English Tourist Riding Wrong Way on Jomtien Beach Road Crashes into Parked Car

[Patong2021]

9 hours ago, Talon said:

 

The US pays for the majority of all of it; and the US is saddled with doing most of the work. With 32 NATO countries, the US should only be involved in 1/32 of NATO operations and financing.

 

You are making demands based upon imagined facts. 

The USA DOES NOT pay for the majority of the NATO budget, nor is the USA saddled with doing most of the work.

Your demand that  the USA only provide 1/32 of the budget is illogical and would require  the other NATO members to subsidize the USA .

 

Your argument ignores the fact that the USA  requires open access to the world's shipping lanes, and transportation corridors over which it imports and exports.  The USA also requires stable economies with which to trade. If the USA does not have markets to sell to, the USA will quickly die.

 

The NATO budget is based upon GDP and reflects the benefits each economy derives from access to the  markets protected.  The USA pays roughly the same proportion of the NATO budget as Germany despite being significantly larger than Germany. Europe as a whole provides much of NATO's budget.

 

The USA wishes to have influence around the world. One of the way it achieves this is through military might. The Gulf Arab nations would not purchase the billions of USD in military hardware and services unless there was a US presence.  The USA could not dictate international  financial policies and diplomatic positions unless it had a worldwide presence.

If the USA loses that presence and footprint, its economy which is  trade driven will collapse.

 

Cost share arrangements for civil budget, military budget and NATO Security Investment Programme
Nation	Cost share "at 32" following the accession of Sweden Valid as from 7 March 2024 until 31 December 2024
Albania	0.0882
Belgium	2.0447
Bulgaria	0.3552
Canada	6.6840
Croatia	0.2910
Czechia	1.0259
Denmark	1.2744
Estonia	0.1213
Finland	0.9057
France	10.1940
Germany	15.8813
Greece	1.0273
Hungary	0.7380
Iceland	0.0624
Italy	8.5324
Latvia	0.1550
Lithuania	0.2493
Luxembourg	0.1645
Montenegro	0.0283
Netherlands	3.3528
North Macedonia	0.0756
Norway	1.7267
Poland	2.9015
Portugal	1.0194
Romania	1.1931
Slovakia	0.5014
Slovenia	0.2212
Spain	5.8211
Sweden	1.9277
Türkiye	4.5927
United Kingdom	10.9626
United States	15.8813
TOTAL NATO	100.0000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Talon]

1 hour ago, Patong2021 said:

The NATO budget is based upon GDP and reflects the benefits each economy derives from access to the  markets protected.  

 

 

I know what it's based on and what each country contributes. I don't agree with it.

 

Each country should provide 1/32 of the budget. Period.

[Gecko123]

11 hours ago, theblether said:

I can't really be bothered getting into the Russian military debate. There's going to be a few other people on this forum who have a military background and don't just sit in their basement making up scare stories. But here goes: 

 

Conventional war only. 

 

Russia cannot defeat NATO. The notion is laughable and Russia has known this since at least 1982. I say again, the notion is laughable. 

 

The biggest con trick played on the Western public in my lifetime was the notion that Russia could invade and defeat our forces. Under no circumstances was that ever going to be the case. NATO always knew that the Russian military was dysfunctional. They knew because among other things, NATO were allowed to observe Soviet exercises in person. I know that as I, personally, witnessed Soviets inspect my troops position. 

 

The utter failure of Russia to defeat Ukraine is only a taster of how bad things are in the Russian military. They've already lost the majority of their professional army and NATO hasn't lost a single soldier. 

 

In my opinion, if Poland alone attacked Russia it would crush them. Only Poland. 

 

But from a conventional point of view, troops from Finland, the Baltic states, Poland, all.the way down and round to Ukraine invading Russia? Then in the Far East the US Navy and Marine Corps pouring in before Aliied support from countries such as Australia? 

 

The Russians cannot defend their border from NATO attack. It cannot be done. It's too long, too vast, and they don't have the troops numbers. It would be comparable to the Turkey Run in Desert Storm or the Shock & Awe of the Iraq War. 

 

Why is it a con trick? Because the amount of money spent on unnecessary military build up could be spent on improving infrastructure. US infrastructure is under real pressure, and it will take another 30 years for Europe to bring Eastern European former Soviet infrastructure up to standard. 

 

We've been lied to by the military industrial complex for years. Eisenhower warned us. 

 

All I can say is thank God you're not in charge of foreign policy for the West. I can tell you think you're some sort of think tank geopolitical strategist worthy of employment at the Heritage Foundation, but  your counter-arguments have more in common with Alfred E. Newman than they do with Henry Kissinger. Your 24/7 spewing of rhetoric on this forum makes me highly suspicious that you are secretly a paid propagandist on God-knows-who's payroll.

 

You are discounting the possibility that Russia would likely have allies (North Korea, China, Iran), and that Russia's geographic mass (as Hitler discovered) can serve as a military advantage as well. If you look at Russia's efforts to undermine Western democracies and what they are doing to undermine Western influence around the world but especially in the Middle East, North Africa and the Sahel region, it's obvious that Russia has designs on Western Europe and it's foolhardy and disingenuous to pretend that NATO solidarity isn't important because of perceived limits to Russia's military capabilities.

[theblether]

My view, based upon what Mexicans told me when I lived there during 2016. 

 

What Mexicans want. Legal access to the US workplace - no surprise. 

 

What they'll happily accept - seasonal visas so they can arrive when there is a surge in labor force requirements. 

 

What they dream of - seasonal visas at US pay rates. 

 

What they fear - constant harassment and gangmasters. 

 

What they love - Mexico. 

 

There's a misconception that Mexicans want to live permantly in the USA. Some do, many want to dip in and out of the labor market and take advantage of the lower cost of living in Mexico. And many just love being at home. 

 

What they really don't like - their access to the USA being controlled by gangs. 

 

And catching the whiptail of Central American migration. Even worse when they see Africans, Chinese etc using their country as a stepping stone. 

 

What defeats the Democrats. Trump's tariff use is intended to punish unfair trade. The one way to upset him is to tariff American products then expect free access to the US market. 

 

He doesn't mind the Mexican economy growing as it reduces emigration demand and a wealthier nation to the South is preferable to exporting cash to Asia.  

 

Here's something virtually none of you know. Thailand has been watchlisted by the USA for years. Currency manipulation draws the attention of the Fed Reserve - keep that in mind when you hear Thai politicians request intervention in the currency markets  

 

Also, the USA is well aware of unfair Thai tariffs. So far the judgement has been political ( alliance ) benefits over tariff brutality. 

 

This is why you see Thai politicians dance around Sino-Thai relations. They don't want the US moving them into the wrong column. Equally, they don't want to scunner the Chinese who are historically dominant in this theater. 

 

Hence why you see a lot of pushback against Chinese infrastructure investments. Just like Malaysia, Thailand fears being in excessive debt to China. 

 

Put simply. Tariffs are used routinely against the USA. It cannot be a shock to anyone that US Presidents are capable of retaliation. 

 

But here again the Dems are on a hook of their own making. Human rights abuses now figure into international trade ( quite right ). Environmental issues do not. 

 

The West breathes the same air as China eventually. If anyone is serious about climate change ( and I'm not getting involved in that argument ) then manufacturing methods must be on the table. 

 

The UK - the original coal island - has closed all coal fired power stations while China opens a new one every week? 

 

What is the point. Welcome to Alice in Wonderland where the mad hatters run around spouting inane garbage with zero lateral thinking. 

 

Just like this forum on a normal say. 🫠

 

 

[theblether]

10 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

 

All I can say is thank God you're not in charge of foreign policy for the West. I can tell you think you're some sort of think tank geopolitical strategist worthy of employment at the Heritage Foundation, but  your counter-arguments have more in common with Alfred E. Newman than they do with Henry Kissinger. Your 24/7 spewing of rhetoric on this forum makes me highly suspicious that you are secretly a paid propagandist on God-knows-who's payroll.

 

You are discounting the possibility that Russia would likely have allies (North Korea, China, Iran), and that Russia's geographic mass (as Hitler discovered) can serve as a military advantage as well. If you look at Russia's efforts to undermine Western democracies and what they are doing to undermine Western influence around the world but especially in the Middle East, North Africa and the Sahel region, it's obvious that Russia has designs on Western Europe and it's foolhardy and disingenuous to pretend that NATO solidarity isn't important because of perceived limits to Russia's military capabilities.

 

You are making things up in your head. 

 

The reason Russia cannot defeat the West is clear. They do not have the manpower. 

 

Your point about how vast the country? This is not Napoleonic War time, and neither would NATO make the mistake of replaying the WW2 land invasion.

 

Note I said conventional war only. It would not be a conventional war as the Russians KNOW THEY WOULD LOSE and would pull out the only tool they have - Nuclear blackmail. 

 

You accuse me of Heritage Foundation blah blah drivel. Let me help you here - point me to a single conservative think tank promoting the idea that we are spending too much money on military build up? 

 

You can't. By that single comment you proved yourself a buffoon, out of your league on these issues. 

 

 

[theblether]

Sometimes on this forum a member jumps the shark. Dunning-Kruger syndrome. Let's see if this clown can answer the true ""China Syndrome." 

 

Russia has no allies that can tip the scale. North Korea? Give it a rest. 

 

So China? You'd need to be either mentally ill or a believer in the Revelations chapter of the bible to believe that China would go to war on behalf of Russia. 

 

Which is it? 

Edited 1 hour ago by theblether

[theblether]

And now a second question for the Dunning-Kruger syndrome sufferer. 

 

Why has China not invaded Taiwan? 

 

I've posted the answer here before. 

[Talon]

2 minutes ago, theblether said:

You'd need to be either mentally ill or a believer in the Revelations chapter of the bible to believe that China would go to war on behalf of Russia. 

 

Correct. The CCP doesn't stick out their neck for anyone.

[earlinclaifornia]

3 minutes ago, theblether said:

And now a second question for the Dunning-Kruger syndrome sufferer. 

 

Why has China not invaded Taiwan? 

 

I've posted the answer here before. 

Did Vlad tell you?

[theblether]

1 minute ago, earlinclaifornia said:

Did Vlad tell you?

 

So I, one of the guys who joined the British army because I detest Marxism, am now to be labeled a Russian plant by a worthless troll clown on the Internet. 

 

Let me add something. As a West of Scotland Protestant in uniform during The Troubles, I faced abuse from the Irish Republican section of my home town. 

 

I didn't and still don't give a flying <deleted> about Ireland. As I said to them and I say to you. 

 

I joined the British army as I detest Karl Marx and all his Satanic spawn with a lifetime passion. 

 

People like you calling people like me Russian plants are utter category one scum. 

 

You earned that title, wear it with pride. 

[earlinclaifornia]

2 minutes ago, theblether said:

 

So I, one of the guys who joined the British army because I detest Marxism, am now to be labeled a Russian plant by a worthless troll clown on the Internet. 

 

Let me add something. As a West of Scotland Protestant in uniform during The Troubles, I faced abuse from the Irish Republican section of my home town. 

 

I didn't and still don't give a flying <deleted> about Ireland. As I said to them and I say to you. 

 

I joined the British army as I detest Karl Marx and all his Satanic spawn with a lifetime passion. 

 

People like you calling people like me Russian plants are utter category one scum. 

 

You earned that title, wear it with pride. 

Thank you for the badge of Scum. You made my day hobo

[theblether]

I'm going to sleep. I wonder how many will now go research Revelations. 

 

I wrote a thesis on that chapter in 1982. 

 

Seek out the biblical story of the rise of the "Yellowman" 

 

It will lead you to why the Evangelicals support Israel with a passion. 

[theblether]

1 minute ago, earlinclaifornia said:

Thank you for the badge of Scum. You made my day hobo

 

You earned it. 

 

Outrageous you indicated that a former British serviceman is a Russian stooge. 

 

You are a disgrace. Disgusting rhetoric. 

[earlinclaifornia]

1 minute ago, theblether said:

 

You earned it. 

 

Outrageous you indicated that a former British serviceman is a Russian stooge. 

 

You are a disgrace. Disgusting rhetoric. 

You sound very much to be a Russian troll

Almost all the non Americans loving Trumpets have no any real offerings.