Clinton: U.S. ready to help Libyan opposition

What! Who is going to blame America, or anyone else, for taking out Qaddafi? He's a total nutjob, he makes Amedinajad look rational! Put a smart bomb up his ass already, we will be heroes.

Send a drone over and put a smart bomb up his ass. No invasion, no occupation, the nutcase is dead and Libian people do as they want. I don't see a problem with that. They will love us, they are trying to kill him now. And maybe our economy won't be crushed by $6 gas. Win win.

Vanity war in Afghanistan makes it sound more narcissistic than it probably is. It's more likely about rare earth elements and Afghanistan being a good source of those that isn't China. We want them to have the 'freedom' to elect a government that would be willing to contract with international firms to mine that material and sell it on the open market (to us). As a benefit, those international firms will hire its locals to work in the dismal mine conditions for a "fair local wage" and keep a lions share of the profits until their services and machinery are paid off.

It's all about bringing these downtrodden people into the 21st Century, you know?

:)

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9LC0LMG0.htm

Already happening!
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/2/28/headlines#8
McCain Praises Egyptian Revolution
Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona and independent Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut were in Egypt this weekend as the first visiting congressional delegation since Mubarak’s ouster. McCain and Lieberman met with officials in Egypt’s transitional government and even took a walk through Cairo’s Tahrir Square, the focal point of the uprising. At a news conference, McCain had warm words for the Egyptian revolution.
Sen. John McCain: "This revolution is a repudiation of al-Qaeda. This revolution has shown the people of the world, not just in the Arab world, that peaceful change can come about and violence and extremism is not required in order to achieve democracy and freedom. That’s why we are especially proud to be here, where history is being made for the entire world, not just the Arab world."
McCain’s comments appear to differ from his stance during the height of the Egyptian uprising. Speaking on Fox News just days before Mubarak was forced to resign, McCain described the popular movements in the Arab world as a "virus."
Sen. John McCain: "This virus is spreading throughout the Middle East. The president of Yemen, as you know, just made the announcement that he wasn’t running again. This, I would argue, is probably the most dangerous period of history in—of our entire involvement in the Middle East, at least in modern times."

Great point.

Obama has copied so many of Bush/Cheney's most heinous policies, lying to get us into another Middle Eastern war certainly won't be outside of Obama's range.

Well, yes, there's THAT, of course.

What it sounds like to me is "We are going to make even more American taxpayers homeless by sucking them dry to prop up another American president's ego by letting him play with what he considers "toy" soldiers (but which we know are our loved ones, enough of whom have already been sacrificed on the Bush/Cheney/Obama altar of Avarice and Greed in the Middle East) in yet another quagmire."

We no longer have the money to prop up Obama's Commander-in-Chief vanity.

Exactly. This is what I was trying to say way at the bottom where my original post is.

Lots more to export anyway. Egypt turned from oil exporter to oil importer in 2010 (which is probably the biggest reason for that Country's recent fiscal problems). On the other hand, Libya is the world's eighth largest exporter (or at least was until this started).

You nailed it, my friend!

You know what is worse than a "troll"?

Someone who uses a free message board for free advertisement to pimp their product.

I very seldom flag a post for the modeators, but I will flag each and every product-pimping post I see, in a heartbeat.

It doesn't and you're right. Obama is playing this by the book. NATO, UN, Sanctions, No fly zone, Blockade, Strikes. It won't or shouldn't get to strikes. UN/NATO transition force, and diplomatic aid. This does not need to be a war. It will require intervention.

and intervention of many countries, not just the USA. President Obama is doing a fine job being President, protecting American citizens and soldiers while being a part of the world rather than a reactionary cowboy. It will be good to see troops coming home rather than invading any more countries!

It does say that there is no military involvement right now, but "the Navy has moved several ships - including the aircraft carrier Enterprise and the amphibious assault ship Kearsarge - into the Red Sea in preparation for sending them through the Suez Canal and into the Mediterranean, depending on what (if any) military options are approved."

100% correct. +^d

Sure and that's why American casualties in Afghanistan are higher now than at any time in the war.

What in the world would make you think he isn't?

He has zero disregard for what is best for the American people, OR our economy OR our newly-homeless families, kicked out no the streets thanks to the Bush/Cheney/Obama cluterfucking of our economy.

If he thinks it will prop up his image for 2012, he will sacrifice every last living person in the United States on the Bush/Cheney/Obama altar of Avarice and Greed in the Middle East.

Again, what makes you think Obama hasn't already started planning to send our love ones to slaughter in Libya?

The U.S. does not have the funds to do ANYTHING to help ANYBODY outside of the U.S., even as part of a multination action.

There comes a time when we have to stand up to our Fraud-in-Chief and let him know we are no longer going to stand for him using our taxpayer funds and Treasury to prop up his vanity so he can claim "I'm a Big (FAKE) Soldier Boy, Too!" in his 2012 campaign.

EXACTLY.

"Operation Second Presidential Term" has started. Too bad Obama's olwn kids aren't old enough to be the first ones into the fray. He might not be so zealous about slaughtering America's children if his own were first in line.

You sound like you're losing your ability to reason. We are a NATO nation, and we are members of the UN Security Council. You don't really mean to say the US should not take part in helping the people of Libya, right?

We need to stop "Nation Building" not crawl in a hole and act like we can't see what goes on around us. You obviously have not been watching developments in Libya. You just freak out every time somebody says Obama is doing something right.

You are shooting from the hip PA. Suddenly you don't understand how these interventions happen.

You're fanatic position on Obama is myopic, and ill informed.

You may as well join a Tea Party, on Obama you'll find a home among the wing nuts.

Yeah I know you're a Democrat.

On this one you are completely wrong. Call him whatever you want, He's doing the right thing, the right way. Count to 10, take a pill and come down to earth.

The sky is not falling.

I understand your opinion, and I respectfully disagree with it.

The two Navy ships already sent to be ready to engage....is NATO a part of that, too?

I think the difference between us is that I have no sentiment when I reflect on what a politician, group of politicians, or political interest group has done in the past when presented with a sent of conditions.

Think of Iraq for a minute...there was even LESS justification for the U.S. "helping the Iraqi people restore freedom" than there is for "helping Libyans help restore freedom." In fact, the Bush lies were quite easily revealed, from credible sources.

Yet we are STILL there.

Obama has copied so many of Bush/Cheney's most heinous policies, including invading and occupying a country under the guise of "bringing freedom" to the people, that I believe it is quite obvious that once Obama gets a toe-hold in Libya, he will get us involved to the same extent as he did with his Afghanistan vanity war, and it will have the same results.

If you want to doom Libya's fight for their own destination and government, the #1 sure-fire way to do it is to get the U.S. involved. Libya will immediately be turned on by the other Middle East countries and viewed as being a U.S. poodle. Libya will be seen as being so weak that it could not do what Egypt and Tunisia are in the process of doing, and what other ME countries hope to do for their own countries.

Our brand of government and "freedom" is so different from the way ME people view it. Therefore, we can do nothing but fuck up Libya's so-far successful efforts at rooting out Gaddafi.

The difference between us is not emotions. I respectfully disagree with you.
Sending the Navy is par for the course. If I see Obama sending an invasion into Libya then I'll be there right with you slamming him.

What I see happening is a coordinated multinational effort to stop G'Daffy from doing more harm. Not doing this is not an option. hands off is not on the table.

Afghanistan is not a good war, I never said it was. I want us out of Afghanistan, and Iraq.
Libya has not been an ally of the US for a long long time. I don't want a war with Libya either.

We have not sold arms to Libya since before 1970. Have they gotten some? Sure they have, they got some from South Africa, and in 1970 from a guy that went to jail for 27 years for selling them. He was released because it was proven that after he left the CIA, he did some work for them, something the prosecution had suppressed.

I don't support Cowboy Diplomacy. I do support proper Diplomacy, and so far when it comes to Libya, Obama has played it strictly by the book.

If he were to have done what McCain says "Establish a no fly zone" that would have been a clue that he is overstepping. The fact that this has not happened yet indicates there is serious Diplomacy going on to avert another ground war.

Do you think Gates making that statement was not cleared by the President?

The 5th fleet is in the area permanently specifically to do what they are doing right now. Securing the Suez canal, and posing a threat to Libya's Dictator.

Next step is in fact a no fly zone, when that happens this is the last threat before UN / NATO forces come in as a Peace Keeping force, not battle troops.

How gnarly it get depends on Gaddafi, and his sons. It is conceivable that there could be a battle or some firefights, as well as shelling.

To compare this to Iraq, and or Afghanistan is a big stretch.

Since it has not happened yet, I expect we are going to find out which one of us had a better read on this. If it is you, I'll be the first to say it, and if you are right and Obama fucks this up, he will lose my respect, and defense on this.

I don't work for Barack Obama, I believe him. I'm not infallible so I know I can be wrong. So far he has not let me down.

Still your fan and admirer.

Ziggy

I almost put a stamp on my forehead to post just for you.

To lose something, one must first possess it.

"Too bad Obama's own kids aren't old enough to be the first ones into the fray."

Nice comment you freak.

She goes off on me every so often. I have come to respect her. She's very intelligent, she just really really really opposes Obama.

Read her blog, she's a real activist Dem.

Oh please don't say that. I really respected your view until that.

This is the most destructive troll to the liberal cause I've ever seen. I don't care what's on her blog. If she's a Dem then she is an idiot. If she's intelligent she's not a Dem.

You can always judge someone by what they chose to fight for. Whatever she claims her motives to be, she fights for the Republican cause. It may be that she does it on purpose, or it may be that she truly doesn't doesn't understand the current political nature of our country. But it doesn't matter because the effect is the same.

If you no longer respect me because I don't hate an opponent, then I never had your respect in the first place.

I told you my thoughts.

Peace to you.

I'm not the first one to say it, and I won't be the last.

It is the truth. If those deciding to send our loved ones to war had to have already put their own loved ones on the front lines, there would be a lot less of sending people off to war.

Enough of the American fat-cat elites launching wars of avarice and greed and using the non-elites' children to serve as fodder for the cannons of war.

Blacks anger over Vietnam soldiers being largely Black Americans turned them against LBJ. I wonder how long it will be before people of all color will rise up against the blood-thirsty fiends we have in Congress and the Oval Office, who get rich on the blood of our children.

If the rest of your posts are made based on such profound ignorance, then I REALLY wish they had an "ignore" feature on this board system.

Oh jeeze. I only meant I liked all your views until that one. That doesn't negate the previous agreement. I just think your respect for this radical is misplaced.

Hey there is no hard feelings. I like your positions. I'm not saying she doesn't get on my nerves. I feel like a heel, here you were agreeing with me, and then I tell you what I did.
I'm sorry.

Let's just go on and be friends. We want the same thing. I want the Administration to be the success it will be, and for my part already is.

So what do you say, let's start over.

Ziggy

It's all good. My tone's always edgy and it isn't helped listening to her. I could have phrased the respect line better.

Cheers.

I hate to break it to you, but the US Government really doesn't care about 'freedom'. If the storyline works, it's great, but if we do "help" Libya it will be for International Corporations:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/02/27/libya.evacuations/

wait, are you a shanklinite? trust me i dont have any illusions about the corporate run government, but the sum total of the equasion here might be greater than you think. i seem to remember you as a shanklinite though...

free yourself from corporate slavery!

Never even heard of Shanklin......had to go and look him up, but no, he doesn't sound like someone I follow intellectually. My point was that we, as a country, don't engage in military actions on the basis of freedom alone. We might list it as our principle reason or even make it the pillar of every speech about a military adventure, but our military marches when it's protecting "our interests"......and by "our", they don't mean you and me.

First and foremost, it will help Obama. It may help Obama by way of slaughtering our children in another Middle Eastern Country to serve corporate America, but it will help Obama.

"Operation Second Presidential Term" has begun.

I think he's going to eagerly keep getting our children slaughtered until he can do something he can call "success" in the Middle East.

Fine. You and your children first. Then write back and let us know how it is. Maybe there will be more support for Obama's Operation Vanity: Libya by then.

So, I will say Corporations are an evil pestilence on society, especially as they operate today. BUT!!! They operate in a manner WE let them too. Want to stop slave labor in China...stop buying Chinese produced goods. If not, you are not sincere about the belief that a Corporation is evil for using such tactics.

If you SHOP AT WAL-MART, you think what Wal-Mart does is JUST FINE.

Once we get our own country's Constitutional Rights fully restored, then, and only then, should we presume to offer "help" to other countries in the process of installing their own version of a "free" government.

"It will help Obama" - Which is enough reason for you hate it right?

You can pretend to hold whatever views you want, but every comment you make is to attack Obama or defend conservatives. you are no progressive. I can smell the tea leaves on you and it reeks.

Hammy, the American people do not have the power to regulate and pass laws. And when people are unemployed and their family's needs still continue, they will shop where they can get the most for the few dollars they have left to spend.

We elected politicans to Congress who promised they would stand up for our best interests. Instead, they have bent over and grabbed ankles for corporate interests.

You are wrong, yet again.

Deal with my opinion. Don't play DougieTheMagnificent two-bit mind-reader because, whenever you try to guess the motivations of another person online, or try to guess what they are thinking, the odds are WAAAAAY big against you being correct.

My opinions aren't based on the junior-high-school-level thinking, where an opinion/action is good if our friends have the opinion/action, and an opinion/action is bad if it comes from someone who is not our friends.

That kind of thinking is okay for kids, but in adults it indicates an unethical cognitive process, or a lack of cognitive integrity. Indeed, it is the kind of thinking you see with conservatives who criticized Bill Clinton for getting a blow-job from a young woman, yet praise the likes of Newt Gingrich for his own "family values."

The "family values" of both Bill Clinton and Gingrich aren't the kind of "family values" I was raised with. If I was going to criticize someone for that kind of fooling around, Gingrich and Clinton would both get criticized, although I still hold that getting a BJ is not nearly as bad as telling your wife you want a divorce when she is still in the hospital recovering from a mastectomy for cancer.

What i don't do is flip-flop on whether something is right or wrong, based on whether the person is a Democrat or a Republican. That means, if I criticize GWBush for his own vanity war in Iraq, then Obama is in line to get criticized for his own vanity war in Afghanistan.

Your analysis is not correct. I am not a tribal thinker. If I were, I would withhold my disgust for you since you claim to be a Democrat.

Taking you at your word, the difference between our points of view is very simple. You are going on pure ideology and ignoring the realities of the political makeup of our country. I probably want most of the things you want, but I actually want to achieve them some day, which requires baby-steps and independent/centrist support. I am willing to compromise to get movement in the right direction. You are not. You refuse to recognize the forces that tether Obama. You could fight those forces, but you choose instead to fight him. Most of the things you criticize him for are things he's gone centrist on and where the alternative party is a mile off in the opposite direction from what you want. How this can not matter to you is beyond me. You will happily work to destroy him and then you will be flabbergasted when you wake up in a fully Republican controlled country at war with Iran.

That's the most generous justification for your point of view I can come up with. The truth is you seem to have an inability to handle nuance bordering on disorder and you reserve a special venom for Obama that makes me doubt everything else you've said.

They have even MORE power that that of the Legislative branch. They have the power to STOP consuming those products. To go on Strike, and to help one another with food and shelter in order to get through the "tough" times it would take to do such a thing. But, Americans will not give up American Idol for anything. Let alone actually take any action of any significance.

For the record, I have been homeless before, and still was able to not shop at Wal-Mart and companies like that. It's not EASY, but it is absurd to think that it can not be done. It is not that it CAN'T be done, it's that it WON'T be done.

the sword can save as well as kill.

or we can stand back with our thumbs up our collective ass and just watch as quadafi (sp) slaughters innocent people trying to attain freedom. at least this would be a morally good choice. pull our troops from afghanistan and iraq and let this bastard have it. last i heard that sicko was using anti aircraft guns against crowds of freedom fighters.

When does it stop? When the public realizes that both Democrats and Republicans carry out the same basic foreign policies and monetary (banking) policies no matter who's in office. The rest is just window dressing to keep us fighting each other so they can carry out their collective foreign and monetary policies.

that wouldn't be a bad idea, i wasn't even thinking of that, pull them all out of Afghanistan and Iraq and let them help Libya... great comment! voted up!

The older I become, the clearer the truth of what you say has become.

How would U.S. forces know who to shoot? Muammar Gaddafi is arming civilians. Sometimes the people of a country need to choose their own destiny. The U.S. will only protect its vested interest and very well could cause a vacuum that results in A Islamic extremist government. Who should step in when we decide to overthrow our corporate masters? Our government has been doing business with this very real terrorist in recent years.

Voted up !

When it is the POTUS' own kids who will be the first ones out of the gate to be slaughtered in another useless war.

NO, it is not a morally correct choice.

The Libyans have done more to gain their own freedom in 10 days than Bush/Cheney/Obama's clusterfuck Middle East quagmires have done in YEARS.

Why would you want to destroy Libya, just when the people are gaining their freedom, by turning them into bombed-out infrastructure-destroyed death pits like Bush/Cheney/Obama have done to Iraq and Afghanistan?

What in the world do you have against the Libyans? Why would you want to do to them what Bush/Cheney/Obama and their piss-poor military leaders have done to Iraq and Afghanistan?

The Libyans are taking care of their own problem! They have done more to bring freedom to Libya in the last 10 days than America has done to bring freedom to Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan in decades!

You cannot "bring freedom" to any country. That is the biggest lie of a patriotic jingoism our government has ever fooled us with.

A country's people has to plot its own destiny.

I don't think anyone has the right--including our What-Me-Worry? president--to advocate sending other people's children to slaughter unless their own kids are already out there, in the front lines.

I think it is long past time that the rest of us sacrifice our own children and loved ones so politicians can play Big Men in D.C., while using their power to keep their own kids from ever risking their lives in the very wars the politicians wish to engage teh U.S. in.

I don't have all the answers my friend, but Nephwrack has a great point. Take the military out of the countries we are wasting our time in and take them to Libya, but if they, the people, want our need our help, why not? why not help? Once we take Muammar Qaddafi out, we leave... not stay and help them rebuild but just leave... pack and go.

But like i said, i don't have all the answers and another invasion like Iraq would just make us look worse to other countries.

I don't see how you can think that the same government you so often berate can magically start doing good. These are the same assholes that were running the country last month, many from last year and still many from 10-20 years ago. If they ever showed that they value human life over money I might agree, but I just can't find an example. Instead I see a ploy to control the most oil rich nation in Africa. The U.S. could always go and help some Haitians or Hondurans but for some strange reason democracy does not matter except in words to move public opinion. I know your heart is in the right place; with the powerful and strong people of Libya!

As long as we have the same Commander in Chief, military leaders, military suppliers, contractors, etc., the result in Libya will be the same.

In Alcoholics Anonymous, they have a concept called "Doing a geographic." It denotes the situation where a practicing alcoholic has run into all kinds of trouble because of their drinking, and they convince themselves it's not the drinking that is the problem, but the environment where they live, the friends they have, etc. So, to keep from having more problems and to get rid of the problems created before, they will pick up and move to another area, start all over again.

Except, when the problems are caused by drinking, then, unless you quit drinking when you move, your problems will follow you and you will create similar ones very quickly.

That's how I see the concept of looking at the clusterfucks Bush/Cheney/obama have created and worsened in Iraq and Afghanistan, and saying, "Say! The problem is that it was due to the countries we invaded and occupied. It's THEIR fault, not ours. So if we do the same thing, with the same people, under the same circumstances, as long as it isn't in Iraq and Afghanistan, we will do great!

I think, for the sake of his reelection in 2012, Obama would, too.

Is our need for a pride boost worth risking another Iraq or Afghanistan? I don't think so. We have freaking destroyed those countries, and left the people far worse off than before we stuck our oil-sucking nose into their affairs.

My friend, i didn't say they needed our help and i knew that for a fact, i said "but if they, the people, want our need our help, why not?" I know i berate my country all the time but that's because i love it and want the best for it and you still have to have hope that they will do something good.

I live here, year round. I don't have a summer home in another country or get out when i don't think they are doing what I want them to do. No matter what, you have to hope and think that something positive will come, but you're right... that might not happen. Either way, i'm here supporting the people of Libya!

I know my friend. If I had one ounce of trust in our government doing the right thing for honest democracy.........I just don't. At the moment though imposing sanctions and a no fly zone is tolerable. I remember when Pres. Clinton intervened and ordered up some bombs. Somehow one landed on the Chinese embassy. Reagan tried to assassinate Gaddafi and ended up solidifying his power.

+^'d. All about oil!

Thanks!

Military assistance can involve arms or supplies, maybe a little air support, not just an invading army. Trust me, we're not stretched thin in those things. Have you seen our military budget for the last 30 years? The people have said no to dictatorship and are in the process of fighting for their own democracy. But there's a madman who's going to try to slaughter as many as he can on his way out. You suggest we just watch it happen? Or hold a solidarity protest? Are you one of these people who don't see any lives but American lives as precious? Is oil the only thing you can imagine being of value in Libya?

If it's not about oil what is our strategic interest in Libya?

I don't know, if the lives of the Libyan people are not enough for you per se, perhaps peace, stability, the democratic aspirations of the people, preventing a future terrorist attack from disgruntled Libyans now instead of fighting a trillion dollar war with them tomorrow...I've never seen you have a remotely complex thought so this again is probably too nuanced for you to grasp.

Fine, I want to see you and your children on the front fricking lines, okay?

As a nation, we cannot afford another Middle East clusterfuck--not financially, ethically, international-standing-wise, nor morally.

What does it say about a group of people who so willingly send their children to slaughter in a useless war?

Uhhh....it's freedom. That's it. We'll bring freedom to Libya just like we brought it to Iraq and Afghanistan.

What front lines? What children? How weak is your mind?

We're talking about support for the Libyan rebels. It's only useless if you hold a disgustingly racist view of human life. Right now it's not even military support being offered, but more along the lines of supplies and international legitimacy. If we offer military support it would be in the form of arms and maybe air support. In all cases it would only be whatever is asked for. No one is talking about sending in troops and if they did I won't support them.

This is nothing like Iraq or Afghanistan and it's pathetic that you can't differentiate.

United States foreign policy has NEVER been based on Peace, Stability and Democracy. Not EVER.

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/2/28/headlines#8
Afghan Civilian Killings at Record Level
Afghanistan is facing what is being described as its deadliest period for civilians since the U.S.-led invasion began more than nine years ago. According to Afghan officials, more than 200 Afghans have been killed in attacks and military operations of the past two weeks. An Afghan government panel is still investigating claims some 65 people were killed in a U.S.-led attack last week. On Saturday, a government adviser and investigator said that 40 of the dead were children.

Sorry, that excuse burned out under Bush/Cheney.

I cannot believe the gullibility it must take to think that the U.S., controlled by our military-industrial complex, would hand out a few chips to the locals, bandage a few wounds, and then leave such an oil-rich nation as Libya.

Perhaps people have forgotten how powerful Dick Cheney still is? And how America's current economic condition is because of years of Bush/Cheney/Obama "helping them build democracy"?

The problem with America going to other countries and helping them install such culturally-specifically-interpreted things such as "democracy" and "freedom" is that we don't have a clue as to what that means to them, or even if those are their #1 priorities, really.

"Democracy" may mean to them "getting a decent pay for a day's work." It may mean that "all MEN can vote, no matter if they own property or not."

When we go in to 'help" other countries' in the definition of their new government, it ALWAYS turns out diastrous. ALWAYS.

I don't know why people hate the Libyans so that they would want to turn them into the bombed-out death-pits of Iraq and Afghanistan.

The U.S. does not have a successful track record in "helping" other countries. What we usually do, especially in ME, is to bomb the shit out of the country, totally destroy its infrastructure and government, steal as much of their natural resources as possible, and then leave the people to fend for themselves in the hell-hole we created for them.

I request that you keep your ad hominem "weak mind" comments to yourself. It is not *I* who is so gullible as to believe the architects of the devastation of Iraq and Afghanistan to do anything different if they get their greedy, oil-grabbing paws in Libya.

YOU may be buying the "support for Libyan rebels," but thankfully not all others are.

Remember how we invaded Iraq to bring "freedom" to the people? Have you paid attention over the years to the looting of natural resources and devastation the U.S. has, instead, delivered to the Iraqis?

Why would you want that kind of destruction visited on the Libyans?

It is right now. Don't worry though, judging by the instincts of the progressives to cannibalize their own leaders we'll be back to Global Republicanism soon enough.

This is irrelevant to the Libya discussion. This is the heart of the problem. You are not willing to hold subtle views and differentiate between foreign regions.

They're not asking us to help build a democracy and so far we aren't offering. If we do, I'll agree with you completely. Right now we are talking about a democratic uprising being slaughtered with tanks and warplanes. If you can't stand up to that, when it would be so easy for us to do, you're a monster. I admit there are big issues that will come into play later, but your point of view is horrific at this point.