Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Yemen President: Open To Talks With Al-Qaeda  
User currently offlineFuturePilot16 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2035 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2708 times:

I though this was interesting. At first I'm thinking, what the frig is this guy talking about? In the past, Yemen has let terrorists out of prison if they promised not to work with terrorist groups like al-Quaida (That worked real well  Yeah sure ). However, what exactly is al-Quaida fighting against? Could it be possible that the United States, could agree to terms with al-Quaida, like Yemen wants to do. These talks would include the U.S. pulling out of the middle east for good, and al-Quaida promising no more terrorist attacks.

My answer is NO, a treaty like this would not work, but is it possible? George Bush said we don't negotiate with terrorists, to which I agree. But what if  scratchchin ?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34790787/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa

Your thoughts?


"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
41 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSOBHI51 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jun 2003, 3504 posts, RR: 17
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2693 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

No no no. I never trust those people. Any organization who kill innocent people is not to be trusted.


I am against any terrorist acts committed under the name of Islam
User currently offlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4703 posts, RR: 50
Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2648 times:

Sounds logical to me. Fighting them clearly doesn't work (for Yemen and the US), so might as well try this.


For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3385 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2627 times:



Quoting FuturePilot16 (Thread starter):
My answer is NO, a treaty like this would not work, but is it possible? George Bush said we don't negotiate with terrorists, to which I agree. But what if scratchchin ?

Won't work at all, only some groups are really pissed off with the US presence in the ME and those groups that would be the Palestinians (for the US supporting Israel) , The Iraqi's, and the Afghan's (two countries that the US in occupying).

These things are not directly connected to Al-Qaeda in any way in fact the Palestinians do not want to be associated with them because their main issue is a border dispute with Israel. in fact they have said that Al-Qaeda is wrong to suggest that their are fighting the west because of the US support for Israel. What is dangerous with the US occupations is that the alleged imperialism seen from their point of view is good to get people against the US and the west to join their movement.

Quoting FuturePilot16 (Thread starter):
However, what exactly is al-Quaida fighting against?

They want a holy war between the west and Islam because they feel that their are the ones of god and everyone else is the evil Satan. (Yes it is more complex than that, but that is what people like Bin Laden do say) What is scary about this group is that they are not afraid of death which is something the communists in the USSR were afraid of. So no amount of military force can kill this amount of extremism because as crazy as it sounds killing them will be in a way giving them what they want.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineTheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2039 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2608 times:



Quoting FuturePilot16 (Thread starter):
Could it be possible that the United States, could agree to terms with al-Quaida

The only thing that the West would ever negotiate with AQ is the handover of OBL and his cronies. Negotiating with OBL directly would be exactly like negotiating with Hitler before the war, and we all know how that turned out. Every time the West has shook hands with the devil, he came around and bit us in the ass later.

Quoting FuturePilot16 (Thread starter):
and al-Quaida promising no more terrorist attacks.

Hitler made a lot of promises too, and they meant jack all in the end.



No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
User currently offlineFuturePilot16 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2035 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2600 times:



Quoting SOBHI51 (Reply 1):
No no no. I never trust those people. Any organization who kill innocent people is not to be trusted.

You mean like the U.S. gov't?  stirthepot 



"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4967 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2594 times:



Quoting SOBHI51 (Reply 1):
No no no. I never trust those people. Any organization who kill innocent people is not to be trusted

Like the country that invades Iraq killing thousands of people in the process?

I too would have my dounts about having talks with these guys, but on the other hand, the "No talk" policy has been useless until now, so the question is, would talks make things worse or better?



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3385 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2593 times:



Quoting TheCol (Reply 4):
The only thing that the West would ever negotiate with AQ is the handover of OBL and his cronies.

That would be more symbolic than anything else because I believe that he has said something along the lines of what James Bond said whenever he was about to get killed which is. "If you kill me 008 will be there to take my place."

As long as there are people who believe what he believes (which is not very many people in the world anyways) there will always be an Al-Qaeda.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineME AVN FAN From Switzerland, joined May 2002, 13920 posts, RR: 25
Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2590 times:



Quoting FuturePilot16 (Thread starter):
what exactly is al-Quaida fighting against?

THIS is one question, the other is what they demand in exchange for stopping their attacks against Yemen. Mr Saleh now will find out whether talks are possible with those people. But he of course only can speak for Yemen, but not for Europe or the USA.


User currently offlineTheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2039 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2578 times:



Quoting FuturePilot16 (Reply 5):



Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 6):

Like the country that invades Iraq killing thousands of people in the process?

Bush and Co. are gone. New ballgame.

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 6):
would talks make things worse or better?

That question is moot. OBL doesn't want peace with the West.

Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 8):
the other is what they demand in exchange for stopping their attacks against Yemen.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Hopefully history won't repeat itself:




No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4967 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2554 times:



Quoting TheCol (Reply 9):
That question is moot. OBL doesn't want peace with the West.

I agree, but OBL won't be around for ever. We don't know who will come after him.

Quoting TheCol (Reply 9):
Bush and Co. are gone. New ballgame.

And yet the troops are still there. In their view it doesn't make too much of a difference that W is gone. The deaths of all those people are still way too fresh, especially since the ones that perpetrated them are still there!



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2548 times:

As Jurgen and Ezeiza write, killing them meets their wildest desires. And that itself might be considered a contra-indication.

Astonishing effort in response. A recourse - rather incorrectly as it happens - to 1938 but then it is claimed that the Iraqis and a goodly few others should forget being bombed and blown up from 2003 through to yesterday. Keep banging the war drums. But meanwhile the more practical have to find a solution to the disasters those lines of thinking have produced. So let me get this right, we should use an incorrect recall of 1938 as a guide, but the Iraqis and Afghans should not remember 2008.

Bombing clearly is not working on what is now a ten year time scale, so why should another 10 years of bombing suddenly "come good". Doing the same thing and expecting different results ....... at least Einstein knew what that indicates.

Time for a change. It hardly seems likely that with the experiences to date, any set of negotiators are going to march in all naive and optimistic. Not that they did in 1938 either, they were frantically playing for time.

The "we don't negotiate with terrorists" has always been dumb and it has almost always been a lie. One of the greatest "buyers off" of kidnappers was the US under Reagan.

As it happens, it appears the US was until last week negotiating with and paying a terrorist in Afghanistan, and he responded by blowing up the CIA. At least a set of formal negotiations should have a lower risk of that happening.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19931 posts, RR: 59
Reply 12, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2523 times:



Quoting FuturePilot16 (Thread starter):

My answer is NO, a treaty like this would not work, but is it possible? George Bush said we don't negotiate with terrorists, to which I agree. But what if scratchchin ?



Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 6):

Like the country that invades Iraq killing thousands of people in the process?

Here's the difference (and it's not that we're the U.S. so we're the angels of good even if we kill women and children):

The U.S. Army/Navy/Air Force/Marines take orders from the top. When we reach an agreement not to attack, we can be trusted not to. And we're accountable to that agreement if we break it. When the CIC says "we're pulling out of the Mid East" and issues a direct order to do so, it happens. The troops may like or dislike the orders, but they will follow them regardless.

This is not the case for any terrorist or guerilla organization. These organizations, by their very nature, must be disorganized, decentralized, and cannot have a clear chain of command. Al Qaeda has branches and cells all over the world and no clear system of authority or accountability. They don't wear uniforms, they don't have ranks, and they don't all agree on whose orders to follow.

And so when Osama bin Laden himself gives an order for AQ to disengage and to stop any attacks on the U.S., certain cells will simply decide that he's 1) sold out 2) been tortured into giving an order and ignore it. This is what happened with the IRA, who were much more organized and centralized than AQ ever was. When the leadership called on the IRA to stop bombing the British, lo and behold, a splinter group called "The Real IRA" appeared and kept it up.

And so that is why I do not believe that we can come to a peaceful accord with these people. It's not because they're bad people (even though I think they are) but it's because they aren't capable of stopping even if they wanted to.


User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4967 posts, RR: 25
Reply 13, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2513 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 12):
This is not the case for any terrorist or guerilla organization. These organizations, by their very nature, must be disorganized, decentralized, and cannot have a clear chain of command

I see your point and I would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that I believe that you are completely wrong (with all due respect, this is just matter of opinion  Smile ) in thinking that these guys are disorganized and that they don't have chains of command. I truly believe it is the contrary; in fact their power relies on how well organized they are, and their ability to follow orders to the last detail. There's a reason why the most powerful military in the world has not been able to finish with them (not even close really).



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3385 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2510 times:



Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 13):
in fact their power relies on how well organized they are, and their ability to follow orders to the last detail. There's a reason why the most powerful military in the world has not been able to finish with them (not even close really).

No military, no matter how big, how how smart and how powerful can deal with this kind of threat because you don't have an enemy that is well defined to a country or region. This is an ideology that doesn't appear to fear death in any way and is easily able to convince people on the fence on who to side with that the West are the evil ones when we rightly or wrongly retaliate.

The best thing to do is to use intelligence to stop the attacks and hope that with time that this mentality disappears over time. We simply can't eliminate by attacking them back when they succeed in attacking us.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2498 times:



Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 13):
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 12):
This is not the case for any terrorist or guerilla organization. These organizations, by their very nature, must be disorganized, decentralized, and cannot have a clear chain of command

I see your point and I would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that I believe that you are completely wrong (with all due respect, this is just matter of opinion Smile ) in thinking that these guys are disorganized and that they don't have chains of command. I truly believe it is the contrary; in fact their power relies on how well organized they are, and their ability to follow orders to the last detail. There's a reason why the most powerful military in the world has not been able to finish with them (not even close really).

The trouble is you are both right. But only one has the right conclusion.

In the end the critical factor is that 10 years of whatever it is we are doing has killed plenty but not really diminished their ability to attack. Perhaps more exactly it has not really diminished our apprehension of the likelihod of their attacking. And as far as they are concerned that is sufficient.

Which takes you back to continuing to do the same thing and expecting different results. Insanity saith Einstein. Just saying they are disorganized is not enough.

In any case we already have an example with Islamic extremists, we don't have to rely on the IRA.

Detachment 88 in Indonesia has persuaded the main body of JI to abandon violence as a tactic. Yes, a splinter group is still trying violent methods. But now it looks as if instead of chasing some thousand of JI operatives, Det 88 is chasing perhaps 20 or 30 - rather a different problem.

And no, Det 88 does not use heavy weapons and does not bomb civilian populations. It would be out of business in about 3 hours if it did.

Anyway, if someone can come up with material from Indonesia suggestion that Det 88 is a bunch of appeasers not worth the ground they stand on, I will be interested to read. Till then, perhaps we should follow their lead.


User currently offlineQANTAS077 From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 5861 posts, RR: 39
Reply 16, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2479 times:



Quoting TheCol (Reply 9):
That question is moot. OBL doesn't want peace with the West.

Bin laden is irrelevant..he has been for some time now.



a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.
User currently offlineFuturePilot16 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2035 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2472 times:



Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 14):

No military, no matter how big, how how smart and how powerful can deal with this kind of threat because you don't have an enemy that is well defined to a country or region. This is an ideology that doesn't appear to fear death in any way and is easily able to convince people on the fence on who to side with that the West are the evil ones when we rightly or wrongly retaliate.

The reason why I made this thread is to encourage a little different dialogue rather than "we should just blow them all up", which I do support, don't get me wrong. But, the United States, or any other country on earth has ever faced an enemy that welcomes death. It's practically impossible for us to win. So If not dialogue, anybody else see a fitting solution? Because I don't see an end to it.

I think what the U.S. is trying to do is just backfiring because the more we try to help the Afghans and make them think we're good, it's ultimately falling on deaf ears.



"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
User currently offlineTheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2039 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2467 times:



Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 10):
We don't know who will come after him.

Probably Omar or one of his other cronies, though I have a sneaking suspicion that AQ will be pretty lost without him. The rest of the leaders are competing with each other for power, and that's really all they care about. There is already rumors of infighting and confusion over the current leadership.

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 10):
And yet the troops are still there.

They would hate us more if we pulled out and let the shit really hit the fan. Especially in Afghanistan, where most of the Taliban fighters are foreigners.

Quoting QANTAS077 (Reply 16):

Irrelevant to who? Certainly not AQ.



No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2450 times:



Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 10):
We don't know who will come after him.

Indeed we do not. However, what you might call "experiments" on the Taliban in Pakistan/Afghanistan rather suggest the successors will be "more bad" (perhaps badder?? or even more badder??) than the ones eliminated. That seems to be how the CIA suffered its latest problems. A plot hatched by the son of one whom they assassinated. ??Time to do the sums again???


User currently offlineME AVN FAN From Switzerland, joined May 2002, 13920 posts, RR: 25
Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2436 times:



Quoting TheCol (Reply 9):
history won't repeat itself:

the comparison is wrong, as
- elQaeda is not a country
- Ali Abdullah Saleh is both president and CIC of the armed forces
- Ali Abdullah Saleh has NOT lost a war
- Ali Abdullah Saleh is NOT senile
He however has to show that HE is ready to negotiate and to talk. He at the other hand is NOT known as an appeaser, and usually first talks and then hits.

Quoting TheCol (Reply 18):
We don't know who will come after him.

Probably Omar or one of his other cronies, though I have a sneaking suspicion that AQ will be pretty lost without him. The rest of the leaders are competing with each other for power

Sounds as if you think of "Mullah Omar" ? But Mullah Omar is an Afghan and was a leading person in the Taliban regime. And so has nothing to do with elQaeda which is NOT Afghan but Arab. The most obvious leader after OBL of course is his deputy, Dr med Ayman al-Zawahiri. But that man has no access to the binLaden finances. So that he will have to do a power-sharing with one of the sons of OBL


User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4967 posts, RR: 25
Reply 21, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 2420 times:



Quoting TheCol (Reply 18):
They would hate us more if we pulled out and let the shit really hit the fan. Especially in Afghanistan, where most of the Taliban fighters are foreigners.

possibly, but that's not hwo they see it at present. propaganda kicks in here; in that sense the evil invader is still their ruling over their lives.



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineME AVN FAN From Switzerland, joined May 2002, 13920 posts, RR: 25
Reply 22, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2400 times:



Quoting TheCol (Reply 18):
They would hate us more if we pulled out and let the shit really hit the fan. Especially in Afghanistan, where most of the Taliban fighters are foreigners.

Sorry, but does it matter to you whether somebody up on the plains or in the mountains of Afghanistan hates "the West" ??

You ought to get updated.
<> the days when the anti-western forces were the "Taliban" are gone
<> the most important anti-western force is the Mudjahideen movement of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (again in fact)
<> the various anti-western groups no longer have many foreign fighters, and the thing with the foreign fighters of the "old" Taliban regime was highly exaggerated in the media, as most of those "fighters" simply were Afghani conscripts
<> the "anti-western forces" mostly are locals, as the conscripts now are on the side of the "Khan of Kabul"

in case of a full pull-out of the "Western" forces, not so much will really change. Important regional leaders like the one of Herat or General Rashid Dostum who at present proforma side with the disrespected Khan of Kabul will adapt. The various groups, bundled together in the media as "Taliban" will fight for influence. Afghanistan will continue to be a "country" in the legal sense, but in reality be lead by the local/regional rulers.

To say that "the shit hits the fan" is nonsense. I rather expect that at a given time one of the warlords, possibly Rashid Dostum, will by force "unite" his country.


User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3385 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2379 times:



Quoting FuturePilot16 (Reply 17):
So If not dialogue, anybody else see a fitting solution? Because I don't see an end to it.

What you can be optimistic about is that with things like the internet and increased globalization especially with communication made available through the internet (examples being forums like this one, facebook and twitter etc.) that the younger people in the Muslim world can make the point that we won't live in fear and this holy war mindset becomes so small and quiet that it is essentially harmless and is absorbed by the culture at large. This somewhat happened in Iran last year with their election when Twitter and Facebook were used by many Iranians to get information out on what was happening.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4967 posts, RR: 25
Reply 24, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2361 times:



Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 23):
What you can be optimistic about is that with things like the internet and increased globalization especially with communication made available through the internet (examples being forums like this one, facebook and twitter etc.) that the younger people in the Muslim world can make the point that we won't live in fear and this holy war mindset becomes so small and quiet that it is essentially harmless and is absorbed by the culture at large.

The downside to this however is that Internet also provides a quick link between the various groups, and they can organize better and faster through this quick connection. Hopefully you are right though, and eventually the "good guys" will prevail.



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
25 StarAC17 : Yes but the internet is a fishbowl in a way and nearly everything done on it can be seen or at least traced to somewhere.
26 DocLightning : On the contrary, the disorganization is precisely *why* they cannot be defeated by conventional means. So you kill Osama Bin Laden. Fine. They don't
27 EZEIZA : But that's the point, you are looking at them as a conventional enemy. Compared to a highly trained military they might seem disorganized, that's why
28 DocLightning : But that disorganization has shown that the dismantling of any terrorist group never happens by intention. They simply die out. But even the IRA coul
29 Vc10 : If you look at the break up of the European Empires after the second world war military force was nearly always used initially by both sides, but alwa
30 Baroque : Well you are perfectly right and further most of the leaders of the new nations had a common qualification - JB, jailed by the British. Wonder if thi
31 EZEIZA : Eventually the IRA stopped using force after dialogue, end even ETA went through the same path (for some time).
32 Baroque : You are right EZEIZA, both had their main wings give up on terrorism after negotiations, although the ETA setup seems to have regressed. But there is
33 L410Turbolet : Vast majority of those thousands killed were a result od various factions of muslims butchering each other.... trying to prove whose version of islam
34 EZEIZA : Their problem then, but the US still had no reason to be there, and kill still way too many people in the process.
35 Baroque : There is also the issue of China House Rules. At least Powell knew that, even if it is now convenient to forget them.
36 ME AVN FAN : True, most of the 11Sep01 people were not fundamentalists but extreme Arab nationalists. The top command is made up by a construction engineer and a
37 ME AVN FAN : Sorry but here you have become a victim of their propaganda. The matter is NOT "versions of Islam" but political power and personal feuds. How many p
38 Post contains links DXing : Pretty much nailed it there. Very difficult to kill an idea. As someone else pointed out, by whom? He is still revered within a larger context than j
39 TheCol : If I remember correctly, he's also close to OBL. I wouldn't rule him out of a power grab, in the case of OBL's death, especially since he has access
40 ME AVN FAN : "We" ? No, I speak about President General Ali Abdullah Saleh. And this man does not and will talk about the rest of the world. He will offer them an
41 ME AVN FAN : They were very close partners, as OBL was the weapons supplier of the Taliban regime. They were known to pay in time and that was loved by the man. A
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Gates/DoD Go To Battle With AP Over Photo posted Fri Sep 4 2009 17:16:35 by JetBlueGuy2006
Farve To Sign With The Vikings? posted Tue Aug 18 2009 08:43:52 by 7324ever
US Tortured Detainees To Prove Iraq-Al Qaeda Link posted Thu Apr 23 2009 11:30:12 by Yellowstone
$19K Honda Insight Hybrid To Compete With Prius! posted Thu Dec 4 2008 22:05:30 by StasisLAX
Obama - His Plans To Deal With Economic Problems posted Wed Sep 10 2008 18:12:05 by Tugger
McCain - His Plans To Deal With Economic Problems posted Wed Sep 10 2008 18:06:59 by Tugger
One Way To Deal With A Streaker... posted Tue Mar 4 2008 10:10:05 by Banco
How To Cope With Lack Of Sleep/red Eye? posted Wed Feb 6 2008 06:48:58 by AA61Hvy
What To Serve With The Christmas Goose? posted Thu Dec 20 2007 15:55:53 by LH459
Lisbon To Riga With No Passport From Tonight! posted Thu Dec 20 2007 15:07:10 by OA260