[smacintush]

Originally Posted by kobi

We might even get the troops home before Jan of 07. Now wouldn't that be a shock.

Again, this shows your naivety.

Since we are making up unfounded predictions here's mine: Even if we end up with Dems in the House, Senate and White House. Once they are in power they will suddenly find that there needs to be certain objectives met first and those objectives can't be rushed, etc., etc.…

We will not see a full withdrawal for years. Essentially they will continue with the same policies regarding withdrawal as we have now and if that happens to be while they are in power then they will get the credit for "bringing them home".

[Spliff]

Originally Posted by abe

kobi, von Wrangell is Muslim and I personally think he would be quite happy to have our system of government eliminated and for Islam to take over. Not that I believe ALL Muslims feel as he does.

What? I thought von Wrangell was aka Logic, a pale-faced Icelander with a love of whale meat. Aren't the vast majority of Icelanders Lutheran? And why the hell would he convert to Islam?

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Ahh liberals and their selective "facts" once again.

Currently there are 72 Republican veterans in the house, 18 in the Senate.

Currently there are 49 Democrat veterans in the house, 16 in the Senate.

SHAD-TH-F UP with the leftie-loon propaganda lists that leave out all the Republican veterans, while cherry-picking lists of Democrat vets. So typical of leftie kooks and their tired propadanda.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Spliff

What? I thought von Wrangell was aka Logic

Correct.

Originally Posted by Spliff

a pale-faced Icelander with a love of whale meat.

Correct.


Is there some rule that only brown-faced Arabians can be islamic? I must have missed the memo.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by kobi

I can't wait until Bush is out of office and can be charged for War Crimes and for Treason. His Excutive Privilege cloak that he is hiding under now can't protect him when he's out of office.

Pray tell, what exactly has Bush done that's treasonous? Or is this yet more lib hyperbole?

[analogika]

Originally Posted by itistoday

Your idiocy is so extreme that I hesitate to take it seriously, thinking perhaps you're pulling our legs.

It's taken you HOW many years to work that out?

The guy is often supremely arrogant and usually wrong, but almost always tongue-in-cheek.

Oh, and what's with all the huge text lately?
PENIS ENVY?

[Doofy]

Removed - joke didn't work because minimum text size ain't small enough.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by kobi

vmarks........I'm sorry to hear that you were put on trial for something that you didn't do. That's why there is a justice system. Just be glad that the evidence didn't point your way. Every situation is different. Hopefully given that experience, you can get past your hate for Mr. Murtha and look at situations differently.

kobi, you should try to read more precisely. It was not vmarks who was put on trial for something he didn't do. He merely copied an article in which another marine wrote about his experience with the law-system and emotional accusations.

Taliesin

[spauldingg]

Originally Posted by analogika

Oh, and what's with all the huge text lately?

I'll have to take credit (?) for that. In another thread I was saying how "smackdown" images, and all-cap type is considered rude, and I was looking for alternative ways to emphasize a point without being rude.

I will never do it again.

I will use italics instead.

[spacefreak]

Why is it that the same folks who are bitching about an alleged Marine shooting are conveniently silent whenever insurgents blow up children and women[/url]?

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by Spliff

What? I thought von Wrangell was aka Logic, a pale-faced Icelander with a love of whale meat. Aren't the vast majority of Icelanders Lutheran? And why the hell would he convert to Islam?

I'm a pale-faced Icelander with a love of whale meat that reverted to Islam.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

Why is it that the same folks who are bitching about an alleged Marine shooting are conveniently silent whenever insurgents blow up children and women[/url]?

We expect more from professional and well trained troops than of a bunch of murderous thugs. But perhaps we should just throw all US soldiers in with the murderous thugs to make you feel better.

But thanks for bringing the thread back on track. Abe and SpliffD were a bit too successful in derailing this thread. Like they always try when they don't like the topic.

[PacHead]

War is hell, bad things happen in every war. That's just the way it is.
The USA will not lose no matter what.

[spauldingg]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

Why is it that the same folks who are bitching about an alleged Marine shooting are conveniently silent whenever insurgents blow up children and women[/url]?

Your link is incomplete. Maybe it was this one?

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by PacHead

War is hell, bad things happen in every war. That's just the way it is.
The USA will not lose no matter what.

And it was unavoidable to bring hell to the Iraqi people?

[chabig]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

These so called "soldiers" slaughtered 24 innocent human beings and you start shifting blame!

You write as though you have all of the facts. What makes you so special that you know exactly what happened? Also, how do you "know" that these people were innocent?

[chabig]

Originally Posted by kobi

I don't have any Military experience. I'm not ashamed to say.

The point is that I'm not in charge of troops that are in a war zone. If your sending kids to kill or be killed; then you should have military experience.

Then I guess that means you won't be voting for the next Democratic presidential candidate.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by chabig

You write as though you have all of the facts. What makes you so special that you know exactly what happened? Also, how do you "know" that these people were innocent?

Guilty until proven innocent - that's American law and judgement.

[Y3a]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

This is a complete breakdown in discipline and a complete breakdown in leadership by their superiors.

But as usual this will be silenced (by ignoring it) and then the US will slap a few of these soldiers on the wrist.

And if you think this is the only instance of this happening in Iraq (and Afghanistan) you are wrong.

The same can be said for the entire Islamic world, and IT'S LEADERS. I would expect YOU to use absolutes to make any point these days. Again with the forked tongue...Jeez

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by spauldingg

Your link is incomplete. Maybe it was this one?

Nope. It was this one.

"United Nations: Insurgents, terrorists and armed groups indulging in revenge killings in Iraq are now increasingly targeting women, children and professionals, the United Nations has reported."

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by analogika

Oh, and what's with all the huge text lately?
PENIS ENVY?

Probably the same reasons a good percentage of your posts have no content, and are simply character assassinations?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

We expect more from professional and well trained troops than of a bunch of murderous thugs.

What a cop-out.

They are both human.

But it's ok von. We know why you don't complain. You've made that clear one too many times.

Originally Posted by TETENAL

And it was unavoidable to bring hell to the Iraqi people?

Hell was there way before we got there. Or did you forget?

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

Ahh liberals and their selective "facts" once again.

Currently there are 72 Republican veterans in the house, 18 in the Senate.

Currently there are 49 Democrat veterans in the house, 16 in the Senate.

SHAD-TH-F UP with the leftie-loon propaganda lists that leave out all the Republican veterans, while cherry-picking lists of Democrat vets. So typical of leftie kooks and their tired propadanda.

*SMACKDOWN*

(no dispute on that one)

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

Closer and closer to mankind comes their Reckoning: yet they heed not and they turn away.

You need to read that carefully.

Originally Posted by kobi

Thanks von. Finally there is a voice of itelligence and reason on this board.

You missed the times von was going nutty and making death threats.

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

and then post less propaganda.

You first.

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

Seek help.

You are the one that has made death threats to forum members von. Not abe.

Originally Posted by itistoday

I'm all for political incorrectness; but when it comes to killing innocent families, you'll have to excuse me if I don't share your views.

So you think letting Saddam murder, rape, and torture innocent people was ok? Nothing should have been done about it?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by kobi

The Iraq war failed when we invaded a country that had nothing to do with 9-11.

Good thing the war wasn't JUST ABOUT 9/11, It was a war on terror.

The war failed when America was lied too about WMD's.

You don't know what the word lie means.

The War failed when George Bush announced "Mission Accomplished" on a aircraft carrier, all the while our soldiers were dying and being killed. What is the count up to tonight???

Mission WAS accomplished. The left just exaggerated what that meant.

You have no clue. None. The war for one, hasn't failed. WAAAAAAAAAAY too early to tell.

The same people that are calling Iraq a failure in these few years, are the SAME one that wanted to continue the UN weapons inspections after 10 years of failure.

Yes, they are that transparent.

20 years from now we will see.

[itistoday]

Originally Posted by Kevin

So you think letting Saddam murder, rape, and torture innocent people was ok? Nothing should have been done about it?

Obviously not, can't you read? My posts concerned Spliffdaddy's statements.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by itistoday

Obviously not, can't you read? My posts concerned Spliffdaddy's statements.

So tell me, what should have we done about that? (Iraqi people being murdered ad raped etc)

[davesimondotcom]

I noticed the skillful handpicking of the Republicans (John McCain is somehow missing) in the posts about who did and didn't serve and the same in the posts about the Democrats (Bill Clinton, anyone?).

The fact is, people from both sides have served honorably.

I didn't serve in the military, but why should I have had to in order to support the war? I have relatives and good friends that are serving, each one of them who have told me that they believe strongly in what the US is doing in Iraq.

I also never played football beyond the 8th grade, but I can certainly speak intelligently on the topic of football and cheer for my favorite team, the Denver Broncos.

Originally Posted by kobi

I can't wait until Bush is out of office and can be charged for War Crimes and for Treason. His Excutive Privilege cloak that he is hiding under now can't protect him when he's out of office.

Keep hoping, because it's not going to happen. You may think it will because you have a warped "surround myself with liberal thought" worldview* but nothing of the sort will ever happen. In fact, whoever comes after him will still be fighting the same wars, be they a Republican or a Democrat.

*If you can accuse anyone who disagrees with you as being less intelligent and just sitting there watching Fox News, perhaps the turnabout is fair play. Pick up a paper other than the New York Times and its clones. Find out why other people have opinions that you don't share. Accept the fact that intelligent people can disagree.

I've given this advice to liberal after liberal on this board. Realize that those who disagree with you have thought out the issues and come to a different conclusion. Don't think of them as less intelligent than you. Because in doing so, you are simply showing off how closed-minded you really are. And I thought the last thing a good liberal was is "closed-minded."

[davesimondotcom]

BTW, have these Marines been proven guilty in a court martial?

Just curious.

If it turns out they are innocent of what they are accused of, will certain people on this board be "liars" or only people who were reacting to the information they had at the time, only to find out later that information was incomplete?

Oh, that's right, only Republicans can be liars, haters, ignorants, evil Nazis...

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

FFS!

These so called "troops" were targeted by an IED. These troops stayed in a civilian area getting kids to them by spreading candy. They are the only ones to blame. There is nothing illegal about attacking foreign troops in your country.

These so called "soldiers" slaughtered 24 innocent human beings and you start shifting blame! You were in the military IIRC and yet you take the time to defend these sick bastards who tarnish your fellow troops. Sickening!

It doesn't matter what happened before. This is a complete breakdown in discipline and a complete breakdown in leadership by their superiors.

But as usual this will be silenced (by ignoring it) and then the US will slap a few of these soldiers on the wrist.

And if you think this is the only instance of this happening in Iraq (and Afghanistan) you are wrong.

I think you missed the part where I said I wasn't excusing anything. Not in the least. You are right that if it really happened in the way being reported (an enormous "if") then it most certainly would be a breakdown in both discipline and leadership-which I also noted.

If this event did indeed happen as reported, then the people who did the crime WILL DO LONG, HARD TIME IN A VERY NASTY PRISON. Guaranteed. The USMC will not put up with anyone sullying their reputation as professional and well-disciplined military men and women.

I did not defend ANYONE. I merely pointed out that people who have never served a minute in a military organization are the last people to make judgements about those who do serve. Quite different, don't you think? I spent over 23 years in uniform. I had Noriega's goons point weapons at my wife and baby every single day of the two years we were in Panama, and could do nothing about it. I volunteered to go back to Panama once the invasion started (we left three days before), and I volunteered to go to Desert Shield (and would have been there for the whole thing if I'd been sent) as well as the build up to the current conflict. I've been shot at, and more importantly, I have been responsible for the lives and actions of a number of people assigned under me. I have standing to say "this is not for civilians to decide." Most people do not.

Recap: don't twist my words-I didn't defend anyone, instead I said that if the allegations prove correct, this was a serious and dangerous breakdown in discipline and leadership. Let's keep facts straight, shall we?

[[email protected]]

Originally posted by Kevin
Quote:
Originally Posted by kobi
The Iraq war failed when we invaded a country that had nothing to do with 9-11.
Good thing the war wasn't JUST ABOUT 9/11, It was a war on terror.
Quote:
The war failed when America was lied too about WMD's.
You don't know what the word lie means.
Quote:
The War failed when George Bush announced "Mission Accomplished" on a aircraft carrier, all the while our soldiers were dying and being killed. What is the count up to tonight???
Mission WAS accomplished. The left just exaggerated what that meant.

You have no clue. None. The war for one, hasn't failed. WAAAAAAAAAAY too early to tell.

The same people that are calling Iraq a failure in these few years, are the SAME one that wanted to continue the UN weapons inspections after 10 years of failure.

Yes, they are that transparent.

20 years from now we will see.

From Kevin's comments, it looks like He and Tom Cruise were brainwashed by the same people. Let me guess Kevin, your a sciencetologist? You/they are allways right aren't you.

Kevin please get a clue and stop spreading lies. Fox news spreads enough of them. Unless your cashing a check from Fox news, and the Bush's then it's not doing anybody a bit of good.

Hell, a republician only knows what is good for him, not for anybody else. That's why this country is in the shape that it in.

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Good thing the war wasn't JUST ABOUT 9/11, It was a war on terror.

It was about regime change, protecting oil resources, spreading democracy. Terror wasn't a problem in Iraq until after the war.

Originally Posted by Kevin

You don't know what the word lie means.

The administration turned a blind eye to corroborating evidence of no WMDs while exaggerating pro-WMD reports. They had an agenda. For what we know, maybe they intentionally lied too? In any case, the war was based on a lie since it was founded on this mistaken impression.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Mission WAS accomplished. The left just exaggerated what that meant.

You have no clue. None. The war for one, hasn't failed. WAAAAAAAAAAY too early to tell.

The same people that are calling Iraq a failure in these few years, are the SAME one that wanted to continue the UN weapons inspections after 10 years of failure.

Yes, they are that transparent.

20 years from now we will see.

People said Vietnam would turn into a success too. Not saying Iraq can't be a success down the road, simply because of all the oil, but we'll see.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

BTW, have these Marines been proven guilty in a court martial?

Just curious.

If it turns out they are innocent of what they are accused of, will certain people on this board be "liars" or only people who were reacting to the information they had at the time, only to find out later that information was incomplete?

Oh, that's right, only Republicans can be liars, haters, ignorants, evil Nazis...

Nobody's even been charged yet. This event will require a lot of investigation. There's a problem, a big problem with such investigations, in that the locals may have altered the evidence in the area, may have been organized to report events that did not happen, or change the order in which they report what they really saw. And we are talking about an event that happened six months ago, so there's darn little forensic evidence left, even if the location was left completely untouched-which I seriously doubt.

Expect the investigation to be done by a number of agencies, including the DoD Inspector General, Naval CID, and probably others, just to ensure that all the facts are known and well documented. It sounds very much like there may have been a very complex situation that went very wrong, whether because the Marines lost their cool, or because other agents were involved, or because some outside organization has manipulated things to cause negative publicity. Or all three.

I guarantee that if any Marines can be shown to have violated the Law of Armed Conflict (a real, binding set of rules for the conduct of warfare that the U.S. tries valiantly to adhere to, in spite of the fact that most of our adversaries have ignored such rules), then those Marines will spend a very long time in a very bad place.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by kobi

From Kevin's comments, it looks like He and Tom Cruise were brainwashed by the same people. Let me guess Kevin, your a sciencetologist? You/they are allways right aren't you.

Typical of the left. When they have no argument, the ad-hominem silliness comes out.

Kevin please get a clue and stop spreading lies. Fox news spreads enough of them. Unless your cashing a check from Fox news, and the Bush's then it's not doing anybody a bit of good.

Hell, a republician only knows what is good for him, not for anybody else. That's why this country is in the shape that it in.

1. I am not a Republican.
2. You refuted NOTHING I said. But just launched personal attacks.

Well done.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Busemann

It was about regime change, protecting oil resources, spreading democracy. Terror wasn't a problem in Iraq until after the war.

In your opinion. Certainly facts show otherwise.

The administration turned a blind eye to corroborating evidence of no WMDs while exaggerating pro-WMD reports. They had an agenda. For what we know, maybe they intentionally lied too? In any case, the war was based on a lie since it was founded on this mistaken impression.

Again, people don't know what a lie is. Funny, no one called Clinton a liar when he used WMDs and nuke excuses to bomb Iraq. (And yes, yes he did)

People said Vietnam would turn into a success too. Not saying Iraq can't be a success down the road, simply because of all the oil, but we'll see.

Simply because Iraq isn't being run by Hussein's.

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by Kevin

In your opinion. Certainly facts show otherwise.

According to Bush himself, those were the reasons. Protecting oil reserves is a major reason they're still there, according to military officials.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Again, people don't know what a lie is. Funny, no one called Clinton a liar when he used WMDs and nuke excuses to bomb Iraq. (And yes, yes he did)

Well, Mr Semantics over there. It's a polysemic word. There's nothing wrong in how it's used in my post.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Simply because Iraq isn't being run by Hussein's.

And that's a guarantee for success.. how exactly? Just because you've removed the plague doesn't mean cholera can't replace it. That's what's happening in Palestine.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Busemann

According to Bush himself, those were the reasons. Protecting oil reserves is a major reason they're still there, according to military officials.

I am speaking about the "Terror wasn't a problem in Iraq until after the war."

Which is a load of malarky.

Well, Mr Semantics over there. It's a polysemic word. There's nothing wrong in how it's used in my post.

It's called being DISHONEST. When someone doesn't lie, and you call them a liar. That makes you a...... class?

And that's a guarantee for success.. how exactly? Just because you've removed the plague doesn't mean cholera can't replace it

Never said it was guaranteed. But atleast now it has a chance, where before it did not.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by kobi

Hell, a republician only knows what is good for him, not for anybody else. That's why this country is in the shape that it in.

Historically low unemployment, consistently growing ecomomy the past three+ years, all-time high home ownership, if you want to blame that stuff on Bush and the Republicans, that would be nice, too.

I'm sick of the "sky is falling" attitude without anything to back it up. YOU and the people who politically oppose Bush think the country is in terrible shape because YOU are losing.

Go out and win an election or two, you'll feel better. But the only way to do that is to come up with better ideas than your opponents, or at least to convince voters of such.

Of course, now you'll come back with the age-old (or at least 6 year old) argument - "But Bush didn't win!!! He stole it with the Supreme Court's help!! And in 2004, it was FEAR that got him reelected. Well, that and broken voting machines!!!"

Or you could just admit that the American people elected him and move on with your life. Work on winning the next election.

Good luck with your bitterness. Welcome to the Lounge.

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by kevin

I am speaking about the "Terror wasn't a problem in Iraq until after the war."

Which is a load of malarky.

So, three years on, have the US been successful defeating this Iraqi terrorism? Or has it gotten worse?

Originally Posted by Kevin

It's called being DISHONEST. When someone doesn't lie, and you call them a liar. That makes you a...... class?

Seems you don't know the meanings of the word lie. Please explain how it's wrong in the way I used it.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Never said it was guaranteed. But atleast now it has a chance, where before it did not.

Heh, if 40 million Iraqis united to overthrow Saddam and his people, they could probably have succeeded in a matter of weeks.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by ghporter

Nobody's even been charged yet. This event will require a lot of investigation. There's a problem, a big problem with such investigations, in that the locals may have altered the evidence in the area, may have been organized to report events that did not happen, or change the order in which they report what they really saw. And we are talking about an event that happened six months ago, so there's darn little forensic evidence left, even if the location was left completely untouched-which I seriously doubt.

Expect the investigation to be done by a number of agencies, including the DoD Inspector General, Naval CID, and probably others, just to ensure that all the facts are known and well documented. It sounds very much like there may have been a very complex situation that went very wrong, whether because the Marines lost their cool, or because other agents were involved, or because some outside organization has manipulated things to cause negative publicity. Or all three.

I guarantee that if any Marines can be shown to have violated the Law of Armed Conflict (a real, binding set of rules for the conduct of warfare that the U.S. tries valiantly to adhere to, in spite of the fact that most of our adversaries have ignored such rules), then those Marines will spend a very long time in a very bad place.

Exctly. to cooler heads.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

I'm a pale-faced Icelander with a love of whale meat that reverted to Islam.

Um, reverted or converted?

What's whale meat taste like? Not that I'll be having any anytime soon (try finding a whale in Montana!) I'm just curious.

And please don't say "like chicken." Because its got to taste like at least a few thousand chickens...

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by Kevin

In your opinion. Certainly facts show otherwise.

Reason given for the war was weapons of mass destructions and Iraq links to Al Quaida. FACTS

Never has there been talk about liberating the Iraqi people from a dictatorship as you claim.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

Um, reverted or converted?

Since everybody was born as a Muslim, he reverted.

[itistoday]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

Reason given for the war was weapons of mass destructions and Iraq links to Al Quaida. FACTS

Never has there been talk about liberating the Iraqi people from a dictatorship as you claim.

Now that's an authentic *SMACKDOWN*!

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Busemann

So, three years on, have the US been successful defeating this Iraqi terrorism? Or has it gotten worse?

#1 I wasn't talking about Iraqi terrorism in general.
#2 Bush himself said it would get WORSE before it would get better did he not? Yes, yes he did.

But that is irrelevant to what you said, which was there was none there till we got there. So cut out the straw-man.

Seems you don't know the meanings of the word lie. Please explain how it's wrong in the way I used it.

Prove that Bush willingly and knowingly told us something he himself did not believe to be true. You cannot. Therefore you cannot call him a liar. You can say you THINK he lied in your opinion. And it would be just that. I am not saying he did or did not. I don't know. But calling him a liar when you TOO don't know is ALSO lying.

Heh, if 40 million Iraqis united to overthrow Saddam and his people, they could probably have succeeded in a matter of weeks.

Correct. But they couldn't. They were unarmed. And really has nothing to do with what I posted.

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by Kevin

But that is irrelevant to what you said, which was there was none there till we got there. So cut out the straw-man.

I said terror wasn't a problem in Iraq, it wasn't something to go to war over, not that there wasn't any terror. Iraqis had nothing to do with terror attacks against the US.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Prove that Bush willingly and knowingly told us something he himself did not believe to be true. You cannot. Therefore you cannot call him a liar. You can say you THINK he lied in your opinion. And it would be just that. I am not saying he did or did not. I don't know. But calling him a liar when you TOO don't know is ALSO lying.

Perhaps you should read what I wrote?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

Reason given for the war was weapons of mass destructions and Iraq links to Al Quaida. FACTS

Never has there been talk about liberating the Iraqi people from a dictatorship as you claim.

No, that was a speech given as to why Iraq was breaking UN resolutions. They ALSO gave other reasons.

I surely hope you aren't attempting to say liberation reason was not given.

I suggest you read

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0021007-8.html

Originally Posted by itistoday

Now that's an authentic *SMACKDOWN*!

Premature smackdown call revoked.

News at 11.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Busemann

I said terror wasn't a problem in Iraq, it wasn't something to go to war over, not that there wasn't any terror.

And I said that it was MALARKY.

Perhaps you should read what I wrote?

I did, it was malarky too.

But go on, prove that Bush lied. I'll be waiting.

[Busemann]

Originally Posted by Kevin

But go on, prove that Bush lied. I'll be waiting.

Well, you can disprove my original claim first: that the war is based on a lie.

[itistoday]

Originally Posted by Kevin

So tell me, what should have we done about that? (Iraqi people being murdered ad raped etc)

We should have done absolutely nothing about it unless the Iraqi people asked us to intervene. Do you really not understand that?