If Conditionals Were Ponies

I think the more complete quote is "I'm not there yet and willing to give the military one last try, if Rumsfeld is fired and a serious new plan for regaining control is unveiled...and a pony!

Awesome post title, by the way. If I were better at post titles, I would have come up with that.

For some time now, public voices have been discussing "options" for Iraq, without the existence of a consensus regarding the real state of affairs in that country. That's a recipe for nothing, when you don't have a common premise to work with. Now, perhaps a strong voice like Fareed's -- essentially I guess he's saying, there's no way to "win," but perhaps we can find ways to limit our failure -- can help move public discourse in the direction of real exit strategies. Hopefully, the strength of consensus about the need to exit will motivate our leaders to do something.

"stay the course" -> 2000 more american deaths before bush departs (at sept. 06 rate). how many more deaths is sullivan up for?

I approve of the title too, though "if antecedents were ponies" strikes me as more accurate.

Why would Sullivan think that somehow these clowns are going to magically discover how to be competent? I wouldn't trust Bush & Co. to run a two-car parade.

"we'll just stay and people will keep dying"

The death rate among Iraqis will probably go up as they kill each other off. The Kurds and Shia will probably join up to reduce the number of Sunni insurgents and their base. The US presence is prolonging the lives of thousands of Sunni.

The number of US deaths among the military isn't much higher than the peacetime death rate of soldiers due to training accidents and such.

Neither leaving nor staying is a "Solution".

Reread the last paragraph and especially the last sentence of Zakaria's piece. It seems to me that he is NOT saying we need to start leaving, only that we need to scale down our objective and that the president's current goals are unattainable.

The number of US deaths among the military isn't much higher than the peacetime death rate of soldiers due to training accidents and such.

Well, here's a military source that says you're full of it. The peacetime mortality rate from 1992 - 2001 was about 57 per 100,000--obviously a lot lower than 2,700+ out of a couple hundred thousand.

Tom, that's not even the half of it. The fact that there are combat deaths doesn't mean that there aren't also accidental deaths. The accidental deaths continue to take place during a war. The combat deaths add to the overall mortality rate of service personnel.

Gen. Stephen Blum of the National Guard made similar false statements when he told reporters that the rate of Guardsmen dying in vehicle accidents in the States was about the same as that of combat deaths in Iraq. Just an incredible pack of lies. Good find on the doc, by the way.

http://www.darrelplant.com/blog_item.php?ItemRef=256

James Baker, to whom Bush owes his presidency, is coughing into his fist like a Delt at a Dean Wormer meeting, "Get out".

Neither leaving nor staying is a "Solution".

Maybe not. But if I have to pick one or the other I'll go with the position advocated by those that recognized that little problem before we actually had boots on the ground in Iraq and indeed held that as a reason we shouldn't invade in the first place.

Darrel, I should have given credit--I got the source from a comment by BrianFC at Lawyers, Guns, & Money. And yeah, you're absolutely right--it's not as if accidents have ceased to happen because there's a war on.

Somewhat demoralizing to see people bothering to
quote the ditherings of one A. Sullivan. Need to hold to higher threshold of significance and value.

Matt, this post confuses me. Why is Bush withdrawing our troops a reasonable policy position but Bush firing Rumsfeld and changing policy is a fantasy? Aren't they both fantasies? You make it sound like a point of logic, not opinion, but I fail to see the logical difference.

True dat, Matt.

All the talk of partitioning, phased withdrawls, redeployment, time tables, and benchmarks is just blowing smoke rings, navel-gazing, and to quote The Simpsons "cloud talk." We're there for another 2 1/2 years MINIMUM, so lets attempt to be somewhat realistic when we contemplate the future. I've had enough fantasy-driven politics over the last 6 yrs to last the rest of my life.

Mark makes a good observation. Policy recommendations from pundits with no actual political power are an interesting game of what-ifs. What does it mean to advocate withdrawal from Iraq if Bush doesn't care what you think? What does it mean to say, "fire Rumsfeld now" if it won't make a difference?

Sure its reasonable to discuss what good public policy would be. But we also have to spend time in this meta-game, talking about what is or is not politically possible. I think the rules get pretty confused here and people don't talk about this meta-game very explicity. I think one way to describe it is asking the question: what political impact will your arguments have? This seems like a reasonable critique of public argument. But I think some pundits are kind of in denial about their role in politics, possibly Sullivan included. Sullivan needs to clarify his position. Namely, I am interested in knowing whether he thinks we should be withdrawing from Iraq already b/c Rumsfeld is still defsec and Bush shows no inclination of firing him.

Yeah -- let's say the Dems take both Houses back with enough seats that they can pass whatever they want... They can't force Bush to withdraw, can they? I mean, practically speaking, Bush is commander-in-chief regardless of who controls Congress. Has anybody been looking at how, once victory is achieved in November (please please please), we can force action on Iraq?

Congress controls the pursestrings, so they could just stop passing spending bills for the Iraq deployment. It'd be political suicide (Dems vote against troop pay!) but they could do it.

Sullivan's plan is that we can somehow miraculously find another 100-200,000 troops and win in Iraq and yet it is the Democrats who he says aren't serious about Iraq?

They can't force Bush to withdraw, can they?

They can cut off the funding, I believe, although I don't know if they can get their exclusive authority to declare war back at this point.

Mark, you're right that Bush is not going to leave Iraq just because we say so. The point is that those who play the conditionals game enable Bush's "stay forever" plan by wishing rather than protesting. As long as they persist in a hope for a positive result in Iraq that will never come, they are prolonging the inevitable admission of failure. Sullivan is willing to give the military one more chance "if" the impossible happens. Well, the impossible is not going to happen, so Sullivan is just passing the buck, postponing an actual decision and giving the mistaken impression that something good could yet come of this.

Those who say it would be impossible for Congress to force withdrawal, or that it would be "political suicide" to do so, should study the history of the Vietnam War. It was Congressional action to cut off funding that forced Nixon to finally throw in the towel.

Another way of looking at this is that while no one but Bush can change the personnel at the Department of Defense, many of us can throw sand in the wheels of continued occupation. Once your realize that's what you're doing, tho, you need to change the way you talk. There's no use in talking about detailed course adjustments, the question is just "go" or "stay". Sullivan and others are probably too wedded to their role as advisors to the throne to adopt the appropriately adversarial tone.

Re: It was Congressional action to cut off funding that forced Nixon to finally throw in the towel.

Nixon was already gone from office by then. And note well that Nixon did gradually withdraw US forces from Vietnam. Sure public opinion (not Congress) forced his hand. Nixon was a crook but at least he was smart crook and knew a losing proposition when he saw it.

Democrats de-funding the war is another fantasy. The Democrats are divided on the war, and will have a slim majority if they have one at all.

Those who say it would be impossible for Congress to force withdrawal, or that it would be "political suicide" to do so, should study the history of the Vietnam War. It was Congressional action to cut off funding that forced Nixon to finally throw in the towel.

I think you mean Ford.

Congress didn't 'cut off' aid to South Viet Nam. That's a hawkish propaganda meme. It just voted for less than Ford asked for.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/print.php?pid=4660

The crucial difference is that U.S forces were no longer in the field, and there was no public enthusiasm for sending them back.

Cutting funding for an operation in which U.S. forces are currently engaged, would indeed be political suicide.

Jonf, you may know better, but my understanding was that funding cutoffs were an important vehicle for that public pressure. The Congressional Research Service says:

In late December 1970, Congress cleared H.R. 19911, P.L. 91-652, for the President. This Supplemental Foreign Assistance Appropriations Act prohibited the use of funds to finance the introduction of United States ground combat troops into Cambodia or to provide U.S. advisors to or for Cambodian military forces in Cambodia. As part of the compromise between Congress and the President that led to the enactment of H.R.19911, similar curbs that had been placed in other legislation in 1970—specifically H.R. 15628, P.L. 91-672 (the Foreign Military Sales Act), and H.R. 19580, P.L. 91-668 (the Department of Defense Appropriations Act), were deleted.

In late June 1973, Congress cleared H.R. 9055, P.L. 93-50, the second Supplemental Appropriations Act for FY1973, for the President’s signature. This legislation contained language cutting off funds for combat activities in Indochina after August 15, 1973. Its text read: “None of the funds herein appropriated under this act may be expended to support directly or indirectly combat activities in or over Cambodia, Laos, North Vietnam, and South Vietnam by United States forces, and after August 15, 1973, no other funds heretofore appropriated under any other act may be expended for such purpose.”

In a related action, Congress completed action on June 30, 1973 on H.J.Res. 636, P.L. 93-52, the Continuing Appropriations Resolution for FY1974. This legislation contained language similar to that in H.R. 9055. The language in H.J.Res. 636 read: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, on or after August 15, 1973, no funds herein or heretofore appropriated may be obligated or expended to finance directly or indirectly combat activities by United States military forces in or over or from off the shores of North Vietnam, South Vietnam, Laos or Cambodia.”

Was passage of these bills political suicide?

lemuel, those funding cutoffs were for combat activity by US forces, i.e. any attempt to redeploy into Indochina after the US had finally withdrawn in 1973 (or to use US bombers to support the ARVN, which in that era of dumb bombs involved so many civilian casualties that it was arguably simply immoral). They were not for US aid to the ARVN, which continued through 1975. Congress did reject an emergency supplemental funding bill in early 1975. By that time it had become clear that the ARVN was a black hole, unable to sustain itself. In any case, nothing the US did on this count had any real impact on the collapse of the ARVN and the north's victory in 1975.

As for the political repercussions, Jimmy Carter won the White House in 1976 and the Democrats retained a strong majority in Congress. Reagan's victory in 1980 was due to high inflation, high gas prices, the Iranian hostage crisis and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The chief political repercussion of the vote against the supplemental arms appropriations bill for RVN in spring 1975 is that we will forever have to read idiotic op-ed pieces by the likes of Melvin Laird and (alas) Jim Webb. Do not aid these nincompoops in their attempts to distort the history of the Vietnam War, much less of the political landscape of the 1970s.

I concede a lack of expertise in this area. However:

* The first bill cited is from 1970.

* My view that this was an imporant factor in US withdrawal from Vietnam comes from conversations with smart older leftists who would like to see the same stick used now, not from (or at least, not directly from)right-wing propaganda.

* Given that Bush is going to be President for two more years, and this is one fo the few tools available for compelling a withdrawal from Iraq, and that it was at least seriously attempted by the good guys in the Vietnam era, isn't it something we should be talking about now?

(There actually was a bill like this -- H.R. 4232 -- introduced last year. Admittedly it doesn't seem to have gone anywhere...)

On the pursestrings issue: yes, it would be political suicide. A bad declaration of war is always better rewarded than a necessary withdrawal.

I think there are more fine-grained ways of dealing with Bush's War, not least by cutting off the money spigot to Halliburton. If something sufficiently transformative gets through so that it's not Bush's War any more, the petulant little man might just take his ball and go home. Might.

Whatever it was before, it's a rescue mission now.

We waited until the Yugoslavs were done playing musical chairs to intervene and partition the country; they didn't play nice.

In this instance, we happen to already be there. Don't we have a certain responsibility to help Shiites relocate to Shiite-majority areas, and likewise with Sunnis and Kurds.

I'm not underestimating the political, logistical, and emotional impediments to such an operation. The Americans don't want to admit that that partition is next to inevitable, and they sure the hell don't want to risk young lives for that kind of mission. And you have to suspect that the average Sunni father of four with an electronics shop on the edge of Sadr City whose family has owned the property for six generations and whose livelihood depends on its revenue doesn't want to relocate to Tikrit.

But is either staying the course or departure the most moral choice?

Nate,

If the Dems take both chambers of Congress with enough seats to pass whatever they want, GW Bush has a lot more to worry about than loosing control of the war in Iraq to the Congress.

What ever happened to the Haditha report, btw?

We're coming up on the one year anniversary of that incident.

Justice delayed...

I'm not underestimating the political, logistical, and emotional impediments to such an operation.

Yes you are. "First, do no harm." There will be no way to know whether the good we might possibly do in averting bloody massacres might outweight the harm we do in uprooting people unnecessarily, definitively partitioning and perhaps fatally weakening the Iraqi state, legitimizing ethnic cleansing and so forth. The Muslim world will perceive us as having dismembered Iraq to aid our own hegemony. The arguments over whether we did more harm than good will go on forever.

This patient is suffering as a result of complications ensuing from an ill-advised operation which we botched. Further operations to try to mitigate the harm we have already caused will only compound our responsibility for further suffering. It is time for us to stop trying to "help". The patient is stating more and more clearly that he wants us to simply go away.

It's interesting that more than a few of the commenters here appear to be only interested in the numbers of US deaths and fatalities, and rather uninterested in the number of deaths and fatalities among the Iraqis--many of which probably would not have occurred if Bush and the PNACians overthrown the Hussein regime. After all, it was allegedly to help the Iraqis that Bush and the PNACians pushed to overthrow the Iraqi regime, not to unleash a killing wave in Iraq.

I suspect that such American provincialism is just another example of what a British lady once told us: "Americans are very keen on themselves."

"...definitively partitioning and perhaps fatally weakening the Iraqi state..."

My view is that Iraq should be spoken of in the past tense.

"The Muslim world will perceive us as having dismembered Iraq to aid our own hegemony."

It doesn't matter. We'll have saved thousands of lives.

Because we all concede that Bush is in for the long haul and the Dems are going to go along, does that mean all political options are used up? I don't think so. The grassroots anti-recruitment movement is politics in the American Grain. We have a volunteer army, which means the army depends on volunteers. Squeeze the numbers and you deprive D.C. of its mercenaries.

The establishment anti-war voices who keep congratulating each other that this time, unlike those crazy anti-Vietnam protesters, the protests have been all american and oh so patriotic forget to add -- and oh so futile. It is certainly time to learn some lessons in protest from the Vietnam era. And the best lesson is - you can attack the Pentagon. It will notice.

I suspect that such American provincialism is just another example of what a British lady once told us: "Americans are very keen on themselves."

Which makes us more or less like everyone on earth. If you bought the White Man's Burden that the Brits were selling, you bought more than you should have.

Should the Democrats gain control of both chambers and pass a bill limiting the money Bush has to spend on fighting in Iraq, won't the "decider" have a signing statement declaring his different interpretation?

Which makes us more or less like everyone on earth. If you bought the White Man's Burden that the Brits were selling, you bought more than you should have.

Indeed. I love I'm So Bored with the USA, for example, but I can't help feeling there's an unconscious sense of British entitlement behind it--that part of the reason for this resentment is simply the fact that we displaced them as the country that bores everybody.

"And the best lesson is - you can attack the Pentagon. It will notice."

Yeah, it noticed on 9-11. Took out the Taliban and Saddam Hussein and stationed troops on either side of Iran.

Told the dictator of Pakistan, you're either with us or we'll bomb you back to the Stone Age.

Then gave Pakistan's nemesis India (democratic) the okay to go ahead with its nuclear weapons program even though it's not a signitory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Changing the Middle East will take a long time. It's a volunteer army. Unlike Vietnam, there's no draft.

Peter K. gives us typical nonsensical "analysis" from a war hawk.

In the real world, as opposed to Peter K. world, the Taliban is alive and active. They have been injured but hardly taken out.

Taking out Saddam Hussein was a victory for the people who attacked the Pentagon.

Stationing U.S. troops in occupied Muslim countries was a victory for the people who attacked the Pentagon.

India was going ahead with its nuclear weapons program whatever we did, as was Pakistan.

On net, then, attacking the Pentagon was a smart decision for the people who did it.

Attacking the Pentagon means -- taking away its money. Taking away its manpower. Taking away its political power. An attack via levitation, as in 1967, rather than a rightwing theocratic terrorist attempt, re 9/11. 9/11 was the last unexpected result of the sick, sick Reagan doctrine in the 80s, arming jihadis and creating an international network of them. The Bush people, who have never seen a mistake they haven't wanted to emulate, are doing the same thing with jihadi paramilitaries in Iraq. As they fight Sadr to give SCIRI a chance to create a Taliban like state in Southern Iraq, the jihadists must be laughing their asses off.

The whole militarist lifestyle was foisted upon Americans from D.C., but in actuality, there has never been a huge appetite in America to meddle militarily overseas. This isn't to exonerate the American people of their complicity in American aggression, of course. Americans have a fatal belief that they should be invulnerable, and everybody else should be vulnerable. It is hard to root this type of thinking out, since it was planted in frontier days, when slave power and a genocidal mindset towards Indians prompted a culture of self righteous violence. However, the Iraq war is helpful, in one way, by making people think about why we are such a hyper-aggressive nation. I think the intuitive rejection of being in a country we know nothing of, trying to remake it by trusting power hungry frauds, such as the President and Vice President, is slowly spreading.

Of course, as Peter K knows in his heart, the U.S. should really spend about a 10th of what it is presently spending on the military, which really shouldn't be a priority. Our enemies are laughably miniscule -- a handful of bandits in a Pakistan province. We have no reason to be hostile to Iran, and we have no reason to occupy Iraq, and eventually the equation will be made. There will be an Iraq syndrome, and I think that can be ridden as a vehicle to radically cut into the war economy in this country. Since we should be shifting resources anyway to meet coming huge environmental challenges, this will all eventually work out for the best.

"The Muslim world will perceive us as having dismembered Iraq to aid our own hegemony."

It doesn't matter. We'll have saved thousands of lives.

On past experience, declaring a formal partition is more likely to raise than lower the level of violence.

Do we all remember when were all through with this war the day before it started?

thank you

thank you

thank you

thank you

Good comment.Thanks admin.

Thanks
Best regards
mirc
mirç
mırc
mırç
mircturk
turkmirc
mirc indir
mirc yukle
mirch
mırch
mirc turk
turk mirc
mırcturk
turkmırc
mırc turk
turk mırc
turkiyemirc
türkiyemirc
turkiye mirc
türkiye mirc
mircturkiye
mirctürkiye
mirc turkiye
mircturk
turkmırc
muhabbet
forum
forum
turkforum
turkiyeforum
mirc
turkmirc
toplist
site ekle
pagerank
turkmirc
turkforum
sohbet
chat
sohbet odaları
bedava sohbet
bedava chat
türk
karar

thanks

perde

jaluzi perde

stor perde

dikey perde

iso belgesi

iphone kılıfı

süper site

kozmetik

kolonyalı mendil

kolonyalı mendil

dolum

güvenlik kamerası

kamera

süper

sohbetim

joyturk tekstilkent joytürk mIRC Chat Video poşet imalat ambalaj paketleme iso güvenlik ıslak mendil

sasis

pors

ses

sohbet
sohbet
sohbet
chat
chat
diziler
gebze
asansör
hikaye
felsefe
reklam
webtasarım
facebook
face book
face turk
kadın
youtube
sinema
sohbet
muhabbet
trkadin
hikayen
chat
sohbet
sohbet
marmara
gebze web tasarım
gebze webtasarım
sohbet
chat
moda
magazin
yemek tarifi
yemek tarifleri
kozmetik
diyet
Yakışıklı
Yakışıklılar
Anne Çocuk
Filmler
Filimler
Film
Dizi
sohbet
sohbet
chat
chat
diziler
gebze
asansör
hikaye
felsefe
reklam
webtasarım
facebook
face book
face turk
arkadaş
sinema
film
toplist
pagerank
muhabbet
masaj
masör
sohbet
kadın
youtube
sinema
sohbet
chat
gebze ticaret
forex
kredi
borsa
sohbet
chat
sohbet
Arkadaş

vasdasdasdas

  ♥ Anasayfa

  ♥ YurtchatNet

  ♥ Duvar Yazilari

  ♥ Sifali Bitkiler

  ♥ Beslenme

  ♥ Cocuk-Sagligi

  ♥ ideal Kilo

  ♥ Guzel Yasam

  ♥ Bebek Resimleri

  ♥ Renklerin Dunyasi

  ♥ Askmetre

  ♥ Askin 50 isareti

  ♥yemek tarifleri

  ♥ask mektuplari

  ♥ guzellik estetik

  ♥kahve falı

  ♥ burçlar ve anlamlari

  ♥ siirler

  ♥ hikaye

  ♥ ruyatabiri

  ♥seniseviyorum

  ♥ask sevgi mesajlari

  ♥ özlem hasret mesajlari

  ♥ Dogum Gunu Mesajlari

  ♥ Asker Mesajlari

  ♥ Atesli Ask

  ♥ Veda-hutbesi

  ♥ Bebek İsimleri

  ♥ Sevgi Testi

  ♥ Sevgi sozleri

  ♥ Ayrilik Mesajlari

  ♥ Kadin

  ♥ Ciceklerin Dili

  ♥ Hazir Mesajlar

  ♥ Dostluk

  ♥ Deyimler

  ♥ Siir

  ♥ Kiz Tavlama

  ♥ Platonik Ask

  ♥ Oper Komutlari

  ♥ Sohbetnickleri

  ♥ Sohbet Kurallari

  ♥ Belirli Gunler

  ♥ Ask Sozleri

  ♥ Bilmeceler

  ♥ Anlamli Sozler

  ♥ Sevgi Sozcukleri

  ♥ Birtanem

  ♥ Mavisim

  ♥ Ask Testi

  ♥ Yurtchat2

  ♥ Mehteran

  ♥ Bebek İsimleri

  ♥ Yurtchat Cafe

  ♥ E-kart

  ♥ Gul Resimleri

  ♥ Sevgi Gulu

  ♥ Ask Gulu

TurkChat

  ♥ sohbetci
  ♥ seslichat
  ♥ dini-mesajlar
  ♥ sohbetsohbet
  ♥ gulum-sohbet
  ♥ hollanda-sohbet
  ♥ ruzgar-sohbet
  ♥ sohbet-kanali
  ♥ seviye-sohbet
  ♥ tutku-sohbet
  ♥ sohbet-hatti
  ♥ delidolu-sohbet
  ♥ hadis-sozleri
  ♥hep-gul
  ♥ arkadaslik-sohbet
  ♥ seni-seviyorum
  ♥bjk-chat
  ♥ oyun-sohbet
  ♥ mhp-sohbet
  ♥ dostluk-sohbet
  ♥galatasaray-sohbet
  ♥ geveze-sohbet
  ♥ almanya-kanali
  ♥ kanada-sohbet
  ♥ ask-sohbet
  ♥ goruntulu-sohbet
  ♥ radyo-sohbet
  ♥ universite-sohbet
  ♥ seviyorum
  ♥ siir-sohbet
  ♥ cafe-sohbet
  ♥ sevgi-sohbet
  ♥ kalp-resimleri
  ♥ fransa-sohbet
  ♥ ask-yalanlari
  ♥ sohbet-et
  ♥ ingiltere-chat
  ♥ hollanda-chat
  ♥ ucretsiz-sohbet
  ♥ antalya-sohbet
  ♥ dogum-gunu
  ♥ kalbim-senin
  ♥ tip-bayrami
  ♥ aglamak-istiyorsaniz
  ♥ kisa-etkiliyeci-sozler
  ♥ ask-yemini
  ♥ guller-anlatsin
  ♥ sevmek-olmektir
  ♥ aci-cekmek
  ♥ mevlid-kandil-mesajlari
  ♥ mirac-kandili-mesajlari
  ♥ ask-icin
  ♥ birakma-beni
  ♥ kalbimden-silinmez
  ♥ yalnizim
  ♥ bir-gulumseme
  ♥ask-acisi
  ♥Burclarin ozellikleri
Platonik ask Kiz tavlama Siir oper komutlari Çiçeklerin Dili Ayrilik Mesajlari Bebek İsimleri Sevgi kadin deyimler hazir mesajlar Sohbet Nickleri sohbet kurallari Belirli Gunler Asksozleri Dostluk Bilmeceler Anlamli Sozler Sevgi sozcukleri birtanem mavisim asktesti Yurtchat2 Yurtchat sohbet chat mehter marsi sozleri bebek isimleri Adanasohbet Adiyamansohbet agrisohbet Ankarasohbet Antalyasohbet Artvinsohbet Aydınsohbet Balıkesirsohbet Bileciksohbet Bingölsohbet Bitlissohbet bolusohbet Burdursohbet Bursasohbet Canakalesohbet Cankirisohbet
Corumsohbet Denizlisohbet Diyarbakirsohbet Edirnesohbet Elazigsohbet Erzincansohbet Erzurumsohbet Eskisehirsohbet Gaziantepsohbet Giresunsohbet Gümüşhanesohbet Hakkarisohbet Hataysohbet Ispartasohbet Mersinsohbet İstanbulsohbet İzmirsohbet Karssohbet Kastamonusohbet Kayserisohbet Kirklarelisohbet Ankarasohbet Kocaelisohbet Konyasohbet
Kütahyasohbet Malatyasohbet Manisasohbet ahramanMarassohbet Mardinsohbet Muglasohbet Muşsohbet Nevsehirsohbet Nigdesohbet Ordusohbet Rizesohbet Sakaryasohbet Samsunsohbet Siirtsohbet Sinopsohbet Sivassohbet Tekirdagsohbet Tokatsohbet Trabzonsohbet Tuncelisohbet Şanliurfasohbet Uşaksohbet Vansohbet Yozgatsohbet Zonguldaksohbet Aksaraysohbet Bayburtsohbet Karamansohbet Kırıkkalesohbet Batmansohbet Şırnaksohbet Bartınsohbet Ardahansohbet Iğdırsohbet Yalovasohbet Karabüksohbet Kilissohbet Osmaniyesohbet Düzcesohbet Bursasohbet Canakalesohbet Adanachat Adiyamanchat agrichat Ankarachat Antalyachat Artvinchat Aydınchat Balıkesirchat Bilecikchat Bingölchat Bitlischat boluchat Burdurchat Bursachat
Canakalechat Cankirichat Corumchat Denizlichat Diyarbakirchat Edirnechat Elazigchat Erzincanchat Erzurumchat Eskisehirchat Gaziantepchat Giresunchat Gümüşhanechat Hakkarichat Hataychat Ispartachat Mersinchat İstanbulchat İzmirchat Karschat Kastamonuchat Kayserichat Kirklarelichat Ankarachat Kocaelichat Konyachat Kütahyachat Malatyachat Manisachat kahramanMaraschat Mardinchat Muglachat Muşchat Nevsehirchat Nigdechat Orduchat Rizechat Sakaryachat Samsunchat Siirtchat Sinopchat Sivaschat Tekirdagchat Tokatchat Trabzonchat Tuncelichat Şanliurfachat Uşakchat Vanchat Yozgatchat Zonguldakchat Aksaraychat Bayburtchat Karamanchat Kırıkkalechat Batmanchat Şırnakchat Bartınchat Ardahanchat Iğdırchat Yalovachat Karabükchat Kilischat Osmaniyechat Düzcechat Bursachat CanakalechatRadyo sohbet Radyo chat
Muzik sohbet Muzik Chat muhabbet chatyeri sevgichat sevgisohbet Ask sohbet ask_chat
soru coz soru botu kelime botu sohbetyaris
astroloji burclar muzik dinle dostluk dostluk
Anasayfa YurtchatNet Duvar Yazilari Sifali Bitkiler
Beslenme Cocuk-Sagligi ideal Kilo Guzel Yasam
Bebek Resimleri Renklerin Dunyasi Askmetre Askin 50 isareti
yemek tarifleri ask mektuplari guzellik estetik kahve falı
burçlar ve anlamlari siirler hikaye ruyatabiri
seniseviyorum ask sevgi mesajlari özlem hasret mesajlari Dogum Gunu Mesajlari
Asker Mesajlari Atesli Ask Veda-hutbesi Bebek İsimleri
Sevgi Testi Sevgi sozleri Ayrilik Mesajlari Kadin
Ciceklerin Dili Hazir Mesajlar Dostluk Deyimler
SiirKiz Tavlama Platonik Ask

Oper Komutlari Sohbetnickleri Sohbet Kurallari Belirli Gunler
Ask Sozleri Bilmeceler Anlamli SozlerSevgi Sozcukleri
Birtanem Mavisim Ask Testi Yurtchat2
Mehteran Bebek İsimleri
Yurtchat Cafe E-kart
chat Sohbet ederken muzik
dinlemenin Keyfini cikarin Platonik ask Kiz tavlama Siir oper komutlari Çiçeklerin Dili Ayrilik Mesajlari Bebek İsimleri Sevgi kadindeyimler hazir mesajlar Sohbet Nicklerisohbet kurallariBelirli GunlerAsksozleriDostlukBilmecelerAnlamli SozlerSevgi sozcukleribirtanemmavisimasktesti