mrwebb8825

This is 1 the US shouldn't touch. Let them figure it all out.

On 5/21/2018 at 12:31 PM, webfact said:

Saudi air defences‬ ‮intercepted‬ and destroyed ‮a ballistic missile‬ fired by Yemen's Houthi movement over the southern city of Jazan, the Saudi-led coalition said on Monday.

Mods, can you translate this into English please. ?

On 5/17/2018 at 1:14 PM, sukhumvitneon said:

Equating Thailand with the US isn't a fair comparison by a long shot.  The US has birthright citizenship, owed to the poor interpretation of the 14th amendment which was meant to ensure former slaves weren't denied the same, but that's an argument for another day, where the children of the illegals are on equal footing for jobs/college places with US persons who were born there or otherwise immigrated legally.  These kids can vote and therefore shape government policy.  They compete with other US citizens for jobs, scholarships, and universities with in-state tuition with families that have lived there and paid tax in for generations.

 

Try introducing those policies in Thailand and let me know how it works out for you.

You really need to do a little research before posting drivel.

"Dreamers on the campaign trail: 'We cannot vote, but we do have a voice'"

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/25/latino-voters-clinton-sanders-campaigns-dreamers

"Many state colleges and universities charge undocumented students out-of-state tuition fees (even if the student is a longtime resident of the state). "

https://citizenpath.com/college-education-dreamers/

Any bets SpaceX has a tourist group sitting in beach chairs sipping margaritas and filming their landing? 

The world has gone to hell in a handbasket lately. Why is it that the ONLY "group" that can NOT march together are white men? Everybody else is an "activist" but let 3 white guys march to lunch and they are racists, sexists, bigots, etc.

Wasn't there another awards thing not too long ago that was dominated by male winners and the director made an off the cuff comment about the "ladies needing to step up their game..."? Has he been fired and awaiting prison yet? 

17 hours ago, Scott said:

I don't have a problem with removing temporary status one the actual need is over.   Sadly, waiting this many years is detrimental to many of them.  

 

I am simply trying to point out that for many, gaining permanent status is not an option.   For those that could (such as marrying a US citizen), it's probably best that they do so.  

1 HUGE problem with the US government (mainly congress and the senate) is that they need to hire a small staff for each house just to keep track of timelines because they keep forgetting about things they did.

These staff members could open the 1st meeting of every month and "remind" the geriatric set that it's time to "take the pills" by announcing; "OK, temp status for X people due to Y issue in their country is now 1 yr old". "2 yrs old", "3 yrs old", etc. "The approved funding for ABC Research is now 5 yrs old with 0 results". This sort of thing.

Everybody spends so much time fighting to be in control that they completely forget all the laws and such that were passed over the years.

These people should have been sent home 1-3 yrs after they arrived and NObody should be allowed sanctuary because they don't like the politics or the elected officials. They should stay right the 'heck' there and fight to kick them out. If you don't care about your own home, why would you care about someone else's?

On 5/12/2018 at 11:12 AM, rooster59 said:

"We should fold all of the TPS people that have been here for a considerable period of time and find a way for them to be on a path to citizenship," Kelly, one of President Donald Trump's top aides, said in an interview.

I pretty sure there is a path already on the books. The 1st step on this path would be actually APPLYING for citizenship. It takes 8-10 yrs to become a US citizen and seeings as they've been here for over 20, I don't believe they want to be citizens. They would rather just have their own little country inside of ours so they don't have to give up the government freebies.

7 minutes ago, Credo said:

You mean like people who live near forests that sometimes burn, rivers that sometimes floods and oceans that hurricanes?

 

Where would you suggest people live?

Since the OP is about people living on an active volcano... 

Yes, I suppose you could include places built on a yearly to 5 yr flood plain.

Nature reclaiming nature. Never understood people who purposely live in areas that are destroyed by nature often and then whine to the federal government to rebuild their homes, cities and lives.

Why on Earth would you want/need/have to cancel a teachers licence? A waiver maybe but the actual licence?

On 5/9/2018 at 5:18 PM, Get Real said:

By the way, I am not wrong. I am as right as I can be.

Which only proves your goal isn't very high.

President Trump put the pressure on and made China and Russia quit bucking the system. Russia's a bit of a rogue still but China doesn't want it's financial plan squeezed off it's timeline.

The USA economy is doing just fine without funding wars around the world and has started making plans to draw back it's people from the few that were left for President Trump to solve.

He stated his point very clearly when he let fly with 59(?) Tomahawk missiles that hit their targets with pinpoint accuracy with a 5-7 minute window from launch to impact. Kim couldn't get his missiles primed and ready in that time frame. He then sent a task force to cruise around outside Kim's porch. He later backed that up with a unified air strike backed by allies that are also pushing the sanctions just to show he wasn't kidding around.

With Obama he wasn't worried because his "lines in the sand" kept washing away with the tide while he slept.

That's when Kim sent his sister to feel out Moon and when she reported back to him, he took a secret trip to meet with Xi looking for a way out of the mess he'd crated. Then he came back, met with Moon and sent word he wanted to meet President Trump. The only people who were shocked when President Trump immediately said yes were the same losers that backed HC in the election. Those are the same people who are "warning him" and trying to "advise him" now but without the guts to meet him face to face because they know he'd laugh them out of his office. He even said so during a press conference.

Seems either Moon has been drinking the kool-aide or Kim is just plain scared of being kicked to the curb and having to work for a living. Just amazed that Moon believes they have a "Deep Mutual Trust" built on 3 meetings after years of death threats.

1 hour ago, VocalNeal said:

Which of course are very close to the North Atlantic 

They are not doing it to monitor either the Ukraine or Syria.

"Russia has increased its naval patrols in the Baltic Sea, the North Atlantic and the Arctic, NATO officials say, although the size of its navy is smaller now than during the Cold War era."

which, of course, ARE close to the North Atlantic. 

40 minutes ago, billd766 said:

To make a real 2nd Fleet it needs its ownm assets though "borrowing" ships, sailors, air wings etc works in the short term in the long term it doesn't

How is it borrowing when they were the 2nd fleet to begin with. They're currently "on loan" in a new assignment and would simply be recalled back to their original duty.

1st, an observation; if you worked for an agency at the old school and you are still working for that agency going to a new school then you shouldn't need a new check as you are not changing employers, only work locations.

2nd, I've been here going on 17 years and did an FBI criminal history check 13-14(?) yrs ago online when they first decided they needed 1. I have never done or been asked to do another 1 since. I have changed jobs but still never needed to redo a check. I include a copy with every wp app and/or renewal and it is always accepted.

Must be some kind of safeguard against getting bad new teachers is all I can think of. Just my 2 cents worth.

4 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

But if a fleet has only a few admin staff and great pile of paperwork it is only a paper fleet. If ships and crews are taken from other fleets it reduces their capacity but does nothing to add to the Navy except more paperwork. Transferring ships to other commands and Navy bases usually means the sailors families move also to different accommodation at government expense.

 

If you want to re-establish the 2nd Fleet then do it properly, and not simply a paper exercise.

 

Nobody said it would be done next week. However, it could get started with unrep ships and clerical staff could share the workload. It could also be co-managed from the existing admin offices at Norfolk, VA. where it would be bases out of anyway during the whole process.

When they moved to Kitty Hawk from CA to FL and turned it into a training carrier there were 5,000 sailors that went with it. The air wings stayed behind at Miramar and were reassigned.

On 5/7/2018 at 6:35 AM, webfact said:

Former President George W. Bush authorized the Rendition, Detention and Interrogation Program after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

With congressional and senatorial approval. Some of which are now sitting in judgement of those following their orders. Does everybody in DC wear brown shoes and socks so the crap they're wading around in doesn't show as well?

On 5/7/2018 at 8:10 AM, car720 said:

Jack Ma is an agent at large.  China is desperate to get it's hands on technology and they will try to open every door no matter how insignificant it seems.

Isn't Alibaba the leader of the 40 thieves? 

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

Did you actually read what I wrote?

"First of all, that "Obama retiree" could not take actions against the Russians without Obama's approval. So you can blame Obama."

But it is true that no one realized the extent of Russian involvement back than. Some threats grow, some shrink, some stay  more or less the same. In the case of the Russians, it grew massively.

And I think you need to watch that video again. Not only does he say he didn't get approval from Trump to go ahead, but common sense dictates that no general is going to make such a grave move without Presidential approval. Which is a good thing. Do you actually believe it's a good idea for subordinates to take hostile action against foreign without approval from the commander-in-chief? That's just so obviously ridiculous.

1st off, Obama knew it was serious enough that he met with Putin and bragged at later press conferences at having told him to "Knock it off". He should have issued the orders then but, then again, he was on his last year butt kissing, apology tour.

Now, do YOU really think that the head of the most powerful intelligence and cyber community in the world is so restricted in his authority that all he can do is monitor cyber threats while they erode the fabric of America?

Doesn't say much about the "No Such Agency" mystic now does it?

6 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

First of all, that "Obama retiree" could not take actions against the Russians without Obama's approval. So you can blame Obama. But back then it was a blip. But the extent of it has since been revealed  and after that revelation Trump still did nothing.

Yes, "offensive plans" have been created but it's up to Trump to implement them.

Given his bizarre reluctance to utter even one word of criticism of Putin, it seems unlikely that he'll be confronting the Russians anytime soon.

 

So you want to blame President Trump when it's bad things but still want to credit Obama when it's good things?

Unless you can provide a link to the specific authorities the director of the NSA can and can't undertake on his own then I guess what he should have done or could have done with and without presidential directives are a moot point as proven by your own video.

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

I have to disagree with you completely. There are many admirals and their lower ranks doing very little so "executive" manpower won't be a problem. Taking a hundred ships from the other fleets will weaken those fleets and they way that Trump is expanding the military means that the 2nd Fleet will need to get its ships from the Fleet Reserve or get new ones.

I respect your right to disagree but when the 2nd fleet was deactivated those ships weren't sunk or abandoned or even mothballed. They are all still active with full compliments of sailors and simply need to be reassigned back to where they came from.

As for weakening the largest and most powerful navy in the world, I would remind you that they have only been deactivated and reassigned for 7 years.

Since it takes 4+ years to build 1 ship (depending on size and class) and the navy only buys 1 ship every 5 years, I hardly believe that building a new fleet would be the plan.

53 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Of what use is a weapon, if a commander refuses to use it?

The NSA chief can't explain why Trump hasn't authorized the NSA to fight Russian cyber hacking.

 

Perhaps he thinks it's too big a task for an Obama retiree who did nothing during 2015 when it supposedly started?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/senate-confirms-paul-nakasone-to-lead-the-nsa-us-cyber-command/2018/04/24/52c95ca4-47e8-11e8-9072-f6d4bc32f223_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.cbb3a5c4d360

"He also said that a “series of offensive plans” have been developed to thwart Russian cyber aggression, but declined to detail them in public."

OP, my dad is 82 and thinking of moving here for retirement. He found this place  careresortchiangmai.com  and care over a month ago to check it out. He stayed for about 4 weeks and gave it some good reviews. (if you knew him you'd know those don't come lightly)

Anyway, might be an option to consider.

On 5/5/2018 at 10:47 PM, billd766 said:

The problem is in 2 parts.

 

1   To recomission warships will be expensive and fairly lengthy depending on how many ships of different classes will need to be recommisioned. A single aircraft carrier will need cruisers, destroyers, submarines, aircraft, helicopters, man/womenpower etc, as well as support ships for fuel, food, ammunition etc. The fleet will be regular navy and reserves and the support ships will be merchant seamen.

 

2   IIRC a single carrier has a crew of about 5,000 men and women and to commission the Second Fleet may take up to 25,000 men and women on board let alone the land based back up. Where will they get the staff from?

 

Where will they find the aircraft, missles, ammunition, training, crews etc let alone the money to rebuild and re-equip a fleet from?

Let's put your mind at ease and eliminate your single, 2-fold problem. There is no recommissioning, refurbishing, refitting, etc.

"Washington disbanded the 2nd fleet, which at the time numbered over 100 ships, in 2011. Many of its assets and personnel were assigned to other sections of the US Navy."

http://www.dw.com/en/us-re-establishes-2nd-fleet-to-counter-competition/a-43662253

As mentioned above, the most difficult part will be putting the leadership structure back in place. Then it's simple reassignment of home port.

3 minutes ago, mikebike said:

We have been discussing "defamation" as introduced in your post which I replied to.

"Defamation law in the United States is much less plaintiff-friendly than its counterparts in European and the Commonwealth countries, due to the enforcement of the First Amendment. ... Washington State has held its criminal libel statute unconstitutional applying the state and federal constitutions to the question."

"Truth is an absolute defense against defamation in the United States, meaning true statements cannot be defamatory."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law

Guess it'll be up to the courts but don't hold your breath. In her claim she says that the "event" occurred shortly after she agreed to do the InTouch interview in May, 2011 yet makes NO MENTION of any such "event" during the interview that took place just 1 month later in June, 2011.