minimoi

1 hour ago, fvw53 said:

Is this "Satan" rocket then also imaginary ?

Russia's New ICBM Nuke Capable of Leveling France or Texas in One Hit

http://futurism.com/meet-satan-2-russias-new-icbm-nuke-capable-of-leveling-france-or-texas-in-one-hit/

What is your point?

If we check how many nuclear weapons each side has US+Europe is clearly at the top.

This weapon is not new, it was just improved and the "one Satan-2 could level france" is pure clickbait.

17 minutes ago, tominbkk said:

Was The King cremated or is he in a casket?

For now His body rest in a casket. His body will be cremated but I m not sure when.

1 hour ago, Pimay1 said:

More profits of doom just like the climate change nutters.

Yeah it is well known the humans have clearly no impact on the environment and it was never the case :

The Dodo were probably depressives and killed themselves. The invasive species are tales for children, the disparition of the bees is a figment of our imagination, the poaching of protected species is just helping to regulate the animal population, the oil spillings at sea or ashores is nothing more than modern art...The dolphin dyings because they mistake plastic bags for jellyfish? they should be less stupid.... Clearly we have no impact on our environment....

Just now, Publicus said:

 

Good to see you've finally read the Nato Charter of 1949.

 

2009 was their 50th anniversary y'know. (Erdogan was there, however, Putin was not invited.)

 

Again, Putin is an Old Testament guy as Erdogan is in his own point of reference. However, rather than the two engaging in any more gouging or pulling, the two did confession together and all's well.

 

Putin and a Potus Hillary Clinton if she wins are not going to shoot at one another. The no-fly zone is to protect civilians against air assault: The only applicable parties in the conflict with airpower are Russia and what remains of the Syrian government.

 

HRC is advocating USA do what it typically does as a matter of policy and practice, whenever it can do so, which is to shelter and protect massed civilian refugees in a war or a conflict by intervening in a realistic and timely humanitarian way. If Putin or Assad think that's bad, then let 'em say so. They won't. (Retain this post thx.) 

As previously stated : "winter is coming" and Turkey is heavily dependant of Russian energy, and Russian are the main tourists in Turkey, he was the  one losing.

"Putin and a Potus Hillary Clinton if she wins are not going to shoot at one another. The no-fly zone is to protect civilians against air assault: The only applicable parties in the conflict with airpower are Russia and what remains of the Syrian government."

USA will never enforce a no fly zone, on this we agree...

2 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

Your sword is accepted as you drift away.

 

Erdogan kicked Putin in the balls. Anything less than Putin kicking back identically is a surrender by Putin. Vlad did not kick Erdogan in the nuts. Putin did not shoot down or blow up anything as is his normal response as an abnormal person and leader.

 

Putin withheld some carrots and tomatoes, threw in a bit of fuel, squeezed Erdogan to a certain extent, then Putin said okay, I got you where you want me, so let's make up.

 

Putin is an Old Testament guy of an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. So's Erdogan in his own respect. Yet all we got here was a confession by each and a new start to an old relationship. Putin getting down on his knees and doing only five Hail Marys is really weak. 

Dunno where you read the news, but in this feud Putin was not the one on its knees...

Also NATO would intervene in case of a member being attacked in its borders. If the member attack a country or is attacked outside its border, NATO members are not in position to help if they do not want it.

Posting it again as it seems it was removed for an unknown reason :

 "It has been found that plants grown at lower altitudes produce much lower levels of cocaine, so growing it outside of its native environment are likely to produce plants which are of little value other than as an ornamental plant."

Just now, shunter said:

You are it seems according to your claims a Thai national like me.

I am a Thai citizen as well as a U K citizen mixed race parentage.

Can we and should we not look at the actions of our  administrations here over the years with regard to the Royhingya and Bangladeshi's/

 

Perhaps you would be better off not espousing your  puerile xenophobic jingoistic racial views.You do our country Thailand no good at all rambling on about a matter which has nothing to do with you or even affect you.

Me xenophobic? what a joke! you should seriously re-read the posts.

I am the first one to claim Royhingya extradition to please China was stupid, the bombing at Erawan was certainly due to "avenge" the extraditions..even if El dear Commandante Prayut said it had nothing to do..

Thailand is a nationalist country, with many flaws as well...but this is Off Topic. the topic is children coming to UK and a bunch of expats who left UK, because they couldn t afford to live the way they want there or had some other views here, ranting about the "great risks" those migrants are for UK and assimilate them as leeches coming there to enjoy the "huge benefits" UK offer them while not working....

12 minutes ago, Caps said:

I am not going to deny it. But it's good to see you are missing/deliberately forgetting the point I also made about the EU law? So unless they are going to paddle along the Mediterranean Sea across the Bay of Bisque and up the English Channel then it's not a UK problem, it's the problem of the country where they landed and it should be dealt with accordingly so your ramblings don't really count for much in the scheme of things
I also didn't just turn up......I applied correctly as I always do, please don't just type rubbish if you are trying to have an adult debate


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Forgetting the EU law? Why that because of the "the migrants should stay in the country they first landed"? Well as far as I know UK is not willing to have anything to do with EU laws anymore right? so if there was an agreement between France and UK then it is an agreement between a member of the UE and UK...and even if UK is still under UE laws, that doesn t mean two countries can't haver bilateral agreements. And yes it is an UK problem as the people seem strangely willing to go there so except if you follow Trump nonsense and build a wall all around the island well you have  a problem as well. I am not sure I can take YOUR interpretation of the UE laws for the real way laws are applied there.

7 minutes ago, Caps said:

 

I fluctuate between the two, not that's it's any of your concern. I don't mind if it's done properly, just turning up on the doorstep uninvited and expecting is what I don't like and I didn't make the EU law but I suppose it's only used when it suits


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

"ust turning up on the doorstep uninvited"

were you invited to Thailande?

Admitting you re a bit racist is already a plus, not like some others here in the same situation but hiding behind a wall of nonsense....

They do not expect nothing except maybe having a life and a way to construct a decent living for them and their family after their countries were bombed, in war, civil war...

Not that they will have this life they re dreaming, but at least they have something they didn t had at home : hope.

A bit like how the USA was built, a bit like the jewish people fleeing Germany and Austria,....

Maybe you should ask your government in UK why they still bomb Syria, why they bombed Lybia, why they use civil wars in africa to put the people they want to rule those countries....

When UK was an empire, they went to many countries, only to steal the ressources...

That's why people are scared of migrants : they are scared the migrant would do the same thing the western countries did in their colonies.

10 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Are the communist and neo-communist parties allowed to parade in French streets?

I Highly doubt they can praise white supremacy or use racial profiling in their statements

Just now, Caps said:

Well I don't give a to55 if they think they are going to be the next Richard Branson I still don't want them. Besides I thought it was EU ruling that they sought whatever they are after in the first country they arrive at? Which quite clearly is not the UK, thankfully


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

you don t want them but you re not there neither and your previous post as well as this one show the "migration" is not the problem, it is racism the problem

3 minutes ago, i claudius said:

 

So at last you admit it ,you are the master of bullshit ,all hail the master

Well with a teacher like you it was a piece of cake...I m number one but History will keep you as the beacon of bullshitting here

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Quote edited for brevity.

 

Are you serious? Nobody on TV living in LOS is here illegally, and we all pay our own way. None of us arrived on a rubber boat and demanded to be fed, accommodated and educated at Thai expense.

 

None of them neither used thai names to create their company. Nobody here living while in overstay, none of them coming here because their life was so shitty in their own country thei decided to come here to enjoy a better retirement...no all the people here are perfectly legal, play by the rules and do not cheat the system....dream on dream on..

I was wondering if you  would have help the jewish fleeing Germany during WW2, or even fleeing during the war in Northern Africa (yes plenty of westerners went to North Africa to avoid the bombings....)

It is good to be old, but it plays a bit on the memory, right?

2 minutes ago, i claudius said:

 

Well if you think i write it , then you are so far superior to me in it , i bow to your far greater knowledge of it ,

At last..it was about time...

Don't bow too much..some nasty migrant could use this opportunity 

1 minute ago, i claudius said:

 

I do not wish to be rude , but did you take lessons in bullshit ,or does it come naturally?

I learnt it from you, so you re probably the best teacher ever

Just now, Morch said:

 

You have no idea how many are retired, how many are here for economic reasons, and what they could or could not afford in their own countries.

 

And there is no irony - if those migrants in the Calais camp would have come legally there would have been no issue.

Yes I have, I just have to look at the official stats available both on the internet and where I work.

And yes there is a lot of Irony, you just do not see it as you re a part of the studied group.

Because, not like the retired westerners, they fleed their country and are willing to work in the country they come, not just enjoying "benefits" as you say. And one more time : the balance between cost and incomes of the migrants play in their favor, and do cost money. (see the link I posted earlier)

If those migrant in Calais had the choice they would probably like it better to stay in their homecountry if they had any chance to have a job a way to improve their living and were not bombed on daily basis.

47 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Hints which you cannot substantiate. And you are obviously in possession of a crystal ball, knowing so much about other posters.

It doesn t need rocket science to see the irony of a bunch of retired westerners complaining about a migrant crisis in a country they left while enjoying a life in Thailand they couldn't afford in their own country. (my crystal ball is the history of the conversations and posts which is visible in the profile of the users)

5 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

The Thai government (or whatever government) does not have to invite anyone for his presence in the country to be legal. There are standing rules regulating immigration to most countries. For some reason, certain posters think these should be overlooked in this case.

 

I am quite sure you have no idea, and no reference with regard to what most Thais think. If this was Trollland, perhaps....

Working at the BOI give me some hints, which is obviously not your case

1 minute ago, vogie said:

 

I am not a migrant, I am a legal immigrant, I asked the Thai Embassy in my respective country if it was ok to come and live in their country, and guess what, they said yes, as long as you bring plenty of dosh with you.

 

Did the Thai government asked you to come here for a specific purpose?

If the answer is no, you re a migrant, legal or not. Nobody was waiting for you to save them, and I am quite sure lot of thais would disagree to have you in their country.

2 minutes ago, YeahSiam said:

 

Daily Mail, word for word.

The overwhelming majority of these people aren't planning to claim benefits. As someone else said, the welfare systems in countries like Germany are more generous.

They're coming to WORK because even with very low wages, the money they can send home makes a very real, very significant difference.

They're economic migrants and while I don't believe all of them should be let in, I do find it a bit predictable when people who are economic migrants in Thailand describe other economic migrants in such demeaning ways.

 

the old retired chaps here will never understand these facts. As long as the benefits are for them, they don't care!

11 minutes ago, vogie said:

God you're a right charmer, do you have any social skills? 

I paid money into my country before I left that seems to be benefiting others who haven't paid in a penny, in this country I am putting money in their coffers, not sponging off the Thai people. What have you done?

My social skills are probably better than yours if we just compare empathy.

I have obviously done more than you for thai people than you will ever do.

Cost of migrant is negligeable and can even end in a positive balance, especially after this glorious Brexit!

of course it holds :
when someone is leaving a country for another without being invited by this country they become migrant:

and most of the foreigners here are not coming because there was a war in their country but because they wanted to enjoy a better living than in their own country.

Personnal or not I think it is amusing to see people ranting  against migrants in a country they left. Espcially when the ones pointed at in UK are living in poverty and probably have lost people in wars provoked by Occident.

Look at the HUGE cost of migration in UK :
https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/386

10 minutes ago, vogie said:

Reason I came to Thailand is, I thought I would get a free house, free medical treatment and free handouts, oh I'm so disappointed.

Not the cheap labor cost, not the cheap price of daily life, not the girls, not the cheap red label at 7/11, not to enjoy a better retirement with  the pension? why the hell are you here then? 

I bet you were called by Prayut himself to come save this country....

Just now, i claudius said:

 

Well i "fled" here after having a buisness in Bangkok for 8 years (i ran the uk end) with my Thai wife and our son, i brought all my own money and i pay for everything here out of my own money or money my wife earns ,i also still pay some tax in the UK , so i paid for my better living all my life ,and i do not want to pay for someone elses , especially some guys who are pretending to be 14 when they are nearer 34 .

so if i have answered your question , you can go off and hug Lilly Allan , or that bloke who adertizes crisps if thats more up your street , i am not predugiced

Looking at your Post History, it seems you come here mostly to enjoy a better living, right?

"14 when they are nearer 34 ." this is plain Bullsh!t and you know it.

Somebody is actually paying for your retirement in UK while you re in Thailand, you know that right?

You know that with all your money you re a part of the "privileged" do you had a look at the countries they flee?

I m not fan of Lilly Allan, but you re still a migrant in Thailand and nobody asked you to come here in the first place....

By the way in the vast majority of countries : migrant brings more money than they cost...have a look at this bfore ranting about people coming to countries which are not their own : UK in thailand complaining for migrants in UK.

You cam here for the business opportunities right? certainly not for a house in Pattaya instead of London, not for girls 20 yrs old younger than you, not for the cheap life, not for the cheap labor cost....

Now you can go kiss  and hug Nigel farage

15 minutes ago, i claudius said:

 

 

Sorry we will not stop complaining ,until they stop coming to our country , STOP in the FIRST safe country , what part of that do you nor them understand?

Know a bit before saying this : 400,000 refugees in countries bordering the places they flee. Did you have a look at the "camps"?

Learn a bit about the countries bordering the ones they leave...

Did you stop to the first country? Are you thai? Did some international company brought you here?

Why did you come to Thailand? I bet there are other countries closer from yours, is it because you wanted a BETTER LIVING?

I bet you did!

And if you create troubles in countries you bomb and mess with, it is fair to pay back in a way or another