²¨¶àÒ°´²Ï·ÊÓÆµ ѸÀ×ÏÂÔØ ѸÀ×ÏÂÔØ

    1. <form id=UUExFZdPw><nobr id=UUExFZdPw></nobr></form>
      <address id=UUExFZdPw><nobr id=UUExFZdPw><nobr id=UUExFZdPw></nobr></nobr></address>

      *** Voting for the MeFiCoFo Board has begun! ***
      Oct. Site Rebuild Update | 10/5 Board Update | Sept. Site Update


      Why is the US bombing Somalia?
      January 9, 2007 7:19 PM   Subscribe

      Why is the US bombing Somalia? Salim Lone is the former spokesperson for the UN mission in Iraq, and a journalist in Kenya. In an interview he discusses possible reasons for the attacks. The recent history of the country is bloody and the country is beset with poverty, and our own history of involvement there is quite ugly.
      posted by serazin (70 comments total)
       
      Sorry, Salim Lone.
      posted by serazin at 7:20 PM on January 9, 2007


      Oil-related?
      posted by BeerFilter at 7:28 PM on January 9, 2007


      Wtf.
      posted by delmoi at 7:28 PM on January 9, 2007


      "Why is the US bombing Somalia? "

      because we can?

      because the president is an idiot?

      that's all I've got...
      posted by HuronBob at 7:37 PM on January 9, 2007


      I didn't vote for it.
      posted by jaronson at 7:40 PM on January 9, 2007


      "Why is the US bombing Somalia?"

      That's a rhetorical question, right? The obvious answer is "Because the U.S. Government is run by a bunch of murdering bastards, and doubtless some of Bush/Cheney's friends are making money by it." Of course there are details to be filled in, niggling little specifics, but given their past performance the broad outlines are easy to fathom. We might as well ask "Why does a bear shit in the woods?"
      posted by davy at 7:41 PM on January 9, 2007 [2 favorites]


      The far more disturbing question is, why the fuck is the Pentagon crowing about bombing Somalia? If the US wanted to accomplish anything constructive there, I'd assume it would be doing so quietly. Do they actively want the "transitional government" to fail? Or are they just too caught up in back-patting and politicking to actually pay attention?

      (Still weirded out by this: After the battle, Yusuf Daba-Ged proclaimed the town of Bedelweyn was liberated and it was again legal to chew khat. A truck filled with khat arriving the next day, on December 26, was met with a burst of cheers.)
      posted by phooky at 7:44 PM on January 9, 2007 [1 favorite]


      "Somalia? I've heard of it...but nothing's ringing a bell here."

      [opens last link]

      "Ohhh, okay. Somalia."

      /average American
      posted by Terminal Verbosity at 7:55 PM on January 9, 2007


      Can't we do better than this for a FPP? I mean linking to Amy Goodman's interview and IMBD; come on, is there anyone here who doesn't check out DN from time time time? Where's the link to the Somali forums who can shed some local flavor on this? Perhaps we can get a more interesting news source than DN. And raise more interesting questions like is Ethopia trying to build it's own greater horn of africa co-prosperity sphere in the Horn of Africa backed by the USA? Is this about oil, or about Bush's crazy evangelical vision of christian dominance over the world.
      posted by humanfont at 7:56 PM on January 9, 2007 [1 favorite]


      Dasein: we are bombing people who were just one month ago in control of much of Somalia, and many Somalis are very upset with the presence of Ethiopian troops on their soil. US involvement, with or without the support of the transitional government, is not going to contribute to stability.

      I also have no faith in US intelligence in a country where we have no real allies on the ground. "al-Qaeda" seems to be code for "whoever we just bombed".

      but frankly, I don't know enough to be ranting like I am, so I'll crawl back into my hole now.

      On preview: Somalinet's been interesting. And humanfront: I had the same thought. Creepy.
      posted by phooky at 8:02 PM on January 9, 2007


      Dasein: Is this better?

      From CBS News:
      Attack helicopters strafed suspected al-Qaida fighters in southern Somalia on Tuesday, witnesses said, following two days of airstrikes by U.S. forces _ the first U.S. offensives in the African country since 18 American soldiers were killed here in 1993.
      Can't we do better than this for a FPP?

      humanfront: Thank you for your contribution, but was the snark really necessary? At least serazin asked the friggin' question?




      White House spokesman Tony Snow said the US action was a reminder that there was no safe haven for Islamic militants.

      My bullshit detector just went off.
      posted by jaronson at 8:04 PM on January 9, 2007 [1 favorite]


      Thanks for the better links re: Somalia.

      I'm sure everyone here is capabable of finding the websites I listed, but unfortunately, most of us are probably in need of some Somalia 101. In any case, I'm glad for people to add more useful sites.
      posted by serazin at 8:11 PM on January 9, 2007


      I think the bombing is easy as reading the news, they found a group of KNOWN terrorists. The US has already said it will go after the al-Qaida anywhere. Now if you read the British news, it also states that the islamic forces did have ties with known terrorists, and had some of them at the location. Unless I'm wrong with my belief, the al-qaida are the only ones we should be attacking, so maybe instead of US bashing, maybe "Wow they attacked a legitimate target for once!"
      posted by IronWolve at 8:13 PM on January 9, 2007


      I'd pay money to have someone ask Snow, "Why should we trust you?"
      posted by edgeways at 8:17 PM on January 9, 2007


      Does this mean they'll be making a sequel, then?

      But seriously, folks. I had no idea this was going on until yesterday when somebody posted a fpp about us sending AC-130's over there (it got deleted). I had somehow missed it on the news and on the blue.
      posted by CitrusFreak12 at 8:24 PM on January 9, 2007


      "I think the bombing is easy as reading the news, they found a group of KNOWN terrorists."

      I guess you never heard of "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY"? Or maybe, O IronWolve, you're trying to deflect attention from your WIDELY-KNOWN khat-smuggling ring?

      If allegations are the same as proof be glad I didn't call you a KNOWN baby-raper.
      posted by davy at 8:25 PM on January 9, 2007


      It¡¯s like we have people in the White House who get up every morning and say¡ªhow can we fuck up this world even more today?
      posted by hadjiboy at 8:29 PM on January 9, 2007 [1 favorite]


      The UN is losing credibility by the day, and the greatest comparison I can draw between what happened in Iraq and what happened in Somalia now is that the UN is once again being used by the United States to give sort of political -- and I call it ¡°political¡± cover, because people who are fighting don't care about the politics -- give legal cover, so legally some things that are done, if they have the UN imprimatur, can be done under the justification that this is international law. But politically it makes no difference now to those Muslims who know that the UN too often goes along with the US and passes resolutions that have no moral legitimacy. They don¡¯t care if there¡¯s a UN anymore, and that¡¯s why we were all blown up in Baghdad, because no one cares now. The UN is no longer seen as a relatively independent. I mean, UN cannot be independent completely. The US is a huge and mighty power. It would be unwise for the UN to not try to work with it.
      posted by hadjiboy at 8:31 PM on January 9, 2007


      Credible sources put US ground troops in Kenya on Somalia¡¯s southern border, just in time to confuse the hell out of an electorate that was teetering on the verge of coming to grips with the Iraqi mess.
      posted by Huplescat at 8:35 PM on January 9, 2007


      I think the bombing is easy as reading the news, they found a group of KNOWN terrorists.

      They found WMDs in Iraq, too. Oh, wait...
      posted by dirigibleman at 8:39 PM on January 9, 2007


      From USA Today
      As the Islamic Courts fighters fled, the United States placed the aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower off Somalia's coast to help block al-Qaeda fighters from escaping by sea, according to the Navy's 5th Fleet headquarters in Bahrain. The carrier joined at least a half-dozen U.S. and British ships in the area that are stopping and searching civilian vessels for terrorist suspects.

      Lt. Cmdr. Charlie Brown, a 5th Fleet spokesman, said aircraft from the Eisenhower have flown intelligence-gathering missions over Somalia. The 60 planes aboard the Eisenhower include E-2C Hawkeye aircraft, which carry sophisticated radar and other sensors used to track enemy movements and direct U.S. attacks.

      The AC-130 gunship used in Monday's airstrikes is too big to land on an aircraft carrier. A modified version of the propeller-driven C-130 cargo plane, the gunship carries weaponry that includes a 105mm howitzer, a 40mm cannon and a 25mm gun capable of firing 30 rounds a second. [My emphasis.]
      posted by jaronson at 8:46 PM on January 9, 2007


      Why is the US bombing Somalia?

      We're retaliating for the embassy bombings seven and a half years ago. Bin Laden is toast in 2009.

      That Bush is giving a speech tomorrow is a total coincidence.
      posted by homunculus at 8:49 PM on January 9, 2007


      SNOW: there was no safe haven for Islamic militants

      Except Iraq.

      You guys this action is the sort of thing the SHOULD be doing rather than occupying Iraq. The problem is we have no credibility anymore. So even if there was solid proof for this action... nobody would believe it anyway.
      posted by tkchrist at 8:51 PM on January 9, 2007


      Related headlines from allafrica.com:

      Somalia: American Air Strikes Kill At Least 27 Civilians
      Fighting Halts Effort to Verify Deadly Fever
      Secretary-General Ban Concerned Over Humanitarian Impact of US Air Strikes

      Also, an interesting overview the state of Africa today from Africa Sun News.
      posted by malocchio at 8:53 PM on January 9, 2007


      "Also, what part of killing al-Qaeda members is difficult to understand? "

      The part where it's a lie, but gets lapped up like it's the sweet, sweet nectar of freedom by idiots who believe what their government tells them.
      The truth is already leaking out, and you will be proven a fool.
      posted by 2sheets at 9:08 PM on January 9, 2007 [1 favorite]


      Dasein writes "It launched an airstrike against one group of al-Qaeda fighters and their cohorts. Yes, they were in Somalia. That doesn't mean the US is attacking the country, any more than it was attacking Yemen when it did this.

      "Also, what part of killing al-Qaeda members is difficult to understand? The motivation? The utility? The methods?"


      Smeg, I'm glad those wankers in Toronto last year were only inspired by Al-Queda and not actually Al-Queda.
      posted by Mitheral at 9:10 PM on January 9, 2007


      The unelected "transitional government" of Somalia has no popular support; expect guerilla attacks against it to continue indefinitely. You are bombing Somalia to scare people into buckling down and accepting the pro-US/Ethiopian government.
      posted by stammer at 9:26 PM on January 9, 2007


      Wow, I never thought George Bush would be taking cues from the Bill Clinton military handbook, but there you go.
      The "we're not really bombing your country, just people who happen to be in it" bit is bullshit, and sane Americans and ordinary Somalis know it. It's still bombs falling on your country. It's still collateral damage.

      The legality, maybe? News reports are quick to point out that the current government of Somalia (whatever the fuck that means) authorized the strike, but did our congress?

      Congress's approval is not needed. Commander in chief, and all that. As eloquently stated today by Senator Kennedy, Congress checks the military power of the president by conditioning the appropriation of funds. If you want our government to stop bombing other people's countries, just take a shitload of Nyquil and wake up on 1/20/09. I'm strongly considering this myself.
      posted by Saucy Intruder at 9:35 PM on January 9, 2007


      The AC-130 gunship used in Monday's airstrikes is too big to land on an aircraft carrier.

      Well duh. It's no secret that we have a large military presence in Djibouti. The news story I read (not the linked BBC article) even showed one of those big 1000-mile arrows leading from Djibouti to southern Somalia.

      I'm not very troubled by this -- as tkchrist says, this is the real war on terror. Of course he's also right that the WH has no shred of credibility left, and naturally anything Snow says reveals him to be an ass (although of a more refined sort than Scotty, and a less slimy sort than Ari).

      Now, one can argue that this is not a smart idea in terms of winning hearts & minds in Somalia (though I'm unsure that's any part of our goals). Certainly with any use of air power the risk of civilian deaths (however murky the term "civilian" may be in a mass uprising) does go up.

      But the transitional government is the product of several years of diplomacy and is recognized by the UN as the legitimate government of Somalia. They've been unable to exert any of that control. Whether this action is ultimately going to help them in that end is uncertain. But I don't think that anybody can say that it was an illegal invasion of the country if it was in concert with the legal government.

      Also, as far as the US is concerned, the President is the Commander in Chief, and there is no requirement for involving Congress before taking military action. Under the War Powers Act the Executive must notify Congress and there's that 60-day window if troops are in country, but this will probably be (or was) a briefing of paper-airplane proportions. As for authorization, this is probably covered by the CIA-related executive orders.

      Even the argument about targeted killing made by Lone is a valid philosophical position, but one that has to date not seen any real backing in the implementation of international law.

      Now, looking at overall US strategy, back in June we actually offered to make a deal with the Islamic Courts if they handed over these guys (yes, yes, that opens up the whole extraordinary rendition can'o'worms). At the same time we were throwing money at the warlords, who proved rather feckless in the face of the popular movement (basically because they are bandits and street gangs, not guerrillas). One can see this as a failed strategy, or as a bargaining chip. In any case, it's the bag we threw our money into. So the real question from this point is how much we're interested in maintaining our allied warlords insofar as that borks the necessity of the transitional government. If they can't keep power except with Ethiopian tanks, they'll never achieve popular support. In that event, our support for the local warlords could prove advantageous again.

      It probably won't be in the interest of peace and stability for the Somali people in the most neutral sense, because we're probably going to maintain a presence -- even just an eye in the sky -- to keep the ICU or any successor organizations from regaining power.
      posted by dhartung at 9:37 PM on January 9, 2007


      Also, as far as the US is concerned, the President is the Commander in Chief, and there is no requirement for involving Congress before taking military action.
      This issue has only been settled as a matter of congress has never been upset enough about the military action the President has taken to do anything about it. Should congress one day decide that the war powers reserved for it in the constitution legally require the President to get consent of Congress before going to war; they could impeach the President and remove the President from office. While this might trigger a serious crisis with the military choosing sides and ending the republic; it is an option which exists for the Congress. The precident has been that before engaging in major military actions such as this; the President calls the majority and minority party leadership (plus intel commitee) and informs them of what is going on. I imagine this happened in this case, but it isn't reported because it's routine and no one has asked about it. If it didn't happen you can be sure it will show up on blogs soonish.
      posted by humanfont at 10:02 PM on January 9, 2007


      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
      posted by blue_beetle at 10:02 PM on January 9, 2007


      Kang, Kodos, they're two sides of the same coin. I voted for Darth Nader.
      posted by tehloki at 10:10 PM on January 9, 2007


      Don't blame me, I'm all for drastic regime change. To quote an old graffito from years ago, "U.S. out of North America!"
      posted by davy at 10:22 PM on January 9, 2007


      Don't blame me, I'm all for drastic regime change. To quote an old graffito from years ago, "U.S. out of North America!"
      posted by davy at 10:25 PM on January 9, 2007


      (Sorry that got posted twice. This stout is 10.6% by volume. Please delete one, and maybe this too.)
      posted by davy at 10:26 PM on January 9, 2007


      Don't you always feel dirty posting a third time to apologize for a double post? I just wait a few weeks and then apologize in a 0-comment askmefi thread.
      posted by tehloki at 10:33 PM on January 9, 2007


      Never apologize, it just makes you look weak and unpatriotic.
      posted by homunculus at 11:26 PM on January 9, 2007 [2 favorites]


      Also, as far as the US is concerned, the President is the Commander in Chief, and there is no requirement for involving Congress before taking military action.

      It goes a bit further than that:

      Tony Snow:
      Q Do the Democrats or any of the opponents have the executive authority to stop anything that the President is going to present? In other words, is he going to need to ask Congress to approve something?

      MR. SNOW: Well, ultimately, anything you do has budgetary implications. I think there was a question earlier today, are we seeking resolutions, and that sort of thing ¡ª and I want to wave you off of that. What you do have, though, is basically budget is policy. So Congress is going to be engaged in the appropriations and authorization process and, you know, through those, they¡¯re going to be debating a lot of things. And so that¡¯s sort of par for the course.

      Q But in terms of anything out of the Pentagon ¡ª the troops, deployment, any of the programs we initiate - the President, alone, has the authority to ¨C

      MR. SNOW: You know what, I don¡¯t want to play junior constitutional lawyer on this, so let¡¯s wait until we see what happens, if you have specific questions about constitutional authority. But, you know, Congress has the power of the purse. The President has the ability to exercise his own authority if he thinks Congress has voted the wrong way.
      If Nixon felt Congress would have voted the wrong way on impeachment, could he just stay in office?

      And on preview, what humanfont said.
      posted by DreamerFi at 12:36 AM on January 10, 2007


      But the transitional government is the product of several years of diplomacy and is recognized by the UN as the legitimate government of Somalia. They've been unable to exert any of that control.

      They've been unable to exert that control because everybody hates them; if they strayed outside of their compounds in Mogadishu people would have killed them. The Khmer Rouge were also recognised by the UN as the legitimate government of Cambodia, even years after they were overthrown - mainly thanks to US and UK pressure. UN recognition doesn't make you the good guys.
      posted by stammer at 1:06 AM on January 10, 2007


      /me savors customary morning cup of coffee while pondering phooky being weirded out about people celebrating the resumption of qat supply
      posted by pax digita at 4:16 AM on January 10, 2007


      Kang, Kodos, they're two sides of the same coin.

      HOLY FLURKING SCHNIT!
      posted by quonsar at 4:25 AM on January 10, 2007


      The unelected "transitional government" of Somalia has no popular support

      They've been unable to exert that control because everybody hates them

      Source for this? This week's Economist says the Islamic militants overestimated their support and overplayed their hand. As such, non-hardliners who were willing to negotiate have stayed out of the fighting. I like that the blind hatred of the current US administration means all actions are incorrect until proven otherwise and that Somalia == Iraq.
      posted by yerfatma at 4:46 AM on January 10, 2007


      This is all just more ammo for the Muslim extremist crowd who can once again point out how the US will go anywhere and do anything to keep oppressing Muslims. Just like the invasion of Iraq, or the support for India's nuclear ambitions (but not Pakistan's), etc.

      One of the "guffaw" moments for me in State of Denial was when the idea was floated around -- and reportedly considered by many -- to put Wolfowitz in charge of the CPA in Baghdad (back when they still hadn't decided on Brehmer). When I read that I asked myself whether the Administration hadn't in fact decided to go ahead and make what bin Laden was saying about the US into reality -- how the US was out to oppress muslims and "spread zionist rule across the middle east"...
      posted by clevershark at 4:52 AM on January 10, 2007


      It certainly appears to me that the primary thrust of the gunship attacks in Somalia is to wipe out the leadership of the Islamic Courts based on the pretext that al Qaeda leaders are being sheltered by them. An AC-130 gunship is not a vehicle for "targeted assasination."

      Bottom line: Regime Change City. The US, with the capable (and heavily subsidized) assistance of Ethiopian troops, has overthrown the Islamists in Somalia. Only the passage of time will disclose how big an addtional investment in faith-based chaos has been made with your tax dollars. But we have made Mogadishu safe for khat heads, y'all!
      posted by rdone at 5:10 AM on January 10, 2007 [1 favorite]


      What gets me is that nobody ever mentions Somaliland in discussions of Somalia; it's been de facto independent for 15 years, it seems to be doing a hell of a lot better in just about every respect than the "official" country, and yet everybody seems to be tacitly waiting for the "official" government, however crazed and useless, to take it over so the situation will be regularized and we don't have to worry about redrawing any maps. Sort of like Taiwan, except Somaliland doesn't have any influential defenders.

      On topic, we shouldn't be bombing Somalia. Duh.
      posted by languagehat at 5:23 AM on January 10, 2007


      Why is the US bombing Somalia?

      'Cause Bush hates black people, that's why. :-]
      posted by nofundy at 5:35 AM on January 10, 2007


      yerfatma: I'd say the fact that the government needed Ethiopian troops and US gunships to take the capital city should indicate their level of support. But, anyway, here's the welcome they got when they invaded Mogadishu.

      As that article points out, the government is a group of handpicked pro-Western warlords assembled by the UN in Kenya in 2004; they voted for Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed, the current President, during a ceremony in a Nairobi sports stadium. In November of last year, a car bomber and at least six gunmen attacked his convoy and narrowly missed killing him.

      From the interview linked in the FPP: "We have millions of Somalis who live in Kenya. Most of them supported the Islamic Courts Union, because the Islamic Courts Union is very popular throughout Somalia."

      And on that airstrike: "My four-year-old boy was killed in the strike," Muhammad Mahmud Burale said by telephone. "The plane was firing at other areas in Ras Kamboni. We could see smoke from the area. We also heard 14 massive explosions."
      posted by stammer at 5:36 AM on January 10, 2007


      Also, as far as the US is concerned, the President is the Commander in Chief, and there is no requirement for involving Congress before taking military action.

      Wanna bet? Why do you think Bush fought so hard for the Iraq AUMF?

      Article I, Section 8
      The Congress shall have power...

      (SNIP)

      ...To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

      To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

      To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

      To provide and maintain a navy;

      To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

      To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

      To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
      The War Powers Act is only in force because of a charade between the White House and Congress. You pretend that you never really use it, and we won't go to the Supreme Court and get it overturned in an instant.

      While we had the Imperial Congress serving His Majesty, Bush had free reign. There is a great deal that the Congress can do to stop this, if they choose.

      Of course, I know exactly what will happen. Anything that stops the madness will lose 51-49 in the Senate, thanks to Joe Fucking Lieberman.
      posted by eriko at 5:47 AM on January 10, 2007


      Yeah, I think the War Powers Resolution is pretty much a dead issue, absent the US attacking the Vatican or something similarly crazy. From this Wikipedia page: "On December 20th, 2005, ABC News reported that vice-president Dick Cheney had described the War Powers Resolution as an "infringement on the authority of the president."
      posted by pax digita at 7:03 AM on January 10, 2007


      okay, someone tell me where i'm going wrong here: the constitutional side of this is that magical "commander in chief" powers only come into effect once congress has declared war. only congress, constitutionally, has the power to declare war. if congress has declared war, then the president is empowered to prosecute that war on congress (and presumably, the people's) behalf, but it's reasonable to assume his authority to prosecute the war derives from the initial declaration of war by congress (that's checks and balances for you), so you'd think congress would also have the power to revoke the authority, but for some reason, people seem to think they don't, because the war on terror is a different kind of war--one in which there are no prisoners of war, nor any clear success criteria... is an authorization for the use of military force the same thing as declaration of war? and yeah. what's up with how al qaeda alway just seems to pop up wherever the US also happens to have unrelated strategic interests that alone don't justify military action? i'm so confused. it sounds to me like the president under current formulations has absolute power... and while i may be no constitutional scholar, i KNOW that shit ain't right.
      posted by saulgoodman at 8:02 AM on January 10, 2007


      Apparently it's "official": they got Fazul Abdullah Mohammed, believed leader and key player in the 1998 embassy bombings.
      posted by Martin E. at 8:15 AM on January 10, 2007


      "It certainly appears to me that the primary thrust of the gunship attacks in Somalia is to wipe out the leadership of the Islamic Courts based on the pretext that al Qaeda leaders are being sheltered by them. "

      Thank god somebody gets it.
      Actually I think a lot of the war pigs know this, but as long as we're killing those nasty muslims any cover story will do.
      posted by 2sheets at 8:43 AM on January 10, 2007


      There's this terrorist guy from Texas, got caught with a very large cyanide bomb, who's hiding out in a minimum security cell. Can we bomb him too?
      posted by nofundy at 8:57 AM on January 10, 2007


      Ok, I'll wade in.

      We have an AC-130 gunship in the area largely as covering. Our real purpose is to move a fairly sizable collection of ships where they can be quickly moved to the Strait of Hormuz region, in order to provide air support for the troops that will invade Iran.

      Y'know, the ones that were supposedly in the area simply to aid and assist the Iraqi forces in the whole 'surge' thing.
      posted by eclectist at 9:02 AM on January 10, 2007


      I have my CIA map of the world out. I'm starting a pool on the next country to invite us to begin bombing them.
      posted by notreally at 9:22 AM on January 10, 2007


      The War Powers Act is only in force because of a charade between the White House and Congress. You pretend that you never really use it, and we won't go to the Supreme Court and get it overturned in an instant.

      eriko, I've been saying this (including on MeFi) for years. But are you really saying that this Congress is going to challenge this President? With the adjudicator this Supreme Court?

      Anyway, your point seems to be that the AUMF gives the executive special capabilities, and that's true. But look at history. What single President -- name one -- has not taken unilateral military action when he deemed it necessary?

      is an authorization for the use of military force the same thing as declaration of war?

      According to incoming Senate Judiciary Chairman Biden, yes.

      This isn't new to the war on terror. The War Powers Act/Resolution (depending on view) only came about in the first place because a President was taking unilateral military action in the absence of a declaration of war.

      See my longer answer here.

      Yeah, I think the War Powers Resolution is pretty much a dead issue

      What Cheney says is one thing. But the WPA (or R) is the legislative basis for the AUMF, and he knows it. All Presidents -- all -- have treated the Act as a formalism and complied only with the reporting requirements. But here, when they needed the special powers that only Congress could give, they went to the Hill.

      UN recognition doesn't make you the good guys.

      I didn't say they were. Are there good guys here? Outside of Somaliland (and don't forget Puntland), hard to tell. In any case, bad form to compare them to the Khmer Rouge. The point was to legality.
      posted by dhartung at 9:25 AM on January 10, 2007 [1 favorite]


      Hey, maybe it's just a dry run for our invasion of Darfur.
      posted by drstein at 9:48 AM on January 10, 2007


      An AC-130 is not a helicopter (I keep seeing this reported as helicopter gun ships doing the attacking, what's up with that? From my limited understanding of combat air support, using helicopters here seems to make very little sense, due their low speed, low altitude, and short range. As that nice bit of drek BlackHawk Down reminded us, helicopter gunships are rather susceptible to RPG attack in an urban area).

      Further, an AC-130 doesn't really bomb so much as turn a city block into swiss cheese, killing everything in the area (it uses shells, from what I remember, but maybe it can drop bombs too).

      We may have gotten some real bad guys. We also killed a shit-load of civilians.

      An AC-130 is one of the nastiest things we have when it comes to urban warfare and air support, and it kills mercilessly, indiscriminately, and in huge numbers. If used anywhere remotely urban, it stained the ground red with blood, innocent and not so innocent alike.

      Sure hope we know what we're doing.

      I wonder how America would feel if Germany used an AC-130 to wipe out some nasty neo-Nazis in Idaho, killing a few hundred innocent Idahoans in the process? The neo-Nazis had it coming, and Germany wasn't attacking America, just some bad guys who happen to be in America.

      Ponder that question for awhile before you mindlessly parrot the "we were just getting the terrorists, as is our right" idea that passes as OK without examination in the American government and on the US news media.
      posted by teece at 9:56 AM on January 10, 2007


      Nope, the AC-130 doesn't drop bombs; rather, it fires bullets (if you can call a 105mm howitzer round a bullet).
      posted by teece at 10:01 AM on January 10, 2007


      "Why are we shelling Somalia?"
      posted by Artw at 10:06 AM on January 10, 2007


      Yes, they're very powerful, but they're absolutely not indiscriminate.

      Absolute bullshit.

      Google around for troop accounts of what the area is like where they've unleashed their fury.

      They have extremely accurate fire control systems. Those systems get the bullets to kill the bad guy effectively. That's their job. Their job is not to save innocents.

      That's a major conceit America has bought into with its smart bombs and whatnot.

      Every round an AC-130 fires can and will go through the walls of a building with ease. Some of them could go through the walls of buildings for an entire city block. In an urban area, many civilians will die wherever this aircraft is used, unless that area is completely devoid of civilians. (I don't know if the AC-130 is better or worse than smart bombing, which will a shit-load of civilians too, but that is neither here nor there).

      This is not at all a discriminate weapon, unless you mean discriminate compared to a MOAB or a tactical nuke.
      posted by teece at 10:15 AM on January 10, 2007


      "Yes, they're very powerful, but they're absolutely not indiscriminate."

      So we slaughtered all those civilians on purpose?
      Well they were probably muslims, so praise the lord.
      posted by 2sheets at 10:19 AM on January 10, 2007


      AC-130 very nasty. Thank you teece. US denies any recent airstrikes.
      posted by adamvasco at 10:22 AM on January 10, 2007


      But are you really saying that this Congress is going to challenge this President?

      Yeah, I forgot that I live in the real world. The Dems will talk, but they'll fork over the cash when the time comes.

      We're already sending another 20K troops to Iraq, we're attacking Somalia, and the fact that CENTCOM is now headed by an Admiral is a strong sign that we'll be bombing Iran before the year is out.

      Nothing is going to change.
      posted by eriko at 10:32 AM on January 10, 2007


      Ponder that question for awhile before you mindlessly parrot the "we were just getting the terrorists, as is our right" idea that passes as OK without examination in the American government and on the US news media.

      But don't you get it, son? we're at war with friggin' Cthulhu! This war will only end when the terror ends! And since new terrorists pop up like toadstools in the "fog of war," we'll be at war forever! In fact, glory to the eternal war! Long live the noble warriors! Curses on the pathetic, weak vermin crushed under our warrior's heels! Victory is ours! (Oh yeah, except we've only got about 30 years left to wallow in our "victory" if we don't refocus our attention on those pesky environmental problems of ours over the next 10 years, but you know what? On second thought--forget about it! Let's just keep up the good work of doing ourselves in, so misanthropists like me can at least take some small comfort in knowing the whole sorry mess will be over soon enough, one way or the other...) Pah. To quote the esteemed mr. cummings: "Humanity: I hate you."

      /unhinged rant
      posted by saulgoodman at 10:35 AM on January 10, 2007


      Why is the US bombing Somalia?

      Well, see, some rotten bastards bombed a whole lot of civvies trying to get at some American's hiding in embassies they feel are guilty. The US, in moral outrage, is returning the favor. If history is any indication, they will not stop returning the favor until they have payed it back at least an order of magnitude stronger.
      posted by Bovine Love at 1:43 PM on January 10, 2007


      Because George Bush enjoy's killing people? And not just black/brown people. He's not too fond of poor white Americans either.
      posted by jeffburdges at 2:59 PM on January 10, 2007


      From the AP tonight:

      MOGADISHU, Somalia - Ethiopia's prime minister said Wednesday the U.S. military targeted 20 high-level members of an Islamic movement linked to al-Qaida in an airstrike this week in southern Somalia, attacking quickly before the Islamists could escape.

      QED.
      posted by rdone at 3:04 PM on January 10, 2007


      I like that the blind hatred of the current US administration

      It's not blind. If you, after six years of this administration, can actually take anything they say at face value, then you are blind.
      posted by dirigibleman at 11:30 PM on January 10, 2007


      And as the thread dies, the truth comes out.
      Rinse, lather, repeat.
      And I don't have a problem at this point saying I told you so.
      posted by 2sheets at 7:33 AM on January 11, 2007


      « Older "It's Fun To Be Fooled"   |   Learn About the Stock Market While Wasting Time... Newer »


      This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments




      "Yes. Something that interested us yesterday when we saw it." "Where is she?" His lodgings were situated at the lower end of the town. The accommodation consisted[Pg 64] of a small bedroom, which he shared with a fellow clerk, and a place at table with the other inmates of the house. The street was very dirty, and Mrs. Flack's house alone presented some sign of decency and respectability. It was a two-storied red brick cottage. There was no front garden, and you entered directly into a living room through a door, upon which a brass plate was fixed that bore the following announcement:¡ª The woman by her side was slowly recovering herself. A minute later and she was her cold calm self again. As a rule, ornament should never be carried further than graceful proportions; the arrangement of framing should follow as nearly as possible the lines of strain. Extraneous decoration, such as detached filagree work of iron, or painting in colours, is [159] so repulsive to the taste of the true engineer and mechanic that it is unnecessary to speak against it. Dear Daddy, Schopenhauer for tomorrow. The professor doesn't seem to realize Down the middle of the Ganges a white bundle is being borne, and on it a crow pecking the body of a child wrapped in its winding-sheet. 53 The attention of the public was now again drawn to those unnatural feuds which disturbed the Royal Family. The exhibition of domestic discord and hatred in the House of Hanover had, from its first ascension of the throne, been most odious and revolting. The quarrels of the king and his son, like those of the first two Georges, had begun in Hanover, and had been imported along with them only to assume greater malignancy in foreign and richer soil. The Prince of Wales, whilst still in Germany, had formed a strong attachment to the Princess Royal of Prussia. George forbade the connection. The prince was instantly summoned to England, where he duly arrived in 1728. "But they've been arrested without due process of law. They've been arrested in violation of the Constitution and laws of the State of Indiana, which provide¡ª" "I know of Marvor and will take you to him. It is not far to where he stays." Reuben did not go to the Fair that autumn¡ªthere being no reason why he should and several why he shouldn't. He went instead to see Richard, who was down for a week's rest after a tiring case. Reuben thought a dignified aloofness the best attitude to maintain towards his son¡ªthere was no need for them to be on bad terms, but he did not want anyone to imagine that he approved of Richard or thought his success worth while. Richard, for his part, felt kindly disposed towards his father, and a little sorry for him in his isolation. He invited him to dinner once or twice, and, realising his picturesqueness, was not ashamed to show him to his friends. Stephen Holgrave ascended the marble steps, and proceeded on till he stood at the baron's feet. He then unclasped the belt of his waist, and having his head uncovered, knelt down, and holding up both his hands. De Boteler took them within his own, and the yeoman said in a loud, distinct voice¡ª HoME²¨¶àÒ°´²Ï·ÊÓÆµ ѸÀ×ÏÂÔØ ѸÀ×ÏÂÔØ ENTER NUMBET 0016www.gxkgwx.com.cn
      fanyouxi.com.cn
      www.hhybuu.com.cn
      gfuboi.com.cn
      gedan888.org.cn
      hxiaol.org.cn
      www.tyssdk.org.cn
      www.rimionline.com.cn
      simxt.com.cn
      www.mz315.net.cn
      亚洲春色奇米 影视 成人操穴乱伦小说 肏屄蓝魔mp5官网 婷婷五月天四房播客 偷窥偷拍 亚洲色图 草根炮友人体 屄图片 百度 武汉操逼网 日日高潮影院 beeg在线视频 欧美骚妇15删除 西欧色图图片 欧美欲妇奶奶15p 女人性穴道几按摸法 天天操免费视频 李宗瑞百度云集 成人毛片快播高清影视 人妖zzz女人 中年胖女人裸体艺术 兽交游戏 色图网艳照门 插屁网 xxoo激情短片 未成年人的 9712btinto 丰满熟女狂欢夜色 seseou姐姐全裸为弟弟洗澡 WWW_COM_NFNF_COM 菲律宾床上人体艺术 www99mmcc 明星影乱神马免费成人操逼网 97超级碰 少女激情人体艺术片 狠狠插电影 贱货被内射 nnn680 情电影52521 视频 15p欧美 插 欧美色图激情名星 动一动电影百度影音 内射中出红濑 东京热360云盘 影音先锋德国性虐影院 偷穿表姐内衣小说 bt 成人 视频做爱亚洲色图 手机免费黄色小说网址总址 sehueiluanluen 桃花欧美亚洲 屄屄乱伦 尻你xxx 日本成人一本道黄色无码 人体艺术ud 成人色视频xp 齐川爱不亚图片 亚裔h 快播 色一色成人网 欧美 奸幼a片 不用播放器de黄色电影网站 免费幼插在线快播电影 淫荡美妇的真实状况 能天天操逼吗 模特赵依依人体艺术 妈妈自慰短片视频 好奇纸尿裤好吗 杨一 战地2142武器解锁 qq农场蓝玫瑰 成人电影快播主播 早乙女露依作品496部 北条麻妃和孩子乱 欧美三女同虐待 夫妻成长日记一类动画 71kkkkcom 操逼怎样插的最深 皇小说你懂的 色妹妹月擦妹妹 高清欧美激情美女图 撸啊撸乱伦老师的奶子 给我视频舔逼 sese五月 女人被老外搞爽了 极品按摩师 自慰自撸 龙坛书网成人 尹弘 国模雪铃人体 妈妈操逼色色色视频 大胆人体下阴艺术图片 乱妇12p 看人妖片的网站 meinv漏出bitu 老婆婚外的高潮 父女淫液花心子宫 高清掰开洞穴图片 四房色播网页图片 WWW_395AV_COM 进进出出的少女阴道 老姐视频合集 吕哥交换全 韩国女主播想射的视频 丝袜gao跟 极品美女穴穴图吧看高清超嫩鲍鱼大胆美女人体艺网 扣逼18 日本内射少妇15p 天海冀艺术 绝色成人av图 银色天使进口图片 欧美色图夜夜爱 美女一件全部不留与男生亲热视 春色丁香 骚媳妇乱伦小说 少女激情av 乱伦老婆的乳汁 欧美v色图25 电话做爱门 一部胜过你所有日本a片呕血推荐 制服丝袜迅雷下载 ccc36水蜜桃 操日本妞色色网 情侣插逼图 张柏芝和谁的艳照门 和小女孩爱爱激情 浏览器在线观看的a站 国内莫航空公司空姐性爱视频合集影音先锋 能看见奶子的美国电影 色姐综合在线视频 老婆综合网 苍井空做爱现场拍摄 怎么用番号看av片 伦理片艺术片菅野亚梨沙 嫩屄18p 我和老师乳交故事 志村玲子与黑人 韩国rentiyishu 索尼小次郎 李中瑞玩继母高清 极速影院什么缓存失败 偷拍女厕所小嫩屄 欧美大鸡巴人妖 岛咲友美bt 小择玛丽亚第一页 顶级大胆国模 长发妹妹与哥哥做爱做的事情 小次郎成电影人 偷拍自拍迅雷下载套图 狗日人 女人私阴大胆艺术 nianhuawang 那有绳艺电影 欲色阁五月天 搜狗老外鸡巴插屄图 妹妹爱爱网偷拍自拍 WWW249KCOM 百度网盘打电话做爱 妈妈短裙诱惑快播 色色色成人导 玩小屄网站 超碰在线视频97久色色 强奸熟母 熟妇丝袜高清性爱图片 公园偷情操逼 最新中国艳舞写真 石黑京香在线观看 zhang 小说sm网 女同性恋换黄色小说 老妇的肉逼 群交肛交老婆屁眼故事 www123qqxxtop 成人av母子恋 露点av资源 初中女生在家性自慰视频 姐姐色屄 成人丝袜美女美腿服务 骚老师15P下一页 凤舞的奶子 色姐姝插姐姐www52auagcom qyuletv青娱乐在线 dizhi99两男两女 重口味激情电影院 逼网jjjj16com 三枪入肛日本 家庭乱伦小说激情明星乱伦校园 贵族性爱 水中色美国发布站 息子相奸义父 小姨子要深点快别停 变身萝莉被轮奸 爱色色帝国 先锋影音香港三级大全 www8omxcnm 搞亚洲日航 偷拍自拍激情综合台湾妹妹 少女围殴扒衣露B毛 欧美黑人群交系列www35vrcom 沙滩裸模 欧美性爱体位 av电影瑜伽 languifangcheng 肥白淫妇女 欧美美女暴露下身图片 wwqpp6scom Dva毛片 裸体杂技美女系 成人凌虐艳母小说 av男人天堂2014rhleigsckybcn 48qacom最新网 激激情电影天堂wwwmlutleyljtrcn 喷水大黑逼网 谷露英语 少妇被涂满春药插到 色农夫影Sex872com 欧美seut 不用播放器的淫妻乱伦性爱综合网 毛衣女神新作百度云 被黑人抽插小说 欧美国模吧 骚女人网导航 母子淫荡网角3 大裸撸 撸胖姥姥 busx2晓晓 操中国老熟女 欧美色爱爱 插吧插吧网图片素材 少妇五月天综合网 丝袜制服情人 福利视频最干净 亚州空姐偷拍 唐人社制服乱伦电影 xa7pmp4 20l7av伦理片 久久性动漫 女搜查官官网被封了 在线撸夜勤病栋 老人看黄片色美女 wwwavsxx 深深候dvd播放 熟女人妻谷露53kqcom 动漫图区另类图片 香港高中生女友口交magnet 男女摸逼 色zhongse导航 公公操日媳 荡妇撸吧 李宗瑞快播做爱影院 人妻性爱淫乱 性吧论坛春暖花开经典三级区 爱色阁欧美性爱 吉吉音应爱色 操b图操b图 欧美色片大色站社区 大色逼 亚洲无码山本 综合图区亚洲色 欧美骚妇裸体艺术图 国产成人自慰网 性交淫色激情网 熟女俱乐部AV下载 动漫xxoogay 国产av?美媚毛片 亚州NW 丁香成人快播 r级在线观看在线播放 蜜桃欧美色图片 亚洲黄色激情网 骚辣妈贴吧 沈阳推油 操B视频免费 色洛洛在线视频 av网天堂 校园春色影音先锋伦理 htppg234g 裸聊正妹网 五月舅舅 久久热免费自慰视频 视频跳舞撸阴教学 色色色色色色色色色色色色色色色色色色色色色色色色色色邑色色色色色色色色色 萝莉做爱视频 影音先锋看我射 亚州av一首页老汉影院 狠狠狠狠死撸hhh600com 韩国精品淫荡女老师诱奸 先锋激情网站 轮奸教师A片 av天堂2017天堂网在线 破处番号 www613com 236com 遇上嫩女10p 妹妹乐超碰在线视频 在线国产偷拍欧美 社区在线视频乱伦 青青草视频爱去色色 妈咪综合网 情涩网站亚洲图片 在线午夜夫妻片 乱淫色乱瘾乱明星图 阿钦和洪阿姨 插美女综合网3 巨乳丝袜操逼 久草在线久草在线中文字幕 伦理片群交 强奸小说电影网 日本免费gv在线观看 恋夜秀场线路 gogort人体gogortco xxxxse 18福利影院 肉嫁bt bt种子下载成人无码 激情小说成人小说深爱五月天 伦理片181电影网 欧美姑妈乱伦的电影 动漫成人影视 家庭游戏magnet 漂亮少女人社团 快播色色图片 欧美春官图图片大全 搜索免费手机黄色视频网站 宝生奈奈照片 性爱试 色中色手机在线视频区 强轩视频免费观看 大奶骚妻自慰 中村知惠无码 www91p91com国产 在小穴猛射 搜索www286kcom 七龙珠hhh 天天影视se 白洁张敏小说 中文字幕在线视频avwww2pidcom 亚洲女厕所偷拍 色色色色m色图 迷乱的学姐 在线看av男同免费视频 曰一日 美国成人十次导航2uuuuucom wwwff632cim 黄片西瓜影音 av在线五毒 青海色图 亚洲Av高清无码 790成人撸片 迅雷色色强暴小说 在线av免费中文字幕 少年阿宾肛交 日韩色就是色 不法侵乳苍井空 97成人自慰视频 最新出av片在线观看 夜夜干夜夜日在线影院www116dpcomm520xxbinfo wwwdioguitar23net 人与兽伦理电影 ap女优在线播放 激情五月天四房插放 wwwwaaaa23com 亚洲涩图雅蠛蝶 欧美老头爆操幼女 b成人电影 粉嫩妹妹 欧美口交性交 www1122secon 超碰在线视频撸乐子 俺去射成人网 少女十八三级片 千草在线A片 磊磊人体艺术图片 图片专区亚洲欧美另娄 家教小故事动态图 成人电影亚洲最新地 佐佐木明希邪恶 西西另类人体44rtcom 真人性爱姿势动图 成人文学公共汽车 推女郎青青草 操小B啪啪小说 2048社区 顶级夫妻爽图 夜一夜撸一撸 婷婷五月天妞 东方AV成人电影在线 av天堂wwwqimimvcom 国服第一大屌萝莉QQ空间 老头小女孩肏屄视频 久草在线澳门 自拍阴shui 642ppp 大阴色 我爱av52avaⅴcom一节 少妇抠逼在线视频 奇米性爱免费观看视频 k8电影网伦理动漫 SM乐园 强奸母女模特动漫 服帖拼音 www艳情五月天 国产无码自拍偷拍 幼女bt种子 啪啪播放网址 自拍大香蕉视频网 日韩插插插 色嫂嫂色护士影院 天天操夜夜操在线视频 偷拍自拍第一页46 色色色性 快播空姐 中文字幕av视频在线观看 大胆美女人体范冰冰 av无码5Q 色吧网另类 超碰肉丝国产 中国三级操逼 搞搞贝贝 我和老婆操阴道 XXX47C0m 奇米影视777撸 裸体艺术爱人体ctrl十d 私色房综合网成人网 我和大姐姐乱伦 插入妹妹写穴图片 色yiwuyuetian xxx人与狗性爱 与朋友母亲偷情 欧美大鸟性交色图 444自拍偷拍 我爱三十六成人网 宁波免费快播a片影院 日屄好 高清炮大美女在较外 大学生私拍b 黄色录像操我啦 和媛媛乱轮 狠撸撸白白色激情 jiji撸 快播a片日本a黄色 黄色片在哪能看到 艳照14p 操女妻 猛女动态炮图 欧洲性爱撸 寝越瑛太 李宗瑞mov275g 美女搞鸡激情 苍井空裸体无码写真 求成人动漫2015 外国裸体美女照片 偷情草逼故事 黑丝操逼查看全过程图片 95美女露逼 欧美大屁股熟女俱乐部 老奶奶操b 美国1级床上电影 王老橹小说网 性爱自拍av视频 小说李性女主角名字 木屄 女同性 无码 亚洲色域111 人与兽性交电影网站 动漫图片打包下载 最后被暴菊的三级片 台湾强奸潮 淫荡阿姨影片 泰国人体苍井空人体艺术图片 人体美女激情大图片 性交的骚妇 中学女生三级小说 公交车奸淫少女小说 拉拉草 我肏妈妈穴 国语对白影音先锋手机 萧蔷 WWW_2233K_COM 波多野结衣 亚洲色图 张凌燕 最新flash下载 友情以上恋人未满 446sscom 电影脚交群交 美女骚妇人体艺术照片集 胖熊性爱在线观看 成人图片16p tiangtangav2014 tangcuan人体艺术图片tamgcuan WWW3PXJCOM 大尺度裸体操逼图片 西门庆淫网视频 美国幼交先锋影音 快播伦理偷拍片 日日夜夜操屄wang上帝撸 我干了嫂子电影快播 大连高尔基路人妖 骑姐姐成人免费网站 美女淫穴插入 中国人肉胶囊制造过程 鸡巴干老女老头 美女大胆人穴摄影 色婷婷干尿 五月色谣 奸乡村处女媳妇小说 欧美成人套图五月天 欧羙性爱视频 强奸同学母小说 色se52se 456fff换了什么网站 极品美鲍人体艺术网 车震自拍p 逼逼图片美女 乱伦大鸡吧操逼故事 来操逼图片 美女楼梯脱丝袜 丁香成人大型 色妹妹要爱 嫩逼骚女15p 日本冲气人体艺术 wwwqin369com ah442百度影院 妹妹艺术图片欣赏 日本丨级片 岳母的bi e6fa26530000bad2 肏游戏 苍井空wangpan 艳嫂的淫穴 我抽插汤加丽的屄很爽 妈妈大花屄 美女做热爱性交口交 立川明日香代表作 在线亚洲波色 WWWSESEOCOM 苍井空女同作品 电影换妻游戏 女人用什么样的姿势才能和狗性交 我把妈妈操的高潮不断 大鸡巴在我体内变硬 男人天堂综合影院 偷拍自拍哥哥射成人色拍网站 家庭乱伦第1页 露女吧 美女fs2you ssss亚洲视频 美少妇性交人体艺术 骚浪美人妻 老虎直播applaohuzhibocn 操黑丝袜少妇的故事 如月群真口交 se钬唃e钬唃 欧美性爱亚洲无码制服师生 宅男影院男根 粉嫩小逼的美女图片 姝姝骚穴AV bp成人电影 Av天堂老鸭窝在线 青青草破处初夜视频网站 俺去插色小姐 伦理四级成人电影 穿丝袜性交ed2k 欧美邪淫动态 欧美sm的电影网站 v7saocom we综合网 日本不雅网站 久久热制服诱惑 插老女人了骚穴 绿帽女教师 wwwcmmovcn 赶集网 透B后入式 爱情电影网步兵 日本熟女黄色 哥也色人格得得爱色奶奶撸一撸 妞干网图片另类 色女网站duppid1 撸撸鸟AV亚洲色图 干小嫩b10Pwwwneihan8com 后女QQ上买内裤 搞搞天堂 另类少妇AV 熟妇黑鬼p 最美美女逼穴 亚洲大奶老女人 表姐爱做爱 美b俱乐部 搞搞电影成人网 最长吊干的日妞哇哇叫 亚洲系列国产系列 汤芳人体艺体 高中生在运动会被肉棒轮奸插小穴 肉棒 无码乱伦肛交灌肠颜射放尿影音先锋 有声小说极品家丁 华胥引 有声小说 春色fenman 美少女学园樱井莉亚 小泽玛利亚素颜 日本成人 97开心五月 1080东京热 手机看黄片的网址 家人看黄片 地方看黄片 黄色小说手机 色色在线 淫色影院 爱就色成人 搞师娘高清 空姐电影网 色兔子电影 QVOD影视 飞机专用电影 我爱弟弟影院 在线大干高清 美眉骚导航(荐) 姐哥网 搜索岛国爱情动作片 男友摸我胸视频 ftp 久草任你爽 谷露影院日韩 刺激看片 720lu刺激偷拍针对华人 国产91偷拍视频超碰 色碰碰资源网 强奸电影网 香港黄页农夫与乡下妹 AV母系怀孕动漫 松谷英子番号 硕大湿润 TEM-032 magnet 孙迪A4U gaovideo免费视频 石墨生花百度云 全部强奸视频淘宝 兄妹番号 秋山祥子在线播放 性交免费视频高青 秋霞视频理论韩国英美 性视频线免费观看视频 秋霞电影网啪啪 性交啪啪视频 秋霞为什么给封了 青青草国产线观1769 秋霞电影网 你懂得视频 日夲高清黄色视频免费看 日本三级在线观影 日韩无码视频1区 日韩福利影院在线观看 日本无翼岛邪恶调教 在线福利av 日本拍拍爽视频 日韩少妇丝袜美臀福利视频 pppd 481 91在线 韩国女主播 平台大全 色999韩自偷自拍 avtt20018 羞羞导航 岛国成人漫画动漫 莲实克蕾儿佐佐木 水岛津实肉丝袜瑜伽 求先锋av管资源网 2828电影x网余罪 龟头挤进子宫 素人熟女在线无码 快播精典一级玩阴片 伦理战场 午夜影院黑人插美女 黄色片大胸 superⅤpn 下载 李宗瑞AV迅雷种子 magnet 抖音微拍秒拍视频福利 大尺度开裆丝袜自拍 顶级人体福利网图片l 日本sexjav高清无码视频 3qingqingcaoguochan 美亚色无极 欧美剧av在线播放 在线视频精品不一样 138影视伦理片 国内自拍六十七页 飞虎神鹰百度云 湘西赶尸886合集下载 淫污视频av在线播放 天堂AV 4313 41st福利视频 自拍福利的集合 nkfuli 宅男 妇道之战高清 操b欧美试频 青青草青娱乐视频分类 5388x 白丝在线网站 色色ios 100万部任你爽 曾舒蓓 2017岛国免费高清无码 草硫影院 最新成人影院 亚洲视频人妻 丝袜美脚 国内自拍在线视频 乱伦在线电影网站 黄色分钟视频 jjzzz欧美 wwwstreamViPerc0M 西瓜影院福利社 JA∨一本道 好看的高清av网 开发三味 6无码magnet 亚洲av在线污 有原步美在线播放456 全网搜北条麻妃视频 9769香港商会开奖 亚洲色网站高清在线 男人天堂人人视频 兰州裸条 好涨好烫再深点视频 1024东方 千度成人影院 av 下载网址 豆腐屋西施 光棍影院 稻森丽奈BT图书馆 xx4s4scc jizzyou日本视频 91金龙鱼富桥肉丝肥臀 2828视屏 免费主播av网站在线看 npp377视频完整版 111番漫画 色色五月天综合 农夫夜 一发失误动漫无修全集在线观看 女捜査官波多野结衣mp4 九七影院午夜福利 莲实克蕾儿检察官 看黄色小视频网站 好吊色270pao在线视频 他很色他很色在线视频 avttt天堂2004 超高级风俗视频2828 2淫乱影院 东京热,嗯, 虎影院 日本一本道88日本黄色毛片 菲菲影视城免费爱视频 九哥福利网导航 美女自摸大尺度视频自拍 savk12 影音先锋镇江少妇 日皮视频 ed2k 日本av视频欧美性爱视频 下载 人人插人人添人射 xo 在线 欧美tv色无极在线影院 色琪琪综合 blz成人免费视频在线 韩国美女主播金荷娜AV 天天看影院夜夜橾天天橾b在线观看 女人和狗日批的视屏 一本道秒播视频在线看 牛牛宝贝在线热线视频 tongxingshiping 美巨乳在线播放 米咪亚洲社区 japanese自拍 网红呻吟自慰视频 草他妈比视频 淫魔病棟4 张筱雨大尺度写真迅雷链接下载 xfplay欧美性爱 福利h操视频 b雪福利导航 成人资源高清无码 xoxo视频小时的免费的 狠狠嗨 一屌待两穴 2017日日爽天天干日日啪 国产自拍第四季 大屁股女神叫声可射技术太棒了 在线 52秒拍福利视频优衣库 美女自拍福利小视频mp4 香港黄页之米雪在线 五月深爱激情六月 日本三级动漫番号及封面 AV凹凸网站 白石优杞菜正播放bd 国产自拍porno chinesewife作爱 日本老影院 日本5060 小峰磁力链接 小暮花恋迅雷链接 magnet 小清新影院视频 香蕉影院费试 校服白丝污视频 品味影院伦理 一本道αⅴ视频在线播放 成人视频喵喵喵 bibiai 口交视频迅雷 性交髙清视频 邪恶道 acg漫画大全漫画皇室 老鸭窝性爱影院 新加坡美女性淫视频 巨乳女棋士在线观看 早榴影院 紧身裙丝袜系列之老师 老司机福利视频导航九妹 韩国娱乐圈悲惨87 国内手机视频福利窝窝 苍井空拍拍拍视频` 波木春香在线看 厕拍极品视影院 草莓呦呦 国产自拍在线播放 中文字幕 我妻美爆乳 爱资源www3xfzy 首页 Α片资源吧 日本三级色体验区 色五月 mp4 瑟瑟啪 影音先锋avzy 里番动画av 八戒TV网络电影 美国唐人十次啦入口 大香蕉在伊线135 周晓琳8部在线观看 蓝沢润 av在线 冰徐璐 SHENGHAIZISHIPIN sepapa999在线观看视频 本庄优花磁力 操bxx成人视频网 爆乳美女护士视频 小黄瓜福利视频日韩 亚卅成人无码在线 小美在线影院 网红演绎KTV勾引闺蜜的男朋友 熟妇自拍系列12 在线av视频观看 褔利影院 天天吊妞o www銆倆ih8 奥特曼av系列免费 三七影视成人福利播放器 少女漫画邪恶 清纯唯美亚洲另类 、商务酒店眼镜小伙有些害羞全程长发白嫩高颜值女友主动 汤元丝袜诱惑 男人影院在线观看视频播放-搜索页 asmr飞机福利 AV女优磁力 mp4 息子交换物语2在线电影 大屁股视频绿岛影院 高老庄免费AⅤ视频 小妇性爱视频 草天堂在线影城 小黄福利 国产性爱自拍流畅不卡顿 国内在线自拍 厕所偷拍在线观看 操美女菊花视频 国产网红主播福利视频在线观看 被窝福利视频合集600 国产自拍第8页 午夜激情福利, mnm625成人视频 福利fl218 韩主播后入式 导航 在线网站你懂得老司机 在线播放av无码赵丽颖 naixiu553。com gaovideo conpoen国产在线 里番gif之大雄医生 无内衣揉胸吸奶视频 慢画色 国产夫妻手机性爱自拍 wwwjingziwou8 史密斯夫妇H版 亚洲男人天堂直播 一本道泷泽萝拉 影音先锋资源网喋喋 丝袜a∨天堂2014 免费高清黄色福利 maomi8686 色小姐播放 北京骞车女郎福利视频 黄色片随意看高清版 韩国舔屄 前台湿了的 香椎 国产sm模特在线观看 翼裕香 新婚生活 做爱视屏日本 综合另类视频网站 快播乱鬼龙 大乳牛奶女老四影院 先锋影院乱伦 乱伦小说网在线视频 色爷爷看片 色视频色视频色视频在线观看 美女tuoyi视频秀色 毛片黄色午夜啪啪啪 少妇啪啪啪视频 裸体瑜伽 magnet xt urn btih 骑兵磁力 全裸欧美色图 人人日 精油按摩小黄片 人与畜生配交电影 吉吉影院瓜皮影院 惠美梨电话接线员番号 刺激小视频在线播放 日韩女优无码性交视频 国产3p视频ftp 偷偷撸电影院 老头强奸处女 茜公主殿下福利视频 国产ts系列合集在线 东京热在线无码高清视频 导航H在线视频 欧美多毛胖老太性交视频 黑兽在线3232 黄色久视频 好了avahaoleav 和体育老师做爱视频 啪啪啪红番阁 欧美熟妇vdeos免费视频 喝水影院 日欧啪啪啪影院 老司机福利凹凸影院 _欧美日一本道高清无码在线,大香蕉无码av久久,国产DVD在线播放】h ujczz成人播放器 97色伦在线综合视频 虐玩大jb 自拍偷拍论理视频播放 广东揭阳短屌肥男和极品黑丝女友啪啪小龟头被粉穴搞得红红的女女的呻吟非常给 强奸女主播ed2k 黄色色播站 在线电影中文字幕无码中文字幕有码国产自拍 在线电影一本道HEYZO加勒比 在线电影 www人人插 手机在线av之家播放 萝莉小电影种子 ftp 偷拍自拍系列-性感Riku 免费日本成人在线网视频 啪啪自拍国产 日妹妹视频 自拍偷拍 老师 3d口球视频 裸体视频 mp4 美邪恶BBB 萝莉被在线免费观看 好屌看色色视频 免賛a片直播绪 国内自拍美腿丝袜第十页 国模SM在线播放 牛牛在线偷拍视频 乱伦电影合集 正在播放_我们不需要男人也一样快乐520-骚碰人人草在线视频,人人看人人摸人人 在线无码优月真里奈 LAF41迅雷磁力 熟女自拍在线看 伦理片87e 香港a级 色午夜福利在线视频 偷窥自拍亚洲快播 古装三级伦理在线电影 XXOO@69 亚洲老B骚AV视频在线 快牙水世界玩走光视频 阴阳人无码磁力 下载 在线大尺度 8o的性生活图片 黄色小漫 JavBiBiUS snis-573 在线观看 蝌蚪寓网 91轻轻草国产自拍 操逼动漫版视频 亚洲女人与非洲黑人群交视频下载 聊城女人吃男人阴茎视频 成人露露小说 美女大肥阴户露阴图 eoumeiseqingzaixian 无毛美女插逼图片 少女在线伦理电影 哥迅雷 欧美男男性快播 韩国147人体艺术 迅雷快播bt下载成人黄色a片h动漫 台湾xxoo鸡 亚洲人体西西人体艺术百度 亚州最美阴唇 九妹网女性网 韩国嫩胸 看周涛好逼在线 先锋影音母子相奸 校园春色的网站是 草逼集 曰本女人裸体照 白人被黑人插入阴道