan are Mujahedeen, and not "Taliban" just because you leftist whackjobs say so.
- Mar 16, 2012
- 59,165
- 17,463
- 2,180
Nope! Is the communist Iranian group known as "Mujahedeen Khalg" that is living in exile now, Jihadists, Olagh?Get over it, these are Mujahedeen that is for sure. Several legit sites have confirmed it.Exactly, so why did your friends make the claim that these guys were the Taliban? They are Mujahedeen who were fighting the Islamists and were able to repel the Soviets from Afghanistan with the help of the Reagan administration. Shah Massoud was the Mujaheddin leader, regardless of whether he was in this picture or not.There was no Taliban back then moron. These are the founders of Taliban, thanks to the US foreign policies....
"That's Shah Massoud in the brown jacket on the right, dumbass:"
These are your own words, now time to eat them.... or optionally, you can shove it up your arse...
Because this is not Shah Masood(as you claimed), this is not the Mujaheddin that the US should be supporting in this picture, but the religious extremist Haqqani people (Haqqani himself later joining in, his photos with Reagan is also available), who later found Taliban and started a war against US.
Why don't you just accept you did a mistake?
We are not gonna act like some kids in school and circle around you and point fingers at you till you cry...
Just be honest about it, accept your mistake and fix it like an adult...
Do you even know what the meaning of mujaheddin is?
Mujaheddin: person who fights for islam
Of course they are mujaheddin, just like OBL and Taliban. What the fuck is your point?
The question here is; are these the mujaheddin US was supposed to be funding or not. Since these are the guys who founded the Taliban right after the war, obviously, they were not... You said it was Shah Masood in this picture, the mujaheddin US should have supported. But that was wrong, you don't even know what he looks like. Shah Masood NEVER, let alone white house, been to the US, EVER...
Do you even know what you are talking about?
You haven't confirmed jack shit. You are just making claims that are not just wrong, but also moronic. And when we call those out, you just run.
Run Roudy run, mujaheddin gonna get you, little boy..........................
mohajedin= jihadist
People's Mujahedin of Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
People's Mojahedin of Iran or the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK, also PMOI, MKO; Persian: سازمان مجاهدين خلق ايران Sāzmān-e mojāhedin-e khalq-e irān) is an Iranian opposition movement in exile that advocates the overthrow of the Islamic Republic of Iran.[2] Massoud Rajavi is the Secretary-General of the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran.
It was founded on September 5, 1965 by a group of left-leaning Muslim Iranian university students, as a Muslim, progressive, nationalist and democratic organization,[3] who were devoted to armed struggle against the Shah of Iran and his supporters.[4] The PMOI played an active role in the protests within Iran that ultimately led to the downfall of the Shah in 1979. Consequently, the PMOI came into conflict with the succeeding fundamentalist regime of the Ayatollah Khomeini[5] In the immediate aftermath of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the MEK was suppressed by Khomeini's revolutionary organizations and harassed by the Hezbollahi, who attacked meeting places, bookstores, and kiosks of the Mujahideen.[6]Toward the end of 1981, several PMOI members and supporters went into exile.
Nope! Is the communist Iranian group known as "Mujahedeen Khalg" that is living in exile now, Jihadists, Olagh?Get over it, these are Mujahedeen that is for sure. Several legit sites have confirmed it.Exactly, so why did your friends make the claim that these guys were the Taliban? They are Mujahedeen who were fighting the Islamists and were able to repel the Soviets from Afghanistan with the help of the Reagan administration. Shah Massoud was the Mujaheddin leader, regardless of whether he was in this picture or not.
Because this is not Shah Masood(as you claimed), this is not the Mujaheddin that the US should be supporting in this picture, but the religious extremist Haqqani people (Haqqani himself later joining in, his photos with Reagan is also available), who later found Taliban and started a war against US.
Why don't you just accept you did a mistake?
We are not gonna act like some kids in school and circle around you and point fingers at you till you cry...
Just be honest about it, accept your mistake and fix it like an adult...
Do you even know what the meaning of mujaheddin is?
Mujaheddin: person who fights for islam
Of course they are mujaheddin, just like OBL and Taliban. What the fuck is your point?
The question here is; are these the mujaheddin US was supposed to be funding or not. Since these are the guys who founded the Taliban right after the war, obviously, they were not... You said it was Shah Masood in this picture, the mujaheddin US should have supported. But that was wrong, you don't even know what he looks like. Shah Masood NEVER, let alone white house, been to the US, EVER...
Do you even know what you are talking about?
You haven't confirmed jack shit. You are just making claims that are not just wrong, but also moronic. And when we call those out, you just run.
Run Roudy run, mujaheddin gonna get you, little boy..........................
mohajedin= jihadist
this people think that they fighting for god too
It was founded on September 5, 1965 by a group of left-leaning Muslim Iranian university students, as a Muslim, progressive, nationalist and democratic organization
- Mar 16, 2012
- 59,165
- 17,463
- 2,180
Nope they're communists and probably worse the the Islamists but they aren't "Islamic Jihadists". Mujahed simply means fighter.Nope! Is the communist Iranian group known as "Mujahedeen Khalg" that is living in exile now, Jihadists, Olagh?Get over it, these are Mujahedeen that is for sure. Several legit sites have confirmed it.Because this is not Shah Masood(as you claimed), this is not the Mujaheddin that the US should be supporting in this picture, but the religious extremist Haqqani people (Haqqani himself later joining in, his photos with Reagan is also available), who later found Taliban and started a war against US.
Why don't you just accept you did a mistake?
We are not gonna act like some kids in school and circle around you and point fingers at you till you cry...
Just be honest about it, accept your mistake and fix it like an adult...
Do you even know what the meaning of mujaheddin is?
Mujaheddin: person who fights for islam
Of course they are mujaheddin, just like OBL and Taliban. What the fuck is your point?
The question here is; are these the mujaheddin US was supposed to be funding or not. Since these are the guys who founded the Taliban right after the war, obviously, they were not... You said it was Shah Masood in this picture, the mujaheddin US should have supported. But that was wrong, you don't even know what he looks like. Shah Masood NEVER, let alone white house, been to the US, EVER...
Do you even know what you are talking about?
You haven't confirmed jack shit. You are just making claims that are not just wrong, but also moronic. And when we call those out, you just run.
Run Roudy run, mujaheddin gonna get you, little boy..........................
mohajedin= jihadist
this people think that they fighting for god too
It was founded on September 5, 1965 by a group of left-leaning Muslim Iranian university students, as a Muslim, progressive, nationalist and democratic organization
they stole their boots.Humiliation?Must turn you on to see Americans subjected to that humiliation.
News for ya, don't stray into the territorial waters of other nations when you are in the military. You are subject to arrest, if not much worse.
lol, the root is the same. mujahid, jihad. they derive from the same arabic word.Nope they're communists and probably worse the the Islamists but they aren't "Islamic Jihadists". Mujahed simply means fighter.Nope! Is the communist Iranian group known as "Mujahedeen Khalg" that is living in exile now, Jihadists, Olagh?Get over it, these are Mujahedeen that is for sure. Several legit sites have confirmed it.
Do you even know what the meaning of mujaheddin is?
Mujaheddin: person who fights for islam
Of course they are mujaheddin, just like OBL and Taliban. What the fuck is your point?
The question here is; are these the mujaheddin US was supposed to be funding or not. Since these are the guys who founded the Taliban right after the war, obviously, they were not... You said it was Shah Masood in this picture, the mujaheddin US should have supported. But that was wrong, you don't even know what he looks like. Shah Masood NEVER, let alone white house, been to the US, EVER...
Do you even know what you are talking about?
You haven't confirmed jack shit. You are just making claims that are not just wrong, but also moronic. And when we call those out, you just run.
Run Roudy run, mujaheddin gonna get you, little boy..........................
mohajedin= jihadist
this people think that they fighting for god too
It was founded on September 5, 1965 by a group of left-leaning Muslim Iranian university students, as a Muslim, progressive, nationalist and democratic organization
alpine
Gold Member
- Sep 13, 2012
- 3,535
- 809
- 130
Get over it, these are Mujahedeen that is for sure. Several legit sites have confirmed it.Exactly, so why did your friends make the claim that these guys were the Taliban? They are Mujahedeen who were fighting the Islamists and were able to repel the Soviets from Afghanistan with the help of the Reagan administration. Shah Massoud was the Mujaheddin leader, regardless of whether he was in this picture or not.There was no Taliban back then moron. These are the founders of Taliban, thanks to the US foreign policies....
"That's Shah Massoud in the brown jacket on the right, dumbass:"
These are your own words, now time to eat them.... or optionally, you can shove it up your arse...
Because this is not Shah Masood(as you claimed), this is not the Mujaheddin that the US should be supporting in this picture, but the religious extremist Haqqani people (Haqqani himself later joining in, his photos with Reagan is also available), who later found Taliban and started a war against US.
Why don't you just accept you did a mistake?
We are not gonna act like some kids in school and circle around you and point fingers at you till you cry...
Just be honest about it, accept your mistake and fix it like an adult...
Do you even know what the meaning of mujaheddin is?
Mujaheddin: person who fights for islam
Of course they are mujaheddin, just like OBL and Taliban. What the fuck is your point?
The question here is; are these the mujaheddin US was supposed to be funding or not. Since these are the guys who founded the Taliban right after the war, obviously, they were not... You said it was Shah Masood in this picture, the mujaheddin US should have supported. But that was wrong, you don't even know what he looks like. Shah Masood NEVER, let alone white house, been to the US, EVER...
Do you even know what you are talking about?
You haven't confirmed jack shit. You are just making claims that are not just wrong, but also moronic. And when we call those out, you just run.
Run Roudy run, mujaheddin gonna get you, little boy..........................
Bzzzz wrong. Mojahedeen simply means "Muslim guerrila fighter" or simply "fighter". Then when you add for example "Mujahedeen al Islam" it means Islamic fighter. The men in that picture with Reagan are Mujahedeen, and not "Taliban" just because you leftist whackjobs say so.
Wow, you don't stop do you? Digging deeper and deeper.
Mucahit means "simply fighter" eh.... Nice, you can type a word in google, i guess.....
You are a much bigger moron than I previously thought. You have no knowledge of the language or the history of the countries this word is coming out of, and yet, you have the ignorance to claim things that are utter garbage.
[FONT=arial, sans-serif]مجاهد = mujaheddin or mucahit = people fighting for the holy cause (which is being islam)[/FONT]
There are other words that translates to "simply fighter" in the language where mucahit is being used. But mucahit is special, because it is a religious term, not "simply fighter".
If you are "simply fighter" and die while fighting, you get jack shit.
But if you are a mucahit and die while fighting, then you get the virgins and all sorts of perks in heaven. Just like a jihadist.
In Afghanistan, there has been a lot of tribal clashes. None of those called themselves mucahit while they were "simply fighters", but only when they were fighting against communists, because they were fighting against godless infidel communists, for islam.........
First you claimed Shah Masood was in white house meeting with Reagan, and pointed him in a photo with Reagan
Turned out Shah Masood did not even step foot in the US
Then you claimed, (god knows what you claiming anymore but) something in the line of; you know a word better than a person who is from a country where this word was originated from.
It turned out, your brain once again was just farting...
Just stop farting little boy, it smells.................
Nope they're communists and probably worse the the Islamists but they aren't "Islamic Jihadists". Mujahed simply means fighter.Nope! Is the communist Iranian group known as "Mujahedeen Khalg" that is living in exile now, Jihadists, Olagh?Get over it, these are Mujahedeen that is for sure. Several legit sites have confirmed it.
Do you even know what the meaning of mujaheddin is?
Mujaheddin: person who fights for islam
Of course they are mujaheddin, just like OBL and Taliban. What the fuck is your point?
The question here is; are these the mujaheddin US was supposed to be funding or not. Since these are the guys who founded the Taliban right after the war, obviously, they were not... You said it was Shah Masood in this picture, the mujaheddin US should have supported. But that was wrong, you don't even know what he looks like. Shah Masood NEVER, let alone white house, been to the US, EVER...
Do you even know what you are talking about?
You haven't confirmed jack shit. You are just making claims that are not just wrong, but also moronic. And when we call those out, you just run.
Run Roudy run, mujaheddin gonna get you, little boy..........................
mohajedin= jihadist
this people think that they fighting for god too
It was founded on September 5, 1965 by a group of left-leaning Muslim Iranian university students, as a Muslim, progressive, nationalist and democratic organization
they are just left islamist.
they had great record for terror attack too.even suicide bomber
Speech at the Conference of the Arab-Islamic Committee in Defense of Ashraf
We especially congratulate Massoud Rajavi, the flag bearer of democratic Islam against reactionaries and those who misuse the religion for their own ends.
age khat farsi baladi
jahad= جهاد
mojahedin= مجاهدین
yani kasani ke jahad mikoNAND
Are you calling me a liar?What a strong smell of bull fecesI was on the Enterprise and the Saratoga when they were assigned to the Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean.What Reagan Did When Iran Assaulted a Navy Ship
“They must know that we will protect our ships, and if they threaten us, they will pay a price.”With those words, President Ronald Reagan justified his approval of Operation Praying Mantis, a day-long engagement in which U.S. Navy and Marine forces delivered a powerful response to the Iranian assault of the USS Samuel B. Roberts. A hidden Iranian mine had struck the frigate in the open waters of the Persian Gulf on April 14, 1988. No sailors died, but several were injured and the ship was severely damaged.
Operation Praying Mantis remains the largest surface battle engaged in by the U.S. Navy since World War II, and its outcome was decisive. According to official reports released afterward, using a combination of anti-ship missiles, naval gunfire, and aircraft launched from several ships, including the aircraft carrier the USS Enterprise, the Navy destroyed two oil platforms used by Iran for intelligence collection, sank 4 small Iranian Navy boats, sank an Iranian frigate, and severely damaged another Iranian warship.
But that was all on April 18, 1988. Back when the United States believed in delivering swift, decisive responses to enemy provocations.
[FONT=Roboto Slab, serif]What Reagan Did When Iran Assaulted a Navy Ship[/FONT]
I was on the Enterprise and the Saratoga when they were assigned to the Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean.What Reagan Did When Iran Assaulted a Navy Ship
“They must know that we will protect our ships, and if they threaten us, they will pay a price.”With those words, President Ronald Reagan justified his approval of Operation Praying Mantis, a day-long engagement in which U.S. Navy and Marine forces delivered a powerful response to the Iranian assault of the USS Samuel B. Roberts. A hidden Iranian mine had struck the frigate in the open waters of the Persian Gulf on April 14, 1988. No sailors died, but several were injured and the ship was severely damaged.
Operation Praying Mantis remains the largest surface battle engaged in by the U.S. Navy since World War II, and its outcome was decisive. According to official reports released afterward, using a combination of anti-ship missiles, naval gunfire, and aircraft launched from several ships, including the aircraft carrier the USS Enterprise, the Navy destroyed two oil platforms used by Iran for intelligence collection, sank 4 small Iranian Navy boats, sank an Iranian frigate, and severely damaged another Iranian warship.
But that was all on April 18, 1988. Back when the United States believed in delivering swift, decisive responses to enemy provocations.
[FONT=Roboto Slab, serif]What Reagan Did When Iran Assaulted a Navy Ship[/FONT]
In one week six fighters crashed into the stern of the Enterprise. Terrible tragedies.
What would Reagan have done this time to the Iranians?
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
they stole their boots.Humiliation?Must turn you on to see Americans subjected to that humiliation.
News for ya, don't stray into the territorial waters of other nations when you are in the military. You are subject to arrest, if not much worse.
thanatos144
Gold Member
I am sure you can feel better that no terrorist were killed.... you sick freakHumiliation?Must turn you on to see Americans subjected to that humiliation.
News for ya, don't stray into the territorial waters of other nations when you are in the military. You are subject to arrest, if not much worse.
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
Similar threads
- Replies
- 12
- Views
- 149
- Replies
- 9
- Views
- 165
- Replies
- 7
- Views
- 131
- Replies
- 541
- Views
- 5K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 3K
- Views
- 35K
- Replies
- 645
- Views
- 3K
- Replies
- 755
- Views
- 4K
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8058
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 469
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-