World War III Starts in The Middle East? Saudi Arabia and Turkey Consider a Ground Invasion of Syria - By Michael Snyder -
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/world-war-iii-starts-in-the-middle-east-saudi-arabia-and-turkey-consider-a-ground-invasion-of-syria
Are Saudi Arabia and Turkey about to send ground troops into Syria? If so, how will Russia, Iran and the Syrian government respond? In 2016, Syria has become ground zero for a conflict that has been raging for centuries. For more than a thousand years, the Sunnis and the Shiites have been wrestling with one another for control of the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, Turkey and other Sunni nations had hoped to turn Syria into a Sunni nation, and for years they have been funding and arming ISIS and other Sunni insurgent groups in an attempt to overthrow the Assad regime. Initially the Assad regime was losing quite a bit of ground, but the tide turned once the Syrians invited the Russians and the Iranians to help them. Of course the Iranians have their own long-term goals. Once Assad leaves power, the Iranians hope to turn Syria into a truly Shiite nation that is run and dominated by Hezbollah. At this moment, the Sunnis and losing and the Shiites are winning. Relentless Russian airstrikes have enabled Syrian, Iranian and Hezbollah ground forces to advance, and now they have surrounded Aleppo. Before the war Aleppo was the largest city in Syria, and if it falls, the war will be very close to over.
Thousands of refugees are currently flooding out of Aleppo as the Russians bombard the surrounding area continually. There is little hope that the Sunni forces that once were so optimistic about overthrowing Assad can hold out much longer without help.
As the situation becomes increasingly desperate, Saudi Arabia and Turkey are now considering what was once unthinkable - a full-blown ground invasion of Syria.
Of course this could very well set off World War III in the Middle East, but Saudi Arabia and Turkey have already invested so much in this conflict, and they don't appear to be willing to throw up their hands and walk away now.
Just consider what Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told reporters this past weekend...
"What's going on in Syria can only go on for so long. At some point it has to change," Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan told reporters on a plane back to Turkey from Latin America over the weekend.
As we've documented extensively over the past several days, Ankara, Riyadh, and Doha have their backs against the wall when it comes to the effort to oust Bashar al-Assad and perpetuate Sunni hegemony in the Arabian Peninsula.
Hezbollah has surrounded Aleppo and their advance is backed by what's been described as an unrelenting Russian air campaign. The rebels' supply lines to Turkey have been cut and without a direct intervention by either the US or the Gulf states, the battle for Syria will have been lost for the opposition which pulled out of peace talks in Geneva citing the ongoing aerial bombardment by Moscow.
And according to Bloomberg, he added the following ominous statement...
"You don't talk about these things. When necessary, you do what's needed. Right now our security forces are prepared for all possibilities."
The Saudis are being less vague. They are now publicly saying that they would definitely be willing to commit ground troops to the conflict in Syria...
Ahmed Asseri, a spokesman for the Saudi Arabia-led coalition fighting Yemen, said Saudis would also be willing to contribute ground troops as part of a wider campaign against Islamic State in Syria, Al-Arabiya television reported Friday.
And consider what one of their top generals told Al Jazeera...
"Today, the Saudi kingdom announced its readiness to participate with ground troops with the US-led coalition against ISIL, because we now have the experience in Yemen," Brigadier General Ahmed Asseri told Al Jazeera.
We know that air strikes cannot be enough and that a ground operation is needed. We need to combine both to achieve better results on the ground."
In addition to Saudi Arabia, the government of the United Arab Emirates is also indicating that it is ready to send ground forces into Syria. The following comes from the Express...
On Sunday, the UAE, a federation of seven states and one the Middle East's most important economic centres, said it stands ready to supply ground troops to support and train international coalition soldiers in the war-ravaged country.
Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Anwar Gargash said boots on the ground are the most effective way to fight ISIS, also known as Daesh.
Mr Gargash said: "I think that this has been our position throughout, that a real campaign against Daesh has to include ground elements."
All of that stuff that the UAE and the Saudis are saying about fighting ISIS is complete nonsense.
Thanks to the Russians, the Iranians and Hezbollah, ISIS and other Sunni insurgent groups are already on their last legs in Syria.
No, the truth is that the only reason the UAE, the Saudis and Turkey would go in would be to help the Sunni insurgency win the war.
And of course they would absolutely love the assistance of the United States in this venture. Unfortunately for them, the Obama administration does not seem very eager to commit troops in large numbers to this fight.
I think that the Obama administration realizes that a full-blown invasion of Syria at this point could easily bring us to the brink of war with Russia. The following is what U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry reportedly said to a Syrian aid worker on the sidelines of a recent international conference on Syria...
Two Syrian aid workers said they approached Kerry at a donor conference drinks reception and told him that he had not done enough to protect Syrian civilians. He then said they should blame the opposition.
"He said that basically, it was the opposition that didn't want to negotiate and didn't want a ceasefire, and they walked away," the second of the aid workers told MEE in a separate conversation and also on the basis of anonymity.
"'What do you want me to do? Go to war with Russia? Is that what you want?'" the aid worker said Kerry told her.
For once, John Kerry has it right.
If a Sunni coalition spearheaded by the United States were to conduct a full-blown invasion of Syria, it would force the Russians to respond.
And once Americans and Russians start killing one another, World War III is only a hop, skip and jump away.
But even if the U.S. is not involved, joint military action by Saudi Arabia and Turkey in Syria definitely would have the potential to spark a major regional war in the Middle East. From there, who knows how far it could spread.
Our world is becoming increasingly unstable, and Syria has become a crucible for rising global tensions that could explode at any moment.
Hopefully Saudi Arabia and Turkey will listen to common sense. If they choose to go in, there is very little to be gained and so much that could be lost. They will never be able to defeat the combined forces of the Russians, the Iranians and Hezbollah, and they could very easily end up starting a war that nobody wants to see.
Russia warns of 'new world war' starting in Syria - Richard Spencer - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/12153112/Russia-warns-of-new-world-war-starting-in-Syria.html
Foreign and defense ministers of the leading international states are meeting in Munich and Brussels following the collapse of the latest round of peace talks
Russia warned of "a new world war" starting in Syria on Thursday after a dramatic day in which Gulf states threatened to send in ground forces.
Foreign and defense ministers of the leading international states backing different factions in the war-torn country met in separate meetings in Munich and Brussels following the collapse of the latest round of peace talks.
Both Russia and the United States demanded ceasefires in the long-running civil war so that the fight could be concentrated against Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) - but each on their own, conflicting terms.
But the Gulf states, led by Saudi Arabia, staged their own intervention, saying they were committed to sending ground troops to the country. Their favored rebel groups have been pulverized by Russian air raids and driven back on the ground by Iranian-supplied pro-regime troops.
They said their declared target was Isil. But the presence of troops from Gulf states which have funded the Syrian rebels would be taken as a hostile act by the Assad regime and its backers, and a sign that they were committed to staking their claim to a say in the final Syrian settlement.
Russia issued a stark warning of the potential consequences. "The Americans and our Arab partners must think well: do they want a permanent war?" its prime minister, Dmitry Medvedev, told Germany's Handelsblatt newspaper in an interview due to be published on Friday but released on Thursday night.
"It would be impossible to win such a war quickly, especially in the Arab world, where everybody is fighting against everybody.
"All sides must be compelled to sit at the negotiating table instead of unleashing a new world war."
Earlier in the day, both Russia and the United States had demanded a ceasefire in the Syrian war.
Russia did not specify a date publicly but diplomats said that they had suggested March 1, which the Americans say would leave them another two weeks to achieve their military goals, including the defeat of "moderate" rebel forces in the north around Aleppo.
The United States countered by demanding an immediate ceasefire.
The rebels, whose main negotiators have been touring Europe in the wake of the collapse of the Geneva peace talks and the renewed assault on Aleppo, say a ceasefire can only happen in conjunction with a negotiated "political transition" - something which looks ever more unlikely in light of regime victories on the ground.
Under the United Nations security council resolution passed in December, any ceasefire would automatically exclude Isil, the local al-Qaeda branch Jabhat al-Nusra, which operates throughout rebel territory, and other UN-designated terrorist groups.
Since these are being struck by both the United States and Russia, as well as the regime, the terms of the resolution mean that the only group that would have to stop fighting under the terms of a ceasefire would be the "moderate rebels" backed by the West.
This they are unlikely to do voluntarily.
Saudi Arabia is said to be furious that their main regional rival, Iran, has been allowed to consolidate its power bases in both Iraq and Syria because of the civil wars in both countries and under the cover of an international air campaign supposedly targeting Isil.
Its defense ministry spokesman, Brig Gen Ahmed al-Assiri, said its decision to send ground troops to Syria was "irreversible".
The kingdom, along with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, is offering to provide the troops the United States-led coalition are needed to take on Isil on the ground under coalition air cover.
Michael Fallon, who held talks in Brussels on the fringes of a defense ministers meeting with deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, said he welcomed the Saudi offer.
"The Saudis are leading the Islamic military coalition," he said.
"We've always made clear this is a campaign that can't be won by western troops doing the fighting. It can only be won in the end by local forces that have the support of the local population." That last phrase appears to refer to the undesirability in western minds of Isil being defeated from the air only for pro-regime troops to retake the territory it now holds, which is overwhelming Sunni and was previously in the hands of non-Isil Sunni-led rebels.
The Saudis are also testing American willingness to "lead from the front" in Syria in the face of the apparent defeat of their favored rebels at the hands of an assertive Russian intervention.
"Saudi Arabia will not step back from its offer to send ground troops to Syria as part of an International Coalition operation," Mohammed al-Yahya, a London-based Saudi analyst said.
"The strategies used to fight Isil so far have not adequately weakened it, let alone eliminated it. It has become clear that Assad and the forces allied to him, namely Hezbollah, Russia, and Iran, are focusing on fighting the Assad regime's opposition, not Isil." Meanwhile on the ground, Russian-backed Kurdish forces took new ground from the rebels near the Turkish border, seizing the Minnegh air base, a highly symbolic target as it was seized from the regime first by Isil and then from them by non-Isil rebels two years ago after some of the fiercest battles of the whole war.
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Prince Zeid Ra'ad al-Hussein said more than 50,000 people had now been displaced north of Aleppo in the latest bout of fighting, calling the situation "grotesque".
"The warring parties in Syria are constantly sinking to new depths, without apparently caring in the slightest about the death and destruction they are wreaking across the country," he said.
Munich Puts Stamp on Tightened US-Russian military cooperation in Syria - http://www.debka.com/article/25229/Munich-Puts-Stamp-on-Tightened-US-Russian-military-cooperation-in-Syria
At the end of hours of debate in Munich, US Secretary of State John Kerry announced early Friday, Feb. 12, that the US, Russia and other powers had agreed to a "cessation of hostilities" in Syria's civil war to take place next week and immediate humanitarian access to besieged areas.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov added: The cessation would go into effect next Friday, Feb. 19 but, he stressed, "terrorist" groups would continue to be targeted.
Possibly for the first time in his diplomatic career, Kerry termed an international document he initiated "words on paper" because, he said, "the proof of commitment will come only with implementation."
The document was signed by 17 nations, including Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubayr for the Syrian opposition and Iran's top diplomat Muhammed Javad Zarif in the name of the Assad regime.
Lavrov listed the terrorist groups that will continue to be targeted as the Islamic State and Jabhat al-Nusra, an al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria. Since Jabhat members are integrated in many non-jihadi rebel groups, debkafile's analysts infer enough caveats in the paper to be used as carte blanche for Russia, Syria, Iran and Hezbollah to carry on fighting the Assad regime's enemies, even after the ceasefire goes into effect.
The nub of the Munich accord was therefore the parties authorized to name the terrorists. This was spelled out as follows: "The determination of eligible targets and geographic areas is to be left up to a task force of nations headed by Russia and the United States."
This puts the entire agreement in the joint hands of the US and Russia. Lavrov emphasized, "The key thing is to build direct contacts, not only on procedures to avoid incidents, but also cooperation between our militaries."
The Munich accord therefore provided the framework for expanding the existing US-Russian coordination on air force flights over Syria to cover their direct collaboration in broader aspects of military operations in the war-torn country.
Lavrov mentioned a "qualitative" change in US military policy to cooperate with Russia in continuing the fight against the Islamic State, but it clearly goes beyond that.
debkafile's military sources report that this collaboration has been in place since December, when Presidents Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin concluded a secret pact for working together to end the Syrian war.
This pact was first revealed by DEBKA Weekly as setting out a division of military responsibility between the two powers: The Americans took charge of areas east of the Euphrates, leaving the Russians responsible for the territory east of the river. The Munich accord provides this pact with a formal framework
A glance at the attached map shows the specifics of their arrangement:
The Russians military is in control of all the land in southern, central and western Syria, including Damascus, the southern town of Daraa, Homs, Hama and Latakia in the center and Aleppo in the north.
The US military has control of the Kurdish towns of Hassakeh and Qamishli in the north, the ISIS de facto Syrian capital of Raqqa and the border regions between Syria and Iraq. The Syrian-Turkish border district is divided between the Russians and Americans.
Therefore, behind the diplomatic bombast, the Munich accord for ending hostilities in Syria provided a rubber stamp for the hostilities to continue, amid the ramping up of US military intervention in the war, both by air and on the ground, in close collaboration with Russia.
Neither Kerry nor Lavrov referred to the massive refugee crisis building up primarily on the locked Syrian-Turkish frontier, indicating Ankara's exclusion from the Munich deliberations and the big power planning for Syria's future.
The Tipping Point - By Matt Ward - http://www.raptureready.com/soap2/ward46.html
There is a new military build-up taking place within Syria between three major power blocs. At this point it is unclear whether this militarization is in sync or whether these power blocs are at odds with one other. The silence surrounding this major military escalation from all sides though, is ominous.
In the Kurdish areas of Northern Syria, Russia and America have begun a major military build-up in a narrow strip of land sitting right on the Syrian-Turkish border. Facing this growing U.S.-Russian build-up is a parallel Turkish build-up on the other side of the border, from within Turkey.
In view of the tense and highly strained relations between Russia and Turkey over the recent shooting down by Turkey of a Russian fighter aircraft, it is unlikely that this build-up is coordinated or in unison. They are building-up their forces in order to counter and oppose one another's mutual military threat.
This in itself is not abnormal. What is abnormal though is how close this Russian and American build up is to the Turkish border, how extremely narrow the strip of land is that America and Russia are amassing their forces on, and how easy it would be for a misunderstanding or some form of human error to spark a conflagration that may well escalate beyond our ability to predict, or their ability to control.
This is a highly charged convergence of three opposing armies and air forces, all operational in one tiny area just 85 km long. Major wars have begun in such a way.
The Americans have made a base at the small Remelan Airport. Quickly bringing in Special Forces troops and attack helicopters they have now effectively occupied the airport. American engineers have worked fast to widen the airport landing strip so that larger U.S. military aircraft can be accepted there.
The Russians, in response, have immediately taken over a small abandoned Syrian army air base just 80 km from the U.S. Remelan Air Base. They, too, have brought in Russian Special Forces troops and strike elements of their air force to directly counter the threat posed by the U.S. presence in the same small area. This Russian base is under 4 kilometers from the Turkish border and is now a barrier separating the two NATO allies, the U.S. and Turkey.
At both these bases, as we speak, there is a rapid militarization underway.
To counter this Russian threat, Turkey has arrayed a significant number of tanks and artillery batteries along the border as well as amassing a very large number of troops just three kilometers away from their Russian adversaries.
Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan stated as recently as last month that he will not countenance such an amassing of military equipment right on Turkey's border, "We have said this from the beginning: we won't tolerate such formations (in northern Syria) along the area stretching from the Iraqi border up to the Mediterranean."
There are deep suspicions that the Russians have begun to amass their forces so that they can began to penetrate, and then claim territory deep into the Kurdish region of northern Syria. This is a hotly disputed area that Turkey also claims as historical sovereignty.
Turkey have been hamstrung. They know full-well that Russia is just waiting for an opportunity to avenge the recent shooting down of the Su-24 warplane in November, resulting in the deaths of both Russian pilots. As a consequence of this, Turkey must not wrongly put forth a single foot.
However, if Russia moves into the Kurdish region of Northern Syria, Turkey may be obliged to act. If Turkey does move against Russia (if and when they make a move into Northern Syria), their NATO ally America may also be forced to come to Turkey's defense. That is potentially why the U.S. is also amassing forces in the same Turkish border area.
The more I look at Syria the more the very real specter a significant war between major world powers becomes. In my lifetime, the Middle East has never looked as dangerous or as volatile as it does right now.
I believe that Syria may be approaching a tipping point and a very real danger that almost every military alliance on earth might be sucked into a rapidly escalating conflagration there. It is possible that we are looking at the beginnings of a wider war in Syria taking shape right now.
Syria today is a powder-keg and it looks as though it could blow up at any time. If it does, chaos will surely follow in its wake.
Time is short.
Syria and the real demographic threat - Caroline B. Glick - http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Our-World-Syria-and-the-real-demographic-threat-444294
It is impossible to imagine that a Palestinian state on the western side of the Jordan River could block refugee flows from the east.
Last week marked the 17th anniversary of Jordan's King Abdullah's coronation after the death of his father, King Hussein.
Abdullah's ascension to the monarchy was unanticipated. His uncle Hassan was his father's long-serving crown prince and was expected to inherit the throne. Hussein made the change in succession from his deathbed.
Today it is hard to believe that Abdullah will have the power to decide who succeeds him.
For generations, the largest looming threat to Jordan was its Palestinian majority. Although estimates of the size of Jordan's Palestinian population vary widely, some placing it at just over 50 percent, and other estimates claiming that Palestinians made up 70% of the overall population, all credible demographic studies have agreed that most Jordanians are Palestinians.
It was due to fear of his Palestinian citizenry that for the past decade or so, Abdullah has sought to disenfranchise them. Beginning around 2004, Abdullah began throwing Palestinians out of the Jordanian armed forces. He also began canceling their citizenship.
According to a 2010 report by Human Rights Watch, between 2004 and 2008, the kingdom revoked the citizenship of several thousand Palestinian Jordanians and hundreds of thousands were considered at risk of losing their citizenship in an arbitrary process.
Today, concerns that Palestinians may assert their rights as the majority and so threaten the kingdom have given way to even greater fears. Demographic changes in Jordan in recent years have been so enormous that Palestinians may be the least of Abdullah's worries. Indeed, it is far from clear that they are still the majority of the people in Jordan.
Since the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, between 750,000 and a million Iraqis entered Jordan. Current data are not clear regarding how many of those Iraqis remain in Jordan today.
But whatever their number, they have been eclipsed by the Syrians.
Today, the official UN count of Syrian refugees stands at 635,000. That official number is probably less than half the actual number of Syrians in Jordan which is assessed at between 1.1 million and 1.6 million - or some 13% of the population.
To get a sense of just how large the population changes have been it is worth looking at historic data.
According to the World Bank, the population of Jordan stood at 5.29 million in 2004. In 2013 it was 6.46 million.
In 2015 it was 9.53 million. The massive influx has strained Jordan's public resources to the breaking point.
According to King Abdullah, a quarter of the kingdom's budget last year went to supporting the refugees. According to a 2014 report by Germany's Konrad Adenauer Siftung, the aggregate cost of the Syrian presence in Jordan outstripped its economic benefits by around $2 billion.
A Chatham House report on the Syrian refugees in Jordan warned that in the coming years, the Syrian refugee flow could have a profound impact on the stability of the kingdom. Until 2013, the regime's main concern was the radicalization of Beduin tribes in large part due to the rise of al-Qaida and Islamic State (ISIS or IS) among Beduin tribes in the Sinai and the Muslim Brotherhood's rise to power in Egypt.
Although those concerns remain prevalent today, they being eclipsed by the destabilizing impact of Syrian refugees in the north of the country. According to the September 2015 Chatham House report, although there appears to be little public support for regime change in Jordan, "If the economic situation fails to improve across the country, and resentment of refugees continues to fuel other national grievances, protests against government policies could escalate in the coming five to 10 years."
In Lebanon, the refugee crisis is even more profound. Since the start of the war in Syria, more than a million Syrians have entered Lebanon as refugees.
Today they comprise 25% of the population of Lebanon. Three quarters of the refugees are Sunnis. Their presence in Lebanon has upended the demographic balance between Sunnis, Shi'ites and Christians. While Hezbollah has deployed thousands of forces to Syria to prevent the Iranian-sponsored Assad regime from falling to Sunni opposition forces, the Sunni refugees in Lebanon have been fighting Hezbollah forces throughout the country.
Many of these Sunnis are affiliated with Salafist groups like IS and the al-Qaida- aligned al-Nusra Front.
It is far from clear what the medium- and short-term implications of the refugee flows will be for either Jordan or for Lebanon. But there can be no doubt that they will have profound long-term ramifications.
Neither Jordan nor Lebanon have a clear unifying national ethos. Before the Syrians began streaming over the border, the ruling Hashemites comprised somewhere around 20% of the overall population. The backbone of the regime was the Beduin tribes, which, as noted, have undergone a process of radicalization in recent years.
Jordan's relations with Israel have already been negatively impacted by this radicalization. When King Abdullah appointed Walid Obeidat to serve as ambassador to Israel in 2012, his tribe - the largest in Jordan - disowned him. Experts on Jordan warned that the tribe's action indicated that relations between the regime and the tribes were at an all-time low. Although previous ambassadorial appointments had been criticized, the Obeidat tribe's reaction to their son's appointment to Israel was unprecedented. According to Chatham House, given the current social instability in the kingdom, it is unclear that Abdullah's regime will be able to implement its gas deal with Israel.
Both Israel and the US view the survival of the Hashemite monarchy as a key national interest. And both have made clear over the years that they will deploy forces to defend the Hashemite regime from Islamist forces that have in recent years pledged to overthrow it. In 2014 for instance, the Obama administration held a confidential Senate briefing regarding threats to the regime's survival. A senator who attended the briefing told The Daily Beast, "Jordan could not repel a full assault from ISIS on its own at this point," and would ask Israel and the US to defend it.
At the same time, it is hard to believe that the threats to the regime, particularly the demographic threat posed by the massive transfer of population from Syria to Jordan, are likely to subside in the near future. Indeed, Russia's entry into the war on the side of the Iranian-sponsored Assad regime will likely cause the number of Syrians seeking refuge in neighboring states to rise. The same goes for Lebanon.
The demographic transformations that Jordan and Lebanon are currently undergoing require Israel to reassess our regional position and strategic options to preserve and defend the country in the coming years. This is particularly the case for everything related to demographic threat assessments.
Unfortunately, despite the collapse of Syria and Iraq, and despite the rising threats to Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon, for the most part, Israeli analysts continue to base their view of Israel's options moving forward - particularly in relation to the Palestinians - on a regional map that is no longer relevant.
Sunday the Labor Party endorsed party leader Isaac Herzog's plan to unilaterally withdraw from much of Judea and Samaria. Given the regional population changes, the notion that Israel can transfer more land along its eastern flank to the chronically unstable, and hostile Palestinian Authority today is reckless at best. For all their weaknesses, both the Jordanian and Lebanese regimes are far stronger than the PA. And they have been unable to stop the refugee flows across their borders.
It is impossible to imagine that a Palestinian state on the western side of the Jordan River could block refugee flows from the east, particularly when the Palestinians demand the free immigration of millions of ethnic Palestinians from Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.
The demographic transformation of Jordan and Lebanon in recent years shows that the greatest demographic threat to the remaining states in the region is not natural growth, but refugees from states that have collapsed. The integration of Palestinians into Israel is far less dangerous to the long-term survivability of Israel than the influx of millions of refugees from neighboring states into a Palestinian state on the western side of the Jordan River.
In the hopes of keeping the Syrians displaced by the war in their country from turning to Europe for refuge, last week Western countries held a donor conference for Syria in London.
Speaking at the conference King Abdullah warned that Jordan is at a "boiling point," and told the West to commit to donating $1.6b. over the next three years before the "dam bursts."
Unfortunately, the dam is already leaking. And if Israel doesn't want to be flooded as well, the time has come to understand that old thinking about demography - and just about everything else - is no longer relevant.
BE SURE TO CHECK OUT MY ALL NEW PROPHECY AND CREATION DESIGN WEBSITES. THERE IS A LOT TO SEE AND DO..........
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.