mikebike

Just now, elgenon said:

Would this quiet a barking dog inside the neighbor's house?

No.

4 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Not enough to have an impact.  Russia is also supplying NK with goods and services.

 

I'll try to find the article from the BBC.  It laid out why China no longer has leverage over NK.  NK is actually becoming hostile to China.

Ultimately this type of leverage hurts the regular peeps more than the regime anyway...

3 minutes ago, rijb said:

You're probably thinking of Canada.

Actually I was thinking of Sherrif Buford T... lol.

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

They... ...are still covertly supplying NK with oil and banking resources.

Isn't that the definition of leverage?

5 minutes ago, rijb said:

Has that ever worked?

Yes.

Ultrasonic chasers do work. Not on all dogs in all situations but in using them for about six years I would say the success rate for me has been 80%.

Purchase online in Thailand. COD.

http://www.lazada.co.th/catalog/?q=Ultrasonic dog

Vulcan 900. 500,000 baht new. Used should be in your price range.

15 minutes ago, Thian said:

What was China's reaction to this?? They still keep very quiet?

A little early for official reactions.

12 minutes ago, webfact said:

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif tweeted a withering response: "Trump's ignorant hate speech belongs in medieval times - not the 21st Century UN - unworthy of a reply. Fake empathy for Iranians fools no one."

 

Bazinga.

3 hours ago, webfact said:

Trump is already using his four days in New York to voice his concern about Venezuela, telling Latin American leaders on Monday night the United States would take additional steps if Caracas moved toward authoritarian rule.

 

As the USA move toward authoritarian rule. Massive face palm.

Wood glue mixed with sawdust works well.

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

So it shouldn't happen but still you're advocating it to happen.

I think you are conflating posters. Daboyz1's point is that it is Obama's fault. Zydeco has been all in for punishing dreamers.

12 minutes ago, daboyz1 said:

No of course it shouldn't happen, but that's not reality. These kids aren't being thrown in jail so the word "punish" is a bit subjective. Kids are "punished" for the mistakes of their parents all the time.

If someone wants to change that, then go to Congress and get them to pass a law saying it's perfectly fine to bring children to the US without following the process. Until then it's illegal.

Deportation may, in this circumstance, be considered a worse "punish"ment than jail... somewhat cruel and unusual I would posit.

38 minutes ago, daboyz1 said:

Happens all the time. Kids always suffer when their parents break the law.

Here's a thought. Go ahead and give the kids the benefits and prosecute the parents for bringing them here. That may act as a deterrent for future "dreamers"

You finally got there!!

18 minutes ago, daboyz1 said:

The message sent by allowing this is "Bring your kids here illegally and they'll be able to stay."

Should the Government condone and even encourage this illegal behavior?

No. Should any government punish children for the sins of their parents?

8 minutes ago, zydeco said:

Nobody is punishing the child. He just can't keep the loot (US residency) his parents stole for him.

Ah so your astute analogy equates an inanimate object to a whole life experience of shared community and productive life skills. Got it.

1 hour ago, zydeco said:

So, if some parent steals the bicycle of some kid and then gives it to his own kids, it would be bellicose and unfair to arrest him and make him return the bike.  Because that would be taking something away from the thief's children.

No that would be the right thing to do. The wrong thing would be to punish the child.

5 minutes ago, thehelmsman said:

No one asked me or my family who immigrated the painfully legal way. No, you're wrong to make such a statement.

Their parents knowingly put their kids in harms way. When will this insanity stop.

 

You want to legalize these 800,000, won't be long before you have double that.

So maybe deport the parents if you can prove criminal intent of putting helpless children in harms way. Do NOT take out your bellicose attitude on the innocents.

20 minutes ago, daboyz1 said:

Is that a question or a statement?

Your choice.

8 hours ago, FreddieRoyle said:

 You fail to consider how proper "legal" immigrants feel about this saga. They jumped through multiple hoops and it took a huge effort to get legal residency or a passport, and yet there are people now saying all anybody must do is illegally cross the border and then we should give them a passport. I can't believe we are even having this argument. Obama was absolutely wrong to implement this scheme, and that it must end now is absolutely Obama's fault. Trump is merely trying to enforce the law.

 Understanding how this problem arose is crucial to avoid such a snafu occurring again.

Legal immigrants have been strongly on the side of the dreamers. They understand that these children had no choice in where they ended up and that humanity dictates caring for them.

9 hours ago, bristolgeoff said:

If you stayed in Thailand illegal,you were found out.you will be in goal straight away a fine get a ticket out and banned.Amercia  should be just as tuff too. 

Yes so true and an excellent analogy. The huddled masses of the world have been beating a path to Thailand's shores for centuries because of its perceived position as leader of the free world and the bounty of opportunities here.

8 hours ago, daboyz1 said:

Blame Obama. He's the one that circumvented congress. If he did it the right way, then there would be no issue.

So of course you are against 45's ban on transgender in the military, those "muslim bans", militarizing domestic police, or all of the other 50-ish exec orders 45has issued.

9 hours ago, FreddieRoyle said:

Interesting POV,  but I would counter that to follow the rule of law is of paramount importance. Once you start saying, well it's OK for this type of person to break the law but not for this type of person I'm afraid much bigger problems will arise.

You are correct. Pardoning of felonious racist sheriff ring any bells? 

38 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Several thoughts come to mind:  

>>>  Bad stuff happens.  People chose to reside in a Hurricane Alley, whether wittingly or not.  Should the Feds, using taxpayer money, have to pay for everyone to rebuild?  I don't think so.

 

>>>  When an individual's house gets flooded in an isolated scenario, the Feds don't step in to give him big money.  Yet, when it's many houses, the Feds step in.  I saw the same difference, in California, when a house burned down, ...in contrast to when many houses burned down.  A destroyed house is a destroyed house.  Is it more grave when it's individually destroyed compared to collectively destroyed?

 

>>>  Those with insurance, planned ahead.  

 

 

Funded rebuilding occurs for economic reasons, not out of any sense of altruism. The lion's share of "aid" goes to businesses and corporations not individuals.

Did you find what you needed?