War Invasion of Ukraine News Megathread - Thread is only for articles and discussion of articles, general discussion thread is still in Happenings.

Status
Not open for further replies.
President Joe Biden on Tuesday said that the United States will impose sanctions “far beyond” the ones that the United States imposed in 2014 following the annexation of the Crimean peninsula.

“This is the beginning of a Russian invasion of Ukraine,” Biden said in a White House speech, signaling a shift in his administration’s position. “We will continue to escalate sanctions if Russia escalates,” he added.

Russian elites and their family members will also soon face sanctions, Biden said, adding that “Russia will pay an even steeper price” if Moscow decides to push forward into Ukraine. Two Russian banks and Russian sovereign debt will also be sanctioned, he said.

Also in his speech, Biden said he would send more U.S. troops to the Baltic states as a defensive measure to strengthen NATO’s position in the area.

Russia shares a border with Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.

A day earlier, Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered troops to go into the separatist Donetsk and Lugansk regions in eastern Ukraine after a lengthy speech in which he recognized the two regions’ independence.

Western powers decried the move and began to slap sanctions on certain Russian individuals, while Germany announced it would halt plans to go ahead with the Russia-to-Germany Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

At home, Biden is facing bipartisan pressure to take more extensive actions against Russia following Putin’s decision. However, a recent poll showed that a majority of Americans believe that sending troops to Ukraine is a “bad idea,” and a slim minority believes it’s a good one.

All 27 European Union countries unanimously agreed on an initial list of sanctions targeting Russian authorities, said French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian, and EU foreign affairs head Josep Borell claimed the package “will hurt Russia … a lot.”

Earlier Tuesday, Borell asserted that Russian troops have already entered the Donbas region, which comprises Donetsk and Lugansk, which are under the control of pro-Russia groups since 2014.

And on Tuesday, the Russian Parliament approved a Putin-back plan to use military force outside of Russia’s borders as Putin further said that Russia confirmed it would recognize the expanded borders of Lugansk and Donetsk.

“We recognized the states,” the Russian president said. “That means we recognized all of their fundamental documents, including the constitution, where it is written that their [borders] are the territories at the time the two regions were part of Ukraine.”

Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Putin said that Ukraine is “not interested in peaceful solutions” and that “every day, they are amassing troops in the Donbas.”

Meanwhile, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky on Tuesday morning again downplayed the prospect of a Russian invasion and proclaimed: “There will be no war.”

“There will not be an all-out war against Ukraine, and there will not be a broad escalation from Russia. If there is, then we will put Ukraine on a war footing,” he said in a televised address.

The White House began to signal that they would shift their own position on whether it’s the start of an invasion.

“We think this is, yes, the beginning of an invasion, Russia’s latest invasion into Ukraine,” said Jon Finer, the White House deputy national security adviser in public remarks. “An invasion is an invasion and that is what is underway.”

For weeks, Western governments have been claiming Moscow would invade its neighbor after Russia gathered some 150,000 troops along the countries’ borders. They alleged that the Kremlin would attempt to come up with a pretext to attack, while some officials on Monday said Putin’s speech recognizing the two regions was just that.

But Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin told reporters Tuesday that Russia’s “latest invasion” of Ukraine is threatening stability in the region, but he asserted that Putin can “still avoid a full blown, tragic war of choice.”

Article
 
Note, this would mean that Russia in the space of a month and with minimal success has lost around 20-25% of its Air Force.
I'd argue they've lost all their air forces. Losing roughly a quarter of anything is bad, real bad, especially when it comes to planes. Its more likely than not the Russians have been cannibalizing their planes for parts, so serviceability on the rest will be poor at best, so no real reserves. Those 75% of flying planes left need to be regularly examined, cycled off the equipment lists, and repaired and put back into circulation, so that's a 25% loss in effective reserve capability, and when you're engaged in active combat... that's really, really bad on readiness for everything else, since it means things that really need maintenance done will be sent into combat, and things will break down harder and faster than if they could cycle in planes fresh from the maintenance crews. We're looking at a week, tops, of continued effectiveness, with increasingly steep drops after that as more and more planes need to be overhauled due to wear and tear, if not written off from either that or battle damage.

To give you Kiwis some idea of how maintenance-heavy planes are, a C-17 Globemaster III cargo plane requires 20 around man hours of maintenance and overhaul work on the ground per hour up in the skies. Somehow I doubt a MiG-29 is going to be less than that, and will most likely be closer to 100 man-hours.
Personally though, I would suggest that Ground Based Air Defences if used correctly are a powerful force multiplier, and perhaps Western militaries should seek to develop more tactical or non-strategic means of carrying out this task. Sure, Patriot is good but each system is worth like $1bn, when clearly a TOR is able to do the business too.
Tor is a medium range system with a maximum range of 15km or so, with the small PAC-3 Patriot reaching out to 35km. Not really comparable in terms of capability, especially since Patriot is also capable of ABM intercepts.
The problem is generals and politicos have a fucking hardon for multi-role capability, which comes with the price tag. Hence adding more expensive patriot missiles for ballistic missile defence, or why they're insisting on shit like trying to make the SM-6 a jack of all trades instead of keeping it an AA missile and then carrying proper dedicated AShM/Land Attack options.
Gotta disagree. Multi-role capability is a nice thing to have. Cuts down on logistics and maintenance concerns since you only need to train crews on and supply parts for one missile, and ensures you're always prepared for an encounter since your magazines can engage anything you want dead. For land-based systems you also need fewer launch platforms, fewer support vehicles, etc. which means fewer men to crew them and reduced supply and maintenance needs...
 
I saw that article mentioned via the Drudge Report, one Holocaust survivor wasn't lucky in Ukraine.

A Ukrainian Holocaust survivor has been killed by Russian forces in Kharkiv, the Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation has said.

96-year-old Boris Romantschenko, who survived the Buchenwald, Peenemünde, Dora and Bergen Belsen concentration camps, was reportedly killed last Friday.

Mr Romantscheno’s granddaughter told the Foundation his apartment building was hit by a shell.

In a tweet, they said they were “stunned” by the news.

Mr Romanchenko worked intensively on the memory of Nazi crimes, they added, and was vice-president of the Buchenwald-Dora International Committee.

In 2012, Mr Romanchenko spoke at a celebration of the anniversary of the liberation of the Buchenwald concentration camp.

Then I wonder if the Sun had jumped the gun or the shark with that article about Putin's successor?

UKRAINIAN intelligence has claimed that members of the Russian elite are planning to poison Vladimir Putin.

The Chief Directorate of Intelligence of the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine has said that "a group of influential" Kremlin insiders have been plotting to oust Putin.
https://www.the-sun.com/news/493908...ccessor-according-to-ukrainian-intelligence/#
The goal of the "Russian elite" is to supposedly remove the president from power as soon as possible before restoring economic ties with the West.

According to the brief, the Ukrainian intelligence service also claims that a successor to Putin has already been lined up in the shape of FSB director Oleksandr Bortnikov, reports The Mirror.

Powerful insiders are allegedly dismayed at the ramifications of the war and the sanctions imposed on the Russian economy.

The Chief Directorate of Intelligence said: "It is known that Bortnikov and some other influential representatives of the Russian elite are considering various options to remove Putin from power.

"In particular, poisoning, sudden disease, or any other 'coincidence' is not excluded."
 
Personally though, I would suggest that Ground Based Air Defences if used correctly are a powerful force multiplier, and perhaps Western militaries should seek to develop more tactical or non-strategic means of carrying out this task. Sure, Patriot is good but each system is worth like $1bn, when clearly a TOR is able to do the business too.
There was a rather interesting demonstration project that the US Army did a year or two ago. They took a cluster of M109 Paladin’s. Cross connected them all to a suped up radar and fire control system. Took the special Hypersonic artillery rounds designed for the Navy Railguns project, but rigged them for conventional artillery launch instead of magnetic (they will hit Mach 5.5 instead of Mach 7). And using this system were able to engage and shoot down pretty much any type of missile out there. At a cost that was shocking for how low it was. Using entirely already in inventory systems and components. I think they worked it out to be about $5000/shot. Estimates were it even had a fast enough rate of engagement and speed of projectile to take out a hypersonic cruise missile. And that is was easily adaptable to existing Naval systems. Pretty much anything using relatively common 155mm computer controlled tube artillery could be linked into the system. The more tubes it had available the greater the chance of shoot down.
 

Copy of deleted arcticle from russian state newspaper.

It is official: Russia had at least 9k KIA and 16k wounded. At least, because forces of so-called "separatist" republics aren't counted. Not sure if Kadyrov and other shits are in this number.
Just about to post that and you ninja'd me!!
Interesting they have not included forces from the separatist republics, I had read somewhere that they were conscripting men there and effectively sending them to the frontline untrained and to do the most dangerous work. Obviously, it could just be a propaganda piece, but if true potentially would bump that number up somewhat, perhaps closer to the Ukrainian figure of 15,000. At this point though, do I believe the Russian MoD on this one - this too could be a low ball. Interesting to see it lines up relatively well with the US guesstimate, who actually lowballed the figure somewhat.

Just as an addendum to my death to casualty ratio post - this is about 1-2, actually slightly below 2, which is actually worse than my lower end prediction of 1-3. Which is... shocking. Got to wonder how many more are ineffective. Being in the field for a month as you are having chunks taken out of you is not conducive to operating effectively.

Kadyrov's men look clean in pictures, do not think they do much fighting because Russia wants to keep the Chechens sweet.
Not just Russian hardware, but old hardware. I mean according to the Russians shit like the S-400 and the Pantsir were supposed to be an enormous leap forward over their older shit, yet the Ukrainian air force is still flying and they're getting their shit pushed in by Turkish build frankenstein drones.
The Ukrainian Air Force is flying very little compared to the Russian Air Force, probably because they do not want to get shot down like their opponents. More importantly, the ELINT supplied from Western RJs more than likely informs the Ukrainians where it is safe to fly. They can map out radar signals, their strength and where they original from - easier to just avoid than engage.

I do not know this, but my guess is that drones are hard to identify and shoot down due to their size and what they are made of. Allegedly the S-400 can track a penny travelling at super sonic speeds from 75km away. Is this true? I have no fucking clue. If it is true though I would speculate that this is not something the S-400 could do in operational terms - for two reasons, first you would need to turn up your emission strength which would give away your location, making you vulnerable to anti-radtiation missiles, and it would also result in tracking things like small birds. It's not practical to operate like this.

Drones are smaller, quieter and move slower. They are not made of the same materials, especially ones which are just little off the shelf things made of plastic. How do you distinguish that from a bird? Maybe they fly too low for the radar to see them. Air Defense is more complicated than just putting up a shield that shoots everything that moves, and clearly drones represent a new challenge that Russian air defense systems are not effective against.
I'd argue they've lost all their air forces.
They have been flying more sorties in recent days.
To give you Kiwis some idea of how maintenance-heavy planes are, a C-17 Globemaster III cargo plane requires 20 around man hours of maintenance and overhaul work on the ground per hour up in the skies. Somehow I doubt a MiG-29 is going to be less than that, and will most likely be closer to 100 man-hours.
Of course that is with Western maintenance regimes, cutting corners seems to be a Russian speciality on boring things like this. More likely than not they will just change the oil and send it back up - seems like their attitude to all their other bits of kit. Apparently their cruise missiles are constantly missing, misfiring and not detonating.
Tor is a medium range system with a maximum range of 15km or so, with the small PAC-3 Patriot reaching out to 35km. Not really comparable in terms of capability, especially since Patriot is also capable of ABM intercepts.
I was not talking about it as a replacement, more that lower end systems would also have a place in the mix within NATO doctrine. THADD/ PATRIOT are the primary SAM capability that isn't man portable or close range - yet it is incredibly expensive, and you end up seeing shit like this. The UK had Rapier which was old and shit, and has Sky Sabre now which looks good but is still a high end system (full system costs about £300m IIRC).

In addition to this, have more than just one high end system like Patriot means that you do not just rely on one thing. While it is undoubtedly going to be better than a lower end system, it would not take much imagination to see how an adversary could overwhelm one by firing more PGMs at it than it has rockets in it's tubes. My understanding of how the Russia SAMs were supposed to work is that you would have an S-400 in the centre, this would then parse out targeting information to other lower end systems and they would work together in tandem. So a TOR could use the same radar to engage with closer or lower end threats, whilst retaining the S-400s valuable silo space for other targets. This also makes them much more difficult to overwhelm - in theory.

@RodgerDodger https://www.popularmechanics.com/mi...-army-howitzer-shoots-down-simulated-missile/
Just googled it and found this, good memory - interesting!
 
Interesting they have not included forces from the separatist republics, I had read somewhere that they were conscripting men there and effectively sending them to the frontline untrained and to do the most dangerous work.

What I heard recently is that conscription age there was increased from 55 to 65.
Also, a lot of people in that area were used as semi-combatants to dig trenches and man checkpoints.
Also, bodies sent back there could be retrieved but no compensation paid out even if conscript has RF passport.
Also, there was a vid of RF POW who claimed to be RailRoad branch and was stationed next to a checkpoint that manned ... by a military orchestra unit. This may indicate being short on warm bodies, because every checkpoint is essentially glorified guards who are expected to warn others before dying.



So Polish president signed into law a new homeland defense bill, that increases spending from up to 2.2 to at least 3% GDP by 2023 for military and increases army from 100k to 300k.

I tried to find how fast they were ramping up the numbers and found few interesting articles. This bill was sent to parliament on 22nd of Feb this year, right when invasion happened.

But, from October last year:

the bill was introduced basically why:
Kaczyński also pointed to growing threats to Poland’s security. “The situation has worsened: we have a hybrid war, provocations, the Russian army and Russia’s imperial ambitions,” he said.

The buildup of troops wasn't a big deal until Jan. and the famous ultimatum to NATO (that went largely ignored) was made in December, so the smell of war was already in the air by October.

There were also statements from Ukrainian side saying that they new that Russia would invade in November and were making preparations to that effect.


Either way, tripling Polish army (mancount wise) is a big move. While other countries are not even getting to 2.2GDP, Poland is going beyond that. Something tells me that they don't have a whole lot of confidence in NATO coming to save them ...



... and hot off the telegram channel, casualties of military orchestra confirmed:

25y.o., loved music, on contract in orchestra, "played tenor" and assisted the soloist. ... I am not sure if I want to laugh or cry

1647893637357.png


1647893926366.png
 
Last edited:

Copy of deleted arcticle from russian state newspaper.

It is official: Russia had at least 9k KIA and 16k wounded. At least, because forces of so-called "separatist" republics aren't counted. Not sure if Kadyrov and other shits are in this number.
Google Translated Excerb
According to preliminary estimates of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, from the beginning of the special military operation in Ukraine to March 20, the RF Armed Forces have lost 96 aircraft, 118 helicopters and 14.7 thousand military personnel.

The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation refutes the information of the Ukrainian General Staff about the alleged large-scale losses of the RF Armed Forces in Ukraine. According to the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, during the special operation in Ukraine, the Russian Armed Forces lost 9861 people killed, 16153 people were injured.
Particularly funny is the part about Russians refuting the Ukrainian info about large scale losses while apparently admitting almost 10k KIA and 16k WIA, well fuck me, 5k more confirmed KIA would really bump the number from small-scale to large-scale huh, this is the reason nobody sane wants to be on the side of Russia, you're going to be cannon fodder and more than likely, once you're dead, you'll be cremated in a mobile crematorium along with your papers and made to have never existed because you getting killed makes mama russia and dada Putin look bad.
 

Copy of deleted arcticle from russian state newspaper.

It is official: Russia had at least 9k KIA and 16k wounded. At least, because forces of so-called "separatist" republics aren't counted. Not sure if Kadyrov and other shits are in this number.
There were some reports from the First week that the Russian’s had about 20,000 - 30,000 infantry from the two breakaway regions. And by the end of the week they had about 2000 left. So the huge discrepancy between Russia’s numbers and Ukraine’s may be those poor fools that got used up as cannon fodder.
 
being a sore-winner
I dont think he's being a "sore winner." The war is still going on and war can change on a dime with one decision. He knows that he needs as much support as he can get and if that means using "manipulative language" in his speech to get a few more anti-tank launchers, he's gonna do it. I think it's overexaggerating his character to call him a crazy, unstable politician that just wants the world to end when he didn't start the war and doesn't seem like he wanted to be in this situation in the first place. Sure, he wants more NATO involvement like a No Fly Zone, which is a bad idea, but that doesn't make him crazy, he clearly wants to win the war and stop the Russian attack and is asking for any edge he can get. I don't think NATO should get directly involved because I dont want nuclear war either but I dont see the problem for a President overlooking a war torn nation asking for more assistance in whatever indirect form it takes, like supplying weapons, money or Intel. He compared his situation to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor, which at least in the former, is not an inaccurate comparison. His people are dying from a military invasion. A lot of Ukrainians are dead, it doesn't mean he's saying literally the Russians sneaked attack a navy port but that the national trauma and loss of life is on par with those attacks.
 
just for scale, Russian losses in other wars fought since 1991. Officially they lost 15k in Afghanistan and three generals over 10 years of war. They have officially admitted to loosing 6 generals already.

View attachment 3094614
I’m pretty sure I read somewhere that 99.9% of the losses in the Georgian campaign were “alcohol related”.
I dont think he's being a "sore winner." The war is still going on and war can change on a dime with one decision. He knows that he needs as much support as he can get and if that means using "manipulative language" in his speech to get a few more anti-tank launchers, he's gonna do it. I think it's overexaggerating his character to call him a crazy, unstable politician that just wants the world to end when he didn't start the war and doesn't seem like he wanted to be in this situation in the first place. Sure, he wants more NATO involvement like a No Fly Zone, which is a bad idea, but that doesn't make him crazy, he clearly wants to win the war and stop the Russian attack and is asking for any edge he can get. I don't think NATO should get directly involved because I dont want nuclear war either but I dont see the problem for a President overlooking a war torn nation asking for more assistance in whatever indirect form it takes, like supplying weapons, money or Intel. He compared his situation to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor, which at least in the former, is not an inaccurate comparison. His people are dying from a military invasion. A lot of Ukrainians are dead, it doesn't mean he's saying literally the Russians sneaked attack a navy port but that the national trauma and loss of life is on par with those attacks.
The hyperbole is understandable. But using the Holocaust comparisons, to the Israeli Knesset, were ill advised. Especially given his peoples actual history of joining the SS. (For context the Wehrmacht was restricted from recruiting foreign troops in captured lands. SS units had no such restrictions. So most foreigners recruited to fight for Germany, that were not part of pre-existing Military units, such as the French, had to join SS Battalions. And the Ukrainians were quite on board with fighting Russians)
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Elim Garak
I dont think he's being a "sore winner." The war is still going on and war can change on a dime with one decision. He knows that he needs as much support as he can get and if that means using "manipulative language" in his speech to get a few more anti-tank launchers, he's gonna do it. I think it's overexaggerating his character to call him a crazy, unstable politician that just wants the world to end when he didn't start the war and doesn't seem like he wanted to be in this situation in the first place. Sure, he wants more NATO involvement like a No Fly Zone, which is a bad idea, but that doesn't make him crazy, he clearly wants to win the war and stop the Russian attack and is asking for any edge he can get. I don't think NATO should get directly involved because I dont want nuclear war either but I dont see the problem for a President overlooking a war torn nation asking for more assistance in whatever indirect form it takes, like supplying weapons, money or Intel. He compared his situation to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor, which at least in the former, is not an inaccurate comparison. His people are dying from a military invasion. A lot of Ukrainians are dead, it doesn't mean he's saying literally the Russians sneaked attack a navy port but that the national trauma and loss of life is on par with those attacks.
Yeah, I don't think he necessarily needs or expects actual full Western participation, what he needs is the possibility of it being on the table in order to hold Russia back from going all-in. If he stops asking for it, it's not on the table anymore.
 
I dont think he's being a "sore winner." The war is still going on and war can change on a dime with one decision. He knows that he needs as much support as he can get and if that means using "manipulative language" in his speech to get a few more anti-tank launchers, he's gonna do it. I think it's overexaggerating his character to call him a crazy, unstable politician that just wants the world to end when he didn't start the war and doesn't seem like he wanted to be in this situation in the first place. Sure, he wants more NATO involvement like a No Fly Zone, which is a bad idea, but that doesn't make him crazy, he clearly wants to win the war and stop the Russian attack and is asking for any edge he can get. I don't think NATO should get directly involved because I dont want nuclear war either but I dont see the problem for a President overlooking a war torn nation asking for more assistance in whatever indirect form it takes, like supplying weapons, money or Intel. He compared his situation to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor, which at least in the former, is not an inaccurate comparison. His people are dying from a military invasion. A lot of Ukrainians are dead, it doesn't mean he's saying literally the Russians sneaked attack a navy port but that the national trauma and loss of life is on par with those attacks.
It may not be intentional but he's playing a dangerous game. I can understand using facades to get support, that I don't see an issue with, it's what you say and how you say it to get that support that matters.. In regards to the analogy it's not that it's way to far off the mark in comparison terms, but after seeing analogies similar to Jan 6th, and comparing everything to 9/11-/etc. It start to feel greatly exaggerated.

When I said "sore-winner" it's more the rhetoric in this case towards Russia in making some provocations, it's quite clear Russia has majorly screwed up even if it does end up "winning the war" it's been damaged severely (optics wise, literally, and metaphorically) that a victory at this point would be short lived. Even if Ukraine were to have a flip, it already obtained multiple victories in not only gaining support, and staggering Russia... In a sense even if Russia prevails Ukraine won a majority of the battles even if (big if here) it loses the war.

Edit: at the very least Putin is in for some trouble regardless of victory or not. I added this merely because sometimes I interchangeably use Putin and Russia
 
It may not be intentional but he's playing a dangerous game.
This whole war is a dangerous game, but its the game Putin chose to play.

One the few things Ukraine can leverage over Russia is the potential of direct NATO intervention if the Russians take a bridge too far. So he's going to keep that card in play for as long as possible.
 
I’m pretty sure I read somewhere that 99.9% of the losses in the Georgian campaign were “alcohol related”.

The hyperbole is understandable. But using the Holocaust comparisons, to the Israeli Knesset, were ill advised. Especially given his peoples actual history of joining the SS. (For context the Wehrmacht was restricted from recruiting foreign troops in captured lands. SS units had no such restrictions. So most foreigners recruited to fight for Germany, that were not part of pre-existing Military units, such as the French, had to join SS Battalions. And the Ukrainians were quite on board with fighting Russians)

The war was pretty hot in Georgia, I have a friend who lost family on Georgian side. Also Georgians shot down a Russian pilot in russian plane and Russia mocked them and denied that it was their pilot.

Who didn't serve in SS? ... honest question, pretty much everyone under occupation did. For Ukrainian males the choice depending on circumstance was: Red army, SS, UPA (fight both), labor camps in Germany. Shitty choices.

Also Zelensky did go to Israel on some sort of scholarship, so he is not strictly paper jew because his mom was. If anyone can pull the Holocost card, he can.
 
The war was pretty hot in Georgia, I have a friend who lost family on Georgian side. Also Georgians shot down a Russian pilot in russian plane and Russia mocked them and denied that it was their pilot.

Who didn't serve in SS? ... honest question, pretty much everyone under occupation did. For Ukrainian males the choice depending on circumstance was: Red army, SS, UPA (fight both), labor camps in Germany. Shitty choices.

Also Zelensky did go to Israel on some sort of scholarship, so he is not strictly paper jew because his mom was. If anyone can pull the Holocost card, he can.
Yeah, but still a comedian should know his audience. The Knesset was not a good crowd for Holocaust comparisons.
 

Controversial former world title challenger Sergey Karjakin, who sparked widespread criticism for his support of Russia's war in Ukraine, has been banned from all chess competitions by FIDE, it was announced today.

The Crimea-born Grandmaster, who switched from representing Ukraine to Russia in 2009, now faces being stripped of his place in the upcoming Candidates Tournament in June. The 6-month ban is due to run until Wednesday, September 21.

This might be the most random side effect of the flurry of sanctions and shit on Russia I've seen. Apparently he's already said he won't bother appealing because he knows it'll be pointless, but the Russian Chess Federation have said they'll appeal on his behalf. Interestingly another Russian grandmaster was found not guilty of breaching the same code of ethics partly because what he said was of a "slightly different and less provacative character" but also partly coz he's kind of a nobody by comparison so less people would have seen his shit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back