(07-17-2018 09:03 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 06:24 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwlStill Wrote:  Really? You guys are still defending Trump after his performance in Helsinki? Does Putin have kompromat on you too? LOL

I officially re-retire from the Russia debate.

You should wonder why the media is so very interested in maintaining perception of Russia as the boogeyman and Putin as insensate evil, that they define even talking to Russia and Putin as treason.

Talking to Putin wasn't what J. McCain, J. Brennan, W. Hurd, Gen. Hayden, and most of the media are defining as treasonous or disastrous.

If you're good with Trump's performance yesterday and think he advanced our interests, OK.

Don't see it. I'm on vacation and watched the press conference in real time. The president appeared naive, aggrieved and unprepared.

(07-17-2018 09:03 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 06:24 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwlStill Wrote:  Really? You guys are still defending Trump after his performance in Helsinki? Does Putin have kompromat on you too? LOL

I officially re-retire from the Russia debate.

You should wonder why the media is so very interested in maintaining perception of Russia as the boogeyman and Putin as insensate evil, that they define even talking to Russia and Putin as treason.

Talking to Putin wasn't what J. McCain, J. Brennan, W. Hurd, Gen. Hayden, and most of the media are defining as treasonous or disastrous.

If you're good with Trump's performance yesterday and think he advanced our interests, OK.

Don't see it. I'm on vacation and watched the press conference in real time. The president appeared naive, aggrieved and unprepared.

(07-17-2018 10:40 AM)ausowl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:03 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 06:24 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwlStill Wrote:  Really? You guys are still defending Trump after his performance in Helsinki? Does Putin have kompromat on you too? LOL

I officially re-retire from the Russia debate.

You should wonder why the media is so very interested in maintaining perception of Russia as the boogeyman and Putin as insensate evil, that they define even talking to Russia and Putin as treason.

Talking to Putin wasn't what J. McCain, J. Brennan, W. Hurd, Gen. Hayden, and most of the media are defining as treasonous or disastrous.

If you're good with Trump's performance yesterday and think he advanced our interests, OK.

Don't see it. I'm on vacation and watched the press conference in real time. The president appeared naive, aggrieved and unprepared.

I didn't say he advanced our interests.

It's interesting the collection of people who label Trump's conduct as "treasonous", not "incompetent" or "inept". The very neocons whose worldview and policies require a boogeyman. McCain, for example. He just cannot accept that the Cold War ended a long time ago.

(07-17-2018 09:50 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:47 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  [quote='Frizzy Owl' pid='15387524' dateline='1531836222']
[quote='JustAnotherAustinOwlStill' pid='15387358' dateline='1531826679']

It was not the simple act of talking that has so many worked up (although there are some who felt that elevating a hostile and, from a GDP perspective, rather weak country to equal status was bad). It was the fact that when pressed, Trump turned his back on his intelligence agencies and sided with Putin, and said that we had some blame in Russia’a aggressive posture and actions.

Goes to show, nothing infuriates people more than telling the truth.

What did we do, exactly, to cause Russia to annex Crimea?

(07-17-2018 11:15 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:50 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:47 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  [quote='Frizzy Owl' pid='15387524' dateline='1531836222']
[quote='JustAnotherAustinOwlStill' pid='15387358' dateline='1531826679']

It was not the simple act of talking that has so many worked up (although there are some who felt that elevating a hostile and, from a GDP perspective, rather weak country to equal status was bad). It was the fact that when pressed, Trump turned his back on his intelligence agencies and sided with Putin, and said that we had some blame in Russia’a aggressive posture and actions.

Goes to show, nothing infuriates people more than telling the truth.

What did we do, exactly, to cause Russia to annex Crimea?

NATO was making overtures to Ukraine. Russia has always fought hard to keep Western powers out of the Crimean peninsula, and makes no secret that they view Western control of the Crimean peninsula as an existential threat. NATO affiliation would have meant NATO basing rights in the Crimean peninsula. Russia will see the world burn before they let that happen, and NATO's leadership either knew that or acted in complete ignorance of history and disregard of Russia's warnings.

NATO's attempt to gain a Crimean presence was going to be the next step in a decades-long strategy of encircling Russia and tightening the circle.

The Cuban Missile Crisis was a very close historical analog. Crimea is to Russia what the Caribbean islands are to the United States, and Russia reacted violently just as the United States was prepared to do - and NATO either knew that would happen or they are walking around blind without a cane.

(07-17-2018 11:15 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:50 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:47 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  [quote='Frizzy Owl' pid='15387524' dateline='1531836222']
[quote='JustAnotherAustinOwlStill' pid='15387358' dateline='1531826679']

It was not the simple act of talking that has so many worked up (although there are some who felt that elevating a hostile and, from a GDP perspective, rather weak country to equal status was bad). It was the fact that when pressed, Trump turned his back on his intelligence agencies and sided with Putin, and said that we had some blame in Russia’a aggressive posture and actions.

Goes to show, nothing infuriates people more than telling the truth.

What did we do, exactly, to cause Russia to annex Crimea?

Make it easy? I think they knew all they would get in the way of push back was some finger shaking. I wanted a stronger response, and the left defended Obama's lack of action.

(07-17-2018 11:32 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:15 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:50 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:47 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  [quote='Frizzy Owl' pid='15387524' dateline='1531836222']
[quote='JustAnotherAustinOwlStill' pid='15387358' dateline='1531826679']

It was not the simple act of talking that has so many worked up (although there are some who felt that elevating a hostile and, from a GDP perspective, rather weak country to equal status was bad). It was the fact that when pressed, Trump turned his back on his intelligence agencies and sided with Putin, and said that we had some blame in Russia’a aggressive posture and actions.

Goes to show, nothing infuriates people more than telling the truth.

What did we do, exactly, to cause Russia to annex Crimea?

Make it easy? I think they knew all they would get in the way of push back was some finger shaking. I wanted a stronger response, and the left defended Obama's lack of action.

See above. It's no longer word games and symbolic sanctions when it comes to Crimea.

(07-17-2018 11:32 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:15 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:50 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:47 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  [quote='Frizzy Owl' pid='15387524' dateline='1531836222']
[quote='JustAnotherAustinOwlStill' pid='15387358' dateline='1531826679']

It was not the simple act of talking that has so many worked up (although there are some who felt that elevating a hostile and, from a GDP perspective, rather weak country to equal status was bad). It was the fact that when pressed, Trump turned his back on his intelligence agencies and sided with Putin, and said that we had some blame in Russia’a aggressive posture and actions.

Goes to show, nothing infuriates people more than telling the truth.

What did we do, exactly, to cause Russia to annex Crimea?

Make it easy? I think they knew all they would get in the way of push back was some finger shaking. I wanted a stronger response, and the left defended Obama's lack of action.

What a nonsensical response. In your response, you are suggesting that we are now responsible for a foreign country’s actions due to inaction when there wasn’t even an event to react to. Somehow we made Putin decide to invade another country.

You can argue about the severity of our response to Putin’s actions, but to suggest that Putin we are at fault because we “made it easy” doesn’t really cut the mustard.

So you must be furious about Trumps response, which was to bend over and take it, if you felt that Obama's finger wagging was too little, right?

(07-17-2018 11:45 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:32 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:15 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:50 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:47 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  [quote='Frizzy Owl' pid='15387524' dateline='1531836222']
[quote='JustAnotherAustinOwlStill' pid='15387358' dateline='1531826679']

It was not the simple act of talking that has so many worked up (although there are some who felt that elevating a hostile and, from a GDP perspective, rather weak country to equal status was bad). It was the fact that when pressed, Trump turned his back on his intelligence agencies and sided with Putin, and said that we had some blame in Russia’a aggressive posture and actions.

Goes to show, nothing infuriates people more than telling the truth.

What did we do, exactly, to cause Russia to annex Crimea?

Make it easy? I think they knew all they would get in the way of push back was some finger shaking. I wanted a stronger response, and the left defended Obama's lack of action.

What a nonsensical response. In your response, you are suggesting that we are now responsible for a foreign country’s actions due to inaction when there wasn’t even an event to react to. Somehow we made Putin decide to invade another country.

You can argue about the severity of our response to Putin’s actions, but to suggest that Putin we are at fault because we “made it easy” doesn’t really cut the mustard.

So you must be furious about Trumps response, which was to bend over and take it, if you felt that Obama's finger wagging was too little, right?

Obama - or his advisors, anyway - knew not to push Russia and China too hard, and I'll give him credit for that, especially when it put him at odds not just with Republican warmongers but those in his own party.

(07-17-2018 11:45 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:32 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:15 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:50 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:47 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  [quote='Frizzy Owl' pid='15387524' dateline='1531836222']
[quote='JustAnotherAustinOwlStill' pid='15387358' dateline='1531826679']

It was not the simple act of talking that has so many worked up (although there are some who felt that elevating a hostile and, from a GDP perspective, rather weak country to equal status was bad). It was the fact that when pressed, Trump turned his back on his intelligence agencies and sided with Putin, and said that we had some blame in Russia’a aggressive posture and actions.

Goes to show, nothing infuriates people more than telling the truth.

What did we do, exactly, to cause Russia to annex Crimea?

Make it easy? I think they knew all they would get in the way of push back was some finger shaking. I wanted a stronger response, and the left defended Obama's lack of action.

What a nonsensical response. In your response, you are suggesting that we are now responsible for a foreign country’s actions due to inaction when there wasn’t even an event to react to. Somehow we made Putin decide to invade another country.

You can argue about the severity of our response to Putin’s actions, but to suggest that Putin we are at fault because we “made it easy” doesn’t really cut the mustard.

So you must be furious about Trumps response, which was to bend over and take it, if you felt that Obama's finger wagging was too little, right?

You leave the door open, advertise that you will not do anything to any body who comes in, don't be surprised if your TV gets stolen.

You brought up Crimea. what do you think Obama should have done?

(07-17-2018 11:49 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:45 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:32 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:15 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 09:50 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  Goes to show, nothing infuriates people more than telling the truth.

What did we do, exactly, to cause Russia to annex Crimea?

Make it easy? I think they knew all they would get in the way of push back was some finger shaking. I wanted a stronger response, and the left defended Obama's lack of action.

What a nonsensical response. In your response, you are suggesting that we are now responsible for a foreign country’s actions due to inaction when there wasn’t even an event to react to. Somehow we made Putin decide to invade another country.

You can argue about the severity of our response to Putin’s actions, but to suggest that Putin we are at fault because we “made it easy” doesn’t really cut the mustard.

So you must be furious about Trumps response, which was to bend over and take it, if you felt that Obama's finger wagging was too little, right?

You leave the door open, advertise that you will not do anything to any body who comes in, don't be surprised if your TV gets stolen.

You brought up Crimea. what do you think Obama should have done?

Nothing. What's Crimea to us, especially when most Crimeans identify as Russians?

I had nothing invested in Trump's reaction to the indictments. It appears to me that it was a made-for-TV "gotcha" moment, where no matter what Trump did or didn't do, the left was going t make a big (negative) deal out of it. Damned if he did, damned if he didn't. If he had called Putin a liar to his face, would that have made you happy?

I think the long view is that we will have a lot of things to discuss/negotiate with this guy over the years. Alienating him by embarrassing him is not going to help. Weren't you the guys worried that Trump would ignite a nuclear war by dissing Un, and now you want him t diss somebody with 1000 X the nukes?

Your turn: What action from Trump would have elicited a "Well Done" from you?

In Crimea, and in Georgia under GWB, there really isn't much the US can do. Our standard response is to send a carrier task force wherever there is a problem (Bill Clinton once said, "Whenever there is a crisis, a president's first thought is, 'where are the carriers?'"). We can't take carriers into the Black Sea without breaking international law, per the Montreux Convention. The very act of sending a carrier through the Bosporus and Dardanelles could be regarded as an act of war by any state bordering on the Black Sea, including Russia--and Turkey.

We could use air support from bases in Romania, but--and it's a huge but--that's not very satisfactory. It's 400 miles from Bucharest to Crimea, almost 1000 miles to Georgia. That is a lot of transit time, which would seriously impair the effectiveness of any air demonstration. Furthermore, those Romanian bases are not really set up to support the size and scope of operation that would be required. And without air cover, any troops would get chopped up pretty badly and pretty quickly.

We can impose sanctions, but sanctions have seldom had any meaningful impact. The most rigorous sanctions ever imposed were probably those against South Africa in the wake of Apartheid. If if you asked Nelson Mandela, he would probably have said that New Zealand's decision that the All-Blacks would no longer play the Springboks in rugby probably had more impact on ending Apartheid than did the sanctions.

Funny, Trump is derided for his 'lack of diplomacy', yet is chastised for not yelling 'Liar liar' to Putin's face at worldwide televised press conference.

Lets have a little Gedankenexperiment here:

Assume Trump does the opposite, precisely what many seem demand -- that is verbally and viciously assault Putin for all his authoritarian and expansionist actions (annexing the Crimea, Syria intervention, eastern Ukraine, DNC servers, etc.)?

What would have that explicit criticism *to his face* accomplished with these matters? My best guess is precisely nada.

What would be most likely if that occurred? Relations, already in the dumpster, would have been set back further.

I dont think that is rocket science to figure out.

Next, look at what has actually happened and in the course of happening. Trump's actions re: Russia amazingly more strict (some might say unfriendly) than his words yesterday -- let alone when comparing them to the actions *and* diplomatic treatment enjoined by Obama, mind you. For me, it's hard to categorize an explicit attack on the economic base of Russia (i.e. continuing and accelerating the opening of energy spigots), increasing sanctions, arming the Ukrainians, ejecting 60 Russian agents, etc. If Trump is in Putin's pocket, he's doing a terrible job of it on the actions front.

Being personally gracious and diplomatic to Putin on the largest stage ever provided to Putin doesnt seem to be a wholly improper item, especially in light of the tangible friction of Trump's actual policies to Putin's Russia. But I guess complaining about not being a dick on that world stage is something that Trump's opponents seem to truly care more about than tangible policies.

(07-17-2018 11:58 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I had nothing invested in Trump's reaction to the indictments. It appears to me that it was a made-for-TV "gotcha" moment, where no matter what Trump did or didn't do, the left was going t make a big (negative) deal out of it. Damned if he did, damned if he didn't. If he had called Putin a liar to his face, would that have made you happy?

I think the long view is that we will have a lot of things to discuss/negotiate with this guy over the years. Alienating him by embarrassing him is not going to help. Weren't you the guys worried that Trump would ignite a nuclear war by dissing Un, and now you want him t diss somebody with 1000 X the nukes?

Your turn: What action from Trump would have elicited a "Well Done" from you?

Would have been *real* effective.... And apparently he *would* have made his erstwhile constant critics happy./sarcasm off.

If you believe that Trump's critics will ever be less than pissed off with anything Trump does, says, or indicates, I have some land in central Florida I'd love to sell you.

(07-17-2018 12:08 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:58 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I had nothing invested in Trump's reaction to the indictments. It appears to me that it was a made-for-TV "gotcha" moment, where no matter what Trump did or didn't do, the left was going t make a big (negative) deal out of it. Damned if he did, damned if he didn't. If he had called Putin a liar to his face, would that have made you happy?

I think the long view is that we will have a lot of things to discuss/negotiate with this guy over the years. Alienating him by embarrassing him is not going to help. Weren't you the guys worried that Trump would ignite a nuclear war by dissing Un, and now you want him t diss somebody with 1000 X the nukes?

Your turn: What action from Trump would have elicited a "Well Done" from you?

Would have been *real* effective.... And apparently he *would* have made his erstwhile constant critics happy./sarcasm off.

If you believe that Trump's critics will ever be less than pissed off with anything Trump does, says, or indicates, I have some land in central Florida I'd love to sell you.

I don't think anything would make his critics happy. In the above case, they would have (rightly) made the case that making a personal enemy of the leader of Russia was a mistake.

Of course, they are now saying that NOT making a personal enemy of the leader of Russia is a mistake.

Thus the "gotcha"!

If Trump dived into icy waters to save a toddler from drowning, they would have criticisms.

Keep your land, or sell it to a liberal. Tell him it is 'sanctuary" acreage.

(07-17-2018 11:52 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:49 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:45 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:32 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:15 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  What did we do, exactly, to cause Russia to annex Crimea?

Make it easy? I think they knew all they would get in the way of push back was some finger shaking. I wanted a stronger response, and the left defended Obama's lack of action.

What a nonsensical response. In your response, you are suggesting that we are now responsible for a foreign country’s actions due to inaction when there wasn’t even an event to react to. Somehow we made Putin decide to invade another country.

You can argue about the severity of our response to Putin’s actions, but to suggest that Putin we are at fault because we “made it easy” doesn’t really cut the mustard.

So you must be furious about Trumps response, which was to bend over and take it, if you felt that Obama's finger wagging was too little, right?

You leave the door open, advertise that you will not do anything to any body who comes in, don't be surprised if your TV gets stolen.

You brought up Crimea. what do you think Obama should have done?

Nothing. What's Crimea to us, especially when most Crimeans identify as Russians?

From a force standpoint, exactly what we did. Putin was wrong to annex the region, and we responded with condemnations and sanctions. We should not have gone to war over it, though.

Edit: I was responding to OO, to clarify.

(07-17-2018 12:04 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Funny, Trump is derided for his 'lack of diplomacy', yet is chastised for not yelling 'Liar liar' to Putin's face at worldwide televised press conference.

Lets have a little Gedankenexperiment here:

Assume Trump does the opposite, precisely what many seem demand -- that is verbally and viciously assault Putin for all his authoritarian and expansionist actions (annexing the Crimea, Syria intervention, eastern Ukraine, DNC servers, etc.)?

What would have that explicit criticism *to his face* accomplished with these matters? My best guess is precisely nada.

What would be most likely if that occurred? Relations, already in the dumpster, would have been set back further.

I dont think that is rocket science to figure out.

Next, look at what has actually happened and in the course of happening. Trump's actions re: Russia amazingly more strict (some might say unfriendly) than his words yesterday -- let alone when comparing them to the actions *and* diplomatic treatment enjoined by Obama, mind you. For me, it's hard to categorize an explicit attack on the economic base of Russia (i.e. continuing and accelerating the opening of energy spigots), increasing sanctions, arming the Ukrainians, ejecting 60 Russian agents, etc. If Trump is in Putin's pocket, he's doing a terrible job of it on the actions front.

Being personally gracious and diplomatic to Putin on the largest stage ever provided to Putin doesnt seem to be a wholly improper item, especially in light of the tangible friction of Trump's actual policies to Putin's Russia. But I guess complaining about not being a dick on that world stage is something that Trump's opponents seem to truly care more about than tangible policies.

Have you watched the press conference?

I think describing Trump’s response to the reporter who asked about the meddling was in no way “gracious and diplomatic.” If anything, because he used it as a platform to attack Clinton. He could still have been gracious and diplomatic without siding with Putin and directly in opposition to our own intelligence community.

(07-17-2018 11:52 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:49 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:45 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:32 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:15 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  What did we do, exactly, to cause Russia to annex Crimea?

Make it easy? I think they knew all they would get in the way of push back was some finger shaking. I wanted a stronger response, and the left defended Obama's lack of action.

What a nonsensical response. In your response, you are suggesting that we are now responsible for a foreign country’s actions due to inaction when there wasn’t even an event to react to. Somehow we made Putin decide to invade another country.

You can argue about the severity of our response to Putin’s actions, but to suggest that Putin we are at fault because we “made it easy” doesn’t really cut the mustard.

So you must be furious about Trumps response, which was to bend over and take it, if you felt that Obama's finger wagging was too little, right?

You leave the door open, advertise that you will not do anything to any body who comes in, don't be surprised if your TV gets stolen.

You brought up Crimea. what do you think Obama should have done?

Nothing. What's Crimea to us, especially when most Crimeans identify as Russians?

Nothing. What's California to us, especially when about 30 per cent of Californians identify as Mexicans?

I guess you have no problems with Ossetia either, since they ostensibly 'identify as Russians'?

Any problems then with eastern Ukraine, who colorably 'identify as Russians'?

Not a great bulwark on national aggression there, I would proffer.

At the risk of violating Godwin's law, that attitude on national sovereignty is chilling. One has to remember that the German annexation of Austria and the following annexation of Sudentland just a tad later was ostensibly because the inhabitants in each 'identified as German'.

Call it what you might, but that supposed rationale was pretty much torched in 1938 (at least in my book) as nothing more than the pure pretext that that cute saying always seems to be when covering up simple, naked, national aggression.

(07-17-2018 01:57 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:52 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:49 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:45 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-17-2018 11:32 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Make it easy? I think they knew all they would get in the way of push back was some finger shaking. I wanted a stronger response, and the left defended Obama's lack of action.

What a nonsensical response. In your response, you are suggesting that we are now responsible for a foreign country’s actions due to inaction when there wasn’t even an event to react to. Somehow we made Putin decide to invade another country.

You can argue about the severity of our response to Putin’s actions, but to suggest that Putin we are at fault because we “made it easy” doesn’t really cut the mustard.

So you must be furious about Trumps response, which was to bend over and take it, if you felt that Obama's finger wagging was too little, right?

You leave the door open, advertise that you will not do anything to any body who comes in, don't be surprised if your TV gets stolen.

You brought up Crimea. what do you think Obama should have done?

Nothing. What's Crimea to us, especially when most Crimeans identify as Russians?

Nothing. What's California to us, especially when about 30 per cent of Californians identify as Mexicans?

I guess you have no problems with Ossetia either, since they ostensibly 'identify as Russians'?

At the risk of violating Godwin's law, that attitude on national sovereignty is chilling. One has to remember that the German annexation of Austria and the Sudentland just a tad later was ostensibly because the inhabitants there 'identified as German'.

Call it what you might, but that supposed rationale was pretty much torched in 1938 (at least in my book) as nothing more than the pure pretext that that cute saying always seems to be when covering up simple, naked, national aggression.

I agree with your thoughts on sovereignty and why things are concerning.

Not sure if you’re suggesting that military intervention on our part was warranted.