Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

USAF planes to be built by the FRENCH???

KageraKagera Imitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered User regular
edited March 2008 in Debate and/or Discourse
Do they come with free white flags or do we have to make them ourselves?

Well that's the sentiment from some Congressmen after hearing that the Air Force awarded a big defense contract to Northrup which is owned by EADS AKA Airbus manufacturers. The decision is a pretty big deal because most were sure that Boeing would get it (in fact they had the contract before but because the person making the deal with Boeing was also trying to get a position at Boeing at the time it was nullified and the bidding reopened).

The decision is sound in and of itself as the tanker (the planes are air tankers for refueling) is bigger and can carry a greater payload and fly farther than Boeing's proposal (while being more expensive though), but never let logic get in the way of lobbyists and good ol' fashioned nationalism.
Signs posted throughout the building read "R.I.P. U.S.-built tanker 1930-2008" and "We will get a new tanker made in France?"
"I just don't think the government should have allowed this to happen," he said. Hetland echoed the sentiments of other Boeing workers who said they were worried about national security, sending good American jobs overseas and the local economy in Snohomish County.
ed: Some parts will actually be built in Alabama and it is expected to bring 7,000 new jobs to the state.
"I'm offended," said Cummins. "I'm offended because these are our tax dollars."
Tom Wroblewski, district president of the Machinists union, said "American taxpayers should be outraged."

He said that building the tankers should have been "a sacred bond" between American workers and the armed forces.

"The win went to the wrong side," he said.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2004252363_webeverett29.html

But as I said this is something that is going to be brought before Congress by politicians 'outraged' that them there foreigners are getting the contract.
Wichita's Rep. Tiahrt said, "I am deeply troubled by the Air Force's decision to award the KC-X tanker to a French company that has never built a tanker in its history.

"We should have an American tanker built by an American company with American workers. I cannot believe we would create French jobs in place of Kansas jobs."

And of course, for response from Washington's Democratic Senators (it's a joint statement):
Washington Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, both Democrats, along with six other lawmakers from the state said in a joint statement: "We are outraged that this decision taps European Airbus and its foreign workers to provide a tanker to our American military.
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSN2925137720080301?pageNumber=3&virtualBrandChannel=0

Anyway all the red tape and such are predicted to hold up the agreement for a year while lobbyists and flag-wavers try to stop it.

Now I'm all for protecting American jobs but I'm also for the best design being built for 'our boys in the military'. And it's not just America that will get these planes the UK, Australia, hell even Saudi Arabia chose this design over Boeing's.

But when is the fear of foreigners going to stop? I know the people directly and indirectly tied to Boeing are gonna get upset but does it have to get to the point where it's going to waste time in Congress over? Is there some national security risk I'm not seeing here? And hell why can other countries accept defense contracts from American businesses but not the other way around? Doesn't that kind of hypocrisy make us look petty and paranoid?

It just weirds me out that they had to throw nationalism in the mix against this deal. I expect better than this from my country even if that leads to constant disappointment.

Of course I'm not in anyway an expert of the aerospace industry so if someone who knows more or even works in it says I'm completely wrong on the subject there's a good chance he's right. I just think it's odd that this is all that big of a deal.

Kagera on
My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
«13

Posts

  • ElkiElki GOBS OF PUKE!!! YES!!!!!!!Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited March 2008
    This is not about nationalism, just the pork. Everyone wants whatever the military is doing to create jobs in their districts, but creating jobs is not the military's job. Or at least it shouldn't be.

  • KageraKagera Imitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    This is not about nationalism, just the pork. Everyone wants whatever the military is doing to create jobs in their districts, but creating jobs is not the military's job. Or at least it shouldn't be.

    I figure that but there IS an underlying sentiment of mistrust in foreign businesses since even people not affected by the decision are complaining about someone not American making planes for the military, and I just don't get why since that's been happening for a LONG time in other countries. It just makes me sad that they use nationalism as a reason to change the decision, it aggravates me.

    My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
  • redxredx Bow Down! Before the power of Santa!Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Kagera wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    This is not about nationalism, just the pork. Everyone wants whatever the military is doing to create jobs in their districts, but creating jobs is not the military's job. Or at least it shouldn't be.

    I figure that but there IS an underlying sentiment of mistrust in foreign businesses since even people not affected by the decision are complaining about someone not American making planes for the military, and I just don't get why since that's been happening for a LONG time in other countries. It just makes me sad that they use nationalism as a reason to change the decision, it aggravates me.

    they use nationalism as a tool to motivate the public.

    There are many, many, many, foreign companies that have US defense contracts for everything from cleaning and waste removal, to weapon systems and aircraft. Hell, Marine 1, the helocopter that president flys in? It's made in Italy. We get guns from germany(h&k, right). Recently heard that the replacement for the LAW is being produced in sweden.

    My mom gets to travel around europe and north africa auditing these folk. We have shitloads of foreign contractors and the defense department relies on them heavily for a great many roles.


    I think you are mistaking retoric for how people in power actually feel and act. I don't really understand how after the last 7 years someone is still incapable of understanding that the two are vastly diffrent and are pretty much independent of each other.

    Bow Down, Bow Down
    Before the power of Santa
    Or be crushed, be crushed
    By his jolly boots of doom.
  • SavantSavant Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    It's a shame, because it'll probably cost me some business. Not surprising though, given how corrupt Boeing was in trying to get the contract in the first place. I believe they were behind in the actual merit of the planes.

    The "ololol protectionism" complaint is a bit misplaced, because a lot of the parts of the plane will be made in America even though it's under Airbus's umbrella. I can see why the WA senators are pissed though, because most of Boeing's business is up here, while Northrop is elsewhere. I think one of their big plants was in Alabama if I remember correctly.

    Edit: I knew it was Alabama.

  • MalkorMalkor Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Boeing's hella going all out in Washington, with ads in the subways and radio.

    14271f3c-c765-4e74-92b1-49d7612675f2.jpg
  • deadonthestreetdeadonthestreet Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    It isn't like Northrop building stuff for the air force is a new thing.

  • PicardathonPicardathon Registered User
    edited March 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    This is not about nationalism, just the pork. Everyone wants whatever the military is doing to create jobs in their districts, but creating jobs is not the military's job. Or at least it shouldn't be.

    But of course, it is.
    See Dubai.
    I'm pretty sure whoever is complaining about this is a smaller subset of the people who were complaining about that, plus the "They took our jerb!" segment as well.
    Also, I'm surprised that the US military industrial complex has become so incompetent that we've been beat out by the French? Seriously, the French? I know Boeing is a bad company, but yeesh, it has let itself go.

  • PicardathonPicardathon Registered User
    edited March 2008
    redx wrote: »
    Kagera wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    This is not about nationalism, just the pork. Everyone wants whatever the military is doing to create jobs in their districts, but creating jobs is not the military's job. Or at least it shouldn't be.

    I figure that but there IS an underlying sentiment of mistrust in foreign businesses since even people not affected by the decision are complaining about someone not American making planes for the military, and I just don't get why since that's been happening for a LONG time in other countries. It just makes me sad that they use nationalism as a reason to change the decision, it aggravates me.

    they use nationalism as a tool to motivate the public.

    There are many, many, many, foreign companies that have US defense contracts for everything from cleaning and waste removal, to weapon systems and aircraft. Hell, Marine 1, the helocopter that president flys in? It's made in Italy. We get guns from germany(h&k, right). Recently heard that the replacement for the LAW is being produced in sweden.

    My mom gets to travel around europe and north africa auditing these folk. We have shitloads of foreign contractors and the defense department relies on them heavily for a great many roles.


    I think you are mistaking retoric for how people in power actually feel and act. I don't really understand how after the last 7 years someone is still incapable of understanding that the two are vastly diffrent and are pretty much independent of each other.

    Because if we believe what the military industrial complex says then we get to believe that the military industrial complex is run by completely incompetent idiots and needs a good kick in the knees and a bunch of spending cuts. I personally like this view of the military.

  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    This is not about nationalism, just the pork. Everyone wants whatever the military is doing to create jobs in their districts, but creating jobs is not the military's job. Or at least it shouldn't be.

    But of course, it is.
    See Dubai.
    I'm pretty sure whoever is complaining about this is a smaller subset of the people who were complaining about that, plus the "They took our jerb!" segment as well.
    Also, I'm surprised that the US military industrial complex has become so incompetent that we've been beat out by the French? Seriously, the French? I know Boeing is a bad company, but yeesh, it has let itself go.

    Airbus has been edging Boeing out for years.

  • SavantSavant Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    This is not about nationalism, just the pork. Everyone wants whatever the military is doing to create jobs in their districts, but creating jobs is not the military's job. Or at least it shouldn't be.

    But of course, it is.
    See Dubai.
    I'm pretty sure whoever is complaining about this is a smaller subset of the people who were complaining about that, plus the "They took our jerb!" segment as well.
    Also, I'm surprised that the US military industrial complex has become so incompetent that we've been beat out by the French? Seriously, the French? I know Boeing is a bad company, but yeesh, it has let itself go.

    Airbus has been edging Boeing out for years.

    From what I've heard Boeing caught Airbus with their pants down on the 787. That thing is pretty swanky.

  • MalkorMalkor Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    The A300 or whatever it was called has had problems.

    14271f3c-c765-4e74-92b1-49d7612675f2.jpg
  • Satan.Satan. __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2008
    Am I insane in that I trust the USAF to make the best decision, you know, for them? We're looking at the Iraq war here and seeing skyrocketing no-bid contracts. A company (albeit foreign) makes a competitive bid, and we're in uproar?

    I'm all for keeping jobs in America, but does it have to be every single job?

  • L|amaL|ama Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    This is not about nationalism, just the pork. Everyone wants whatever the military is doing to create jobs in their districts, but creating jobs is not the military's job. Or at least it shouldn't be.

    But of course, it is.
    See Dubai.
    I'm pretty sure whoever is complaining about this is a smaller subset of the people who were complaining about that, plus the "They took our jerb!" segment as well.
    Also, I'm surprised that the US military industrial complex has become so incompetent that we've been beat out by the French? Seriously, the French? I know Boeing is a bad company, but yeesh, it has let itself go.

    I'm usually the first to hate the French, but they do make good military equipment (lololol maginot line). The Leclerc tank is regarded by many as one of, if not the best tank around (possibly behind the Leopard 2). I'm guessing the Swedish company that was being talked about regarding the LAW replacement would be Bofors, and they have been making cannons since like the 1500s. Quality is really not likely to be a real problem here. The USAF will have either chosen the cheaper option, the better option, or both. Taxpayers in general will gain from this (albeit a microscopic amount per capita), Boeing will be the main losers.

  • themightypuckthemightypuck MontanaRegistered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    This is not about nationalism, just the pork. Everyone wants whatever the military is doing to create jobs in their districts, but creating jobs is not the military's job. Or at least it shouldn't be.

    You could be disappeared for talk like that. I think Benjamin Disraeli had some quote about what a politicians job is along the lines of talking nationalism while dealing in pork. Gotta go Google.

    “Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius
  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    This is not about nationalism, just the pork. Everyone wants whatever the military is doing to create jobs in their districts, but creating jobs is not the military's job. Or at least it shouldn't be.

    I think it's probably nationalism and pork.

    2ezikn6.jpg
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    It isn't like Northrop building stuff for the air force is a new thing.

    That's what I thought, but I didn't know if it was a different Northrop or something.
    redx wrote: »
    There are many, many, many, foreign companies that have US defense contracts for everything from cleaning and waste removal, to weapon systems and aircraft. Hell, Marine 1, the helocopter that president flys in? It's made in Italy. We get guns from germany(h&k, right). Recently heard that the replacement for the LAW is being produced in sweden.

    We have H&K's, and unless I'm mistaken the M9 pistol (the most common sidearm in the US military) is made in Italy by Beretta.

  • L|amaL|ama Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Interesting aside: Beretta got the contract for the M9 largely because the army wanted bases in Italy (allegedly).

  • KalkinoKalkino Buttons Londres Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    The thing is tho, if the US actually bows to pressure it almost means that Boeing has a lock on any large plane manufacture for the US military, right? Which could have negative effects in future procurement.

    Freedom for the Northern Isles!
  • CycloneRangerCycloneRanger Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    I also strongly suspect that this is all about the money, and that the nationalism aspect is a front. After all, it's not as though we're buying military aircraft from China or Russia. France has been our ally for a long-ass time, and we're all part of the same "Western" cultural block.

    Re: Boeing vs. France: I don't know where some of you are getting these ideas, but Boeing is not a shitty company, and France is not shitty (at least w.r.t. the aerospace industry) and hasn't been for a very long time. Dassault is French, and Airbus is based in France as well.

    MWO User Name: Gorn Arming
    StarCraft II User Name: DeadMenRise
  • CycloneRangerCycloneRanger Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Kalkino wrote: »
    The thing is tho, if the US actually bows to pressure it almost means that Boeing has a lock on any large plane manufacture for the US military, right? Which could have negative effects in future procurement.
    You're forgetting Lockheed Martin and other US aerospace companies. If Boeing does bring the politicians around, it won't give them a meaningful lock on future contracts--it'll just provide a precedent for awarding them preferentially to an American company, not necessarily Boeing.

    According to my limited understanding of the industry, that would still be a mistake.

    MWO User Name: Gorn Arming
    StarCraft II User Name: DeadMenRise
  • deadonthestreetdeadonthestreet Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Well, Northrop is an American company. They are just making it in cooperation with a French company. So really this is extra super stupid.

  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Guys, you know the Harrier jet? British.

  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    IIRC, aren't these tankers only in the budget because someone porked them in? I vaguely recall the USAF's response to the tagged funds being "Um, we don't need more tankers...?"

    It amuses me greatly that funds earmarked to give money to someone's district are being outsourced.


    edit: the more I think about it, the scandal was the USAF requesting like, 5 new tankers, and the contract giving them 15-20.

  • ege02ege02 __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2008
    Also, I'm surprised that the US military industrial complex has become so incompetent that we've been beat out by the French? Seriously, the French? I know Boeing is a bad company, but yeesh, it has let itself go.

    The cognitive dissonance people are going through is remarkable.

    Medopine wrote: »
    Fuck that woman going "oh god oh no!!"

    It's nature, bitch
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    This is not about nationalism, just the pork. Everyone wants whatever the military is doing to create jobs in their districts, but creating jobs is not the military's job. Or at least it shouldn't be.
    While I wouldn't say it's its job per se I would argue that it's an important part of having such a large standing military, and such considerations should play into large decisions made since it has a lasting effect on the people supporting said military.

    I'm not passing judgement on this particular decision, I'm just saying it should be an important factor in these types of decisions.

    PSN: allenquid
  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Kalkino wrote: »
    The thing is tho, if the US actually bows to pressure it almost means that Boeing has a lock on any large plane manufacture for the US military, right? Which could have negative effects in future procurement.
    You're forgetting Lockheed Martin and other US aerospace companies. If Boeing does bring the politicians around, it won't give them a meaningful lock on future contracts--it'll just provide a precedent for awarding them preferentially to an American company, not necessarily Boeing.

    According to my limited understanding of the industry, that would still be a mistake.

    There really aren't any big-name players in aerospace outside of the US. Airbus is about it, and it's getting its ass kicked over the A300 trainwreck.

    sig.png
  • 12gauge12gauge Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Kalkino wrote: »
    The thing is tho, if the US actually bows to pressure it almost means that Boeing has a lock on any large plane manufacture for the US military, right? Which could have negative effects in future procurement.
    You're forgetting Lockheed Martin and other US aerospace companies. If Boeing does bring the politicians around, it won't give them a meaningful lock on future contracts--it'll just provide a precedent for awarding them preferentially to an American company, not necessarily Boeing.

    According to my limited understanding of the industry, that would still be a mistake.

    There really aren't any big-name players in aerospace outside of the US. Airbus is about it, and it's getting its ass kicked over the A300 trainwreck.

    I think all of you are talking about the A380, not the A300 which was the first design by Airbus. Second, the company is not getting its ass kicked over it, actually the books are filled with contracts, but because of the current bickering between Germany and France on who gets to produce which part of the plane the costs of making the plane do not leave a large enough margin - thus the whole company is needs to lay off jobs to get more efficient which is in turn hindered by politicians on both sides of the Rhine to avoid losing jobs in their country.
    Anyway, the attitude against other countries by some of the posters in this thread is really starting to piss me off - I mean, I am not even French (nor do I like them that much) but it's still annoying to read through all that garbage.

    davidoc0.jpg
  • HappylilElfHappylilElf Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    This is not about nationalism, just the pork. Everyone wants whatever the military is doing to create jobs in their districts, but creating jobs is not the military's job. Or at least it shouldn't be.

    But of course, it is.
    See Dubai.
    I'm pretty sure whoever is complaining about this is a smaller subset of the people who were complaining about that, plus the "They took our jerb!" segment as well.
    Also, I'm surprised that the US military industrial complex has become so incompetent that we've been beat out by the French? Seriously, the French? I know Boeing is a bad company, but yeesh, it has let itself go.

    Airbus has been edging Boeing out for years.

    They're doing great but the future is looking up for Boeing to say the least as far as civil aircraft go. The A380 is a great aircraft but the market for a long range and more importantly fuel efficient mid-sized passenger jet is arguably a more attactive place to be and the 787 is a pretty amazing aircraft as far as that goes. This is assuming that Boeing can get it's production problems with the 787 worked out and last I heard that hasn't been done yet.

    sigtk.jpg
  • Kayne Red RobeKayne Red Robe Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    This is silly, the parts are still going to be made in the US, since it's sure as hell cheaper to make them here than to make them on the other side of the Atlantic and ship them here. Not to mention Northrup is a pretty classic AF manufacturer; it's not like this is some sort of upstart French company that came out of the wild blue yonder.

  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    I'm going to go with "incompetence before malice" here and suggest these old congressmen are serious about their national prejudice and ignorance. The sissy French shouldn't be making God's American planes.

    This is also quite frustrating.

  • OboroOboro __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2008
    Is it Boeing or Airbus that manufactures the civilian jet-prop hybrids? Someone in this thread has to know, and in order to make it a topical question, whoever made such a fantastic plane is whom I feel the contract should have gone to. Indubitably.

    Also, the lack of respect that the French get is indeed unsettling. :(

    words
  • ege02ege02 __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    Also, the lack of respect that the French get is indeed unsettling. :(

    Medopine wrote: »
    Fuck that woman going "oh god oh no!!"

    It's nature, bitch
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited March 2008
    wow some of you really have an irrational hatred for the french huh

    I guess its because you can't get away with slagging off the traditional groups of people

    its really rather funny to see a board characterised as lunatic liberals toeing the conservative line so closely. Who knew a joke involving monkeys and cheese could have such a hold.

    tmsig.jpg
  • DerrickDerrick Registered User regular
    edited March 2008
    I think this is unfortunate but not in the way people are casing the issue. The real sadness is that the American airplane industry is subpar in comparison. If they want the contracts, they're just going to have to be the best. Long term I see this as a good thing for our boys in uniform.

    "The welfare of each of us is dependent fundamentally upon the welfare of all of us."
    Spoiler:
    -Theodore Roosevelt
  • ShintoShinto __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2008
    Elki wrote: »
    This is not about nationalism, just the pork. Everyone wants whatever the military is doing to create jobs in their districts, but creating jobs is not the military's job. Or at least it shouldn't be.

    Up with economic competition, down with monopolies.

  • ShintoShinto __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2008
    The Cat wrote: »
    wow some of you really have an irrational hatred for the french huh

    I guess its because you can't get away with slagging off the traditional groups of people

    its really rather funny to see a board characterised as lunatic liberals toeing the conservative line so closely. Who knew a joke involving monkeys and cheese could have such a hold.

    I saw one comment about the French perhaps made ironically. Almost without exception the posts in this thread have been "Hey, great, yay merit, boo industrial-military complex." Apparently that is toeing the conservative line? Maybe in the sense of supporting market competition? Does "conservative" mean something else in Australia?

    I think it is funny to see three or four posts flipping out about anti-French bias, and one insinuating that if it wasn't the French that people were taking crack at (if anyone was actually serious . . .?) then we'd be keepin' down them womens, darkies and fags.

    A lunatic liberal board indeed.

  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited March 2008
    well, I'm more concerned with the OP, who has a history as a bit of a trolling dick, and the tone he tried to set for this thread. I can understand the desire to keep defense tech development and manufacture local for obvious security concerns, but very few countries have that luxury. Seems silly to whine.



    Also, I'm really needling the local conservatives' characterisation of this board as excessively liberal, rather than its actual political status. Its pretty sensibly moderate around these here parts.

    tmsig.jpg
  • EchoEcho staring is caring Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    edited March 2008
    ege02 wrote: »
    Oboro wrote: »
    Also, the lack of respect that the French get is indeed unsettling. :(

    Why do they hate their freedom?

  • ShintoShinto __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2008
    The Cat wrote: »
    well, I'm more concerned with the OP, who has a history as a bit of a trolling dick, and the tone he tried to set for this thread. I can understand the desire to keep defense tech development and manufacture local for obvious security concerns, but very few countries have that luxury. Seems silly to whine.

    Did you read to OP?
    The decision is sound in and of itself as the tanker (the planes are air tankers for refueling) is bigger and can carry a greater payload and fly farther than Boeing's proposal (while being more expensive though), but never let logic get in the way of lobbyists and good ol' fashioned nationalism.

    Now I'm all for protecting American jobs but I'm also for the best design being built for 'our boys in the military'. And it's not just America that will get these planes the UK, Australia, hell even Saudi Arabia chose this design over Boeing's.

    But when is the fear of foreigners going to stop? I know the people directly and indirectly tied to Boeing are gonna get upset but does it have to get to the point where it's going to waste time in Congress over? Is there some national security risk I'm not seeing here? And hell why can other countries accept defense contracts from American businesses but not the other way around? Doesn't that kind of hypocrisy make us look petty and paranoid

    Yeah, what a nationalist dick.

    Looks to me like you read the title of the thread, but not the OP, then characterized the posters in it as pro-nationalist wankers when in fact they universally support foreign contracting.

    Then when you got called on that you tried to say you were responding to the character of the OP - which you manifestly had not read.

  • ShintoShinto __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2008
    Echo wrote: »
    ege02 wrote: »
    Oboro wrote: »
    Also, the lack of respect that the French get is indeed unsettling. :(

    Why do they hate their freedom?

    Existentalism.

«13
Sign In or Register to comment.