» »

Kim Jong-il : "Commerades, We Have a Bomb !"

Kim Jong-il : "Commerades, We Have a Bomb !"

strani: « 1 2 3 ... 6

Pepca*Kardelj ::

  • zavaroval slike: kuglvinkl ()

jype ::

When you see the flash, remember to hold on to your hat!

Ne upam si napovedovat, kaj bo zdaj. Če lahko sanjam utopijo, potem upam, da bodo Korejci vrgli svoje šefe, preden bi ti lahko naredili kakšno neumnost.

Da se niso Američani zmotili, ko so rekli, da je Irak grožnja varnosti ZDA? Ah, nič hudega. We can always invade another country if need be.

Pepca*Kardelj ::

When you see the flash, remember to hold on to your hat!

Hehehehehheeh.....:


"Duck - and cover!"

(zapoješ z melodijo iz risank iz 50-ih let)

sparklyslo ::

Ja in Sadama je bilo treba dobiti tudi, če ni bilo nobenih dokazov za jedrsko orožje.
Teli Korejci pa odkrito mahajo z njim, pa se očitno ne bo zgodilo nič.
Ni nafte, v bližini kitajske se pa ni več za hecat.

Pepca*Kardelj ::

Še malo seizmičnih podatkov:

Linque

Zgodovina sprememb…

  • zavaroval slike: kuglvinkl ()

WarpedOne ::

Amerika je rekla:

If you do that, the world will be very different.


Zdej lahk sam čakamo, kaj so mislili s tem. Js korejskemu sistemu dam še največ eno leto.
How do you know what you don't know?

Vajenc ::

Zaznan potres naj bi bil plitev (na površini). Mogoče bi lahko napovedali, kdaj naj imamo zaprta okna in da se npr. koruza pravočasno porabuta.

STASI ::

Zanimivo da ne Pentagon ne Bela hiša na svojih straneh nimajo ničesar o tem dogodku:\ . CNN in Reuters se opirata na besede Pjongjanga in na sezmično dogajanje v S.Koreji. Noben še ni potdil da so res testirali, le S.Korejci. Mogoče je v ZDA še prezgodaj in še niso dobro vstali. :D
"WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH"

abcčdefghijklmnoprsštuvzž

EvilDare ::

Potrjeno na foxnews: Klik

jype ::

Ojej.

Fox news se bere skoraj tako, kot severnokorejska izjava. "Axis of Evil". Svašta.

Ni čudno, da rabijo atomske bombe, da se počutijo varno (eni in drugi).

BBCjev povzetek dogodka je mnogo bolj na nivoju. Priporočam v branje.

Modri dirkač ::

Hans Blix: "Mr Jong, we are very angry at you and we will write you a letter in which we tell you how angry we are at you."

Kim: "Hans, Hans, Hans..."
Hans
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wO28NQc9tW4
Everybody lies!

Zgodovina sprememb…

Grey ::

Hm...je možno, da se uresniči scenarij iz Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory? Seveda v malo bolj grozni različici...

Thomas ::

Zna biti, da so v Severni Koreji čakali na en šibkejši potres in objavili, da so "preizkusil A bombo".

Ni nujno, je pa možno.
Man muss immer generalisieren - Carl Jacobi

frudi ::

težko, menda so Kitajce in Ruse vnaprej obvestili.
prve ocene za moč naj bi bile reda velikosti 1 kT. precej skromno...
1ACDoHVj3wn7N4EMpGVU4YGLR9HTfkNhTd... in case I've written something useful :)

sumadinac ::

S. Koreja zmeraj naredi kaj takega na državni praznik ta vikend je bila obletnica Kim Jong-il-a njegovega prihoda na oblast.

Me pa zanima kaj bo lahko naredijo ZDA kajti S. Koreja ni Iraq ali neka banana država brez vojske. WTG S. Koreja:D

Pepca*Kardelj ::

....prve ocene za moč naj bi bile reda 1 kT....

Rusi pravijo da je lahko tudi do 15 kT. :

The size of the bomb is uncertain. South Korean reports put it as low as 550 tons of destructive power but Russia said it was between five and 15 kilotons.
The Hiroshima bomb of 1945 was 12.5-15 kilotons.

sverde21 ::

LOL najprej neki Iran bajkajo sm in tja pol se pa izkaže da je resna zadeva na dalnem vzhodu :D
<?php echo `w`; ?>

Thomas ::

Obe zadevi sta resni, obe.
Man muss immer generalisieren - Carl Jacobi

kopriwa ::

Američanom očitno ne znese nadzirat obe državi, tako si Iran in S.Koreja podajata njihovo pozornost :D . Dobro je da tudi Kitajska in Rusija obtužujeta njihov poskus.

jype ::

Kitajska je trenutno edina država, ki lahko zresni režim S. Koreje.

Ne vem, a je to na žalost, a na srečo. Se mi zdi, da Kitajska ne bo vojaško posredovala, a po drugi strani ji sploh ni treba. Samo enkrat s prstom ne mignejo in S. Koreja praktično instantno umre od lakote.

Jaz upam, da jim tega ne bo treba storiti.

Vajenc ::

Res ne razumem pomena tega zastraševanja. Verjetno se Kim Jong tolaži, da sedaj ne bo upala "po pomoti" zaiti s smeri, kakšna stealth raketa usmerjena v njegovo spalnico, ali pa se gre le igro "kdo naredi lepši oblaček-gobo".
Razumem, da želijo imeti jedrsko oborožitev, kot protiutež ameriškemu kapitalizmu, ne zastopim pa zakaj poskuse ne delajo tajno, kot so (morda še vedno) to delali Francozi, ZDA, ZSSR in verjetno še kdo. Sej zemlja, stratosfera, morje... očitno zna prebavit in pozabit take svinjarije.

Saladin ::

ne zastopim pa zakaj poskuse ne delajo tajno

Če bi naredili poskus tajno, da so obenem priznavali sporazum o neširjenju jedrskega orožja In da se jih potem odkrije, ne bi imeli absolutno nobenega izgovora, ki bi preprečil ZN vojaško akcijo nad SK.
Sedaj pa se kao lahko izgovarjajo na nacionalno varnost.
Dobro je kar nosi največ svobodne koristi/najmanj bolečine čim več sentientom
na najhitrejši, najvarnejši in najbolj moralen način za najdaljše obdobje.
"Utilitarianizem po Saladinovo"

Zgodovina sprememb…

  • spremenil: Saladin ()

Vajenc ::

Sej S.Koreja je odstopila l. 2003 od tega sporazuma, ravno zato vsa ta gonja zoper njo. Je pa zanimivo kako je nekoč bila podpisnica procesa neširjenja orožja za množično uničenje, nikoli pa ni podpisala pogodbe o celoviti prepovedi jedrskih poskusov - CTBT, samo sprenevedanje.

Saladin ::

Pustila si je vrata odprta. Potem je videla neučinkovitost in obotavljanje ZN pri iranskem jedrskem vprašanju in se odločila riskirat.
Dobro je kar nosi največ svobodne koristi/najmanj bolečine čim več sentientom
na najhitrejši, najvarnejši in najbolj moralen način za najdaljše obdobje.
"Utilitarianizem po Saladinovo"

Vajenc ::

To riskiranje je vprašljivo. Da bi razkazovali svojo moč v regiji je nesmiselno, ker sta Kitajska in Rusija "capo di banda". Dokazovanje ZDA, da si upajo in s tem neupoštevajo kapitalističnega imperija je ravno tako nesmiselno, razen, če imajo tajno podporo "capo di bande" in želijo s tem narediti nek bolj globalen konflikt.

Saladin ::

To riskiranje je vprašljivo

Razum Kim Jong-il-ja je vprašljiv.
Dobro je kar nosi največ svobodne koristi/najmanj bolečine čim več sentientom
na najhitrejši, najvarnejši in najbolj moralen način za najdaljše obdobje.
"Utilitarianizem po Saladinovo"

Thomas ::

Hmmm ... potres mogoče res ni bil naraven. Lahko pa, da so razstrelili kakšnih 1000 ton TNT v kakšnem rovu pod zemljo.
Man muss immer generalisieren - Carl Jacobi

Double_J ::

To se pa vendar da zaznat iz grafa, za kaj je šlo.

Daedalus ::

Hmmm ... potres mogoče res ni bil naraven. Lahko pa, da so razstrelili kakšnih 1000 ton TNT v kakšnem rovu pod zemljo.

Ja, to se meni zdi tudi precej realna možnost poskusa zastraševanja in odvračanja. Zdaj je sam vprašanje, kdo je pravilno ocenil velikost eksplozije...
Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world,
he is responsible for everything he does.
[J.P.Sartre]

Thomas ::

1 kT atomsko bombo narediš samo s kakšnimi transurani, ki jih imajo kvečjemu Američani. Mogoče Francozi in noben drug. Korejci zagotovo ne!

Če pa ti delaš z uranom, boš težko naredil 1 kT bombo.
Man muss immer generalisieren - Carl Jacobi

Double_J ::

Kolikor vem imajo plutonijevo, ne uranovo...

Pyr0Beast ::

The size of the bomb is uncertain. South Korean reports put it as low as 550 tons of destructive power but Russia said it was between five and 15 kilotons.

Sploh lahko tako majhno bombo narediš. Jst sem vajen moči 2-h megaton. :D

Lahko pa, da so razstrelili kakšnih 1000 ton TNT v kakšnem rovu pod zemljo.
Hudddda, 1 mio kg TNT-ja >:D
Some nanoparticles are more equal than others

Good work: Any notion of sanity and critical thought is off-topic in this place

gumby ::

>>>Kolikor vem imajo plutonijevo, ne uranovo...

klik
my brain hurts

sverde21 ::

Hudddda, 1 mio kg TNT-ja >:D
Ja ne vem če so glih TNT fural not v tist tunel al kaj so že razstrelil, pomoje je to preveč dela.
Sploh lahko tako majhno bombo narediš.
In zakaj nebi mogu? Pač mal mej urana/plutonija daš not pa je ;) .

BTW po čem ocenjujejo moč bombe? Po potresnim sunku? To je IMO tak k bi hotu na 1 km zmerit kak visok je sosedov froc. :D
<?php echo `w`; ?>

WarpedOne ::

How do you know what you don't know?

Pyr0Beast ::

Že 1kg jedrskega goriva ti sprosti takšno moč. Tako nizke kritične mase pa ne vidim nikjer.

Ja ne vem če so glih TNT fural not v tist tunel al kaj so že razstrelil, pomoje je to preveč dela.
niso, ti garantiram, preveč dela, pa predrago.

In zakaj nebi mogu? Pač mal mej urana/plutonija daš not pa je ;) .
Pod kritično maso bomba ne eksplodira.

BTW po čem ocenjujejo moč bombe?
Primerjajo eksplozijo s 1000kg tnt-ja > kT TNT.

Po potresnim sunku?
NE

Hmm, moje pisanje se sliši nekam napadalno :\
Some nanoparticles are more equal than others

Good work: Any notion of sanity and critical thought is off-topic in this place

sverde21 ::

Že 1kg jedrskega goriva ti sprosti takšno moč. Tako nizke kritične mase pa ne vidim nikjer.
Aja :8) . Nism vedu, ker v šoli ne učijo jedrske fizike :| .
niso, ti garantiram, preveč dela, pa predrago.
Ja sej sm že reku da je preveč dela, pa še vprašanje je kam bi ga stišal :)
Primerjajo eksplozijo s 1000kg tnt-ja > kT TNT.
ja OK ampak če nimajo dostopa da bi vidl, kako lukno je naredla tista bomba morajo verjetn nekak ugibat... moraš vedet kaj primerjaš, šele potem lahko primerjaš.
Hmm, moje pisanje se sliši nekam napadalno :\
LOL :D

P.S.: zdle ko mal berem wikipedio o jedrskim orožju, atomih, A-bombah,... opažam, da bi lahk že skor doma naredu A-bombo ;) . Največji problem je ustrezna zaščita in seveda uran/plutonij, ki se ga ne dobi kr na odpadu :D

Pa še link na Wikipedio: 2006 North Korean nuclear test
<?php echo `w`; ?>

Zgodovina sprememb…

  • spremenil: sverde21 ()

Gundolf ::

Sej kritična masa ni noben nakazatel moči bombe. Sej se da vsako bombo tako šlampasto narest, da explodira le delno. Torej da kritična masa le sproži reakcijo, ki pa je prehitra in bomba kritično maso razbije ter gorivo namesto da bi ga porabila razrese naokoli. Šlampasto narest je lažje kot pa kvalitetno :)

Thomas ::

Bomba, ki bi jo "slabo razneslo", bi lahko bila precej šibka.

Ampak taka bi dosegla najbolj verjetno 0,001 kT ali še manj. Kot tista po nesreči v Vinči pri Beogradu, desetletja nazaj.

Ta scenarij sicer ni povsem izključen, verjeten pa ni.
Man muss immer generalisieren - Carl Jacobi

Thomas ::

Uranova in plutonijeva bomba nad Japonsko sta bili precej minimalni obe.

Šibkejše so naredili šele mnogo kasneje z izotopi kalifornija, ki ga je pa Umetnost narest. Recimo z zbiranjem ostankov po podzemskih nuklearnih eksplozijah.

To so, če prav vem, zmogli razen Američanov le še Francozi. Da bi imeli vžigalnike za takoimenovane nevtronske bombe, ki so majhne vodikove.

Čudno.
Man muss immer generalisieren - Carl Jacobi

guest #44 ::

thomas, kakšna nesreča pri Beogradu?

Thomas ::

Man muss immer generalisieren - Carl Jacobi

sverde21 ::

Zbiranje ostankov po podzemnih eksplozijah ni glih zdrav IMO, tak kot tud tole ne:
V rokah ima uran ^^
<?php echo `w`; ?>

Zgodovina sprememb…

  • zavaroval slike: kuglvinkl ()

guest #44 ::

smeh...no ja. nisem vedu da se je kaj takega zgodilo v yu. kaj pa so nacrtovali nardit?

anyway, back on topic:

Red Alert: North Korea -- Is There a Military Solution?
Summary

Whatever the political realities may seem to dictate after a North Korean nuclear test, an overt military strike -- even one limited to cruise missiles -- is not in the cards. The consequences of even the most restrained attack could be devastating.

Analysis

The reported detonation of a nuclear device by North Korea on Oct. 9 raises the question of potential military action against North Korea. The rationale for such a strike would be simple. North Korea, given its rhetoric, cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons. Therefore, an attack to deny them the facilities with which to convert their device into a weapon and deploy it is essential. If such an attack were to take place, it is assumed, the United States would play the dominant or even sole role.

This scenario assumes that North Korea is as aggressive as its rhetoric.

But what about North Korea's well-armed neighbors -- Russia, China, South Korea, Japan? Would they not be willing to assume the major burden of an attack against North Korea? Is the United States really willing to go it alone, even while engaged in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Leaving these obvious political questions aside for the moment, let's reverse the issue by posing it in military terms: What would a U.S. strike against North Korea look like?

The USS Kitty Hawk is currently sitting in port at Yokosuka Naval Base, Japan. The USS Enterprise is operating in the Arabian Sea, while the Nimitz and the Stennis are conducting exercises off the coast of California. All are an ocean away, and none is less than a week's transit from the region. Nevertheless, naval cruise missiles are readily available, as are long-range strikes by B-2A Spirit stealth bombers and B-52H Stratofortresses and B-1B Lancers currently supporting NATO operations in Afghanistan out of Diego Garcia. A more robust strike package would take longer to deploy.

When U.S. military planners have nightmares, they have nightmares about war with North Korea. Even the idea of limited strikes against the isolated nation is fraught with potential escalations. The problem is the mission. A limited attack against nuclear facilities might destabilize North Korea or lead North Korea to the conclusion that the United States would intend regime change.

Regime preservation is the entire point of its nuclear capability. Therefore, it is quite conceivable that Kim Jong-Il and his advisors -- or other factions --might construe even the most limited military strikes against targets directly related to missile development or a nuclear program as an act threatening the regime, and therefore one that necessitates a fierce response. Regime survival could very easily entail a full, unlimited reprisal by the Korean People's Army (KPA) to any military strike whatsoever on North Korean soil.

North Korea has some 10,000 fortified artillery pieces trained on Seoul. It is essential to understand that South Korea's capital city, a major population center and the industrial heartland of South Korea, is within range of conventional artillery. The United States has been moving its forces out of range of these guns, but the South Koreans cannot move their capital.

Add to this the fact that North Korea has more than 100 No-Dong missiles that can reach deep into South Korea, as well as to Japan, and we can see that the possibility for retaliation is very real. Although the No-Dong has not always been the most reliable weapon, just the possibility of dozens of strikes against U.S. forces in Korea and other cities in Korea and Japan presents a daunting scenario.

North Korea has cultivated a reputation for unpredictability. Although it has been fairly conservative in its actions compared to its rhetoric, the fact is that no one can predict North Korea's response to strikes against its nuclear facilities. And with Seoul at risk -- a city of 20 million people -- the ability to take risks is limited.

The United States must assume, for the sake of planning, that U.S. airstrikes would be followed by massed artillery fire on Seoul. Now, massed artillery is itself not immune to countermeasures. But North Korea's artillery lies deep inside caves and fortifications all along the western section of the demilitarized zone (DMZ). An air campaign against these guns would take a long time, during which enormous damage would be done to Seoul and the South Korean economy -- perhaps on the order of several hundred thousand high-explosive rounds per hour. Even using tactical nuclear weapons against this artillery would pose serious threats to Seoul. The radiation from even low-yield weapons could force the evacuation of the city.

The option of moving north into the North Korean defensive belt is an option, but an enormously costly one. North Korea has a huge army and, on the defensive, it can be formidable. Fifty years of concerted military fortification would make Hezbollah's preparations in southern Lebanon look like child's play. Moving U.S. and South Korean armor into this defensive belt could break it, but only with substantial casualties and without the certainty of success. A massive stalemate along the DMZ, if it developed, would work in favor of the larger, defensive force.

Moreover, the North Koreans would have the option of moving south. Now, in U.S. thinking, this is the ideal scenario. The North Korean force on the move, outside of its fortifications, would be vulnerable to U.S. and South Korean airstrikes and superior ground maneuver and fire capabilities. In most war games, the defeat of North Korea requires the KPA to move south, exposing itself to counterstrikes.

However, the same war-gaming has also supposed at least 30 days for the activation and mobilization of U.S. forces for a counterattack. U.S. and South Korean forces would maintain an elastic defense against the North; as in the first war, forces would be rushed into the region, stabilizing the front, and then a counterattack would develop, breaking the North Korean army and allowing a move north.

There are three problems with this strategy. The first is that the elastic strategy would inevitably lead to the fall of Seoul and, if the 1950 model were a guide, a much deeper withdrawal along the Korean Peninsula. Second, the ability of the U.S. Army to deploy substantial forces to Korea within a 30-day window is highly dubious. Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom both required much longer periods of time.

Finally, the U.S. Army is already fighting two major ground wars and is stretched to the breaking point. The rotation schedule is now so tight that units are already spending more time in Iraq than they are home between rotations. The idea that the U.S. Army has a multidivisional force available for deployment in South Korea would require a national mobilization not seen since the last Korean War.

It comes down to this: If the United States strikes at North Korea's nuclear capabilities, it does so placing a bet. And that bet is that North Korea will not respond. That might be true, but if it is not true, it poses a battlefield problem to which neither South Korea nor the United States will be able to respond. In one scenario, the North Koreans bombard Seoul and the United States makes a doomed attempt at shutting down the massive artillery barrage. By the time the guns are silenced -- even in the best-case scenarios -- Seoul will be a mess. In another scenario, the North Korean army executes an offensive of even minimal competence, which costs South Korea its capital and industrial heartland. The third is a guerrilla onslaught from the elite of the North Korean Army, deployed by mini-subs and tunnels under the DMZ. The guerrillas pour into the south and wreak havoc on U.S. military installations.

That is how a U.S. strike -- and its outcome -- might look. Now, what about the Chinese and Russians? They are, of course, not likely to support such a U.S. attack (and could even supply North Korea in an extended war). Add in the fact that South Korea would not be willing to risk destroying Seoul and you arrive at a situation where even a U.S. nuclear strike against nuclear and non-nuclear targets would pose an unacceptable threat to South Korea.

There are two advantages the United States has. The first is time. There is a huge difference between a nuclear device and a deployable nuclear weapon. The latter has to be shaped into a small, rugged package able to be launched on a missile or dropped from a plane. Causing atomic fission is not the same as having a weapon.

The second advantage is distance. The United States is safe and far away from North Korea. Four other powers -- Russia, China, South Korea and Japan -- have much more to fear from North Korea than the United States does. The United States will always act unilaterally if it feels that it has no other way to protect its national interest. As it is, however, U.S. national interest is not at stake.

South Korea faces nothing less than national destruction in an all-out war. South Korea knows this and it will vigorously oppose any overt military action. Nor does China profit from a destabilized North Korea and a heavy-handed U.S. military move in its backyard. Nevertheless, if North Korea is a threat, it is first a threat to its immediate neighbors, one or more of whom can deal with North Korea.

In the end, North Korea wants regime survival. In the end, allowing the North Koran regime to survive is something that has been acceptable for over half a century. When you play out the options, the acquisition of a nuclear device -- especially one neither robust nor deployable -- does not, by itself, compel the United States to act, nor does it give the United States a militarily satisfactory option. The most important issue is the transfer of North Korean nuclear technology to other countries and groups. That is something the six-party talk participants have an equal interest in and might have the leverage to prevent.

Every situation does not have a satisfactory military solution. This seems to be one of them.


ne se bat...še! :\

Pyr0Beast ::

V rokah ima uran ^^
Dokler je 235 je ql, ko je kej 237 noter si že mrtev.

Aja :8) . Nism vedu, ker v šoli ne učijo jedrske fizike :| .
Sej pri nas tudi niso, ampak so stvari, ki jih mora vsak človek vedeti >:D

ja OK ampak če nimajo dostopa da bi vidl, kako lukno je naredla tista bomba morajo verjetn nekak ugibat... moraš vedet kaj primerjaš, šele potem lahko primerjaš.
Glede na čistost/maso zračunaš udarno moč.

Največji problem je ustrezna zaščita in seveda uran/plutonij, ki se ga ne dobi kr na odpadu :D
Ja, treba znat iskat >:D >:D :D

Sej se da vsako bombo tako šlampasto narest, da explodira le delno
Če mene vprašaš, je to čista potrata urana/plutonija. Samo čiščenje je zelo drago. Kako težko pa je sploh narediti uranovo A bombo. Oz. koliko lahko sploh zaj..
Some nanoparticles are more equal than others

Good work: Any notion of sanity and critical thought is off-topic in this place

Zgodovina sprememb…

sverde21 ::

Sounds like start of WW3... :|

Dokler je 235 je ql, ko je kej 237 noter si že mrtev.
A niso vsi izotopi urana radioaktivni? :8)
<?php echo `w`; ?>

Zgodovina sprememb…

  • spremenil: sverde21 ()

Pyr0Beast ::

A niso vsi izotopi urana radioaktivni? :8)
Niti ne. Večina jih je, čeprav lahko izotop urana U238 prištevaš k plutoniju - Pu238
235 ni nobeden problem, če mene vprašaš, tudi zelo stabilen je, in zato ne razpade kr tako.

Samo, da je model ozon zavohal so mogli pa reaktor kr precej skuhati.
Some nanoparticles are more equal than others

Good work: Any notion of sanity and critical thought is off-topic in this place

Zgodovina sprememb…

Thomas ::

Washington Post:


U.S. officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that seismic readings show that the conventional high explosives used to create a chain reaction in a plutonium-based device went off, but that the blast's readings were shy of a typical nuclear detonation.
Man muss immer generalisieren - Carl Jacobi

Daedalus ::

Sounds like start of WW3...

IMO ne. Zna pa bit, da bo na koncu res grozljivo visoko ceno plačalo civilno prebivalstvo. S Koreja zna ostat z nula mednarodne pomoči, kar pomeni stradanje do sesutja režima. Pa če gre karkoli verjeti onemu članku zgoraj - je to bolj kot ne edina opcija.
Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world,
he is responsible for everything he does.
[J.P.Sartre]

Gundolf ::

Mogoče so slabo plutonijevo kroglo naredili ali so pa pri explozivu zasrali. Kim bo jezen in enepar znanstvenikov bo 'degradiranih'.
strani: « 1 2 3 ... 6


Vredno ogleda ...

TemaSporočilaOglediZadnje sporočilo
TemaSporočilaOglediZadnje sporočilo
»

Ali bo Amerika napadla Iran do 20.3.2006??? (strani: 1 2 3 4 )

Oddelek: Problemi človeštva
18510126 (6062) leinad
»

Zrušitev komunizma (strani: 1 2 )

Oddelek: Problemi človeštva
504418 (3983) MadMicka
»

Ima kdo izkušnje z Micronet ruterjem

Oddelek: Omrežja in internet
121119 (1040) Tody
»

Vici na temo ponosnih Američanov

Oddelek: Loža
273219 (2473) spader
»

35 razlogov v premislek...

Oddelek: Loža
171166 (835) Balandeque

Več podobnih tem