Surely it can’t do any harm to have such checks
Nor can it do any good.
Surely it can’t do any harm to have such checks
Nor can it do any good.
Let me inform you then. 🙂
It IS legal to own a functioning machine gun (or assault rifle) in the US and hundreds (thousands?) do, however it requires an expensive annual license with mental screening and background checks.
Never heard of a machine gun used in mass shooting.
That is wrong.
It only requires a two hundred dollar Federal Tax to be paid.
Transportation and use varies from state to state.
Even a class 2 or 3 dealer permit is not an annual deal and is not that expensive.
There is no mental screening, good grief.
Let me inform you then. 🙂
It IS legal to own a functioning machine gun (or assault rifle) in the US and hundreds (thousands?) do, however it requires an expensive annual license with mental screening and background checks.
Never heard of a machine gun used in mass shooting.
That is wrong.
It only requires a two hundred dollar Federal Tax to be paid.
Transportation and use varies from state to state.
Even a class 2 or 3 dealer permit is not an annual deal and is not that expensive.
There is no mental screening, good grief.
Indeed. I think that all Sri Lanka needs is
1) a very small number of fast jets for air policing.
2) MPAs for EEZ patrol. Nothing fancy (no P-8s or the like), just capable of finding pirates, unlicenced foreign fishing boats, ships in distress, etc. & vectoring the navy or coastguard onto them.
3) Transports & helicopters (a few armed or capable of being fitted with HMGs) to support the army, for disaster relief, etc.
4) Trainers for the above.What, if any, of what’s listed above does Sri Lanka lack?
What they need is determined by what they want.
They are the only ones who know what is correct for them.
The two heavy cruisers Sweden built after WWII, probably the last large gun ships built, ended up in South America.
Have they been scrapped or a preserved?
This is pure politics and nothing more.
What happened at the EAA and the money, smaller than tiny amount, involved there proves the point beyond any doubt.
Yeah, the US def did not suffer a complete setback in Vietnam. All the goals it hoped to achieve in Vietnam did not fail miserably.
It won. America STRONG!!!!
This is an image of victory.
That is an image of what happens when you sign a pact with Democrats.
If you have even a clue, probably not, of what happened in Washington. The Democrats REFUSED to send the aid promised years before.
End of story, end of of South Vietnam.
Had even the airstrikes been allowed the North Viets would have run out of caskets but the Liberal ****-bags in Washington refused even that.
You were not around then but ignorance is bliss.
that must have been a first. winning all the battles and still losing the war takes some doing
but I would agree the biggest enemy the US forces had in Vietnam was the US government
That’s the fact jack.
The amount of denial in this thread is amazing.
By this standard, the USSR, uhh, didn’t lose A-stan, we just retreated….
Only your ignorance of what went on before you were born exceeds any supposed denial.
You’re a ******* moron.
One’s rhetoric reveals one’s intellect and your rhetoric revealed the level of intellect I expected.
If it were not for the Soviet Union and Russia, Mongolia would be under Chinese control.
If Mongolia become a natural resource producer, I have few doubts they will speak with the Russians about help to keep their sovereignty, whereas Russia also likes the buffer.
In Vietnam the North never stopped challenging the US and ended up winning the war and region despite losing a number of battles
All battles.
The Tet offensive is considered a victory for the North in the manner that the Cong were so decisively defeated, the Cong never amounted to a serious threat again so the North did not have to worry about dealing with the Cong in the South after they took over, as they were mostly dead.