Caps

Just now, AlexRich said:

I think the EU bloc will eventually have to allow Italy to inject funds into its banks and either cut Greece loose or cut their debt levels, as they can never recover with the debt burden they have. As we are not in the EU currency bloc we are not on the hook, but may be asked to help out via the IMF, along with the other members. As for an EU military, the treacherous Donald Trump is in cahoots with Putin to weaken NATO, and as a consequence we might well see the EU strengthen and coordinate it's military.

Ah right, I thought some of our EU contributions were being used for the Bailing out....i stand corrected

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

I think Caps has just been buried in a sand storm! Quick, anyone got a long distance straw?

That would be nice :)

Just now, AlexRich said:

I'm not for most of that either ... but we don't have an EU military, we don't bail out others, we decide our own taxes ... the only thing we agree to is free movement, and that works both ways. Like you, I think immigration has been beneficial to a country where the population is both ageing and living longer ... the fresh blood from the EU generates tax revenues to fund our future needs. 

 

I think people voted against things they feared ... like Turkey immigration ... that aren't real.

Yes I agree that we don't have those things yet.  But I do believe they are coming, watch this space once we have gone, The UK has already said it will veto the Military because we have NATO and I think that was last year or the year before.   I don't really like Free movement and prefer the border checks for security although Visa Free Travel with checks i think is a better option.  I thought we were bailing out Greece?   Possibly Italy...I could be wrong

1 minute ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

I hope all these Brexiteers concerned about a 'free and bold future' for their native land will be returning home to help with the great experiment and great leap forward rather than just tapping away in their air-conditioned condos sipping their Changs. I won't be holding my breath anytime soon.

Ummmm an air-conditioned condo and a Chang would be great right now, far better than 46 degrees c and a sand storm  

1 hour ago, owl sees all said:

Yes jobwolf! On second/third reading you have a point; if I am reading it correctly.

 

I think you are referring to the UK's fee to the EU when we leave!? Of course the UK has signed up for things and has undertaken certain programmes and will have to pay something. No matter what the bill. GET OUT at any cost is better than staying in that sinking ship.

 

 

That fee is nowhere near the idiotic sum they are asking for, as for paying the subs for the 2 years of membership remaining then yes we should pay and get the huck out of dodge 

13 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

I loathe the expression "will of the people" ... it refers to about 30% of the population, and quite frankly is a nonsense description of a vote where 48% opposed the decision and those that voted for it were predominantly anti-immigration protesters. I'd liken the vote to the X Factor or Britain's Got Talent ... two years later no one can remember who the winner was or why anyone voted for them. 

Well maybe the other 70% should of got of their fat @rse and voted.  I am not against immigration, but I am against being told how many I have to have, I am against having an EU military, I am against having EU Tax, I am against bailing out other countries because of one failing or another, I am against the so called democratically elected drunken halfwits telling us what to do,  I am against being told to pay millions of GBP in to this and that etc etc

I actually think immigration is good for the country.

2 hours ago, smedly said:

so you keep saying and repeating and repeating and repeating.............we got it

 

However, the reality is that the US is contributing huge resource and finance to EU security - why should they, nothing to do with NATO or anything else for that matter - simply - why should they ???? why should the America tax payer fund anything in Europe to protect Europe interests while Germany sits pretty observing and reaping.

 

Mirror mirror on the wall who is the richest of them all - now there's a chart worth looking at over the last 40 years 

You could also say that the US is contributing huge resources and finance for their own security.  It just happens to be on EU soil?    So that is why the yank tax payer is funding it.  If it was not the case they would/could scale down their troops/bases in Europe....can't see it happening though!

I watched 'Rita, Sue and Bob too' the other night, still makes me laugh

4 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

This thread is depressing....

 

Corbyn thinks any deal is better than no deal .

 

Unable to answer the question about a 'bad deal' - all he could say way 'There will be a deal'......

'There will be a deal', yep one where Corbyn gets us bent over  barrel and spanked (had to be polite)

4 minutes ago, sanukjim said:

The US is the largest contributor.

Not to the German Defence spending, maybe to NATO Defence spending, but that is there fault, they don't need to spend the 2% agreement till 2024

19 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

Where are you going to put all the troops that you pull out? There are probably (including families) 170-200K in Europe. In Italy and Germany alone the US has around 230-240 bases and military installations. Not all are active but all are there to be used as forward deployment areas when it suits US needs, and believe me it does NOT suit US interests to have Europe invaded by Russia, that would be the beginning of the end of the US (if Trump has not already started that beginning of the end). The real estate that the US holds on to is worth billions of dollars, so by all means clear off out.  Further across Europe and moving into Korea and Japan which also seems to gripe Trump supporters as they cannot comprehend why the US projects power in these areas, we are probably pushing 500-600 000 people including families. Where exactly are these people going to be housed and schooled if you dump them all back in the USA? Do you think there are houses and barracks for all these folks just sitting there? Don't forget to take ALL your hardware with you.

 

It would be IMPOSSIBLE for the US to operate in the Middle East as it does without forward deployment bases such as Ramstein in Germany and even Fairford in the UK. If the US gave it all up it would become impotent. Anytime it needed to deploy it would somehow have to get all the hardware out from the USA that it currently conveniently stores around the world. Everything from vehicles, hummers, kitchens, field surgeries, fast jets helicopters, would have to be deployed from the US EVERY TIME and don't forget all those personnel. How long would it take just to move 100K combat troops back to Europe for forward staging to the Middle East WITH Equipment. And lets not forget you would not actually be able to stage them through Europe (you pulled out on Europe), or refuel aircraft or transport weapons through. So tell me HOW you would get all the troops and hardware anywhere if you had to route from the USA.

 

All of you calling for the measures in the post by smedly and for other countries to 'pay their way' are as ignorant as Trump when it comes to Military strategy and economies. The US is currently getting a bargain of a deal for the use of the other countries it holds bases in and if I were a head of state in NATO right now after Trumps insults last week,  I would now be discussing with my counterparts about INCREASING the rental to US Military and lets see how smart the chump Trump would seem then. The USA military CANNOT operate without it's forward deployed bases in Europe, Asia and the Far East. Now just give it up with the school boy arguments and talking utter drivel. Just stop and THINK about it.

I like that, but you forgot to add that the US presence in these places is so that the next war (should it happen) will be fought on another countries land and not theirs.  Another reason why they wont pull out

1 hour ago, soalbundy said:

EU commissioners are proposed by national governments. New legislation has to be agreed upon by member states and passed by the European parliament which is directly elected by EU voters.

I think you might find that the UK vetoed Drunker but it happened anyway, so much for all nations having to agree on things

1 hour ago, dunroaming said:

May may want a strong partnership with the EU but it is not up to her.  She has placed herself in a weak position by her irrational rhetoric and stupid threats to walk away without any deal at all.

Is that like the same threats from the EU about wanting between 60 and 100 billion before they will start to talk to us.  Better to walk away than get sent home with a 'just pumped the neighbours cat look on your face', and 60 billion lighter

2 hours ago, Usernames said:

28 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall and 72 years after VE Day and the Germans finally may be forced to pay for their own defense. No wonder Beer Belly Merkel was soused up at that Beer Garden and raging against the US, the UK and Trump.

Who's been paying their defence then?  I am sure they are already paying for their own defence and contributing to NATO

4 hours ago, phantomfiddler said:

No-one likes to be told that they have a large bill that has not been paid. Why should America have to foot the bills of other nations ?

whats this so called big bill that needs playing?

Please don't bore us all by saying NATO, do some research and I think you will find the 2% is not due to come in untill 2024, then you can moan about it 

I can't understand what all the fuss is about the US can moan all they want, they won't pull out of Europe because as Trump says 'America First', it always has been.  Europe (as is Japan and S Korea on the other side) is the early warning platform for the US and if they removed all their assets from Europe they wouldn't have that.  Maybe Europe should tell Trump he has six months to pull all his troops and equipment out and see where that goes.  

So for once I can agree with some of the Yanks on here and let Europe sort its self out and go home. 

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

B.S. He flew in from Belgium, dude. Has been abroad over a week. 

Remember how he viciously attacked Hillary for her lack of stamina?

Karma bites. 

BTW, he is not in good shape. 

The man is clearly quite obese. 

He doesn't exercise at all and he eats poorly. 

No, being super fit isn't necessarily needed to be president. But he's clearly the opposite in an extreme way, plus it's clear that his brain is badly deteriorating based on the history of his speech patterns. He used to be articulate but now he speaks in word salad (if not a written speech by others). 

Not fit to be president in so MANY ways.

Truly embarrassing for Americans and dangerous for the planet. 

 

Wow...that could be shortened to Overweight Muppet 

3 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

From what I have read you are very clever with the wording you use and never ever condemn the causes of terror, which are the violent passages in the Quran and the terrorist actions of the prophet which encourage terror attacks today. He is quoted in the haddith as saying he was victorious by terror, Muslims need to denounce the bad in their scriptures and the conduct of the terrorist prophet, but like you never will.

read this

https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx

Just now, vogie said:

We can sleep peacefully tonight knowing these brave keyboard warriors are not fit to tie our DMS boots.

He can do my putties though....hated doing those 

I have used the old Japanese Train for the overnight to CM from BKK, I used the 1st class single occupant, I can not remember the price.  It was adequate.

They have got some new trains now from China, they don't look too bad,  might be giving them a go next month

<removed link to Bangkok Post>

Nice report, Thank you 

1 minute ago, darksidedog said:

When I was a kid the only bombings we had came from the IRA. If you look at history over the last 40 years, you will see that Muslims only started to become aggressive following the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. Since that time, there have been numerous foreign incursions into Muslim territory, millions killed and as Kraitaboy rightly pointed out, we are reaping what we sowed.

Now IF, you want to do some research, do so on Religious intolerance. Christianity has a far worse record. And by the tone of your post, you have been believing way too much crap you read in the papers. In fact it is ignorance that is widely responsible for the Islamic religion being labeled a religion of hate, when in truth it is not.

Before you throw a wobbler, let me say I am Christian, I have worked all over the world, have friends of numerous religions and I know how to do my research.

I am so pleased that you know how to do research.  I didn't ask about the IRA, I also didn't ask about religious intolerance.

The post had no tone it was just a question.  As for crap in the papers, I have been working in Iraq for 4 years out of the last 6, sat here whilst typing this, so I know a little bit of what they are like and how they think.  But I don't profess to be an expert 

I asked, did they reap what they sow or is it just the way they are.

Contrary to popular believe you are not the only one who has worked all over the world or who has friends of different religions.  

1 hour ago, Krataiboy said:

We are reaping what we have sown. It is no good us crying foul when we get a dose of our own medicine from Islamic fundamentalists from countries like Libya, Iraq and Syria where we have killed countless civilian men, women and children in support of US hegemony.

 

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. If we don't wake up to this fact and stop supporting the murderous White House strategy of  toppling the leaderships of seven Middle Eastern and countries in five years, we can expect more of the kind of carnage that has put Manchester and the rest of the country in mourning.

 

My heart bleeds for the victims of the bombing. Should it not also bleed for the countless thousands of innocent children and adults already killed, with more dying every day, in conflicts fomented deliberately in pursuit of the grotesque American dream of total world domination?

 

The US is already the world's wealthiest nation and the greatest military superpower in human history, with more than 700 military bases worldwide and a nuclear arsenal capable of destroying not only any nation which stands in its way but the entire planet - several times over.

 

When will enough be enough - and when will Britain, which has shown the courage to reject further political and economic subjugation to the EU, have the guts to do the same when it comes to supporting US wars and proxy wars?

 

The question is far from academic. Even as refugees from the Syrian war continue to flood into Europe, Donald Trump is ramping up a hate campaign against Iran -  next on the US list for regime change. His threats are underscored by a massive new arms deal with the medievalist Saudi regime - who hate the Ayatollahs even more than the averaged brainwashed American does.

 

This time around, Britain must say no to support a war which can only cause more deaths among innocent civilians - and more Manchesters.

 

 

So can I now have your infinite wisdom on why the 'Religion of Peace' are killing Christians in Egypt or in the Philippines, or in some of the African Countries.  Probably more if I bother to do research.  

Or are they too just reaping what they sow?  

Or is it just because Islam/Muslims or whatever you decide to call it are just plain horrible and don't value anything or anyone except their culture/religion?

3 minutes ago, vogie said:

I wouldn't get too complacent just yet, he has launched an appeal with the ICHR to return to Britain, and serve his prison sentence there because his conditions in an American jail are too harsh.

It cost the UK 38 million pounds to extradite whilst he received 3 million in benefits.

  why doesn't that surprise me 

1 minute ago, dick dasterdly said:

I gather he was eventually, but you have proof otherwise?

I thought he was extradited, but I could be wrong, but either way it took long enough to get rid of the Vermin