top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 81 points 11 months ago (29 children)
  • [–] 53 points 11 months ago (28 children)

    Thanks.

    Iranian law stipulates that 85 percent of domestic food be produced locally, Morad Kaviani, professor of geography and hydropolitics at Iran’s Kharazmi University, told state television last week.

    However, he added, Iran does not have the water and soil capacities, and nearly 30 percent of agricultural produce is wasted due to a lack of infrastructure, outdated irrigation practices and misguided crop selection.

    Sounds like one of the biggest root disasters, eh?

    So, this situation may only slightly be related to AGCC, but it does seem ominous in painting a certain picture of the future. I wonder if and when Russia and China step in, here...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago

    Protip; first time you use an acronym, parse it, and then you can continue referring to it with the abbreviation.

    ROFL (rolling on the floor laughing) as an example could be used to denote something that was, to the receiver, funnier than LOL (laughing out loud)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (18 children)
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (17 children)

    Anthropomorphic, global climate change.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 11 months ago (9 children)

    Holy shit, what made you think anyone will understand that abbreviation?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    I don't know... I'd never seen the acronym before, but it seemed fairly obvious in context... (as Anthropogenic Global Climate Change, obviously), especially given that “global warming” seems to be falling out of use due to it being at the same time too specific and not enough...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 11 months ago (7 children)

    Er, well... it's now year 2025, AGCC has been scientifically documented and publicly talked about for decades, and is now arguably the biggest existential threat to humanity?

    You know... as seen in increasingly dangerous storm systems year after year, rising global temps year after year, more wildfires, more droughts, rising ocean acidification, rising difficulty growing crops, the holocene extinction accelerating... things like that? All are directly impacted by AGCC, to name a few.

    Getting harder and harder to live under a rock, tell you hwat.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    I'm not questioning how real anthropogenic global climate change is. I'm questioning your decision of using just the initials assuming everyone understand automatically.

    When I googled "AGCC meaning" the suggestions were:

    AGenesis of the Corpus Callosum
    Alderney Gambling Control Commission
    Arab Gulf Cooperation Council
    Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce Action for a Global Climate Community
    Agencia Comercial Spirits ltd (AGCC)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    I didn't assume. People are going to understand and misunderstand terms no matter what acronym or definition is used, like CC or GCC. Or they'll deny, get it twisted, whatever. Or ask a curious followup, as you did.

    When I googled “AGCC meaning” the suggestions were:

    Well, context is king. If you asked what it meant within that sentence, then it might be able to narrow things down better. We all do this all the time, of course.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    To avoid misunderstandings wouldn't be better to use the actual words instead of acronyms?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -3 points 11 months ago

    For the reader, I would think mostly "yes."

    For the writer, I recall him being focused moreso on the main thought he wanted to express. And his thoughts have been pretty scattered indeed these days, focus harder to come by...

    Anyway, I think that's enough of all that. Ciao!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Not OP - I've been exposed to Climate Change news to the point of possible depression but I've never seen the concept referred to as AGCC before too

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    One way that serves a purpose is in making it clear that this isn't just some natural variance going on, for example in taking on the hand-wavers who like to say 'oh, it all goes in cycles; nothing to worry about!'

    So GCC sometimes gets appended with an "A" for "anthropomorphic" to make it crystal clear that (just like the Holocene Extinction) it's largely (or wholly) man-made. Personally I tend to fluctuate between terms, mainly based on recency bias and just whatever my naked ape brain happens to settle on. :P

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Does someone have a climate change fursona?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 11 months ago (7 children)

    So US sanctions and hostility basically caused the water crisis because they're forced to maintain food security by growing it at home.. In essentially a desert

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Eh, reading the first article, it sounds like it was even more than that, as in: too much middle-management involved in making key water decisions, too much zeal post-revolution in building new dams, too much waffling and inadequate resoluteness at the leadership levels across several decades.

    In other words, the sanctions were no doubt a major blow, but the real issue seems to be how Iran responded to the blow. Plus a bunch of other stuff on top that didn't help.

    Meanwhile, something I have no idea about is whether Iran's regional allies, plus China & Russia, could have used trade and such to help offset the sanctions in the first place..?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Meanwhile, something I have no idea about is whether Iran’s regional allies, plus China & Russia, could have used trade and such to help offset the sanctions in the first place…?

    They could almost certainly offset it enormously. Rice and beans shipped in from China are unlikely to cost much more than those from the US.

    My bet is that "85% domestic production" threshold is less a result of sanctions, and more either (a) self-imposed isolationism, or (b) protectionist policies designed to empower one or other political faction in the country.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Iran has open trade relations with China, Russia, and Turkey, which all have significant agricultural output. It also does quite a bit of trade with Europe despite sanctions. It does not have to artificially limit itself to importing only 15% of its food, especially given that irrigation is contributing to an unsustainable water crisis.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    Note that just because they have open trade relations with a state doesn't mean they can import whatever they want. It's a Cuba situation; US secondary sanctions target businesses and they're harsh. Water mismanagement is obviously a major cause here, but don't underestimate the effect of Western sanctions on smaller countries.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 121 points 11 months ago (20 children)

    Same thing is happening in Iraq.

    After all the fighting, suffering and genocide in the region, it'll all be for nothing once climate change makes it uninhabitable.

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 11 months ago (18 children)

    If there had been less spent on war they could have built some infrastructure to help with the situation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago* (4 children)

    As the Official British Report On The Iraq War showed, both the Brits and the Americans (more the latter than the former) committed the War Crime of Pillaging by forcing the Iraqi Administration they themselves put in place after conquering the place to give Oil Exploration contracts to British and American companies.

    Saddam (for decades supported by America) was shit and the self proclaimed "Liberators of the Iraqi People" were almost as bad, so that "infinite" money hasn't been for Iraqis in a long time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -14 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (12 children)

    They've had "infinite" free money for decades and have had Norway as a clear example to follow but have chosen to squander it all.

    Edit: I'm not talking about Iran specifically, although I understand the confusion, but the region in general as mentioned in rimus comment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 11 months ago (8 children)

    Gee, I wonder why they didn't use their free money to improve their country. Was it the (at least for a while) US-backed dictator getting US aid and weapons to send young Iraqi men to their deaths? Or was it the US sanctions killing thousands of Iraqi children and impoverishing the rest of the population? Or was it the US invasion plunging their country into over a decade of civil war and instability that continues to this day? I suppose we'll never know!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago (7 children)

    The us invaded every country in the middle east? TIL

    Guess they're never going to be the masters of their own fate, in 200 years they can still blame the us for any shortcomings.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (6 children)

    Iran literally got couped in 1953 after democratically electing a progressive, secular government. The country's oil exports literally got MILITARILY BLOCKED by the British navy, and the USA sponsored mafias to carry out terror attacks and make it seem like it was communists who did it.

    But go ahead, remain ignorant.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    I'm not talking about Iran specifically, although I understand it wasn't very clear in my first comment, but the region in general.

    Besides that, 1953 is quite a few decades ago, will they ever stand on their own feet or will they forever blame the past? Every country has had tragedies but unjust as it may be you have to move forwards

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    So, not talking about Iran in particular in a post about Iran, just handwaving about "the region", shows how much you understand the politics of Iran.

    What happened to Iran isn't an isolated incident a few decades ago. The fact is that as soon as a government tries to rule itself to serve its people instead of western capitalists, it gets couped at best and bombed and invaded at worst. We're seeing it today with Venezuela. The constant threat of invasion, coup and bombing is what makes these governments more repressive than they would be otherwise.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    After all the fighting, suffering and genocide in the region, it'll all be for nothing once climate change makes it uninhabitable.

    I've marked the pertinent word from the original comment in bold so you can spot it easier.

    The government of Venezuela is trying to serve it's people? One of the most corrupt governments in the world? That's your example of a government trying to serve it's people? Pretty funny

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    The government of Venezuela is trying to serve it's people? One of the most corrupt governments in the world?

    Source: Eagle Freedom Burger institute. The US is literally bombing civilians off the coasts of Venezuela, and your main concern with the country is "corruption, as measured by whom exactly. I hate American exceptionalism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    Source: Eagle Freedom Burger institute.

    It's on wikipedia but sure.

    "While corruption is not a new phenomenon in Venezuela, it has dramatically worsened with the Chávez and Maduro regimes. In recent years, Venezuela has been ranked as one of the most corrupt countries globally by international indices, and has played a major role in the economic collapse and broader crisis in Venezuela"

    your main concern with the country is "corruption, as measured by whom exactly

    I'm merely replying to your previous comment, but maybe reading what you're responding to is difficult, much easier to move goalposts

    The fact is that as soon as a government tries to rule itself to serve its people instead of western capitalists

    I've highlighted the pertinent part of your previous comment

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago*

    The sources to your Wikipedia article:

    Transparency International. From the article: "Members in the chat group included chief prosecutor Deltan Dallagnol as well as the head of TI Brazil. The chat group included posts on a "backstage campaign" to "disarm resistance on the left", fund selected candidates, and target others, seen as adversaries, using social media. Plans extended to preparing a series of false accusations ("denúncias sem materialidade") intended to damage the reputation of former president and potential candidate Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva".

    This is exactly what I mean by Freedom Eagle Burger Institute: western institutions with political motives fabricating false information in order to punish leaders in anti-imperialist countries.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 208 points 11 months ago (38 children)

    Minute 1:30, it calls them a "fascist dictatorship"....

    Look, I'm not going to apologize for Iran in any manner. But calling them fascist isn't, its not quite right. Fascism is a form of political identity. It has a specific meaning. The regime in Iran might be terrible, but its not fascist, per se..

    Also the comments on this video are wild.

    This video is hard to suffer through. I'd love to hear a deep dive, but I can't stomach this.

  • source
  • hideshow 38 child comments
  • [–] 133 points 11 months ago (12 children)

    I've never heard of Iran being called fascist. It is a militant theocracy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [+] -10 points 11 months ago (10 children)

    "a populist political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual, that is associated with a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, and that is characterized by severe economic and social regimentation and by forcible suppression of opposition"- merriam webster.

    Autocratic-check Dictatorship-check Economic and social regimentation-check Suppression of opposition-check The only thing missing is nation/race above the individual and arguably their extremist theism could be considered sufficient for this as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    I wish people would read into Mussolinis own words on this. The asshole invented fascism and wanted to call it Corporatism. The US is essentially fascist. Iran is authoritarian.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (7 children)

    "a populist political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual, that is associated with a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, and that is characterized by severe economic and social regimentation and by forcible suppression of opposition"- merriam webster.

    Well Merriam Webster is wrong. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Definitions. Fascism is a pretty complicated class of ideologies, but a characteristic attribute of fascism is always seeking enemies internal and external and "punishing" them and that is simply not present in Iran.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 11 months ago

    fascism is always seeking enemies internal and external and "punishing" them

    1. Morality police definitely not hurting anyone. /s
    2. Iran is not in opposition to western imperialism at all, actually, they are surrounded by friends. /s

    That being said, I don't think I would characterize Iran as fascist.

    If you really want to define fascism, you need to understand how it appears:

    Fascism is a counter-revolutionary reactionary movement led by finance capital and a form of dictatorship of the bourgeoisie which emerged during periods of economic crisis in imperialist countries. In other words, fascism is capitalism in decay.

    Thus many of its characteristics becomes an aesthetic dependant on the specific material conditions and social superstructure of its origins.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    Uh, doesn't Iran's government obsess over Israel and the USA, and people at home who don't follow Sharia?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Iran doesn't "obsess" about the US and Israel; they're geopolitical rivals with the US and Israel. This is like saying Russia or China obsess about the West. As for Sharia, I don't know shit about the Iranian justice system, but theocracy does not equal fascism. These are two completely different things.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Which of those refers to their geopolitical rivals as "great satan"?

    But bringing in Russia is somewhat ironic here. Modern Russia has many fascist traits. Fascism is on the rise...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago* (2 children)

    Which of those refers to their geopolitical rivals as "great satan"?

    If someone does to you what America did to Iran you'd call them Satan too. There's still no basis for the fascism accusation; countries under fascism will do more than call their rivals bad words.

    Modern Russia has many fascist traits.

    Yes, and it's not because they hate America. Russia has everything from violence against minorities and expansionism to literal genocide. Contrast to Iran's somewhat aggressive but restrained foreign policy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Mmm, Iran isn't the only country fucked by the USA, but they are an outstanding example of one that, decades later, still scapegoats the USA for all sorts.

    Yes, and it’s not because they hate America.

    I don't think Russia/Russians hate America. I do think they hate Ukrainians. But this conversation didn't start about hatred; it started about "enemies".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 23 points 11 months ago (10 children)

    Yeah they're a totalitarian theocracy

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] -11 points 11 months ago (9 children)

    Iranians have a more democratic society than any other country you could name in the region.

    What they are is under siege. The eleven day war with Israel crippled their domestic infrastructure. And the ongoing sanctions placed by the US prevented them from rebuilding in a timely manner.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    That's like saying that out of a rhino, a hippo and a horse, the horse is best at flying because it can jump. Iran isn't democratic. It's a single party theocracy that jails or murders it's people for saying mean stuff about the unelected leader that was supposedly chosen by god.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Iran isn’t democratic. It’s a single party theocracy

    I count four major coalitions of parties, and a healthy batch of independents, which is more than can be said of any American, Canadian, or UK government. I don't know how you get "single party" out of that. Hell, the Reformist coalition just took the Presidency a year ago for the first time.

    jails or murders it’s people for saying mean stuff about the unelected leader that was supposedly chosen by god

    You seem to have Iran confused with the US. It's always fucking projection with you guys.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    How fucking disingenuous can you be? Like the number of prties is an indicator if how good you're doing democracy, ignoring the rape, torture, murder, and disappearance of dissidents.

    You should be ashamed to defend such a brutal regime, unless you live there in fear of arbitrary arrest for not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Like the number of prties is an indicator if how good you’re doing democracy

    "Iran only has one party and that's bad"

    "The number of parties doesn't matter, aktuly, and you're stupid if you thought so"

    :-/

    You should be ashamed to defend such a brutal regime

    Wipe the Saudi light sweet crude off your lips before you try to deliver that line in earnest.

    I suspect your definition of "brutal regime" is "they won't let me jerk it to women in bikinis". There's no real concern for Iranians assassinated by the Mossad or bombed by the Americans or starved through international sanctions. Nevermind the native expats hounded by western anti-immigration police or scientists who were kidnapped and tortured or civilians shot out of the sky for no reason at all.

    You only seem to understand "brutality" as a White Man's Burden to resolve. So long as westerners get to exploit the labor and livelihood of a Middle Eastern people, Islamic Despots don't seem to bother you in the slightest.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Nice job not remotely adressing my point, while callously handwaving away rape and diappearances as a tool of governmental control by claiming I support their mildly less authoritarian neighbors. When you feel the need to strawman the shit out of someone, you should know you're talking out of your ass.

    This is the country you are explicitly defending. https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-africa/middle-east/iran/report-iran/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Who elected the Mullahs that have absolute power?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago

    Do you mean the Guardian Council of Islamic Jurists? The populist leaders that lead the revolution against the Shah's military dictatorship in 1979 and retain enormous popularity within Iran's conservative religious community?

    They've got about as much "absolute power" as any unelected SCOTUS judges. The power is entirely derived from the Iranian bureaucracy's loyalty to the Council over the Presidency.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 11 months ago

    As an Italian, I can tell you that I call theocratic regimes whose power is based on individual control and punishment at scale, fascist regimes.

    I know that totalitarian or, in some other cases, authoritarian would be more appropriate, but at least in my culture fascism has been the first and the archetype of all totalitarianisms.

    Not letting Iran enjoy the deserved hate it derives from an even longer history of antifascism would be too big a discount.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    How much of it did you watch? I watched all of it and thought it was very informative, despite a few errors. I don't think they spent too much time on WHY the government is inept, just HOW inept it is. They shit on the current government and the Shah before them so I don't see them playing favorites.

    Iran is pretty fascist-adjacent so it's an easy mistake to make. They hit almost all the notes to play that song.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    I just finished with it and its terrible in this regard. There is no disambiguation between "just the facts" and the author/ narrators political opinions and identity. Not to say those opinions are wrong or invalid but its incredibly important to separate them and to clearly identify which is which, which even the most amateur journalist understands.

    Its the framing that's the problem, and its often what a framing leaves out that ends up being more telling. You might re-watch it with a lens for what is missing rather than what is said, and honestly, its not my job to make the gaps in your political education apparent. Like, if you come away from this video with its explanation of "why" things in Iran are the way that they are, you'll come away wildly miseducated.

    Just because something agrees with your bias, this doesn't make it correct.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 11 months ago

    It's definitely glossing over some stuff, like when it talks about the unwillingness of neighbors to trade with them and chalking it up to "burned bridges", I imagine the aggressive US sanctions they've been under played a big role there.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 11 months ago

    Theocracy, fascist, dictatorship, the difference is fun for political majors to circlejerk about, but at the end of the day, these governments are hell for the populace.

    They torture, imprison and kill people that are different, people that dare dissent.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Fascism is a political buzz word. In some ways it is like communism was back in the cold war.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago

    I don't agree. Calling it a buzzword diminishes the terrible things that are happening in the world. There's really a lot of parallels to the 1930s which is really worrying because the 1930s led to the 1940s.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Since when are we getting so heated debates about fascism? Trump has ICE, and no one discussed if he wasn't facist before that. Learn to see the cues. Elimination of competing political rivals is just one aspect.

    Plus, if we were to look for a definition, might as well take one that accounts for understanding that facist regimes are, beyond all, a process. See for example the text by George Orwell: ‘What is Fascism?’ (1944)

    By ‘Fascism’ they mean, roughly speaking, something cruel, unscrupulous, arrogant, obscurantist, anti-liberal and anti-working-class. Except for the relatively small number of Fascist sympathizers, almost any English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for ‘Fascist’. That is about as near to a definition as this much-abused word has come.

    But Fascism is also a political and economic system. Why, then, cannot we have a clear and generally accepted definition of it? Alas! we shall not get one — not yet, anyway. To say why would take too long, but basically it is because it is impossible to define Fascism satisfactorily without making admissions which neither the Fascists themselves, nor the Conservatives, nor Socialists of any colour, are willing to make. All one can do for the moment is to use the word with a certain amount of circumspection and not, as is usually done, degrade it to the level of a swearword.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    And I wouldn't say the use here is just a swearword. Saying Iran is under a fascist regime should unite us to identify a problem, the suffering of their population. Do not allow semantics to be one another reason why we are fighting among us, the people with radical decency.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -5 points 11 months ago

    Fascism is contantly evolving, thus calling it one is fitting. It's not just swastikas, and some realized they can deflect accusations of fascism with stuff like being "anti-swastika", but only performatively (see Russia for that example).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 11 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 43 points 11 months ago (7 children)

    My first grade teacher swore WW3 would be over clean water.

    Hes been proven more and more right as time goes on.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    That's a pretty heavy topic for a first grade teacher. Meanwhile I wasn't taught about WWII until freshman year of high school.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    GenX has had WW3 hanging over our heads since we could walk. There was a brief respite during the 90s, but that's over now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›