US Soldiers (Afghanistan) How good are they?

[LozHinge the Unhinged]

Of that I've no doubt. Thing is, when I did that to old Smeggums, I got a temp ban...

The ban you got was because you failed entirely to say it with love in your heart and a smile on your lips

What's illogical about it? I'm not saying that the USSR came up with -

Phase 1) Illicit funding & infiltration of Left-leaning institutions.
Phase 2) ???
Phase 3) True Communism!

Nice dodge! :admiring glance:

Not saying you are illogical on this particular point. I merely observe that you are trying to fill in blanks with a hypothesis that is less convincing than the one I put forward - your suggestion requires evidence that is lacking whereas mine relies only on what we already know of human nature. I could mention Occam's Razor but I don't want to be modkilled - oh wait, we aren't playing Forum Mafia, are we. D'oh. OK, I'll refer to Maimonides, an early exponent of what it came to be known as.

What I'm talking about was the incontrovertible fact that "Phase 1" occurred, on a significant level. I used to harangue my wife because she claimed the IRA somehow had legitimacy, when in reality the USSR had been the author and backer for most of the world's terrorist movements for decades. It's always fun to ignore the fact that Nelson Mandela had the same Soviet backing that his fellow Nobel recipient Yasser Arafat did...

I am not denying the existence of the Soviet efforts to destabilise the West, only its efficacy. Western society is following the course it is regardless of any outside agitation (as distinct from terrorism or threat of nuclear war).

Still wrong, aren't you. Society shapes gov't,

Seriously? Bwahahaha!

They shape each other perhaps, if I'm being generous. Gov't holds the whip hand (until or unless the populace eventually bites it off). There's a whole argument waiting in the wings on this issue, trust me, but I am not starting that tonight

so if you can instill controversy and self-doubt in a democratic system, it can cause it to be far weaker and ready for conquest from a totalitarian or at least unified one.

Instill? How can you instill weakness and controversy in a system whose defining characteristics include those two very things?

Sorry, proven false, and years ago at that. I had trouble finding a single link among all the examples. However, they <do> provide a perfect example of how that USSR funding bore fruit; quite a lot of bang for very little, er, Ruble.

Proven? I am forever amused by the evidence you offer as proof
AI is left wing because people who think AI is left wing say AI is left wing. Ah-huh.

You don't hear much about AI's attempts to intercede in human rights issues in China, etc because it is not in the West's interests to have a population (or portion thereof) all fired up about injustices carried out by a foreign power about whom the West can do nothing. That would be bad for business, amongst other things
You do however get to hear all about AI accusing the US because, "Isn't Democracy grand, it even allows loony fringe groups to make tits of themselves with crazy unfounded accusations!". No sweat.

Your attempts to toy with me aside, the history is all but undeniable. The Germanic "Barbarians" desired incorporation and assimilation, while the Islamists desired extermination.

I'm not sure we are having the same conversation as each other right here.

Agreed about the cross purposes, and that there was no "Golden Age", but I'm not sure we're on terms about the rest. The Byzantine culture is stupidly forgotten about, perhaps because it also is an unpleasant reminder of the hostility of Islam.

I was pretty sure that Byzantine culture preceded Islam and is only relevant as being the culture that Islam emerged from. In a similar way to that in which we view pre-1917 and post-revolution Russia - i.e. not the same thing.

Hardly; just haven't enough time.

Busy socialite, answering inappropriate emails and such no doubt.

Definitely not the case. In point of fact, it was only with about a week to go that suddenly there was a strange awareness that we were going to do something that previously would have been considered on the level of supernatural. I suspect it was because of the Battle of Khafji - which modern media hindsight claims generally claims a strategic miscalculation by Iraq. In reality, it was intended to be a major Iraqi offensive resulting in strategic positioning, but since the Iraqi army was solidly based on the USSR's doctrine, it exposed just how worthless those post-WW2 tactical considerations could be on the modern battlefield. When you get your arse kicked by retreating Marine LAV's and the Saudi National Guard, it kind of reduces the "battle hardened veterans" storyline.

Interesting commentary aside ... but no, you'd have to be simple-minded to believe that Kuwait was ever going to be left to rot.

It doesn't matter how battle-hardened you are when you haven't eaten in close to a week and have no idea what's happening...

True.

Re-read. I'm saying that the "J00z are the root of all Ebil" song & dance was at best a sideshow prior to the "Naqbah". Once a rag-tag Israeli army defeated the best that the Arab world had to offer, though...

I still think you are missing my point on this. I like the jingoism though

As ever, well-trained/motivated/well-armed beats hysterical/hate-filled/rage-boy nearly every day of the week.

If THAT's the case, then you best do me homage, and fast. I <am> the "marrow-eminent" one, after all (though perhaps it's easier for you to just use "High Lord")...

You misspelled drunk as a lord, I think :razzle:

So having your hands on other's rightful stuff is prejudice? Do tell.

Ooh, self-referential argument alert! I love these! *excited clapping*

I see you have spared us the trouble of defining rightful ownership here. Good, saves time and effort.

Why? There's a large segment, myself included, that don't believe he's done any good with the multiple interventions, and that Paulson snookered Bush in the first place.

It's entirely possible that no amount of intervention can fix the broken that the US economy actually is. But thanks for not challenging my assertion that intervention was necessary.

Oh, well, I'm glad that we will soon number in such august ranks as those you inhabit. Tell me, which d'y'think is kinder and gentler - your "Care Pathways" or our "Lives System"? Rather Orwellian when labeled as "Death Panels", to be sure...

These days, I am starting to lean towards "What's Mine Is Mine, Now Pass Me The Ammunition So I Can Hold Onto It All". This is possibly because no one can, will or is able to, help me with my particular issues so why should I give a **** about theirs?

Damn, my lefty is washing off.

There are two schools of thought when looking at UK and US society, although the ratio of adherents differs in each case. There are those who say, We are all in this together and those who think, We are all in this for ourselves. Do I really have to pick a side, can't I just alternate according to mood?

[BobCox2]

Well I got the shooter of the week contest going over here in Sol Cal.

Chris Donner's old new now.

[jmervyn]

The ban you got was because you failed entirely to say it with love in your heart and a smile on your lips

Not true at all! Smeg was on my side... eww.

I merely observe that you are trying to fill in blanks with a hypothesis that is less convincing than the one I put forward - your suggestion requires evidence that is lacking whereas mine relies only on what we already know of human nature.

I don't want you to cut yourself on the Razor, but you seem to continue misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm not saying that the USSR's funding & support <caused> Western Leftists, or caused them to be nearly unhinged in their current beliefs & perceptions. I'm saying that the USSR's funding & support - funded and supported them. Movements will always be more successful in their goals when funded and supported (Cap'n Ob).

I am not denying the existence of the Soviet efforts to destabilise the West, only its efficacy. Western society is following the course it is regardless of any outside agitation (as distinct from terrorism or threat of nuclear war).

See above. What it seems like you're claiming is that massive funding of agitprop and sedition by the USSR have made no difference in the degree of pro-Soviet, pro-Marxist mentality within the populace. Doesn't that claim seem more than a little silly to you, really? Here, since we're discussing it - wouldn't the blithe attitude from the West regarding Soviet gulags and the hundreds of millions dead thanks to the COMINTERN compared to the intense hate and agitation regarding the "torture" of Iraqis seem more than a little misplaced if one was a truly non-partisan observer?

There's a whole argument waiting in the wings on this issue, trust me, but I am not starting that tonight

Yes, seriously, but I agree it's not worth the effort in this perfectly useful thread.

Instill? How can you instill weakness and controversy in a system whose defining characteristics include those two very things?

First, I dispute the concepts that not only self-doubt is a characteristic of Democratic society, but that it's also an inherent weakness. Use the alternate "introspection" if you prefer, and to counter-point, I don't know just how much introspection was going on back during the heyday of the Great Society.

Proven? I am forever amused by the evidence you offer as proof
AI is left wing because people who think AI is left wing say AI is left wing. Ah-huh.

Fine. Prove AI has a pro-Western bias, or is even truly impartial. Can't be done, and statements from the organization back that up.

That would be bad for business, amongst other things

Doesn't wash. Not only are AI generally favorable to the sort of looney leftists who would delight in BEING bad for business, but filing a report about Chinese (and similar) behavior and burying it in a locked cabinet in a closet behind a sign saying "Beware of the Leopard" isn't exactly the same treatment they give their anti-Western diatribes.

I'm not sure we are having the same conversation as each other right here.

Perhaps not. Is it worth unraveling?

Busy socialite, answering inappropriate emails and such no doubt.

but no, you'd have to be simple-minded to believe that Kuwait was ever going to be left to rot.

This is me thinking that still doesn't rise to your claim of "sophistry".

As ever, well-trained/motivated/well-armed beats hysterical/hate-filled/rage-boy nearly every day of the week.

Hardly. You better go watch Dances with Wolves Avatar a couple dozen more times. Honestly, though, motivated & hysterical can be bedfellows, and both well-trained and well-armed doesn't always spell success. The Iraqis were remarkably armed & equipped; I still have some of their kit.

There was some strange Arab superstition about not dying with your boots on, though. We found hundreds of thousands of boots lying in the desert...

I see you have spared us the trouble of defining rightful ownership here. Good, saves time and effort.

Nice. Try "work of one's own" and "purchases" on fer size.

But thanks for not challenging my assertion that intervention was necessary.

Weren't you just calling that sophistry a couple of paragraphs ago?

These days, I am starting to lean towards "What's Mine Is Mine, Now Pass Me The Ammunition So I Can Hold Onto It All". This is possibly because no one can, will or is able to, help me with my particular issues so why should I give a **** about theirs?

Snicker. As if you had access to a firearm and ammunition to begin with!

Damn, my lefty is washing off.

I suggest heavy doses of Garofalo venom, Maher brains, and Olbermann semen. Assuming you can get sufficient amounts of all three.

Do I really have to pick a side, can't I just alternate according to mood?

Sorry, buddy, Obama sent back the bust - remember? For all those yowling earlier about Blair being Shrubbo's lapdog, I think the "special relationship" is well & truly destroyed now thanks to THE WON. Shouldn't that make them HAPPIER? Never satisfied, that lot.

[LozHinge the Unhinged]

[...]

I don't want you to cut yourself on the Razor, but you seem to continue misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm not saying that the USSR's funding & support <caused> Western Leftists, or caused them to be nearly unhinged in their current beliefs & perceptions. I'm saying that the USSR's funding & support - funded and supported them. Movements will always be more successful in their goals when funded and supported (Cap'n Ob).

Unhinged seems to be the word for 2013. Just an observation ...

There's no misunderstanding, see next para.

See above. What it seems like you're claiming is that massive funding of agitprop and sedition by the USSR have made no difference in the degree of pro-Soviet, pro-Marxist mentality within the populace.

Indeed, I claim just that. There is no pro-Soviet, pro-Marxist mentality within the majority, or even a significant minority of the populace. A small section, yes, but currently and historically non-significant.
The difference in opinion between us stems in part from a labeling disagreement. I find your labels to be alarmist / hysterical / hysterically funny whereas you view my POV as impossibly naive or something. What you view as Marxist, I view as leave no citizen behind - yes, I use that turn of phrase advisedly.
The kind of socialism / marxism / communism that the USSR was attempting to promote / agitate / fund is a far cry from the kind of social conscience / caring society that bleeding-heart, sitting-on-the-fence liberals espouse. The one does not demand or preclude the other.

Doesn't that claim seem more than a little silly to you, really? Here, since we're discussing it - wouldn't the blithe attitude from the West regarding Soviet gulags and the hundreds of millions dead thanks to the COMINTERN compared to the intense hate and agitation regarding the "torture" of Iraqis seem more than a little misplaced if one was a truly non-partisan observer?

Again, this connects back to human nature. Given the choice of complaining about a. something one can do nothing about and b. something one feels one can do something about (rightly or wrongly), the rational person is going to choose b.

[...]

First, I dispute the concepts that not only self-doubt is a characteristic of Democratic society, but that it's also an inherent weakness. Use the alternate "introspection" if you prefer, and to counter-point, I don't know just how much introspection was going on back during the heyday of the Great Society.

I may have been waxing cynical at this point as I find currently myself unwilling to defend the idea that Democracy's propensity for self-doubt is a weakness. It is a feature though and time will tell whether it is a force for good or ill as far as stability is concerned.

Fine. Prove AI has a pro-Western bias, or is even truly impartial. Can't be done, and statements from the organization back that up.

We've touched on this. AI is essentially an organisation that relies upon the tolerance of government to survive as an entity. Islam and the former USSR weren't / aren't famous for their tolerance.
The worst you can accuse AI of is the fact that they make lemonade only in countries where you aren't machine-gunned for handling lemons. One truly mangled metaphor

Doesn't wash. Not only are AI generally favorable to the sort of looney leftists who would delight in BEING bad for business, but filing a report about Chinese (and similar) behavior and burying it in a locked cabinet in a closet behind a sign saying "Beware of the Leopard" isn't exactly the same treatment they give their anti-Western diatribes.

What I may define as "civilisation", especially where human rights are concerned, you lambast and denounce as marxism. The pejorative looney leftist moniker doesn't help us identify what AI is about.
As for the locked cupboard, some group moaning about the Chinese approach to human rights with absolutely no hope of achieving their goals is not only un-newsworthy, it is unhelpful as regards the official diplomatic approach to relations with the Big Yellow Peril. Hence we don't read about the issues in our (mainstream - or favourite) newspapers, websites, etc.

Perhaps not. Is it worth unraveling?

I forbid you to even try

Heh, I had to take part in a presentation to EDS one time. Unfortunately, or fortunately, the battle-axe we needed to convince was not available for the meeting. Just as well, she had a fearsome rep and I was still young and green. Good times.

This is me thinking that still doesn't rise to your claim of "sophistry".

We are still both unconvinced that you understand what sophistry actually means.

Hardly. You better go watch Dances with Wolves Avatar a couple dozen more times. Honestly, though, motivated & hysterical can be bedfellows, and both well-trained and well-armed doesn't always spell success. The Iraqis were remarkably armed & equipped; I still have some of their kit.

Put the three together - trained, motivated and equipped - and the only reason you lose is either overwhelming numbers (This Is Sparta!) or through dumb luck (Battle of Midway, anyone?).

There was some strange Arab superstition about not dying with your boots on, though. We found hundreds of thousands of boots lying in the desert...

Arab? I thought that was a Texan thing.

Nice. Try "work of one's own" and "purchases" on fer size.

Big conversation, that one. Money is a construct of society. Society determines what ownership actually is.

*big punch-up ensues*

Weren't you just calling that sophistry a couple of paragraphs ago?

Here. let me explain ...

*rolls up newspaper*

Snicker. As if you had access to a firearm and ammunition to begin with!

Damn those stupid gun controls ...!

Wait. What?

I suggest heavy doses of Garofalo venom, Maher brains, and Olbermann semen. Assuming you can get sufficient amounts of all three.

In a free market society, I obviously can get hold of a supplier who will lie about the authenticity of such items. Problem solved

Sorry, buddy, Obama sent back the bust - remember? For all those yowling earlier about Blair being Shrubbo's lapdog, I think the "special relationship" is well & truly destroyed now thanks to THE WON. Shouldn't that make them HAPPIER? Never satisfied, that lot.

The only time the special relationship is ever at risk is when the KY supply is running low.

*pucker*

[jmervyn]

Indeed, I claim just that. There is no pro-Soviet, pro-Marxist mentality within the majority, or even a significant minority of the populace. A small section, yes, but currently and historically non-significant.

Ah, that's a good start. So, the next step: you're wrong. IIRC Around 60% of the American populace thinks Socialism is a viable economic system, no doubt in part because of the slippery words AKA labels you identify. Around 39% thinks that Communism is a viable economic system. Close to 20% thinks that the USSR was a "good" nation, or at least no different than the U.S. I can find the polling data I saw that backs this up (I'm sure it will take a while), but it aligns quite closely with both Obama's approval numbers and the degree of Democrat Party allegiance (though I'm not silly enough to say that it actually <tracks> said data, as in they're all the same individuals).

What you view as Marxist, I view as leave no citizen behind - yes, I use that turn of phrase advisedly.

Not really. That's misconception on you part. I do try to be somewhat careful with my use of those labels, since I apply them so readily. It is why I find "Progressive" to be so legitimate - it is indeed the same Nanny Statism impulse that led to the Great Society (and Prohibition, and Eugenics, and Planned Parenthood). Marxism is a much narrower classification, though it happens to be the one Obama inhabits.

Perhaps you're inadvertently trying to argue that Obama is no Marxist? If so, I'll flay you to ribbons with Occam's Razor.

The kind of socialism / marxism / communism that the USSR was attempting to promote / agitate / fund is a far cry from the kind of social conscience / caring society that bleeding-heart, sitting-on-the-fence liberals espouse. The one does not demand or preclude the other.

That's actually quite a false statement, though I'm not surprised you believe it. That which the USSR was IN THEORY achieving was exact-a-feckin-lutely identical to that the bleeding of heart support, and reveal when scratched a little deeper. It's why the organized Progressive Left was so enamored of both Russian Communism and German and Italian Fascism - they all were perceived as your "complete safety net" systems by the American and Western Left.

I'm sorry if you don't like the facts, but they're the only ones there are. There's plenty of historical documentation - some of it derided now as "revisionist" because the Progressives thought they had safely buried the facts beneath the mountain of Great Lie.

Again, this connects back to human nature. Given the choice of complaining about a. something one can do nothing about and b. something one feels one can do something about (rightly or wrongly), the rational person is going to choose b.

Not true, even though that's their frequently proffered excuse, insofar as not only are AI's denouncements of questionable efficacy (there's your word back, thanks) in the first place but also were admittedly unidirectional and in violation of their own supposed rules.

I may have been waxing cynical at this point as I find currently myself unwilling to defend the idea that Democracy's propensity for self-doubt is a weakness. It is a feature though and time will tell whether it is a force for good or ill as far as stability is concerned.

I believe it is not a weakness in any fashion. Germany has seen the dark side of that, and America has had a couple of examples already, such as the internment camps at Manzana, Prohibition, and the (original) NRA.

AI is essentially an organisation that relies upon the tolerance of government to survive as an entity. Islam and the former USSR weren't / aren't famous for their tolerance.
The worst you can accuse AI of is the fact that they make lemonade only in countries where you aren't machine-gunned for handling lemons.

No way is that weaselly claim good enough to pass the smell test. AI makes their pronouncements safely ensconced in the West. Yet all the true human rights issues no longer pass from their lips to God's ears, but rather from people working outside their system. I'm not cynical enough to claim that they suppress true violations. I'm simply more than cynical enough to recognize they're nothing but another bloated bureaucratic pseudo-NGO raking in cash and just going through the motions, and you're not cynical enough to realize your world view on these things is indeed beyond naive. I call my horrible view of the world and my fellow humanity "realistic". Then again, you know I believe in Original Sin.

What I may define as "civilisation", especially where human rights are concerned, you lambast and denounce as marxism.

Completely honest here - I truly hope that's not the case. Do you really view civilization as best embodied by the Nanny State, and that State being a rather abusive Nanny?

Here's a remarkably succinct and effective put-down of that mentality, noted in responses to Cass Sunstein's review of a pro-collectivization book:

...So, tell me again the difference between (1) living under such a far-left regime and (2) being a monk of a religious order that imposes harsh discipline 24 hours a day, or (3) being a dog trained to kill other dogs in a kennel, or (4) being a slave of an autocratic ruler who delights in controlling every aspect of every subject including death? Actually, #2 provides much, much more freedom in that you are allowed to leave freely (non-Islamic, since Islam demands death for leaving it) and #3, the dog can always lick its own balls in the off time.

So basically being a slave is the same as being a slave - one is by committee, and one is by birth.

As for the locked cupboard, some group moaning about the Chinese approach to human rights with absolutely no hope of achieving their goals is not only un-newsworthy, it is unhelpful as regards the official diplomatic approach to relations with the Big Yellow Peril. Hence we don't read about the issues in our (mainstream - or favourite) newspapers, websites, etc.

I disagree. In fact, it is the only example of times when I've had any respect for AI in the first place - when they do that sort of thing. It's pretty damned rare.

Put the three together - trained, motivated and equipped - and the only reason you lose is either overwhelming numbers (This Is Sparta!) or through dumb luck (Battle of Midway, anyone?).

I prefer to consider Zulu, and need to watch it again soon. There's far too many variables to sum up, and I studied that discipline for years. Let's take it up in my new "WAR" thread if needed.

Arab? I thought that was a Texan thing.

That's "boots on" - strange, isn't it?

*big punch-up ensues*

That's why I like the term "wealth", since we can consider more primitive examples.

Damn those stupid gun controls ...!

Wait. What?

Here's your second assignment for the night. The original writer is a self-proclaimed lib, and apparently a known sci-fi author, so he's worth hearing out.

The only time the special relationship is ever at risk is when the KY supply is running low.

*pucker*

Not sure how I should... take... that. I might suggest that there's a certain amount of perspective regarding the perception of cricket roles.

[BobCox2]

Ah, that's a good start. So, the next step: you're wrong. IIRC Around 60% of the American populace thinks Socialism is a viable economic system, no doubt in part because of the slippery words AKA labels you identify. Around 39% thinks that Communism is a viable economic system. Close to 20% thinks that the USSR was a "good" nation, or at least no different than the U.S.

the 60% number is the only one in the majority and American Pro-Union Socialism is not Soviet Communism.

[Glurin]

Here's the thing. I show people an animal that looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, has the same DNA as a duck and even comes with papers certifying it as a duck. A reasonable person would conclude that it is a duck, yes?

It's not, because I say it's a banana.

That's the game they play. Communism isn't communism. It's "progressivism" or "liberalism" or about a hundred other labels that get changed around when people wise up to what the previous one actually means. They use this tactic with just about everything. Taxes, spending, surveillance, rationing, dependency. You name it, they've named it something else.

[BobCox2]

Here's the thing. I show people an animal that looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, has the same DNA as a duck and even comes with papers certifying it as a duck. A reasonable person would conclude that it is a duck, yes?

It's not, because I say it's a banana.

That's the game they play. Communism isn't communism. It's "progressivism" or "liberalism" or about a hundred other labels that get changed around when people wise up to what the previous one actually means. They use this tactic with just about everything. Taxes, spending, surveillance, rationing, dependency. You name it, they've named it something else.

Duck Duck...

Goose you silly Glurin

I'm sorry you have a problem with big words that are very precise in what they mean.
We have this thing called a dictionary.
I suggest you use it and find out what you sound like to those that understand them.



but in the meantime here's another close miss.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=29e_1361513319

[jmervyn]

the 60% number is the only one in the majority and American Pro-Union Socialism is not Soviet Communism.

True and kinda true, which is why I broke it into the three groups. Only that last 20%, of which Obama and many of his cabinet are members, really think the USSR was a "good thing", and you can hear them prove it when they talk of China's neo-Fascism as better than America.

Socialist-loving Americans pretend that the lie on which all fully Socialist systems hinge is truth; they deny the basic principle highlighted by the Maggie Thatcher quote. Envy is a remarkably powerful sin, and people will go to any lengths to justify it.

Remember, "True Communism" was always considered just around the corner in the USSR, as well. Just put up with the bread lines and militarism for a little while more... one more rule and we'll achieve Utopia.

I'm sorry you have a problem with big words that are very precise in what they mean.
We have this thing called a dictionary.
I suggest you use it and find out what you sound like to those that understand them.

No need to be mean; Glurin is correct regarding the Left's propensity for false advertising. Of course, it's seen on the 'right' as well, particularly by the Progressive 'right': "Path to Citizenship"?

I really like that one quip I heard, so I'll use it again. Communism: the stupid, led by the evil.

[BobCox2]

Muslims..

• 2013.02.26 Mardan, Pakistan (1 killed) Muslim radicals gun down a guard for a polio vaccination team.
• 2013.02.25 Shikarpur, Pakistan (2 killed, 10 injured) Sunnis bomb a Sufi shrine, killing two worshippers.
• 2013.02.24 Gulak, Nigeria (1 killed) Boko Haram slit a man's throat in front of his wife and children.
• 2013.02.24 Fika, Nigeria (5 killed, 3 injured) Islamists rampage through a Christian village, killing five people in attacks that included a church.
• 2013.02.24 Jalalabad, Afghanistan (2 killed, 3 injured) A Fedayeen suicide bomber kills two.
• 2013.02.23 Ngalda, Nigeria (6 killed, 12 injured) Fundamentalists storm a small town late at night and indiscriminately murder six people at a bar.
• 2013.02.23 Gombe, Nigeria (5 killed, 3 injured) Fundamentalists drive by a card game and shoot five people to death.

So see, stop being a racist. Muslim extremists rarely commit these acts, look at how peaceful they've just been over these last three days.
/s