Suppose They Gave A War – and Nobody Came

January 2nd, 2012

By Eric Anschutz, December 21, 2011

One of civilization’s most vexing questions is why nations resort to violence against each other. Every culture condemns murder, yet killing in the name of the state is not only permitted but has traditionally been glorified. We Americans have in the last 6o years become self-appointed policemen of the world, and in that role have undertaken a prolonged and costly Cold War; four major hot wars: Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan; and the ongoing war against terrorism.

We have become the most militant and most militaristic state in the world, with a “defense” budget greater than the combined budgets of all other countries, and with troops and naval armadas stationed across the globe. Why? Militarism is costly and generally counterproductive, it results in the killing and maiming of our young soldiers, and results in collateral damage that inflames more hatred and more determined opponents.

Some years after the end of WW I, Dalton Trumbo wrote a book called Johnny Got His Gun, which more than any learned tract about war defines its horrors. Trumbo’s magnificent saga begins in 1917, with a young man caught up in the patriotism and excitement that resulted from America’s entry into war. Bands played, flags waved, politicians orated, and young men across America rushed to enlist. Over the protests of his girlfriend and parents, “Johnny” volunteered for the army, and soon found himself in the frontline trenches. The scene shifts, years later, to a veteran’s hospital. A torso lies in the hospital bed, no arms, no legs, deaf and blind, and with his face destroyed – no lower jaw, unable to speak. With no sight, no hearing, no ability to speak, this ultimate basket-case is over the years treated with sensitivity and respect by hospital attendants. He is frequently massaged and gently patted. Strangely, during these “therapy” sessions, the torso frequently bangs his head (the only moveable part of his body) up and down on his pillow. After many years, a newly assigned nurse suddenly realizes that “Johnny” may be attempting thereby to communicate. She rushes out to find a Morse code expert, who deciphers Johnny’s message: “Let me out of here.” A message in response is then tapped onto Johnny’s chest: “What you ask is against regulations.”

Exhortations to maintain peace among nations are an almost inevitable part of public and ceremonial events. But the gap between rhetoric and achievement remains wide. People and leaders alike are almost incredibly tolerant of this crucial deficiency in the organization of man’s international affairs.

An important inquiry into the causes of war comes from psychologist Ralph White’s Nobody Wanted War. Let me list just a few of his thoughts on how violence is justified:

• A diabolical enemy-image; the enemy is bad and must be destroyed.

• The moral self-image; our way is good and honorable and must be preserved.

• The virile self-image. Nations are reluctant to retreat lest they be deemed weak or irresolute. The essential thing is to seem con¬sistent, strong and firm. Domestic opponents of war are deemed appeasers, wimps and disloyal.

• Absence of empathy; failure to try to understand how the situation looks from the adversary’s point of view.

From The Fog of War, a documentary film about former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara and the Vietnam War, we learn that McNamara, ruminating about the war long after his retirement, set forth thoughts on how to avoid war, the most important of which was to “empathize with your enemy.”

Upon taking office, former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld posted on the Pentagon’s web site a set of Rumsfeld’s Rules. Let me quote four of them: 1. It is easier to get into something than to get out of it. 2. Don’t divide the world into them and us. 3. Visit your predecessors from previous administrations. 4. Try to make original mistakes rather than needlessly repeating theirs. These “rules,” all of which were ignored during the run up to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, were removed from the Pentagon’s web site as our nation entered into its wars!

Jon Huntsman and Ron Paul, candidates for the Republican nomination, are the only two public voices heard to call for immediate ending of the war in Afghanistan, and withdrawal of American troops from places like Germany, Korea and Japan. Their calls are either ridiculed or ignored. No one, not even fellow Republicans, takes seriously calls to dismantle any of the bases we have across the globe. Indeed, just a few days ago, President Obama committed us to place 2,500 troops in Australia, a move designed to put China on notice that “we remain a Pacific power.”

There are unceasing calls by neo-cons and others urging a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Haven’t we learned from Rumsfeld’s Rules that “It is easier to get into something than to get out of it?” We can be fairly certain that more than one strike would be necessary, and that there would be collateral damage. We cannot know what Iran would do in response, but it would seem reasonable to expect some kind of a military response, probably against Israel or against US interests elsewhere in the Middle East, or both. Following initial clashes, there would almost certainly be escalation – with the real possibility of a new and prolonged war in the Middle East.

The cost to our nation of its wars in the Middle East since 9/11 is said to be several trillions of dollars, some six thousand American soldiers killed, many tens of thousands of our troops grievously wounded, with no promise of meaningful gain in either Iraq or Afghanistan. And we may be on the brink of more billions or trillions if we go too war in Iran – or Syria – or Pakistan.

All of this looms at a time when our economy is in dire straits, when our infrastructure and education and technology are in decline, need for investment in our own country is clearly our top priority. Sure, as the militarists tell us, “there are those out there who would kill us.” But by denying investment in America, we are slowly killing ourselves. By turning away from war to rebuild our country, we regain moral stature and put ourselves in a position to use economic and diplomatic power rather than feckless and counterproductive military power to build a better world and to ensure that we thrive in it.

Posted in Rantle | No Comments »

Librarians on the March!

October 24th, 2011

By Eric Anschutz, October 26, 2011

The “99 Percent” protest movement seems to be growing every day – in size and in scope. It has spread from Manhattan to every big city in America (and to some small ones, including Walnut Creek!). It has spread from our United States to Canada, and on to Latin America and Asia and Europe and Africa – burgeoning on Saturday October 15th to 1500 events in 82 countries.

The protest movement, originally know an “Occupy Wall Street,” has grown from protests against economic greed to encompass protests against war, regressive tax policies, global warming, crumbling infrastructure, political stalemate, and a failed education system. Of the many signs carried by protesters, my favorite was one held by two bespectacled young women: “Things are really messed up when librarians start marching.”

Protesters from Orlando to Anchorage include students, retirees, workers, veterans and teachers. The movement has opened a bank account into which donations (reportedly over $300,000) are deposited; blankets, clothing and food arrive daily from supporters across the country. The movement, a cultural phenomenon discussed widely in print media, has become a staple on talk shows ranging from Fox News to CNN to MSNBC, in sermons across the nation, and regularly by comedians Jay Leno, David Letterman and Saturday Night Live.

The widening gap between rich and poor was the trigger for this rising tide of protest. Here are some numbers:

• The 400 wealthiest Americans have a greater combined net worth than does the bottom 150 million of our population. The top 1 percent of Americans possess more wealth than the bottom 90 percent.
• Average pay for American CEO’s is 225 times the average pay of teachers, 28 times the pay of the President of the United States, and 8 times the pay of average Nobel Laureates.
• Annual pay of the CEO of General Electric is $21 million, 645 times the average pay of GE workers. The CEO of Ford Motors is paid $26 million, 799 times the earnings of the average Ford worker.
• Wall Street executives, despite the years of inept management that led to financial collapse and despite the expensive bailout paid for by Main Street taxpayers, have managed to hold on to their exorbitant salaries and even more exorbitant bonuses.

While CEO salaries are deservedly much higher than those paid to workers, it is noteworthy that salary multiples for senior executives in Europe and Asia are far lower, and their managerial effectiveness is arguably as good or better than that of their American counterparts. Wall Street’s very high salary scales seem unmerited – but the same can be said for earnings of top tier athletes and entertainers. While we may grumble and complain, in the last analysis there is nothing we can do to impose limits. Market forces need to be left to deal with these matters. We citizens can, however, and indeed should vote for higher taxes on the very wealthy.

The vast gaps in wealth and income hurt not only the middle class and the poor – but threaten also the long-term economic interests of the wealthy. We all benefit from a growing economy, and we all lose during periods of economic decline or malaise. Two recent studies bring this sharply into focus:

• A study at Cornell University finds that among 65 industrial nations, those with the widest gaps between rich and poor experience slower growth.

• Another study, done by the International Monetary Fund, concludes that “income and wealth equality is an important ingredient in promoting and sustaining growth.”

Thus, closing the gap in wealth and income disparity is advantageous to rich and poor alike. As columnist Nicholas Kristoff has written, inequality is a cancer to our national well-being.

Listening to debates between Republican presidential candidates suggests that they live on another planet. Hermann Cain’s simplistic and regressive “9-9-9” plan would further widen the wealth gap by imposing a 9% federal sales taxes (added to existing state and local sales taxes) and granting the mother of all tax reliefs to the wealthy who currently pay far more than 9% income tax. Cain would grant the ultimate boon to the wealthy by removing any and all taxes on capital gains and dividends. He would also reduce estate taxes (death taxes in Republican parlance) to zero.

Mitt Romney would not only retain the Bush tax relief for the wealthy, but would build on it by further reduction in tax rates for both the wealthy and for corporations. Romney would increase the national debt by massive increases to the already bloated defense budget. Bachmann unthinkingly has on one occasion advocated zero income taxes. All Republican candidates (except for Jon Huntsman) have taken the “no new taxes” oath devised by the Koch-brothers backed Grover Norquist. Newt Gingrich, once again demonstrating why he is unfit for public office, has said that Grover Norquist is “the person who I regard as the most innovative, creative, courageous and entrepreneurial leader of the anti-tax efforts and of conservative grassroots activism in America.

The Republican mantra is simple: cutting taxes and eliminating regulations will “free” the economy and lead to a surge in economic vitality. Do they forget that there was zero net increase in jobs during the eight years of the George W. Bush administration – where regulations were few with minimal enforcement – and during which taxes on “wealthy job creators” were low? Do they not understand that evisceration of regulations that govern financial practices will lead to abusive banking practices, that evisceration of environmental regulations and IRS agents (all proposed by Republicans) will lead to dirty air, contaminated water, and a great rise in tax cheating. Who will guard our medicines, our gasoline stations, our meat supplies and so forth, when regulations and regulators are reduced or eliminated so that the business community can be “free to surge” without government interference.

So, what is the answer? What should Democrats propose? Three things: 1. Stop the wars, 2. Effect steeply progressive tax policies and 3. Rebuild America using funds from steps 1 and 2. For those who care to delve further into this, I refer you to my column of August 3, which can be found on my blog: Rantle.com. Obama’s Jobs Bill does deal (mildly) with items 2 and 3, but our President remains stubbornly committed to “winning” the war in Afghanistan, a war dismissed by 70% of Americans as unwinnable and counterproductive, and to maintaining US troops in German, Korea and Japan. Again, go to Rantle.com for details.

Posted in Life, Money, Rantle, peace, politics, war | No Comments »

Cities and The Accidents of History

August 31st, 2011

By Eric Anschutz, August 31, 2011

We are all subject, at least now and then, to stray thoughts. Here are two that I thought worthy of column space: first, our woeful neglect of cities; second, the accidents of history.

CITIES: Our cities are neglected – policies at the local level too often get short shrift. We give insufficient attention and vastly insufficient resources to our urban centers. As a consequence, the quality of urban (and suburban) life, which is to say our daily life, is less happy and less safe and less wholesome than it could or should be. We read on a daily basis about cities in California and elsewhere on the brink of bankruptcy, about reduced funding for already poorly financed schools, about deferral of desperately needed construction of bridges and tunnels and levees, and about the deterioration of publicly financed health care and aid to our handicapped.

Policies at the national level, such as foreign affairs, defense matters and fiscal strategies, while of critical importance, are of less immediate and direct relevance to most citizens. On a day-by-day basis, most of us are more concerned about whether our trash gets picked up with sufficient frequency, and whether local schools are staffed with first-rate teachers, than we are with most issues at a national or global level..

I raise this issue to make a point: our cities, the place in which we spend our lives, do not receive the attention warranted by their relevance to our immediate well-being. That should change. The quality of our lives has far more to do with the beauty of our parks, our public buildings and our neighborhoods, with the efficiency and convenience of urban roadways and mass transit, and with the reliability and excellence of civic services, than it does with suppression of the Taliban in Afghanistan. The (too small) emphasis given in Obama’s stimulus package to sending stimulus funds to cities and states is an important and welcome shift in emphasis. A good school system is in the long term the most important and most effective weapon in America’s arsenal.

THE ACCIDENTS OF HISTORY: The course of history is often greatly affected by the actions of people who themselves had no power to influence the direction of global policies, yet who had major negative impact on the world. Three examples come to mind: Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan and Monica Lewinsky. Each of them had massive impact on the course of history.

First, consider the case of Lee Harvey Oswald. By assassinating President John Kennedy, in 1963, it might be said that Oswald brought about the Vietnam War. Here’s my logic: though JFK had in 1961 committed several thousand US troops to South Vietnam, their mission was limited to providing advice and training to the South Vietnamese army. Most historians believe that had JFK survived in office, he would never have escalated that commitment. It was Lyndon Johnson, who by virtue of Oswald’s terrible and vile deed, ascended to the presidency in 1963 and who then took us (starting in 1964) from several thousand “advisory” troops to more the 400,000 troops engaged in direct combat. Thus, absent Lee Harvey Oswald, the US would almost certainly not have gotten itself embroiled in the war in Vietnam.

Second, we turn to Sirhan Sirhan, Robert Kennedy’s assassin. It can be said that Sirhan, by his foul deed, extended the Vietnam War, counterproductively, for some four years. RFK, running in 1968 on an anti-war platform, was assassinated by Sirhan on the very night of Kennedy’s decisive win of the California primary. RFK, then well ahead in the delegate count, would have gone on to be the Democratic nominee, and would probably have defeated Nixon to become our next President. Had that happened, Kennedy would certainly have pulled our troops out of Vietnam in 1969, Instead, Richard Nixon won, and to achieve the illusory quest for “peace with honor,” the war continued until 1973. Because of Sirhan’s assassination of Robert Kennedy, the Vietnam War went on for about four more years, thereby raising the fatality count by another 20,000 to an end total of 58,000.

Third, and last, we turn to Monica Lewinsky, Clinton’s unlikely paramour. Lewinsky can arguably be said to have brought about the war in Iraq. My reasoning here is that absent Clinton’s affair with Lewinsky, Al Gore would have brought Clinton into his 2000 campaign, and would thereby almost certainly have won Arkansas, whose six electoral votes would have been sufficient to put Gore over the top. (Note: with a win in Arkansas, the electoral count would have been 272 for Gore to 265 for Bush.) Indeed, with Clinton at his side, Gore would probably have won in other closely fought states (Florida comes to mind!). Had Gore won the Presidency in 2000, the US would not have gone to war in Iraq. So, it can be said that the tragedy of the ill-fated war in Iraq is attributable, however indirectly, to Monica and her ill-fated blue dress.

Posted in Rantle | No Comments »

The America We All Want

August 11th, 2011

By Eric Anschutz, August 3, 2011

There are many ways to skin a cat. There are even more ways to resolve the deficit issue. Let me propose one that is the product of discussion among some progressive members of Rossmoor. Though we know that our proposal will have no direct effect on near-term congressional or presidential action, I advance the proposal here because discussion of deficits, tax policies and defense policies will be at the center of the oncoming 2012 elections.

Our proposed solution is simple; it has three component parts:

1. Stop the wars.
2. Effect steeply progressive tax policies.
3. Rebuild America.

Let’s have a look at what we advocate for each of these three components.

STOP THE WARS: We propose an immediate withdrawal (consistent with the safety of our troops) from Iraq and Afghanistan. Polls tell us that the majority of Americans have long since concluded that the war in Afghanistan is pointless. Bin Laden is dead, Afghan President Karzai is unworthy of our support, there are very few al Qaeda left in Afghanistan, and the small benefits of staying (if any) are not worth the cost in lives and resources. We still have 50,000 US troops in Iraq. Why? We need to reduce that number to zero (except for a small group of marines to guard our embassy). From here on it is the responsibility of the Iraq government to provide security in that country, relying on Iraqi troops and police to do so.

We must stop thinking of ourselves as the world’s policemen; we need to stop our bombing in Libya. It is also high time to fully withdraw US troops still deployed in very large numbers in Germany, South Korea and Japan. Each of these three countries is wealthy, has substantial military forces of its own, and is well able to secure its borders and its interests without direct support from US troops stationed there. In addition to withdrawing from these three countries, we need to close most if not all of the many hundreds of US bases in more than 100 other countries worldwide. We should also bring our naval fleets closer to our own shores; we need to ask ourselves how we would react to Chinese or Russian fleets on constant patrol just off our Atlantic and Pacific coastlines.

The Pentagon’s budget has doubled since 9/11. Our obscenely obese “defense” budget exceeds the combined military budgets of China, Russia, Germany, Japan, Korea and all other countries combined. We propose immediate major reductions to the Pentagon’s budget by termination of next-generation weapons programs described as needless by Robert Gates and Admiral Mike Mullin (recently retired Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, respectively). While still in office, both men said repeatedly that the greatest threat to America’s security is our weak economy.

EFFECT STEEPLY PROGRESSIVE TAX POLICIES: We propose immediate termination of Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy. Republican assertion that the wealthy are “job creators” who should as such be shielded from tax increases is a long-since discredited “supply side economics” fantasy handed down from President Reagan. David Stockman, Reagan’s budget czar, has recently admitted “Trickle down was a gimmick to get votes thirty years ago…all the numbers we are seeing today confirm it.” President Bush the elder rightly and wisely condemned Reagan’s trickle down tax policies as “voo-doo economics.” The economic decline during the eight years of Bush 43, fully committed to trickle down tax policies and to shielding the rich from taxation confirmed his father’s wisdom. The economic success brought to us by Clinton’s progressive tax policies, which became law without a single Republican vote, is perhaps the best evidence that “Trickle down creates puddles, not jobs -“ as noted on bumper stickers recently seen around Rossmoor!

In addition to income tax policies that will require the wealthy to pay their fair share, we propose too the imposition of estate taxes, and the upward revision of taxes on capital gains and dividends – so that billionaire Warren Buffet is no longer taxed at levels lower than those levied against his secretary! Also, we need to close tax shelters used by the very wealthy to put their income outside the reach of tax laws that apply to the rest of us.

REBUILD AMERICA: Stopping the wars and effecting progressive tax policies, as described above, will over time enrich the nation’s coffers by many trillions of dollars. We propose that this new wealth be used in part to balance the budget and pay down the debt. But a significant part of these saved trillions needs to be invested in rebuilding America. Rebuilding our country must include massive investment in “physical” infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, electrical grids, high-speed rail, parks, school buildings, courthouses, airports and public utilities. But we need also to rebuild America’s “soft” infrastructure in ways to make it competitive with other world class economies. Thus, we deem it essential to include large investments in education from preschool through graduate programs in the sciences, health care to include a public option, child-care for the children of working parents, and, importantly, training in the manual arts like carpentry and plumbing. Soft infrastructure is as much a part of rebuilding America as is investment in physical infrastructure.

Investments in rebuilding America will in the near term create high-paying jobs – most of which cannot be outsourced. Crime rates will decrease accordingly; racial harmony will improve. In the longer term, rebuilding our country will enhance productivity making our workforce more competitive with those of other countries – which will in turn tilt the balance of trade in our direction. As the economy prospers, tax revenues will increase for cities and states as well as for the federal government. Beautification and harmonization of our communities will improve the quality of life for all of us.

Finally: Nothing proposed here is meant to isolate America. We strongly advocate our country’s continued active involvement in world affairs – but that involvement is far more effective when based on moral stature instead of military power. A rebuilt America will lead by the example of a thriving economy, world-class science and industry, and a restored social contract in which all citizens share in our nation’s success. Only by first putting our own house in order can we hope to regain our position as a nation first among equals.

Email: ericsr@yahoo.com

Posted in International, Life, Money, Rantle, peace, politics, war | No Comments »

Mr. X and Mr. Y

May 18th, 2011

By Eric Anschutz, May 25, 2011

A few weeks ago, on April 8, the Pentagon quietly issued a report entitled “A National Strategic Narrative.” The report, written by two military officers, both members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, under the pseudonym “Mr. Y,” sets forth a vision for America, and as such is directly relevant to the ongoing highly politicized game of chicken over the federal budget.

Attribution of authorship to “Mr. Y” is a tip of the hat to the “Long Telegram” written in 1946 from our Moscow Embassy by “X” – subsequently identified as American Diplomat George Kennen. The Long Telegram famously argued that the USSR should be “contained,” rather than directly confronted; “X’s” advice became the basis for our decades long cold war policy with the Soviet Union.

The non-partisan blueprint drawn up by Mr. Y (Navy Captain Wayne Porter and Marine Colonel Mark Mykleby) builds on earlier oft-repeated statements by Secretary of Defense Bob Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Admiral Mike Mullen to the effect that the greatest threat to America is our current weak economy, and that to rebuild our economic strength we need to invest less in our military and more in education, diplomacy, infrastructure and job creation.

The Y Report, again echoing Gates and Mullen, asserts that to build and sustain international influence, we need to rely less on military power and more on diplomacy coupled with societal and cultural excellence. We must seek to be a nation that other nations listen to and rely on out of respect and admiration, not out of fear.

There is no gainsaying the fact that our nation is no longer admired worldwide – as it once was. Our economy is weak by most metrics, our students lag far behind those of all other first-tier nations, poverty in America is ignored rather than confronted, and health care costs are about twice that of other nations – with worse “wellness” and health outcomes. The Y Report asserts that to build the America we all want, our nation’s top investment priority needs to be in education, health and social services. Yet, those in Congress (and in state governments) responsible for addressing budget issues are making things ever-worse by slashing further the already too-small budgets for schoolteachers, first responders, social services and health care in the name of fiscal austerity.

The Y Report reminds us too that the “Arab Spring” uprisings against totalitarian governments are fueled by new communications technology (such as Facebook and Twitter). People-power has been greatly facilitated and multiplied by swift and unfiltered communication among those who dissent from despotic authority. Ideas and ideologies are exchanged and discussed across gaps of culture and caste in ways that are transforming suppressed followers into active citizens demanding of their rights. America needs to be involved worldwide in this new discourse; the effectiveness of our involvement will be measured not by the size of our military, but rather by the power of our ideas, the quality of our democracy, our leadership in science and technology, and the demonstrable well-being of our people.

America needs to reclaim its century-long reputation as the country where big things got done, and the “biggest” of these “big things” got done through the investment of government monies. Infrastructure on the scale of the Hoover Dam, the GI Bill and the Golden Gate Bridge require the investment of public funds, as do subways and highways and sewage systems. The notion of public investment is not well understood in American politics. Congress will not invest sufficiently in high-speed rail or in development and deployment of alternative fuel technologies. Republican Governors of New Jersey and Florida have won acclaim among their constituents by stopping projects for a tunnel and high-speed rail, respectively. In so doing, these governors pointed to the need to reduce budget deficits – but in doing so failed to take into account the savings that would result from these investments.

To cite an example of such investment savings, it is estimated that road congestion costs the US $63 billion annually in lost time and fuel; poorly maintained roads cause a third of all highway fatalities. Airline delays cost more than $30 billion annually. Railroads, ports, inland waterways, transit systems, water systems and our electric grid are overburdened and technologically obsolete, causing failures and disruptions on a daily basis. Bridges, sewers, tunnels are in urgent need of repair and modernization. The Society of Civil Engineers estimates that America needs $1.6 trillion over five years to repair its infrastructure. We think of ourselves as being in the first rank of technology, yet we rank 15th in the world in broadband penetration. These and other deficiencies in our infrastructure limit our productivity, reduce our quality of life, and in the long run cost our citizens more than infrastructure investment. And, by the way, investment in infrastructure produces jobs that cannot be exported.

The Y Report states: “We must recognize that security means more than (just) defense.” Yes. National security needs to be redefined to include freedom from joblessness, freedom from environmental calamity, freedom from inadequate education, freedom from floods and crime and potholes. We need to understand that investment in a new aircraft carrier (we have eleven – no other country has more than one) contributes far less to our everyday security than investment in such things as schools and bridges. Moreover, we need to remind ourselves that America is not secure when there exists despair and hopelessness elsewhere in the world; we are interconnected not only with allies and trading partners but also with the disenfranchised whose misery can and does threaten our well-being.

There is a mood rising in Congress, from Ron Paul and Dick Lugar on the right to Dennis Kucinich and John Kerry on the left, that the time has come to bring our troops home, not only from Iraq and Afghanistan, but as well from Germany, Japan, Korea and elsewhere. Conservative columnist George Will joins liberal columnist Tom Friedman in the rising demand to turn from military involvement abroad to rebuilding at home. To say it again, investment in education and infrastructure will do more for America than continued hemorrhaging of blood and treasure in weaponry and war. The recent demise of Osama bin Laden provides an opportunity to turn from the waste of war to the building of an America that can serve as a model for the world.

Posted in International, Life, Money, Rantle, peace, politics, war | No Comments »

« Older Entries