Yellowtail

You post links to Wiki pages and the claim you've provided the actual law. Anyone doing that knows nothing of the law. I'm guessing you background in law has to do with a few D & Ds and a DUI or two.

As if they are ever going to stop.

It won't hurt all of us. Let them cut it off.

Wow, the bank takes your word in regard to the value of your loan collateral?

Even if you are correct, there are still about 500,000 civilians supporting hamas and 400,000 that admit they want to eradicate Israel, correct? So, it is your position that these numbers are not significant?

You don't really expect more from Sir Linksalot do you?

Apparent to you anyways.

Why should Israel continue to facilitate the killing of their citizens by suppling their enemy? It's only apparent to some people.

Really? Bombing people often kills them instantly, or within a few days. People starving have a month or two to surrender and be fed. We agree. Just because hamas has plenty of supplies, does not mean they can go on indefinably without being resupplied. If you can drive the poorly supplied civilians into the safety zones, you can take care of them, and continue to pummel hamas.

As am I. Are there suffering Gazans? Absolutely. Many are without food, running water and electricity. But clearly, they have enough water to drink, or they would be dead by now. People can typically for 3-5 days without water. And notice when you look at photos and video, they look pretty clean, so apparently, they are bathing. Would they like more and or better food to eat and to run the AC, no doubt. I don't know much about it either, but I do generally believe what I can see. If they had no food, water and power, they would have surrendered by now. Particularly the one that so not support hamas. And many news sources say it's not true. "You pays your money and you takes your chances." Most news sources say any number of things every day that are not true. You disagree, whatever.

I think the Brits have given us a good bit already, for which I think most Americans are (or at least should be) grateful, I know I am. I know it is a joke thread, but the Statue of Liberty was a gift, not a donation.

Yeah ,grew on me as well. I liked the retro Mustang taillights from the get. I liked Gens 1, 3 & 4. Almost bought a gen 1 back in '05... I've had a number of Fords, and they've all been good to me. I've not owned one in Thailand.

"The British Army Museum quotes a figure of 750 Military and Police killed from 1945-1948." Killed by Jewish terrorists? It's not clear.

I think you are not being completely honest. From your link: 1. Federal law already requires background checks. Could they be improved? Sure, people like Hunter Biden (as an example everyone knows) can just lie on the applicant and get a gun. The problem is not with background checks, they are already mandatory, the problem is confirming the information provided by the applicant. 2. Convicted felons are already barred by federal law from possessing handguns, and many states (like Florida) bar convicted felons from possessing any firearm. 3. Federal law prohibits anyone under 21 from buying handguns, which are responsible for the vast majority of gun crime. You can buy long guns at 18. It is interesting that it's often the same people that think kids do not have the maturity to buy a gun until they're 21, think they're mature enough to have their penis cut off at 13. 4. So a ban on the "scary looking" rifles with the black stocks and muzzle-brakes (which are responsible for less than 3% of gun deaths) but shotguns and semi-automatics with nice walnut stocks (that are just as deadly) will still be available, and of course there are the millions of AR15s that are already out there to contend with. 5. It is interesting that while you claim "the vast majority" of Americans want stricter gun laws, only 57% do not support allowing people to carry guns in public WITHOUT A PERMIT, while 29% support it.

That forth-gen Everest is good looking!

Yeah, dude need to stick to Al-Jazeera interview where they only ask how many babies Israel has killed.

So what's to do with hamas, do you think they'll surrender?

Yeah, figures like the ones you posted when you lied and claimed Israel had killed a million innocent Palestinians since the 7th. Or that the US was sending a WW1 aircraft carrier...

My boy went to: Mariwittaya Kabin Buri (marykabin.ac.th) Great course work, facilities and activities. Almost no western teachers but a lot of Filipinas, which I prefer under the circumstances. I'm thinking it was 17K a term for the English program (800 to 17:00, with last two hours in English) but that was probably 6-7 years ago. I would not get caught up in the "International School" thing. If your kid can do well on the SAT, I think the focus is going to be on them leaning Thai. Good Luck!

I disagree. And even if it were true, would cutting off the water, power and food not be more humane that bombing? Hamam has plenty of power, water and food.

That's because it's not true. What percentage of Gaza's water did Israel provide? What percentage of Gaza's electricity did Israel provide? What percentage of Gaza's food did Israel provide? If Gaza had no water for two weeks, they would all be dead. If Gaza had no electricity, hamas would not be able hide in the tunnels. If Gaza had no food for two weeks, people would be surrendering or at least fleeing to the safe areas.

Rather than just posting just posting link and pretending it supports your argument, why not provide a few pertinent quotes we can discuss?

I wonder if they let the Arab Muslim on Israel’s Supreme Court use the same bathroom as the Jews....