Jump to content

Caps

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    1,302
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Caps

  1. 1 hour ago, tezzainthailand said:

    If you want a good outcome you play the percentages.  As evil as he was, their was relative stability under Saddam.  There are plenty of evil dictators in the world, why did America pick that one?  You don't believe America and its sycophantic allies invaded Iraq because they had the best interests of the Iraqi people in mind do you?  If America had the interests of the Iraqis in mind they had could have tried other methods but instead invaded and ripped apart the country.  Some people like Dick Cheney did nicely out of  raping that country though.  

    No I don't and it was the Kurds who they were possibly thinking about and not the iraqis.  Yes they invaded the country, just as Saddam invaded Kuwait.  

    What has been raped as you put it.

  2. 1 hour ago, Xaos said:

    And EU thretening Poland with 200k eur per every refugee they refuse and sanctions. There was never terrorist attack in PL and its pretty safe to walk streets. Brusells can't stand we racist dont take them. Its everyday headlines in PL news.

    Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
     

    I am pleased Poland are saying no to the EU and i hope they continue to do so and not have the problems other countries are having

    Maybe they can join the UK and we can have our own EU....EXIT UNION

  3. 52 minutes ago, tezzainthailand said:

    Invading a country (Iraq), unsettling it's population, plundering its resources, creating political instability, creating a flow of refugees, sowing the seeds of terrorism (Abu Grahib, etc.) .  You call that kindness?  Weakness, definitely.

     

    So invading a country to stop a man from sytematically trying to wipe out a race of people should not have happened?  Yes i know about the WMD lies too but that was just one of the things.  What would you have suggested we do as so called civilised countries?  Throw a street party!  Go give them all a hug!  Buy them all a council house!   What have we plunderd?  If you are going to say oil, then that is not the case, the iraqis get paid handsomely for the oil and rip off all the people coming in to get it out of the ground for them becasue they are too thick, lazy and corrupt to do it themselves. If they spent the money for the oil wisely they could be a good country, but they would rather wittle it away and loose it in the corruption 

  4. 41 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

    Actually you can make a whole host of fairly legitimate arguments as to why burqas in public places are undesirable.

     

    Hanson didn't make any of those arguments. She in fact undermined them by pulling this stunt. She is a bigot and islamophobe and this was a stunt to garner support from other Australian bigots, plain and simple. It worked because bigots are also idiots, and she knows how to play to them.

     

    Now, anyone trying to make a legitimate argument against burqas in public are going to look like a bigot, so thanks, Hanson, you self-serving racist twerp.

     

    does the definition of a bigot not make most of the people on the planet an idiot then?  I would suppose that a non racist would be bigoted to a racist person and vise versa.  Or is that word just reserved for racist people?

  5. 8 minutes ago, andersonat said:

     

     

    "If a person who wears a balaclava or a helmet in to a bank or any other building, or even on the floor of the court, they must be removed. Why is it not the same case for someone who is covering up their face and cannot be identified ?"

     

    I invite someone to explain to me the difference between a [face-covering] balaclava, a [face-covering] helmet, and a Niqab/Burka, from a security-standpoint.

    Yes, I can agree from the security point of view.  But all the islam huggers don't see it like that.  They would rather call everyone racists.  Far easier to do that than look at it constructively.  I do think she was a bit stupid doing what she did, but on the security side she has a valid point.  If they don't like going out with out wearing one then they have a choice, stay in or move to a country of their brethren.  

    Security is paramount in today's world and should come before hurting a few feelings 

     

  6. 2 hours ago, Somtamnication said:

    With America preoccupied with a North Korean battle, this will happen:

    China will enter Taiwan and completely take over Hong Kong

    Russia will enter the Balkans again and take over the 3 countries there

    India and Pakistan will press buttons

    Nato countries will be left to defend Europe.

    Turkey will join the Russian faction

    The internet will be shut down completely to avoid information and leads

    ZERO tourists will come to Thailand

    The world economy will collapse

     

    Seriously folks, it looks pretty dire to me.

    But on the bright side at least the remoaners will be happy because Brexit wont happen as there wont be many people left to do it :whistling:

  7. On 02/08/2017 at 6:31 AM, Namplik said:

    Took the car to the new location yesterday which is at The Davies Hotel, they have a large capacity it seems. 2000 THB per month in their secure parking building. 

    Where is the Davies Hotel please?  Soi 24?  Thanks 

     

    I got Ohmmy to check out the other sugestions given.  The outdoor one on Soi 22 charges 150 THB per day but you can do a full month for 1600 THB.  The guys lives on site with his family and has security on a night.  But its outsdie so I will need to get a cover, Ohmmy is pricing one up.  

    The Windsor Hotel wanted 6000 THB per month and I think 400 THB per day

  8. Been with my Partner 2.5 years, while I was out of work she had a job and contributed all the time as all we had was my military pension.  She has never wasted money and is always the one that says "its too expensive".  I am back working now on a good wage and she still wont spend it unless she really needs to.  She is trustworthy and is great company whether sitting at home or out and about.  Very Happy 

  9. 4 minutes ago, Kieranmc said:

    From Sgt. Robert Brown US      

     

    Nobody has a "right" to serve in the Military. Nobody.

     

    What makes people think the Military is an equal opportunity employer? Very far from it.

     

    The Military uses prejudice regularly and consistently to deny citizens from joining for being too old or too young, too fat or too skinny, too tall or too short.

     

    Citizens are denied for having flat feet, or for missing or additional fingers. Poor eyesight will disqualify you, as well as bad teeth. Malnourished? Drug addiction? Bad back? Criminal history? Low IQ? Anxiety? Phobias? Hearing damage? Six arms? Hear voices in your head? Self-identify as a Unicorn? Need a special access ramp for your wheelchair? Can't run the required course in the required time? Can't do the required number of pushups?

     

    Not really a "morning person" and refuse to get out of bed before noon?

     

    All can be reasons for denial.

     

    The Military has one job. War. Anything else is a distraction and a liability.

     

    Did someone just scream "That isn't Fair"? War is VERY unfair, there are no exceptions made for being special or challenged or socially wonderful.

     

    YOU change yourself to meet Military standards. Not the other way around.

     

    I say again: You don't change the Military... you must change yourself.

     

    The Military doesn't need to accommodate anyone with special issues. The Military needs to Win Wars.

     

    If any of your personal issues are a liability that detracts from readiness or lethality... Thank you for applying and good luck in future endeavors. Who's next in line?

    One job..Just War?

    What about Peacekeeping. MACC, MACA, MACP to name but a few more.  Maybe different meaning in the states?

    Splitting hairs maybe, but there is more to the Military than just War and fighting 

×
×
  • Create New...