PepperMe

Hark back to 2003 and ask yourselves how long it took for the US military to destroy the 4th largest army in the world (at that time). The US entered Iraq on 20 March 2003 and entered Baghdad on 10 April 2003.

Actually, I believe it was the 4th largest standing army in the world before the first Gulf War in 1991. What was it...40 days of bombing and a 100-hour ground war? All that to defeat a massive army with pretty much the same weapons as Russia is pouring into Ukraine now?

The Russian military today is the same as the Iraqi one 24 years ago with a few differences - nuclear missiles, nuclear subs, a few hundred top notch special forces soldiers and the best disinformation/propaganda unit the world has ever seen.

People like you are a danger to the American people.

I will enjoy watching you eat those words when the US can not raise a coalition and Russia will have China, India, Most of the Middle East, N Korea and South America.

Then the US will back away........ they would be annihilated.

US dominance is at an end mate.

The USA will not go to war with Russia..... It is as simple as that.

Russia would obliterate Ukraine.

Russia is not Iraq.... Iraq did not have air superiority, they did not send a single plane up..... The Iraq army did not engage.... The US may have strolled into Baghdad unchallenged, but that was when their problems started, tell me..... How long did they have to stay and fight before they could leave?....

Russia will have control of their airspace and they will challenge any invasion. They will also resort to guerrilla warfare if they need to.

The US do not have a chance in Russia, it will not have enough allies and Russia will have plenty.

For the record..... Iraq was not invaded by the US it was invaded by one of the worlds largest ever coalition forces that was just led by the US. But it is not unusual for US citizens to crow on about just being the Americans who did it all.

Let them suspend their services, and let them go bankrupt.

No need to rise to these threats.

Right - reds under the bed, eh wot ? Things have progressed a little since the 50s, Chairman Wow.

Still, it WOULD give neversure and his gun-totin' buddies some justification for the hundred or so assault rifles and 10,000 rounds of ammunition they each have in their basements should the British decide to re-invade the US of A.

Well now, that's a bit of an exaggeration but, as I've said many times, I know of no time in history when a guerilla army was defeated on its own soil. It can blend into the population, it isn't in uniform, it will be fed... IMHO this is what happened to the US in Vietnam, etc. It's far different from fighting a WWII in Europe or Asia with identifiable combatants and equipment.

NOW fast forward to the idea of having a war on US soil where 100 million Americans have 300 million guns and gobs of ammunition. It would be a slaughter. Seriously a slaughter by the American people.

Lol.... They are hardly going to invade in fleets of rubber dinghies with machine guns..... They are going to launch missiles from subs.

Just like the one the Chinese launched off the coast of LA a few years back.

Meanwhile the US citizens will be out in the streets protesting the government.

Now you may say that "it will be different if the US itself were attacked, the people will rise up and defend its soil".... But when 9/11 happened, yes the people got together, they got together to hand out sandwiches and bottles of water to fire crews and rescue contractors and shout down the Muslims, but did they all join the army en masse?.... No.... The army had to go out in "press gangs" and talk young black kids to join up, offering them a career and loads a money.

Regarding US technology, it was all available in Afghanistan and Iraq, and they made those wars look very difficult where it was supposed to make it look easy. There were lots of casualties on the side of the allies and that was a huge coalition of many many countries against the likes of Iraq whose military had zero air capability and whose army did not challenge the invasion.

How well do you think the US is going to do against a country like Russia who will have serious control of the airspace and a massive army that WILL challenge an aggressive force..... I have a feeling the US will be defeated heavily.

It is not a good idea to pursue this.

TAT are using business trips, visa border runs for expats and everything they can to pump up the numbers artificially.

The truth is..... They are failing, tourism is seriously down, evidence of that is everywhere, and TAT are just trying to cling to their gravy train by presenting false figures.

I hope it keeps declining so that TAT can no longer sustain the bullsh*t.

Do the decent thing...... Just close it down.

It is pathetic the way they declare one day that tourism is deffo going to rise this year, and the next they get their excuse ready and tomorrow it will be on the rise again and the next day another excuse for a decline, mand so it will go on for the entire year........ PATHETIC and a complete joke of a set up.

the U.S. has to be aggressive in pursuing terrorists.

If they weren't so aggressive in creating them they would not need to be pursuing them.

Then again wheres the money in that?

Yes, they were just pacifists. Happy with their medieval life.

They just wanted to 'live and let live' with the rest of the world, in religious harmony.

And then the US came along and said give us your oil or else!

I think you are confused.

Even if the US motive is oil. The ISIS motive is the islamification of the world.

A cute move really. Especially if this government is replaced by a republican government. Nice to have all the names and addresses of the illegal immigrants in one database.

France is paying lip service to fool the people into thinking it is sympathetic to the eurosceptic cause and to curtail the huge rise in Marine Le Pens FNP.

Red Shirt heartlands?

Don't make me laugh.

The red shirts around here are about as popular as a fart in a space suit.

More likely that NHCR has been put under the control of the Ombudsman to usurp its power.

This is NOT a merger, this is a move to control and inhibit.

Is it just me, or does this seem like a botched / amateurish effort ? Put me in a speeding cab with a bucket of thumb tacks and I could injure several people in that part of BKK - even after the shops had closed. Either mistimed or someone looking for attention - it will be interesting to see where this goes.

I doubt these were intended to kill or injure, they were meant to disrupt and send a message. Hence destroying an electricity transformer, and not put somewhere where there are a lot of people.

I would also say by Thai standards these were not amateur devices if they contained timers (watches).

Way off topic here, but could you please explain how, when or where the British invented the computer, or internet. The Greeks and the guys at CERN would like to know as well as I.

The originator of the programmable computer concept was Charles Babbage.

Charles Babbage, FRS (/ˈbæbɪdʒ/; 26 December 1791 – 18 October 1871) was an English polymath.^[1] A mathematician, philosopher, inventor and mechanical engineer, Babbage is best remembered for originating the concept of a programmable computer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Babbage

Later in WW11 Alan Turing refined it and eventually cracked the Enigma code that is credited to have won the war.... Not the Americans. Without Turing the Nazis would have pummeled the Yanks trying to cross the Atlantic.

Alan Mathison Turing, OBE, FRS (/ˈtjʊərɪŋ/ TEWR-ing; 23 June 1912 – 7 June 1954) was a British pioneering computer scientist, mathematician, logician, cryptanalyst, philosopher, mathematical biologist, and marathon and ultra distance runner. He was highly influential in the development of computer science, providing a formalisation of the concepts of "algorithm" and "computation" with the Turing machine, which can be considered a model of a general purpose computer.^[3][4][5] Turing is widely considered to be the father of theoretical computer science and artificial intelligence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing

Finally you have Tim Berners Lee..... the inventor of "HTTP" and the "world wide web" and pioneered the first "server to client over internet" transfer which is the fundamental basics of the entire internet still used today.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee

Or am I going to be challenged with Bill Gates and Steve Jobs......... lol.

For the record, the highest decorated soldier during the Vietnam war was also a British Soldier...... For those who didn't know

Not sure I would even agree with the OP's premise. The US and China have had disagreements, but China needs the US. Their export driven economy needs the US as consumers. The Chinese hold trillions in US dollar reserves. They've invested billions in US real estate. There are more Chinese studying in US universities than any other foreign nationality. The Chinese may back Russia in certain isolated instances. But in terms of who China needs more, US or Russia, it's the US by a wide margin.

I do not agree.

You are probably the ONLY person I have ever come across whether in real life or on the internet that holds that thought. Just about every expert in the world will disagree with you also.

This is not about what China gets from the US currently. It is what they can get from the US once it surrenders.

The US is only 4.5% of the global population..... This is not essential for the Chinese economy to survive. Plus they will still be there consuming long after the war is ended, and China may actually end up being their leader along with Russia anyway.

The Chinese have already wrote off those USD, they are scrambling to convert to gold and hard assets. They will have a hand in crashing the dollar... Everyone knows the US is going to default on their almost 20 trillon debt... It is not a matter of if, but when.

You need to change your thinking of the US being vital to the survival of the entire world, they are ion fact the biggest threat, not only to peace, but also to the global economy.

Chine knows that if Russia gets defeated...... The US will be coming for China. End of story.

You are sitting right now using technology invented in the US. US companies are making a fortune from the internet.

China's economy is falling while the US is having boom times. The US has the technology and I won't list the international businesses to drive a REAL economy. The US doesn't have 1.4 Billion mouths to feed as a communist nation.

The US invents technology and China picks up the scraps by providing cheap labor to manufacture it. Then the US consumer goes to Walmart and buys a $395 laptop which includes a valid copy of Windows and laughs all the way to the bank. The real money was made by the US companies while the Chinese slaved for peanuts.

The US has natural resources that China could only dream of. Those natural resources are wealth. The US has 88,000 miles (144,000 kms) of saltwater shoreline just to give you an idea of what it owns.

You don't like the US. You'd like China even less if that crocodile ever was turned loose without the US to block it.

Computers and the internet were invented by the BRITISH.

I have not bothered to read past your first line.... It became more than clear to me 24 hours ago that you are nothing more than a US cheerleader, deluded by this strange USA supremacy myth.

If it was not for the British, you would not be able to sit there on your PC with your head in the sand trying to bulls**t everyone about how everything good in the world come from the good ole US of A.

I am far from being anti-US, but people like you do not help the common perception that there are some that are an embarrassment to modesty.

Not sure I would even agree with the OP's premise. The US and China have had disagreements, but China needs the US. Their export driven economy needs the US as consumers. The Chinese hold trillions in US dollar reserves. They've invested billions in US real estate. There are more Chinese studying in US universities than any other foreign nationality. The Chinese may back Russia in certain isolated instances. But in terms of who China needs more, US or Russia, it's the US by a wide margin.

I do not agree.

You are probably the ONLY person I have ever come across whether in real life or on the internet that holds that thought. Just about every expert in the world will disagree with you also.

This is not about what China gets from the US currently. It is what they can get from the US once it surrenders.

The US is only 4.5% of the global population..... This is not essential for the Chinese economy to survive. Plus they will still be there consuming long after the war is ended, and China may actually end up being their leader along with Russia anyway.

The Chinese have already wrote off those USD, they are scrambling to convert to gold and hard assets. They will have a hand in crashing the dollar... Everyone knows the US is going to default on their almost 20 trillon debt... It is not a matter of if, but when.

You need to change your thinking of the US being vital to the survival of the entire world, they are ion fact the biggest threat, not only to peace, but also to the global economy.

Chine knows that if Russia gets defeated...... The US will be coming for China. End of story.

That's what Japan thought in WWII.

Every carrier is accompanied by a carrier group of ships. There are destroyers which mean submarine destroyers. They can detect and destroy a submarine before it gets into effective range.

The US can hit and destroy a torpedo too.

China doesn't have stealth. The US can shoot down an ICBM.

These are the things that China doesn't have when I say its technology is antiquated. Neither it or Russia is ready to take on the West and they know it.

Hahaha

I wondered how long it would be before we got the old WW11 rubbish.... First off, this is NOT 1940. All of Russias allies will have much more advanced technology just as much as the US have, also the Japs only lost because the US nuked the,m.... IO doubt they would dare think about using nukes in the next conflict because it will be the end of the USA and probably all of us.

If that is all you can come up with, then you are very ignorant of current military .... Look how long it took them to sort out Afgahistan and Iraq and they did nothing in Vietnam....... You are kidding yourself, even US military experts would agree with me...... and they do.

Russia, China, India and the middle east can collapse the US economy in days, and they will as part of the war effort, and the US will collapse on top of this war...... The USA have no chance and I pray to god that the UK and the EU come to their senses soon. France and half of the EU countries will back down against Russia mate.

As for technology...... Typical American attitude, think everyone are backwards compared to them.... Russia has some of the finest military technology in the world, so does China.... and you lot don't have a clue exactly what China or Russia has.

One of the most advanced countries in the world for military hardware is Israel, and it sells its advances to everyone with the cash and China has plenty of that.... then they copy it and mass produce it..... You have no idea what they have, only China knows that. So carry on and underestimate it.... Prepare to be shocked.

Your technological advances did not help you in Vietnam where you got your <deleted> handed to you and fled with your tails between your legs.....

You are right in most..but unfortunately...wrong in a big one. The next WW will be nuclear with big destruction in both sides and "collateral damages" around the world.

The next world war will be done on a basis where everyone involved will sign an ANP (anti nuclear pact).

The only nation that will refuse to sign is N Korea. If they ended up pushed right up against the wall, rather than face defeat, they will send off their nukes, probably to Seoul. Whether the US will respond is another matter, but it would be foolhardy if they did and I think they know that. So I would be amazed if they had the balls to try it.

I think it is almost certain that discounting the above scenario.... This will be a conventional war fought on land, air and sea.

30,000 baht in the house..... sigh... If you are going to keep money in the house, hide it.

Tuck it in places where a robber will not look, like among dirty laundry, cut the back out of a shower Gel bottle and hide it in there in the bathroom. Literally thousands of places a robber will not look. I have put money inside a toilet roll..... seriously