War with N Korea. Any impacts on Thailand?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, dave_boo said:

Whoah, you sure veered off course here.  As I didn't call you a Russian Swede, why did you find it incumbent to insinuate that the US is full of violent and stupid people who only succeed because of the rest of the world?  Didn't your concentration camps during WWII have a nearly 30% death rate?  Sounds much more violent than what happened during the unfortunate internments in the US.

 

I keep hearing about how reduction of US power is a good thing because the rest of the world will be better off and things will be peaceful.  And yet looking at history things were much worst before the US's ascension to power.

 

I don't know why you think I care about only myself and my own well being.  I think the quote below clearly states that I am against using other countries to produce cheap things (anti-wage slavery) whilst destroying theirs (and the rest of the world's) environment.

 

 

 

 

I don't understand how that could be considered wanting them to live in a developed world.  Perhaps I am just the 'lesser educated' American.

 

Your assertions about my 'representing' is laughable.  I want people to have the freedom to improve themselves.  I want people to have the freedom to live their lives as they choose.  I want people to have the freedom to decide how their countries are ran.  I want people to have the freedom to pursue happiness.

 

However freedom should not infringe on other people's freedoms.  Should a company or business owner have the freedom to strip mine an area using carcinogenic chemicals next to a school?  Should the US have the freedom to dump spent nuclear fuel in the North Sea?  Personally I don't think so because for both of those examples the 'freedoms'  exercised impinge on other people's freedoms.

 

Now perhaps your post is due to language barriers.  I speak Spanish fluently and am still cautious as something as simple as subtle conjugations can have an enormous impact on the message.  Combined with the late hour and possibility of adult beverages influencing posts I will not take offense and tell you in all sincerity that it appears you misunderstood my post based on your reply.

I'm not sure if a Finn should ever be called as a Russian Swede. It's frucking offencive of us, but then again, it's actually pretty definitive. I actually like that definition. 

When it comes to Finland and concentration camps, we actually made sure that 0% of our jews died due nazi regime. 

 

I'm happy you are able to speak Spanish as your second language, it's my 4th language. English being my 3rd learned language.

[dave_boo]

7 minutes ago, oilinki said:

I'm not sure if a Finn should ever be called as a Russian Swede. It's frucking offencive of us, but then again, it's actually pretty definitive. I actually like that definition. 

When it comes to Finland and concentration camps, we actually made sure that 0% of our jews died due nazi regime. 

 

I'm happy you are able to speak Spanish as your second language, it's my 4th language. English being my 3rd learned language.

Yeah; that was a low blow on my part.  Does it show I have hung out with Norwegians?

 

The deaths statistic came from Russian prisoners.

 

I'm not going to get in a pissing contest about superiority.  You don't know me and I don't know you.  I harbor no ill will and would even buy you a beer if we ever met (but Archa only because I'm poor :D ).  

 

I am still interested about what you were talking about below.  Could you please explain the parallels?

 

The way USA is playing it's hands right now, is the way Soviet Union played it's hands when it became Russia and become subcritical power.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, dave_boo said:

I could be wrong; but the longer flight time means that you have more data about its flight path.  If you've ever seen the Phalanx LPWS system work, you'll know what I'm talking about.  Used against mortars, it radar tracks it and catches it after the arc.  I.E. when it is coming down.  Very successful.

 

Throw up a bunch of proximity detonating munitions in its path an watch the fireworks.  Of course dealing with the spread of the missile components is bad.

You are wrong. Deadly wrong in this occasion. 

This is pure physics.

The best time to attack a missile, is when it moving slow. 
The time a missile is moving slow, is when it's starting it's journey.

After that, the missile is moving very fast, much faster than any intercepting missile could reach it. 

The second option is to make a 'fog' of particles, when the missile does re-entry to the earth's atmosphere. That's a long shot, every time. 

There are no mortars to kill a flying missile. There are very few ways to kill a nuclear warhead coming down. 

And at the end of the day, the nuclear warhead doesn't even have to come down. The far more effective way is to detonate nuclear bomb way up in the sky and create EMP.

https://tennessine.com/ScienceFunFacts/NuclearWar/EMP

Even one nuclear bomb at high altitude renders a country or continent back to ages before electricity. 
 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, tryasimight said:

NK and USA same thing...will not happen. MAD is still in effect but with different countries. 

 

Does people of today, still understand what MAD actually means?

It doesn't mean being in a nuclear shelter for two week and then trying to recover and get on with our lives. 

MAD means, we are going to have an nuclear winter, where people like us, who have been far, far away from the nuclear detonations, are going to die of hunger, due the nuclear winter. 

 

[tryasimight]

Just now, oilinki said:

Does people of today, still understand what MAD actually means?

It doesn't mean being in a nuclear shelter for two week and then trying to recover and get on with our lives. 

MAD means, we are going to have an nuclear winter, where people like us, who have been far, far away from the nuclear detonations, are going to die of hunger, due the nuclear winter. 

 

Iy mens Mutually Assured Destruction....pretty simple term I thought,,,we gonna die

[superal]

This post is a repeat / same as a post I made last month , or have you all got short memories ? 

               

Time to evacuate Asia ?

By superal, August 10 in World News 

[Guest]

26 minutes ago, dave_boo said:

I'm not going to get in a pissing contest about superiority.  You don't know me and I don't know you.  I harbor no ill will and would even buy you a beer if we ever met (but Archa only because I'm poor :D ).  

 

I am still interested about what you were talking about below.  Could you please explain the parallels?

Archa is my favorite beer in Thailand. One of those treasures, which others don't appreciate, but are good :)
I'd love to enjoy 10 bottles with you, along talking philosophy while becoming intoxicated :D

United Kingdom used to be world super power. They lost their power. Soviet Union used to be a world super power, they lost their power. United States used to be world super power.. they are losing their power at this moment. 

China is world super power. They also will lose their power at some point, but for the rest of our lives, China will be the main motor of the world. 

 

[tryasimight]

9 minutes ago, superal said:

This post is a repeat / same as a post I made last month , or have you all got short memories ? 

               

Time to evacuate Asia ?

By superal, August 10 in World News 

probably on both counts

[tryasimight]

2 hours ago, jeab1980 said:

Might not be a bad thing wipe out most of the population of the world and start again. Cant do any worse than than we have already done to it.

worked well with the various plagues we've had, plenty of food for those who made it and advances in technology

 

[tryasimight]

2 hours ago, AlexRRR said:

 

Yes Mate not to long and the Yanks are on the ball....what they dont shoot down most wont hit there target cause the NK isn't up to the same standard as them meanwhile once the Nk shoot off the Yanks will have a reason to wipe out every god dam city in NK then an almighty invasion will begin....its Iraq all over again....its the boy who cried wolf once to often a few of us dont believe western press after GW Bush and weapons of mass destruction...

 

Cuban missile crisis of the early 60's. Iraq...biggest army outside of China US and Russia at the time do i need to go on? Think about it...You can believe China isn't interested in a war if it got close they would engineer the overthrow of the NK dictator, they dont want a US allied nation on there border as the US didn't want Cuba under Russian influence during the cold war...

 

Sabre rattling bonds nations especially when your political power base is under threat, sells papers too and it arms nations to the teeth, good for business if your in the munitions business, do i think there is a threat there? yes i do, do i think it will come to a war....possibly and why? because the Americans are broke they print money to stay afloat they owe a fortune and dont want to balance there books because it means they will loose there power base, as we have seen time and time again empires do not last they all crumble and so will the American one its just a matter off time, does it mean it will come to a war? not necessarily but it did and the Americans lost it would wipe out dept and retool the nation if they won everyone gets to pay them the cost of the war...win win no matter how you look at it...simplified of course but thats the crutch of it...and you my friend are just a pawn in the game .....

 

 

No problem...just send in Julie Bishop she'll scre the F!!!!!!kes down

[dave_boo]

1 hour ago, oilinki said:

You are wrong. Deadly wrong in this occasion. 

This is pure physics.

The best time to attack a missile, is when it moving slow. 
The time a missile is moving slow, is when it's starting it's journey.

After that, the missile is moving very fast, much faster than any intercepting missile could reach it. 

The second option is to make a 'fog' of particles, when the missile does re-entry to the earth's atmosphere. That's a long shot, every time. 

There are no mortars to kill a flying missile. There are very few ways to kill a nuclear warhead coming down. 

And at the end of the day, the nuclear warhead doesn't even have to come down. The far more effective way is to detonate nuclear bomb way up in the sky and create EMP.

https://tennessine.com/ScienceFunFacts/NuclearWar/EMP

Even one nuclear bomb at high altitude renders a country or continent back to ages before electricity. 
 

You understand that during descent the defensive missile doesn't have to catch up to the ICBM because the ICBM is headed towards where the defensive missile is coming from?  Your claim about speed makes as much sense as saying you will never hit a train because you can't run as fast as it.  Test that out by waiting until one comes and you run directly at the train...

 

It's obvious that you don't know about CIWS or LPWS.  They don't shoot mortars; they shoot mortars and supersonic missiles down by releasing a stream (75 rounds a second) of either penetrator style munitions or proximity fused munitions.  Both of those systems are extremely effective; there's 20 countries use them.  The idea is to make the target non-aerodynamic and/or cause it to detonate.  

 

I can't tell if you're being deliberately obtuse or if it's not actually an act.  Bravo.

[dave_boo]

1 hour ago, oilinki said:

Archa is my favorite beer in Thailand. One of those treasures, which others don't appreciate, but are good :)
I'd love to enjoy 10 bottles with you, along talking philosophy while becoming intoxicated :D

United Kingdom used to be world super power. They lost their power. Soviet Union used to be a world super power, they lost their power. United States used to be world super power.. they are losing their power at this moment. 

China is world super power. They also will lose their power at some point, but for the rest of our lives, China will be the main motor of the world. 

 

You're ok if I drink gin with you as beer makes my tummy hurt?  Wouldn't want me walking out on you while you're making a point so I can relieve myself.

[Guest]

32 minutes ago, dave_boo said:

You understand that during descent the defensive missile doesn't have to catch up to the ICBM because the ICBM is headed towards where the defensive missile is coming from?  Your claim about speed makes as much sense as saying you will never hit a train because you can't run as fast as it.  Test that out by waiting until one comes and you run directly at the train...

 

It's obvious that you don't know about CIWS or LPWS.  They don't shoot mortars; they shoot mortars and supersonic missiles down by releasing a stream (75 rounds a second) of either penetrator style munitions or proximity fused munitions.  Both of those systems are extremely effective; there's 20 countries use them.  The idea is to make the target non-aerodynamic and/or cause it to detonate.  

 

I can't tell if you're being deliberately obtuse or if it's not actually an act.  Bravo.

Firstly the math become exponentially more difficult, when trying to intercept a really fast moving object on ballistic trajectory. 

Secondary the physics of trying to trying to predict the trajectory of an moving object, which is penetrating earth's atmosphere, has to take account so many variables, starting from simplest atmospheric pressures at any given point, going towards weather patterns and air moisture of any given point of the re-entry. This is just to understand where the hostile missile will go.

Thirdly to guide a interceptive missile, within few meters to meet the missile, which is coming down from the space with a speed of 25.000km/hour. The interceptor missile has to know all the parameters, even before it's worth to launch.

That is rocket science. Then of course there is the chemistry of to interceptive missile. Everything has to work at first go.

All those calculations must be done and adjusted within milliseconds. There is no space for error at all.

It's much easier to shoot an apple with a gun, than try to hit the flying bullet with a stone.

Btw. One of the most destructive ways to detonate a nuclear bomb is to detonate it high up in the space. This would cause and EMP effect, which can disable entire continent.
https://tennessine.com/ScienceFunFacts/NuclearWar/EMP

 

North Korea has already shown their ability to launch missiles up to 500km height. I'd be more afraid of EMP, than any other nuclear detonation. 


 

Edited September 2, 2017 by Guest

[elgenon]

Nuclear fallout?

[GOLDBUGGY]

Well if N Korea did have Nuclear War Heads, and did hit Guam, with one then I agree the USA would not sit back if that happened. But pretty big "If's" here as I highly doubt N/ Korea does have Nuclear Warheads. 

 

But if this was true, then any Nation within North Korea Missle Range is in threat. Including the USA, Russia, China, Japan, and Thailand, along with many others. I don't include South Korea as to me that is the prize and what North Korea has been fighting about all these years, and to unify the South with the North. 

 

Economically, a war like this would generate a lot of income and jobs, especially in the field of making Military Equipment. Blow up a few Oil Depos and Oil Prices climb. But in short, it would not be a good thing if North Korea bomb Guam with a Nuclear War Head. 

[inThailand]

9 hours ago, oilinki said:

Archa is my favorite beer in Thailand. One of those treasures, which others don't appreciate, but are good :)
I'd love to enjoy 10 bottles with you, along talking philosophy while becoming intoxicated :D

United Kingdom used to be world super power. They lost their power. Soviet Union used to be a world super power, they lost their power. United States used to be world super power.. they are losing their power at this moment. 

China is world super power. They also will lose their power at some point, but for the rest of our lives, China will be the main motor of the world. 

 

Well put! Except for the part about Archa beer.

[4MyEgo]

The way I see it for what its worth is, NK has stood on its own for how long.......right or wrong in everybody's eyes.

 

I find it strange that the US finds them a threat, is their leader mad, I have to ask, are any of the world's leaders who store nuclear warheads mad, in my opinion the countries listed below are, think about it, any of these leaders could lose it at any time, human nature, we all have our limits, while the most of us will just turn, walk away and calm down, others for example: who are carrying a gun, might just react differently, suffice to say that is why we have gun laws, excluding the US (Second Amendment), hence the reason people get killed over there all the time, tempers flare, etc etc etc, if a gun is in sight, its a threat, maybe the US should delete the Second Amendment while we are on the topic ?

 

I would like to ask why the US and everybody else doesn't start reducing their nuclear warhead arsenal till they get to zero, I mean do we really need them, didn't the US drop 2  nuclear bombs on Japan killing hundreds of thousands of people, and judging by how many nuclear warheads the US has, i.e. 6.800 Vs NK 8, its laughable to worry about NK in my opinion:

 

Country					Total Inventory
Russia					7,000
United States					6,800
France					300
China					270
United Kingdom					215
Israel					80
Pakistan					120-130
India					110-120
North Korea					8

 

[AjarnRichard]

The yankees should air drop port-a-potties all over Kim Jongs stomping grounds..............  then see how he responds...........  LOL  
 

[maxpower]

Target already decided and programmed into system

 

[dave_boo]

2 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

The way I see it for what its worth is, NK has stood on its own for how long.......right or wrong in everybody's eyes.

 

I find it strange that the US finds them a threat, is their leader mad, I have to ask, are any of the world's leaders who store nuclear warheads mad, in my opinion the countries listed below are, think about it, any of these leaders could lose it at any time, human nature, we all have our limits, while the most of us will just turn, walk away and calm down, others for example: who are carrying a gun, might just react differently, suffice to say that is why we have gun laws, excluding the US (Second Amendment), hence the reason people get killed over there all the time, tempers flare, etc etc etc, if a gun is in sight, its a threat, maybe the US should delete the Second Amendment while we are on the topic ?

 

I would like to ask why the US and everybody else doesn't start reducing their nuclear warhead arsenal till they get to zero, I mean do we really need them, didn't the US drop 2  nuclear bombs on Japan killing hundreds of thousands of people, and judging by how many nuclear warheads the US has, i.e. 6.800 Vs NK 8, its laughable to worry about NK in my opinion:

 

Country					Total Inventory
Russia					7,000
United States					6,800
France					300
China					270
United Kingdom					215
Israel					80
Pakistan					120-130
India					110-120
North Korea					8

 

I wouldn't say that NK has stood on it's own when 1/2 of China's foreign aid budget goes to NK.

 

But yeah, it's pretty horrible to think that there are over 700 nukes for each country.  Even more terrifying in my mind is that your list doesn't specify if that's counting each part of a MIRV, which can have 16 warheads per missile, or just counting missiles.

 

Your point about the availability of guns is spot on with this discussion.  In most countries ownership is very regulated.  Breaches of the law are taken care of by authorized force...by people with guns.

 

So getting rid of all nukes removes the deterrent against using nukes by an unstable regime due to fear of retaliatory strikes.

 

129 - 224,000 people perished due to the two nuclear attacks.  Whether this prevented many more lives being lost, on both sides, is debatable.  But that point (kill 129 - 224,000 people now to prevent millions more from dying) was a part of the decision in dropping the bombs.  Funny thing is that the night time firebombing campaign killed at least as many, and up to 3x as many, and it doesn't get the same bad press.  I'd rather be flash varouprised than slowly burn to death...

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, dave_boo said:

So getting rid of all nukes removes the deterrent against using nukes by an unstable regime due to fear of retaliatory strikes.

Getting rid of all nukes, would make US military relatively far, far more powerful than it is today.

 

Getting rid of nukes will not happen in this state of world we are currently living in. Well, it actually can happen and is likely to happen, but having a humanity ending nuclear war.

 

All because some idiots wish to have or keep their power. Little boys with big bombs.

 

 

[billd766]

21 hours ago, johnmcc6 said:

We may get a bit of ash blow over from a total annihilation of that maniac. Every one of his artillery pieces, factories , nuke sites AND his fat little butt has a big target on it. Who needs it? No one. But if he is crazy enough to pull the trigger he and his piss ant little country will be wiped off the map.

 

Unfortnately nuclear radiation has a tendency to ignore borders and will go where the winds of the day take it. The bigger and heavier parts tend to drop back but the lighter the debris is including the radio active dust can travel thousands of miles and come down anywhere contaminating water and food supplies.

 

The main target areas can remain radio active for decades and centuries depending on what class of weapon is used.

 

I suspect that several NK weapons are targeting Seoul and if they are used the casualties will start in the tens of millions and only get more horrific from there on.

 

Most of North Korea will be decimated adding another 10 or 20 millions of dead and I would think that large chunks of South Korea will be the same.

 

No fire services will work properly as the water mains will be ruptured, if there are any hospitals left working they will be overwhelmed before the medical staff die of radiation poisoning.

 

Any rescue attempts made to save people will stir up the radio active rubble and dust and the rescuers themselves will also die sooner or later.

 

Most people will lose their jobs and have no money (which will be worthless anyway) to buy food so you can add starvation and food riots on to that.

 

The leaders who cause this will no doubt be safe in their bunkers but they will have to come out some time.

 

And yes, it WILL affect the whole world.

 

Now if you think that is the best way to go, please leave me out of it.

[4MyEgo]

20 minutes ago, dave_boo said:

I wouldn't say that NK has stood on it's own when 1/2 of China's foreign aid budget goes to NK.

 

But yeah, it's pretty horrible to think that there are over 700 nukes for each country.  Even more terrifying in my mind is that your list doesn't specify if that's counting each part of a MIRV, which can have 16 warheads per missile, or just counting missiles.

 

Your point about the availability of guns is spot on with this discussion.  In most countries ownership is very regulated.  Breaches of the law are taken care of by authorized force...by people with guns.

 

So getting rid of all nukes removes the deterrent against using nukes by an unstable regime due to fear of retaliatory strikes.

 

129 - 224,000 people perished due to the two nuclear attacks.  Whether this prevented many more lives being lost, on both sides, is debatable.  But that point (kill 129 - 224,000 people now to prevent millions more from dying) was a part of the decision in dropping the bombs.  Funny thing is that the night time firebombing campaign killed at least as many, and up to 3x as many, and it doesn't get the same bad press.  I'd rather be flash varouprised than slowly burn to death...

I meant standing on its own away from the hands of the US who definately want to tap into its recourse's if you believe everything you read.

 

I would prefer neither vapourised or bombed at night, hence living in the bush in Thailand, big City's don't stand a chance for survival.

[billd766]

16 hours ago, AlexRRR said:

 

Yes Mate not to long and the Yanks are on the ball....what they dont shoot down most wont hit there target cause the NK isn't up to the same standard as them meanwhile once the Nk shoot off the Yanks will have a reason to wipe out every god dam city in NK then an almighty invasion will begin....its Iraq all over again....its the boy who cried wolf once to often a few of us dont believe western press after GW Bush and weapons of mass destruction...

 

Cuban missile crisis of the early 60's. Iraq...biggest army outside of China US and Russia at the time do i need to go on? Think about it...You can believe China isn't interested in a war if it got close they would engineer the overthrow of the NK dictator, they dont want a US allied nation on there border as the US didn't want Cuba under Russian influence during the cold war...

 

Sabre rattling bonds nations especially when your political power base is under threat, sells papers too and it arms nations to the teeth, good for business if your in the munitions business, do i think there is a threat there? yes i do, do i think it will come to a war....possibly and why? because the Americans are broke they print money to stay afloat they owe a fortune and dont want to balance there books because it means they will loose there power base, as we have seen time and time again empires do not last they all crumble and so will the American one its just a matter off time, does it mean it will come to a war? not necessarily but it did and the Americans lost it would wipe out dept and retool the nation if they won everyone gets to pay them the cost of the war...win win no matter how you look at it...simplified of course but thats the crutch of it...and you my friend are just a pawn in the game .....

 

 

 

Do you have ANY idea of the logistics required for an invasion?

 

The buildup for the invasion of Iraq took over 6 months and the Iraqis did nothing to stop it. That was a long time ago and the shipping is no longer available to support one.

 

NK goes ape every time the USA and SK simply have their annual exercises.

 

Do you think that they will just sit there and do nothing and wait to be invaded?

 

What do you think that the Chinese will do about an invasion?

 

They don't even want SK on their border let alone the USA.

 

What I hate the most is the keyboard warriors who think that war is just a game on a computer and have no real idea of the effect that it will have on them sitting safely at home on their computer.

[johnmcc6]

21 hours ago, oilinki said:

Yup and the same applies to Kim Jong Un and North Korea as well.

Wow! I never knew that.

[William C F Pierce]

On 02/09/2017 at 8:47 AM, rocketman777 said:

None - and N.Korea won't 'hit' Guam with a  Nuke. Despite the propaganda Kim Jong-un  is not nuts

Absolutely true! Kim Jong-un is a mouse that is frightening the Rogue Elephant Trump. Trump is likely to be the one to be first to stampede. Would China or Russia retaliate on NKs behalf, very unlikely?

Edited September 3, 2017 by William C F Pierce

[AlexRRR]

3 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

Do you have ANY idea of the logistics required for an invasion?

 

The buildup for the invasion of Iraq took over 6 months and the Iraqis did nothing to stop it. That was a long time ago and the shipping is no longer available to support one.

 

NK goes ape every time the USA and SK simply have their annual exercises.

 

Do you think that they will just sit there and do nothing and wait to be invaded?

 

What do you think that the Chinese will do about an invasion?

 

They don't even want SK on their border let alone the USA.

 

What I hate the most is the keyboard warriors who think that war is just a game on a computer and have no real idea of the effect that it will have on them sitting safely at home on their computer.

 

If your referring to me and my post yes of course i have an idea on whats required for an invasion that invasion would happen after the NK set off there missiles  and also after the Americans pulverised North Korea with there nukes, there are US troops in the region you have the South Korean army on there doorstep gees were not dragin a million men from the other side of the world you got 2 to 300,000 ready to go....and in the early days thats more than enough.

 

As for the invasion once again the western press is placing a third world nation as a very formidable foe, the Americans stitched up the Iraqis in a matter of weeks both times, Kim being unpopular the resistance once the army is smashed probably will fall away.

 

The only snag is China, as i keep saying...and I'm not a keyboard warrior, i think its sabre rattling, lets face it NK is pretty much screwed economically Kim needs an enemy to get the peoples mind off there bellies and on to something else...The Yanks should take a step back and let the UN handle it, China do not want an allie of the US on there border which check mates any American or South Korean moves and I'm pretty dam sure the Chinese have let the NK know...no playing silly buggers please....in the end the world will just have to suck it....they have the bomb....Pakistan and india and Israel also have the bomb....were living ok with that..

[idman]

As I sit in the various bars and lift a beer to.my mouth the very last thing I am worrying about is an errant Nuke hitting beautiful Downtown Chiang Mai.

[davidst01]

On 9/3/2017 at 2:01 PM, billd766 said:

 

Do you have ANY idea of the logistics required for an invasion?

 

The buildup for the invasion of Iraq took over 6 months and the Iraqis did nothing to stop it. That was a long time ago and the shipping is no longer available to support one.

 

NK goes ape every time the USA and SK simply have their annual exercises.

 

Do you think that they will just sit there and do nothing and wait to be invaded?

 

What do you think that the Chinese will do about an invasion?

 

They don't even want SK on their border let alone the USA.

 

What I hate the most is the keyboard warriors who think that war is just a game on a computer and have no real idea of the effect that it will have on them sitting safely at home on their computer.

A strong reply from you but you didnt answer the Op's question at all. Just a lot of no it all jargon. 

[malt25]

18 hours ago, idman said:

As I sit in the various bars and lift a beer to.my mouth the very last thing I am worrying about is an errant Nuke hitting beautiful Downtown Chiang Mai.

How very cavalier of you. Me thinks if those 2 "dickheads" don't back down & pull their heads in there will be a fair amount of worrying all over SE Asia.