Third Party & Independents Archives

Be Proud That We Fought Nazi Fascism

Whether you be liberal, conservative, progressive, or any other political ideology, at times you have felt that our nation’s priorities have been out of whack. A tourist walking around DC seeing the sites may not realize how DC represents this, but it does. Look at the sites around DC and when they were erected and it becomes apparent.

Three years ago I came to the DC area for three months to intern for the summer. It was my first time here and I remember going to see the sites with my roommates and thinking something was wrong. At this time we walked around and saw the White House, the Vietnam Wall, the Korean War memorial, the Lincoln Memorial, and various museums. But I knew something was missing, something was missing! I thought to myself how can this be that in 2003 there is no memorial to World War II.

Fast forward to January 2006 when I moved back to the DC area, finally I saw that a memorial to those who served in World War II was built. Still I wonder how come this took so long? The Vietnam War and the Korean War certainly saw great opposition, and to this day many still wonder why we fought these two wars. Yet with World War II you will have a hard time finding anyone who does not see our fight against Nazi Fascism as one of the greatest things our nation has ever done.

In my eyes this is sad, even a national tradegy, that our nation took this long to finally build a memorial to those who served in World War II. It was long past due, and I am proud it is finally here. The World War II memorial should have been built before any memorial to the Vietnam War, Korean War, or museums such as the DEA museum or spy museum.

If you ever visit DC the first site you see should be the World War II memorial, period.

When in DC hop on the Orange or Blue Line and get off on the Smithsonian stop, than take a left and walk about 2 to 3 blocks and you will be at the World War II memorial.

Posted by Richard Rhodes at June 11, 2006 12:39 AM
Comments
Comment #156426

Richard, I can’t speak authoritatively on this, but, I suspect a couple reasons exist why it took so long. First was the fact that we embraced the Germans, even before the war was over, taking thousands of them, some Nazis even, and bringing them here to work for us. This was all hush hush during and after WWII, but, I believe our capturing and setting Nazis free in America during and shortly after WWII had a part to play in why we avoided too much focus on WWII at all after it was over. I should quickly add that the Korean War immediately followed and that also detracted from the impetus to enjoy the peace and honor our dead in WWII, since there was only victory, but, not yet peace.

Then there is the psychological ramifications of War memorials. After WWII and the horrors of nuclear weapons, the American people, rightly I think, wanted to avoid the appearance of being a war loving country. The people wanted peace, and memorials to the soldiers of war tend to detract from the dialogue and focus on future peace.

The American people were reluctant to enter WWII, and having won it, they were not changed about war being an evil activity, though necessary when attacked. The Korean War highlighted politician’s proclivity toward war even when our homeland is not attacked, and that put our government at odds with the sentiments of the people, as it still is today. There was insufficient time of peace between the Korean and Viet Nam wars to have allowed our government and the people to reconcile on the issue of engaging in war without attack on our homeland, and the people and the politicians once again found themselves on opposite sides of elective war.

Personally, I think America has spent far more money, time, and space memorializing war than is necessary. Personally, one memorial for all of our soldiers in all wars from the Revolutionary to the Iraq War, is sufficient to honor their bravery, their sacrifice, and their respect and love for their country. At the rate we are going with wars, its going to be hard to find real estate for homes in the DC area for all the memorials to past and future wars with Iran, China, Indonesia, Pakistan, etc. etc. etc.

In 50 or 75 years we may have to vacate the seat of government in DC to Nevada to make more room for war memorials in DC. Haliburton can’t wait for those no-bid contracts. At least all the highroller politicians playing the fast and loose gamble with the law and tax payer money will be right at home in our new Capitol just outside of Las Vegas or Reno.

Americans don’t like to view themselves as war lovers. But, one only has to look at our history of war, including the war for civil rights and women’s suffrage, to see that deep down, Americans are addicted to war; good ones, bad ones, provoked ones, unprovoked, international, civil, you name it, if a war can be started, Americans want a piece of the action. War and democracy have been our legacy.

What is profoundly sad, is that the wars we fought for Democracy, are being dishonored by the slow piecemeal dismantling of our democracy right here at home under the current administration and Congress on both sides of the aisle.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 11, 2006 3:18 AM
Comment #156428

David R. Remer stated: “Personally, I think America has spent far more money, time, and space memorializing war.”

You have never made me wish more that I was Jewish. What would you think if your entire race was up for extermination?

World War II was the only war in the history of humans where no one can be against. WWII is special. We helped save a whole race of people. The Third Reich was the closest too the devil we have ever come.

Posted by: Richard Rhodes at June 11, 2006 3:33 AM
Comment #156430

Richard, and the U.S. is the most war prone large nation in the last 2 1/4 centuries. What’s next, war memorials for Yugoslavia and Mogadaishu? Were our soldiers there any less brave, willing to sacrifice, or loving of our country? Afghanistan? Iraq?

At a time when we can’t seem to bankrupt the nation and future taxpayers fast enough, I don’t think spending 100’s of millions on Marriage Amendments and War Memorials is the right priority set for what ails us. Wouldn’t we honor our soldiers and their children far more by exerting the same effort and money toward preventing the next war from occuring in the first place?

Priorities, Richard. Everyone’s got them, and they are bankrupting our nation and the progeny of our fallen heroes. We are already committed to an 11 trillion dollar national debt by the end of this decade. And you and millions of others want to keep asking for more government spending.

Priorities, the plethora and lack of them, are killing our children’s future which our soldiers fought and died to protect and make safe.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 11, 2006 4:05 AM
Comment #156435

You, (both liberal and consevative) shout at each other, trade barbs, and do nothing, absolutely nothing towards a common dialogue. This is the perfect vehicle and you neglect it.

Everything you criticise is only valuable compared to your willingness to attach to the most endorphin elevating ideology.

Do not hate.

You may know all of the answers, but not all of the questions.

Listen.

Love.

Listen.

And above all…..love.

Posted by: Amazed at June 11, 2006 6:13 AM
Comment #156469

Now If I remember right the WWII memorial was almost entirely built by private donations, I seem to remember Tom Hanks and Bob Dole Working hard to get doniations to get it built, the federal goverment just have to approve the design and allow it, so taxpayers tax money wasn’t an issue it was private donations that went to build it

Posted by: RHancheck at June 11, 2006 10:37 AM
Comment #156477

Whoa David, Dont even think Reno, they might make the a reality. Im living in Reno and well the last thing we want is all those politicians moving out here!!!

Posted by: j2t2 at June 11, 2006 11:04 AM
Comment #156493

David et al

I think the WWII memorial was delayed is because we simply did not do big memorials to specific wars until Vietnam. Our previous memorials were about particular battles or heroes. A general “war memorial” tended to be inscribed with the names of local boys killed in subsequent conflicts.

They also tended to be small and not on the Capital Mall.

Posted by: Jack at June 11, 2006 11:53 AM
Comment #156514

Jack,

You’ve hit the nail on the head. We as a country didn’t put up large memorials to specific wars until the Vietnam memorial went up. Like you said, there are memorials to individual people, memorials in cities to the local dead, and memorials at specific battlefields like Gettysburg. If you visit Gettysburg, go to Little Roundtop and look for the memorial to the 20th Maine in the woods. It’s an amazing place where the actions of a few men (especially the commander, Joshua Chamberlain) may have saved the Union Army. There’s a wonderful book on the subject, called “The Killer Angels” by Michael Shaara - I highly recommend it.

Posted by: ElliottBay at June 11, 2006 12:47 PM
Comment #156526

My point was not too support war. It was too point out that WWII was the one modern war, and by modern I mean since 1900, where it can be generally agreed that we needed to fight it because of the pure evil of Nazi Fascism.

Posted by: Richard Rhodes at June 11, 2006 1:22 PM
Comment #156554

I find it amazing myself that people can look at the Nazis and think of ‘evil’, yet when they look at the current U.S government they are blind to the comparisons that would logically lead you to conclude that the U.S government is also, therefore, ‘evil’. Not that ‘evil’ is really a term i like to apply to anything as it implies a lack of complexity and humanity.

Posted by: The Fly at June 11, 2006 3:19 PM
Comment #156559

Prior to WW2 we did not have a thing to say about German occupation of Poland. The Japanese were fighting against an Imperialist power(the U.S.)
that was attempting to stop them from getting easy access to raw materials they needed.
Everybody has an issue. All combatants believed that God was on their side. While this may have seemed to be the proverbial shootout at the ok corral,it was actually another example of how growing economic needs can be a catalyst for unchecked and dangerous growth.

Posted by: jblym at June 11, 2006 3:29 PM
Comment #156568

I must say that I am really surprised by the comments so far. Let me say this, in what was the original intent of my post:

Think about modern wars lets compare the current Iraq War, Vietnam, the first Gulf War and WWII:

1. If the current Iraq War never happened Saddam would still be in power more and likely, but also hundreds of thousands of Iraqis would not have been dead, we wouldn’t have lost the soldiers we did, and we wouldn’t have been dumb enough to go to war on a lie. So thus it can be assumed this war was not necessary.

2. The first Gulf War, likely if we wouldn’t have fought this war Iraq would maybe have control of Kuwait, although that is debatable. However we know that if we wouldnt have fought the first Gulf War than hundreds of thousands of our soldiers wouldn’t have gotten ‘Gulf War Syndrome’ (which is likely to be because of the use of depleted uranium) and we wouldnt have had a dramatic increase in severe birth defects in Iraq, which also resulted from the use of depleted uranium. Again it can be assumed this war was unnecessary.

3. Vietnam, if we wouldn’t have fought this both sides would not have had the massive loss of life that we did. We wouldn’t have had the effects on our soldiers from Agent Orange, and this war played a large part in advancing anti-Americanism worldwide. Again it can be assumed this war was unneccessary.

4. WWII: It is very likely that if we would not have become involved in this war that much of western europe would have been permanently conquered by the Fascist Nazi regime. Even more of the Jewish people would have been executed, and it is possible the Jewish people of Europe as a whole would have been wiped out. The disabled and homosexual were also executed, without fighting against Nazi Fascism even more of them would have been executed as well. We would have saw a long spread era of fascist oppression over all of Europe, much likely.
Now here is the point of this all to say that WWII was necessary and that helping to stop the extermination of the Jewish people, homosexuals, and the disabled was an honorable, noble, good thing to be proud of.

Posted by: Richard Rhodes at June 11, 2006 3:58 PM
Comment #156570

Moreover to anyone wondering why me a Green Party editor for Watchblog made a post that seems to be pro-war the answer is this:

The anti-war community needs to stand by its values and fight against wars of aggression, to stand against unnecessary war, to speak out against imperialistic wars, to be a watchdog against government’s rush to war.

However we also need to be grounded and realize that while in most situations standing up for peace and being anti-war is good, that sometimes it is necessary in order to stop the extermination of a whole nation of people, to stop the extermination of the disabled and homosexual.

The anti-war community, which the Green Party embraces should be proud of its values. But to say that WWII was unnecessary makes us look foolish. We need to realize that we are anti-war largely because our respect for human rights and human lives. And to fight the evil that was Nazi Fascism was standing up for human rights and human lives.

The Nazi Fascism regime was the closest thing to the devil we have ever seen, it was pure unadulterated evil. If we did not fight to stop it think about how different the world today would be.

Posted by: Richard Rhodes at June 11, 2006 4:05 PM
Comment #156589
Three years ago I came to the DC area for three months to intern for the summer. It was my first time here and I remember going to see the sites with my roommates and thinking something was wrong. At this time we walked around and saw the White House, the Vietnam Wall, the Korean War memorial, the Lincoln Memorial, and various museums. But I knew something was missing, something was missing! I thought to myself how can this be that in 2003 there is no memorial to World War II.

The USMC War Memorial (Iwo Jima) and the Netherlands Carillon both commemorate World War II and have been around for some time, as has the Tomb of the Unknowns which includes an Unknown Soldier from World War II. Was there really a need for a new memorial? I can’t answer that, though personally I would prefer those who wish to really remember their sacrifice take a trip to the American Cemetary at Normandy and really remember what these men sacrificed rather than looking at a nice, safe marble memorial here in the US. Seeing them there, at rest beneath ivory markers of their various faiths, may give a much better sence of them as individuals than any wall of names or gold stars representing them.

Posted by: Jarandhel at June 11, 2006 5:16 PM
Comment #156592

National Socialism is Fascism? Interesting. Little do you know both are entirely different idealogies past the superficial tenet of authoritarianism.

Be proud we fought them. Be shamed we don’t know what we fought.

Posted by: FNP at June 11, 2006 5:27 PM
Comment #156598

FNP

NAZI is a subgroup of fascism. The NAZI party translates from German are National Socialist Worker’s Party. They were part of the revolutionary socialism spasm we suffered in the early 20th century. The other heresy of that collectivist religion is communism. They all valued the state above the individual, controlled or owned private business and judged people by their group membership.

Richard

If the European power had been less appeasing and attacked Hitler when he remilitarized the Rhineland, when he took over Sudetenland or when he conquered Czechoslovakia, they would have fought a much shorter war. Had they done that, the appeasers would have complained that Hitler was not very dangerous. They would have said that Germany was in the box that they put it in by the Treaty of Versailles and that the Western leaders were war mongers.

When dealing with history, we know what happened and can only speculate what might have. Gulf War was absolutely necessary, certainly as useful as a war against Germany when they took over Czechoslovakia. Saddam was not as well organized as the NAZIs and Iraq was not advanced as Germany, but it was certainly regionally dangerous. After the invasion of Kuwait, war was inevitable. It was just a matter of when. But like WWI, when Germany was not completely defeated (or didn’t think it was) Iraq went to fight another day.

Fly

You might think the U.S. is like NAZI Germany. But you may notice in your history books that not many Germans dared criticize Hitler. Americans have no trouble giving Bush a hard time. And I don’t know if you have visited those concentration camps the NAZIs set up. We have about 500 people in Guantanamo and a few dozen “secret prisoners” You may notice the NAZIs did somewhat more.

The comparison of the U.S. with NAZIs is only possible for someone who has not experienced a real dictatorship.

Posted by: Jack at June 11, 2006 5:48 PM
Comment #156621

jblym,
You should read some history books. You have WWII backward.
It was Germany’s invasion of Poland that started WWII.
Prior to WWII the US was isolationist. It was only after Hitler declared war on the US and the navy of Imperial Japan attacked our base at Pearl Harbor that we entered the war.
By the time Japan attacked us they had already established an empire which began in 1871. It lasted until the end of WWII in 1945.

Posted by: traveller at June 11, 2006 7:38 PM
Comment #156634

My daddy served under Old Blood and Guts in France. Like most veterans from that war he didn’t brag about what he did. He was proud though that he able to served his country when it needed him. I never heard him or any other WWII veteran ask for a memorial. That seemed to be the last thing on their minds. They were more interested in raising their families in a country that was at peace. Unfortunately that wasn’t to be.
These brave men that fought for not only our freedom, but the freedom of folks they didn’t know. And only wanted to see their children to live in peace watched as their sons went to war.
And now their grandchildren and great grandchildren are going to war.
I personally don’t think that a memorial to these heroes that gave so much is out of order. It should have been built long before it was.

Posted by: Ron Brown at June 11, 2006 9:25 PM
Comment #156684

Traveller:
On the contrary,the European war started in 1939,due to obligations of France and England toward Poland. The US while a semi-participant due to the Lend Lease of warships,did not engage in the European theater until 1941.
The Japanese empire, existed well before 1841,but was forced to deal with the West through the shenanigans of Admiral Perry,and was in fact going through a period of modernization and industry building in the 20’s and 30’s.
One of the most important sources of raw material rubber,was being obtained from the Japanese trading partners in the Malaysian and Phillipine Island areas.
American business interests were mortified by this and urged the government to put a stop to this “yellow menace”.
We were attacked by the Japanese largely because of a co-ordinated effort by the younger officer cadre. They had a genuine fear that America was attempting to strangle Japanese growth,and the fact is that America was.
But we sure showed them,huh traveller?
I especially like the part, during WWII where we justified american concentration camps.

Posted by: jblym at June 12, 2006 10:36 AM
Comment #156706

jblym,
Like I said, WWII started with the German invasion of Poland.
The Japanese Empire, needing raw materials for industrial and imperial expansion, didn’t try to obtain them through trade. They waged brutal, merciless, aggressive war. They invaded China in 1937 and waged a campaign of atrocities equalled in modern history only by the Holocaust. The most famous is known as “The Rape of Nanking”. Google that and see if you still want to defend the Japanese imperialists.
The “yellow menace” that so terrified people of that time was a bloodthirsty military dictatorship that slaughtered the innocent by the thousands wherever they held sway.
Strangling the growth of this evil was the right thing to do.
If by “American concentration camps” you mean the internment camps, it can be argued they were unjust. Characterizing them as concentration camps is absolutely unjustified.
Don’t try to make America the evil aggressor in the Pacific war. We stopped aggression.

Posted by: traveller at June 12, 2006 12:20 PM
Comment #156810

j2t2, thinks that the city of sin (Reno) is too good for the politicians. He is probably correct.

Now Jack, there you go poking sticks in my cage again. Suggesting that the National Socialist had anything to do with liberalism. The fascist National Socialist were conservative extremist. They were your kissing cousins Jack. They are part of your gene pool - not ours. Now mind you, I am willing to accept that Marxist socialist and communist are liberal extremist. They are my red headed step child illegitimate kissin cousins. I will admit that. But when you try to use cheap semantical tricks to deliberately twist truth and imply that conservative right wing extremist Nazis are somehow related to mainstream liberalism… History is written by the winners. So since Republicans rule, I guess this transparent distortion is your little attempt at revisionist history.

Jack,
I agree that the U.S. is a long way from full fledged fascism. Just because we do not have millions in concentration camps, does not mean that we have not already gone far too far in that direction. I am sure that you are not suggesting that we liberals and moderates shut up until you righties exterminate millions of people? Are you? When you start leading this country in that direction - trust me - we are going to start screaming a long time before you get there. If more German liberals and moderates had stood up to Hitler for freedom and moderation before Hitler consolidated power WWII would have been unnecessary. We do not intend to make the same mistake. We do not intend to allow this corrupt proto-fascist regime to consolidate its power. So, we are going to confront Bush now, when he has only began to stray across the line. I hope that we are not too late. I hope that the American people are not lulled into complacency by distortionist rhetoric like yours. The good German people were lulled. The great American people can be lulled as well. Watch the spinning lies of the Bush Regime swinging slowly back and forth… aren’t you tired of hearing all of the lies… Your arms are becoming heavy… go kill a liberal, commie, pinko, fag… Is that your plan?

Posted by: Ray Guest at June 12, 2006 3:53 PM
Comment #156942

No point in killing commies these days. The whole revolutionary socialist enterprise is bankrupt. In the 1930s it was the “wave of the future”. Now the only people who really still believe it are those who never experience it (or much of life in general)

In America, we are so far from fascism that we cannot see it even on a clear day. Nobody in the U.S. takes any risk by speaking out, except maybe conservative on university campuses.

It is just silly even to bring it up. It took courage to speak up in NAZI Germany. The reasons Germans didn’t speak up is because they were beat up, arrested or killed when they did. When an American stands up on his hind legs to criticize the president, if he does it well enough he gets a book contract or at least an honorable mention by celebritities.

Posted by: Jack at June 12, 2006 9:05 PM
Comment #157169

Jack, we are far from text book fascism. But, we bear more and more some of the hallmarks of a fascist regime, like authoritarian leadership and rule of men, not law.

We have a President who is making up laws as he goes along, in total disregard of the Constitution and of Congress which is the heart of the democratic process in America. When men make the laws according to their preferences (signing statements) and circumvent the Constitution adopted by the people, we do indeed begin taking on the mantle of a fascist regime despite the fact that we conduct rigged elections like the best of the Communists (gerrymandering).

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 13, 2006 11:06 AM
Comment #157208

Jack, I think we can easily see Fascism on a clear day.
Between congressional attempts at banning actions like flag burning, etc… and more and more people over the last 5 years ridiculing people for speaking out against government activities like the so-called “war on terror” (which will NEVER end).
Then there are quite likely rigged elections… and in some cases such as the 2004 presidential election… they dont even need to rig it, because Kerry was only a Bush Lite version, and most likely was backed by the same people Bush was, in case Kerry won.
Then there is the Patriot Act, and even though was originally said to be temporary to all the American sheeple, most of it is now being made permanent.

All we need is another 9/11 type event to push it over the edge…
maybe this time a spreading virus… then they quarantine millions of people… have the National Guard patrolling the streets in tanks and APC’s. Troops checking “papers” at airports, train stations, etc…

Dont forget, Fascism didnt happen overnight in Germany, Italy, Spain, etc… it took many years to dig its claws into the political bodies and the minds of the people in those nations. One event wont cause it to change…. but many, more subtle events over time are a lot harder to detect.
We may not be in the same situation that Germany was in the 1920’s and early 30’s… and I believe it will be a LOT harder to warp our nation into a Fascist style government than Germany was… but it still remains clear that it CAN happen… and if we keep the same pace we are going now I think it will happen… maybe 5 years… 10… 30 years… who knows….

But after years of subtle changes to our governmental system, and in the minds and beliefs of the people, all we will need is one near-cataclysmic event (whether it be from true terrorists or state sponsored ones) to warp our nation into a similar one that Hitler started.
**

Posted by: Craig Dawson at June 13, 2006 12:27 PM
Comment #157362

Traveller
Chamberlin not only accepted the German invasion of Poland,but was busy discussing the German/British alliance against the U.S.S.R.
That in itself did not cause the war. America’s complicity in essentially GIVING warships to the British while still trading with Germany is dubious morality at best. But good buisness,and with us still reeling from the Great Depression,sound economic practice. Let’s face it the war is what brought the economy back.
So I still believe that while we did not start the war directly,our active involvement, prior to a actual declaration of war, is an early historical example of policies we still follow. Vietnam. Afghanistan. Iraq.
I won’t argue that Japanese armies commited atrocities during the occupation of China. There is too much historical data that agrees with that. I will argue however that the conflict between Japan and China was just that. Between them. Wherever your sympathies lie,we had no legal right to intervene.
It is worth noting that the only reason that the Japanese had anything to do with the West originally was because Americans,forced them at gunpoint to open their harbors to our ships. Did the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor? Yes,and paid for it with two cities. I don’t want to re-fight WW2. Was there a Bataan Death March? Yes and a large reason for the incredible mortality is that culturally,the Japanese held anyone who surrendered with contempt .
Finally,think about this. The Germans took Jews out of their houses,often in the middle of the night,stole businesses,seperated families. Did we do any less to innocent Japanese -Americans? No, we did not kill any to my knowledge,but how would that have changed if we were losing the war? This was a time when we were putting up posters,and showing magazine ads with buck toothed Japanese soldiers,bayonneting little white children..I have no quarrel with the brave soldiers who fought and saved us from a terrible time. But we were not the innocent bystanders you seem to think we were.

Posted by: jblym at June 13, 2006 6:14 PM
Comment #157431

jblym

You cannot be making a moral equivelence arguement. You may recall that the NAZIs started their final solution when they were winning the war. It was not a final choice.

No country is innocent. The U.S. is just better than most.

Posted by: Jack at June 13, 2006 9:43 PM
Comment #157457

Ron Brown I am reposting your comment in its entireity. Your comment is exactly what my point for this post is. Here it is.

“My daddy served under Old Blood and Guts in France. Like most veterans from that war he didn’t brag about what he did. He was proud though that he able to served his country when it needed him. I never heard him or any other WWII veteran ask for a memorial. That seemed to be the last thing on their minds. They were more interested in raising their families in a country that was at peace. Unfortunately that wasn’t to be.
These brave men that fought for not only our freedom, but the freedom of folks they didn’t know. And only wanted to see their children to live in peace watched as their sons went to war.
And now their grandchildren and great grandchildren are going to war.
I personally don’t think that a memorial to these heroes that gave so much is out of order. It should have been built long before it was.”

Posted by: Richard Rhodes at June 13, 2006 10:50 PM
Comment #157790

Jack,

Been busy putting food on the table…

You wrote:

No point in killing commies these days. The whole revolutionary socialist enterprise is bankrupt. In the 1930s it was the “wave of the future”. Now the only people who really still believe it are those who never experience it (or much of life in general)

First, your kissin cousins, the NAZIS liked killing commies. Aparently you think that was a good thing. Now you tried to tie the NAZIS to liberals. There is more of a case to be made to tie Stalinism to conservatives. If you will recall, Stalin killed the last true Marxist Socialist in exile (Leo Trotsky) - like the good ultra fascist Stalin was. Stalin was also an incompetent Commander and Chief who manipulated the mass media to remain popular - sound familar?

Posted by: Ray Guest at June 14, 2006 6:21 PM
Comment #157791

Spelling error: Leon Trotsky - sorry.

Posted by: Ray Guest at June 14, 2006 6:22 PM
Post a comment