I would imagine a lot of their kit is as good because it’s going to be largely copied as with most Chinese tech over the last few decades, and then done cheaper and faster and in cases, better - like the EV market.The point is that Chinese kit is now almost certainly superior to Russian.Again, as predicted.They have been actively pushing a line that Pakistan used Chinese made jets to down several Raffale Indian Airforce jets to advertise the Chinese jets’ abilities and damage the French efforts to sell Raffales.
China’s Defense Ministry signaled readiness to export J-10 jets to “friendly countries,” as speculation grows over Iran’s interest in the J-10C. No official deal announced, but Beijing hints at willingness to share the aircraft.
https://x.com/PolymarketIntel/status/1942907250148024326
Its not entirely unlikely that China quite fancies benchmarking its kit against what Israel can throw against it.
The French are trying to push back against this story but fighting a losing battle with countries already China curious.
Better radar; better missiles.
And they have available manufacturing capacity for export, which Russia lacks.
How they will stack up against western kit remains a fairly open question.
One other advantage of buying Chinese arms is (apparently) that they are delivered more quickly than their Russian or Western equivalents.Again, as predicted.They have been actively pushing a line that Pakistan used Chinese made jets to down several Raffale Indian Airforce jets to advertise the Chinese jets’ abilities and damage the French efforts to sell Raffales.
China’s Defense Ministry signaled readiness to export J-10 jets to “friendly countries,” as speculation grows over Iran’s interest in the J-10C. No official deal announced, but Beijing hints at willingness to share the aircraft.
https://x.com/PolymarketIntel/status/1942907250148024326
Its not entirely unlikely that China quite fancies benchmarking its kit against what Israel can throw against it.
The French are trying to push back against this story but fighting a losing battle with countries already China curious.
If anyone can do it, Starmer can do it!Also, ban the assembly of more than four persons, unless explicitly permitted by the Home Secretary.Resident Doctors striking July 25 to 30Ban striking.
The Trades Unions are out of control !
McMurdock sat next to Rupert Lowe a row behind the Reform gang at PMQsIs that the naughty step?
The level of info they claim is needed in order for any law to be enacted is bloody absurd. Their upset is understandable but they went beyond reasonable grievance long long ago and i no longer have any sympathy.So what. Every legal challenge has accepted that the change of law in 1995 is not an issue so it is a perfect defence. No issue. It’s been used as a defence in court and won.Surely the WASPI issue is simple.Irony is we have many MPs and public figures queuing up to demand compensation for the WASPE women who don’t deserve a penny.The Waspy women thing was entirely without merit but had the politically critical quality of being easy to understand. Hence the number of MPs and others lining up behind it. And hence the fondness for issues involving calculable amounts of free money to a readily identifiable group. See also WFA and last week's benefits shambles and two child cap which have the same quality.
I have had my retirement age pushed back several times. The changes were decades into the future and made no effect to my plans.
Some of the WASPI women were told that instead of being able to retire and draw your pension next year, you now have to wait 6 years. That's a massive difference.
"But the law changed in 1995" seems to be the defence, Sure. Who goes around proactively checking Hansard in case the government have changed the law against you? They started writing to the affected in 2009 about the change coming into effect the following year. Not much notice if you'd planned to retire and now couldn't.
Even the PHSO judgement found there was no obligation on behalf of the govt to write to them to tell them. It even found people who received letters in 2011 didn’t remember receiving them and if people had received letters that they may not have read them. It’s all in the PHSO report
There was not just Hansard. There were plenty of campaigns in the papers and on TV to raise awareness at the time.
The state pension is a benefit and that is all there is to it and the govt can take it away or give it if they wish. They chop and change at will. This got traction as it’s a well funded, largely middle class and white, group who were effective lobbyists.
I’ve never had a letter telling me my state pension age is increasing to 67. So what.
The solution to the WASPE women is simple. Ignore them. The whole movement is fractured and WASPE doesn’t not represent all affected women either.
So what. Every legal challenge has accepted that the change of law in 1995 is not an issue so it is a perfect defence. No issue. It’s been used as a defence in court and won.Surely the WASPI issue is simple.Irony is we have many MPs and public figures queuing up to demand compensation for the WASPE women who don’t deserve a penny.The Waspy women thing was entirely without merit but had the politically critical quality of being easy to understand. Hence the number of MPs and others lining up behind it. And hence the fondness for issues involving calculable amounts of free money to a readily identifiable group. See also WFA and last week's benefits shambles and two child cap which have the same quality.
I have had my retirement age pushed back several times. The changes were decades into the future and made no effect to my plans.
Some of the WASPI women were told that instead of being able to retire and draw your pension next year, you now have to wait 6 years. That's a massive difference.
"But the law changed in 1995" seems to be the defence, Sure. Who goes around proactively checking Hansard in case the government have changed the law against you? They started writing to the affected in 2009 about the change coming into effect the following year. Not much notice if you'd planned to retire and now couldn't.
Using the Laakso and Taagepera (1979) formula for the effective number of parties, Great Britain has 2.1 parties in terms of Commons seats, but 4.5 parties in terms of votes at the 2024 general election, and 5.0 in terms of current polling.18% of Brits say they would consider a vote for Jezbollah?Less, but only due to the stronger two party system vs our sort of 2.5 party one.
How many Americans would consider a vote for the America Party? Especially if it is led by MechaHitler?
Kemi – you can't tax your way to growth.That’s NLP - New Labour Programming.
A few questions later:-
Starmer – we can't tax our way to growth.
Oops.
It would take an earthquake to break the US two party system and need a charismatic figurehead. Musk of course, aside from not being particularly charismatic, can't stand, and who else is there? Money alone won't get them anywhere and I assume he's either trolling or threatening a spoiler operation on the GOP?18% of Brits say they would consider a vote for Jezbollah?Less, but only due to the stronger two party system vs our sort of 2.5 party one.
How many Americans would consider a vote for the America Party? Especially if it is led by MechaHitler?