SanSaiExPat

All these Thailand British ExPat's have such extraordinary insight into American news events and politics. I think from now on, to get accurate information on what's going on at home I'll just come here.

Celsius maybe you should switch to F. Jai Yen Yen. The Minn. ICE action will be over soon when all the Illegals are deported. The unfortunate death of the protestor this week was due to her interfering with ICE operations. Regarding Greenland. The US has shown long-standing and recently intensified interest in Greenland, driven by national security concerns in the Arctic. Historically, the US attempted to purchase Greenland multiple times (e.g., in 1867, 1946 with a $100 million offer, and discussions in 1910 and 1955), viewing it as vital for defense against potential threats over the North Pole. Currently, as of early 2026, President Trump has revived and escalated efforts to acquire Greenland, describing it as an "absolute necessity" for national security and freedom worldwide. The White House has stated that acquiring Greenland is a "national security priority" to counter Russian and Chinese activities in the Arctic, including missile threats, naval movements, new shipping routes due to melting ice, and access to rare earth minerals. Options under discussion include purchase, economic partnerships, or even military action (though diplomacy is emphasized as the first approach, and some officials like Secretary of State Marco Rubio have indicated preference for buying it). The US already operates Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base) in northwestern Greenland under a 1951 defense agreement with Denmark, supporting missile warning, space surveillance, and NATO operations. Greenland forms part of the critical GIUK Gap (Greenland-Iceland-UK), a chokepoint for monitoring Russian submarines entering the Atlantic. Denmark and Greenland have firmly rejected any sale or annexation, asserting sovereignty, with European NATO allies rallying in support. Greenlandic leaders and polls show strong opposition to becoming part of the US, though many favor eventual independence from Denmark. Iceland The US also maintains strong interest in Iceland, though without recent claims of acquisition or territorial control. Iceland is a key NATO ally (a founding member) with no standing army, relying on a 1951 bilateral defense agreement for protection. The US previously maintained a major base at Keflavík until 2006 but continues cooperative activities, including NATO air policing, joint exercises, search and rescue, and occasional deployments. Iceland's position in the GIUK Gap makes it essential for monitoring Russian naval and air activity in the North Atlantic. Relations focus on shared goals like Arctic cooperation, countering Russian/Chinese influence, trade, and security. The US was the first to recognize Iceland's independence in 1944 and has provided economic/military support historically. No current territorial ambitions exist, unlike with Greenland; ties are cooperative and alliance-based. In summary, US interest in both stems from Arctic geopolitics, with Greenland seeing aggressive recent pursuit (including potential ownership) due to perceived vulnerabilities against adversaries, while Iceland involves stable alliance partnership. Both are tied to deterring Russia and China in a warming Arctic.

Unfortunately, at the rate things are going, it will be an Islamic Republic by the time that happens.

Another liberal throwing around words he doesn't understand. Grow up! We live in a dangerous world.

https://gellerreport.com/2025/09/far-left-radical-arrested-for-attempted-mass-shooting-at-charlie-kirk-memorial.html/

Well you certainly seemed to miss the facts about where the violence comes from in your original post.

My friend I freely admit there are, as in any following, some folks who "...just can't handle critiques...(and), they immediately clam up, get defensive and start making it personal" But you won't find conservatives who go out an assassinate those they disagree with like the left, psycho, socialists do. President Trump, (2 assassination attempts by leftists.) or the case of Luigi Mangione a far left whack job who killed United HealthCare CEO Brian Thompson, to this weeks assassination of Mr. Charlie Kirk, for the crime of daring to debate and have civil discourse with American Students on campus. I couldn't agree with you more and I'm sure Charlie Kirk would agree with your statement too, if he still had a voice. "Criticism and open mindedness is what independent thinkers engage in, and it sets them apart... " from murders, I invite you to reflect on that for just a moment. But maybe you're going to "screen out unhelpful facts, invent favorable ones, and ignore contradictions in... (your) own claims. Take care and God Bless.

Hear! Here! I second that statement.

There is one constitutional way to allow President Trump (or any president) to serve more than two terms and that would be to amend or repeal the 22nd Amendment. This would require a constitutional amendment under Article V, needing a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate to propose, followed by ratification by three-fourths (38) of the 50 state legislatures. Alternatively, a constitutional convention called by two-thirds of states could propose it.

The "news article" is bizarre in the sense that it's armchair psychology at scale, weaponized for political gain rather than genuine medical concern. Remote diagnoses like this violate ethical guidelines from bodies like the American Psychiatric Association (the "Goldwater Rule"), which frowns on speculating about public figures without direct evaluation. Trump has always been bombastic, tangential, and self-aggrandizing—that's his brand, rooted in narcissism, sure, but it's been consistent for decades, not some sudden "decline." Many leaders exhibit narcissistic traits; it's practically a job requirement for high-stakes roles. The cognitive stuff? Anecdotal at best, cherry-picked from gaffes that any 79-year-old (or honestly, anyone under pressure) might make. In 2025, with Trump back in office and pushing through policies, there's no concrete evidence of impairment derailing his administration; if anything, his re-election suggests voters either dismissed these narratives or saw them as partisan noise. Ultimately, this feels like recycled anti-Trump hysteria from left-leaning sources and experts with axes to grind (e.g., Duty To Warn group or family critics like Mary Trump). It's not bizarre in a vacuum—age-related concerns are fair game for any elderly leader—but the selective outrage and lack of balance make it smell like agenda-driven sensationalism rather than objective analysis. If it's real, we'd see official medical disclosures or functional breakdowns; until then, it's just more media theater.

I'm choking on my fried rice. Hard to believe. One man's dictator . Is Thaksin suffering from Stockholm syndrome?

Could Nok Air's International Grounding be politically motivated? Jurangkool Family and Political Connections: Wutthiphum Jurangkool is the cousin of Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, the former leader of the progressive Future Forward Party, which was dissolved in 2020 by Thailand’s Constitutional Court amid political controversy. Thanathorn remains a polarizing figure in Thai politics, associated with anti-establishment movements. Although Wutthiphum has publicly distanced himself from politics, stating in 2020 that he is “not that into political stuff” and has not seen Thanathorn in nearly a decade, the family’s prominence could invite scrutiny from political actors. In Thailand’s polarized political landscape, where business and politics often intersect, regulatory actions against a company linked to a family with political ties (even distant ones) could be perceived as targeted, especially if the government or regulators have ties to opposing factions. Thai Airways and Nok Air Tensions: Nok Air operates largely independently of Thai Airways, its parent company, which holds an 8.91% stake. Historical friction exists, as Thai Airways attempted to increase its stake in Nok Air by purchasing shares from Krungthai Bank (a state enterprise), which was blocked by the bank despite both entities being under the Finance Ministry’s oversight. This refusal suggests potential bureaucratic or political rivalries within state-controlled entities. The CAAT, also a state entity, could theoretically be influenced by such dynamics, especially if Thai Airways or its allies sought to limit Nok Air’s growth to favor other carriers (e.g., Thai Airways or Thai AirAsia). ICAO Audit and National Reputation: The CAAT’s actions coincide with an ICAO audit scheduled for late August 2025, a critical moment for Thailand’s aviation industry to regain a higher safety rating (e.g., from the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, which downgraded Thailand to Category 2 in 2015). Suspending Nok Air’s international flights could be a strategic move to demonstrate strict regulatory enforcement to international bodies, bolstering Thailand’s global aviation reputation. While this is a regulatory motive, it could be politically driven if the government prioritizes national image over supporting a private airline with ties to a controversial family. Market Competition and Economic Interests: The suspension leaves Nok Air’s international routes (e.g., to China and India) open to competitors like Thai Airways, Thai AirAsia, and Bangkok Airways. These carriers could benefit economically from absorbing Nok Air’s passengers, raising questions about whether lobbying or influence from competing airlines played a role. Thailand’s tourism-driven economy relies heavily on aviation, and the government may prioritize carriers with stronger financials or fewer safety concerns, potentially sidelining Nok Air to avoid risks to the sector’s recovery post-pandemic. Historical Context of Political Influence in Thai Aviation: Thailand’s aviation sector has faced political interference in the past. For example, the 2015 FAA downgrade was linked to weak regulatory oversight, prompting the CAAT’s creation in 2016 to address governance issues. Regulatory actions against airlines can sometimes mask political or economic agendas, such as favoring state-backed carriers or punishing companies perceived as misaligned with government priorities.

I've been here long enough to remember when it was 42.

"Trump's Tariffs" Are really the "People's" tariffs. It's what we voted for. A year out from now you will see the USD gain significantly against these ASEAN currencies.

We don't really know. Maybe he still has another 40 Mil in Australia.