5 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Why do you defend them so strongly?

The problem here is shared by both sides : North Korea is a crazy dictatorship for sure...however the US and mostly the US is pressuring Little Kim...but they won't go at war (for now) because Seoul is close from the border, the Japan is not so far, China will be super uspet, South Korea economy would fall if there was some kind of reunification...

The ONLY reason why North Korea was not attacked so far is because of the damage it can do...

In a way you may understand the Kim as you witmess how US tend to represent itself as the  World police..even if we witness that this world police creates much more mess after its wars...
Look at Syria, Libya, Irak...and tell me it is safer now than when it was under Saddam for exemple...Saddam and Ghaddaffi were dictators for sure...but the life of the majority of the population was much safer than it is now...byou can also ask yourself why the US and friends only bring wars in countries with Oil....why the oil companies are already in those countries...

So if I were Kim I would do the same cause the only thing which prevent a US intervention so far is the threat that South Korea and Japan, and now the US may be targetted...

28 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Army people, the ones who go fighting , need to be real Men

Transgenders should join hospital segment of the army

The battle field is a place for Men with nuts , not a place for people with nuts either added or taken away

I am quite sure all the women on the field thanks you for this comment and will be glad to serve to defend people like you

2 minutes ago, UncleFester said:

Careful who you call a nut.  Your picture shows a Trump doll.  You seem to be so affected and upset by Trump that you would take on the picture of him.  I have seen your performances in other threads and you have a history of making accusations and then when challenged, you conveniently claim you have no responsibility to back up your claim.  That is certainly convenient, but cowardly.  

 

Who is the troll?  You for making baiting claims or me for asking you to back them up with at least one fact.

 

 

Probably the one who says : "Real men and women who wants to defend their country", the one who tends to be borderline homophobic and never answer the questions asked...or maybe you re just pro LGBT and are just joking, as your profile pic and name may suggest!

Trump said he was the most supportive president of the LGBT cause in POTUS History, we can clearly see he lied. 

18 minutes ago, UncleFester said:

You stated that Trump is a draft dodger.  I didn't make the statement negative or affirmative.  Now prove it.  Show me some proof.  

 

Otherwise, anyone with some common sense should relegate you to the dust bin for making a false and salacious statement designed to troll the membership who support President Trump.

I would like you to answer the question which was asked to you previously. : as you stated you don't want tax payer money to be for transgenders, do you agree to spend tax money on Golf weekends by Trump?

On a side note it is hilarious to see someone like you who sounds more and more homophobic and anti-lgbt using the name Uncle Fester and such picture, as the actor was openly gay!

18 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/14/world/asia/south-china-sea-taiwan.html

First, let's sort out Taiwan's role. The above is a link from the New York Times.  Taiwan is definitely making the same (or similar) claim as China ! 

Yes, Taiwan rejected the UN ruling in 2016, same as China's rejection. You say that you know about Chinese history ? Good.


Okay, that map, nine dash line map, drawn by the Republic of China. You are claiming that the map is absurd because, you and others feel that parts of the South China Sea are far closer to other countries than to China. I'm trying to say, those areas were claimed by China before Britain and France turned up during the 1800s. Correct, China did not formally declare ownership to Britain and France when Britain first turned up. Do you accept, if China owned the islands before Britain and France turned up, well, they own the islands, right ? I mean, the islands are closer to other countries, but that does not mean that Britain and France will not recognise the ownership issue, when first turning up in Asia. Surely, you accept this ?


The Paracel Islands ? You've raised the issue of artefacts being dug up in other places. Okay, nobody lives on the Paracel Islands, well, no Vietnamese anyway. Do you reckon, it's more sensible to give the Paracel Islands to Vietnam rather than China ? Why give it to Vietnam ? They're just as close to Vietnam as they are to China. China first said 'they belong to China'. Then, Vietnam said 'no, they belong to Vietnam'. And China physically got there first. And we're suppose to declare that they belong to Vietnam ?  

Ok so let's continue : ytou know Taiwan's claim? Well not really it seems :Taiwan first in not recognized by China as a country, but a part of China and therefore downplayed every claim made by Taiwan, Also in a recent article in the New York Times, the President of Taiwan claims that even if they claimed the same thing at first there must be a dialogue, a respect for bodies of land overrluing bodies of water and so on: economic sharing :to summerize they say : yes we claim this but we understand that in those days we must negociate, share and find a good way to be at peace with our neighbour...something China don't want, by militarizing the artifical islands they created (and lying about it) and pressuring the other countries.

So you agree China did not declare the islands and yet justify the fact that they can now claim them retroactively ? never such absurd thing could occur. 

You focus on the Paracel Islands, a simple element in the whole claim China is making, do you want me to list all the islands that china is claiming and comparing their history with the Paracel? 
 

Do you agree that China unilateraly created islands from nothing, militarized them, and asked for air control of the zone ?

Do you agree that such unilateral claim may only create a flash  point in the area between all china's neighbours and USA? Do you think this claims will be recognized soon by Japan, Philippine, Vietnam, and others?

19 minutes ago, seajae said:

now she wants the poor to support her, poor thing she needs 2 million a month just to survive, bugger allowing the poor to eat and have a life, she is far more important. 

You know, when NOBODY take care of you for a long time, and suddenly having someone looking after you, even if crooked to the bones, will do wonder...
The Shinawatra family did what nobody did before : populism...Problem with populism is if you get evicted before the people see the damages, you get re-elected, and re-elected....

Prayuth and his friend Suthep thought, as traditional elite, that they knew better than the common folks...

Just now, tonbridgebrit said:

That Nine Dash map ??  

Do please note, the map came out in 1947.  The Republic of China drew the map. Okay, in 1949, the communists in China won the war, and gave China a new name, the Peoples' Republic of China. Republic of China went to Taiwan, and carried on calling themselves Republic of China. They're actually called Republic of China, Taiwan.

Yes, Taiwan today claims the South China Sea, yes, using the map that they produced. China, as in the Peoples' Republic of China, is using the same map. Notice how people don't wish to blast Taiwan for using the map. And notice how Taiwan is backed by Washington. Washington is not interested in condemning the map, Washington doesn't want to antagonise Taiwan. 


Do you believe the stuff written in wikipedia about the Paracel Islands ? Do you believe that archeology practically shows that China got to the Paracel Islands before Vietnam ?  Do you reckon, if China got there before Vietnam, well, China's claim is legitimate ?

About the Philipinnes. Do you feel, that it's their right (their freedom) to not pursue their claims, if they feel this way ?  Is it sensible for them to look at trade and tourism from China, and then not pursue their caims ?

1947, things change...you know like for exemple China signing a treaty with UK about the guarantee HK would have freedom until a further date and now China claimning : it is just paper and nothing more...
I know about Chinese History thanks, I also know that chinese propaganda is quite strong that's why I try to have info from China and outside of China...China's presse being so free..you know...

I have serious doubts Taiwan is claiming the same thing China is claiming: one more time look at the map and tell me this is completly normal, just so I will be sure you are already well manipulated by China.

Do you believe that you can find french coins in New Orleans? Does this allow France to claim it? Would you think it is fair if Italy find Roman coins in UK they can claim it? If this is ok for you then you would also agree to give back a big part of China's western land to India as they were here before, right? Probably you will also find Russian artefacts in Northern China, so Russia should have some, right.? It seems people like you want to look at history only when the history is in their favor...China won and loss territories and that's why nowdays there are international laws.

International laws which ruled, on demand of the Philippines, that China was wrong and therefore the international community will not recognize such claims...China decided to ignore this...

Cina is a bully, they do not ask nicely to side with them, they pressure countries with economical sanctions, investments withdrawns...etc...currently China apply these kind of pressure to India, mostly because India refused to be associated to the One belt one road project...

5 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

China has already had their claims legally refuted.  Zero legitimacy now.

 

They've got dozens of claims with other countries.

https://chinadailymail.com/2013/12/01/china-claims-territories-of-23-countries-but-only-has-borders-with-14/

 

 

Also from that above link:

 

Your argument about this is bordering on trolling.  Amazing at how hard you defend them.  Even if you are Chinese, you're facts are wrong.

 

This is prefect!  You'll love it.

https://chinadailymail.com/2013/06/26/newly-discovered-ancient-maps-support-chinese-territorial-claims/

 

I am quite sure if we go back in time far enough, the Italians can claim a big part of Europe and a big part of Northern Africa...and probably the French/English?spanish can claim the whole american continent

30 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

China is claiming the South China Sea, and China is certainly not claiming the other lands that you have said. Their claims to the South China Sea are a lot more legitimate than most people on ThaiVisa think. They have no legitimate claims to Africa, Papua NG or Antartica, that's why no claims have been made.

China's disputes with Vietnam ? Okay, the Paracel Islands. They are just as close to China as they are to Vietnam. And archeology (from wikipedia) basically says that China got to the Paracel Islands before Vietnam did. To suggest that China's claim is just as reasonable as Vietnam's claim will be putting it lightly.

What about the rest of the islands on the South China Sea ? Okay, China claimed them before Britain and France turned up in the late 1800s. China did not bother to formally announce ownership to Britain and France at the time. If China had done that, well, there would be no dispute today. Do bear in mind that, Britain and France did not dispute any of China's borders when first turning up in the Far East. That's like saying "Asian countries did not dispute the borders inside Europe when those Asian countries first went to Europe".

Please, be serious, look at the Nine dash map China uses to claim territories and tell me this is not a joke?

Also China is quietly moving on another front : India, there is a big tension between China and Buthan/India those days...and with China opening a base in Pakistan, things could turn ugly qickly...

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

If he does not confiscate it and she leaves he would be seen as a fool. They should just lock it down so nobody can touch it until the verdict is done. Its just a precaution, I am sure she has enough money stashed away somewhere. 

that is what is called freezing assets, the money is still on her account but nobody can touch it until trial end.

Prayuth is playing a dangerous game IMO

This must be <deleted>!ing joke:

"He said it was irrelevant that her guilt has not yet been established by the court"...

Wait a sec, so Iran complied with Nuclear deal, the Us recognized it, even the Trump...and suddenly the US think this is not good enough, because they are devlopping other weapons? A move any country would do if they had the US fleet at their door...I guess Trump wants his own war...I even suspect he wanted to be elected to have one

Just now, AGareth2 said:

check the title you gave him

Is there any President in Thailand? 

12 minutes ago, AGareth2 said:

dangerous

A guy is facing 151 years for such on a 112

I didn't asked for Pizza, Prayuth is not a member of the Royal family and not a member of the Privy Council or any Crown bureaucracy...

29 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Well, the decision was a smart one for a lot of reasons not the least of which is, again, no one has a 'right' to be in the Armed Forces 

Plenty of other careers they can perform in with better aplomb than carrying a rifle into combat 

You do understand that the Army is NOT ONLY people with guns? Trump bared them even from desk jobs...

Well done Dear Presidente! Now you've succeffully turned Yingluk into a martyr for her fan base...! Let's the game begin

2 minutes ago, sawadee1947 said:

what drugs you were taking today?

Brexitin 500mg 3 times a day

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

Just brilliant, like all of your posts. Keep laughing at yourself, everyone else does.

We mostly laugh at your reaction and your dreams, but keep going it is as entertaining as a blind describing a sunset colors

20 hours ago, nauseus said:

I wonder where on earth all this came from? No reference of course. Well I found it and it's from fxcm, a forex trading magazine! 

 

Nothing like some reliable info to cut and paste, eh?! If you had some pride you might come up with something original.

So you want quotes with source and when you have source it is considered as wrong! I suspect in fact that each article which will erode your trust in "UK alone can and will do better " is considered as biased, not good, false...
If we come at you with original stuff you simply ask for source, if we come with source you deny them...so just stay in your lalaland and enjoy the ride, it will be fun to watch 

Just now, Khun Han said:

 

All those countries and more have expressed a strong desire to set up trade deals with the UK asap. The USA has even stated that it's going to fast track one.

Ahhh hope VS reality..

We can count on the Orange Agent on the other side of the Atlantic to come with a perfect solution for sure

1 minute ago, Khun Han said:

 

Firstly, the UK isn't running away, it's currently engaged in negotiations. Secondly, the EU is refusing to provide any details of it's financial demands. Thirdly, there will be no winners from restricted trade, though the EU as an entity will suffer most because of the balance of trade.

Numerous Analysis seem to disagree with you..analysis from UK

The hard reality for UK if they just leave the table :
 

According to initial estimates by the British government, leaving the advantages of EU membership behind and switching to use of WTO trade rules would cost the U.K.’s businesses about £65.5 billion per year (or around US$82 billion). Over a 15-year period, this would lower the country’s GDP by between 5.4% and 9.5%. In addition to lost trade, the U.K. may also be on the hook for paying about £20 billion in unpaid bills to the EU.

Analysts believe that the U.K. would find it difficult to replace the lost trade revenues from the EU, which has a consumer market of around 500 million people and a GDP around €12 trillion (US$13 trillion or £10 trillion). About 44% (or £220 billion of £510 billion) of the U.K.’s exports currently go to EU countries. Export trade with the EU is linked to about 12.5% of U.K.’s GDP, while the EU’s trade with the nation is linked to only about 3% of its GDP.

While the country might be able to expand trade unfettered around the world once out of the EU, it might also find it difficult to match the negotiating power of the EU. With more than 50 partners around the globe, the union has more free trade agreements than any other single nation or trading bloc. And in addition to its existing trade agreements, the EU is negotiating agreements with the U.S., Canada, Japan, India, Australia, New Zealand and others.

Pride may be a difficult thing to keep when the reality strikes....

7 minutes ago, nauseus said:

And if they can't quantify them, they'll have an even harder time justifying them, especially without fully audited accounts.

Do you think it would be a smart move on the long run for the UK to just run away and tell the UE "we owe you nothing" and not enter any discussion?

In my opinion and looking at a map, shows that the one which will be the most penalized would be the UK, not UE...

Just now, chrissables said:

The article 50 treaty says we are not obliged to pay if we don't reach an agreement. The EU are not helping their cause by not actually quantifying the amounts.

 

If i understand correctly this means if we don't reach an agreement of payments, we can leave and owe nothing. 

Sure you could, but this will put a lot of future financial burdens to trade with UE.
If the UE thinks UK owe something, and UK simply "whistle" the whistling will probably less funny once all trade agreements and other bilateral relationships are cut or downgraded...quite sure both side should think carefully...

Also and I repeat : it was a french official speaking for the EU, not for France alone...

46 minutes ago, chrissables said:

You are wrong, we are not legally bound to pay anything after the day we leave.

 

For one year following the leave date there will still some bills due to be paid on projects already started. But we can decide to pay or not, we are not bound to do so.

 

Morally you can argue we should, but the EU needs to come up with a realistic figure and a breakdown of how they arrived at the amount they request. At the moment they are throwing numbers around without any breakdown on an amount we actually don't have to pay by law.  

I never said it was wrong or right, I just pointed that it turned into a UK Vs France discussion while the article is not about France alone...

I agree that having people from each European government (as well as UK) talking about all this may do more harm than good...

Well of course it will because the law was tailored for Thaksin.

This amazing Junta has spent countless efforts to get rid of Thaksin and the red shirts, ignoring all the signals which said it wouldn't be enough now that the "poors" started to awaken...

Instead of trying to do such stupid things they should have left Yingluk fall because of the riece scheme and the non payments, which would have put the voters to go see elsehwere...instead they make her and the Thaksin family "martyrs"... 

The wake up call, bound to happen after a cetain event, will be hard