The Madness of Nuclear Warfare, Alive and Well in America
(Here’s my latest for TomDispatch.com; If you haven’t subscribed, you should!)
Hey, cheer up because it truly is a beauty! I’m talking about this country’s latest “stealth bomber,” the B-21 Raider, just revealed by Northrop Grumman, the company that makes it, in all its glory. With its striking bat-winged shape and its ability to deliver a very big bang (as in nuclear weapons), it’s our very own “bomber of the future.” As Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin put it at its explosive debut, it will “fortify America’s ability to deter aggression, today and into the future.” Now, that truly makes me proud to be an American.
And while you’re at it, on this MAD (as in mutually assured destruction) world of ours, let that scene, that peculiar form of madness, involving the potential end of everything on Planet Earth, sink in. As a retired Air Force officer, it reminded me all too vividly of my former service and brought to mind the old motto of the Strategic Air Command(SAC), “Peace Is Our Profession.” Headed in its proudest years by the notorious General Curtis LeMay, it promised “peace” via the threat of the total nuclear annihilation of America’s enemies.
SAC long controlled two “legs” of this country’s nuclear triad: its land-based bombers and intercontinental ballistic missiles, or ICBMs. During the Cold War, those Titans, Minutemen, and MX “Peacekeepers” were kept on constant alert, ready to pulverize much of the planet at a moment’s notice. It didn’t matter that this country was likely to be pulverized, too, in any war with the Soviet Union. What mattered was remaining atop the nuclear pile. A concomitant benefit was keeping conventional wars from spinning out of control by threatening the nuclear option or, as was said at the time, “going nuclear.” (In the age of Biden, it’s “Armageddon.”)
Luckily, since the atomic destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, the world hasn’t gone nuclear again and yet this country’s military continues, with the help of weapons makers like Northrop Grumman, to hustle down that very path to Armageddon. Once upon a time, the absurdity of all this was captured by Stanley Kubrick’s masterpiece, the satirical 1964 film Dr. Strangelove, which featured a “war room” in which there was no fighting, even as its occupants oversaw a nuclear doomsday. Sadly enough, that movie still seems eerily relevant nearly 60 years later in a world lacking the Soviet Union, where the threat of nuclear war nonetheless looms ever larger. What gives?
The short answer is that America’s leaders, like their counterparts in Russia and China, seem to have a collective death wish, a shared willingness to embrace the most violent and catastrophic weapons in the name of peace.
Nuclear Bombers and ICBMs Return!
There’s nothing magical about the nuclear triad. It’s not the Holy “Trinity,” as a congressman from Florida said long ago. Even so, it’s worshipped by the U.S. military in its own all-too-expensive fashion. America’s triad consists of bombers capable of carrying nuclear weapons (B-52s, B-1s, B-2s, and someday B-21s), those land-based ICBMs, and that most survivable “leg,” the U.S. Navy’s Trident-missile-firing submarines. No other country has a triad quite as impressive (if that’s the word for it), nor is any other country planning to spend up to $2 trillion over the next three decades “modernizing” it. The Air Force, of course, controls the first two legs of that triad and isn’t about to give them up just because they’re redundant to America’s “defense” (given those submarines), while constituting a threat to life on this planet.
Recently, when the Air Force unveiled that B-21 Raider, its latest nuclear-capable bomber, we learned that it looks much like its predecessor, the B-2 Spirit, with its bat-like shape (known as a “flying wing” design) driven by stealth or the avoidance of radar detection. The Air Force plans to buy “at least” 100 of those planes at a projected cost of roughly $750 million each. Count on one thing, though: with the inevitable delays and cost overruns associated with any high-tech military project these days, the flyaway cost will likely exceed $1 billion per plane, or at least $100 billion of your taxpayer dollars (and possibly even $200 billion).
Four years ago, when I first wrote about the B-21, its estimated cost was $550 million per plane, but you know the story, right? The F-35 was supposed to be a low-cost, multi-role fighter jet. A generation later, by the Air Force’s own admission, it’s now a staggeringly expensive “Ferrari” of a plane, sexy in appearance but laden with flaws. Naturally, the B-21 is advertised as a multi-role bomber that can carry “conventional” or non-nuclear munitions as well as thermonuclear ones, but its main reason for being is its alleged ability to put nuclear bombs on target, even without Slim Pickens (“Major Kong” in Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove) riding down on one of them.
The main arguments for expensive nuclear bombers are that they can be launched as a show of resolve but also, unlike missiles, recalled, if necessary. (Or so we hope anyway.) They have a “man in the loop” for greater targeting flexibility and so complicate the enemy’s defensive planning. Such arguments may have made some sense in the 1950s and early 1960s, before ICBMs and their sub-launched equivalents were fully mature technologies, but they’re stuff and nonsense today. If nuclear-capable nations like Russia and China aren’t already deterred by the hundreds of missiles with thousands of highly accurate nuclear warheads in America’s possession, they’re not about to be deterred by a few dozen, or even 100, new B-21 stealth bombers, no matter the recent Hollywood-style hype about them.
Yet logic couldn’t matter less here. What matters is that the Air Force has had nuclear-capable bombers since those first modified B-29s that dropped Little Boy and Fat Man on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the generals are simply not about to give them up — ever. Meanwhile, building any sophisticated weapons system like the B-21 is sure to employ tens of thousands of workers. (There are already 400 parts suppliersfor the B-21 scattered across 40 states to ensure the undying love of the most congressional representatives imaginable.) It’s also a boondoggle for America’s many merchants of death, especially the lead contractor, Northrop Grumman.
A reader at my Bracing Views Substack, a Vietnam veteran, nailed it when he described his own reaction to the B-21’s unveiling:
“What struck me in my heart (fortunately, I have a great pacemaker) was the self-assured, almost condescending demeanor of the Secretary [of Defense], the Hollywood staging and lighting, and the complete absence of consideration of what cognitive/emotional/moral injuries might be inflicted on the viewer, never mind experiencing exposure to the actual bomber and its payload — add in the incredible cost and use of taxpayer money for a machine and support system that can never actually be used, or if used, would produce incalculable destruction of people and planet; again, never mind how all that could have been used to start making America into a functioning social democracy instead of a declining, tottering empire.”
Social democracy? Perish the thought. The U.S. economy is propped up by a militarized Keynesianism tightly embraced by Congress and whatever administration is in the White House. So, no matter how unnecessary those bombers may be, no matter how their costs spiral ever upwards, they’re likely to endure. Look for them flying over a sports stadium near you, perhaps in 2030 — if, that is, we’re still alive as a species.
As the Air Force buys new stealth bombers with your tax dollars, they also plan to purchase a new generation of ICBMs, or a “ground-based strategic deterrent” in Newspeak, to plant in missile silos in garden spots like rural Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Wyoming. The Air Force has had ICBMs since the 1960s. Roughly 1,000 of them (though that service initially requested 10,000) were kept on high alert well into the 1980s. Today’s ICBM force is smaller, but ever more expensive to maintain due to its age. It’s also redundant, thanks to the Navy’s more elusive and survivable nuclear deterrent. But, again, logic doesn’t matter here. Whether needed or not, the Air Force wants those new land-based missiles just like those stealth bombers and Congress is all too willing to fund them in your name.
Ka-ching! But hopefully not ka-boom!
Just as the purchase price for the B-21 project is expected to start at $100 billion (but will likely far exceed that), the new ICBMs, known as Sentinels, are also estimated to cost $100 billion. It brings to mind an old saying (slightly updated): a hundred billion here, a hundred billion there, and pretty soon you’re talking real money. In a case of egregious double-dipping, Northrop Grumman is once again the lead contractor, having recently opened a $1.4 billion facility to design the new missile in Colorado Springs, conveniently close to the Air Force Academy and various other Air and Space Force facilities. Location, location, location!
Why such nuclear folly? The usual reasons, of course. Building genocidal missiles creates jobs. It’s a boon and a half for the industrial part of the military-industrial-congressional complex. It’s considered “healthy” for the communities where those missiles will be located, rural areas that would suffer economically if the Air Force bases there were instead dismantled or decommissioned. For that service, shiny new ICBMs are a budget bonanza, while helping to ensure that the real “enemy” — and yes, I have the U.S. Navy in mind — won’t end up with a monopoly on world-ending weaponry.
In the coming decades, expect those “Sentinels” to be planted in fields far from where most Americans live under the guiding principle that, if we keep them out of sight, they’ll be out of mind as well. Yet I can’t help but think that this country’s military is out of its mind in “planting” them there when the only harvest can be of mass death.
It’s a MAD Old World
As MAD magazine’s Alfred E. Neuman would undoubtedly have said, “What, me worry?”
Oh, MAD old world that has such nukes in it! Color me astonished, in fact, that America’s nuclear weapons mix hasn’t changed much since the 1960s. That sort of world-ending persistence should tell us something, but what exactly? For one thing, that not enough of us can imagine a brave new world without genocidal nuclear weapons in it.
In 1986, President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev actually did so. They came close, in fact, to reaching a deal to eliminate nuclear weapons. Sadly, Reagan proved reluctant to abandon his dream of a nuclear space shield, then popularly known as “Star Wars” or, more formally, as the Strategic Defense Initiative. Since Reagan, sadly enough, U.S. presidents have stayed the course on nukes. Most disappointingly, the Nobel Prize-winning Barack Obama spoke of eliminating them, supported by former Cold War stalwarts like Henry Kissinger and George Schultz, only to abandon that goal, partly to solidify support in the Senate for a nuclear deal with Iran that, no less sadly, is itself pretty much dead and buried today.
If saintly Reagan and saintly Obama couldn’t do it, what hope do ordinary Americans have of ending our nuclear MADness? Well, to quote a real saint, Catholic peace activist Dorothy Day, “Our problems stem from our acceptance of this filthy, rotten system.” It’s hard to think of a system more filthy or rotten than one that threatens to destroy most life on our planet, so that this country could in some fashion “win” World War III.
Win what, exactly? A burnt cinder of a planet?
Look, I’ve known airmen who’ve piloted nuclear bombers. I’ve known missileersresponsible for warheads that could kill millions (if ever launched). My brother guarded ICBM silos when he was a security policeman in SAC. I sat in the Air Force’s missile-warning center at Cheyenne Mountain under 2,000 feet of solid granite as we ran computerized war games that ended in… yep, mutually assured destruction. We were, at least individually, not insane. We were doing our duty, following orders, preparing for the worst, while (most of us, anyway) hoping for the best.
A word of advice: don’t look for those within this nightmarish system to change it, not when our elected representatives are part of the very military-industrial complex that sustains this MADness. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry, with real freedom, could act to do so for the benefit of humanity. But will we ever do that?
“We’re going backwards as a country,” my wife reminds me — and I fear that she’s right. She summarized the hoopla at the B-21’s recent unveiling this way: “Let’s go gaga over a mass-murder machine.”
Collectively, it seems that we may be on the verge of returning to a nightmarish past, where we lived in fear of a nuclear war that would kill us all, the tall and the small, and especially the smallest among us, our children, who really are our future.
My fear: that we’ve already become comfortably numb to it and no longer can take on that culture of mass death. I say this with great sadness, as an American citizen and a human being.
No matter. At least a few of us will have profited from building new ultra-expensive stealth bombers and shiny new missiles, while ensuring that mushroom clouds remain somewhere in our collective future. Isn’t that what life is truly all about?
Copyright 2022 William J. Astore
9 thoughts on “Peace Is Not Our Profession”
One of the Best of all your writing, Bill. Getting hard core aiming right to the crux of the matter.
Take the news the US will be sending Patriot missile systems to Ukraine.
Even if they’re older systems, the US Taxpayer will be on the hook for their immediate replacement with newer, more expensive systems from the US Weapons Industries.
A Patriot missile battery usually has about 90 U.S. soldiers attached to it. Each system includes a phased array radar, a control station, and eight launchers, each of which can hold four missiles.” Experts said it would “take months to train the Ukrainian military how to operate the system.”
For all the talk of Russia buying the dreaded drones from Iran, maybe they bought the plans, but is mass producing them in Russia? I’ve read often they only cost about $20,000 each to produce and maybe less if Russia mass produces them during the Winter months.
Each Patriot missile system has 32 missiles, and each missile costs over $1MILLION to replace.
Russia could launch 100 cheap drones simultaneously for $200,000, overwhelming the Patriots.
That’s what happened during the May 2021 Israeli WAR against the Israeli controlled Gaza Ghetto/open air prison for 2,000,000 Palestinians.
Around 4,360 Palestinian rockets were fired towards Israel, of which 680 landed within the Gaza Strip, and over 90 percent of rockets bound towards populated areas were intercepted by Israel’s Iron Dome.
Each missile cost up to $100,000 and Israel used a lot of them.
The US House in a standalone vote on the supplemental Iron Dome funding, passed it overwhelmingly by a vote of 420-9 The Senate approved it 68-31.
That was supplemental to the $3.5 BILLION gets from the US Taxpayer every year.
What we’ve been shown about the Patriot missile system is, they are so big, cumbersome and super sensitive, there is no quick way to pack up and move on. Russia will take each one out within 50 miles on Ukraine soil on whatever road they take.
I can see no logical Military use for them in Ukraine, other than to funnel more money to the US Military-Industrial Congressional Complex System.
They get so much more, increased Taxpayer funded with borrowed money, Business off this WAR, than the Russian Oligarchs having their wealth seized.
Please ask your wife what she thinks of this, even though I’m still working on it.
Click to access workable-moral-peace.pdf
She took a quick look. She strongly favors the emphasis on peace; also on the challenge to the U.S. to take the lead here. If only! Because peace is a concept out of favor here, and it seems the U.S. only wants to lead in war.
From Civil War veteran Ambrose Bierce’s Devil’s Dictionary:
“Peace. n. A period of cheating between two periods of fighting.”
Think especially here of former German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s recent admission that the “Western” guarantors of the Minsk “peace” Agreements of 20214-2015 never intended to enforce them but only use them as a way to buy time for the U.S.-installed Kiev Regime to recover from its battlefield losses and build back up for another go at fighting Russia in the former Ukraine’s eastern provinces. When peace does again break out in what remains of the former Ukraine — along the model of Japan and Germany in 1945 — the Russians can look forward to another period of cheating by the Consolidated Waste until it can get another period of fighting started somewhere, anywhere, whenever . . .
The US Congress at US Taxpayer expense, approved $1,000,000,000 in supplemental spending to replace the missiles Israel used in that 2021 WAR.
One Israeli Soldier was killed along with 14 Civilians. 256 Palestinians were killed.
‘Celebrities Remind Us the Ukraine War Is Still Being Waged’
On the menu today: Hey, remember Ukraine? The task of reminding Americans that the largest land war in Europe since World War II is still going on has fallen to celebrities like David Letterman and Rachael Ray, who both recently traveled to Ukraine. Meanwhile, a little more than a year after the Ukrainian defense minister asked the U.S. for Patriot missile batteries, the Biden team is almost ready to approve sending some. Don’t worry about that move being perceived as an escalation in Moscow . . . worry about the proposed plan to send Ukraine equipment to turn their missiles into “smart bombs.”
as RJC asseverates, this is the most inspiring contribution your eloquent writer’s pen has propined us, WJA. thank you for this… my crepuscular hour of caffeine/BV’s energizings.
‘mutually assured destruction’… you have to love and embrace that phrase. one is likely to conclude we are a suicidal species; perhaps we are. after all, that is what all ‘life’ forms are here to implement… videlicet, the relentless, inexorable propulsion of DNA/RNA’s evolutionary dynamics toward re-inventing themselves, in ever-amplifying, heuristic manifestations [plaudits to richard dawkins].
a divaricating perspective here, WJA: our species has no special status. we too are but mere vessels for the inevitability of cyclical creation/destruction impulsions, toward which the finish line is unknown, save the re-configuration of biochemical signatures.
recall that 99% of all species who have ever existed on this tiny blue dot are extinct. only the simplest of us, our microbial progenitors, remain extant. ‘Homo sapien sapiens’ will be no exception. howsomever, unlike most other species, we will be the implementers of our own demise. perhaps that’s what makes us ‘special’; unlike other eusocial species, we are a selcouth singularity in that regard. the MICC will help accelerate that evolutionary dynamic, which is long overdue. i declare this, despite my own conative and irresponsible contribution of 7 bairns toward that end.
“A thing is not necessarily true because a man dies for it.”
“Stuffing the ears of men with false reports. I speak of peace, while covert enmity under the smile of safety wounds the world.”
“Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.”
“The power structure wishes us to believe that the only options available are those which they present to us, we know this is simply not true.”
“Government is a disease masquerading as its own cure.”
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”
A potpourri in Information Clearing House this morning.
‘Dancing on the Edge of Hell’
Two dogs walking. One of them says to the other: “I bark and I bark, but I never feel like I affect real change.”
This is the caption of a New Yorker cartoon by Christopher Weyant from several years ago. It keeps popping up in my head — I mean, every day. Like everyone else, I want what I do to matter, to “effect real change.” What I do is write. Specifically, I swim in the infinity of possibility. Humanity can kill itself or it can learn to survive. Most people (I believe) prefer the latter, which is all about discovering how we are connected to one another and to the rest of the universe. This is what I try to write about.
‘The Americans Started the US War with Russia’
The ongoing US war against Russia has elevated American-allied Nazis to the international stage as ‘freedom fighters,’ resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of Ukrainian civilians, raised the risk of nuclear war, ended any effective international cooperation on environmental issues through rekindling energy geopolitics, assured Europe of one or more Great Depression type winters with limited heating fuel, and more probably than not will soon produce the total annihilation of Ukraine as a modern state by the Russians.
The ‘American view’ towards the war, informed domestically by an absence of the political violence that the US so regularly visits upon innocents around the globe, rank ideology, state propaganda, ignorance of world history, and the narrow economic interests of American oligarchs, imagines that it is fighting Frankenstein’s monster when it is that monster. What is the strategic interest of Ukraine to the US? More importantly, is it worth a potentially world-ending war?
‘Ukraine – Revenge for Russia’s Defeat of U.S. Regime Change in Syria’
Richard Black is a former Senator for Virginia state and a former top Pentagon insider. He explains in this interview with Finian Cunningham how the current war in Ukraine is a proxy war against Russia led by the United States and how that conflict is motivated in part by a desire in Washington for revenge. The impetus for revenge stems from Russia’s military intervention in Syria at the end of 2015 where, crucially, the Russian military thwarted Washington’s covert war for regime change in Damascus.
US troops are still illegally occupying parts of Syria – up to a third of its territory – but the defeat of America and NATO’s regime-change plan in Syria by Russia was an unforgivable setback for US imperial ambitions in the Middle East. Hence the determination of the US to make Russia pay through a war of attrition in Ukraine – right on Russia’s doorstep.
TIME FOR ANOTHER TEA PARTY?
Two hundred and forty-nine years ago today, on December 16, 1773, the “Sons of Liberty” ~ Massachusetts Colonists disguised as Mohawk Indians ~ boarded three British tea ships and dumped 340 chests of tea into Boston Harbor…:
“340 chests of British East India Company tea, weighing over 92,000 pounds (roughly 46 tons), onboard the Beaver, Dartmouth, and Eleanor were smashed open with axes and dumped into Boston Harbor the night of December 16, 1773. THE DAMAGE THE SONS OF LIBERTY CAUSED BY DESTROYING 340 CHESTS OF TEA, IN TODAY’S MONEY, WAS WORTH MORE THAN $1,700,000 DOLLARS.
“The British East India Company reported £9,659 worth of damage caused by the Boston Tea Party. According to some modern estimates, the destroyed tea could have brewed 18,523,000 cups of tea! The destruction of the tea was a very costly blow to the British. Besides the destruction of the tea, HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS RECORD NO DAMAGE WAS DONE TO ANY OF THE THREE SHIPS, THE CREW OR ANY OTHER ITEMS ONBOARD THE SHIPS EXCEPT FOR ONE BROKEN PADLOCK. THE PADLOCK WAS THE PERSONAL PROPERTY OF ONE OF THE SHIPS’ CAPTAINS AND WAS PROMPTLY REPLACED THE NEXT DAY BY THE PATRIOTS.
“Great care was taken by the Sons of Liberty to avoid the destruction of personal property – save for the cargo of British East India Company tea. Nothing was stolen or looted from the ships, not even the tea. One participant tried to steal some tea but was reprimanded and stopped. The Sons of Liberty were very careful about how the action was carried out and made sure nothing besides the tea was damaged. AFTER THE DESTRUCTION OF THE TEA, THE PARTICIPANTS SWEPT THE DECKS OF THE SHIPS CLEAN, AND ANYTHING THAT WAS MOVED WAS PUT BACK IN ITS PROPER PLACE. THE CREWS OF THE SHIPS ATTESTED TO THE FACT THERE HAD BEEN NO DAMAGE TO ANY OF THE SHIPS EXCEPT FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF THEIR CARGOES OF TEA.” [ https://www.bostonteapartyship.com/boston-tea-party-damage ; EMPHASIS added.]
Nine hundred and thirty-one  days later, on July 4, 1776, the American Colonies declared their independence, and launched their War of Secession from the British Empire. [Note that it was a War of Secession, and not a Revolution. The Colonists did not attack London with the intent of overthrowing the King and taking over his Empire. All they wanted was for the King’s governors, tax and duty collectors, and especially his soldiers to get the hell out of the Colonies.]
Nine hundred and thirty-one days from today, December 16, 2022, is July 4, 2025; exactly one year before the 250th anniversary of that Declaration of Independence and Secession. Which raises a Question:
Given the simple, stark, obvious [albeit painful] reality that the United States of America is today, has been for a long, long time, and shows no indication of stopping being:
a Bankrupt Debtor State;
an Imperialist Warfare State;
a Redistributionist Welfare State;
a Secrecy/Surveillance/Security/proto-Police State;
an Autocratic/Oligarchic/Plutocratic Deep State;
a Failing or at best Flailing State and Empire;
an Overshoot State; and, perhaps most importantly,
a People and Nation no longer merely “divided,” but fractured ~ even to the point of disintegration ~ in ways not seen in more than 160 years, since the eve of what may end up being merely the First American Civil War….
Given all that, the Question posed is: What will the United States of America ~ this people, this land, this country, this nation, and above all, this government ~ what will the USA actually, really BE 931 days from now?
Another, blunter way of putting the Question is: Will the United States of America ~ this people, land, country, nation, and above all, this government; will the USA, as it now exists, operates, functions, and in fact now is ~ will this USA survive over these next 931 days all the way up to July 4, 2025? And if it does, will it be in any condition or mood to even be thinking about celebrating its 250th birthday one year later?
These eight “States” are the state of the United States of America today. They constitute flashing, warning signal beacons showing the direction in which America’s collision course with reality is headed. And they give only passing reference to the impact that changing weather and climate patterns will have and are already having on this nation’s infrastructure, economy, society, and security.
Those who would dismiss as implausible and impossible the demise of the United States in less than four years are invited to consider the year 1987, and how things were going back then at the Berlin Wall, around the Warsaw Bloc, and in the USSR itself. And then remember how things had changed there four years later by the end of 1991, starting with the fall of that Wall in 1989.
In light of all this, again the Question isn’t so much Will the United States survive to celebrate #USA-CCL!!!, but Can it? And if it does survive, will it be in any condition ~ or have any desire ~ to celebrate anything? And, finally: If it is to survive, How?
What is the Alternative and the Antidote to these eight Existential Threats to the uniquely American Experiment with Constitutionally-limited, democratically-elected representative government under a Rule of Law, before which all Human Beings are “created equal and treated equally”? [That all Human Beings were NOT treated equally from the very beginning of that Experiment is one of the seeds of a major reason for its being in very real danger of unraveling completely today.]
What changes to the American system of national government and governance ~ and the relationship of that government to the national economy, to subordinate governments, and to civil society ~ what changes need to happen to bring that Experiment back from the edge of total failure?
That is the question that a critical mass of Americans needs to start asking themselves and each other while the opportunity to do so still exists. But first, they must recognize, realize, acknowledge, and accept the fact that that Experiment is frighteningly close to collapsing into chaos, and then into its only available alternative and antidote, tyranny. And then they have to commit to actually, really doing something about it.
And then all they have to do is figure out What, When, Where, How, and Who. At which point the strategic planning process can proceed.
Jeffrey G Moebus
Master Sergeant, US Army [Retired]
Veterans Against War [Sitka Platoon]
Comments are closed.