Woof999

Respect

This. He championed (along with others) the LEAVE campaign which was a crazy decision for the UK to make. As soon as the referendum was over he said "my work is done" and buggered off. Can't stand the man, although I might support some of his ideas. Just some.

Actually I'm more sympathetic to Crimea than I am to the other annexed territories. As I'm sure you know better than me, Crimea was "Russian" from the 18th century and was ceded to Ukraine when both Russia and Ukraine were part of the union. Even before 2014, the majority of people there were still more Russian than Ukrainian, although they didn't necessarily want to join Russia so much as to have more devolved power of their own. However, Putin was so confident that the wider areas of eastern Ukraine (such as Kharkiv) dreamed of integrating with Russia that I'm sure that the defence they put up against his invasion gave him at least a bit of a wakeup call. To end, I think that defeating Putin now and reclaiming ALL the territories will displace less people in the long run, at a cost to a smaller group of people in the short term. If he succeeds in keeping the areas already occupied, I don't think that there are too many people who would believe he will be content to not do exactly the same again, over and over.

Ukraine reclaiming significant territory that is rightfully theirs in not illegal. It is both legal and moral. After Crimea, Donbas and every other territory that has been illegally annexed is returned, Ukraine could facilitate anyone who wants to become Russian to have their wish. Easy, no. Impossible, absolutely not. Those that don't want to be Ukrainian simply don't need to live in Ukraine. Simples. The ONLY reason that Putin cannot agree to that is because it would finish him as a "leader". Where was the personal attack? I didn't insult you. I didn't directly call you a Putin apologist, although the implication is there I guess. I pointed out that every response that I've seen from you on any topic to do with Putin is sympathetic to Putin. Your justification in this thread for doing so is to "think of the people", while clinging to a false absolute position that it would be impossible to do anything other than let Putin have his way. There is one person alone that you should be directing that comment ("think of the people") to and he does not visit this thread.

Weren't those lives broken in 2014? Isn't Putin forcing the assimilation of thousands of Ukrainian children from areas well outside of Crimea to become Russian? Do those broken lives not matter? Why is it only now impossible to reverse Putin's crimes, when he did almost exactly what you say cannot now be done? If people in the territory of Ukraine wanted to live in Russia, they had every opportunity to cross the border and live the life of their dreams. If Putin wanted so much for them to become Russian, he could have facilitated that for them. He is on a land grab. He believes that Ukraine in its entirety belongs to Russia. He longs for the return of the failed union and he will not stop until he either achieves it or he is dead (mostly my opinion of course). The majority of your ~100 or so posts are on threads related to Putin and it's pretty clear that you support him and/or his actions, so I guess there is little value in any kind of debate.

Of course there is. Putin had to do it when he stole the land. Everything on the Crimean peninsular was fully integrated into Ukraine and had been for at least half a century. Putin undid it all. It can be undone again.

Putin created that problem. It is not a reason to not do the right thing. Yeah I know I stole your car, but I've booked it in for a service next week and the kids have gotten used to it, so better that I just keep it.

So that would mean both parties to the war have illegitimate Presidents. Do you honestly believe Putin is in office through the vote of the common people?

ECAM status would, for anything like a hydraulic issue, but it would be bugging you immediately without you needing to take any action from a checklist. Specific landing gear checklist items don't come in until the approach checklist. My best guess is a landing gear not uplocked (which is more likely to have happened shortly after takeoff), a hydraulic issue, which could happen at any time or... well, could be many things which we might never know.

The full approach looked pretty normal, potentially except for the original right hand turn while still at cruise, which took them more southerly towards UTP. That would suggest that they initially had a different destination. I'm not sure of the airways in use though, so that could all be codswallop. Also, if any issue was detected shortly before arrival, that wouldn't have given enough time for all those ambulances to get there. From top of descent to landing was within the time it would have taken a Pattaya ambulance to get anywhere near. Thanks for all the posts in this thread by the way. Very useful.

I'm not sure she'd be that bad... If I was a US voter and Biden was up against someone like Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney or even the late John McCain then I might vote right of centre (I typically do when I vote), but never with someone like Trump. He breeds people like MTG, and she is even worse than him, if that's possible. I agree that politicians don't need to be intelligent, but most of the dumber ones from history at least had enough of it to know that they shouldn't go around bragging how smart they are. As Ricky Gervais says, being dumb is like being dead. You don't know it. It's the other people that have to deal with it.

A standard VIP A319 (if there is such a thing) will hold up to 16 or so passengers. Lucky that all those ambulances weren't needed somewhere else.

Just when you thought the US couldn't get any dumber.

Commercial jets will typically lower the gear a little after capturing the glideslope. Most commonly this will be at around 2,500 feet and less than 10 miles from the airfield. They will start decending roughly based on the formula ((height in feet / 1000) * 3) + 10. Give or take and depending on any STAR (published arrival) selected.

That was no ordinary scheduled flight:

Putin is a bully, which actually makes Putin weak. He may be mad but he's not stupid. He knows exactly what MAD means. He uses the nuclear threat way too often for it to be anything other than empty. He even knows that the use of a single tactical nuclear weapon will end him, unless someone like Trump was in power. Biden could well be POTUS again. This is a fact that has no valid argument against. It is possible whether you like the idea of it or not. Trump is of below average intelligence (my opinion of course), so I'm afraid that your analogy is faulty.

What the hell is he smoking? Unity with a country that he is still in the process of invading, while demanding he keeps his land grab?

So give up a sizeable chunk of territory now and not join an organisation that would stop Putin doing another land grab once he's licked his wounds?

I agree, but after I heard how he talks and what he thinks, what he really stands for and that what and how he speaks shows a narcissist of below average intelligence, I wouldn't want him running anything, let alone one of the most powerful nations that has ever existed. The probability that he will withdraw support for and let Putin further assimilate Ukraine, emboldening him even more, is more than enough for me to believe he is a danger to the world. The fact that he thinks his intellect is above average is even more dangerous. There I agree with you 100%.

The Pope gets more. So does Kenneth Copeland. I wouldn't want any of them as a President either. Cults attract nutters. Anything for a vote eh? As did pretty much every US President ever. It's kind of weird that you try to paint this as a negative.

Why would anyone want to? Sharks and batteries? A rising sea level creating more beachfront property? Constant use of "me" and "I"? The guy is not a gifted public speaker in any way, shape or form. I'm not saying Biden is either particularly, but to admire Trump's public speaking is... well, cultish?

Err... I'm not a Dem. You're debating another user over who came up with a policy. I'm asking if, in the grand scheme of things, why that matters. If you can't, wont or just don't want to answer then that's fine, but it isn't even a strange question / idea and definitely not a really strange one.

It doesn't matter who's idea it was. Isn't the deal to try and do the right thing for the country and stop all of this "you're copying me" or "that's a Dem policy" or "That's what GOP was saying all along" bullcrap? Turn the tables around, if one of Trump's policies didn't contain at least one of the words / phrases "bigliest", "I", "me", "terrible", "everyone's saying" or "covfefe" then he probably didn't write it himself. Would that mean you disagreed with the policy regardless of what the policy actually stated?

It isn't the President's job to write it all up himself. Goodness gracious.

Haven't had boiled eggs with soldiers since I was about 5, so I'm afraid I can't remember.