Friday, January 04, 2008

100% of the Caucuses Reporting: McCain is Batshit Crazy

I once thought that John McCain would make the best candidate out of the Republican front-runners. It was rational to think that a former POW in Vietnam would be shrewd enough to follow through with a just war, if the need ever arose. Dwight Eisenhower said, "I hate war as only a soldier who lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity."

Those are the words of a politician of yesteryear. Today we have the sagacious words of John McCain, Vietnam veteran and Republican presidential candidate, speaking to a crowd in New Hampshire yesterday:





Transcript as follows:



Q: "President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for 50 years --"

McCAIN: "Make it a hundred."

Q: "Is that. . . ."

McCAIN: "We've been in South Korea ... we've been in Japan for 60 years. We've been in South Korea 50 years or so. That would be fine with me. As long as Americans ..."

Q: (Tries to say something)

McCAIN: "As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. That's fine with me, I hope that would be fine with you, if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where Al Qaeda is training and equipping and recruiting and motivating people every single day."

--End demented blathering--

I can't for the life of me recall North Koreans kidnapping and beheading American soldiers in Seoul or Tokyo jihadists planting roadside bombs outside a U.S. base. It's a totally different dynamic there, silly! We're willing to keep a small amount of soldiers on foreign soil, but how many men would it take to stabilize the country? Obviously more than 150,000. Recruiting goals would have to be bolstered to meet the new demand for the next century. How they plan on making those numbers, I'm not sure. Thanks to the pocket veto by Bush, the most powerful government of all time can't pony up the dough for re-enlistment bonuses because the Iraqi government objected to the bill.

Think retention is hard with soldiers deploying two or three times and wanting to get out? Try a tour every other year for the rest of your life, if McCain gets elected. Try to imagine it: every other time a new edition of Madden comes out, you're whisked away for yet another fifteen month tour.

Sometime, in the future...

Dude 1: Hey, remember Baghdad in the summer of '18? It wasn't as hot as this.
Dude 2: Yeah, but the hover-craft IED threat wasn't that bad then. I'd do anything for the fair weather of Mosul in 2010.
Dude 1: Good call! Remember when President McCain sent us a video greeting on Thanksgiving?
Dude 2: Yeah, yeah.
Dude 1: What's the matter? You voted for him didn't you?
Dude 2: Shut the fuck up.


Likely scenario? I hope not.

AH

(Thanks to Brandon Friedman of Vetvoice for the video and transcript.)

24 comments:

Cynthia said...

Found your site through a comment featured in a Matt Stoller post on Open Left. Going to spend some time reading through your stuff. Perhaps I can use some of it in class; I teach a high school senior elective called, um, Peace Studies. Seems to me your perspective might be helpful for the wide-eyed to read.

Rob said...

Hi Alex -- I'm a big fan of your blog. While I don't necessarily support everything McCain advocates, I think he's saying something slightly different than what you're interpreting.

McCain seems to be assuming that, like Japan and South Korea, we will eventually reach a point in Iraq where we can maintain a military presence WITHOUT our troops sustaining frequent casualties. I think that's what he means when he makes the caveat "...as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed."

This case assumes the Iraqis can establish a functional government (like the Koreans and Japanese were eventually able to do post-war). In South Korea, this process took many years and required the direct support and leadership of the United States.

The U.S. has maintained a presence of roughly 30-35,000 troops in South Korea to deter a North Korean invasion and maintain regional stability since the end of the Korean War. The threat to our soldiers there is minimal.

If this scenario were duplicable in Iraq -- and McCain seems to believe it is -- then he is correct: I wouldn't have a problem with the U.S. maintaining a presence in the Middle East indefinitely.

I think that's where your actual disconnect with McCain is -- he seems to believe this threshold of stability can be reached in the near future, and you probably don't. I honestly don't know who's right.

But if your prognosis is correct, and we need to keep 150,000 troops in the region for the next 100 years just to maintain the same level of "stability" we have now while sustaining consistent losses, I don't think McCain (or any other rational U.S. citizen) would be supportive.

--Rob

Alex said...

Thanks for writing Rob. While I do see the point of your assessment, I fail to see any logical reasoning to maintain bases in Iraq long term. If it's for stabilization, we have Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Why be in Iraq with a hostile population against us? What we found time and time again was the insurgents were of local color. That is, their decision to fight is directly connected to our presence and they took up arms against us because of their perceived threat. What we saw in post war South Korea and Japan were rational people taking hold of the government. Thanks to Saddam fermenting sectarian hate when he came to power, I don't see any kind of reconciliation, at least in the next few dozen years. And I don't see a reason to keep troops there for the next 100 minutes, not to mention 100 years. The real fight is Afghanistan, and we have more soldiers in Baghdad than that whole country. Iraq doesn't fit into this war on terror, the Taliban and al Qaeda networks do. And there's nothing more crucial to their success than 1: a foreign occupation in a Muslim country and 2: bogged down forces where they don't matter. The first is a recruiting tool. The second is a byproduct of one, which allows them to roam freely in a country with a third of the coalition forces in Iraq. That is the injustice that McCain willfully ignores.

Sonny said...

You're still blogging great, Alex.

I have to take McCain's remark in the context of the other explanations we have been sold so far by the deciders on this war:

1. Retaliate for 9/11

2. Secret nucular weapons which Saddam could give to al Qaeda, chemical weapons, biological weapons, mobile labs, unmanned aerial delivery systems

3. Get rid of a terrible man, a "threat"

4. Bring democracy to Iraqi people

5. Defeat unexpected post-war insurgency

6. Defeat recently arrived al Qaeda

7. Venue to struggle with and contain Iran

8. Permanent Korea-like presence in a pacified country in an important part of the world

These guys keep swinging, but they are not hitting the ball. It's la-la land with blood at this point. They are making shit up as they go along.

$4 billion a week is flowing from the US treasury into the pockets of people who support these explanations, each one, as it is phased in.

I've always respected McCain, but he's just babbling with his Iraq speech.

IMHO

The Minstrel Boy said...

coming out of arizona i can speak directly to the mcCain thing. the dude is full on batshit crazy. he allows ambition (he really really REAALLLY wants to be preznit) to overcome any restraint or curbs on his behavior. he got beat by bush in south carolina (and remember the most historically significant contribution they made to our country was that they started the civil war) by having lies about his family spread by religious racist assholes, instead of grabbing the nearest firearm he could find, or a baseball bat to knock some heads mcCain instead has spent the last eight years sucking up to those bastards. back when the S&L scandal was breaking mcCain was right there at the keating trough feeding with all the other pigs.

he has let his ambition for power diminish the huge amount of honor he accrued during his impressive service as a pilot and his astonishing courageous leadership and resistance while a POW.

i am shamed and sorry for him.

Jeff said...

Excellent analysis, Alex. While I don't think McCain is certifiably nuts, I think his other domestic policies are screwball. See the misbegotten McCain-Feingold bill for a prime example. For a lot of us moderate Republicans, this year's race will boil down to voting for who we dislike the least. If McCain gets the nomination (God forbid a thousand times) I won't bother to vote.

Love,

Dad

Minnesota Central said...

Looks like you’ve got a good thread going here.

Although McCain’s comment has the same bad joke aspect as his “Bomb bomb Iran” comment, he clarified his statement on today’s Face the Nation. In this instance I believe his comment is based on reality. Yes, we can all agree that being stationed in Japan or Kosovo would be desirable over Iraq. I don’t believe the Big Three Democrats are being honest that they will pull all the troops out of Iraq by the end of 2012. Simple reason is based on why America has been in the Middle East for decades. American politicians view is that as the world’s superpower, it wants to be in charge and have the respect of the countries in the region. America wants to decide who is allowed to do what … Saddam was in trouble when he took Kuwait without America’s approval. Similarly, America allowed Turkey to bomb Northern Iraq last month without a voicing a complaint … when obviously, Turkey could not enter the air space with US Air Force being aware.

In my opinion, America will have armed forces in Iraq for decades … but as McCain said on Face the Nation “in a support” role and not engaged in combat. If armed forces are not there, it can only mean that America has been pushed out by the ruling powers … which would not be good as then we would have armed troops on the ready in Kuwait, etc.

If I may make a case for John McCain as the Republican nominee, it would be that he would be the best for America as an alternative to the Democratic nominee. First off, I am an independent and thus want the political parties to offer the best possible candidates. Being in Minnesota, we have seen elections take strange turns. For example, Democrat Paul Wellstone (whom I supported) was elected after the Republican incumbent Senator issued a letter to supporters referencing that Wellstone was a Jew. Wellstone won. After Wellstone’s death, the memorial service had such a partisan tone that Republican Norm Coleman won (and we in Minnesota and the country have suffered ever since.) Minnesota has also been impacted by third party candidates … I am sure that you heard that Jesse Ventura was an Independent Governor … but he actually replaced a governor that had ran as an Independent.
Why do I mention that? Simple. Ron Paul. Paul’s most vocal criticism is that America needs to get out of world affairs. Paul has raised millions and a third-party run (or even another run as the Libertarian nominee) could have a Nader/Perot/Buchanan effect. He will appeal to people that otherwise may support a Democrat candidate. Under normal circumstances, my vote as a Minnesotan in the Presidential Election would be irrelevant , but if Ron Paul runs in Minnesota and McCain selects Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty as VP, Minnesota could come in to play. Without Paul, there is no debate … Minnesota’s electoral votes would be Democratic.

Now, presuming that the Republican nominee is viable (because of the Paul effect), don’t you want the best possible nominee since a Republican could win ?
I vote based on the issues … and if look at McCain, he does not move in sync with the Neo-cons or Theo-cons. Just prior to the 2006, McCain came to campaign for the local incumbent Republican Congressman. I offered this comparison on my blog. (Incidentally, McCain and Pawlenty came, and the District went Democratic.) Look at those issues, and think about President Romney, Rudy or the Huckster … no, I want McCain.

Jeff said...

With regards to his statement on Iraq - taken way out of context.

I agree with him completely. As long as no harm is done, who cares if Americans are in Iraq?

They've been in Cuba for 100 years...

peteski said...

Kurt Vonnegut said something about never trusting air force pilots when it comes to decisions about war.

Jeff said...

That's a good thing, Peteski, because McCain was a Navy pilot.

Alex's Dad

Michael said...

In response to Jeff,

You may not care, but you should acknowledge that the Iraqis do care. Poll after poll has shown that the vast majorities of Iraqis of all ethnicities and sects want U.S. troops out of their country. John McCain's insistence that they should stay in Iraq clearly shows his blatant disregard of the Iraqis' wishes for the complete withdrawal of the American forces from Iraq.

As for Cuba, I really don't see how this is applicable to Iraq given that the situation between those two countries are completely different.

Michael said...

I would expect better from someone who has fought in a war.

South Korea has a clearly-delineated border secured by thousands of U.S. troops, backed up by the defending army who were sympathetic to the U.S. troops, and hundreds of thousands of mines to keep the sides apart. How is that model similar to Iraq?

Japan's military and government were soundly beaten down and ultimately surrendered after massive sacrifice and expense. There was dissent among some of the population about whether to accept surrender, but there weren't dozens of religious/tribal/sectarian factions looking for an opportunity to wipe out their competitors by civil war or ethnic cleansing. Again, how does he see this situation as proof that occupation will be peaceful?

Lesley said...

America can do without Republican leadership, period, at this point. None of the candidates on the right are sane if you ask me; not a single one is distancing himself from George Bush, the most monstrous buffoon the west has ever seen (and that's saying a lot!).

Lesley said...

Oh yeah, and regarding the various interpretations of John McCain's hundred years in Iraq scenario... I think you'll find those other areas (like South Korea, for example) simply incomparable to Iraq. There are no civil wars in those zones...they are essentially peacekeeping. Iraq is a constant civil war zone and the US created this situation. You (commenters) simply can't say that Iraq is anything like South Korea and be taken seriously.

Sergeant Victor said...

Jeff said:

You may not care, but you should acknowledge that the Iraqis do care. Poll after poll has shown that the vast majorities of Iraqis of all ethnicities and sects want U.S. troops out of their country. John McCain's insistence that they should stay in Iraq clearly shows his blatant disregard of the Iraqis' wishes for the complete withdrawal of the American forces from Iraq.


If you actually believe that, you're oblivious.

Of course the people of Iraq wish we eventually withdraw from their nation and that's all the ridiculous polls will confirm, but they also are considerably appreciative of the help we continue to provide. We work with them, volunteers from both sects who wish to repel foreign fighters, insurgent forces, from Iraq. They also want as much help as they can get, restoring infrastructure we helped decimate, whether it's electricity, running water, sewage or trash removal. These basic services have often been disrupted and sabotaged by insurgents; and we continue to restore and protect them.

The greater majority of Iraqis are concerned that we will just ditch them and leave their country in shambles after we've torn it all apart. Most do fear we'll leave the nation a chaotic battlefield for insurgent forces to fight out in their city streets. Immediate withdrawal not only would confirm their fears, but at this point, would be an egregiously stupid move, after the considerable successes we've had in the past year.

The violence levels in Iraq have returned, in most areas, to levels in 2003. The stability is still tenuous, but we have been able to reduce our presence and return partial or full responsibility to Iraq's own security forces in many areas. Our surge has been a success, but we're by no means all through, where we can pack up and leave and expect that peace to continue.

Sergeant Victor said...

Michael wrote:

I would expect better from someone who has fought in a war.

South Korea has a clearly-delineated border secured by thousands of U.S. troops, backed up by the defending army who were sympathetic to the U.S. troops, and hundreds of thousands of mines to keep the sides apart. How is that model similar to Iraq?

Japan's military and government were soundly beaten down and ultimately surrendered after massive sacrifice and expense. There was dissent among some of the population about whether to accept surrender, but there weren't dozens of religious/tribal/sectarian factions looking for an opportunity to wipe out their competitors by civil war or ethnic cleansing. Again, how does he see this situation as proof that occupation will be peaceful?


Where do you get the idea that the people in Iraq are hostile towards us and vice versa?

Sonny said...

First off, folks, this idea of a permanent Korea-like situation is being woven into public awareness like it's an afterthought.

It's not. We began constructing permanent bases shortly after the invasion.If the Iraqi people wanted this, then everyone would be happy and we wouldn't have any problems or violence to deal with, would we?

All we want is a friendly, peaceful government willing to host 6 or 8 permanent strategic military bases, and a chance to run the oil business with US companies.

This goal is not being achieved. Gen. Petraeus says it takes 10 years to defeat an insurgency, and you can bet the neocons are comfortable with thinking we are about halfway through this process, heading for success. If Americans are willing to go along and foot the personal and financial bill, then they are going to get the next five years.

But I can't stand the rhetorical swindle that just goes on and on, morphing from one thing to the next, all demonstrating "success".

The fingernails-on-chalkboard thing today is people virtuously pointing out that the surge is a success.

So far, the surge is a complete failure. Military pacification was not the goal of the surge, only the means. The goal of the surge was government reform and domestic peace and cooperation. Five years after the invasion, it's not happening.

It's like having to rush your pregnant wife to the delivery room, and calling it a "success" because the car started right up and ran well. And now here you are, pulled up in the grass on the freeway onramp, delivering your kid in the back seat and your wife she is a-screaming. Oh boy, that worked great!

Alex said...

To quote Sergeant Victor:
Where do you get the idea that the people in Iraq are hostile towards us and vice versa?

A great deal of the Sunni insurgents we captured were locals that reacted to the invasion with hostility. They weren't international thugs. The thought that we could operate a minimal amount of FOBs with a 'peacekeeping force' in Iraq without mortar, rocket and suicide attacks is ludicrous. That is assuming another point is reconciled: the IA/IP becoming professional organizations working independently from American forces going out to patrol/recon/snatch and grab on their own. I don't know what part of Iraq you're in, but half our time on raids and patrols was taken up by instructing the IA to do simple things like keep their AKs on safe and to look upstairs in all the houses. They're still low-motivation, squabbling thieves and would collapse if they we gave them a little more responsibility. I believe there is not a point in five or ten years where Americans would be relegated to a support role, far from daily casualties. The Iraqis are simply not ready for it. It'll be a time where we simply say "screw you guys, we're going home." Up to my deployment, we were constantly told we were going in a support role, where the ISF would be leading the way. We'd be there to guide them. I think the surge pretty much squashed that idea between its thick, buttery thighs. Our successes were not reciprocated.

AH

Anonymous said...

I wonder how, in McCain's scenario, the United States is supposed to benefit from 100 years in Iraq. Our presence in Iraq is already a great financial drain. As far as Iran is concerned, we are only providing them with big opportunities.

We cannot defeat al Qaeda or other international terrorists by permanently fortifying ourselves in Iraq. They are willing to travel.

In Japan and South Korea, there were pretty obvious reasons for maintaining a large presence for many decades in the context of the Cold War. I don't think that logic applies in this case.

The Republicans claim to be the "pro-family" party. That doesn't mean the families devastated by the long war the Republicans caused, with some combination of arcane motivations but no reason.

ex-infantryman said...

the ex army infantryman solder HOOAH says: you'll never live to se a radical islamic militant change...as the bible says, can the leopard change his skin...we know the answer to that is no...these folks live to bring havoc into the world. If we haven't learned anything from Somolia, then we never will. Fortunately I was smart enough to get out of the Army before we started policing the Islamic world full time, but the answer isn't a long term military presence... the answer is guarding America within its actual borders...Go AMERICA GO!!!

Anonymous said...

you readers need to go as quickly as you can to the comments left on april 3 at other posting areas at this site.

sexy11 said...

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,A片,A片,情色,A片,A片,情色,A片,A片,情趣用品,A片,情趣用品,A片,情趣用品,a片,情趣用品

A片,A片,AV女優,色情,成人,做愛,情色,AIO,視訊聊天室,SEX,聊天室,自拍,AV,情色,成人,情色,aio,sex,成人,情色

免費A片,美女視訊,情色交友,免費AV,色情網站,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人影片,成人網站,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,情色網,日本A片,免費A片下載,性愛

情色文學,色情A片,A片下載,色情遊戲,色情影片,色情聊天室,情色電影,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,一葉情貼圖片區,情色視訊,免費成人影片,視訊交友,視訊聊天,言情小說,愛情小說,AV片,A漫,AVDVD,情色論壇,視訊美女,AV成人網,成人交友,成人電影,成人貼圖,成人小說,成人文章,成人圖片區,成人遊戲,愛情公寓,情色貼圖,色情小說,情色小說,成人論壇


情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,臺灣情色網,色情,情色電影,色情遊戲,嘟嘟情人色網,麗的色遊戲,情色論壇,色情網站,一葉情貼圖片區,做愛,性愛,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,美女交友,做愛影片

A片,A片,A片下載,做愛,成人電影,.18成人,日本A片,情色小說,情色電影,成人影城,自拍,情色論壇,成人論壇,情色貼圖,情色,免費A片,成人,成人網站,成人圖片,AV女優,成人光碟,色情,色情影片,免費A片下載,SEX,AV,色情網站,本土自拍,性愛,成人影片,情色文學,成人文章,成人圖片區,成人貼圖

sex999 said...

A片,A片,情色,情色,A片,A片,情色,情色,A片,A片,A片下載,做愛,成人電影,.18成人,日本A片,情色小說,情色電影,成人影城,自拍,情色論壇,成人論壇,情色貼圖,情色,免費A片,成人,成人網站,成人圖片,AV女優,成人光碟,色情,色情影片,免費A片下載,SEX,AV,色情網站,本土自拍,性愛,成人影片,情色文學,成人文章,成人圖片區,成人貼圖

美女交友,AIO交友愛情館,AIO,成人交友,視訊交友網,視訊交友,拓網交友,PC交友,視訊交友90739,交友,情色交友,聊天室交友,辣妹視訊,視訊辣妹,美女視訊,視訊美女,情色視訊,日本AV,免費視訊聊天,視訊聊天,AV女優,AV,視訊聊天室,視訊,免費視訊,情人視訊網,本土自拍,自拍,AVDVD,SEX,微風成人,微風論壇,微風成人區,成人網站,成人,成人電影,嘟嘟成人網,成人貼圖,成人影片,成人圖片區,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人影城,成人文章,成人論壇,愛情公寓,情色論壇,情色,色情聊天室,色情,情色貼圖,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,寄情築園小遊戲,色情遊戲,情色電影,情色網,做愛,UT聊天室,聊天室,聊天,哈拉聊天室,豆豆聊天室,尋夢園聊天室,聊天室尋夢園,080苗栗人聊天室,苗栗人聊天室,080中部人聊天室,080聊天室,中部人聊天室,柔情聊天網,6K聊天室,小高聊天室,上班族聊天室,免費A片,A片,成人聊天室,一夜情聊天室,情色聊天室,色色網,免費AV

信次 said...

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,美國aneros,rudeboy,英國rudeboy,英國Rocksoff,德國Fun Factory,Fun Factory,英國甜筒造型按摩座,甜筒造型按摩座,英國Rock Chic ,瑞典 Lelo ,英國Emotional Bliss,英國 E.B,荷蘭 Natural Contours,荷蘭 N C,美國 OhMiBod,美國 OMB,Naughti Nano ,音樂按摩棒,ipod按摩棒,美國 The Screaming O,美國TSO,美國TOPCO,美國Doc Johnson,美國CA Exotic,美國CEN,美國Nasstoy,美國Tonguejoy,英國Je Joue,美國Pipe Dream,美國California Exotic,美國NassToys,美國Vibropod,美國Penthouse,仿真按摩棒,矽膠按摩棒,猛男倒模,真人倒模,仿真倒模,PJUR,Zestra,適趣液,穿戴套具,日本NPG,雙頭龍,FANCARNAL,日本NIPPORI,日本GEL,日本Aqua Style,美國WET,費洛蒙,費洛蒙香水,仿真名器,av女優,打炮,做愛,性愛,口交,吹喇叭,肛交,魔女訓練大師,無線跳蛋,有線跳蛋,震動棒,震動保險套,震動套,TOY-情趣用品,情趣用品網,情趣購物網,成人用品網,情趣用品討論,成人購物網,鎖精套,鎖精環,持久環,持久套,拉珠,逼真按摩棒,名器,超名器,逼真老二,電動自慰,自慰,打手槍,仿真女郎,SM道具,SM,性感內褲,仿真按摩棒,pornograph,hunter系列,h動畫,成人動畫,成人卡通,情色動畫,情色卡通,色情動畫,色情卡通,無修正,禁斷,人妻,極悪調教,姦淫,近親相姦,顏射,盜攝,偷拍,本土自拍,素人自拍,公園露出,街道露出,野外露出,誘姦,迷姦,輪姦,凌辱,痴漢,痴女,素人娘,中出,巨乳,調教,潮吹,av,a片,成人影片,成人影音,線上影片,成人光碟,成人無碼,成人dvd,情色影音,情色影片,情色dvd,情色光碟,航空版,薄碼,色情dvd,色情影音,色情光碟,線上A片,免費A片,A片下載,成人電影,色情電影,TOKYO HOT,SKY ANGEL,一本道,SOD,S1,ALICE JAPAN,皇冠系列,老虎系列,東京熱,亞熱,武士系列,新潮館,情趣用品,情趣,情趣商品,情趣網站,跳蛋,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,自慰套,G點,性感內衣,情趣內衣,角色扮演,生日禮物,生日精品,自慰,打手槍,潮吹,高潮,後庭,情色論譠,影片下載,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,音樂下載,開獎號碼,統一發票號碼,夜市,統一發票對獎,保險套,做愛,減肥,美容,瘦身,當舖,軟體下載,汽車,機車,手機,來電答鈴,週年慶,美食,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計,室內設計,靈異照片,同志,聊天室,運動彩券,大樂透,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍,無名破解,av女優,小說,民宿,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,討論區,痴漢,懷孕,美女交友,交友,日本av,日本,機票,香水,股市,股市行情, 股市分析,租房子,成人影片,免費影片,醫學美容,免費算命,算命,姓名配對,姓名學,姓名學免費,遊戲,好玩遊戲,好玩遊戲區,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片,桌布,桌布下載,電視節目表,線上電視,線上a片,線上掃毒,線上翻譯,購物車,身分證製造機,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車,法拍屋,歌詞,音樂,音樂網,火車,房屋,情趣用品,情趣,情趣商品,情趣網站,跳蛋,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,自慰套, G點,性感內衣,情趣內衣,角色扮演,生日禮物,精品,禮品,自慰,打手槍,潮吹,高潮,後庭,情色論譠,影片下載,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,音樂下載,開獎號碼,統一發票,夜市,保險套,做愛,減肥,美容,瘦身,當舖,軟體下載,汽車,機車,手機,來電答鈴,週年慶,美食,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計,室內設計,靈異照片,同志,聊天室,運動彩券,,大樂透,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍,無名破解, av女優,小說,民宿,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,討論區,痴漢,懷孕,美女交友,交友,日本av ,日本,機票,香水,股市,股市行情,股市分析,租房子,成人影片,免費影片,醫學美容,免費算命,算命,姓名配對,姓名學,姓名學免費,遊戲,好玩遊戲,好玩遊戲區,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片,桌布,桌布下載,電視節目表,線上電視,線上a片,線上a片,線上翻譯,購物車,身分證製造機,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車,法拍屋,歌詞,音樂,音樂網,借錢,房屋,街頭籃球,找工作,旅行社,六合彩,水噹噹,台中隆鼻,果凍隆乳,改運整型,自體脂肪移植,新娘造型,婚禮顧問,下川島,常平,常平,珠海,澳門機票,香港機票,貸款,貸款,信用貸款,宜蘭民宿,花蓮民宿,未婚聯誼,網路購物,婚友,婚友社,未婚聯誼,交友,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,未婚聯誼, 婚友社,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,婚友,未婚聯誼,婚友社,未婚聯誼,單身聯誼,單身聯誼,白蟻,白蟻,除蟲,老鼠,減肥,減肥,在家工作,在家工作,水噹噹,台中隆鼻,果凍隆乳,改運整型,自體脂肪移植,新娘造型,婚禮顧問,下川島,常平,常平,珠海,澳門機票,香港機票,貸款,貸款,信用貸款,宜蘭民宿,花蓮民宿,未婚聯誼,網路購物,婚友,婚友社,未婚聯誼,交友,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,未婚聯誼, 婚友社,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,婚友,未婚聯誼,婚友社,未婚聯誼,單身聯誼,單身聯誼,白蟻,白蟻,除蟲,老鼠,減肥,減肥,在家工作,在家工作,婚友,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,婚友,交友,交友,婚友社,婚友社,婚友社,大陸新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,越南新娘,外籍新娘,外籍新娘,台中坐月子中心,搬家公司,搬家公司,中和搬家,台北搬家,板橋搬家,新店搬家,線上客服,網頁設計,線上客服,網頁設計,植牙,關鍵字,關鍵字,seo,seo,網路排名,自然排序,網路排名軟體,交友,越南新娘,婚友社,外籍新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,交友,外籍新娘,視訊聊天,大陸新娘,婚友社,婚友,越南新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,視訊交友,外籍新娘,網路排名,網路排名軟體,網站排名優化大師,關鍵字排名大師,網站排名seo大師,關鍵字行銷專家,關鍵字,seo,關鍵字行銷,網頁排序,網頁排名,關鍵字大師,seo大,自然排名,網站排序,網路行銷創業,汽車借款,汽車借錢,汽車貸款,汽車貸款,拉皮,抽脂,近視雷射,隆乳,隆鼻,變性,雙眼皮,眼袋,牙齒,下巴,植牙,人工植牙,植髮,雷射美容,膠原蛋白,皮膚科,醫學美容,玻尿酸,肉毒桿菌,微晶瓷,電波拉皮,脈衝光,關鍵字,關鍵字,seo,seo,網路排名,自然排序,網路排名軟體,英語演講,托福,Toastmaster,汽車借款,汽車借款,汽車借款,汽車貸款,汽車貸款,借錢,借貸,當舖,借款,借貸,借錢,週轉,