Cameroni

This is, by a long distance, by far the best advice on this thread. And the key is to qualify the woman properly before you go all in, ie make sure she can be trusted. I learned that the hard way after a Filipina kindly taught me this lesson. The problem is if you really want to know a person you have to push her to the limit, be in an extreme situation. Only then will you really find out what she is like, if she can really be trusted. Sometimes you dont' find out the true character of a woman after 6 years or longer. They can pretend to be trustworthy exceptionally well sometimes.

That''s a fair point actually about laundry. But dishes she can do no problem. It's all about training!

That waitress was so nice and competent. I though, this time I'll make an exception. She looked embarassed when I gave her the 100 Baht and ran to the main cashier to give him the money to put in the pot. Not even a thanks. You should never be nice basically, you just get diappointed.

Says Mr Above Average double divorced "send your women to work so they don't go on Tik Tok to cheat on you, and btw, bang 48 year olds to have a reasonable chance". Yah, I hope you enjoy doing the dishes or paying for it, while your 49 super hottie is flirting it up at work with Thais and Farang. You've really been giving yourself great advice, how is it working out right now, are you doing the dishes later?

Alimony only comes into play if you cannot agree terms with the wife on divorce. If you agree terms with the wife you don't have to pay alimony. I divorced and do not pay a cent in alimony by law, because we agreed like reasonable adults on terms by ourselves, without courts becoming involved except for the actual divorce decree. But that wasn't the reason our "Mr Above Aveage" was advocating the gf go to work. His concern was that she'd otherwise be on dating sites, on social media, looking for guys to cheat with. From that standpoint, sending her out to work, where she interacts daily with other Thai guys and probably Farang, would actually make it more likely that she hooks up with another guy. Leaving aside the fact that she cannot manage the household or house, while she's away at work, and he'd have to pay extra for it, or do the dishes himself. If you have to structure your whole life on the basis of fear that she will leave you, that you will divorce, perhaps you did not qualify the girl properly.

The fact that you feel the need to post pictures, if they're real, shows you clearly have exceedingly low self-esteem. You clearly live in fantasy land if you think sending your older woman to work will stop her from cheating on you, if she's inclined to do that. You're actually making it more likely she'll cheat on you. Not less. Women screw you over, sure. So what? I should bang 49 year olds like you and send them to work so they don't go on Tik Tok and find guys to cheat with? Or pick a 49 year old because the age range is more "realistic"? Before you give advice on the subject of women you should really know a thing or two. It's clear you really don't.

I love the older British humour as well, John Cleese, Fawlty Towers, Blackadder, Rowan Atkinson, Rick Mayall, all great. But the new crop, Russel Brand, Ricky Gervais, David Baddiel, worse than <deleted>.

Look, there's no shame in admitting you're insecure about being cheated on, you had a number of divorces, it's only understandable. But to advise other people to bang old women like you, just because of that: That's just terrible, you realise most posters here are 82 years old, what they should bang 70 year olds because you're afraid people will talk bad about you behind your back in Thai? So sad, dude.

What's sad is advising other people to make their gf go to work, because you're so afraid she'll cheat on you that you don't want her going on Tik Tok, when in fact making her go out to work will mean she will be far more likely to meet other guys. Or to pick a 59 year old girlfriend, so you're in a good "range" and she won't leave you. I guess your divorces left you a bit insecure and fearful. That's a really sad, man.

Better that than banging a 59 year old who goes to work, lol. I'll take syphilis please.

Even by the level of your idiotic posts, number 1 is exceptionally dumb. If she has a full time job she will be out of the house, interacting with other guys, and the risk she will get to know a nice Thai or Farang guy increases exponentially. You're basically inviting her to cheat. Plus she can't tend to your needs or manage the house while she's out. To send her to work is the most stupid advice one could possibly give. No kids, of course, that's more than obvious. Number 3 only applies to ugly poor and impotent men, if you are still nice to look at, can perform in the bedroom and pay for her boat noodles, you're already way ahead of the competition in Thailand and you can easily have rel with a 24 year old no problem.

Brits are a naturally offensive people, as British hooliganism proves. Something in their confrontational and offensive nature can often be funny. But in terms of comedy, since the Russel Brand, who was never funny, or Ricky Gervais, who just takes offensive obnoxiousness to the max without being actually funny, David Baddiel etc, you have to conclude British comedy has lost its touch. The only funny comedian in the UK at the moment is a Sri Lankan, Jonathan Ranganathan.

What are you talking about, there is a massive trail of statements by the West going back to 1989 where the West lies to Russia that it would not expand NATO. Russia repeatedly tells the West clearly that it feels threatened by NATO expansion and that Ukraine joining NATO is a red line, that it concerns their national security. In 2008 at the Bucharest conference NATO reveals Ukraine will become a member. So it was, very clearly, the West that lied to Russia. There have been endless rounds of negotiation with Ukraine. When Ukraine tried to stiff Russia over gas, before that the Russo - Ukrainian friendship Treaty, endless rounds from 2014 to 2022. https://www.declassifieduk.org/lets-just-fight-how-britain-prefers-war-over-peace-in-ukraine/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_negotiations_in_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine Of course it's very hard to negotiate when the British prime minister flies in and tells Ukraine "Don't sign, if you do the West will not support Ukraine. We will send you billions and arms, let's just fight". Though of course, it was a miracle that Russia would negotiate at all, since Ukraine had repeatedly ignored the provisions of any treaty with Russia it agreed to and taken military and other steps, such as banning Russian social media in Ukraine, to provoke Russians in Ukraine. Russia did not "forment" any insurrection in the Donbass, the civil unrest in the majority Russian Donbass region was a result of the pro West demonstrations in the Western parts of Ukraine, which were gainst the interests of the Russian majority in Donbass. And of course the Crimean invasion was the result of the NATO disclosure in 2008 that Ukraine would join NATO, and the constant provocations of Russia by Ukraine before that, not paying their gas bill, prohibiting Russian websites and social media, etc. The Donbass is 90% Russian, Kiev had neglected the region so badly that they voted to rejoin the CIS again for the Russian language to be the main language, 90% voted in favour of this. The people of the Donbass wanted to rid themselves of the neglectful and incompetent Ukrainian government. This is total nonsense on stilts, the Russian economy is NOT a war economy, it is very much a majority civil economy at the moment and the Russian economy is blooming at the moment. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68823399 If you are so completely ignorant on basically everything, rickudon, it would be better you don't comment on things you have no information or do not understand at all.

I really can't be bothered, it's just total nonsense.

My pleasure.

This post is almost 100 per cent wrong in everything. Literally almost every sentence is dripping with ignorance and ill-informed nonsense. One would correct it, but it would take so long.

Why, oh why, would the head of the Ukrainian delegation lie to say something like this? What you are suggesting does not even make sense. You are being completely ridiculous and just sticking your head in the sand because this Ukrainian witness report does not fit your view on the war. Lol. I almost feel sorry for you.

Yes, I am sure Boris Johnson flying in unexpectedly and delivering the message "The West will not support Ukraine if you sign this peace deal with Russia, and btw, let us just fight, we will send you billions and weapons" had absolutely no bearing on the decision whatsoever. Do you also have a bridge in Brooklyn you would care to sell?

The Financial Times can be reliable, but it is still no guarantee of truthfulness.

I was not talking about Boris Liar Johnson. I was talking about that Ukrainian bloke who headed the Ukrainian delegation and said that Johnson came, said the West would not support Ukraine if they signed and that Johnson said "let us just fight".

You are wrong. It was not.

She also prosecuted this innocent man. Her conviction was overturned, but the man had his life ruined thanks to Kamala Harris. Her record as a prosectuor is litany of failures and ruined lives. https://abcnews.go.com/2020/years-anthony-harris-conviction-overturned-murder-girl-remains/story?id=84376442

That is certainly more likely than nuclear response by the US. However, if the US were to do a repeat of the bombings of the Serbians, we should remember in that campaign it took NATO 10,000 plus sorties to make any impact on the conflict. And Serbia does not have the airfoce Russia has. In addition such a conventional warfare response would certianly be a hot war and escalation into a nuclear conflict would always be a possibillity. I strongly suspect both parties would negotiate before risking mutual nuclear annihiliation.

Obviously when they do not have a reason to lie and gain nothing by the statement you can consider if the statement could be true. Nobody lies 100 per cent of the time. Not even Boris Liar Johnson. What he said about Trump is absolutely true. With Trump in the white house, the Ukraine war would not have happened.

Because he reported on a meeting with a Brit, this was not an election issue. It was not a reputation issue for him. That account is obviously the truth. They do not lie 100 per cent of the time.