เพื่อใช้การแชท โปรดเข้าสู่ระบบ
กลับไปที่รายชื่อ
TNguyen
Nov 14 2015 at 13:48
41 โพสต์
158 people killed . Is EUR going to crash like the event 15 January this year when Forex opens on Monday ?
FXtrader2010
Nov 14 2015 at 14:50
724 โพสต์
TNguyen posted:
158 people killed . Is EUR going to crash like the event 15 January this year when Forex opens on Monday ?
eurusd no change atm
Rihan
RSTrading
Nov 14 2015 at 20:12
385 โพสต์
Crazytrader, you are from that part of the world. How are things there ?..

What do you guys think will happen to the dollar..?


molyang
Nov 15 2015 at 08:52
13 โพสต์
TNguyen posted:
158 people killed . Is EUR going to crash like the event 15 January this year when Forex opens on Monday ?

RIP to the victims. . It certainly is a hard time for their loved ones.

I think it might affect Eur on Monday a little bit.
Bonja [UA] (Bonja)
Nov 15 2015 at 08:58
13 โพสต์
You think about yourself and not about currency!!! No one is immune to the 100%...
Bonja [UA] (Bonja)
Nov 15 2015 at 08:58
13 โพสต์
CrazyTraderfx (CrazyTrader)
Nov 15 2015 at 10:41
1718 โพสต์
RSTrading posted:
Crazytrader, you are from that part of the world. How are things there ?..

What do you guys think will happen to the dollar..?



Hello guys,

State of war is declared now... France and Occident only pretend to fight against ISIS so far. So unfortunately France will suffer again from theses attacks.

About currency, How could it affect currencies... I don't know, However I'm still Short EurUSd.

Cheers
RainFall
Rainfall0204
Nov 15 2015 at 16:06
28 โพสต์
that's what happens when citizens and police cannot carry guns it wasn't the government that got hurt it was their people they failed to protect, that's outrageous, and its insane for French president to sit there and say its not our fault its lack of human decency dear French government if you cannot protect your citizens as efficiently as they can protect themselves and their country by freely owning a gun then maybe you have a few choices to make welcome to real world there is no common decency every human being should have the right and the means to protect their life WHILE THE GOVERNMENT SUPPOSTED TO BE THERE TO HELP, I guess that's my two cents.
As far as trading wise I am sure we will see so volatility the question is whether every one will be selling EUR because france failed to protect itself or everyone will feel bad and buy in into last bear move for retracement or trend shift

 
Michael Bai (michaelbai)
Nov 17 2015 at 13:53
33 โพสต์
Rainfall0204 posted:
that's what happens when citizens and police cannot carry guns it wasn't the government that got hurt it was their people they failed to protect, that's outrageous, and its insane for French president to sit there and say its not our fault its lack of human decency dear French government if you cannot protect your citizens as efficiently as they can protect themselves and their country by freely owning a gun then maybe you have a few choices to make welcome to real world there is no common decency every human being should have the right and the means to protect their life WHILE THE GOVERNMENT SUPPOSTED TO BE THERE TO HELP, I guess that's my two cents.
As far as trading wise I am sure we will see so volatility the question is whether every one will be selling EUR because france failed to protect itself or everyone will feel bad and buy in into last bear move for retracement or trend shift

 

That is about the most ridiculous thing I have read today. If that is the case every police officer in the world needs to carry a rocket launcer, chaingun, and have full access to drones, artillary, etc. The probelm isnt becuase the police didnt have guns, etc. 911 happened right? In the USA police carry guns right? In the USA individuals can own guns right? So using your logic 911 couldnt have happened because...GUNS!.....Or the other logical nonsense of inability to protect its citizens, which the point of terrorism and these kind of attacks and what makes them so TERRIFYING....is they directly identify the fact that NO ONE is protected. Think about if someone driving a car jsut decided hey, im going to drive my car on this sidewalk full of people in the name of ISIS. How could ANY government protect against that? Ok ban cars. Then people will use a different method. The problem is sick twisted people that for whatever motive decide to harm people. Not governments nor guns.
Rihan
RSTrading
Nov 17 2015 at 14:05
385 โพสต์
To an extent @Rainfall0204 is correct imo. If you take a look at some countries where owning a gun is not so impossible like the Swiss and in Finland - terrorists will think twice about attacking, because chances are much higher that they will be counterattacked.
In France, I assume owning a gun is not so easy, and the terrorists knew they wouldn't have to put up much of a fight.

But it is a very debatable subject.
RainFall
Rainfall0204
Nov 18 2015 at 02:14
28 โพสต์
lets just put it this way you come to US and start shooting you might shoot us you might kill a few of us but we fight back and we will track you down to the moon if we have to, btw the way my friend put this to my a while ago he said if we ever get invaded its almost guaranteed that we will have more friendly fire casualties then there were invading forces deployed
Michael Bai (michaelbai)
Nov 18 2015 at 07:56
33 โพสต์
Rainfall0204 posted:
lets just put it this way you come to US and start shooting you might shoot us you might kill a few of us but we fight back and we will track you down to the moon if we have to, btw the way my friend put this to my a while ago he said if we ever get invaded its almost guaranteed that we will have more friendly fire casualties then there were invading forces deployed

Yea your friend is right, there would be as history has proven. I recall one serious debacle that happened when forces were invading an area where there were no enemy forces and yet still had casualties. So then we would be come worse than the terrorists?
Michael Bai (michaelbai)
Nov 18 2015 at 07:59
33 โพสต์
RSTrading posted:
To an extent @Rainfall0204 is correct imo. If you take a look at some countries where owning a gun is not so impossible like the Swiss and in Finland - terrorists will think twice about attacking, because chances are much higher that they will be counterattacked.
In France, I assume owning a gun is not so easy, and the terrorists knew they wouldn't have to put up much of a fight.

But it is a very debatable subject.

You think people willing to die as a martyr for their cause are really concerned with IF they will get shot? I seem to remember in the USA where guns are plenty of incidents where airplane crashed into buildings, pressure cooker bombs blew up happy sporting events, a van blew up a world trade center, multiple mass murders due to ONE gunman at a school, and the list goes on.....I am American and all for 'merica cuz %$#^ yea! but saying the problem is guns or lack of guns is retarded. The problem is bad people will find a way to do bad things because its what they do and their motivations for this are irrelevant as they are only justifications to bad people to do bad things and in their mind not be bad people.
Rihan
RSTrading
Nov 18 2015 at 08:35
385 โพสต์
michaelbai posted:

You think people willing to die as a martyr for their cause are really concerned with IF they will get shot? I seem to remember in the USA where guns are plenty of incidents where airplane crashed into buildings, pressure cooker bombs blew up happy sporting events, a van blew up a world trade center, multiple mass murders due to ONE gunman at a school, and the list goes on.....I am American and all for 'merica cuz %$#^ yea! but saying the problem is guns or lack of guns is retarded. The problem is bad people will find a way to do bad things because its what they do and their motivations for this are irrelevant as they are only justifications to bad people to do bad things and in their mind not be bad people.

Obviously when attacks are lodged via airplanes crashing into buildings or bombs going off at sporting events guns are obsolete. I was referring to this specific incident where the situation might have been totally different if some citizens were armed.

Although if they expected some form of a fight back, they would have done something else, making armed citizens totally useless.
Bringing us back to square one.

If you read carefully you will see I said @Rainfall0204 is right to an extent. To an extent.... It could have helped this specific incident.
But if there were more loose gun-laws, we wouldn't have had this specific incident - the terrorists would have killed another way.
Michael Bai (michaelbai)
Nov 18 2015 at 15:15
33 โพสต์
RSTrading posted:
michaelbai posted:

You think people willing to die as a martyr for their cause are really concerned with IF they will get shot? I seem to remember in the USA where guns are plenty of incidents where airplane crashed into buildings, pressure cooker bombs blew up happy sporting events, a van blew up a world trade center, multiple mass murders due to ONE gunman at a school, and the list goes on.....I am American and all for 'merica cuz %$#^ yea! but saying the problem is guns or lack of guns is retarded. The problem is bad people will find a way to do bad things because its what they do and their motivations for this are irrelevant as they are only justifications to bad people to do bad things and in their mind not be bad people.

Obviously when attacks are lodged via airplanes crashing into buildings or bombs going off at sporting events guns are obsolete. I was referring to this specific incident where the situation might have been totally different if some citizens were armed.

Although if they expected some form of a fight back, they would have done something else, making armed citizens totally useless.
Bringing us back to square one.

If you read carefully you will see I said @Rainfall0204 is right to an extent. To an extent.... It could have helped this specific incident.
But if there were more loose gun-laws, we wouldn't have had this specific incident - the terrorists would have killed another way.

Fair enough 😎
RainFall
Rainfall0204
Nov 19 2015 at 02:08
28 โพสต์
put it anyway you want to I sleep better with my combat gear and a few guns in the gun safe its better to have it and never need it then to needed it and not have it already went through that once still taking shotgun pellets out of my skull and my side got lucky it was just bird shot

Michael Bai (michaelbai)
Nov 24 2015 at 07:12
33 โพสต์
Definitely. When I was living in the states I had my CWP and kept a few guns in the house, and I encountered 2 situations (1 a breaking and entering into my house with me home and the other breaking and entering into my vehicle with me home) when I needed them. Oddly enough it protected both of the individuals AND myself until police arrived. But my problem was with saying the issues happened BECAUSE police didnt have weapons.
xdj3richo
Nov 24 2015 at 12:21
61 โพสต์
having guns doesnt creates problems ,its human thinking that creates problem .To be honest am a racist and i will defend my race no matter what .My race includes all human beings who want to stay in peace , make a decent living and enjoy moments with family and friends and i would defend my race no matter what .SO proud to be a racist
dealeres
Nov 24 2015 at 15:49
14 โพสต์
michaelbai posted:
Rainfall0204 posted:
that's what happens when citizens and police cannot carry guns it wasn't the government that got hurt it was their people they failed to protect, that's outrageous, and its insane for French president to sit there and say its not our fault its lack of human decency dear French government if you cannot protect your citizens as efficiently as they can protect themselves and their country by freely owning a gun then maybe you have a few choices to make welcome to real world there is no common decency every human being should have the right and the means to protect their life WHILE THE GOVERNMENT SUPPOSTED TO BE THERE TO HELP, I guess that's my two cents.
As far as trading wise I am sure we will see so volatility the question is whether every one will be selling EUR because france failed to protect itself or everyone will feel bad and buy in into last bear move for retracement or trend shift

 

That is about the most ridiculous thing I have read today. If that is the case every police officer in the world needs to carry a rocket launcer, chaingun, and have full access to drones, artillary, etc. The probelm isnt becuase the police didnt have guns, etc. 911 happened right? In the USA police carry guns right? In the USA individuals can own guns right? So using your logic 911 couldnt have happened because...GUNS!.....Or the other logical nonsense of inability to protect its citizens, which the point of terrorism and these kind of attacks and what makes them so TERRIFYING....is they directly identify the fact that NO ONE is protected. Think about if someone driving a car jsut decided hey, im going to drive my car on this sidewalk full of people in the name of ISIS. How could ANY government protect against that? Ok ban cars. Then people will use a different method. The problem is sick twisted people that for whatever motive decide to harm people. Not governments nor guns.

The problem is sick twisted people that for whatever motive decide to harm people. Not governments nor guns.
this is generation of world problem till today , people mount up false story and injecting them to unborn children either ways
RainFall
Rainfall0204
Nov 26 2015 at 02:20
28 โพสต์
well I don't know about you I placed my so called 'assault' (a semi-automatic M4 variant of M-16 rifle) on the porch the other day gave it 200 rounds and left a cup of coffee and a soda and added some OTEP metal music and I was watching it all day interestingly it did not make any sudden movements nor did it kill someone or hurt someone and it wasn't due to the lack of opportunities as the mail man came by to deliver my mail or the fedex driver who dropped of a new water pump for my water-cooled PC and it didn't even hurt the paper boy who frequently attempts to break my door window by throwing that paper as hard as he can... so I conclude guns don't kill people people kill people using any possible means not just guns so shut the hell up btw none of you from Switzerland right? because you know every other person in Switzerland (or one the countries around the vicinity) owns a gun and their country has the lowest crime rate in the world.... Chicago has the lowest gun ownership and highest amount of gun laws and yet has the most violent crimes :) statistics don't lie if 9 out of 10 reputable sources say sell EUR are you going to go long in EUR/USD? or are you going to stop trading and making money because money is evil because money kill people because people use money to buy guns and ammo, knifes and baseball bats? you can call 911 when robbers are already in the house and expect cops to magically teleport there I guarantee you if more people would of carried guns the less people would be killed in the incidents like that and YES THIS FACT HAS BEEN PROVEN REGUARDLESS OF HOW MUCH YOU DISAGREE it has been proven many many many times the first thing hitler and stalin and that Cuban fag (castro I think his name was) did is confiscated all guns with the support of anti-gun morons like some of you and then they went on and murdered bunch of people
โปรดเข้าสู่ระบบเพื่อแสดงความคิดเห็น