Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

China India - future implications

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

Re: To the Chinese and the Indians, the spoils of war

Unread postby Arthur75 » Mon 19 Mar 2012, 15:01:08

evilgenius wrote:the battle with the Arabs in the 70's (a political one) over oil was waged on the part of the West not for control by a regional entity over supply, but for control over that by the spot market. The sense is that if a market can rule then the US and others whose interests eventually are 'all in' with that will come out well too, even in a swelling world where other regions are coming along.


lol, this myth again :D

For your info, US diplomacy and big oil NEEDED price increase (after US peak in 71 and to start Alaska GOM, North sea) and PUSHED OPEC towards the quotas and price increase, there has been no battle --at all-- with the Arabs about that in the 70ies, quite the contrary, that it was then possible to brand it "arab embargo"( a leaking joke that lasted 3 months and never effective towards the US from KSA especially), was quite practical towards the US populace though, that's true.
User avatar
Arthur75
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Sun 29 Mar 2009, 05:10:51
Location: Paris, France

Re: To the Chinese and the Indians, the spoils of war

Unread postby evilgenius » Tue 20 Mar 2012, 11:15:42

Arthur75 wrote:
evilgenius wrote:the battle with the Arabs in the 70's (a political one) over oil was waged on the part of the West not for control by a regional entity over supply, but for control over that by the spot market. The sense is that if a market can rule then the US and others whose interests eventually are 'all in' with that will come out well too, even in a swelling world where other regions are coming along.


lol, this myth again :D

For your info, US diplomacy and big oil NEEDED price increase (after US peak in 71 and to start Alaska GOM, North sea) and PUSHED OPEC towards the quotas and price increase, there has been no battle --at all-- with the Arabs about that in the 70ies, quite the contrary, that it was then possible to brand it "arab embargo"( a leaking joke that lasted 3 months and never effective towards the US from KSA especially), was quite practical towards the US populace though, that's true.


So, whose conspiracy theory book did you lift that one from? I mean, the very idea that big oil needed a price increase so they forced the Arab oil embargo. You must be a youngster, not to remember the geopolitical situation of those times.
User avatar
evilgenius
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3729
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Stopped at the Border.

Re: To the Chinese and the Indians, the spoils of war

Unread postby Sixstrings » Tue 20 Mar 2012, 11:56:22

rangerone314 wrote:At home, Chinese play go, Indians play chess, Americans watch NASCAR and "Dancing With the Stars".


And 19 year old kids come back from the desert missing legs, brain injured, messed up in the head maybe for life.

To what end.. who here would honestly want their son to fight in Iran, or whatever the next Libya is to protect some other country's oil contracts..

How about rare earth metals.. anybody want their son to die for those? Perhaps in Uganda? Then the Chinese will get the deals anyhow, I don't even see why we fight these resource wars.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: To the Chinese and the Indians, the spoils of war

Unread postby Sixstrings » Tue 20 Mar 2012, 12:14:14

radon wrote:While there are some noises that China and others benefit from Iraqi contracts, there is not evidence that the Iraqi oil is not under the US control.


What does control mean, though? It's a free market, no? I know we get oil from Iraq, not sure what the breakdown is compared to their other customers. I know the US gets most of its oil from Canada that's #1 (go tar sands, cook them forests up). Mexico is second, then KSA, Venezuela, Nigeria, Angola and Iraq last on the list.

How is this even decided, I wonder, other than market driven (cost to ship). Do we somehow get first dibs on Iraqi oil, versus other nations?

Afghanistan appears to have never been a resource play. Looks like that article lobbies for the Chinese and others to finance the US military stay in Afghanistan.


It's an odd situation, US companies are all globalist and free market anyhow. A US company would sell to the Chinese and let your grandma freeze in the cold if the Chinese offered more for the heating oil. Just like the Irish starved in the potato famine while the country exported food to England -- that's what an international free market means, that's globalism.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: To the Chinese and the Indians, the spoils of war

Unread postby Sixstrings » Tue 20 Mar 2012, 12:20:02

Arthur75 wrote:Exxon is seriously holding position in Iraq Kurdistan though, for instance :


How does that benefit the US though. It's an American company but whatever, anyone can buy its stock.

Also I'm sure Exxon would ship oil to Europe if the profit were there after cost to transport. It's an international market, oil goes to the highest bidder -- so why do we fight for it?
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: To the Chinese and the Indians, the spoils of war

Unread postby Sixstrings » Tue 20 Mar 2012, 12:41:39

Pretorian wrote:Correction-- you got nothing out of it. Millions of Americans and people around the world did benefit from it directly or indirectly.


Fair point. But might doesn't make right.. nor the profit of a million people while all 300 million of us are dealing with this post war inflation now. I don't guess it benefited the million Iraqi civilians that died -- men, women, children. Maybe it was worth it in the long run but was it our business? Revolution is up to the people there, not us.

Lots of "bad guys" in the world Pretorian. Take one out and another pops up, or something even worse develops -- what if Iran comes to control Iraq. What a mess eh? iran was an ally, then they revolt then Iraq was an ally (didn't we sell them their chem weapons for war with Iran?), then Iraq didn't play ball so Iran and Iraq were both our enemies, now Iraq is regime changed but they're not Iran's enemy anymore. So how are we better off?

If Iran gets too much influence over Iraq, I guess we have to go to war with both of them. :roll:
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: To the Chinese and the Indians, the spoils of war

Unread postby Pretorian » Tue 20 Mar 2012, 19:49:49

Sixstrings wrote:
Pretorian wrote:Correction-- you got nothing out of it. Millions of Americans and people around the world did benefit from it directly or indirectly.


Fair point. But might doesn't make right.. nor the profit of a million people while all 300 million of us are dealing with this post war inflation now. I don't guess it benefited the million Iraqi civilians that died -- men, women, children. Maybe it was worth it in the long run but was it our business? Revolution is up to the people there, not us.

Lots of "bad guys" in the world Pretorian. Take one out and another pops up, or something even worse develops -- what if Iran comes to control Iraq. What a mess eh? iran was an ally, then they revolt then Iraq was an ally (didn't we sell them their chem weapons for war with Iran?), then Iraq didn't play ball so Iran and Iraq were both our enemies, now Iraq is regime changed but they're not Iran's enemy anymore. So how are we better off?

If Iran gets too much influence over Iraq, I guess we have to go to war with both of them. :roll:


Well obviously when you consider an entire nation there is no profit. And obviously gains of the few should not be covered by losses of majority, but this is the world we live in, like it or not.
If benefits to Americans were considered US should have killed most of Iraqis with WMDs or with their own hands ( by paying them a few hundreds per each head ) , and use the rest as slaves or semi-slaves on the oil rigs, or wherever it can be done without jeopardizing security. That is all, and you can have your $1 gasoline for quite awhile.
I honestly doubt Americans care about some country that most college graduates can't find on the map more than they do about their gas bill.

Speaking of gasoline, I've met a flag-waving Obama-lover that told me that his gas bill had not changed in almost 10 years because whenever he needs gas he spends the same $10 on it.


PS Btw is there any other country in the world that has an entire DEPARTMENT dedicated to their veterans? Does it not mean that the wars have to be fought constantly for the sake of it's existence?
Pretorian
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4683
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Somewhere there

Re: To the Chinese and the Indians, the spoils of war

Unread postby Arthur75 » Wed 21 Mar 2012, 08:42:16

evilgenius wrote:
Arthur75 wrote:
evilgenius wrote:the battle with the Arabs in the 70's (a political one) over oil was waged on the part of the West not for control by a regional entity over supply, but for control over that by the spot market. The sense is that if a market can rule then the US and others whose interests eventually are 'all in' with that will come out well too, even in a swelling world where other regions are coming along.


lol, this myth again :D

For your info, US diplomacy and big oil NEEDED price increase (after US peak in 71 and to start Alaska GOM, North sea) and PUSHED OPEC towards the quotas and price increase, there has been no battle --at all-- with the Arabs about that in the 70ies, quite the contrary, that it was then possible to brand it "arab embargo"( a leaking joke that lasted 3 months and never effective towards the US from KSA especially), was quite practical towards the US populace though, that's true.


So, whose conspiracy theory book did you lift that one from? I mean, the very idea that big oil needed a price increase so they forced the Arab oil embargo. You must be a youngster, not to remember the geopolitical situation of those times.


No conspiracy theory there at all, just simple historical facts (and common knowledge to quite a few people). Even though still clearly totally overlooked by most Americans even "peak oil aware" ones (with the "special" KSA relationship as well quite often overlooked, and most "geopolitical games" around oil and its price in general).

You can check James Akins interviews below for instance (sorry no english version of this thing to my knowledge), also interview of some Berkeley professor :
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xewm92 ... les-g_news
(911 logo has nothing to do with this doc, added by the guy who posted it)

Basically :
Fuel shortages issues started in the US from US peak, not the embargo
Akins was the guy that audited US capacity for Nixon : conclusion it's a mess
Akins was then US ambassador to Saudi Arabia, he clearly pushed price increase during an Algiers OPEC meeting in 72, to a level that OPEC members didn't dare mentioning.
Again price increase was necessary for big oil (and always good for them anyway).
The embargo lasted something like 3 months only, towards a few countries (the US, Holland in Europe), was never effective from KSA towards the US (tankers going from KSA though Barhain directly to vietnam for the US army or even the US).
Akins very clear here : voices started in the US especially from some repub senators on necessity to have some "actions" taken.
He explained them what was going on, they shat up, never any leak.
And then you have plenty of other games around the oil price/prod level with Kissinger, the Shah, Saudi king, etc
Or the "oil glut" episode in 85, where Reagan managed to have the Saudis increase their prod (in order to cut USSR revenues), for instance :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02F-3l1EKsA

Again, very clearly, the "Arab embargo" label for the first oil shock is a total misnomer, but was/is quite practical for US domestic "communication".
The proper label should simply be "US 1971 peak" (first producer of the time, don't forget).
User avatar
Arthur75
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Sun 29 Mar 2009, 05:10:51
Location: Paris, France

Re: To the Chinese and the Indians, the spoils of war

Unread postby Arthur75 » Wed 21 Mar 2012, 18:58:53

Sixstrings wrote:Also I'm sure Exxon would ship oil to Europe if the profit were there after cost to transport. It's an international market, oil goes to the highest bidder -- so why do we fight for it?


Because "energy security" is the job of your Army, whether you want it or not, your Army runs on your taxes, and the petro dollars allowed you to print money for quite sometimes (but this is linked to the "energy security" job).
Funny how this "free market" myth comes back whenever things gets touchy, you really don't get that the oil market IS ALSO A DIPLOMATIC game from the beginning, or what ?
The overall ignorance of historical aspects from most Americans is really quite amazing.
User avatar
Arthur75
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Sun 29 Mar 2009, 05:10:51
Location: Paris, France

Re: Growing Space Focus in Sino-Indian Rivalry

Unread postby Tanada » Thu 22 Feb 2018, 01:03:34

China's first space station will be doing its uncontrolled reentry in an imitation of the USA Skylab crash of 1979 some time in the next 8-12 weeks.

Space Agency, IAC to monitor fall of China's Tiangong-1 Space Laboratory

The UAE Space Agency and the International Astronomical Centre, IAC, have announced a joint campaign to monitor China's Tiangong-1 Space Laboratory as it falls back to Earth. The fall is expected to take place in mid-March in areas between 43 degrees north and south latitude, which include most of the Arab region.

The UAE Space Agency confirmed that the lab will be vaporised upon re-entry, prior to reaching the ground. The uncontrolled fall will pose no danger to Earth and will not impact any of the populated areas. Although there is a chance some debris may reach the ground, it will be falling into the sea and will not impact lives or human activities.

The Lab was launched late September 2011, with the purpose of being used in a variety of experiments, however the facility experienced communication failure in 2016. The Lab is equipped with two solar panels, weighs 8.5 tons, is 10.5 metres long and is 3.3 metres wide in diameter.

Dr. Mohammed Nasser Al Ahbabi, Director-General of the UAE Space Agency, said, "The Earth witnesses the fall of many objects, including satellites and other debris, on a daily basis. These objects do not pose a threat to the planet or its population due to their small size or the speed at which they are vaporised in the Earth’s atmosphere. Those that make it through are often scattered over vast areas in the form of very small stones."

"The UAE is well equipped and experienced with monitoring and determining the coordinates of space objects, meteors and meteorites. Many of our capabilities stem the UAE Meteor Monitoring and Filming Network, which was launched two years ago to support scientific research. Today, the network successfully provides reports and studies on meteor traffic over the UAE," he added.

The network was launched as a joint venture between the UAE Space Agency and the IAC, which consists of three different stations distributed throughout the UAE to record astronomical phenomena in the sky. Each station has astronomical cameras directed towards the sky that automatically start recording once a meteor is detected, which may be part of a shower or a piece of space debris. Once the meteor is detected by more than one station, its path is calculated so that its source can be determined.

Three years ago, the IAC set up an international programme involving space enthusiasts from around the world to monitor the fall of satellites on Earth. Four experts, including the IAC Director, a specialist from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, on behalf of the United States, and two other specialist experts from Canada, supervise the programme.


LINK
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17048
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

China India - future implications

Unread postby Newfie » Mon 28 Oct 2019, 18:22:13

mousepad wrote:
EnergyUnlimited wrote:Within a decade or so they will be far ahead of US.


Do you think so?
I remember the big Japanese scare. Everybody was afraid the Japanese are taking over the world.

But even if the Chinese are going to be far ahead of the US. So what?
Do you think it's important to be "number 1" to live a happy life? I don't think so. I think there are many more important things in life than having the largest GDP in the world.


China may be ahead in certain areas, not in food production. That kinda counts for something. What is the value of a bushel of wheat or soybean when you are hungry? What’s the value of an iPhone when you are hungry?

Many opinions here are built on history, what has happened. What is much more I teresti g is what WILL happen, and the recent past is not always a good guide for that.

Both India and China will, in coming decades, face food shortages. But the evolution will be different. Because of the one child policy China is facing an aging population, an inversion of the age/population pyramid. They needed to do this to reduce mouths as they have relatively small agricultural production. This will limit their growth ability and will hobble their economy just when they need money to import food.

India has more AG land but also has a much faster growing population. They will outstrip China if the current world growth model holds. However that just means they will have an even bigger population when they hit their food wall.

These are some very big and long term trends. Will we collapse before they hit? Will climate change hasten the critical times? Will resource depletion (oil, water, soil) change these dynamics? I don’t know. Likely won’t live to know. But it’s easy to imagine some very interesting times coming out of these pressures.

Does Greta contemplate these scenarios?
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18451
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Greta Thunberg's Voyage Pt. 2

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Tue 29 Oct 2019, 02:56:18

Newfie wrote:China may be ahead in certain areas, not in food production. That kinda counts for something. What is the value of a bushel of wheat or soybean when you are hungry? What’s the value of an iPhone when you are hungry?

Many opinions here are built on history, what has happened. What is much more I teresti g is what WILL happen, and the recent past is not always a good guide for that.

Both India and China will, in coming decades, face food shortages. But the evolution will be different. Because of the one child policy China is facing an aging population, an inversion of the age/population pyramid. They needed to do this to reduce mouths as they have relatively small agricultural production. This will limit their growth ability and will hobble their economy just when they need money to import food.

China is making massive acquisitions of land abroad (Africa, South America) to make sure that adequate food supply is secured... and I bet they will wish to enforce these contracts in the future one way or another.

They will also take an advantage of Russia because its native population is facing dieoff right now due to abortions, alcoholism and general low fertility.
They will reconstruct in part at least what Gengis Khan have created.
These tasks can be achieved peacefully. Chinese will gradually replace dying off Russians and Moscow's powers will gradually, step by step, be eroded by Being. Loyalty of those who live in Russia will also gradually shift to Bejing while population replacement proceeds.
Needless to say Russian territories are vast and perhaps very promissing from perspective of CC.

So concerns about food supply there are overgrown.

India has more AG land but also has a much faster growing population. They will outstrip China if the current world growth model holds. However that just means they will have an even bigger population when they hit their food wall.

India, due to its geographic location is destined to CC related catstrophy faster than many of us imagine.

Does Greta contemplate these scenarios?

Unlikely.
Too young and also West centered.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7342
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Greta Thunberg's Voyage Pt. 2

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Tue 29 Oct 2019, 03:23:11

asg70 wrote:
mousepad wrote:You would be surprised how fast patriotism and tolerance go out the window once growth is below expectations.


Really? Mao managed to starve lots of his people during the Great Leap Forward without suffering an uprising. What's measly "growth below expectations" gonna accomplish?

To be fair for him one must notice that the largest wars which have ever happened on Earth have taken place in China.
Taiping Rebellion from XIX century can compete with WWII in terms of body counts (~50 millions, there are also higher and lower estimates).
What about War of Three Kingdoms in III century AD and its 40 millions death toll?
And did you hear about An Lushan Rebellion which involved China, Viet Nam and Muslims and resulted in 20-30 millions dead between 755-763 AD?
When Chiense are doing something, they are doing it BIG.

On the other hand they are really 2 tribe nation (Han-90% and Hokkien-8%) and these tribes are related and friendly to each other.
It is a tremendous advantage these days for those who want to keep social cohesion.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7342
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Greta Thunberg's Voyage Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Tue 29 Oct 2019, 08:08:48

EU,

Those are good points and worth discussion. It’s a very complex topic which perhaps deserves its own thread. Either someone can start one or if there is interest I will start one.

My point going back to Greta and the CC debate is that it is a relatively narrow debate focusing on a single element in a large group of threats. Even if successful in arousing food towards climate change it’s not enough to have a sufficiently balanced world view for proper management.

Some people are beginning to contemplate these issues, but it is still very reactive.


https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-glo ... eport-2019
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18451
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Greta Thunberg's Voyage Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Tue 29 Oct 2019, 09:04:36

Here is a tidbit from the WORLD RISK ASSESSMENT linked above.

“A worst-case scenario—one in which the Gulf Coast ports in the US were shut down due to a hurricane at the same time as key roads in Brazil were swamped owing to heavy rains—would cut off up to half of global soybean supply in one fell swoop.”22


And some interesting graphics.

Image Image
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18451
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Greta Thunberg's Voyage Pt. 2

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Tue 29 Oct 2019, 11:29:42

Newfie wrote:EU,

Those are good points and worth discussion. It’s a very complex topic which perhaps deserves its own thread. Either someone can start one or if there is interest I will start one.

My point going back to Greta and the CC debate is that it is a relatively narrow debate focusing on a single element in a large group of threats. Even if successful in arousing food towards climate change it’s not enough to have a sufficiently balanced world view for proper management.

Some people are beginning to contemplate these issues, but it is still very reactive.
https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-glo ... eport-2019

If you start such a thread, let me know.
I can contribute some interesting insights regarding China and chinese population outside of China.
Because my wife is Chinese I have some relevant knowledge.
I think, Agent R has also Chinese wife so he could also contribute but he is no longer posting here.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7342
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00

Re: China India - future implications

Unread postby Plantagenet » Tue 29 Oct 2019, 12:11:26

IMHO the main "future implication" of China India aka Chindia is that their emissions of greenhouse gases like CO2, SP6, CH4 etc. rose extremely rapidly over the last couple of decades, and are showing little to no sign of stopping. In fact, Obama made special a special side deal with China before the Paris Accords that allows China unlimited increases in their CO2 emissions. Of course India wanted and got the same deal.

As the forests burn in California and elsewhere in the world, and as sea levels rise, and as our global climate system goes to hell, CO2 emission in the US and EU are dropping while China and India are continuing to increase their CO2 emissions, driving the planet towards climate catastrophic.

top CO2 emitters
Cheers!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26607
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Greta Thunberg's Voyage Pt. 2

Unread postby AgentR11 » Tue 29 Oct 2019, 12:25:10

EnergyUnlimited wrote:I think, Agent R has also Chinese wife so he could also contribute but he is no longer posting here.


I've been much less interested in posting, but I still read quite a bit. No idea why, I used to love to pick a fight any time it looked like one was pickable. I'm much more mellow in my 50's apparently.
Yes we are, as we are,
And so shall we remain,
Until the end.
AgentR11
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6341
Joined: Tue 22 Mar 2011, 09:15:51
Location: East Texas

Re: China India - future implications

Unread postby Ibon » Tue 29 Oct 2019, 12:39:22

I think there is a general principal around the stability of countries in reference to human overshoot.

The greater your population and the more you exceed your carrying capacity the more vulnerable you are

to domestic instabilities.

When you have to then go outside the boundaries of your country to secure energy and food this obligates you to commit resources to empire building; protecting foreign assets, building up your military, playing geo politics, etc.

When you further consider that energy and food sources outside your national boundaries are often sourced in poor countries even more vulnerable to domestic instabilities then you find yourself having the challenge of maintains stability both with both your domestic population and the population in the countries you are dependent on to secure your food and energy.

China and India for all their higher IQ's and greater socialization to authoritative rule is not enough of a counter balance to the instabilities that are programmed to throw both of these nations into turmoil as the overshoot predator gains traction in this century.
Patiently awaiting the pathogens. Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9568
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: China India - future implications

Unread postby FLAMEOUT » Tue 29 Oct 2019, 17:43:47

Increasing shortages of clean drinking water and adequate food supplies, together with rapidly rising population (India) will have serious consequences for both nations in the not too distant years ahead.

Mass migration will commence - to where ? - Perhaps war - civil and national.

It will not be pleasant.
User avatar
FLAMEOUT
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue 22 Apr 2008, 03:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Asia Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest