What Just Happened In Libya

Libyans have written their own story, and it is a good one. After nonviolent protesters were massacred across the country in February, a widespread uprising finally coalesced into victory yesterday. Benghazi became the geographic center of rebellion on February 20th; using social media, Libyans there immediately cried out for international intervention. That assistance arrived in the nick of time, with NATO establishing immediate air and sea supremacy. The next six months saw freedom fighters and their international allies organize an AirLandSea campaign of combined arms, maneuver, and insurgency. 

CAUSES

The Chomskyan narrative frame of empire and power has little real application to the outbreak of conflict in Libya. I have written before about the causes, but the most important single thing to understand is that about seventy percent of the North African diet is bread. Climate-change driven drought in Russia last Summer raised global wheat prices across the region over the Winter. In a region with sluggish GDP growth, that has created social alarm.

Food insecurity is a common cause of conflict (.PDF) and the most common cause of conflict in the region (see: Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia, Sudan, Chad). Wars rarely solve food insecurity, however, and the conditions that brought conflict to the North African maghreb have only intensified since February. We live in interesting times.

The tribal structure of Libyan society also plays a role. Moammar Ghadafi has been playing the tribes against one another for four decades, and it has finally caught up with him. On this map, you can see one of the disaffected Berber tribes to the southwest of Tripoli, along the Nafusa Mountain escarpment. They are among the most persecuted minorities in the country:

In this map, you can see the location of another tribal group: the powerful Warfalla, centered around the city of Bani Walid, has also played a key role in the Libyan story. Ghadafi came to regret massacres in Bani Walid; despite his attempts to woo them back to his side, tribal leadership wavered throughout the Spring and turned against him during the Summer. Located between the rebel stronghold of Misrata and the Berbers of Nafusa, they would later play an important part in cutting off Tripoli.

One more cause needs to be named: water insecurity. Water rights have been a major source of Ghadafi’s tribal power system. Advancing desertification (again, climate-change driven) has compounded both tribal resentments and food insecurity. Ghadafi’s much-ballyhooed 26-year long water project is unsustainable. By draining a nonrenewable supply of fossil water, the project promises the same long-term outcome as Saudi Arabia’s fossil water project: after three decades of self-sufficiency in wheat production, their water is running out — and the kingdom has switched to importing wheat again.

These insecurities set the stage for the Arab Spring in North Africa. The spark in Tunisia spread to Cairo, then Libya, because these countries were tinder-dry powder kegs waiting to be lit.

OBJECTIVES

Of course, oil figures large in the conflict — but not as a cause. Indeed, the oil industry can expect to spend at least months, if not years, ramping production levels back to prewar levels. The conflict has not served the hydrocarbon industry in any appreciable way. However, gasoline figures large in military logistics: tanks and trucks need fuel to bring firepower within range of the enemy. Rommel’s Afrika Corps lost their war in this same stretch of desert when they ran out of fuel.

Naturally, Libya’s petroleum infrastructure has provided many of the war’s primary objectives and battlefields. The capture of the refinery at Zawiya last week proved the fatal blow to regime power in Tripoli, as gasoline supplies in the capitol were already low and forces could no longer be motored to the fight.

Below, a map of oilfield distribution within Libya. With most of the country’s pumps in the Eastern half, the Transitional National Council began the conflict with a working refinery at Tobruk and most of the nation’s oil resources either in hand or within reach.

This situation produced a raiding style of warfare in the East, but it also limited Ghadafi’s ability to maintain offensives. He proved unwilling to destroy these contested wells and pumps; instead, the raids were about denial — leaving the infrastructure booby-trapped instead of damaged. Ghadafi was more than willing to attack and destroy fuel infrastructure firmly within rebel territory, while NATO planes have unapologetically targeted his supplies of gasoline.

Objectives often determine the forces. Most of the war has been fought with “technicals” — converted pickup trucks. While these vehicles have been the object of admiring reportage about a “ragtag” army, in fact the technical was invented by Chadians during their Toyota War with Ghadafi in 1986 — outrunning and outmaneuvering his very expensive Russian-built tanks to attack them with shoulder-fired rockets. The open desert rewards fast movement, so technicals have proven the mainstay weapon of the war for both sides.

ALLIES

Objectives are also driven by policy. After the initial phase in which NATO forces established air and sea supremacy, the first six weeks of Operation Odyssey Dawn focused on destroying command and control centers as well as mass concentrations of government armor and heavy weapons. This phase saw European allies burning through their stockpiles of precision munitions so quickly that observers lamented their unpreparedness. Indeed, by April the Euroskeptics (including yours truly) were calling for an end to Western Europe’s free ride on American firepower.

Yet Odyssey Dawn has been a truly international effort, a fact recognized by the freedom fighters in rows of allied national flags (including, importantly, the United States). The international nature of the war, for better or worse, is exactly what has driven neocons bonkers. Furthermore, the air campaign has been extremely judicious — too much so for Senator John McCain, who raged against NATO multilateralism and advised a go-it-alone strategy of increased American firepower.

By late May, Western special forces were operating in Libya. Rather than engage in combat, they mainly served as eyes on the ground; half of modern war is just finding out what the hell is going on. Where is the fighting? What are the conditions? What is the terrain? Together with human and electronic intelligence, this information provides commanders with a clearer picture of where and how air power can be applied.

Close air support is not easy. It is even harder to do in a supersonic jet, and depends largely on ground-to-air communication. The most underreported aspect of the Libyan conflict has been the outsize contribution of drones, which have replaced the need for a common radio net with their ability to linger for hours, even days, over target areas to monitor movement and identify targets.

Unmanned Arial Vehicles provided the best air support of the war, earning praise from the Libyans. Each escalation by the United States involved more UAVs. They are fast becoming the most revolutionary weapon in the American arsenal, and Libya will probably be seen one day as the beginning of the end of manned combat flight.

The Western Allies also advanced the Transitional National Council by recognizing it as the legitimate government of Libya. Especially in the last two months, Ghadafi has faced a series of new “facts on the ground” as Russia, China, Europe, and the United States shifted their national diplomatic contacts to the TNC, culminating last week in the handover of Libya’s US embassy.

Last, but certainly not least, supplies of arms and equipment have reached the rebels. At least two countries, Qatar and France, have done so quite openly.

PHASES

After the early campaign, US forces remained “over the horizon” while the popular rebellion attempted its first offensives. In the closing days of March, resurgent freedom fighters dashed along the coastal road towards Ghadafi’s stronghold of Sirte (alt. Surt). This is my own map of that first offensive phase:

However, the rapid advance stalled before Sirte when loyalist forces counterattacked. Fighters’ lack of training and coordination told in a disorganized retreat back to Ajdabiya, where the rest of the war would see a battle of attrition before the loyalist defenses at Brega. While indecisive — and largely to blame for the media’s narrative of a static, futile conflict — the main achievement of this phase was to tie down lots of loyalist troops in the East.

This created space for advance by maneuver. During the second offensive phase, with Ghadafi’s forces at Sirte unable to turn on Misratah, the TNC moved troops and supplies to relieve the besieged city:

This action circumvented the long coastal road and Sirte by moving through space denied to Ghadafi’s navy — an application of maneuver warfare theory that took advantage of the allies’ control of the sea. It would be repeated in the fall of Tripoli later. Mind you, the kill boxes on my map are likely to look nothing like the ones on operational maps used by any American commander; they merely represent another trend of this phase, as NATO strikes were stepped up again.

The loudest, best-known airstrikes were in Tripoli, especially Ghadafi’s command-and-control bunkers at Bab al-Aziziya. Yet out in the hinterland, a sustained and effective targeting campaign (aided especially by the arrival of the first drones) was pounding armories, armor, and heavy weapons — producing scenes of destruction for Berber tribesmen to gawk over as they pressed Ghadafi from the south.

Indeed, by the middle of May a whole new front had appeared on what I call “the Wazan Line.” The people living along the escarpment of the Nafusa Mountains defeated Ghadafi’s forces from high ground, capturing the border crossing at Nalut on May 21st. This Western fight proved to be the most important one of all. By early July, the door was already swinging shut on Ghadafi, with the vital crossroads at Gharyan under rebel eyes:

It was during this third offensive phase, as the Misrata beachhead expanded and the Warfalla tribe turned against Ghadafi, that loyalist units began to crack under the strain. Demoralized, abandoned by commanders, soldiers started defecting and deserting. Operations began to take on their own momentum. Before July was over, freedom fighters had enveloped Brega. Ghadafi’s raids on Eastern oil infrastructure ceased for lack of fuel. In fact, there had been no sustained offensive by loyalists since April.

The fourth offensive phase saw the Berber tribesmen descend on Gharyan, cutting the pipeline to Zawiyah and then advancing to take that city and cut off Tripoli from Tunisia. With the Warfalla to the south and Misrata to the East, Ghadafi was effectively surrounded by early last week. The fifth phase would be the most daring one yet, and involve the most clear uses of insurgency doctrine since the war’s beginning.

Sometime after dark on Saturday, hundreds (perhaps one thousand) fighters arrived at the shores of Tripoli in Zodiac boats. They carried guns and ammunition for an apparently-large underground within the city that had been patiently awaiting this moment. Having linked up, the freedom fighters fanned out across the city to erupt in many places at once. This map was crowdsourced by Libyan tweeters:


The confusion and chaos kept security forces pinned inside Tripoli as rebels advanced from South and East. By yesterday afternoon, they were overrunning Mitiga airbase as they blew past the city limits, finding it deserted. Despite pockets of continued resistance, liberators continued streaming into the city long past nightfall in a pattern familiar to anyone who has studied the fall of Saigon. A numerically and materially inferior force has overcome its weaknesses with well-coordinated, effective planning.

CONCLUSIONS

Two myths should be put to rest. First, the idea that Libya’s war originated as anything but a native conflict is nothing but paranoid speculation. Indeed, freedom fighters have systematically ignored international sanctimony and calls for a cease-fire. Libyans fought, and appear to have won, their own war, following their own plan. That they had help — from the sky, or via Egypt, or by sea — does not detract from the sacrifices of Libyans who refused to stop fighting and dying. They own their victory.

Second, the image of “ragtag revolutionaries” is also false. Freedom fighters have in fact been consistently clever and creative. While still undisciplined tactically, they have demonstrated good operational discipline and planning, and in fact have done a very good job of coordinating with air power despite the challenges. Never wavering in determination, Libyans have written their own epic, and it is a good one. All the allies did was help.

About Matt Osborne

Veteran blogging the culture wars from Alabama. Video journalist, mash-up artist, aspiring novelist, and metalhead. Expect bunnies, geekery, dark humor, and snarky empirical analysis to annoy idealists of all stripes. You can follow me on Twitter, but be ready 'cause it might get loud.
This entry was posted in Jasmine Revolutions and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.
  • Anthony Noel

    What a tremendous, steaming pile of horseshit. Just quit your real job and go to work for the CIA, already.

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    You’ve left a little pile of doo-doo yourself, there.

  • http://www.politicalruminations.com nicole473

    Awesome job, Matt!

  • Anonymous

    Stuff you.

    Go read this again and Juan Cole’s recent posting, if you’ve got the guts.

    http://www.juancole.com/2011/08/top-ten-myths-about-the-libya-war.html

  • Anonymous

    Speaking at Matt’s co-blogger, I’m glad to see the comments section around here coming to life. :)

    Speaking for myself, this is about as good as an analysis gets without delving so far into the arcanabula of war analysis that the layman is left behind. Good job, Matt.

    It’s not stew yet – the hard part will be setting up a government that is worthy of the fight. As Egypt has sadly shown, however, that’s a struggle regardless of NATO intervention or not. We’re going to hear more news out of the region, not all of it good. We’ll hear about favors being traded and corruption in high places and policies we are not 100% comfortable with.at Libya has now is a chance to do better, and while I fondly hope they make full use of it… put it this way, if Obama didn’t give us the Electric Super Jesus Disco Unicorn (coming soon to season 2 of My Little Pony: Grown Men Watch This Show) it’s doubtful that Libya will get one too.

    But they have a chance. I’m glad they have a chance. I feel a bit saddened that loss of life may have been needed to get them to this point. So Jon Stewart will not be asking me to leave the room, I hope.

  • Anonymous

    Say, aren’t you the same dude that told Angry Black Lady to “get over being black”?

    How thoughtful of you to pop up here and tell us more of your opinions, you measly little shit.

  • Anonymous

    “coming soon to season 2 of My Little Pony: Grown Men Watch This Show”

    Hehe :)

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    No one is more glad than me to see this section in use. Trust me on that one!

  • http://www.politicalruminations.com nicole473

    well said, raistuumum!

  • Pingback: ChrisWeigant.com » Obama's Libya Strategy Proves His Critics Wrong

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    That is a great post by Cole. I recommend it highly!

  • Pingback: Chris Weigant: Obama’s Libya Strategy Proves His Critics Wrong | Politimo - PoliticalParades.com

  • Pingback: Chris Weigant: Obama’s Libya Strategy Proves His Critics Wrong | 318 News

  • Pingback: Chris Weigant: Obama’s Libya Strategy Proves His Critics Wrong «ScrollPost.com

  • Pingback: Chris Weigant: Obama’s Libya Strategy Proves His Critics Wrong | PUII - News Blog

  • Pingback: Chris Weigant: Obama’s Libya Strategy Proves His Critics Wrong | World News

  • http://twitter.com/ferallike ferallike

    I do have to agree with the measly little shit about one thing though. Matt would be a terrific analyst at Langley.  Seriously.

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    OK, that made my day. Thanks! @twitter-48520727:disqus #1stAL

  • Anonymous

    Great analysis Matt. Now it is up to the people to keep up the fight so that their victory is not stolen by the old guard trying to take over. Here’s hoping the new government can keep the tribes united and working for the good of all instead of themselves alone. After 42 years of daffy they deserve their freedom.

  • Anonymous

    Great analysis Matt. Now it is up to the people to keep up the fight so that their victory is not stolen by the old guard trying to take over. Here’s hoping the new government can keep the tribes united and working for the good of all instead of themselves alone. After 42 years of daffy they deserve their freedom.

  • Ongho

    This narrative sounds more like a CIA briefing than an objective analysis.  The U.S. and Europe obviously were instrumental, from start to finish, in planning, funding, organizing, mobilizing international /U.N. support, and of course, fighting. It’s David vs. Goliath.  The conflict Libya was certainly *not* a spontaneous, solely indigenous event. NATO waged a full-scale air war, and even then the ‘rebels’ almost lost. Wait a while, and watch the catfight over the spoils begin. Chomsky, by the way, has identified food prices as a major factor in the unrest.

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    “more like a CIA briefing than an objective analysis” — presupposes that the CIA doesn’t do objective analysis.

    “instrumental, from start to finish, in planning, funding, organizing,
    mobilizing international /U.N. support, and of course, fighting” — good, I’m glad they’re on the side of a democratic revolution for once.

    David vs. Goliath — Yes, with Ghadafi as the Goliath to his people. As for whether the United States and Nato are more powerful: that’s war. War is not about a fair fight. War is about hurting people and breaking their stuff.

    The assumption that Libyans are incapable of wanting their own freedom enough to fight for it is utterly Orientalist and even a little racist.

  • Ongho

    Come now, let’s not confuse actual history with wishful
    thinking. Being on the “right side” means what, exactly?  Admittedly, America’s track record in emitting
    hot air on human rights in unmatched anywhere in the known galaxy. However,
    when it comes to living up to its rhetoric, America gets an F-.

     

    Who gave America permission to “regime change”
    Libya in the first place? Is this a universal right, or just a special
    privilege God granted to America? If riots were to break out in America, for
    example, do you think it’s OK for foreign countries to supply the rioters with
    weapons, mondy, intelligence, covert operatives, and then bomb the shit out of
    us?

     

    Never forget the Golden Rule, my friend.  Or the alternative formulation, what’s good
    for the goose is good for the gander, no? :)

     

    America is always on on the “right side”. I can’t
    recall any refreshing moments of honesty, where an American president, or the
    CIA for that matter, admit we are intentionally supporting the
    “wrong” side.

     

    Perhaps you recall the Iraq second War? Colin Powell’s eyes
    misted as he described the horrendous WMD of the evil dictator Saddam (our
    ex-ally), who had to be regime-changed to save the planet from mushroom clouds
    auguring a new Islamic Terrorist Caliphate descending upon Western
    Civilization.

     

    At the moment, according to every single poll I’ve seen, most
    Iraqis hate America’s guts. They think things were much, much better under
    Saddam. Women didn’t have wear chadors, young people could stay out late at
    nightclubs, music was not considered the work of the devil, and as long as you
    didn’t engage in anti-regime politics, Saddam left you alone. Most Iraqis,
    including most Shiites, think the current Maliki regime is a U.S. puppet
    dictatorship.

     

    Perhaps you are right — I hope you are — that we are
    witnesses a spontaneous, indigenous upwelling of democracy, freedom and
    artistic expression of the Libyan people, that will culminate in a democracy
    where freedom of expression and assembling, individual rights, and a more equal
    distribution of income will occur. Let us pray.

     

    Sadly, I think the more likely future of Libya is a NATO
    enforced Maliki-style dictatorship, which cuts favorable oil deals with Western
    mega-giants in return for hefty bribes and visa preferences for family members.

     

    In the meantime, let’s hope no one notices how immigrants in
    Arizona are treated like shit or the 50 million Americans who don’t have health
    insurance, and decides that it would be a public service to regime change
    America.

  • Ongho

    Come now, let’s not confuse actual history with wishful
    thinking. Being on the “right side” means what, exactly?  Admittedly, America’s track record in emitting
    hot air on human rights in unmatched anywhere in the known galaxy. However,
    when it comes to living up to its rhetoric, America gets an F-.

     

    Who gave America permission to “regime change”
    Libya in the first place? Is this a universal right, or just a special
    privilege God granted to America? If riots were to break out in America, for
    example, do you think it’s OK for foreign countries to supply the rioters with
    weapons, mondy, intelligence, covert operatives, and then bomb the shit out of
    us?

     

    Never forget the Golden Rule, my friend.  Or the alternative formulation, what’s good
    for the goose is good for the gander, no? :)

     

    America is always on on the “right side”. I can’t
    recall any refreshing moments of honesty, where an American president, or the
    CIA for that matter, admit we are intentionally supporting the
    “wrong” side.

     

    Perhaps you recall the Iraq second War? Colin Powell’s eyes
    misted as he described the horrendous WMD of the evil dictator Saddam (our
    ex-ally), who had to be regime-changed to save the planet from mushroom clouds
    auguring a new Islamic Terrorist Caliphate descending upon Western
    Civilization.

     

    At the moment, according to every single poll I’ve seen, most
    Iraqis hate America’s guts. They think things were much, much better under
    Saddam. Women didn’t have wear chadors, young people could stay out late at
    nightclubs, music was not considered the work of the devil, and as long as you
    didn’t engage in anti-regime politics, Saddam left you alone. Most Iraqis,
    including most Shiites, think the current Maliki regime is a U.S. puppet
    dictatorship.

     

    Perhaps you are right — I hope you are — that we are
    witnesses a spontaneous, indigenous upwelling of democracy, freedom and
    artistic expression of the Libyan people, that will culminate in a democracy
    where freedom of expression and assembling, individual rights, and a more equal
    distribution of income will occur. Let us pray.

     

    Sadly, I think the more likely future of Libya is a NATO
    enforced Maliki-style dictatorship, which cuts favorable oil deals with Western
    mega-giants in return for hefty bribes and visa preferences for family members.

     

    In the meantime, let’s hope no one notices how immigrants in
    Arizona are treated like shit or the 50 million Americans who don’t have health
    insurance, and decides that it would be a public service to regime change
    America.

  • Ongho

    Ooops, sorry for the over-abundance of paragraph marks. I typed the post
    in MS Word, and ooo la la . . . .  look what happened. I’ll shape up and make
    sure it doesn’t happen next time! :)

    PS: why not allow the editing of posts? I’d fix it if I could, but I can’t.

  • Ongho

    Ooops, sorry for the over-abundance of paragraph marks. I typed the post
    in MS Word, and ooo la la . . . .  look what happened. I’ll shape up and make
    sure it doesn’t happen next time! :)

    PS: why not allow the editing of posts? I’d fix it if I could, but I can’t.

  • Ongho

    Or at least a Preview button.

  • Ongho

    Or at least a Preview button.

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    “Who gave America permission to “regime change” Libya in the first place?”

    Who gave Libyans permission? Because they’re the ones doing all the fighting and dying for regime change. It’s their regime to change, and they obviously want to. No amount of noise from you will change this basic fact.

  • Ongho

    Al Qaeda claims responsibility for Algeria attack
    Reuters

    ALGIERS (Reuters) – Al Qaeda’s North Africa wing has claimed responsibility for a suicide attack on a military academy in Algeria, accusing it of supporting the regime of Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi.

    Aug. 30, 2011 – Reuters
    http://old.news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110829/wl_nm/us_algeria_attack_qaeda

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    I use Disqus. There’s an edit option. You may need to enable the scripts in your browser.

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    AQ is desperate for relevance; there are plenty of violent Islamists in Algeria.

  • Ongho

    Abd al-Hakim
    Belhaj, one of the supposedly converted al-Qaeda terrorists introduced
    to reporters last year, led rebel troops who swept into the Libyan
    capital, Tripoli, last week, Omar Ashour, a visiting fellow in Brookings Doha Center, wrote in Foreign Policy magazine.
    Abdel-Hakim
    al-Hasidi, a rebel leader in eastern Libya, fought with al-Qaeda
    against U.S. forces in Afghanistan and has said he recruited about two
    dozen of his al-Qaeda comrades to join the fight in Libya. His hometown,
    Derna, was described in a 2008 diplomatic cable written by U.S.
    Ambassador Chris Stevens as providing a “disproportionately large
    number” of Libyans who attacked U.S. forces in Iraq with suicide
    bombings and other ways.
    Suggestions to limit influence
    British
    news media have reported that rebel recruits in the eastern city of
    Derna are being trained by Sufyan Bin Qumu, a Libyan who was apprehended
    in Afghanistan and held at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for
    six years.
    Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb,
    which operates in Mali, Algeria, Mauritania and Chad and has kidnapped
    and beheaded European tourists from Italy and France, is likely to gain
    a foothold in the current chaos, says Michael Rubin, a senior lecturer at the Naval Postgraduate School. “It’s not a risk — it’s a certainty,” Rubin says.

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2011-08-31/Islamists–evolving-role-in-Libya/50209166/1?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+UsatodaycomWorld-TopStories+%28News+-+World+-+Top+Stories%29

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    Fearmongery. Leave it up to the Libyans: they’re not about to hand their national revolution over to a caliphate. Can you show me a country in the maghreb that doesn’t have al-Qaeda in it? No, you can’t.

  • Ongho

    While Tripoli celebrates ‘freedom’, refugees from Africa fear for their lives

    Poor black migrant workers are cowering in camps as rebels hunt down Gaddafi’s mercenaries’

    http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/kim-sengupta-while-tripoli-celebrates-freedom-refugees-from-africa-fear-for-their-lives-2347200.html

  • Ongho
  • Ongho

    UK, France deploy ground troops to Libya
    Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:8PM GMT
    North Atlantic Treaty
    Organization (NATO) has confirmed that some of its member countries such
    as Britain and France may have troops deployed to Libya. Meanwhile, the Russian ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, said
    there is “direct evidence” that British and French Special Forces were
    carrying out ground operations in Libya in violation of UN Security
    Council resolution 1973.
    An unnamed NATO official admitted that Britain and France have
    deployed ground troops inside the Libyan territory, but said it would be
    “unfair to call them NATO forces.”
    http://www.presstv.com/detail/196546.html

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    Proof? None. Just rumors.

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    Teasing apart: (1) special forces are not unexpected and I disagree they are a bad thing. (2) An “unnamed source” is not the same as proof, and to date I have seen zero proof of NATO troops in Libya.

  • Pingback: Latest Music News

  • Pingback: rencontre webcam sexy, rencontre webcam, rencontre sexe, plan cul, rencontre sexy, tchat sexe, tchat webcam, tchat sexy, tchat webcam

  • Pingback: protectionspecialties

  • Pingback: Option Premium