MaxYakov

19 minutes ago, Ossy said:

You think, maybe, that she has a 10 yard invisible protective shield? . . . No, she'd have mentioned it

Rocket-based ejection seat with self-inflating landing pod. Rear view mirrors would be a very unrealistic, "far out" adjunct to the ejection seat. 

Was the "guardrail" the article referring to the road-level guardrail or the over-walk railing? It seems more likely to me that it was the road-level one: Here's a pedestrian over-walk in the Bang Pa-in district or thereabouts showing a protective road-level vehicle guardrail, not the one where the accident allegedly occurred  (Google Maps Street View - 14.2380957  100.6127943)

17 minutes ago, nobodysfriend said:

I think this is a war of words ... if NK would be seriously attacked by the US , they would fire a few rockets , of course , but the majority of this country's population is starving and not willing to die for Kim Yong , I guess . They would just throw their weapons away and surrender or run away ...

You think the "majority" of DPRK's population is simultaneously starving and armed?

I don't believe anyone is greatly concerned about the DPRK's "majority" other than how many would be tragic, collateral damage (as if they aren't already by just living under a totalitarian regime).

42 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

I don't see how the article you link to refutes what I wrote. Or perhaps you are agreeing with me?

"So here’s the big difference: In Norway, capitalism serves the people. The government, elected by the people, sees to that. All eight of the parties that won parliamentary seats in the last national election—including the conservative Høyre party now leading the government—are committed to maintaining the welfare state."

https://www.thenation.com/article/after-i-lived-in-norway-america-felt-backward-heres-why/

It wasn't intended to "refute" your quote, nor necessarily to indicate agreement.

Simply a point of discussion, since your brought the USA into it.

Tip: Try using italics when quoting rather than using a larger font. Re-iterating the link in entirety (without a text anchor) was a nice touch, but pretty ugly. I should have better documented the Nation article's text-anchored link.

8 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

We've seen how well waging war in the name of regime change has worked in recent past.

It couldn't possibly be because the leadership of the regime-change efforts were incompetent, could it? 

13 hours ago, halloween said:

Who needs CSI when we have physics? There has to be a vertical force applied to lift 2 bodies some 4 or 5 (??) metres into the air. If their motorcycle struck a relatively slow vehicle at high speed some metres before the bridge, their forward energy could pivot on the front axle to supply the needed vertical component.

Seems plausible to me. The condition / damage to the motorcycle, especially the front wheel, may substantiate this hypothesis (or  not).

I'm disappointed because I can't find any pertinent images of the accident on the internet and also failed to get a street view of the over-walk using Google Maps.

Does anyone have images or a GPS position?

I want DPRK regime change because I don't agree with there being a country that is a 25-million-person concentration camp.

3 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

If your point is somehow related to the victors being a "right wing" party, think again. What passes for right wing in Norway would be considered extremely eftist in the USA.

Actually, I was thinking in terms of how the two handled their oil revenue / wealth and their general health and stability as countries, but it may not be ideal or simple to compare Norway and Venezuela.

Norway may be considered to be a "welfare state" from a cursory internet consensus and they seem to be doing well compared to almost any other country. Here's a "Nation" article that compares Norway and the US political / economic systems, you brought the USA into this.

"Apart from its sovereign wealth fund, Norway tops U.N. lists of the best country in which to live, based on issues such as personal earnings and education. It even rose to first, from fourth, in a 2017 survey that ranked nations by happiness."

They could learn something from the Venezuelans, huh, folks? Or maybe they already have?

No mystery is unsolvable for the highly-acclaimed TV CSI team!

5 hours ago, YetAnother said:

lampoon ? cant seem to locate that on a map

It's got to be Lamphun or we've (or someone has) been "lampooned"!

2 hours ago, HooHaa said:

im amazed at the HUGE number of negative responses here from people who do not cycle, never have cycled, or more simply put inhabit the sofa without any exercise whatsoever.

 

good for her i say.

i hope she enjoys the ride.

I cycle every day in Bangkok, which has to be one of the most dangerous and cyclist-unfriendly cities in the world.

I would never allow myself to do what she is planning. When I do inter-city travel in Thailand, the bicycle goes into the luggage compartment and I grab a seat in the coach.

I hope she makes many videos and puts them on the internet like other bicycle tourists so I can watch them and be glad it's not I going through the boredom, agony and high risk.

Cyclists should not be allowed to be roadside, without being on a separated bicycle lane with high-speed cars whizzing by, anymore than should there be roadside pedestrians.

How many pedestrians do we see walking along the "edge" of roads with backpacks (or without!) doing an inter-city walking "tour"? What's the difference between a roadside pedestrian doing 5 kph and a cyclist doing 15-20 kph? (rhetorical question)

IMO, cyclists should understand that most roads are not designed for cycling so they should not be sharing the roads that were designed for, and populated with, relatively high-speed motor vehicles.

Or, on the other hand, maybe I'm just in a bad mood today because I got cut-off or ignored too many times by motorists because I was only a cyclist.

That having been said, Good Luck to her (because Good Sense seems to have failed her).

"Because Alex, 21, says she always keeps to the edge of the road."

She's a bit too edgy for my tastes.

Her motto: What, me worry? (Now, where have I heard that before?)

2 hours ago, madusa said:

Oh, thank god the stranglehold of the english language is finally loosen. Lots of government ministers are of chinese descents so it wouldn't be hard for them to learn chinese.

The tyranny of the english language is finally beginning to slowly disappear.

The English language from an unknown dialect of the anglo-saxon on the Thames river, competing with the rest like welsh, Irish, scottish and celt. (cockney is most well known). Because of the trades on the Thames improved with ships from colonial countries the English language overtook all the other dialects and became an established language of commerce. Then finally its stranglehold on all other languages overseas.

Like Latin, Greek, Arabic it will die a slow death.

"Oh, thank god the stranglehold of the english language is finally loosen." 

You should thank God that you, obviously, are not in its stranglehold!

3 hours ago, hansnl said:

This embracing of the leading class in Thailand of China and Chinese is disturbing at least and very dangerous in the long run for the real Thai people.

China is a one party state with no democracy at all, a country that is trying to control all countries around it, a country that still believes they are the middle kingdom, a country with no respect for human life at all, and foremost a country that in all its dealings has a strategic goal.

For China.

No self respecting country should have dealings with China while so many neighbouring countries have problems with that country.

 

 

Errr ... wouldn't that be "No self-respecting" (with emphasis thereon, perhaps)?

8 hours ago, Thaiwrath said:

Money is the universal language here ! 

Do you know somewhere where money is NOT the universal language?

If you do, tell us about it. 

On 3/8/2016 at 8:11 PM, Markc said:

Stallion Centaur 150 Sport Classic.

Because I have one and it just is.

Game over

Game's not over until your body temperature is "cooler" than your bike (aka ambient). At least 20,000 or so Thailand motorbike/cycle riders achieve this level of "coolness" on a yearly basis.

32 minutes ago, ezzra said:

How do you say in Thai ' get conned and scammed quick?' and what university 

she's studying? the Bernie Madoff faculty of scoundrels?.....

Maybe the Uni had a "Future Enterprisers" course and she was an overzealous student member? Aren't Ponzi schemes, by definition, out of control from the very first transaction? Silly questions I know, but I'm never amazed by what people "buy into" these days.

3 hours ago, selftaopath said:

IMO: Rules/laws in Lack of Sanctions (LOS) are only to obtain bribes. This country has no effective/responsible police force. Thailand would be a much different place if it did. But I doubt Thais would want a rule of law country. They just could not handle it. They NEED corruption.

Tell us about their NEED to circumvent intersection control lights at the risk of their lives and the lives of the law-abiders. I see it every day. Maybe they NEED the adrenalin rush.

And how about the completely ridiculous noise levels of some motorbikes? What is that NEED all about? And the NEED self-destructiveness of not using helmets and taking unnecessary risks?

How about the NEED to put a motorbike taxi passenger at their ultimate destination by traveling half a block on the sidewalk (pavement(s) for UK folks)?

How about the NEED to place their young children at risk on motorbikes and more often than not without any kind of protection, not even simple eye protection that would cost next to nothing?

I see the above examples of these NEEDS every day. Since they don't involve money directly can it be called "corruption" or should it be termed something else?

Thailand is generally a civilized, "rule-of-law" country for the majority of its citizens; otherwise it would be utter, abject bedlam. However, for the remainder - the numerous, immoral or amoral law-scoffers, especially the ones whose actions are potentially dangerous to others - it would take draconian, totalitarian measures to civilize them.

EoR (End of Rant) 

5 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Next time, please quote in real way, not in the Russian way.

I reported your post and expect it to be removed.. not because what you said, but because what you lied about.

I place the entire blame on Ludwig and I hope they do also. 

22 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Hey, I got some interesting news for you. There's not one member of the house, democratic or republican representing a district that shares a border with Mexico, who is in favor of the wall.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/330045-no-congress-members-along-mexico-border-support-funding-trumps

 Ya think they're taking that stance because they're politically suicidal?

I suspect I won't be hearing back from you on this one.

 

I don't know where (or if) there is a physical description of the wall, but (Thanks) your The Hill article does say, among other things, this:

"According to the report, some GOP lawmakers raised concerns about whether the wall is too focused on a physical barrier, rather than funding other high-tech solutions that could prove to be more effective.

“The solution must be a dynamic, multifaceted one,” Rep. Steve Pearce (R-N.M.) told the publication."

1) You should not be so quick to jump on something based on a potentially questionable survey. Especially one by an author with a name like Nikita Vladimirov.

Aren't you afraid of being accused of colluding with the Ruskies?

2) It's well-known that many Republicans are anti-Trump and may very well be suicidal if they are as obsessive as some of the posters on this forum are about Trump.

3) Maybe the Republicans surveyed, as usual, are afraid to voice a pro-wall opinion so as not to lose Hispanic voters (or their belief that they will lose them).

4) The Republicans are as big on lying as are the Democrats (most likely).

You suspected you wouldn't hear from me on this because ...?

7 minutes ago, oilinki said:

When Finns and Russians agree that the current US politics on North Korea is really bad and really troublesome/frightening , one should take a note. 

On other matters...

Then again, I used to talk with my highly analytical British friend, what if Trump would become the POTUS, a lot before he became one. 

One of the positive points was that he should have had balls to say to Russia was that occupying Crimea was a offencive and big mistake. That was the big issue back then. Do you still remember? 

I guess not.

Ps. Should I fill my profile information and say that I'm from Trang. I make love with dolphins. I used to work for Central African space program, been to the Moon so many times, it bores me already?

 

Just because the Finns and Ruskies agree doesn't make them both correct. But I get your point and I guess it is unusual, at least. If you want a second opinion, ask me tomorrow.

Trump's balls: "should have had" seems a bit presumptive to me.

Should I remember Trump's balls or the Crimea issue? I got confused. 

What are you asking me what nonsense you should place into your profile?

Instead, why don't you answer my question as to why you blame Ludwig?

15 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Sorry, not sure what you're on about.

 

I'm not advocating a US military strike, just relating that as far as I'm aware there aren't massive deployment of forces (especially ground forces) beyond those already stationed in the region. It doesn't seem like the prospects for a swift "painless" operation are high, though.

Sorry, I'm not so sure either (what I'm on about), but I didn't intend to imply that you were advocating a US military strike (at least not consciously). I was sort of mulling it over and wasn't too serious - hence the /sarc.

26 minutes ago, iReason said:

 

"if someone wanted a free ride ... in a nice, tenable welfare state"

 

By your second sentence you've already gotten to your one-dimensional, stereotypical Fox Views bullet point.

Shameful.

 

I believe I've warned you before about editing the content of my posts without any indications of their being edited and this includes editing extracts from my posts that you've quoted in your reply. By not doing so, your credibility on this forum is zilch, AFAIC.

To correct your deluded conclusion that I watch Fox News - I don't watch TV at all because I don't have cable or out-of-the-air TV and am entirely internet-based. Additionally, Fox News is (for the most part) gone too far left for my tastes, except for Sean Hannity, who I have not listened to or watched for some time.

IMHO, If anything is shameful on this forum it's your poor forum participation habits.

13 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Well, NK isn't in a grand economic shape as well and it doesn't seem to bother Kim much, judging from rhetoric and actions. If the US will have to go to war it will go to war, hurricanes or no hurricanes. Still doesn't have much to do with the quoted post, so no idea why directed at me.

 

Major war how? It's not as if the US will turn all it's military resources to NK if it comes to fighting. Considering there isn't much discussion of ground troops, guess they think they can make do with what's already deployed plus long range means.

 

 

Yes, something surgical to take out Kim and his nuclear / missile capability using non-nuclear assets. Sort like hitting a hornets nest with a baseball bat. No problem. /sarc