MangoKorat

I'd be interested to learn which part of any of my posts is anti semetic?

Yes, because I'm not anti semetic in any way! So, 'perfunctory' or not I will state that I am not anti semetic. In fact if I was forced to take sides in this matter I would reluctantly fall on Israel's side - I have no love for a regime that represses its people, imprisons them for dissent and forces women into an unwanted dress code. So, I'd suggest that you read all of my posts and stop your selective reading because in this case you've got egg on your face. I respect the rights of all to hold their beliefs. I just wish they wouldn't fight wars over them or let them run their daily lives. Israel is guilty of war crimes in Gaza just as Hamas are. Its a sad situation that requires an almost impossible amount of compromise to settle. You have completely got hold of the wrong end of the stick. I have not sought to trivialise anything, I am simply pointing out what most of the experts on the region are saying - and I believe they are right. That is that Iran simply wanted to send a message without starting a war that they can't win. They calculated what they thought they could do and the ball is now in Israel's court. However, as the attack was ineffective, Israel's allies are pressing them not to react. Had they wished to start a war, Iran's attack would have been much bigger and sustained. As it is, Iran has stated that their actions are at an end - they sent their message. If you had missiles of varying ages in your arsenal - would you use the newest ones that were due to be destroyed soon in any case?

I am not trying to trivialise anything. Iran wanted to send a message, they didn't want to start a war. In stating that their actions are at an end, Iran more or less said the same. They said they would punish Israel and in their eyes, they have. Israel's defensive capabilities are well known so my guess is that they knew that their attack would be ineffective but you can bet your bottom dollar that the media in Iran will be stating a completely different story. Most of the military experts on the region have the same opinion.

No.

Agreed but the poster should also note that the UK's actions have been defensive. I don't see anything wrong with stopping a missile from killing people. Both the US and the UK have stated that they will not take part in any action against Iran.

I don't agree with any of the parties in the current conflict and there are more than 2. If that means I'm on the fence, then so be it I'd love to see a free Iran, not one controlled by a set of woman hating religious fanatics. I do not and never will think that religion has any place running a country. Belief is something that people should be allowed to have - not used to repress and control. I'd love to see Israel put in its place, made to respect its given borders and stop its campaign of collective punishment. But I'd also love to see the hardline Palestinians accept that Israel exists and stop their terrorist attacks. There's so much wrong in the Middle East and most of it has religion at its core. I'm from a country where various different religions live side by side in peace. Even that has been challenged recently but the main reason for that is that we accepted the influx of a particular group who's background often doesn't live in peace with other religions - just as we see in the Middle East. Thankfully my country is not controlled by religious zealots - yet. Sadly, and I'm simply pointing out facts here; most of the conflicts in the world involve various Muslim faiths who are either fighting with each other or against other religions. That's as true in the South of Thailand as it is in the Middle East. Some Islamist groups seem to think that anyone who doesn't follow their ways doesn't deserve to exist. I have no idea what religion my next door neighbour has, I have none and neither of us has any effect on how the other lives their lives. Likewise, if religion took a back seat in the Middle East, we might not have the problems there that have been going on for centuries.

170 drones, 120 ballistic missiles and you can bet it used its oldest stock which was coming towards the end of its useable life. Iran is said to have 3000 ballistic missiles so it fired 4% of them.

I don't think anything is acceptable - by either side. I'm simply commenting on what has happened and that it was not a particularly large attack in terms of how many missiles and drones Iran actually has. I think I made it clear that I am not an Israel supporter, neither do support the medieval lunatics in Iran.

The information so far is that the attack was mainly composed of drones, something that Iran is reputed to have 000's of thousands of. They are not difficult to launch - especially when you have days to prepare for it. The Iranian Consulate in Syria was attacked on 1 April, Tehran's attack on Israel was 2 weeks later. Russia is trying to launch missiles in a completely different situation. Although Ukraine's capability is severely depleted, it still fires back.

Ask them, they are the ones that achieved nothing.

Doubtful unless Israel retaliates. Believe me, Iran really doesn't want a serious attack by Israel, that's why its been leaving it to its proxies like the Houthis and Hezbollah to carry out long term smaller attacks. The hardline Iranian Islamist government's position internally has been weakened over the last few years - an attack by Israel would probably mean the end for Khomeini and he will be aware of that. Until now, Israel would not have received support if it carried out any sustained attack on Iran. That position is now weaker and if Iran attacks again, the Israelis will feel fully justified in bombing the hell out of Tehran. There are members of the Israeli government that have wanted to deal with Iran for years - any further attacks from Iran and they may well get their way. Remember this, Israel is by far the best equipped and strongest military force overall in the entire Middle East, they also have the backing of the US - that's why they still exist. Iran's main ally Putin, is busy with his own war. He may have stepped in to help that other lunatic in Syria but this conflict is different, I really can't see him getting involved.........unless of course, we move to WW3 but then he'd be rather busy elsewhere. Much as Iran doesn't want to take Israel on directly, Putin doesn't want to take the West on either - not directly. I'm not an Israeli supporter by the way, I'm just telling it like it is.

300 is a minute percentage of the stocks of conventional missiles and drones they hold. They are also widely reputed to have over 3000 ballistic missiles.

Come off it. Iran knows very well that it would come off far worse if Israel launched an out and out attack on them. They also know very well that in addition to Israel's 'Iron Dome' there are US and UK warships in the region with the capability to shoot down just about anything Iran fires (something Ukraine doesn't have).

In fairness, the main reason the attack failed was because Iran had more or less stated what they were going to do - days beforehand. Israel has an effective missile defence system and its allies in the region have been on high alert for months with both US and UK naval vessels constantly monitoring the skies. However, even with that capablity, an unannounced attack would most likely have resulted in more damage. Had the Iranian attack been spontaneous and done more damage, that would have most likely lead to an immediate and probably sustained response by Israel. Iran may have hundreds of thousands of missiles but it does not have the sophisticated defence systems that the Isarelis have - they know very well that they can't defend themselves against such an attack. Iran acted because in the eyes of its 'brothers', it had to be seen to respond to the attack on its Consulate in Syria. Whilst Israel has not admitted responsibility for that attack, it is widely speculated on as having carried it out. The Iranian public are fed propaganda constantly and I doubt many will know that they could not stand up to a sustained attack by Israel. As was seen in news footage following the strike on Israel, the capital was full of chest beating Iranian government loyalists who will, I have no doubt, been fed an entirely different story on the efficacy of their attack on Israel. The Iranian attack appears to have been more symbolic than anything else. If you tell a bank you're going to rob it, they'll put their security on high alert.

You know exactly what I mean.

Nice people those Russians............. The Russian Imperial Romanov family (Nicholas II of Russia, his wife Alexandra Feodorovna, and their five children: Olga, Tatiana, Maria, Anastasia, and Alexei) were shot and bayoneted to death[2][3] by Bolshevik revolutionaries under Yakov Yurovsky on the orders of the Ural Regional Soviet in Yekaterinburg on the night of 16–17 July 1918. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_the_Romanov_family

I don't believe any of what either he or his buddies have said. The man is a meglamaniac and dreams of returning to Soviet days or maybe he dreams of being a Tsar? If that's the case he might want to take account of what happened to the last Tsar and his family.

You just can't help yourself can you? Even when a man has died you just have to make your racist comments.

I don't get your point. People have speculated that Putin doesn't want Nato on his borders. However the facts are that he already has that and if he takes Ukraine, he will have a much bigger one.

I have no idea if Immigration can access matters pertaining to information held by Amphurs but I wouldn't expect them to. What I would expect is that Immigration has access to visa information. Immigration and the MFA's tasks cover the same areas - the MFA run the embassies and control visa applications, immigration check visas and allow entry. I am very much aware that there is separation between the 2 departments - when I was told that a person entering to visit their spouse was not considered to be a tourist, I pointed out that the Thai Embassy in London's website states that a Multi Entry Tourist Visa was applicable for short family visits, the captain at the Suvarnabhumi immigration counter said "we decide which visa is correct, not the embassies". So yes, they are very much their own departments but I repeat, I do not believe that they don't have access to visa information.

I can assure you that until around 2018, I was unable to obtain a KR2 from anywhere other than the Amphur that I was married at. That is not my opinion, that is a fact, I'm not in the habit of driving over 200km for the sake of it. When my local office says "sorry, you need to get that from Buriram" - I should have told them they were wrong then? And demand they supply a KR2?

Back to the proposition made in the title of this thread - that Iran may have triggered World War 3 by attacking Israel. Whilst I don't think that time is yet with us, its a fact that we are closer to that prospect than we have even been since World War 2. The West has been facing actions and threats, mainly from radical Muslim groups and nations for decades. It would take pages and pages to discuss the reasons behind those matters but most seem to involve Islamic groups/regimes that impose a particularly radical version of Islam on their people. Some radical Muslim groups also fight against their 'brothers'. The Palestine/Israel situation has been a particular probelm for even longer. There are very long standing reasons for that conflict and neither side is likely to get what it wants - unless they are made to. The Palestinians will never succeed in ridding what was Palestine of the Israelis and the Israelis need to respect previously drawn borders. I can't see things improving there unless a settlement is imposed on both sides but even then - their neighbours might not accept any settlement and continue creating problems Putin began his aggression in by attacking Georgia in 2008, annexed The Crimea in 2014 and of course, invaded the rest of Ukraine in 2022. The real reasons for his attacks are unknown. Some say he is a bear that shouldn't have been poked by Ukraine's attempts to join both NATO and the EU - he doesn't want NATO or the EU on his borders. That doesn't make sense to me as he already has a small border with NATO and if he is allowed to take Ukraine, he will not only have a bigger border with NATO, he will have more EU neighbours. Several other smaller conflicts exist around the world, notably in Africa where most of the other 'shaky' regimes exist. Again most of the conflicts involve Muslim nations or groups. Although there is no current conflict with China, China remains a threat to many nations such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and The Philippines with more recent potential threats towards the latter two. Putin and Xi also made a pact in 2022 describing their relationship as a 'partnership without limits'. What does the world have to combat these threats to overall world peace? Nothing is the real answer. The United Nations is little more than a talking shop, it has no teeth. It only has its 'peace keeping forces' and if they are attacked, they are usually withdrawn. So, we have a can of worms where different groups seek different things, sometimes out from greed, sometimes seeking power and sometimes trying to impose their ways or religions on others. It is notable that those who are most aggressive usually have very poor human rights records towards their own people. They also, often control the news their populations have access to in order to brainwash them through blatant propaganda. The solution, well maybe for another 80 years or so, probably is another World War. Pretty sad really, seeing as humans are supposed to be the most intelligent species. We are an intelligent species without a police force though. Personally, I believe we are some time from a full on World War but I do think we are creeping slowly but inevitably towards one. The current conflict in the Middle East may accelerate the process though. I don't think Iran will have been the trigger - more like the accelerator pedal, we have been going down that road for quite some time. Using the excuse of respecting sovereignty, we have failed to take on the main troublemakers and allowed their power to grow. The current conflict in the Middle East appears to be diverting attention and funding away from the biggest threat - Putin. He must be very happy - it may have taken him much longer to take Ukraine than he ever thought it would but things are not looking too good for Ukraine right now. People say that nuclear weapons have been the ultimate deterrent and whilst that may be true, the reverse may also be true. Putin has used the threat of nuclear war to deter other nations and NATO from taking the actions necessary to stop him. I believe that NATO and the rest of Europe will regret not taking Putin on directly or providing Ukraine with the means to do that themselves. I certainly wouldn't want to live in Poland at the moment.

Slight correction there, I was looking at visa stamps in my old passport as I typed. It was open on a page with Singapore stamps. We of course, arrived in Taipei.

Thank you - perhaps you should have made it clear that its an opinion? Common sense? I base my 'common sense' on my actual experiences although on several occasions on this website I've been told I'm wrong by people who think they know better. My assertions in this case are based on what I once saw on the screen I.O.'s screen during a protracted discussion firstly on immediate arrival where I was being considered for denial and later at the Immigration counter when, after being warned but allowed entry I went to discuss the matter further (not the same matter as up for discussion here but I did see the screen). Its some years ago now but I was quite amazed at what they had on me - all my passports and visas since 2002 - for various reasons there have been 4 passports which they (rightly) linked to me. I only saw 2 pages, I think, as the officer at the counter kept flicking through as I asked questions. There were several pages that I didn't get to see. The pertainent point is that all my entries were on the screen together with my visas and passports, I know that because I saw them. I cannot state with any honesty that those visas were only ones that had been triggered or not as I cannot read Thai but they were on the screen. Since then some departments of administration in Thailand have begun to share information. For example, its not so long ago that you had to go to the Amphur where you got married in order to obtain proof that your marriage still subsists (Kor Ror 2). Now that information can be obtained at any Amphur. When you get divorced, it is entered onto the system nationwide. I know of people who used to continue obtaining visas long after they were divorced - I wouldn't recommend trying that these days. That and I also simply find it difficult, almost impossible, to believe that a closely related department wouldn't be able to access crucial information. Immigration Entry Officers in the UK can even access the answers to questions on a visa application form - they can and often do, ask entrants questions and compare them to the application. Thailand is not the UK granted, but it is difficult to believe that Thai Immigration Police do not know whether or not a visa has been issued. They are the first line of defence against fake passports and visas which are both known to exist. Surely a visa needs to be verified? As an application for an E-Visa is done online, it would be fairly easy for the information to be shared with Immigration once granted - it would not require manual data entry. Relating this to the OP, I think that the chances of Immigration knowing he holds a visa are real. It may depend on whether or not the I.O. takes the time to read all the information available and it may also depend on whether or not the I.O. agrees not to trigger his visa. It seems to be 'up to them'. When they triggered mine, I got the distinct impression that they didn't have to. I'm pretty sure thay could just have stamped me in for 30 days but the officer refused. When you are married to a Thai citizen, you should not enter using a 30 day waiver, you are not considered to be a tourist - that is from the 'horses mouth' on a separate occasion, not my own thoughts. If the OP is married he should not try to enter visa exempt. There will be plenty of people who have entered and left Thailand more times than I have but I would guess that I have done it more than most here and under several different sets of circumstances. I have therefore come across more situations than many will have and probably been quesioned more. That is the only reason I know what I know, I don't claim to have any special knowledge, I just refer to my experiences. Whatever, it is my opinion that the OP is risking triggering his visa if he tries to enter on a 30 day. He could be lucky but it remains a possibility.

I can't speak for individual circumstances. Any brand of car can be worth less than the cost of a repair. A friend of mine in the UK has just written his VW off because it needed a new ECU. I can tell you that I own a Chevolet now and I have owned them for more than 6 years. I have never had a problem getting parts for any of them. Last year I ordered a gearstick - something I thought I would have to wait for. GP Autoparts, Chevrolet's appointed parts stockist, had it in stock. I haven't had to order many parts but so far, everything I've needed has been in stock. As with other manufacturers, they have models which are considered duds - with Chevrolet, the Captiva seems to be that one. The other thread I refered to was indeed about the Captiva model but a poster in that thread said that his friend/neighbour's car had been at the repairer's for months with a starter motor fault. A quick search located starter motors for that model being available all over Thailand. I suggested that the problem was down to the repairer and the poster agreed - adding thtt he himself had searched for a starter motor at the time and also found them to be available. The Captiva may be a dud but not because of a lack of starter motors. Older Chevrolet trucks, and the OP is looking for a truck, shared many body and mechanical parts with the Isuzu D Max, therefore in a lot of cases, the parts are identical. They are no more or less reliable than the Isuzu but because of all the rubbish about parts availability, they are often much cheaper. Good news for a purchaser with a telephone who doesn't mind making a couple of calls to obtain parts. I case you didn't read it - I'm an ex mechanic, I was in the trade for around 30 years. I have a little knowledge of what I'm talking about. Quantum physics? Computers? No chance but motors? Yes.