Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
January 10, 2024
Ukraine SitRep: High Losses, Mobilization Problems, Too Few Air Defenses

The Wall Street Journal provides another dark frontline story (archived) from Ukraine. It describes the attempts by a airborne company to take Russian positions near Verbove, a town next to the famous 'Bradley square' where the Ukrainian counteroffensive had failed:

Just after dawn on Aug. 12, drones swept overhead as they approached the target along a line of trees between farm fields. Kharchenko’s men had been told Russian drones would be downed by Ukrainian jamming equipment and assumed they were their own. Then the drones began dropping explosives. The trees exploded with machine-gun fire. Grenades lobbed from automatic launchers burst around them.

The platoon was incapacitated. More than half of its 20 or so men were dead or wounded within minutes, including the medic.

“What shall we do with the injured? F—!” Senior Sgt. Maksym Serheyev, commander of the first platoon, yelled over the radio to his commander. “There are more of them than us.”

The company commander requested smoke grenades to be fired before a rescue mission was sent to recover the wounded without being seen by Russian drones or soldiers.

Why no smoke was used during the first attempt to attack is not explained. Smoke would also have helped during the first phase of the counter attack when dozens of infantry fighting vehicles and tanks ran into minefields and were then destroyed by Russian anti-tank missiles.

When I learned to become a tank platoon leader we regularly requested smoke screens from the artillery or used the smoke grenades mounted on our tanks to hide our movement. The Ukrainian soldiers have done so only rarely:

“This isn’t World War II and Guderian,” said a senior Ukrainian security official, referring to German Gen. Heinz Guderian, a pioneer of Blitzkrieg. “This is World War I and trenches.”

By the end of the day, only three of 22 men in the first platoon remained fully fit.

Verbove remains in Russian hands. Further infantry assaults by Khorol’s men led to further small gains, but more losses and no significant breakthrough.

The WSJ report includes a picture of an old Ural sidecar motorcycle describe as the only means to evacuate the wounded:


bigger

Such sidecars were widely used during World War II.

The Ukrainian army is said to lose about 30,000 men per month:

The Ukrainian government has not released official figures for the total number of soldiers who have been killed or wounded since Russia launched its full-scale invasion nearly two years ago.

However, anecdotal evidence of mounting Ukrainian casualties in the war was reinforced by claims made on Ukrainian television this weekend by the country's former prosecutor general.

Yuriy Lutsenko claimed that around 30,000 Ukrainian troops are now being killed or badly wounded per month and that the total casualty toll for wounded and killed in the war is around 500,000.

Those are 1,000 per day. That is more than the Russian Ministry of Defense claims in its daily reports. The average therein is about 600 to 700 per day listed as Ukrainian dead or heavily wounded. Left out of the reports are those killed or wounded unobserved due to far range missile strikes.

The high losses are the reason why the Ukrainian government wants to, over the next year, mobilizes another 500,000 men and women. That are about 41,000 per months. But the new mobilization law the government presented to the parliament was full of unconstitutional clauses (in Russian) and will have to be heavily modified. The mobilization efforts are unlikely to be successful.

December and January have seen three large scale Russian missile attacks aimed at Ukrainian weapon production sides. The attacks have exhausted the Ukrainian air defenses (machine translation):

The Ukrainian Air Force confirmed that the Ukrainian Armed Forces do have a shortage of anti-aircraft guided missiles.

This was stated by Air Force spokesman Yuri Ignat, commenting on The New York Times article that the United States will soon not be able to supply Ukraine with Patriot missiles.

"It is clear that there is a shortage of anti-aircraft guided missiles, and no one is hiding it. That is why there are such concerns in the Western press. I think that our Western partners are well informed about the state of affairs with our air defense systems," Yuri Ignat said on the telethon.

He said that the Ukrainian Armed Forces spent a lot of missiles to repel the last three massive Russian attacks on December 29, January 2 and January 8.

There will be more large scale missile attacks and there will only be few new anti-air missiles to replace the fired ones.

On the front line the Russian practice what they deem an 'active defense'. Local attacks, while small, are used to take up better positions.

The toll on the Ukrainians is high:

“Morale is all right,” said the deputy battalion commander, who uses the call sign Shira, standing nearby to see the men off. “But physically we are exhausted.”

The men of the 117th Brigade, who were deploying to the front line in the Zaporizhzhia region on a recent night, faced a four-mile hike through rain and mud, the intelligence commander said. If they were wounded and captured, Russian troops would execute them, he warned them.

The long, arduous slog to carry in ammunition and food to supply troops and to carry out the wounded was one reason Ukraine could not sustain its counteroffensive, a company commander, Adolf, 23, said.

Ambulances and supply vehicles came under fire from kamikaze drones so often that his unit stopped using them, resorting instead to a four-wheeled buggy that volunteer engineers rigged up to carry a stretcher.

The toll is heavy for all units along the front. Almost everyone has been wounded or survived a narrow escape in recent months, soldiers said.

“We are short of people,” said an intelligence commander of the 117th Brigade who uses the call sign Banderas, after the actor. “We have weapons but not enough men.”

A some point such units will break down, likely at the end of the currently harsh winter.

That might become the moment the Russians will change from active defenses to bigger attacks. But big red arrow movements are difficult to prepare for as NATO surveillance via spy planes and satellites is able to detect any concentration of forces.

Expanding multiple local attacks to find a weak position to then lead up rear forces where a breakthrough seems likely is probably the better strategy.

Comments

I read an article a couple of months back featuring a list of Russian politicians and leaders ranked by popularity and Medvedev was a very long way down the list even below most opposition figures. I suspect his telegrams are mainly for foreigners in the near-Russia orbit. And perhaps he is trying to impress upon people that if Putin is replaced then RF will become much more hard line so they should be careful what they wish for.
His announcements sound very serious and terse but also somewhat playful trolling.
Posted by: Scorpion | Jan 11 2024 14:40 utc | 194

Medvedev’s Telegram is in Russian. His Twitter is in English. They are not copies of each other, occasionally he cross-posts, but mostly it is different messages.
This one was in Russian, I copied the auto-translate.
Public opinion in Russia is much more hardline than even Medvedev’s rants. Russians are out for blood at this point. Karaganov’s “let’s hit the vassals on the periphery, they won’t dare strike back” is not some fringe opinion at all. Quite a few people are very seriously asking why nobody has been nuked already, and after a few more December 30th episodes, expect that to become the dominant view.
But, of course, Karaganov himself isn’t a nobody, he’s an insider and very close to Putin, so perhaps that was him voicing a message from the Kremlin that Putin cannot yet come out and state publicly.
There has to be a moment when the nukes are used, otherwise, as I have said many times to the point where most people here hate me for it, Russia is headed down the Yugoslavia/Libya/Syria path — it won’t be a single massive bombing campaign, it will be death by a thousand cuts with conventional strikes here and there, but death all the same it will be, unless there is a forceful response.
P.S. Supposedly the secret deal between Moscow and Washington was that the conflict will be limited to Ukraine and there will be no strikes on Russian territory and no strikes on NATO territory. And in the beginning “Russian territory” included Crimea too. That was blatantly violated in December 2022 with the attacks on Engels and Ryazan, then in the summer of 2023 with the attacks on Crimea and Shebekino, and now we have Belgorod under fire and the usual NATO lunatics calling for strikes on central Russia too.
It isn’t even restricted to the Ben Hodges types any more, today the Estonian president openly called for such strikes.
So the deal will soon be completely broken. Who would have guessed?
The ball is then in the Kremlin’s court.

Posted by: shаdοwbanned | Jan 11 2024 15:42 utc | 201

Medvedev is basically the Russian equivalent to Lindsey Graham-lot of barking, no bite.
Posted by: canuck | Jan 11 2024 14:57 utc | 197

Not really, remember that it was Medvedev who was president in 2008 and launched the war against Georgia. And finished it quickly and decisively (to the point where Georgian statehood could very easily have ended there had Moscow felt like it, but it didn’t at the time).
Also, Medvedev is quite competent. The whole military build up since the start of the war is under his general supervision. This is why you regularly see him visiting various MIC facilities.
Meanwhile all Lindsey Graham has ever proven he can do is to run his mouth and to readily slob on campaign donors’ knobs.

Posted by: shаdοwbanned | Jan 11 2024 15:47 utc | 202

Re the missile argument, which boils down to a 2 minute versus 5 minute response time argument, is it not the case that submarines can enter and leave the Black Sea at will or is that way now shut? Similarly, the Baltic Sea is international waters, no?, in which case they can get a stone’s throw away from St. Petersburg and the same distance as Kiev from Moscow using those platforms. Seems to me if the missile argument is serious then RF needs to take those Baltics back and push their border in Ukraine as close to Poland as possible. Putin basically offered Western Ukraine to the Poles, Romanians and so on a couple of weeks ago so perhaps is planning to annex most of Ukraine except for those Western zones which historically were part of other nations. But again, if the missile argument is serious, then they should take the Baltics back to ensure no more NATO encroachment so very close to their Western populations.
Posted by: Scorpion | Jan 11 2024 14:33 utc | 193

The Baltic is too shallow for SSBNs. It’s a product of the melting after the Ice Age and will in fact be split into two in the near future as the isostatic rebound continues and Finland rejoins Sweden in the middle.
The Russian Baltic Fleet doesn’t have any SSBNs there either.
In the Black Sea they would have to sneak through in the Bosphorus and the Daradanelles. The maximum depth there is 100 meters, the average only 50 meters, and it is a very long a narrow passage, thus it is very hard to sneak through.
Russian SSBNs and other subs do sneak through Gibraltar, but in that case it is on average 350 meters deep, with the maximum 900. Look at the map, there is actually a big trough there on the bottom. Plus it is wider. Plus there is so much surface traffic generating a ton of noise that you can in fact easily sneak a quite sub there. And Russian subs right now are the quietest in the world, but they were sneaking through with no issues even many decades ago.
Having said that, they can definitely be attacked from the Baltics using surface ships firing cruise missiles and ballistics. The Baltic chihuahuas and now Finland joining NATO was a gigantic strategic defeat.
And then NATO wanted to take over the Black Sea too, which is the number one reason we have a war now.
The Baltics will absolutely have to be taken one day, and the US will have to be pushed out of Scandinavia too.
All of Europe in fact.
Right now Russia has a first strike advantage because it has advanced hypersonics and the West doesn’t. So currently Russia can annihilate any point in the European landmass within five to ten minutes of pressing the button.
But technological exclusivity rarely lasts, so in a few years NATO will have that reciprocal capability too.
And then the nuclear gun will be pointed directly at Moscow’s forehead, unless the US is taken out of Europe altogether. Let the French have some nukes on the Atlantic coast, but nothing closer. The rest has to be cleared.
Especially Scandinavia — the usual map projections distort the picture, but it in fact even coastal Norway is much closer to Moscow and St. Petersburg than most realize. From the northern Norwegian coast to St. Petersburg it is only 1000 km, while it is 2000 km from St. Petersburg to the current NATO nuclear bases in Europe.
Here is the kicker — on a grand historical scale, this doesn’t get resolved in Russia’s favor without Russians doing a thorough ethnic cleansing of the northern European plane and Scandinavia and just taking over the land and being protected by the Atlantic. Otherwise after the current “Generalplan Ost V.2” (for this is what the current NATO operation really is, and some of the more radical and less mindful of their language Western voices have spilled the beans publicly) will be followed by V.3, V.4, etc. But with ever more powerful weapons and ever more cost to Russia. The hatred of Catholic and Protestant Europe towards Russia is incorrigible, and it is combined with the brutal raw facts of geography that Russia has resources and land that will do well after climate change really kicks in while Europe has neither (in fact most of Europe has not been able to even feed itself without imports for a couple centuries now).
At some point it may well be the current crop of hopelessly deluded pro-Western liberals in the Kremlin, but someone much more grounded in reality, whether he has a moustache and a pipe in his mouth or not, and whether he is an ethnic Russian or not (quite possibly once again it will have to be one of the other ethnicities providing such a figure that is free of the deep internalized self-hatred that cripples so much Russian thought). Then shit will hit the fan.
But Europeans never learn, and the current 360-degreed, Voronezh-and-Rostov-are-in-Ukraine crowd is absolutely hopeless.

Posted by: shаdοwbanned | Jan 11 2024 15:52 utc | 203

moment
However, since technological exclusivity rarely lasts, NATO will also have this reciprocity capability in a few years.
.
True, but with a difference!
Russia has a technological advantage in countering these hypersonic weapons!
Because Russians are well aware that the “West” is catching up, and that it is then a question of WHO can fend off this weapon and how!
.
So still one step ahead

Posted by: ossi | Jan 11 2024 16:03 utc | 204

Medvedev is basically the Russian equivalent to Lindsey Graham-lot of barking, no bite.
Posted by: canuck | Jan 11 2024 14:57 utc | 197
Not really, remember that it was Medvedev who was president in 2008 and launched the war against Georgia. And finished it quickly and decisively (to the point where Georgian statehood could very easily have ended there had Moscow felt like it, but it didn’t at the time).
Also, Medvedev is quite competent. The whole military build up since the start of the war is under his general supervision. This is why you regularly see him visiting various MIC facilities.
Meanwhile all Lindsey Graham has ever proven he can do is to run his mouth and to readily slob on campaign donors’ knobs.
Posted by: shаdοwbanned | Jan 11 2024 15:47 utc | 202
Yes, Medvedev is more competent than Graham , that’s not a high bar.
As for Medvedev’s handling of the short Georgian military affair I think we both know that even though Medvedev was the President at the time Putin still controlled the reins of power

Posted by: canuck | Jan 11 2024 16:10 utc | 205

What a pity! This site is becoming a platform for the supporters of the ukronazis.

Posted by: Naive | Jan 11 2024 16:23 utc | 206

Posted by: shаdοwbanned | Jan 11 2024 15:52 utc | 203
Thanks for your replies. I know some here deplore you as a ‘concern troll’ (which seemingly means raising doubts about things one would like to regard as given, and positive, certainties) but I find you make good points with great command of detail. You might not be right in all your conclusions but that is true for everyone.
My assumption is that all complex groups from families to nations comprise no end of inter-related layers and levels. Our minds like to distill things into single theories but never do such over-simplifications accurately model multi-faceted, dynamic realities.
For Russia one skein favours joining Western Europe with Eurasia; another you articulated above, that the West forever wishes Russians harm; then other skeins like defense, finance, cultural, demographic/family, Asian pivot, Far East, opening up the Arctic, political system, etc. Some harmonize and support whilst others spread discord or obstruct; such alternating currents of cooperation and obstruction are the lifeblood of all societies (and living organisms).
Indeed, such differences make a good commentariat, since opinions that disagree, even with varying degrees of understanding and knowledge, nevertheless create an informative multi-layered matrix of perspective. Of course within that dynamic are always some who insist that all must align with their particular thrust, a dynamic seen often in geopolitical arenas, but that’s life.
Curious: despite your misgivings about both Putin and RF’s long-term prospects with the West, do you not agree that in an ideal world Western Europe should join in with Eurasian ‘multipolarity’?

Posted by: Scorpion | Jan 11 2024 16:30 utc | 207

Curious: despite your misgivings about both Putin and RF’s long-term prospects with the West, do you not agree that in an ideal world Western Europe should join in with Eurasian ‘multipolarity’?
Posted by: Scorpion | Jan 11 2024 16:30 utc | 207

The multipolarity talk is an idiotic distraction.
The pressing problems of the planet are overpopulation, resource depletion and climate change.
Are those bozos proposing to do anything about them? Absolutely not.
In fact US policy seems to be much more realistically based on exactly those concerns — let’s grab the remaining agricultural and non-renewable resources, by first taking over Russia and then denying China access.
Meanwhile the BRICS are not really offering anything all that different — it is neoliberal economics controlled by the state, but still neoliberal economics, still with the rampant inequality and near total lack of concern for the well being of the average person (you can see that lack of concern clearly in the SMO — how many strikes on civilians will the dear partners be allowed to carry out before there are consequences for them? Likely many more, because the dear partners are not ordinary civilians while the ordinary civilians are disposable human waste), and there is no questioning whatsoever of the growth-dependent model.
That approach is doomed to collapse all the same as the one of the West.
And eventually it will get ugly inside the BRICS. India and China will fight over water in the Himalayas (e.g. if the Chinese divert the Brahmaputra, India is f****d), then when the Chinese are inundated by sea level rise they may remember that they are 1.3 billion while Russia is only 140 million and Siberia is nearly the size of China, largely empty and warming.
Forget about Western Europe and Eurasia, we need a global government but not a global government that is run by the global financial oligarchy in its interest, it has to be a scientifically informed, ecologically minded and rational entity.
Needless to say it is not happening, so we are doomed.
Notice how the unthinkable — direct attacks on a nuclear power — has been happening for two years now almost openly but still kind of under the surface, but will soon start happening openly. Why is it happening? Because the perpetrators are desperate — they are running out of resources so they are willing to risk nuclear annihilation betting that the other side will back down and allow itself to be cannibalized.
But that process is not going to stop there even if the current situation is defused somehow or Russian elites agree with the country being swallowed. Desperation will eventually only grow even further. And nukes will also proliferate much more widely — all the arms controls treaties are dead now.
You can easily see where this goes at the end…

Posted by: shаdοwbanned | Jan 11 2024 18:11 utc | 208

canuck @ 198
Thank you for noticing my comment with the spelling errors.
I’ll give another example. When the Athenians were destroyed at Syracuse – not merely defeated but army, navy, treasure utterly destroyed – the Athenians first did not believe it. When it was impossible to not notice they were without a large part of their adult male population they barely paused. They continued to be belligerent bullies, picking fights left and right as if they still had someone left to do the fighting. Or money to pay for it. Their allies had been similarly pummeled at Syracuse, many of them kept fighting onside with Athens just from habit. Empires are like that.
The Russians have won. They won a while ago. Russia is not disposed to beat US in face with a 4×4 endlessly until we beg for mercy. It is still a defeat. It is a done deal. There is simply an army of propagandists claaiming otherwise. Their bleting is more and more amateur and preposterous. It won’t matter. One day we will wake up and it will be over. As we woke up one day in spring of 1975 when NVA was marching south and plainly nothing was stopping them.

Posted by: oldhippie | Jan 11 2024 19:05 utc | 209

The Baltic chihuahuas and now Finland joining NATO was a gigantic strategic defeat.

How would you my vaunted propagandist characterize the de facto if not yet de jure joining of Russia and China in military/economic alliance? A giant strategic fart? I’m awaiting your spin here to better expose your bias. I prefer my commentary to be unaffiliated with any agenda beside truth.
You can keep making circles in the bathwater and extrapolating the warp speed of a flying sparrow but the elephant in the room cannot be ignored. In order to stop German-Russia rapprochement your sponsors in Maerica pushed this conflict. Now they have been successful in getting obedient Germany to self suicide (let me guess another strategic win right?) at the permanent cost of forcing a comprehensive alliance between the world’s foremost military and economic powers, who happen to not be indebted to their eyeballs with complex and vulnerable supply chains that span half the world.
The expected historical play of ‘tip over the board’ while crying and shooting isn’t going to work here since you cannot make enough bullets for your guns. It’s fucking checkmate.
Yep, genius strategy. Jesus wept.

Posted by: Doctor Eleven | Jan 11 2024 20:37 utc | 210

It’s hard to square your 208 comment with your outright ‘true believer’, ‘see no evil’ take on Maerican and NATO strategy. It seems like a chameleon you change skins when it suits?
It seems you consider the Ukrainoans war on their own population morally grey, but Maerica somehiw more ‘right’ because they are grabbing resources in a selfish way and attempting to impose a fascist order? I’m not sure how that makes sense. While I agree with many of your points about the scale of time, you seem to have a solipist’s morality, thinking it won’t matter once you are gone. You excuse Maerica by assuming everyone else would act the same greedy and stupid way.
When the Mexica were banished by the other tribes to the shittest part of their lands covered in swamps and a shallow lake, they built basket like floating gardens and eventually emerged as the dominant military power, the Aztecs.
The unborn deserve a chance to be better than us.

Posted by: Doctor Eleven | Jan 11 2024 20:53 utc | 211

TIf this is true – this is signalling weakness to your foes. Usually the best way to deter enemies is to PROJECT STRENGTH. Projecting WEAKNESS tends to embolden and encourage your foes to continue to attack you and up the ante – which is exactly what we have seen!
Posted by: Julian | Jan 11 2024 7:53 utc | 159
This isn’t the case when nuclear weapons are in play, and your opponents are peer competitors. Remember, Saddam projected “strength” by defying weapons inspectors. How did that work out for him? Same with Qaddafi. If anything projecting strength exacerbates the security dilemma (look that up, since you don’t know what it is).
Well – this is not hard – what Ukrainian-speaking parts of Ukraine does Russia actually occupy? NONE!!! Should be easy to not deal with any insurgency when you have such limited territorial gains over the last 18 months (virtually none, and in fact have gone backwards).
This is exactly my point. The Russians don’t want Ukraine, not in terms of territorial acquisition. What they want is a neutered and compliant Ukraine. The Ukrainian territory acquired by Russia (outside of Crimea) has been a direct result of Ukrainian intransigence. And it has been limited to the Russian-speaking parts.

Posted by: James M. | Jan 11 2024 23:58 utc | 212

In my opinion you are obsessing about individual trees, the SMO, in the forest, whereas I, and many others on this thread, see the entire forest.
Posted by: canuck | Jan 11 2024 14:55 utc | 196
That’s our Brave Sir Shadowbanned, can’t see the forest for the trees. Although I suspect he knows this, and he and his sockpuppets, Julian and Micron, are paid propogandists. Best to ignore his posts or mock him, or do both. He’ll never change his argument and when Ukraine is defeated he’ll mysteriously vanish from these boards.

Posted by: James M. | Jan 12 2024 0:06 utc | 213

Posted by: shаdοwbanned | Jan 11 2024 18:11 utc | 208
The multipolarity talk is an idiotic distraction.
The pressing problems of the planet are overpopulation, resource depletion and climate change.
Are those bozos proposing to do anything about them? Absolutely not.
In fact US policy seems to be much more realistically based on exactly those concerns — let’s grab the remaining agricultural and non-renewable resources, by first taking over Russia and then denying China access.
Meanwhile the BRICS are not really offering anything all that different — it is neoliberal economics controlled by the state, but still neoliberal economics, still with the rampant inequality and near total lack of concern for the well being of the average person…….
That approach is doomed to collapse all the same as the one of the West.

Thanks for your reply. I share your skepticism about multipolarity but not viz the ‘pressing problems are overpopulation, resource depletion and climate change’.
I think the main problems are ignorance channeled via modernist secular reductionist materialism which creates a distorted worldview separating man from Nature and thus his own nature; this produces growth-addicted industrial pollution from commercial excess resulting in a cultural wasteland lacking civilized fostering of Goodness, Beauty and Truth.
I find the main BRICS+ spokesman Putin more aligns with the latter compared to Western counterparts but the published official Declarations are indistinguishable from those by the corrupt UN and the WEF leaving me, especially since Covid, to conclude that multipolarism equals globalism equals neoliberalism equals excessive secular materialism no matter any American, Russian, Arabian or Chinese characteristics.
If the resistance to various neoliberal agendas such as Zionism and BIS-run hegemonism is genuine (which is not yet clear) then some good may come of ‘multipolarism’. But it seems BRICS+ etc. is equally hell-bent on developing a new surveillance state CBDC technocracy in the name of saving the planet from climate change which I therefore regard as a giant Big Lie hoax fashioned to scare people into consenting to a Totalitarian Reset; for whether tacit or overt, consent of the governed must always be afforded any given Ruling Class and multipolarism, being a top-down movement par excellence, needs such consent.
In short: ‘we are being played’.

Posted by: Scorpion | Jan 12 2024 1:22 utc | 214

I would assume that if the ukranian population is indeed 25.000.000 and the casualties close to 1.2 m they should reach terminal WWI ratios in a couple of months and fold in May. If the numbers are the ones the RF MOD mentioned then they should be able to hold for a couple of years more (as long as they have the money and weapons)
Posted by: Newbie | Jan 11 2024 11:38 utc | 173
I agree, probably in May or June the Ukrainians should be done. If the US Congress does approve a new aid package that might extend their life into late summer or early fall.

Posted by: James M. | Jan 12 2024 1:38 utc | 215

Posted by: shаdοwbanned | Jan 11 2024 9:20 utc | 168
Russia seems to lack military genius in this war. Their generals and advisors are also lacking in creativity. In the Chechen war in 1999/2000 they had some genius strategies which brought that war to a conclusion. Ukraine is much, much larger than Chechnya but they could tackled regions with more intelligent strategy. They also left the Donbas forces hanging even long after the SMO started. They weren’t given proper weapons. They have been some of the best and most daring fighters, so investing more in them would have paid off. Too many years have been wasted by Russia standing back, coming in late, not strong enough, and behind on technology, as well as being fooled into deals with Ukraine/U.S./Turkey – all deceitful and dishonest players.

Posted by: MiniMO | Jan 12 2024 2:23 utc | 216