NxaiPan

Yeah, I am somewhat starting to agree, but still sitting on the fence about what is more dangerous: guns or the stupid people that own them.

WATERVILLE — A city man who accidentally shot part of his face off with a high-powered hunting rifle was in stable condition at a Boston hospital Thursday night, according to his father.

http://www.onlinesentinel.com/news/Waterville_man_accidently_shoots_part_of_his_face_off__taken_to_Mass__hospital_.html

Somewhat unkindly, you could say that the Darwin Awards concept is alive and well and removing dingbats from the prospective gene pool, so perhaps having an over-armed populace does have some plus points...!

Shootings in Detroit..are they really a surprise? (see below):

http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2013/10/22/detroit-again-tops-list-of-most-dangerous-cities-but-crime-rate-dips/

A pizza delivery being quicker than a police response is of course nothing new when it comes to Thailand. Do the BiB actually respond to crime?

Best observation on this was by my 9 year old son on seeing a police car passing by at speed, lights and siren at full blast. "Dad. That's something I have never seen before." "What's that?" I replied. " A police car in a hurry to get somewhere."

I did not have the heart to tell him that it was merely running interference for some BKK hotshot in his Porsche close behind, up in CNX for the weekend!

Ok so what is the answer to the lack of healthcare for some 49 million Americans?

Is it just a case of, tough luck, earn more and be able to afford the premiums?

Or is it a case of, if you can't hack it go somewhere else?

Is this just part of the American Dream?

I agree with Credo that had China done all these earlier ...it would not be such a complex issue as it is today.

The current focus on human rights issue from the west puts China in a bind where it cannot be given the same latitude as some other western powers during their colonial conquests in the pre-google and YouTube days ...

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The increase in democratic governments resulted in the decline and the demise of colonialism.

Colonialism itself was the creation of absolute monarchy and the exclusive ruling elites associated with the era of absolute monarchy. China has been an imperial continental empire for the past 2500 years. The CCP-PRC is now globalizing the concept.

By the time the CCP-PRC was founded, India had just had a peaceful revolution against colonialism to become a democratic republic with democratic values up to the present, to include human rights.

Human Rights both conceptually and in daily practice originated in democratic societies, cultures, governments.

While decolonization was occurring and while the democratic concept and practice of Human Rights was developing, the CCP-PRC invaded Tibet and seized control of it by military force, in 1949.

In the same year the CCP-PRC invaded East Turkistan and by military force annexed it to become the Xin Jiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of the CCP-PRC thereby extending the western border of the CCP-PRC deep into central Asia.

The CCP is an equal opportunity contemporary colonizer, i.e., the Tibetans are Asian Buddhists, the Uyghurs are Eurasian Muslims.

Moreover, each occupation by military invasion was a huge land grab that substantially and significantly extended the area that is now the westernmost CCP-PRC. Military invasion, conquest and occupation is the Old World way to grab a massive amount of natural resources while shoving aside the human resources native to the place.

The Chinese thus have been running against the tide of history for more than 200 years, to include the absolute (and now ancient) belief in dictatorship and rule by an autocracy and of elites. The present dynasty of dictators, the CCP, are emperors in business suits. They are a young dynasty and thus a very nervous one.

Indeed, the CCP is at the point at which dictatorship in the contemporary world maxes out, either to burn out or to collapse of its own dead weight, which is roughly at 75 years.

The CCP-PRC was founded in 1949 so, hmmm, let's see, in years that would be.........

The increase in democratic governments resulted in the decline and the demise of colonialism.

Colonialism itself was the creation of absolute monarchy and the exclusive ruling elites associated with the era of absolute monarchy. China has been an imperial continental empire for the past 2500 years. The CCP-PRC is now globalizing the concept.

WW2 and the Atlantic Charter (with its emphasis to "respect the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live"), were probably far more important than the spread of democracy in the story of de-colonization. Initial US support for decolonization in SE Asia soon faded once the realpolitik of the Cold War really kicked in, and the French campains in Indochina and Algeria raised few hackles in DC, while interventions in Iran 1953 and Guatemala 1954 were Langley led operations.

Neo-colonialism is the art of gaining traction over countries without physical occupation, and while China is currently giving this a shot, the blueprint was written by the US government, see Monroe Doctrine for an early example.

By the time the CCP-PRC was founded, India had just had a peaceful revolution against colonialism to become a democratic republic with democratic values up to the present, to include human rights.

While decolonization was occurring and while the democratic concept and practice of Human Rights was developing, the CCP-PRC invaded Tibet and seized control of it by military force, in 1949.

In the same year the CCP-PRC invaded East Turkistan and by military force annexed it to become the Xin Jiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of the CCP-PRC thereby extending the western border of the CCP-PRC deep into central Asia.

The CCP is an equal opportunity contemporary colonizer, i.e., the Tibetans are Asian Buddhists, the Uyghurs are Eurasian Muslims.

Moreover, each occupation by military invasion was a huge land grab that substantially and significantly extended the area that is now the westernmost CCP-PRC. Military invasion, conquest and occupation is the Old World way to grab a massive amount of natural resources while shoving aside the human resources native to the place.

India's "peaceful revolution" needs to be seen through the prism of the disastrous partition in 1947 that saw the displacement of 15million and the murder of up to 1million, plus the less than peaceful antics of the INA that fought with the Japanese against the Allies in WW2.

India has hardly ducked the chance for military-led land grabs, annexing by force Hyderabad province in 1948, plus the disastrous annexation of muslim-majority Kashmir in 1947, an issue that festers to this day. There was also the 1961 military invasions of the Portuguese possessions of Goa, Daman and Diu which were contrary to any international law, but disappeared in the fog of the Cold War. Nehru's naive Forward Policy in respect of Arunachal Pradesh, moving troops north of the McMahon Line, helped trigger the 1962 Sino-Indian conflict. More recently the intervention of the Indian Army in the Sri Lankan Civil War from 1987-90 saw highlights such as the murder of almost 100 civilians by the Indian military in the Teaching Hospital of Jaffna and the subsequent murder of India's Prime Minister (Rajiv Gandhi) by the LTTE in 1991.

Tibet was invaded by China in 1951 not 1949.

"East Turkistan" is a politically charged term originally conceived by the Soviets to forment separatism in the 1930's in the extreme western periphery of Xinjiang. A second "East Turkistan" (again backed by the Soviets) arose at the end of the Chinese Civil War located in NW Xinjiang. Xinjiang province was largely occupied by KMT forces who surrendered to the PLA in 1949 with little resistance. Xinjiang had been a formal province of China since 1884. "East Turkistan" is now a term used by Uighur separatists to cover the entire Xinjiang province.

Your accusation that "Military invasion, conquest and occupation is the Old World way to grab a massive amount of natural resources while shoving aside the human resources native to the place" is an accusation that could be addressed not only against China but also (somewhat unfairly) against the US in relation to some fairly recent conflicts, especially in the Middle East.

While these comments may be perceived as US bashing by some, it is more a case of removing the rose-tinted lenses and seeing that China, while far from perfect, is not alone in undertaking self-interested, unpleasant actions to further the national agenda.

"Emperors in business suits".... sounds like a rerun of Barbarians at the Gate, Bonfire of the Vanities, Chuck Prince's "still dancing" 2008 riposte, "too big to fail" etc, etc

You could argue that the US is also a fairly young dynasty and currently pretty nervous about its global position. Quite unnecessarily IMHO. If the US stepped up, many global issues could be resolved, the last thing anyone needs now is a relapse into a disastrous phase of isolationism.

So China is willing to forego this windswept, mountainous area for some bigger fish in the S. China Sea?

I think you know that with 300,000 troops stationed permanently at the border of India the CCP wants it all。

Have you ever known of a communist or fascist regime of dictatorship that didn't include the compelling ideology of its inherent superiority and its concomitant certainty that its destiny and rightful place is that of world conquest and supreme rule？

The CCP is infected by this same ideology and malady, ideology being a brain disease to begin with.

Add to that the mental and personality disorders incubated by China's 5000 year old history and Middle Kingdom complex - which views the Johhnie Come Lately USA as a pimple on the arse of history - and you have the Chinese Communist Party and the PRC as the wave of the future.

Another wave of the future syndrome for us to have to deal with.

The elites of India have been around a while too, and are well aware of this reality. India consequently is proceeding with caution. It makes nice to Beijing while simultaneously preparing for and expecting the worst. Hence India's new longer range missile that for the first time can reach Beijing and Shanghai if and when retaliation becomes required.

Japan PM Shinzo Abe recently addressed the Indian parliament to advocate a "Democracy Diamond“ from Japan to Hawaii to Australia，to India，through Asean, Taiwan. Abe didn't pull this strategic concept out of a hat, or out of the blue. Abe conceived it because of motivation, reasons, a distinct rationale and purpose - the CCP and its belligerence, its bellicosity, its recent aggressions, which to date have been mild compared to Beijing's Grand Plan.

Sorry about that but reality does bite.

So in your "reality" China intends to start a war with India and in the S China Sea?

Why?

How would China benefit from either scenario?

True. It's a good thing they are trying to get it sorted out.

With almost half of the world population between them, it's good they are focusing on trade and feeding the folks instead of fighting over some mountains and grass patches which no one really wants more than to use as a barrier between the 2

Common sense is always preferred. Pity the arms manufacturers who thought there is another fat year end bonus in sight and another steakhouse entertainment night

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Nehru's comment re the Aksai Chin from 1962 still holds true today when he described it as a "region where not a blade of grass grows".

There are a lot of technicalities in determining a refugee. There are a lot of reasons for people leaving their home country, but the UNHCR usually uses this to determine if someone is a refugee:

A refugee has a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group.

People may leave because of war, violence, and natural disasters, but that does not mean they are a refugee. Many people flee a war zone, for example, and they are considered to be displaced people. Once the conflict is over some, if not all, will be able to return.

It is important to screen people to make sure they are genuine refugees. Those that are need to be afforded the protection of a foreign gov't. Those that aren't, should probably be returned to their home country as soon as it is possible and safe for them to do so.

The normally used terminology for a forced migrant is an IDP ( Internally Displaced Person)if they move to a safer place within a country. If they cross an international boundary they become a refugee. Most refugees intend to return home but from examples such as Palestine, Afghanistan and Montserrat show that it is not necessarily what happens.

Also, since when did a refugee have to be poor? Plenty are, but also many are not.

Actually, I was surprised to learn that a Refugee is defined as ... "a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster."

Many of the refugees from Syria ending up in Jordanian camps or trying to cross into Italy are middle-class families looking for a safe place for their families and to restart their careers.

If you lived in Syria what would you do?

http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2012/results/

When I can see Iraq, Afghanistan all moving up from the last place of this index, maybe many can understand the reasons behind the invasion of western forces in the hope of bringing democracy and a better life for the people there vs the current destruction and disruption to normal life and the governance civil mess.

Sent from my iPod touch using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

It's a nice deflection, but I don't think those countries were invaded to bring democracy and a better life. They were invaded because they presented what some some considered a clear and present danger to the present way of life.

I don't know that the same can be said for India or Tibet.

There anyway aren't going to be any more Vietnam in the jungles of SE Asia wars or Iraq or Afghanistan in the dessert wars, as the US Army is being declassed under the new AirSea Battle strategic war doctrine of the Pentagan, which is supported by the Congress at the initiative of the Obama administration.

The present new AirSea Battle strategy integrates Air Forces and Naval Forces into a synergistic high tech military supported by Marine combat forces. The AirSea Battle strategy puts US Air and Naval forces in a standoff position from the land mass of any continent from which it can use stealth warplanes, stealth warships, missiles, stealth submarine forces. The Army is declassed to a support role of cleaning up and occupying territory already neutralized by the AirSea Battle war plan.

The AirSea Battle strategic doctrine applies to either a global war or to a single particular battle. It includes cyberwarfare, electromagnetic laser and pulsing warfare, inner space warfare and other electronic means of warfare.

Each India and the CCP-PRC continue to have the Army as their primary military force which continues to consume up to half of each country's military budget and resources. Each government, however, is moving more towards air and naval warfare, just not to the extent the United States is moving in that direction.

The CCP-PRC is further along than is India in creating an architecture of A2/AD defense systems combined with missile based offensive capabilities. A2/AD refers to the modern high tech missile defense systems intended to deny access to the air and sea areas, respectively, off the coasts of each country - Anti-Access, Area Denial.

In India and in the CCP-PRC, transforming to A2/AD from having the army consume half the military budget is to turn the Titanic, whereas in the United States it's a matter of bringing in a couple of new computers.

The Pentagon's new strategic doctrine is that there are no more land wars - that there are, in a manner of speaking, only star wars.

What has this waffle got to do with the topic? Rather than going down the armchair expert/Monday morning quarterback routine, why not be grateful that steps are being taken to lower tensions in at least one part of the world.

PS love the idea of dessert wars though! Cream pie anyone?

Are there not more pressing problems in Africa?

See, I told you the arguements would start. But like true to form, people take one example out of 300 million and blame an entire nation. And still the so called educated can't recognize its a serious social issue with "people" and human behaviour. Because you bury your heads in the sand and simply irgnor the facts, I guess "Gangs", Bullies, and mentally ill people are not the problem. But guns are? We need to start seriously thinking of the influence that extreme video games are having on our youth. Video games have become so realistic they now train special forces with them. Get a clue people. They are fun for those mature enough to deal with it or are they really mature enough?

As I don't have a dog in the fight may I ask you what your solution to the problem might be?

Honestly, all the so called experts have been tackling this problem for a long time. No one has found the solution yet. As someone else mentioned they need to go in a different direction and not just keep writings laws to ban things. A problem world wide is the growth of gangs and getting mor violent. Even Thailand has them. I think it should start at an early age. Many schools have started anti bulling and anti gang campaigns. But I also think there needs to be more social behaviour training kids are not getting at home. JMHO.

That's it? You just shrug your shoulders and wait for the next bout of slaughter?

Until enough Americans think that the situation is beyond acceptable, these type of shootings will probably happen about once every 6 weeks on average.

Putin started this particular fight, why does everyone else have to do his dirty work for him?

Putin is no angel for sure, but the fight started when Islam moved out of the Arabian peninsula in the 7th century and has continued on and off since then. Geographic separation of a death cult from it's victims is the only answer, eventually the present PC denial will end and what follows then remains to be seen.

so quite what are you suggesting?

Putin started this particular fight, why does everyone else have to do his dirty work for him?

they don't and outsiders certainly won't be asked.

All the political correctness on the West isn't helping the issue either, there're so many muslims now in England/ US/ Canada, etc, that any aggressive action on one of their countries will start a local conflict. We have seen it already with the terrorists acts in US (even though I only partially believe the 911 was actually an Al Qaeda attack), all the bombings in England some years back, etc... Eye for an eye...

So who was responsible for the missing part of the Sept 11th attacks?

Move all the religions people on one continent and burn the bridges! No ins or outs. The rest of the world will be in piece!

Unfortunately for this cunning plan the majority of the world's population is actually religious. It might be a bit of a squish

Only Russia America China and Europe acting together can stop this.

When are they going to unite to end the problem?

Oh that's good then, Asia doesn't have to do anything.

Is China no longer in Asia? Don't forget Africa and the Aussies.....

How on God's given Earth are Russia, America, China and Europe going to stop this? Acting together they might be able to stop Global Warming, but stopping the religious fanatics is a whole lot more complex problem.

Bombing the capitals of the religious fanatics and these countries will crack down on religious fanatics to save their own skin

Your way of doing nothing will just get more peaceful citizens

Bombing will force these countries to police religious fanatics The West Russia and China and the rest of the world can not

Russians already tried this in Chechnya. Sent in tanks and APCs first time round and got seriously kicked. Next time round they just flattened the city first with air and artillery strikes then mopped up the pieces. Funnily enough the bad guys were long gone and elsewhere.

How on God's given Earth are Russia, America, China and Europe going to stop this? Acting together they might be able to stop Global Warming, but stopping the religious fanatics is a whole lot more complex problem.

Dagestan, Chechnya, Ingushetia etc are about more than just religion. It's that fatal combination of nationalism and religion as the rallying cry plus a healthy dose of extreme heavy-handedness by the Russian security forces. No easy solution.

Only Russia America China and Europe acting together can stop this.

When are they going to unite to end the problem?

Can't see the Russians letting anyone else interfere with a domestic situation.

MAJIC some more factual info for you, westminster distribution of wealth in pounds to each

member of the UK. by population and by totals annually.

N. Ireland per head 9,385 population 1.8 million total 16,893,000,000 pounds.

Wales 8,139 3.1 25,230,900,000

Scotland 8,623 5.2 44,839,600,000

England 7,121 53.2 378,837,200,000

It all looks fairly resonable until the totals come up then it becomes obviously

obscene why England are the richest member of this union!!

They collect 4.5 times the total of all the other members added together.

Scotland is approx. 60% the land area of England who collects 8.5 times the

money, 15 times the money Wales gets, and 23.6 times the money N.Ireland gets.

As stated above at 60% the area of England which has just under 2000 miles

of motorway Scotlands 237 miles of motor way is approx. 12% of Englands.

This must be one of the many post oil improvements made to Scotland after the

English found our oil for us.

Rather bizarre way of looking at government expenditure. The relevance of the area of Scotland is basically zero. The key element is how much revenue does each region of the UK actually contribute and then compare that to the levels of government expenditure.

The link below spells this out in detail and the bottom line is quite simple. The only net contributors are London, the SouthEast and East, with the rest of the UK being net consumers rather than contributors. The peripheral regions ( including Scotland) are therefore living off the revenue generated by the SE/E corner of England.

http://www.isitfair....blicFinance.pdf

NxaiPan, For one your link is pre 2008 and as such bears absolutely no relevance in todays finacial climate,

try addressing the present not the past. You cannot strenghthen your case by using outdated historical information.

Now if you can come up with the same info for 2011/12 that would be relevant, but can you???

Pathetic response, and as you are obviously too idle to look it up yourself, here's the breakdown for 2010/2011, which continues to show that London and the SE remain the only net contributors, with surpluses of revenue over expenditure of 10.3 and 0.7% respectively. Even giving Scotland a mighty generous 83% of N. Sea carbon revenues, it remains a net consumer rather than contributor to UK revenue.

http://www.cebr.com/wp-content/uploads/Regional-surplus-and-deficits-Compatibility-Mode.pdf

Sorry I am not in a position to make up the numbers for 2011/12, though given the recent strength in the financial sector (coming off a low base), these are likely to show an increasingly skewed contribution from London/SE to the periphery.

MAJIC some more factual info for you, westminster distribution of wealth in pounds to each

member of the UK. by population and by totals annually.

N. Ireland per head 9,385 population 1.8 million total 16,893,000,000 pounds.

Wales 8,139 3.1 25,230,900,000

Scotland 8,623 5.2 44,839,600,000

England 7,121 53.2 378,837,200,000

It all looks fairly resonable until the totals come up then it becomes obviously

obscene why England are the richest member of this union!!

They collect 4.5 times the total of all the other members added together.

Scotland is approx. 60% the land area of England who collects 8.5 times the

money, 15 times the money Wales gets, and 23.6 times the money N.Ireland gets.

As stated above at 60% the area of England which has just under 2000 miles

of motorway Scotlands 237 miles of motor way is approx. 12% of Englands.

This must be one of the many post oil improvements made to Scotland after the

English found our oil for us.

Rather bizarre way of looking at government expenditure. The relevance of the area of Scotland is basically zero. The key element is how much revenue does each region of the UK actually contribute and then compare that to the levels of government expenditure.

The link below spells this out in detail and the bottom line is quite simple. The only net contributors are London, the SouthEast and East, with the rest of the UK being net consumers rather than contributors. The peripheral regions ( including Scotland) are therefore living off the revenue generated by the SE/E corner of England.

http://www.isitfair.co.uk/Reports/Public/OE%20UKPublicFinance.pdf

So if Palestinian Statehood is on the table, why would the Palestinians start shooting 500 missiles into Israel. Kind of counter productive, isn't it?

Good question.

The bid in the U.N. is about changing Palestine's role in the U.N. from observer entity to nonmember state, a largely SYMBOLIC change. Realistically the only way Palestine (Gaza and West Bank) becomes a state is through a direct negotiation process with Israel.

Israel's reaction to rockets from Gaza is justified by self defense. But will it be effective for Israel in the long run in the much changed political environment in the region? That's another question.

http://www.slate.com...will_leave.html

The fresh round of Israeli reprisals follows an uptick in attacks from militant groups in Gaza. It began last Saturday with the firing of an anti-tank missile at an Israeli army jeep that wounded four soldiers. Several days of intensive rocket fire from Gaza followed. Israel responded by assassinating Ahmed Jabari, the head of Hamas’s military wing in Gaza, and launched an air campaign to try to destroy as many weapons depots as possible.

In 2012, there’s barely been a week when at least a handful of rockets haven’t been fired from Gaza into Israel. Every month or so there is an escalation, like during one six-day period in June when 162 rockets landed in Israel. “No government would tolerate a situation where nearly a fifth of its people live under a constant barrage of rockets and missile fire,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the foreign media on Thursday as he authorized more intensive strikes in Gaza.

Spot on.

The Israelis will probably enjoy a tactical success and Gaza will pay a heavy price, but long term it harly does Israel any strategic favours.

Yes, America lost in Vietnam, but that was then, and that was a very questionable war.

Now the USA is playing an entirely different role in Asia, as the geopolitics in the region are very different now, and I for one, wish the best to Panetta (and his successor because he's leaving).

Yes, it's about a balance with China. It's not about starting a war. It's about preventing war.

And presenting a valid alternative to China. If America does not support and be seen to support allies or wannabe allies, the Chinese will soon fill the void. Thailand could so easily slip into a role of being China's Florida, given proximity, potential and the ethnicity of the bulk of Thailand's decision making elite.

The US are making hay, to China's obvious disgust, in Myanmar, but it suits the Burmese also so it is hardly a neo-colonial re-run.

Let's be seeing it then?

The 11th Baronet, Sir Thomas Loch, to give "Tam" his proper name, merely rehashed a quote by Gladstone from the 1880's concerning Home Rule for Ireland..... Next?

As the apparent master of this subject did think you might know the origin of Sir Thomas of the Binns' famous quote, if not you could always Google it....

I know the answer....you obviously don't.

Why would you take such an apparently conceited view? Google is a great search engine....give it a try.

What did Tam Dalyell say?

Let's be seeing it then?

The 11th Baronet, Sir Thomas Loch, to give "Tam" his proper name, merely rehashed a quote by Gladstone from the 1880's concerning Home Rule for Ireland..... Next?

As the apparent master of this subject did think you might know the origin of Sir Thomas of the Binns' famous quote, if not you could always Google it....