Israel does not target civilians?
- Thread starter fanger
- Start date
- Status
Challenger
Gold Member
Now all Rude-ee needs to do is to get hold of a decent dictionary...
Indeependent
Diamond Member
- Nov 19, 2013
- 73,633
- 28,515
- 2,250
I stated a tactic is the actual specifics for executing a strategy.
Are you that stupid?
Billo_Really
Litre of the Band
While you dumbasses argue about stupid shit like "what is a tactic", there can be no question Israel deliberately targets civilians. When you have 70% of the dead are civilians and over 100,000 people homeless, that is not a mistake, that is deliberate.
Here are the findings from a report by groups that had no affiliation with either side:
Israel did the following in its Operation Protective Edge:
Here are the findings from a report by groups that had no affiliation with either side:
Israel did the following in its Operation Protective Edge:
used civilians as human shields;
shot civilians dead at close range;
left mortally wounded children on the ground to die, even after soldiers made eye contact with them;
conducted multiple consecutive strikes on a single location (“double taps”), killing injured survivors and those attempting to rescue them;
bombed medical clinics that were acting as shelters for civilians and the wounded;
“deliberately” attacked hospitals;
prevented emergency medical evacuation, even by international organizations such as Red Cross;
killed and injured “many” medical teams that were evacuating the injured;
refused to allow civilians to exit areas being attacked;
targeted civilian escape routes;
shelled ambulances; attacked civilians attempting to flee areas under fire;
physically beat civilians;
denied civilians food and water;
All you fuckers trying to defend this crap are really sick in the head.shot civilians dead at close range;
left mortally wounded children on the ground to die, even after soldiers made eye contact with them;
conducted multiple consecutive strikes on a single location (“double taps”), killing injured survivors and those attempting to rescue them;
bombed medical clinics that were acting as shelters for civilians and the wounded;
“deliberately” attacked hospitals;
prevented emergency medical evacuation, even by international organizations such as Red Cross;
killed and injured “many” medical teams that were evacuating the injured;
refused to allow civilians to exit areas being attacked;
targeted civilian escape routes;
shelled ambulances; attacked civilians attempting to flee areas under fire;
physically beat civilians;
denied civilians food and water;
Billo_Really
Litre of the Band
Here's a graph of the location Gazan's were injured...
Roudy
Diamond Member
- Mar 16, 2012
- 63,103
- 20,269
- 2,250
All lies and bullshit as it's been well established that Hamas shoots rockets from homes, hospitals, and schools, while using Palestinian women and children as human shields. They are evil Islamic terrorist scum like ISIS, and the last thing on their minds is the lives of the civilians.
Humanity
Gold Member
- Jul 17, 2014
- 5,089
- 361
- 130
Yeah, because a 2000lb bomb is so targeted isn't it!
Doesn't cause ANY 'collateral damage' does it....
Israel NEVER uses "human shields" does it!
Hamas is a terrorist organisation, no doubt... But they are not ISIS!
You need to move away from comparing apples and oranges... When you can then you will start to see some reality in the situation rather than believing and spreading your zionut propaganda!!
RoccoR
Gold Member
Billo_Really, et al,
I think you had better climb down off your high horse. Until I see a professional War Crimes Team (as we discussed Posting #163), or finding from the ICC Prosecutors Office, your ravings are of very little value. And if it was quite as simple, cut'n'dry, as you make it out to be, THEN the ICC Team, which has been in play for 11 months (Prosecutor's Preliminary Examination opened 16 Jan 15), would have made your point already. So, I suspect they think it is much more complicated then you make it out to be.
Actually, these are unsubstantiated allegations. There is actually no physical evidence associated with a vast majority of the allegations. These are just apparent victims of making statements.
And even if the statements were true, the report does not show in any way that there is a deliberate and established policy of abusing enemy civilians. Many of these statement are a case of Gaza Civilians that where not removed from the battle space by HAMAS, as require in Customary IHL. Or, it describes a cases in which HAMAS was deliberately conducting hostile operations from densely populated area; in violation of Customary IHL.
As to your comments in Posting #166, I draw your attention to these Job Announcement Minimum Criteria:
QUALIFICATIONS
Education
University Degree in Criminology and Criminal Justice or relevant academic qualifications or equivalent training and a diploma in criminal investigations from a recognized public police academy with work experience in criminal investigations. (Note: This was before the IICI was set up)
••• MY ANSWER: The IICI is not a recognized Police or Law Enforcement Academy. It is a college as I explained before.
Work Experience
A minimum of 7 years of progressively responsible experience in criminal investigations at the national or international level. Demonstrated experience of working at a supervisory level and/or substantial participation in complex, long-term criminal investigations, especially of violent crimes is a requirement. Experience in preparing witnesses and evidence for judicial proceedings as well as experience in recruitment, management of sources and in tracking of wanted fugitives is also a requirement.
••• MY ANWSER: 7 Years as a NATION or INTERNATIONAL criminal investigator.
And Your comment that: "So what? the GWCU is a government organ. "That's how the U.S.A. choses to approach investigating war crimes, other countries and the UN have different ideas, like the IICI, for example. Interesting that the GWCU doesn't exist on the FBI current website, wonder what happened to it?"
First please go to the FBI.gov Web Page for:
Genocide War Crimes Unit
OR
Go to the independent resource, FBIAgentEDU.org serves as an objective source of information for those interested in learning about everything from education and experience requirements, to job duties and salary expectations specific to careers with the Federal Bureau of Investigations.
Careers with the FBI’s Genocide and War Crimes Unit
Of course the ICC, INTERPOL, IAEA, etc, are different from the US. But the professionalism and career development and entry level criteria are about the same.
The IICI is a private school, just like and of the Colleges and Universities around the world, that offer criminal justice, law enforcement, and law degrees. But graduating from such course does not mean you have been vetted, and meet the agency specific criteria. Even with such a degree, you have to go through the Academy before you enter your probationary period.
I was a Senior Counterintelligence Special Agent and a Team Chief for a Technical Surveillance Countermeasures Team. Even though I have both a technical degree law enforcement (from CTI) and science degree (from OSU), I still have to go to the Federal Interagency Training Center (ITC) to become a TSCM Special Agent.
Places like IICI are great for meeting the continuing education requirements annually, but they are not a qualification course.
Most Respectfully,
R
I think you had better climb down off your high horse. Until I see a professional War Crimes Team (as we discussed Posting #163), or finding from the ICC Prosecutors Office, your ravings are of very little value. And if it was quite as simple, cut'n'dry, as you make it out to be, THEN the ICC Team, which has been in play for 11 months (Prosecutor's Preliminary Examination opened 16 Jan 15), would have made your point already. So, I suspect they think it is much more complicated then you make it out to be.
(COMMENT)
Actually, these are unsubstantiated allegations. There is actually no physical evidence associated with a vast majority of the allegations. These are just apparent victims of making statements.
And even if the statements were true, the report does not show in any way that there is a deliberate and established policy of abusing enemy civilians. Many of these statement are a case of Gaza Civilians that where not removed from the battle space by HAMAS, as require in Customary IHL. Or, it describes a cases in which HAMAS was deliberately conducting hostile operations from densely populated area; in violation of Customary IHL.
As to your comments in Posting #166, I draw your attention to these Job Announcement Minimum Criteria:
QUALIFICATIONS
Education
University Degree in Criminology and Criminal Justice or relevant academic qualifications or equivalent training and a diploma in criminal investigations from a recognized public police academy with work experience in criminal investigations. (Note: This was before the IICI was set up)
••• MY ANSWER: The IICI is not a recognized Police or Law Enforcement Academy. It is a college as I explained before.
Work Experience
A minimum of 7 years of progressively responsible experience in criminal investigations at the national or international level. Demonstrated experience of working at a supervisory level and/or substantial participation in complex, long-term criminal investigations, especially of violent crimes is a requirement. Experience in preparing witnesses and evidence for judicial proceedings as well as experience in recruitment, management of sources and in tracking of wanted fugitives is also a requirement.
••• MY ANWSER: 7 Years as a NATION or INTERNATIONAL criminal investigator.
And Your comment that: "So what? the GWCU is a government organ. "That's how the U.S.A. choses to approach investigating war crimes, other countries and the UN have different ideas, like the IICI, for example. Interesting that the GWCU doesn't exist on the FBI current website, wonder what happened to it?"
First please go to the FBI.gov Web Page for:
Genocide War Crimes Unit
OR
Go to the independent resource, FBIAgentEDU.org serves as an objective source of information for those interested in learning about everything from education and experience requirements, to job duties and salary expectations specific to careers with the Federal Bureau of Investigations.
Careers with the FBI’s Genocide and War Crimes Unit
The IICI is a private school, just like and of the Colleges and Universities around the world, that offer criminal justice, law enforcement, and law degrees. But graduating from such course does not mean you have been vetted, and meet the agency specific criteria. Even with such a degree, you have to go through the Academy before you enter your probationary period.
I was a Senior Counterintelligence Special Agent and a Team Chief for a Technical Surveillance Countermeasures Team. Even though I have both a technical degree law enforcement (from CTI) and science degree (from OSU), I still have to go to the Federal Interagency Training Center (ITC) to become a TSCM Special Agent.
Places like IICI are great for meeting the continuing education requirements annually, but they are not a qualification course.
Most Respectfully,
R
montelatici
Gold Member
- Feb 5, 2014
- 18,686
- 2,133
- 280
Regardless of whether the perpetrator is indicted and condemned, the bombing of civilians, is today a war crime. The bombing of Guernica, for example, would be a war crime today. The bombing of civilian infrastructure is a war crime today. The problem is that the powerful are able to escape indictment by threatening the judicial body in question or other means. That is why to date, only African and Balkan leaders have been indicted and/or convicted.
If a residential apartment building, school, power plant or any other civilian infrastructure is bombed, it is a war crime today. But, if the country is a powerful one or has powerful friends, nothing will come of it.
RoccoR
Gold Member
Roudy, et al,
Don't get excited.
This all comes from the same source; page #36 of the "Gaza, 2014 Findings of an independent medical fact-finding mission."
This is just platform for mud slinging; and a means of getting unsubstantiated, and uncorroborated allegations into the media. If they can get these Humanitarian Efforts to repeat the Palestinian script often enough, it become fact. Who would have believed 2015, that HAMAS would become labeled victim of Israeli Terror when it was HAMAS which in the last week of February and the first week in March 1996, unleashed a wave of 4 suicide bombers that left 60 dead and another 284 wounded. If the Medical Community wants to spread this kind-of disinformation --- then let them. In the end, it will change nothing; in fact, given the impact that other radicalize Islamic groups are having in across Europeand in the Middle East, the Islamic Resistance Movement for the Palestinians will have their own troubles.
Most Respectfully,
R
Don't get excited.
(COMMENT)
This all comes from the same source; page #36 of the "Gaza, 2014 Findings of an independent medical fact-finding mission."
This is just platform for mud slinging; and a means of getting unsubstantiated, and uncorroborated allegations into the media. If they can get these Humanitarian Efforts to repeat the Palestinian script often enough, it become fact. Who would have believed 2015, that HAMAS would become labeled victim of Israeli Terror when it was HAMAS which in the last week of February and the first week in March 1996, unleashed a wave of 4 suicide bombers that left 60 dead and another 284 wounded. If the Medical Community wants to spread this kind-of disinformation --- then let them. In the end, it will change nothing; in fact, given the impact that other radicalize Islamic groups are having in across Europeand in the Middle East, the Islamic Resistance Movement for the Palestinians will have their own troubles.
Most Respectfully,
R
RoccoR
Gold Member
montelatici, et al,
Well that is not entirely correct.
You simply do not understand what a "War Crime" is. Each Case must be adjudicated individually. All the basic interrogative must be answered even before it is remanded to the Prosecutor.
• Legitimate military targets include: armed forces and persons who take part in the fighting; positions or installations occupied by armed forces as well as objectives that are directly contested in battle; military installations such as barracks, war ministries, munitions or fuel dumps, storage yards for vehicles, airfields, rocket launch ramps, and naval bases.
• Legitimate infrastructure targets include lines and means of communication, command, and control—railway lines, roads, bridges, tunnels, and canals—that are of fundamental military importance.
• Legitimate communications targets include broadcasting and television stations, and telephone and telegraph exchanges of fundamental military importance.
• Legitimate military-industrial targets include factories producing arms, transport, and communications equipment for the military; metallurgical, engineering, and chemicals industries whose nature or purpose is essentially military; and the storage and transport installations serving such industries.
• Legitimate military research targets include experimental research centers for the development of weapons and war matériel.
• Legitimate energy targets include installations providing energy mainly for national defense, such as coal and other fuels, and plants producing gas or electricity mainly for military consumption. Attacks on nuclear power stations and hydroelectric dams are generally, but not always, prohibited by the laws of war.
- See more at: Crimes of War – Legitimate Military Targets
The IDF does not intentionally target civilians or civilian objects. The quest is about whether of not there is any doubt that the target contributes to the efforts of the opposing force. If there is not doubt that target contributes militarily to mission of the opposing force, then it becomes a legitimate target if it is otherwise a concrete target and all other Rules are in play; and military advantage or objective is anticipated with the targets destruction.”
I'm not saying that their are times when a "residential apartment building, school, power plant," would be off the target list. What is being said, is that given the right circumstances, any of those can be a target.
Most Respectfully,
R
Well that is not entirely correct.
"In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage."
SOURCE: Article 52, Additional Protocol I, to the Geneva Convention.
(COMMENT)
You simply do not understand what a "War Crime" is. Each Case must be adjudicated individually. All the basic interrogative must be answered even before it is remanded to the Prosecutor.
• Legitimate military targets include: armed forces and persons who take part in the fighting; positions or installations occupied by armed forces as well as objectives that are directly contested in battle; military installations such as barracks, war ministries, munitions or fuel dumps, storage yards for vehicles, airfields, rocket launch ramps, and naval bases.
• Legitimate infrastructure targets include lines and means of communication, command, and control—railway lines, roads, bridges, tunnels, and canals—that are of fundamental military importance.
• Legitimate communications targets include broadcasting and television stations, and telephone and telegraph exchanges of fundamental military importance.
• Legitimate military-industrial targets include factories producing arms, transport, and communications equipment for the military; metallurgical, engineering, and chemicals industries whose nature or purpose is essentially military; and the storage and transport installations serving such industries.
• Legitimate military research targets include experimental research centers for the development of weapons and war matériel.
• Legitimate energy targets include installations providing energy mainly for national defense, such as coal and other fuels, and plants producing gas or electricity mainly for military consumption. Attacks on nuclear power stations and hydroelectric dams are generally, but not always, prohibited by the laws of war.
- See more at: Crimes of War – Legitimate Military Targets
The IDF does not intentionally target civilians or civilian objects. The quest is about whether of not there is any doubt that the target contributes to the efforts of the opposing force. If there is not doubt that target contributes militarily to mission of the opposing force, then it becomes a legitimate target if it is otherwise a concrete target and all other Rules are in play; and military advantage or objective is anticipated with the targets destruction.”
I'm not saying that their are times when a "residential apartment building, school, power plant," would be off the target list. What is being said, is that given the right circumstances, any of those can be a target.
Most Respectfully,
R
montelatici
Gold Member
- Feb 5, 2014
- 18,686
- 2,133
- 280
1977 additional protocol. Just because warmongering states haven't signed, does not mean it is not International Law.
“reaffirm and develop the provisions protecting the victims of armed conflicts and to supplement measures intended to reinforce their application.” Article 48 codifies the principle of distinction, defining an obligation for the parties to a conflict to distinguish between civilians and combatants and between civilian and military objects. The article states that belligerents may only direct attacks against military objectives. Article 51, meanwhile, defines a general protection for the civilian population against the effects of warfare, including a prohibition on indiscriminate attacks and acts or threats of violence for which the primary purpose is to terrorize the civilian population. Finally, Article 52 defines the general protection of civilian objects. Civilian objects are all objects that are not military objects. The Protocol defines military objects in Article 52(2) as, “limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose, or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture, or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.” While there are 167 states parties to the protocol, notable exceptions include the United States, Iraq, Iran, and Israel. Customary law further supports the definition provided in Additional Protocol I Article 52(2), through numerous examples of state practice and opinio juris, making the prohibition applicable to all states.
Article 51 of Additional Protocol I explicitly prohibits targeting objects with the intention of increasing the duress of the civilian population. A broad interpretation of the Article 52(2) definition of a military object, however, can be used to justify coercive bombing so long as the duress experienced by civilians is a secondary consequence to the destruction or neutralization of a military object. As stated by legal scholar Matthew Waxman, “planners sometimes view the dual-use nature of infrastructure systems opportunistically, because military usage arguably legitimizes these systems as targets, even though it may in fact be the incidental effects on the civilian population that planners hope to manipulate.” This legal gray-area surrounding dual-use infrastructure is therefore the topic of the following discussion.
“reaffirm and develop the provisions protecting the victims of armed conflicts and to supplement measures intended to reinforce their application.” Article 48 codifies the principle of distinction, defining an obligation for the parties to a conflict to distinguish between civilians and combatants and between civilian and military objects. The article states that belligerents may only direct attacks against military objectives. Article 51, meanwhile, defines a general protection for the civilian population against the effects of warfare, including a prohibition on indiscriminate attacks and acts or threats of violence for which the primary purpose is to terrorize the civilian population. Finally, Article 52 defines the general protection of civilian objects. Civilian objects are all objects that are not military objects. The Protocol defines military objects in Article 52(2) as, “limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose, or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture, or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.” While there are 167 states parties to the protocol, notable exceptions include the United States, Iraq, Iran, and Israel. Customary law further supports the definition provided in Additional Protocol I Article 52(2), through numerous examples of state practice and opinio juris, making the prohibition applicable to all states.
Article 51 of Additional Protocol I explicitly prohibits targeting objects with the intention of increasing the duress of the civilian population. A broad interpretation of the Article 52(2) definition of a military object, however, can be used to justify coercive bombing so long as the duress experienced by civilians is a secondary consequence to the destruction or neutralization of a military object. As stated by legal scholar Matthew Waxman, “planners sometimes view the dual-use nature of infrastructure systems opportunistically, because military usage arguably legitimizes these systems as targets, even though it may in fact be the incidental effects on the civilian population that planners hope to manipulate.” This legal gray-area surrounding dual-use infrastructure is therefore the topic of the following discussion.
Roudy
Diamond Member
- Mar 16, 2012
- 63,103
- 20,269
- 2,250
Yeah because shooting a rocket from behind a school or hospital is showing concern for innocent civilian life, isn't it? Bottom line, the Palestinians themselves are responsible for the loss of civilian life, since they engage in war crimes against their own people.
Hamas is a terrorist organization that isn't ISIS but with the same exact goals that ISIS, which is, establishing an Islamic Caliphate. You've seen one Islamic terrorist organization you've seen them all.
Roudy
Diamond Member
- Mar 16, 2012
- 63,103
- 20,269
- 2,250
According to these demented psychopaths, it's okay for Palestinians to shoot rockets at Israeli cities randomly killing innocent women and children, but not okay for Israel to target where the rockets were shot from.
Roudy
Diamond Member
- Mar 16, 2012
- 63,103
- 20,269
- 2,250
So shooting rockets from behind apartment buildings, hospitals, etc. isn't considered a war crime? Ha ha ha. Duh okay.
RoccoR
Gold Member
montelatici, et al,
Yes, this makes the investigation more than difficult.
DUAL-USE has been, and continues to be, a complicating factor. But, as you mention in your response: "because military usage arguably legitimizes these systems as targets, even though it may in fact be the incidental effects on the civilian population." But the IDF had no reason to "manipulate" the target list. In this case, the target list was based on the strategy that the Islamic Resistance Movement would operate in such close proximity as to create a battlefield dilemma. You will no doubt take note that one of the complaints by the Palestinians made to the Medical Team was that the IDF issued a warning, but in some cases the attack never came. In some cases, the IDF terminated the battlefield commitment or air strike because the tactical intelligence changed or that the "doubt" in the use had changed. The strategy for the Islamic Resistance was also crafty. If the Islamic Resistance can document an Israeli battlefield engagement or air strike against a civilian laced target or a civilian object, then they can cry foul --- War Crime. If, on the other hand, the Israelis terminate the battlefield engagement or air strike, the Palestinian get to cry foul --- warning with no strike, and/or the military use was rendered immune from Israeli targeting. In the report we've seen example of both complaints; the complaint that there were warnings with no attack and the complaint that civilian/objects were attacked.
Most Respectfully,
R
Yes, this makes the investigation more than difficult.
(COMMENT)
DUAL-USE has been, and continues to be, a complicating factor. But, as you mention in your response: "because military usage arguably legitimizes these systems as targets, even though it may in fact be the incidental effects on the civilian population." But the IDF had no reason to "manipulate" the target list. In this case, the target list was based on the strategy that the Islamic Resistance Movement would operate in such close proximity as to create a battlefield dilemma. You will no doubt take note that one of the complaints by the Palestinians made to the Medical Team was that the IDF issued a warning, but in some cases the attack never came. In some cases, the IDF terminated the battlefield commitment or air strike because the tactical intelligence changed or that the "doubt" in the use had changed. The strategy for the Islamic Resistance was also crafty. If the Islamic Resistance can document an Israeli battlefield engagement or air strike against a civilian laced target or a civilian object, then they can cry foul --- War Crime. If, on the other hand, the Israelis terminate the battlefield engagement or air strike, the Palestinian get to cry foul --- warning with no strike, and/or the military use was rendered immune from Israeli targeting. In the report we've seen example of both complaints; the complaint that there were warnings with no attack and the complaint that civilian/objects were attacked.
Most Respectfully,
R
Humanity
Gold Member
- Jul 17, 2014
- 5,089
- 361
- 130
Roodboy, your comments are naive at best....
Thank god Hamas don't have the same firepower that Israel has! It's always difficult to hide an F-16 or Cobra helicopters behind a hospital or school isn't it!
I think you might find that Hamas has slightly different goals to ISIS, if you could be bothered to engage brain and understand the differences!
Israel targets civilians, pure and simple... If Israel were in anyway concerned about civilian casualties they would surely use more targeted options than simple blow the shit out of everything indiscriminately. They have the technology, thanks to the US, so why resort to 2000lb bombs that obliterate city blocks of property AND civilians when they can target individuals!
Roudy
Diamond Member
- Mar 16, 2012
- 63,103
- 20,269
- 2,250
The fact that Hamas doesn't have the "firepower" that Israel has, doesn't absolve it from using locations such as school, hospitals, apartment buildings and mosques. And, since Hamas is the ruling authority in Gaza-hole, and that this ruling authority chooses to shoot rockets at Israeli civilians from such locations, absolves Israel of the consequences of taking out those rocket launching sites. Therefore the blame rests only and only on the shoulders of Hamas for using it's own population as human shields.
You don't seem to be as concerned for the civilians that the Hamas animals target with their rockets and other terror activities, and only concerned that Hamas continue to be able to commit war crimes and violations without any reciprocity or proper response from the Israelis. That, will never happen with the Israelis. Rest assured, Israel understands the language that these animals speak.
RoccoR
Gold Member
Humanity, et al,
Yes, but the time is rapidly approaching when technology gaps will begin to close. A Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) with rockets and missiles
I'm not quite sure were they acquired the technology [(I'm betting Iran (Quds Force)], but, there will be a time when the Israeli will have to place low level sensors to detect and neutralize this threat.
Most Respectfully,
R
Yes, but the time is rapidly approaching when technology gaps will begin to close. A Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) with rockets and missiles
(COMMENT)
I'm not quite sure were they acquired the technology [(I'm betting Iran (Quds Force)], but, there will be a time when the Israeli will have to place low level sensors to detect and neutralize this threat.
Most Respectfully,
R
Last edited:
Billo_Really
Litre of the Band
First off, why would they lie? And second, do you have any proof that they did?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
New Topics
-
Cannabis compounds could reverse disease affecting one-third of adults- Started by shockedcanadian
- Replies: 1
-
-
Iran's new Supreme Leader 'is wounded': Ayatollah Khamenei's son sustained mystery injury, claims state TV- Started by 1srelluc
- Replies: 5
-
I'm seeking the help of a trump devotee to explain these conflicting actions.- Started by berg80
- Replies: 17
-
CNN, "The Most Trusted Name In News", Sources Their Coverage From Iranian Government Officials- Started by mudwhistle
- Replies: 5
