Tippmann Paintball Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > News And Views > Thoughts and Opinions
  New Posts New Posts
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Letter from Iraq

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
Author
Message
goodsmitty View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Childish Insults 3/3

Joined: 13 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 635
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote goodsmitty Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Letter from Iraq
    Posted: 28 October 2005 at 3:36am

I got a letter from my nephew in Iraq today. He's an infantry specialist in the 82nd Airborne Division. I thought I would rattle some cages with it:

Originally posted by the smittybrothers' nephew the smittybrothers' nephew wrote:

Things aver here are okay give the circumstances. I currently reside in the near center of Tallafar. Our AO [area of operations] is mostly the eastern side of the city. This place is in shambles. We've taken one of the nicest houses as our home. We call it the mansion. Its okay minusthe bullet holes. We're still living solely off generators without running water. That's the extent of our amenities. We're dirty and nasty. I have not showered for six days. And it was eleven days before that.

We don't see much shooting. The bad guys are cowardly. IED's and suicide bombers are the weapons of choice. I don't really blame them. Last night I watched about 30 155 rounds [artillery rounds] rain down on suspected targets through my NVGs [night vision goggles]. We also have lots of cav here. An M1 can wreck an Opel or an Iraqi building. The only shooting has been random while fleeing.

The people here are dirty and nasty. They just search for handouts. For $10 an iraqi will tell you everyone on the block who has an AK. When we dismount humvees you get mobbed by kids. I swear I about killed a kid who kept grabbing my GPS. Its really a rathol tyrannical place that would not have a clue what to do with freedom.

Seriously, the ONLY jobs are: street peddler, police, IED manufacturer and farmer. There is NO industry no schooling. I honestly do not know how this town ever will support the several hundred thousand residents on its own.

The funny thing is that people have this crazy idea that our soldiers want to be here. That we want to help these people. We hate this place. We hate these people. Most guys just want to shoot someone. Every one rushes to the window when we hear an explosion. We want to eat the humanitarian rations because they're better than ours. And we tell every Iraqi that they're going to Abu Graib because it's funny to watch them squirm. We should reinstate Saddam and give him our most sincere apologies. But that's just my opinion.

*edit* A shot out to whatever mod deleted the Richard Cheney thread: You are a neocon hero. If you could only delete the transgressions of Bush, Cheney, Delay, Bob Taft, Bob Ney, Scooter Libby, etc., etc., etc.



Edited by goodsmitty
"Reading this thread, I'm sad to say that the only difference between the average American and the average Taliban is economic status."
-Zesty

Back to Top
Darur View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Stare directly into my avatar...

Joined: 03 May 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9178
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Darur Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 3:45am
Your point being . . . .?
Real Men play Tuba

[IMG]http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/1859/newsmall6xz.jpg">

PH33R TEH 1337 Dwarf!

DONT CLICK ME!!1
Back to Top
goodsmitty View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Childish Insults 3/3

Joined: 13 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 635
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote goodsmitty Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 4:34am

^^^That you won't see a letter like that on O'Reilly Factor.

"Reading this thread, I'm sad to say that the only difference between the average American and the average Taliban is economic status."
-Zesty

Back to Top
Badsmitty View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member

Parental Advisory Non Conformist

Joined: 22 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1760
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Badsmitty Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 6:09am

That troop is denegrating the troops!  He is an America hater, obviously.

Back to Top
choopie911 View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Commie Canuck

Joined: 01 June 2003
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 30773
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote choopie911 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 6:25am
While some may not like it, that viewpoint makes sense to me. I may not agree with it, but I can understand thinking it.


Not saddam though, BAD choice for a leader.
Back to Top
Reb Cpl View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Has to say "yes" to "are you a cop?"

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 14210
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Reb Cpl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 7:51am

I don't recall ever saying that the soldiers there WANTED to be there myself.

......and it wasnt me that deleted the Cheney thread.

?

Back to Top
usafpilot07 View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
FreeEnterprise's #1 Fan & Potty Mouth

Joined: 31 August 2004
Location: Tokelau
Status: Offline
Points: 4626
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote usafpilot07 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 8:27am
.....If I recall the later I posted on the forums about a month ago....not every soldier hates "this place. We hate these people. Most guys just want to shoot someone.



Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

Crazy old guy

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6725
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 9:04am
You are priceless,

No war ever waged by any country at anytime in the history of man had all the troops enjoying thier stay, and 99% of letters home were of the "frustration" type, BTDT. But someone, somewhere, somehow, will as history reviews this war as it has many others in mans history find a true reason on why it was needed, and why he/she was there.

My son wrote home too from Iraq, many positives, many negatives, humorous as well as almost despondant some times. I even have some of my letters home from a place far, far away, long time ago, no difference.

So what is the point here.

Doubt the WW2 letters were no differant from the front, soldiers complain, nature of the beast, and once older and wiser, find solace in what they have done, for whatever reason, wherever.

I wonder how many troops complained about Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, Truman, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Bush 41,Clinton, Bush 43, and found fault in the reason on why they were there, doing what they were doing, and asking "whats the point of me dieing or being here for this?".

So no surprise on letter content, only your use of it as a political tool again to attack this administration, that in itself is dishonoring your nephews intent on a private communication to family.





Edited by oldsoldier
Back to Top
ShortyBP View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

A G F Y

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5034
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ShortyBP Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 9:56am
Not sure who deleted the Cheney thread regarding the indictments... although I also hadn't looked at it in awhile, so not sure if it had grown into something worth deleting. Feel free to slap up another post on the matter... it's newsworthy, considering the first indictment(s) should be handed down today.


Back on topic though... what OS has written is basically true. Despite the obvious thoughts as to OS's political leanings... having been in combat, I'd suspect his experience with this matter trumps most others here.
Not many people enjoy being in a combat zone. All of the amenities and freedoms experienced at home are taken away... nothing to enjoy about that. Factor in the fact that many soldiers currently serving didn't exactly join up to fight, but rather to get money for college or other reasons... and that misery they experience grows exponentially.

Given my place of employment, I work alongside many who have been in Iraq, some in Afghanistan. There are indeed several who never want to go back. There are several who have served multiple tours, didn't enjoy themselves, but would go back again without much griping if they were called up. And there are some who can't wait to go back, and are actually hoping to serve more tours, despite the horrors they've witnessed. And they're not masochists ready to do more killing... these are combat medics and Corpsmen, patching holes and not making them.

Point being... you have soldiers of all kinds. And no, not all of them *want* to be there. I'd even go so far as to say none of them *want* to be there... it's not a matter of wanting something.
Back to Top
goodsmitty View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Childish Insults 3/3

Joined: 13 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 635
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote goodsmitty Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 10:48am

Seems to me like nearly every post regarding troops on this forum is from the angle that they:

  • want to give Iraqis freedom
  • believe in the mission of disarming Iraq
  • believe in dethroning Saddam
  • stand by their commander in chief unquestioningly

Since the letter comes from a grunt in an elite airborne unit, I would say he and his buddies are a pretty good sample of the military. I actually don't know a single soldier that has come home and said that we are improving Iraq, improving Iraqi's lives, or believe in the mission. So who exactly is for this war? In my experience:

  • Those who don't have to face the danger themselves
  • Those who value supporting GW after he got everything wrong over holding him responsible and bringing the soldiers (who aren't responsible) home.
  • Those religious fundies who think we got God on our side (the same argument of the al-Qaeda, BTW).
  • Those who still think that Hans Blix, Richard Clarke, and Joseph Wilson were wrong, and there really was an Iraqi link to 9/11, al-Qaeda, or a WMD arsenal.

 

"Reading this thread, I'm sad to say that the only difference between the average American and the average Taliban is economic status."
-Zesty

Back to Top
Sargent Duck View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 July 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 843
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sargent Duck Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 11:01am
Originally posted by goodsmitty goodsmitty wrote:

Since the letter comes from a grunt in an elite airborne unit, I would say he and his buddies are a pretty good sample of the military.



You never took statistics did you? He and his buddies are NOT a good sampling, as they're from a special group, not the common infantry.

And I don't think any solder would prefer to be fighting a war instead of being at home watching the game drinking beer. But the point is, that is there job. Their job is to go fight wars. When there boss says "go", they go. Same as if my boss told me to go mow the lawn. When he says "go", I go. Do I complain? yes. Do they complain? yes. If they hate their job so much, why did they join?



Ref: I want a nice clean game
player: but it's paintball!
Back to Top
.Ryan View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Neither cool nor annoying

Joined: 25 June 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4488
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote .Ryan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 11:05am
OS, the thing is that Linclon, FDR, Truman, The VN presidents, Bush "41", and Clinton could answer them when they asked why with something more than false intelligence and political rhetoric. And that was from the begining. Only as this war goes on does this "administration" gain that luxury. I say that because there was absolutely no excuse for us going in there and there was no satisfactory answer Bosh and Co. could have given if one of those soldiers involved in the initial invasion would have asked "why?".


That being said, I'm still of the opinion that Bosh and Co. should be indited, convicted, tarred, and feathered for getting this country in this mess BUT we can't just leave. I really believe that we need to finish the job over there. If we leave we will be letting AQ win. The fact is that Saddam was the only stabilizing force in that country before we took him down. A force against AQ no less, but now there is a power vacuum that we have to make sure is filled with the right people with the right ideals. We don't want another Taliban, much less one with the resources of Iraq and with neighbors like Syria and Iran. The thing is, this war wasn't about the WoT, but now it is. We made it that way. Now, in order to do any good at all in the WoT, we have to win this thing. There is no easy way out and it sucks but ya know, elections have consequences and this stupid country elected him, twice, now we have to deal with it. I just wish my grandchilderen wouldn't have to.

Back to Top
Sargent Duck View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 July 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 843
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sargent Duck Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 11:09am
Originally posted by goodsmitty goodsmitty wrote:

So who exactly is for this war? In my experience:
  • Those who don't have to face the danger themselves
  • Those who value supporting GW after he got everything wrong over holding him responsible and bringing the soldiers (who aren't responsible) home.
Soldiers are never responsible. They've never been responsible for any war, but part of the deal of signing up is that when the boss says go, they go
Originally posted by goodsmitty goodsmitty wrote:

Those who still think that Hans Blix, Richard Clarke, and Joseph Wilson were wrong, and there really was an Iraqi link to 9/11, al-Qaeda, or a WMD arsenal.
Well, history shows that Saddam did have WMD, and he has used them. Also, you never saw the terrorist camps he had set up. There was one well known one that was a full scale mock up of an airport, complete with a passenger plane for terrorists to practise on. Although there might not be a direct link to Al-Quida, Saddam has sponsered other terrorist groups before.

 



You know, I'm sure there were more than a few people in Britian who didn't think Britian should have gotten involved with helping France after the Germans invaded.
Ref: I want a nice clean game
player: but it's paintball!
Back to Top
cadet_sergeant View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
More power to deflector shields, Scotty!

Joined: 23 November 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2538
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote cadet_sergeant Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 11:24am
Originally posted by goodsmitty goodsmitty wrote:

Seems to me like nearly every post regarding troops on this forum is from the angle that they:

  • want to give Iraqis freedom
  • believe in the mission of disarming Iraq
  • believe in dethroning Saddam
  • stand by their commander in chief unquestioningly

Since the letter comes from a grunt in an elite airborne unit, I would say he and his buddies are a pretty good sample of the military. I actually don't know a single soldier that has come home and said that we are improving Iraq, improving Iraqi's lives, or believe in the mission. So who exactly is for this war? In my experience:

  • Those who don't have to face the danger themselves
  • Those who value supporting GW after he got everything wrong over holding him responsible and bringing the soldiers (who aren't responsible) home.
  • Those religious fundies who think we got God on our side (the same argument of the al-Qaeda, BTW).
  • Those who still think that Hans Blix, Richard Clarke, and Joseph Wilson were wrong, and there really was an Iraqi link to 9/11, al-Qaeda, or a WMD arsenal.

 

i have a friend with the 2nd ranger battalion he's been over for a total of 9 months. he's said it is a currupt (sp) place but I believe its because of the government it had.



Edited by cadet_sergeant
Back to Top
Justice View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Sexual slurs 5/2

Joined: 20 March 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4454
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Justice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 11:33am
OMG yeah lets let Sadam back in as dictaitor so he can continue with his genocide and plans on nuking our city's.

-JUSTICE
Outkast Myspace
Back to Top
ShortyBP View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

A G F Y

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5034
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ShortyBP Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 11:37am
Originally posted by .Ryan .Ryan wrote:

BUT we can't just leave. I really believe that we need to finish the job over there. If we leave we will be letting AQ win. The thing is, this war wasn't about the WoT, but now it is. Now, in order to do any good at all in the WoT, we have to win this thing.

Sorry for butchering your quote... but the phrases above pretty much reflect the sentiment of those soldiers and sailors I know who have been there, but were against the war (not counting those who were not against). Regardless as to why we went, or whether it was right... the one thing they have all agreed on is that now that we're in... you can't just leave it unfinished. I haven't met one person who has told me that everyone should be sent home right now.

I truly hate to think of it this way... but WoT has to be fought somewhere. Did it need to be fought in Iraq? Perhaps not. But if not Iraq, it'd be somewhere else. Probably more attacks on our own soil. Expanded in Afghanistan. Expanded in the Philippines/Indonesia. Expanded in Africa. Unfortunately, there is no real option to not fight. Wish there were. Fight the battle where it takes you... happened to be Iraq this time around. Have no doubts... even when the fighting is done in Iraq... the fight will bring us somewhere else. And the soldiers won't want to be there, either.

Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 11:48am

Originally posted by ShortyBP ShortyBP wrote:

... but WoT has to be fought somewhere. ... there is no real option to not fight.

I'm thinking we are too focused on the literal concept of "fighting".  This leads to simplistic concepts like "fight here or fight there".

Terrorism (or, more to the point, militaristic fundamentalist Islam), is a set of beliefs.  You can't fight beliefs with guns.  The guns may help keep the fanatics at bay, but you cannot kill a belief with a gun.  We are not merely fighting terrorists - we are fighting their worldview.  And that worldview will not die just because we kill a bunch of terrorists.

My concern is not so much with the war in Iraq (which I overall think is a good idea), but with the apparent lack of a legitimate attack on the underlying beliefs.  Established democracies in Iraq and Afghanistan might dent the fundamentalists (which is principally why I support the war), but putting all our eggs in that basket seems a little optimistic.

Bush was right that we need to win the "hearts and minds" of Iraqis and other middle-Eastern muslims - but so far that seems more of a slogan than an actual plan.

We can keep sending more guns to Iraq - and if we don't implement a meaningful "hearts and minds" strategy, we may have to.

Back to Top
goodsmitty View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Childish Insults 3/3

Joined: 13 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 635
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote goodsmitty Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 11:49am

Originally posted by ShortyBP ShortyBP wrote:



I truly hate to think of it this way... but WoT has to be fought somewhere. Did it need to be fought in Iraq? Perhaps not. But if not Iraq, it'd be somewhere else. Probably more attacks on our own soil. Expanded in Afghanistan. Expanded in the Philippines/Indonesia. Expanded in Africa. Unfortunately, there is no real option to not fight. Wish there were. Fight the battle where it takes you... happened to be Iraq this time around. Have no doubts... even when the fighting is done in Iraq... the fight will bring us somewhere else. And the soldiers won't want to be there, either.

I don't think we should be fighting a form of combat at all. We should be fighting an enemy, not an ideology. We would never be having this conversation if we had stayed in Afghanistan and got the job done, focusing on an enemy-the Taliban who harbored al Qaeda, who were responsible for 9/11. Instead we are fighting a nebulous ideal that has us in a country that has nothing to do with 9/11. So you tell me why we need to fight "TURROR".

"Reading this thread, I'm sad to say that the only difference between the average American and the average Taliban is economic status."
-Zesty

Back to Top
usafpilot07 View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
FreeEnterprise's #1 Fan & Potty Mouth

Joined: 31 August 2004
Location: Tokelau
Status: Offline
Points: 4626
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote usafpilot07 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 11:59am
Originally posted by goodsmitty goodsmitty wrote:

Originally posted by ShortyBP ShortyBP wrote:



I truly hate to think of it this way... but WoT has to be fought somewhere. Did it need to be fought in Iraq? Perhaps not. But if not Iraq, it'd be somewhere else. Probably more attacks on our own soil. Expanded in Afghanistan. Expanded in the Philippines/Indonesia. Expanded in Africa. Unfortunately, there is no real option to not fight. Wish there were. Fight the battle where it takes you... happened to be Iraq this time around. Have no doubts... even when the fighting is done in Iraq... the fight will bring us somewhere else. And the soldiers won't want to be there, either.

I don't think we should be fighting a form of combat at all. We should be fighting an enemy, not an ideology. We would never be having this conversation if we had stayed in Afghanistan and got the job done, focusing on an enemy-the Taliban who harbored al Qaeda, who were responsible for 9/11. Instead we are fighting a nebulous ideal that has us in a country that has nothing to do with 9/11. So you tell me why we need to fight "TURROR".



You can't draw a line between "enemy" and "idealogy" beacuse they wouldn't be OUR enemy if their(Arabic Fundamentalists/Radicalists) ideas and opinions of the world did not support the destruction of our entire religion/country(whichever applies to the group they are trying to extinguish)  I'm sure there were people who felt that the Nazi's were entitled to their own ideals too.


Edited by usafpilot07
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

Crazy old guy

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6725
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 October 2005 at 12:22pm
My question to those who do not see the reasons for fighting the terror networks logistical and support base.

In the 20th Century several "political ideals" developed, Soviet Russia, Fasist Italy, National Socialist Germany, Imperial Japan, each waged war either hot or cold during its history, against America vowing its destruction and the destruction of what America stands for. Wars are fought for or against an ideaology, and have been, only prior to rhis war we could identify the idea with a certian nation state.
Now we fight an idea with no national boundry.

How many proxy wars were fought with the Soviet Union/ Communist China, Korea, Vietnam, Nicaragua, Honduras, Grenada, each for a reason, each leading to the final political destruction of the primary antagonist (Soviet Union)without having to fight the Soviets either in Soviet Russia, Europe, or here. Each war many questioned at the time, led to the result America and most of the world desired, the political destruction of Soviet Communisum, and those Soviet Sattilite States within Eastarn Europe.

Each time, as we went to war against the ideology of Italy, Germany X2 , Japan, many questioned the reasoning and why we needed to again fight a war against someone who at the time was no direct threat to American soil. Even today with the intelligence and documentation of pre Dec 1941, was FDR holding back from his military commanders, wanting Japan to attack, provoking an attack by his Japan foriegn policy, history will reveal more in time as it has on FDR, then current retoric on this war from polititians with set agendas.

Wars against a idea is a new concept, requiring a new way of bringing the fight to the idea. Putting our head in the sand, appeasing those who wish us harm, will only last till, we stand alone against a threat that today we see as limited.

Look at what the recent Isreali appeasement of Palestine got them. Isreal conceded and returned the west bank to the Palestinians, forceably removed Isreali settlements, all for a promise of Peace from the Palestinians and other extemists groups. And what was the result, the Palestinians and terror groups said, we got this, now lets get the rest, and the fighting continues. Now Iran declears that the destruction of the Isreali State is thier goal, yep appeasement and ignoring problems will allways lead to
"Peace in our time".

Instead of giving us all the reasons why we are doing it wrong, give us the way to do it "right", that is the question?

Edited by oldsoldier
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.04
Copyright ©2001-2021 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.344 seconds.