Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
The US UK and Nato are all on the same page, pity France and Germany are not
Strange. I could have sworn that France and Germany are Nato members.
Yes, but consider eg Macron's words on NATO:
President Emmanuel Macron of France has described Nato as "brain dead", stressing what he sees as waning commitment to the transatlantic alliance by its main guarantor, the US. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50335257
There *are* different attitudes, and a lot of politics overlaying. Mons. Macron wants to build up the concept of an EU army patterned on the French view, and defined over against NATO, and what he calls the Anglosphere.
There are other politics elsewhere - Merkel has pursued a version of Ostpolitik, and certain of the wheels have come off it. But there are still parts of the German coalition (mainly SPD) that are more attached to the previous view.
US-UK-Canada, Scandis, the EUs frontline states, and some Mediterraneans have a more robust view.
Despite all of that there is much more practical alignment than even say 3 months ago.
Overlaid on that for us are tensions about Brexit or opposition to Brexit, and a political need to diss BJ and the UK for some. I'm not keen on Boris, but I do tend to hold up the UK view on Brexit.
It was Trump that turned NATO brain dead.
The quote is from the BBC, reflecting a Macron interview with the Economist:
What about Tory pacts with other parties to maintain power? They need to lose lot more than 47?
The only viable coalition partner for the Conservatives is the DUP. The DUP are highly unlikely to win more than 10 seats, so the Conservatives can't fall below 312.
I seriously doubt any other party would consider a coalition with the Conservatives, certainly none would consider it under a Johnson-led Conservative party.
The Lib Dems clearly have history, but I can't see them picking the Conservatives. In 2010, the momentum was behind the Conservatives consigning Labour to the dustbin. If the situation is such that the Conservatives lose enough seats to be unable to form a majority even with the DUP, the momentum will be against them and I think the LDs will support Labour. Of course, this could, depending on the seats total and vote total, result in the Conservatives being the largest party both in terms of seats and votes, but losing power.
But that's the system.
Incidently, depending on the results, if Labour + LD aren't enough either, I can't see a Lab/LD/SNP alliance lasting long. We'd have to have another election within a couple of years (hurrah!).
I agree with all the replies to me. I am playing a bit of devil’s advocate 😈 Truth is though, there are plenty ifs and buts to kick around on this thread. Here’s a good one. Support can come in different ways, at its basic level support defeating LOTO vonc and support to pass budget in return to for certain bit of legislation put to Parliament? So the Scot Nats give that basic support in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
Puts on tin hat and expects plenty NEVER NEVER NEVER in Scottish, and Swedish, tone 🙂
Far too quiet… did I need to insert the word Torys? Okay -
So the Scot Nats give that basic support TO THE TORIES in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
🤔 not much of a rush to deny a soul equates to 40 pieces of silver and legislation for a referendum.
I think it's seen not so much as 30 (not 40) 5p bits but more as the Temptation by Satan. But equally even Tories have their standards, from their point of view. Can you ever see Mr Johnson ever allowing a referendum? He'd have to do some work and to keep his tongue under total control.
I would support a VONC in any Tory leader and PM who allowed an indyref2, as I expect would most Tory MPs and members.
If the only way a Tory government can stay in power is with SNP support we should go into opposition. There is zero chance the SNP would do a deal with the Tories anyway
But you didn’t vonc Cameron, and he did it?
Cameron was not leading a Tory majority government in 2014, it was a coalition with the LDs. We now have a Tory majority government.
The SNP had also won a Holyrood majority in 2011, there is no such SNP majority at Holyrood now.
The 2014 referendum was held on the basis it would be a 'once in a generation referendum.' Any Tory PM who allowed an indyref2 referendum before such a generation elapsed and did a deal with the SNP would not be fit to serve and must be removed.
But there is a pro-referendum majority at Holyrood now. So you are misleading on that.
And you are also wrong on indiyref 1 being held on a generation basis. Where does it say that in the Edinburgh Agreement? As you have been asked very many times.
Implicit in paragraph 30, since both sides were clear before the referendum that it was once in a generation.
They look forward to a referendum that is legal and fair producing a decisive and respected outcome.
The SNP have clearly broken this part of the agreement.
Biggest load of bollox posted on here since the Pope was a Protestant
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
What in the ever loving Christ does that have to do with anything that is happening right now?
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
As to the references to genocide, there is a lot of attention about Ukraine right now, you are seriously surprised people are bringing up the history of Ukraine? Come on, that's not even serious.
So, PB managed to turn the Russian-Ukrainian contretemps into an excuse to argue about Brexit and Scotland?
I'm shocked, I tell you. Shocked.
I believe there is a formal equation stating that as the length of a thread increases the changes of Scotland or Brexit being mentioned increases exponentially until it becomes a mathematical certainty.
Also, nice use of contretemps.
If there isn't such an equation then we should work on it. The "pigeon-kle4 hypothesis" has a certain ring, no?
So, PB managed to turn the Russian-Ukrainian contretemps into an excuse to argue about Brexit and Scotland?
I'm shocked, I tell you. Shocked.
I believe there is a formal equation stating that as the length of a thread increases the changes of Scotland or Brexit being mentioned increases exponentially until it becomes a mathematical certainty.
Also, nice use of contretemps.
If there isn't such an equation then we should work on it. The "pigeon-kle4 hypothesis" has a certain ring, no?
And thank you.
I demand it be called the 'kle4-pigeon hypothesis' or I shall make it my life's work to undermine it.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
I'm definitely on your list of petulant sniping but then again most people are. Having a clown laughed at by the major powers as PM does not help us. Having smashed our armed forces does not help us. Isolating ourselves diplomatically by replacing big block membership with nothing does not help us.
Boris is obviously an unsuitable prime minister, but it's when people seek to blame him for this, or seek to accuse him of stoking this Ukraine situation to distract from domestic troubles, that's crossing the line I'm talking about. I want Boris gone YESTERDAY and I don't even give a shit if there's a war on, he needs to be out the door. But I'll not attack him for what he's innocent of. There are still a few things left that are wrong in the world that aren't the result of his oafing.
Sure. The petulant sabre-rattling he is doing is by no means unique to him. Most of his predecessors did the same. Its just that his predecessors had standing and respect in the world community and he does not. And the Truss - Lavrov fiasco really doesn't help our cause.
Putin got what he paid for - a chaotic and divided west.
What about Tory pacts with other parties to maintain power? They need to lose lot more than 47?
The only viable coalition partner for the Conservatives is the DUP. The DUP are highly unlikely to win more than 10 seats, so the Conservatives can't fall below 312.
I seriously doubt any other party would consider a coalition with the Conservatives, certainly none would consider it under a Johnson-led Conservative party.
The Lib Dems clearly have history, but I can't see them picking the Conservatives. In 2010, the momentum was behind the Conservatives consigning Labour to the dustbin. If the situation is such that the Conservatives lose enough seats to be unable to form a majority even with the DUP, the momentum will be against them and I think the LDs will support Labour. Of course, this could, depending on the seats total and vote total, result in the Conservatives being the largest party both in terms of seats and votes, but losing power.
But that's the system.
Incidently, depending on the results, if Labour + LD aren't enough either, I can't see a Lab/LD/SNP alliance lasting long. We'd have to have another election within a couple of years (hurrah!).
I agree with all the replies to me. I am playing a bit of devil’s advocate 😈 Truth is though, there are plenty ifs and buts to kick around on this thread. Here’s a good one. Support can come in different ways, at its basic level support defeating LOTO vonc and support to pass budget in return to for certain bit of legislation put to Parliament? So the Scot Nats give that basic support in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
Puts on tin hat and expects plenty NEVER NEVER NEVER in Scottish, and Swedish, tone 🙂
Far too quiet… did I need to insert the word Torys? Okay -
So the Scot Nats give that basic support TO THE TORIES in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
🤔 not much of a rush to deny a soul equates to 40 pieces of silver and legislation for a referendum.
I think it's seen not so much as 30 (not 40) 5p bits but more as the Temptation by Satan. But equally even Tories have their standards, from their point of view. Can you ever see Mr Johnson ever allowing a referendum? He'd have to do some work and to keep his tongue under total control.
I would support a VONC in any Tory leader and PM who allowed an indyref2, as I expect would most Tory MPs and members.
If the only way a Tory government can stay in power is with SNP support we should go into opposition. There is zero chance the SNP would do a deal with the Tories anyway
But you didn’t vonc Cameron, and he did it?
Cameron was not leading a Tory majority government in 2014, it was a coalition with the LDs. We now have a Tory majority government.
The SNP had also won a Holyrood majority in 2011, there is no such SNP majority at Holyrood now.
The 2014 referendum was held on the basis it would be a 'once in a generation referendum.' Any Tory PM who allowed an indyref2 referendum before such a generation elapsed and did a deal with the SNP would not be fit to serve and must be removed.
But there is a pro-referendum majority at Holyrood now. So you are misleading on that.
And you are also wrong on indiyref 1 being held on a generation basis. Where does it say that in the Edinburgh Agreement? As you have been asked very many times.
Implicit in paragraph 30, since both sides were clear before the referendum that it was once in a generation.
They look forward to a referendum that is legal and fair producing a decisive and respected outcome.
The SNP have clearly broken this part of the agreement.
Biggest load of bollox posted on here since the Pope was a Protestant
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
What in the ever loving Christ does that have to do with anything that is happening right now?
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
You actually seem (from earlier in the thread) to believe that we should insist Crimea is returned to the Ukraine. This is lunacy.
The most we should insist is that there is an independent plebiscite in the Crimea (and also Luhansk and Donetsk)
The plebiscite in the Crimea will confirm that the now largely Russian population in Crimea wants to join Russia.
I appreciate that Crimea's demographics have changed a lot over the centuries ... but the population in Crimea now is largely Russian.
I suspect that Luhansk and Donetsk would also want to join Russia -- but I am happy if there is a plebiscite & Ukraine/Russia abide by the results.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
The US UK and Nato are all on the same page, pity France and Germany are not
Strange. I could have sworn that France and Germany are Nato members.
Yes, but consider eg Macron's words on NATO:
President Emmanuel Macron of France has described Nato as "brain dead", stressing what he sees as waning commitment to the transatlantic alliance by its main guarantor, the US. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50335257
There *are* different attitudes, and a lot of politics overlaying. Mons. Macron wants to build up the concept of an EU army patterned on the French view, and defined over against NATO, and what he calls the Anglosphere.
There are other politics elsewhere - Merkel has pursued a version of Ostpolitik, and certain of the wheels have come off it. But there are still parts of the German coalition (mainly SPD) that are more attached to the previous view.
US-UK-Canada, Scandis, the EUs frontline states, and some Mediterraneans have a more robust view.
Despite all of that there is much more practical alignment than even say 3 months ago.
Overlaid on that for us are tensions about Brexit or opposition to Brexit, and a political need to diss BJ and the UK for some. I'm not keen on Boris, but I do tend to hold up the UK view on Brexit.
It was Trump that turned NATO brain dead.
Whereas, it was Macron that turned Covid-sufferers dead....
For @Leon and @rcs1000 Inside Science on Radio 4 on the Wuhan Lab conspiracy. There is also a more details apparently on the web site, but I haven't read any of these.
Have just listened to that programme and thought it was very poor.
First half was a piece moaning about dropping Covid restrictions (Pagel et al) and talking up new Omicron variants.
Second half was a talking to a Chinese journalist who had interviewed the head of the bat virus research in Wuhan. Apparently the lab had been wronged by all these conspiracy theories and western media was to blame for how the 'bat woman' was presented.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
What in the ever loving Christ does that have to do with anything that is happening right now?
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
You actually seem (from earlier in the thread) to believe that we should insist Crimea is returned to the Ukraine. This is lunacy.
Yeah, that was not my point at all. I was in fact making an it seems too subtle point about the limitations of a 'defensive alliance' with Ukraine, given we are not, and no one else is either, going to defend Ukraine to the point of restoring a part of its official territory.
That Crimea is gone from Ukraine probably forever, but obviously will not be ceded by Ukraine officially, is one reason NATO surely wants no piece of this if they can avoid it, since that issue will persist.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
They are upset that the UK is supporting "periphery" Europeans, rather than proper "core" Europeans like the Germans.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
What in the ever loving Christ does that have to do with anything that is happening right now?
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
You actually seem (from earlier in the thread) to believe that we should insist Crimea is returned to the Ukraine. This is lunacy.
Yeah, that was not my point at all. I was in fact making an it seems too subtle point about the limitations of a 'defensive alliance' with Ukraine, given we are not, and no one else is either, going to defend Ukraine to the point of restoring a part of its official territory.
That Crimea is gone from Ukraine probably forever, but obviously will not be ceded by Ukraine officially, is one reason NATO surely wants no piece of this if they can avoid it, since that issue will persist.
Thanks for clarifying.
(Also, having been to the Crimea, it is really beautiful. It is actually worth fighting over, whereas Luhansk is not).
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
I'm not sure what you are arguing here. Some think that the UK's stance isn't especially sensible and it should be more closely aligned with the EU members France and Germany. Others think it's more sensible and it's correctly aligned with the EU members Poland & the Baltic states. The fact that different EU members have a different stance shows that the UK could have taken either approach when it was a member of the EU, so what has this got to do with the UK having left?
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
What in the ever loving Christ does that have to do with anything that is happening right now?
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
You actually seem (from earlier in the thread) to believe that we should insist Crimea is returned to the Ukraine. This is lunacy.
The most we should insist is that there is an independent plebiscite in the Crimea (and also Luhansk and Donetsk)
The plebiscite in the Crimea will confirm that the now largely Russian population in Crimea wants to join Russia.
I appreciate that Crimea's demography has changed a lot ... but the population in Crimea now is largely Russian.
I suspect that Luhansk and Donetsk would also want to join Russia -- but I am happy if there is a plebiscite & Ukraine/Russia abide by the results.
That is what we should be trying to do.
OTOH one can understand why the Ukrainian government might not be particularly keen on this. A pro-Russian majority can, after all, be created in any part of Ukraine via the simple expedient of invading the country and inviting the unsupportive fraction of the populace to migrate to Poland.
It's not even as if the Ukrainians can get rid of Russia's malign influence by ceding substantial chunks of their territory. Russia would insist on treating what was left of the country as a tributary vassal regardless. So they've no incentive at all to co-operate with such a stitch-up. This is quite understandable.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
Don't mistake my criticism of our corrupt and immoral government with support for the positions taken by France and Germany. It isn't either/or. We and the EU are not either side of a pendulum where if one is bad the other must be good.
Putin has divided the west asunder. Nobody is right. Which is what he paid for.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
What in the ever loving Christ does that have to do with anything that is happening right now?
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
I suspect that Luhansk and Donetsk would also want to join Russia -- but I am happy if there is a plebiscite & Ukraine/Russia abide by the results.
The problem with this is achieving that. It's like when it is said Putin would probably win a free and fair election in Russia, which might be true, but could well be true, but he for one doesn't seem inclined to risk it.
Ukraine would not have agreed to such a plan unless forced by invasion, and Russia has already tipped the scales by (in effect) invading in the first place making a fair plebiscite likely impossible.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
I'm not sure what you are arguing here. Some think that the UK's stance isn't especially sensible and it should be more closely aligned with the EU members France and Germany. Others think it's more sensible and it's correctly aligned with the EU members Poland & the Baltic states. The fact that different EU members have a different stance shows that the UK could have taken either approach when it was a member of the EU, so what has this got to do with the UK having left?
I simply do no agree that within the EU we could have charted our own path in this
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
I’m not criticizing the UK response but just pointing out that some especially in the Leave camp are criticizing the EU for not acting like the very thing they never stopped moaning about .
27 countries will often have differing views on foreign policy .
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
What in the ever loving Christ does that have to do with anything that is happening right now?
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
You actually seem (from earlier in the thread) to believe that we should insist Crimea is returned to the Ukraine. This is lunacy.
The most we should insist is that there is an independent plebiscite in the Crimea (and also Luhansk and Donetsk)
The plebiscite in the Crimea will confirm that the now largely Russian population in Crimea wants to join Russia.
I appreciate that Crimea's demography has changed a lot ... but the population in Crimea now is largely Russian.
I suspect that Luhansk and Donetsk would also want to join Russia -- but I am happy if there is a plebiscite & Ukraine/Russia abide by the results.
That is what we should be trying to do.
OTOH one can understand why the Ukrainian government might not be particularly keen on this. A pro-Russian majority can, after all, be created in any part of Ukraine via the simple expedient of invading the country and inviting the unsupportive fraction of the populace to migrate to Poland.
It's not even as if the Ukrainians can get rid of Russia's malign influence by ceding substantial chunks of their territory. Russia would insist on treating what was left of the country as a tributary vassal regardless. So they've no incentive at all to co-operate with such a stitch-up. This is quite understandable.
I guess if you are a smaller country, you have to learn how to deal with a bigger, overbearing neighbour.
C.f. Wales and England, or Scotland and England. (Neatly returning to Pigeon-kle4's Law)
What about Tory pacts with other parties to maintain power? They need to lose lot more than 47?
The only viable coalition partner for the Conservatives is the DUP. The DUP are highly unlikely to win more than 10 seats, so the Conservatives can't fall below 312.
I seriously doubt any other party would consider a coalition with the Conservatives, certainly none would consider it under a Johnson-led Conservative party.
The Lib Dems clearly have history, but I can't see them picking the Conservatives. In 2010, the momentum was behind the Conservatives consigning Labour to the dustbin. If the situation is such that the Conservatives lose enough seats to be unable to form a majority even with the DUP, the momentum will be against them and I think the LDs will support Labour. Of course, this could, depending on the seats total and vote total, result in the Conservatives being the largest party both in terms of seats and votes, but losing power.
But that's the system.
Incidently, depending on the results, if Labour + LD aren't enough either, I can't see a Lab/LD/SNP alliance lasting long. We'd have to have another election within a couple of years (hurrah!).
I agree with all the replies to me. I am playing a bit of devil’s advocate 😈 Truth is though, there are plenty ifs and buts to kick around on this thread. Here’s a good one. Support can come in different ways, at its basic level support defeating LOTO vonc and support to pass budget in return to for certain bit of legislation put to Parliament? So the Scot Nats give that basic support in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
Puts on tin hat and expects plenty NEVER NEVER NEVER in Scottish, and Swedish, tone 🙂
Far too quiet… did I need to insert the word Torys? Okay -
So the Scot Nats give that basic support TO THE TORIES in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
🤔 not much of a rush to deny a soul equates to 40 pieces of silver and legislation for a referendum.
I think it's seen not so much as 30 (not 40) 5p bits but more as the Temptation by Satan. But equally even Tories have their standards, from their point of view. Can you ever see Mr Johnson ever allowing a referendum? He'd have to do some work and to keep his tongue under total control.
I would support a VONC in any Tory leader and PM who allowed an indyref2, as I expect would most Tory MPs and members.
If the only way a Tory government can stay in power is with SNP support we should go into opposition. There is zero chance the SNP would do a deal with the Tories anyway
But you didn’t vonc Cameron, and he did it?
Cameron was not leading a Tory majority government in 2014, it was a coalition with the LDs. We now have a Tory majority government.
The SNP had also won a Holyrood majority in 2011, there is no such SNP majority at Holyrood now.
The 2014 referendum was held on the basis it would be a 'once in a generation referendum.' Any Tory PM who allowed an indyref2 referendum before such a generation elapsed and did a deal with the SNP would not be fit to serve and must be removed.
But there is a pro-referendum majority at Holyrood now. So you are misleading on that.
And you are also wrong on indiyref 1 being held on a generation basis. Where does it say that in the Edinburgh Agreement? As you have been asked very many times.
Implicit in paragraph 30, since both sides were clear before the referendum that it was once in a generation.
They look forward to a referendum that is legal and fair producing a decisive and respected outcome.
The SNP have clearly broken this part of the agreement.
They have not. Different parliament, electoral mandate asked for and given to then and the SGs, driven in large part by the lies of Cameron and Co during the refertendum (vote No to stay in the EU and all that).
A Scottish Parliament election cannot give a mandate for a referendum (or independence) as the constitution is a reserved matter.
I want to ask a hypothetical. Suppose a vast majority of people in Scotland wanted independence. Let's say 75% in favour to make it totally unambiguous. What should happen?
If it was demonstrable that there was an overwhelming majority and sufficient time had passed since the most recent referendum, then the UK parliament should grant a referendum. Ideally with negotiations for what Scottish independence would mean first.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
Don't mistake my criticism of our corrupt and immoral government with support for the positions taken by France and Germany. It isn't either/or. We and the EU are not either side of a pendulum where if one is bad the other must be good.
Putin has divided the west asunder. Nobody is right. Which is what he paid for.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Johnson is just playing at being Churchill to try and distract us from his domestic woes and to try and improve his poll ratings.
He just loves the big gesture and if Ukraine and Poland have been paying attention at all they will know it's all puff and wind, like his empty gesture to lie down in front of the bulldozers if the 3rd runway at Heathrow was approved. If they are expecting Boris to actually do anything they are in for a shock
Good to see somebody is still falling for it though BigG!
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Johnson is just playing at being Churchill to try and distract us from his domestic woes and to try and improve his poll ratings.
He just loves the big gesture and if Ukraine and Poland have been paying attention at all they will know it's all puff and wind, like his empty gesture to lie down in front of the bulldozers if the 3rd runway at Heathrow was approved. If they are expecting Boris to actually do anything they are in for a shock
Good to see somebody is still falling for it though BigG!
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
The US UK and Nato are all on the same page, pity France and Germany are not
Strange. I could have sworn that France and Germany are Nato members.
Yes, but consider eg Macron's words on NATO:
President Emmanuel Macron of France has described Nato as "brain dead", stressing what he sees as waning commitment to the transatlantic alliance by its main guarantor, the US. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50335257
There *are* different attitudes, and a lot of politics overlaying. Mons. Macron wants to build up the concept of an EU army patterned on the French view, and defined over against NATO, and what he calls the Anglosphere.
There are other politics elsewhere - Merkel has pursued a version of Ostpolitik, and certain of the wheels have come off it. But there are still parts of the German coalition (mainly SPD) that are more attached to the previous view.
US-UK-Canada, Scandis, the EUs frontline states, and some Mediterraneans have a more robust view.
Despite all of that there is much more practical alignment than even say 3 months ago.
Overlaid on that for us are tensions about Brexit or opposition to Brexit, and a political need to diss BJ and the UK for some. I'm not keen on Boris, but I do tend to hold up the UK view on Brexit.
It was Trump that turned NATO brain dead.
The quote is from the BBC, reflecting a Macron interview with the Economist:
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
I'm not sure what you are arguing here. Some think that the UK's stance isn't especially sensible and it should be more closely aligned with the EU members France and Germany. Others think it's more sensible and it's correctly aligned with the EU members Poland & the Baltic states. The fact that different EU members have a different stance shows that the UK could have taken either approach when it was a member of the EU, so what has this got to do with the UK having left?
Yes and some fine words from the sidelines as they continue to shovel Russian money into their funds is an absolute joke. Only thing this rotten lot support is their bankbooks.
I suspect you might get away with it on a N facing coast but I wouldn't fancy being in W Wales earlier in the morning. Waves from the SW will be very large and the height of the winds will be near high tide. You will get a storm surge but hopefully not the 40-50ft swell.
A couple of weather models have been trying to weaken the storm a little and possibly shift it slightly north but the exact path remains uncertain. Other models have been hinting at some nastiness in SE England later in the day.
It will be almost a case of 'nowcasting' when it comes to plotting the worst of it tomorrow. Best to be prepared.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
They are upset that the UK is supporting "periphery" Europeans, rather than proper "core" Europeans like the Germans.
What are periphery Europeans ?
You do a good job with your covid data updates but sorry to say your last post was nonsense !
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
What in the ever loving Christ does that have to do with anything that is happening right now?
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
I suspect that Luhansk and Donetsk would also want to join Russia -- but I am happy if there is a plebiscite & Ukraine/Russia abide by the results.
The problem with this is achieving that. It's like when it is said Putin would probably win a free and fair election in Russia, which might be true, but could well be true, but he for one doesn't seem inclined to risk it.
Ukraine would not have agreed to such a plan unless forced by invasion, and Russia has already tipped the scales by (in effect) invading in the first place making a fair plebiscite likely impossible.
Of course the free elections in Belarus didn't go so well. The loser wins and the winners flee the country.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
The US UK and Nato are all on the same page, pity France and Germany are not
Strange. I could have sworn that France and Germany are Nato members.
Yes, but consider eg Macron's words on NATO:
President Emmanuel Macron of France has described Nato as "brain dead", stressing what he sees as waning commitment to the transatlantic alliance by its main guarantor, the US. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50335257
There *are* different attitudes, and a lot of politics overlaying. Mons. Macron wants to build up the concept of an EU army patterned on the French view, and defined over against NATO, and what he calls the Anglosphere.
There are other politics elsewhere - Merkel has pursued a version of Ostpolitik, and certain of the wheels have come off it. But there are still parts of the German coalition (mainly SPD) that are more attached to the previous view.
US-UK-Canada, Scandis, the EUs frontline states, and some Mediterraneans have a more robust view.
Despite all of that there is much more practical alignment than even say 3 months ago.
Overlaid on that for us are tensions about Brexit or opposition to Brexit, and a political need to diss BJ and the UK for some. I'm not keen on Boris, but I do tend to hold up the UK view on Brexit.
It was Trump that turned NATO brain dead.
Whereas, it was Macron that turned Covid-sufferers dead....
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
What in the ever loving Christ does that have to do with anything that is happening right now?
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
You actually seem (from earlier in the thread) to believe that we should insist Crimea is returned to the Ukraine. This is lunacy.
The most we should insist is that there is an independent plebiscite in the Crimea (and also Luhansk and Donetsk)
The plebiscite in the Crimea will confirm that the now largely Russian population in Crimea wants to join Russia.
I appreciate that Crimea's demography has changed a lot ... but the population in Crimea now is largely Russian.
I suspect that Luhansk and Donetsk would also want to join Russia -- but I am happy if there is a plebiscite & Ukraine/Russia abide by the results.
That is what we should be trying to do.
OTOH one can understand why the Ukrainian government might not be particularly keen on this. A pro-Russian majority can, after all, be created in any part of Ukraine via the simple expedient of invading the country and inviting the unsupportive fraction of the populace to migrate to Poland.
It's not even as if the Ukrainians can get rid of Russia's malign influence by ceding substantial chunks of their territory. Russia would insist on treating what was left of the country as a tributary vassal regardless. So they've no incentive at all to co-operate with such a stitch-up. This is quite understandable.
I guess if you are a smaller country, you have to learn how to deal with a bigger, overbearing neighbour.
I recently played Suzerain, a text based game about leading an Eastern European style nation dealing with economic problems, ethnic division and being caught between competing superpower blocs and an unstable nation trying to provoke you into a war they would win, and it was stressful enough in fiction let alone real life.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
What in the ever loving Christ does that have to do with anything that is happening right now?
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
I suspect that Luhansk and Donetsk would also want to join Russia -- but I am happy if there is a plebiscite & Ukraine/Russia abide by the results.
The problem with this is achieving that. It's like when it is said Putin would probably win a free and fair election in Russia, which might be true, but could well be true, but he for one doesn't seem inclined to risk it.
Ukraine would not have agreed to such a plan unless forced by invasion, and Russia has already tipped the scales by (in effect) invading in the first place making a fair plebiscite likely impossible.
There are only three ways of dealing with a large, troublesome minority in your country.
1. Let them go.
2. Let them have a huge amount of autonomy to run their own affairs.
3. Civil War.
If Ukraine cannot countenance 1 or 2, then the only other option is 3.
I suspect you might get away with it on a N facing coast but I wouldn't fancy being in W Wales earlier in the morning. Waves from the SW will be very large and the height of the winds will be near high tide.
A couple of weather models have been trying to weaken the storm a little and possibly shift it slightly north but the exact path remains uncertain. Other models have been hinting at some nastiness in SE England later in the day.
It will be almost a case of 'nowcasting' when it comes to plotting the worst of it tomorrow. Best to be prepared.
We actually face east - west and our only protection will be the Little Orme but our promenade will get a hammering
My prayer tonight is my son does not get a 'shout' in the next 24 hours
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
I'm not sure what you are arguing here. Some think that the UK's stance isn't especially sensible and it should be more closely aligned with the EU members France and Germany. Others think it's more sensible and it's correctly aligned with the EU members Poland & the Baltic states. The fact that different EU members have a different stance shows that the UK could have taken either approach when it was a member of the EU, so what has this got to do with the UK having left?
I simply do no agree that within the EU we could have charted our own path in this
THe UK is doing square root of F all in any case, so they could have done the same in any case.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Johnson is just playing at being Churchill to try and distract us from his domestic woes and to try and improve his poll ratings.
He just loves the big gesture and if Ukraine and Poland have been paying attention at all they will know it's all puff and wind, like his empty gesture to lie down in front of the bulldozers if the 3rd runway at Heathrow was approved. If they are expecting Boris to actually do anything they are in for a shock
Good to see somebody is still falling for it though BigG!
Boris saw how AUUKUS titillated the base and got him off the hook over Afghanistan. He's playing an almost identical trick now.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
What in the ever loving Christ does that have to do with anything that is happening right now?
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
I suspect that Luhansk and Donetsk would also want to join Russia -- but I am happy if there is a plebiscite & Ukraine/Russia abide by the results.
The problem with this is achieving that. It's like when it is said Putin would probably win a free and fair election in Russia, which might be true, but could well be true, but he for one doesn't seem inclined to risk it.
Ukraine would not have agreed to such a plan unless forced by invasion, and Russia has already tipped the scales by (in effect) invading in the first place making a fair plebiscite likely impossible.
Of course the free elections in Belarus didn't go so well. The loser wins and the winners flee the country.
Rather shows one of the risks for sham elections - depending on how you are fixing things, there is a danger that the sham is a little too obvious even for your dictatorship.
Better to just own it and not bother with elections.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
Don't mistake my criticism of our corrupt and immoral government with support for the positions taken by France and Germany. It isn't either/or. We and the EU are not either side of a pendulum where if one is bad the other must be good.
Putin has divided the west asunder. Nobody is right. Which is what he paid for.
Putin is wrong to threaten war.
Quite obviously so.
But we are wrong to promise military help to Ukraine that we cannot deliver. If we are genuinely going to send forces to support Ukraine then that is a very risky thing to do, particularly without US forces.
Churchill famously said "jaw-jaw is better than war war" after all.
What about Tory pacts with other parties to maintain power? They need to lose lot more than 47?
The only viable coalition partner for the Conservatives is the DUP. The DUP are highly unlikely to win more than 10 seats, so the Conservatives can't fall below 312.
I seriously doubt any other party would consider a coalition with the Conservatives, certainly none would consider it under a Johnson-led Conservative party.
The Lib Dems clearly have history, but I can't see them picking the Conservatives. In 2010, the momentum was behind the Conservatives consigning Labour to the dustbin. If the situation is such that the Conservatives lose enough seats to be unable to form a majority even with the DUP, the momentum will be against them and I think the LDs will support Labour. Of course, this could, depending on the seats total and vote total, result in the Conservatives being the largest party both in terms of seats and votes, but losing power.
But that's the system.
Incidently, depending on the results, if Labour + LD aren't enough either, I can't see a Lab/LD/SNP alliance lasting long. We'd have to have another election within a couple of years (hurrah!).
I agree with all the replies to me. I am playing a bit of devil’s advocate 😈 Truth is though, there are plenty ifs and buts to kick around on this thread. Here’s a good one. Support can come in different ways, at its basic level support defeating LOTO vonc and support to pass budget in return to for certain bit of legislation put to Parliament? So the Scot Nats give that basic support in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
Puts on tin hat and expects plenty NEVER NEVER NEVER in Scottish, and Swedish, tone 🙂
Far too quiet… did I need to insert the word Torys? Okay -
So the Scot Nats give that basic support TO THE TORIES in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
🤔 not much of a rush to deny a soul equates to 40 pieces of silver and legislation for a referendum.
I think it's seen not so much as 30 (not 40) 5p bits but more as the Temptation by Satan. But equally even Tories have their standards, from their point of view. Can you ever see Mr Johnson ever allowing a referendum? He'd have to do some work and to keep his tongue under total control.
I would support a VONC in any Tory leader and PM who allowed an indyref2, as I expect would most Tory MPs and members.
If the only way a Tory government can stay in power is with SNP support we should go into opposition. There is zero chance the SNP would do a deal with the Tories anyway
But you didn’t vonc Cameron, and he did it?
Cameron was not leading a Tory majority government in 2014, it was a coalition with the LDs. We now have a Tory majority government.
The SNP had also won a Holyrood majority in 2011, there is no such SNP majority at Holyrood now.
The 2014 referendum was held on the basis it would be a 'once in a generation referendum.' Any Tory PM who allowed an indyref2 referendum before such a generation elapsed and did a deal with the SNP would not be fit to serve and must be removed.
But there is a pro-referendum majority at Holyrood now. So you are misleading on that.
And you are also wrong on indiyref 1 being held on a generation basis. Where does it say that in the Edinburgh Agreement? As you have been asked very many times.
Implicit in paragraph 30, since both sides were clear before the referendum that it was once in a generation.
They look forward to a referendum that is legal and fair producing a decisive and respected outcome.
The SNP have clearly broken this part of the agreement.
They have not. Different parliament, electoral mandate asked for and given to then and the SGs, driven in large part by the lies of Cameron and Co during the refertendum (vote No to stay in the EU and all that).
Not in their remit so no electoral mandate granted despite being asked for
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
I'm not sure what you are arguing here. Some think that the UK's stance isn't especially sensible and it should be more closely aligned with the EU members France and Germany. Others think it's more sensible and it's correctly aligned with the EU members Poland & the Baltic states. The fact that different EU members have a different stance shows that the UK could have taken either approach when it was a member of the EU, so what has this got to do with the UK having left?
I simply do no agree that within the EU we could have charted our own path in this
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
Don't mistake my criticism of our corrupt and immoral government with support for the positions taken by France and Germany. It isn't either/or. We and the EU are not either side of a pendulum where if one is bad the other must be good.
Putin has divided the west asunder. Nobody is right. Which is what he paid for.
Putin is wrong to threaten war.
Quite obviously so.
But we are wrong to promise military help to Ukraine that we cannot deliver. If we are genuinely going to send forces to support Ukraine then that is a very risky thing to do, particularly without US forces.
Churchill famously said "jaw-jaw is better than war war" after all.
Yeah he also took a lot of Lend lease and that is probably the package that works best for Zhelensky at the moment.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
I'm not sure what you are arguing here. Some think that the UK's stance isn't especially sensible and it should be more closely aligned with the EU members France and Germany. Others think it's more sensible and it's correctly aligned with the EU members Poland & the Baltic states. The fact that different EU members have a different stance shows that the UK could have taken either approach when it was a member of the EU, so what has this got to do with the UK having left?
I simply do no agree that within the EU we could have charted our own path in this
What about Tory pacts with other parties to maintain power? They need to lose lot more than 47?
The only viable coalition partner for the Conservatives is the DUP. The DUP are highly unlikely to win more than 10 seats, so the Conservatives can't fall below 312.
I seriously doubt any other party would consider a coalition with the Conservatives, certainly none would consider it under a Johnson-led Conservative party.
The Lib Dems clearly have history, but I can't see them picking the Conservatives. In 2010, the momentum was behind the Conservatives consigning Labour to the dustbin. If the situation is such that the Conservatives lose enough seats to be unable to form a majority even with the DUP, the momentum will be against them and I think the LDs will support Labour. Of course, this could, depending on the seats total and vote total, result in the Conservatives being the largest party both in terms of seats and votes, but losing power.
But that's the system.
Incidently, depending on the results, if Labour + LD aren't enough either, I can't see a Lab/LD/SNP alliance lasting long. We'd have to have another election within a couple of years (hurrah!).
I agree with all the replies to me. I am playing a bit of devil’s advocate 😈 Truth is though, there are plenty ifs and buts to kick around on this thread. Here’s a good one. Support can come in different ways, at its basic level support defeating LOTO vonc and support to pass budget in return to for certain bit of legislation put to Parliament? So the Scot Nats give that basic support in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
Puts on tin hat and expects plenty NEVER NEVER NEVER in Scottish, and Swedish, tone 🙂
Far too quiet… did I need to insert the word Torys? Okay -
So the Scot Nats give that basic support TO THE TORIES in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
🤔 not much of a rush to deny a soul equates to 40 pieces of silver and legislation for a referendum.
I think it's seen not so much as 30 (not 40) 5p bits but more as the Temptation by Satan. But equally even Tories have their standards, from their point of view. Can you ever see Mr Johnson ever allowing a referendum? He'd have to do some work and to keep his tongue under total control.
I would support a VONC in any Tory leader and PM who allowed an indyref2, as I expect would most Tory MPs and members.
If the only way a Tory government can stay in power is with SNP support we should go into opposition. There is zero chance the SNP would do a deal with the Tories anyway
But you didn’t vonc Cameron, and he did it?
Cameron was not leading a Tory majority government in 2014, it was a coalition with the LDs. We now have a Tory majority government.
The SNP had also won a Holyrood majority in 2011, there is no such SNP majority at Holyrood now.
The 2014 referendum was held on the basis it would be a 'once in a generation referendum.' Any Tory PM who allowed an indyref2 referendum before such a generation elapsed and did a deal with the SNP would not be fit to serve and must be removed.
But there is a pro-referendum majority at Holyrood now. So you are misleading on that.
And you are also wrong on indiyref 1 being held on a generation basis. Where does it say that in the Edinburgh Agreement? As you have been asked very many times.
Implicit in paragraph 30, since both sides were clear before the referendum that it was once in a generation.
They look forward to a referendum that is legal and fair producing a decisive and respected outcome.
The SNP have clearly broken this part of the agreement.
They have not. Different parliament, electoral mandate asked for and given to then and the SGs, driven in large part by the lies of Cameron and Co during the refertendum (vote No to stay in the EU and all that).
A Scottish Parliament election cannot give a mandate for a referendum (or independence) as the constitution is a reserved matter.
I want to ask a hypothetical. Suppose a vast majority of people in Scotland wanted independence. Let's say 75% in favour to make it totally unambiguous. What should happen?
The Scottish government needs to convince Westminster to grant a referendum. They have to do this through argument - they have no right to one. If the situation is as clear as you suggest then I think they could come up with a convincing case because what you describe is not sustainable.
I personally do not find the fact that they won a bare majority of votes in a Scottish election a convincing argument and, to date, neither does Westminster
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
What in the ever loving Christ does that have to do with anything that is happening right now?
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
I suspect that Luhansk and Donetsk would also want to join Russia -- but I am happy if there is a plebiscite & Ukraine/Russia abide by the results.
The problem with this is achieving that. It's like when it is said Putin would probably win a free and fair election in Russia, which might be true, but could well be true, but he for one doesn't seem inclined to risk it.
Ukraine would not have agreed to such a plan unless forced by invasion, and Russia has already tipped the scales by (in effect) invading in the first place making a fair plebiscite likely impossible.
Of course the free elections in Belarus didn't go so well. The loser wins and the winners flee the country.
On the quiet there is now a Russian occupation of Belarus. The world has not noticed that in all the sabre rattling to the south.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
Don't mistake my criticism of our corrupt and immoral government with support for the positions taken by France and Germany. It isn't either/or. We and the EU are not either side of a pendulum where if one is bad the other must be good.
Putin has divided the west asunder. Nobody is right. Which is what he paid for.
Putin is wrong to threaten war.
Quite obviously so.
But we are wrong to promise military help to Ukraine that we cannot deliver. If we are genuinely going to send forces to support Ukraine then that is a very risky thing to do, particularly without US forces.
Churchill famously said "jaw-jaw is better than war war" after all.
This strange idea seems to have taken root that the UK has just signed up to an obligation to send troops to defend Ukraine. I stand to be corrected by events, but this sounds like arrant nonsense to me.
What the UK has already done, and will probably continue to do, is ship weapons to Ukraine. This is a good idea. We can't make Ukraine as strong as Russia, but it may be possible to elevate the cost of invading Ukraine - at least on a large scale - to the point at which the number of Russians likely to come home in body bags should Putin be tempted grows too high for his comfort.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
A defence alliance with a country on the verge of being invaded by Russia. So when that happens what are our obligations? To provide them with weapons? Or to defend them?
The alternative is simple and painless - seize the assets of Russian oligarchs in the UK. Sadly as several Russian oligarchs are large donors of the Conservative Party, for some reason the government seems reluctant to engage with such a thing.
A defence alliance doesn't necessarily mean sending troops.
The idea that simply confiscating some oligarchs money now is a "simple and painless" solution is, of course, insane.
Simpler and less painful than a shooting war with Russia. Liar keeps ramping up our stand against Russia. Its a joke. His party is funded by Russia, and whats left of our armed forces would be quickly splatted in a shooting war with Russia.
Again again, NATO is not going to war with Russia over Ukraine. So we need to drop the bluster that we might. Putin isn't that stupid to believe that...
You talk more and more nonsense sadly and your bitterness over HMG is plain to see
Maybe you should listen to the US and Nato itself and criticise France and Germany who are letting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic states down
I'm with Tom Tugendhadt. Warm words are a waste of time. We should have NATO forces in Ukraine and lots of them. He says the idea that Ukraine isn't in NATO is a spurious cop out.
We either negotiate a peace or we demonstrate we mean business. Preferably both.
At this moment in time NATO troops entering Ukraine would see Russia invade
Of course it is too late. Although it looks highly likely that the latter part of your statement might come to pass anyway
Tugendhadt, who I admire very much, states that Putin respects strength, he doesn't care for weakness. Which is why NATO should have been involved at Ukraine's invitation a long time ago.
I accept unlike yourself, I know not what I am talking about, I am not a military strategist like the Churchillian Johnson and Truss, but what Tugendhadt writes makes perfect sense to me.
I suspect you might get away with it on a N facing coast but I wouldn't fancy being in W Wales earlier in the morning. Waves from the SW will be very large and the height of the winds will be near high tide.
A couple of weather models have been trying to weaken the storm a little and possibly shift it slightly north but the exact path remains uncertain. Other models have been hinting at some nastiness in SE England later in the day.
It will be almost a case of 'nowcasting' when it comes to plotting the worst of it tomorrow. Best to be prepared.
We actually face east - west and our only protection will be the Little Orme but our promenade will get a hammering
My prayer tonight is my son does not get a 'shout' in the next 24 hours
In a way, you'd almost be tempted to leave anyone daft enough to be out there tomorrow to their own devices. Of course, that is never an option. I will keep my fingers crossed.
Your main protection is Snowdonia. There will be some strong NW winds once the worst has passed but hopefully the waves won't get too big and with any luck it will be after high tide.
As an aside, the Met Office was of course 'invented' after the Royal Charter wreck on NE Anglesey. Despite all the criticism, forecasters do a decent job these days.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
I'm not sure what you are arguing here. Some think that the UK's stance isn't especially sensible and it should be more closely aligned with the EU members France and Germany. Others think it's more sensible and it's correctly aligned with the EU members Poland & the Baltic states. The fact that different EU members have a different stance shows that the UK could have taken either approach when it was a member of the EU, so what has this got to do with the UK having left?
I simply do no agree that within the EU we could have charted our own path in this
Sorry, so the conclusion you are drawing from different EU members charting different paths is that the UK as a member could not have done so? I mean which of the different EU views would we have been compelled to follow? I'm genuinely confused how France and Germany could have forced the UK to follow them, despite not having a similar level of influence over e.g. Poland.
ps just seen your flood warning - hope all is OK tomorrow. Our coast is generally alright except with a south/south-easterly but I wouldn't fancy being over the moor on the north coast tomorrow morning.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
How has Putin benefitted in Ukraine from the UK leaving the EU? Surely his position would have been better if the UK had been tied to an EU position by majority voting, rather than having us be a powerful and noisy force in NATO?
Putin wants fragmentation. Drive wedges between the NATO members who are also EU members. The fall of the UK in terms of both military power and diplomatic reach weakens the rest of the EU, as does internal divisions over things like energy supplies.
That's right. 'My enemy's enemy is my friend.'
The UK became an enemy of the EU, which became weaker as a result.
My enemy's enemy is my friend - the policy of idiots who can't read history.
It leads to maths like this
a) Bosnian Muslims + West = Friends. b) Serbs + Bosnia Muslims = Enemies c) The West = my enemy.
Therefore - I am a friend of Arkan.
I understand Vitol once paid Arkan $1m to attend a meeting with someone who owed them money. The debt was settled shortly after the meeting.
But apparently they had no idea he was a genocidal war criminal.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
Don't mistake my criticism of our corrupt and immoral government with support for the positions taken by France and Germany. It isn't either/or. We and the EU are not either side of a pendulum where if one is bad the other must be good.
Putin has divided the west asunder. Nobody is right. Which is what he paid for.
Putin is wrong to threaten war.
Quite obviously so.
But we are wrong to promise military help to Ukraine that we cannot deliver. If we are genuinely going to send forces to support Ukraine then that is a very risky thing to do, particularly without US forces.
Churchill famously said "jaw-jaw is better than war war" after all.
This strange idea seems to have taken root that the UK has just signed up to an obligation to send troops to defend Ukraine. I stand to be corrected by events, but this sounds like arrant nonsense to me.
What the UK has already done, and will probably continue to do, is ship weapons to Ukraine. This is a good idea. We can't make Ukraine as strong as Russia, but it may be possible to elevate the cost of invading Ukraine - at least on a large scale - to the point at which the number of Russians likely to come home in body bags should Putin be tempted grows too high for his comfort.
I suspect it is arrant nonsense, but it isn't clear what Truss has signed us up to in alliance with Poland and Ukraine. She does have rather a tendency to sign anything in front of her, provided there is a photo opportunity for her Instagram.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
They are upset that the UK is supporting "periphery" Europeans, rather than proper "core" Europeans like the Germans.
What are periphery Europeans ?
The ones who dare to take a different view to the core old establishment, who think they should control the agenda.
Consider how the response to ignoring EU Law varies by which country does it.
Or the attitude taken to varying responses to the Conference on the Future of Europe last summer.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
Everybody in the West is on exactly the same page: nobody wants Russia to invade Ukraine; everybody wants peace; nobody wants war. You are seeking division where there is none.
Unsurprisingly, there are slightly different views on how to achieve what I've set out above.
The reaction of some of the left on here would be laughable if it was not horrible: "Of course Russia is behaving badly, but we should just let them do what they want because Johnson is in charge. And we should stop poking Russia by telling them not to invade. Instead we should just remain silent and tut-tut behind our hands."
I do wonder if some om here secretly quite like the idea of Russia invading ...
What about Tory pacts with other parties to maintain power? They need to lose lot more than 47?
The only viable coalition partner for the Conservatives is the DUP. The DUP are highly unlikely to win more than 10 seats, so the Conservatives can't fall below 312.
I seriously doubt any other party would consider a coalition with the Conservatives, certainly none would consider it under a Johnson-led Conservative party.
The Lib Dems clearly have history, but I can't see them picking the Conservatives. In 2010, the momentum was behind the Conservatives consigning Labour to the dustbin. If the situation is such that the Conservatives lose enough seats to be unable to form a majority even with the DUP, the momentum will be against them and I think the LDs will support Labour. Of course, this could, depending on the seats total and vote total, result in the Conservatives being the largest party both in terms of seats and votes, but losing power.
But that's the system.
Incidently, depending on the results, if Labour + LD aren't enough either, I can't see a Lab/LD/SNP alliance lasting long. We'd have to have another election within a couple of years (hurrah!).
I agree with all the replies to me. I am playing a bit of devil’s advocate 😈 Truth is though, there are plenty ifs and buts to kick around on this thread. Here’s a good one. Support can come in different ways, at its basic level support defeating LOTO vonc and support to pass budget in return to for certain bit of legislation put to Parliament? So the Scot Nats give that basic support in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
Puts on tin hat and expects plenty NEVER NEVER NEVER in Scottish, and Swedish, tone 🙂
Far too quiet… did I need to insert the word Torys? Okay -
So the Scot Nats give that basic support TO THE TORIES in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
🤔 not much of a rush to deny a soul equates to 40 pieces of silver and legislation for a referendum.
I think it's seen not so much as 30 (not 40) 5p bits but more as the Temptation by Satan. But equally even Tories have their standards, from their point of view. Can you ever see Mr Johnson ever allowing a referendum? He'd have to do some work and to keep his tongue under total control.
I would support a VONC in any Tory leader and PM who allowed an indyref2, as I expect would most Tory MPs and members.
If the only way a Tory government can stay in power is with SNP support we should go into opposition. There is zero chance the SNP would do a deal with the Tories anyway
But you didn’t vonc Cameron, and he did it?
Cameron was not leading a Tory majority government in 2014, it was a coalition with the LDs. We now have a Tory majority government.
The SNP had also won a Holyrood majority in 2011, there is no such SNP majority at Holyrood now.
The 2014 referendum was held on the basis it would be a 'once in a generation referendum.' Any Tory PM who allowed an indyref2 referendum before such a generation elapsed and did a deal with the SNP would not be fit to serve and must be removed.
But there is a pro-referendum majority at Holyrood now. So you are misleading on that.
And you are also wrong on indiyref 1 being held on a generation basis. Where does it say that in the Edinburgh Agreement? As you have been asked very many times.
Implicit in paragraph 30, since both sides were clear before the referendum that it was once in a generation.
They look forward to a referendum that is legal and fair producing a decisive and respected outcome.
The SNP have clearly broken this part of the agreement.
They have not. Different parliament, electoral mandate asked for and given to then and the SGs, driven in large part by the lies of Cameron and Co during the refertendum (vote No to stay in the EU and all that).
A Scottish Parliament election cannot give a mandate for a referendum (or independence) as the constitution is a reserved matter.
I want to ask a hypothetical. Suppose a vast majority of people in Scotland wanted independence. Let's say 75% in favour to make it totally unambiguous. What should happen?
The Scottish government needs to convince Westminster to grant a referendum. They have to do this through argument - they have no right to one. If the situation is as clear as you suggest then I think they could come up with a convincing case because what you describe is not sustainable.
I personally do not find the fact that they won a bare majority of votes in a Scottish election a convincing argument and, to date, neither does Westminster
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
I disagree with @Farooq 's analysis. And I can point to Kyiv on map.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
And I love the way pb.com has recently discovered there was a famine in the Ukraine and this was genocide. (Pretty sure it was wider than the Ukraine).
I have never, ever heard anyone on pb.com refer to the Irish Genocide of 1845-1849 or the Bengal Genocide of 1943-1945.
pb.com is in the mood for a lynching.
There is a serious academic debate as whether the Holodomor can be classified as genocide. I’m not aware about that on the case of the Irish or Bengal Famines.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
A defence alliance with a country on the verge of being invaded by Russia. So when that happens what are our obligations? To provide them with weapons? Or to defend them?
The alternative is simple and painless - seize the assets of Russian oligarchs in the UK. Sadly as several Russian oligarchs are large donors of the Conservative Party, for some reason the government seems reluctant to engage with such a thing.
A defence alliance doesn't necessarily mean sending troops.
The idea that simply confiscating some oligarchs money now is a "simple and painless" solution is, of course, insane.
Simpler and less painful than a shooting war with Russia. Liar keeps ramping up our stand against Russia. Its a joke. His party is funded by Russia, and whats left of our armed forces would be quickly splatted in a shooting war with Russia.
Again again, NATO is not going to war with Russia over Ukraine. So we need to drop the bluster that we might. Putin isn't that stupid to believe that...
You talk more and more nonsense sadly and your bitterness over HMG is plain to see
Maybe you should listen to the US and Nato itself and criticise France and Germany who are letting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic states down
I'm with Tom Tugendhadt. Warm words are a waste of time. We should have NATO forces in Ukraine and lots of them. He says the idea that Ukraine isn't in NATO is a spurious cop out.
We either negotiate a peace or we demonstrate we mean business. Preferably both.
At this moment in time NATO troops entering Ukraine would see Russia invade
Of course it is too late. Although it looks highly likely that the latter part of your statement might come to pass anyway
Tugendhadt, who I admire very much, states that Putin respects strength, he doesn't care for weakness. Which is why NATO should have been involved at Ukraine's invitation a long time ago.
I accept unlike yourself, I know not what I am talking about, I am not a military strategist like the Churchillian Johnson and Truss, but what Tugendhadt writes makes perfect sense to me.
He is a lone voice and it would explode the position if Nato put boots into Ukraine at this point
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
What in the ever loving Christ does that have to do with anything that is happening right now?
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
You actually seem (from earlier in the thread) to believe that we should insist Crimea is returned to the Ukraine. This is lunacy.
The most we should insist is that there is an independent plebiscite in the Crimea (and also Luhansk and Donetsk)
The plebiscite in the Crimea will confirm that the now largely Russian population in Crimea wants to join Russia.
I appreciate that Crimea's demographics have changed a lot over the centuries ... but the population in Crimea now is largely Russian.
I suspect that Luhansk and Donetsk would also want to join Russia -- but I am happy if there is a plebiscite & Ukraine/Russia abide by the results.
That is what we should be trying to do.
You would be sanctifying invasion, annexation, mass murder and violence
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
On a point of order, I am not delighted by France and Germany behaviour rather very disappointed
IF you are disappointed we can only imagine how the eastern EU states feel. What's the point of this club? Our best mate seems to be bloke what left it?
Its that the real intention of Johnson and Truss here? undermine the club? If so, its a dangerous and foolish game I reckon.
The Eastern states are really not impressed by the idea of Western powers doing deals about how the neighbourhood gets carved up, against their wishes.
I wonder why?
Are you saying the Poles, Lithuanians etc don't want our help? Good. Britain is on its uppers and with big issues at home. We can't cash these cheques. Putin surely knows that.
Did you know that the UK spends substantially more of defence than Russia? India does too as well as the big boys of US and China.
Now I do not dispute for a second that the Kremlin gets many more bangs for its bucks than the MoD and that frightening amounts of our Defence budget is wasted but we do have the third largest defence budget in the world and it’s not all wasted.
I suspect you might get away with it on a N facing coast but I wouldn't fancy being in W Wales earlier in the morning. Waves from the SW will be very large and the height of the winds will be near high tide.
A couple of weather models have been trying to weaken the storm a little and possibly shift it slightly north but the exact path remains uncertain. Other models have been hinting at some nastiness in SE England later in the day.
It will be almost a case of 'nowcasting' when it comes to plotting the worst of it tomorrow. Best to be prepared.
We actually face east - west and our only protection will be the Little Orme but our promenade will get a hammering
My prayer tonight is my son does not get a 'shout' in the next 24 hours
In a way, you'd almost be tempted to leave anyone daft enough to be out there tomorrow to their own devices. Of course, that is never an option. I will keep my fingers crossed.
Your main protection is Snowdonia. There will be some strong NW winds once the worst has passed but hopefully the waves won't get too big and with any luck it will be after high tide.
As an aside, the Met Office was of course 'invented' after the Royal Charter wreck on NE Anglesey. Despite all the criticism, forecasters do a decent job these days.
It is very rare for a lifeboat to remain in the boathouse no matter what the condition are
He has recently qualified to crew the All-weather boat but I do not want him out tomorrow if at all possible
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
A defence alliance with a country on the verge of being invaded by Russia. So when that happens what are our obligations? To provide them with weapons? Or to defend them?
The alternative is simple and painless - seize the assets of Russian oligarchs in the UK. Sadly as several Russian oligarchs are large donors of the Conservative Party, for some reason the government seems reluctant to engage with such a thing.
A defence alliance doesn't necessarily mean sending troops.
The idea that simply confiscating some oligarchs money now is a "simple and painless" solution is, of course, insane.
Simpler and less painful than a shooting war with Russia. Liar keeps ramping up our stand against Russia. Its a joke. His party is funded by Russia, and whats left of our armed forces would be quickly splatted in a shooting war with Russia.
Again again, NATO is not going to war with Russia over Ukraine. So we need to drop the bluster that we might. Putin isn't that stupid to believe that...
You talk more and more nonsense sadly and your bitterness over HMG is plain to see
Maybe you should listen to the US and Nato itself and criticise France and Germany who are letting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic states down
I'm with Tom Tugendhadt. Warm words are a waste of time. We should have NATO forces in Ukraine and lots of them. He says the idea that Ukraine isn't in NATO is a spurious cop out.
We either negotiate a peace or we demonstrate we mean business. Preferably both.
At this moment in time NATO troops entering Ukraine would see Russia invade
Of course it is too late. Although it looks highly likely that the latter part of your statement might come to pass anyway
Tugendhadt, who I admire very much, states that Putin respects strength, he doesn't care for weakness. Which is why NATO should have been involved at Ukraine's invitation a long time ago.
I accept unlike yourself, I know not what I am talking about, I am not a military strategist like the Churchillian Johnson and Truss, but what Tugendhadt writes makes perfect sense to me.
He is a lone voice and it would explode the position if Nato put boots into Ukraine at this point
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
I'm not sure what you are arguing here. Some think that the UK's stance isn't especially sensible and it should be more closely aligned with the EU members France and Germany. Others think it's more sensible and it's correctly aligned with the EU members Poland & the Baltic states. The fact that different EU members have a different stance shows that the UK could have taken either approach when it was a member of the EU, so what has this got to do with the UK having left?
I simply do no agree that within the EU we could have charted our own path in this
Sorry, so the conclusion you are drawing from different EU members charting different paths is that the UK as a member could not have done so? I mean which of the different EU views would we have been compelled to follow? I'm genuinely confused how France and Germany could have forced the UK to follow them, despite not having a similar level of influence over e.g. Poland.
ps just seen your flood warning - hope all is OK tomorrow. Our coast is generally alright except with a south/south-easterly but I wouldn't fancy being over the moor on the north coast tomorrow morning.
We have just received our warning and the sea is likely to breach the sea wall about 500 yards away
@YBarddCwsc - In a way, the West's reaction - or lack of - after the annexation of Crimea suggests that if that was the only motive of Russia, then there wouldn't be quite so much concern. But it clearly isn't. They want to have control over the whole of Ukraine.
What about Tory pacts with other parties to maintain power? They need to lose lot more than 47?
The only viable coalition partner for the Conservatives is the DUP. The DUP are highly unlikely to win more than 10 seats, so the Conservatives can't fall below 312.
I seriously doubt any other party would consider a coalition with the Conservatives, certainly none would consider it under a Johnson-led Conservative party.
The Lib Dems clearly have history, but I can't see them picking the Conservatives. In 2010, the momentum was behind the Conservatives consigning Labour to the dustbin. If the situation is such that the Conservatives lose enough seats to be unable to form a majority even with the DUP, the momentum will be against them and I think the LDs will support Labour. Of course, this could, depending on the seats total and vote total, result in the Conservatives being the largest party both in terms of seats and votes, but losing power.
But that's the system.
Incidently, depending on the results, if Labour + LD aren't enough either, I can't see a Lab/LD/SNP alliance lasting long. We'd have to have another election within a couple of years (hurrah!).
I agree with all the replies to me. I am playing a bit of devil’s advocate 😈 Truth is though, there are plenty ifs and buts to kick around on this thread. Here’s a good one. Support can come in different ways, at its basic level support defeating LOTO vonc and support to pass budget in return to for certain bit of legislation put to Parliament? So the Scot Nats give that basic support in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
Puts on tin hat and expects plenty NEVER NEVER NEVER in Scottish, and Swedish, tone 🙂
Far too quiet… did I need to insert the word Torys? Okay -
So the Scot Nats give that basic support TO THE TORIES in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
🤔 not much of a rush to deny a soul equates to 40 pieces of silver and legislation for a referendum.
I think it's seen not so much as 30 (not 40) 5p bits but more as the Temptation by Satan. But equally even Tories have their standards, from their point of view. Can you ever see Mr Johnson ever allowing a referendum? He'd have to do some work and to keep his tongue under total control.
I would support a VONC in any Tory leader and PM who allowed an indyref2, as I expect would most Tory MPs and members.
If the only way a Tory government can stay in power is with SNP support we should go into opposition. There is zero chance the SNP would do a deal with the Tories anyway
But you didn’t vonc Cameron, and he did it?
Cameron was not leading a Tory majority government in 2014, it was a coalition with the LDs. We now have a Tory majority government.
The SNP had also won a Holyrood majority in 2011, there is no such SNP majority at Holyrood now.
The 2014 referendum was held on the basis it would be a 'once in a generation referendum.' Any Tory PM who allowed an indyref2 referendum before such a generation elapsed and did a deal with the SNP would not be fit to serve and must be removed.
But there is a pro-referendum majority at Holyrood now. So you are misleading on that.
And you are also wrong on indiyref 1 being held on a generation basis. Where does it say that in the Edinburgh Agreement? As you have been asked very many times.
Implicit in paragraph 30, since both sides were clear before the referendum that it was once in a generation.
They look forward to a referendum that is legal and fair producing a decisive and respected outcome.
The SNP have clearly broken this part of the agreement.
They have not. Different parliament, electoral mandate asked for and given to then and the SGs, driven in large part by the lies of Cameron and Co during the refertendum (vote No to stay in the EU and all that).
A Scottish Parliament election cannot give a mandate for a referendum (or independence) as the constitution is a reserved matter.
I want to ask a hypothetical. Suppose a vast majority of people in Scotland wanted independence. Let's say 75% in favour to make it totally unambiguous. What should happen?
The Scottish government needs to convince Westminster to grant a referendum. They have to do this through argument - they have no right to one. If the situation is as clear as you suggest then I think they could come up with a convincing case because what you describe is not sustainable.
I personally do not find the fact that they won a bare majority of votes in a Scottish election a convincing argument and, to date, neither does Westminster
Given what is possible generally on much less than a bare majority, unfortunately I am convinced. But Westminster has little upside in being convinced.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
A defence alliance with a country on the verge of being invaded by Russia. So when that happens what are our obligations? To provide them with weapons? Or to defend them?
The alternative is simple and painless - seize the assets of Russian oligarchs in the UK. Sadly as several Russian oligarchs are large donors of the Conservative Party, for some reason the government seems reluctant to engage with such a thing.
A defence alliance doesn't necessarily mean sending troops.
The idea that simply confiscating some oligarchs money now is a "simple and painless" solution is, of course, insane.
Simpler and less painful than a shooting war with Russia. Liar keeps ramping up our stand against Russia. Its a joke. His party is funded by Russia, and whats left of our armed forces would be quickly splatted in a shooting war with Russia.
Again again, NATO is not going to war with Russia over Ukraine. So we need to drop the bluster that we might. Putin isn't that stupid to believe that...
You talk more and more nonsense sadly and your bitterness over HMG is plain to see
Maybe you should listen to the US and Nato itself and criticise France and Germany who are letting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic states down
I'm with Tom Tugendhadt. Warm words are a waste of time. We should have NATO forces in Ukraine and lots of them. He says the idea that Ukraine isn't in NATO is a spurious cop out.
We either negotiate a peace or we demonstrate we mean business. Preferably both.
At this moment in time NATO troops entering Ukraine would see Russia invade
Of course it is too late. Although it looks highly likely that the latter part of your statement might come to pass anyway
Tugendhadt, who I admire very much, states that Putin respects strength, he doesn't care for weakness. Which is why NATO should have been involved at Ukraine's invitation a long time ago.
I accept unlike yourself, I know not what I am talking about, I am not a military strategist like the Churchillian Johnson and Truss, but what Tugendhadt writes makes perfect sense to me.
He is a lone voice and it would explode the position if Nato put boots into Ukraine at this point
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
The US UK and Nato are all on the same page, pity France and Germany are not
Strange. I could have sworn that France and Germany are Nato members.
Yes, but consider eg Macron's words on NATO:
President Emmanuel Macron of France has described Nato as "brain dead", stressing what he sees as waning commitment to the transatlantic alliance by its main guarantor, the US. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50335257
There *are* different attitudes, and a lot of politics overlaying. Mons. Macron wants to build up the concept of an EU army patterned on the French view, and defined over against NATO, and what he calls the Anglosphere.
There are other politics elsewhere - Merkel has pursued a version of Ostpolitik, and certain of the wheels have come off it. But there are still parts of the German coalition (mainly SPD) that are more attached to the previous view.
US-UK-Canada, Scandis, the EUs frontline states, and some Mediterraneans have a more robust view.
Despite all of that there is much more practical alignment than even say 3 months ago.
Overlaid on that for us are tensions about Brexit or opposition to Brexit, and a political need to diss BJ and the UK for some. I'm not keen on Boris, but I do tend to hold up the UK view on Brexit.
It was Trump that turned NATO brain dead.
Whereas, it was Macron that turned Covid-sufferers dead....
Plenty of that here too...
But not from the rank stupidity of dissing our vaccine, for purely political reasons. Unlike the arsehole Macron.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
How has Putin benefitted in Ukraine from the UK leaving the EU? Surely his position would have been better if the UK had been tied to an EU position by majority voting, rather than having us be a powerful and noisy force in NATO?
Putin wants fragmentation. Drive wedges between the NATO members who are also EU members. The fall of the UK in terms of both military power and diplomatic reach weakens the rest of the EU, as does internal divisions over things like energy supplies.
That's right. 'My enemy's enemy is my friend.'
The UK became an enemy of the EU, which became weaker as a result.
My enemy's enemy is my friend - the policy of idiots who can't read history.
It leads to maths like this
a) Bosnian Muslims + West = Friends. b) Serbs + Bosnia Muslims = Enemies c) The West = my enemy.
Therefore - I am a friend of Arkan.
It's an aphorism, not a mathematical principle, but it certainly applies in this case.
What about Tory pacts with other parties to maintain power? They need to lose lot more than 47?
The only viable coalition partner for the Conservatives is the DUP. The DUP are highly unlikely to win more than 10 seats, so the Conservatives can't fall below 312.
I seriously doubt any other party would consider a coalition with the Conservatives, certainly none would consider it under a Johnson-led Conservative party.
The Lib Dems clearly have history, but I can't see them picking the Conservatives. In 2010, the momentum was behind the Conservatives consigning Labour to the dustbin. If the situation is such that the Conservatives lose enough seats to be unable to form a majority even with the DUP, the momentum will be against them and I think the LDs will support Labour. Of course, this could, depending on the seats total and vote total, result in the Conservatives being the largest party both in terms of seats and votes, but losing power.
But that's the system.
Incidently, depending on the results, if Labour + LD aren't enough either, I can't see a Lab/LD/SNP alliance lasting long. We'd have to have another election within a couple of years (hurrah!).
I agree with all the replies to me. I am playing a bit of devil’s advocate 😈 Truth is though, there are plenty ifs and buts to kick around on this thread. Here’s a good one. Support can come in different ways, at its basic level support defeating LOTO vonc and support to pass budget in return to for certain bit of legislation put to Parliament? So the Scot Nats give that basic support in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
Puts on tin hat and expects plenty NEVER NEVER NEVER in Scottish, and Swedish, tone 🙂
Far too quiet… did I need to insert the word Torys? Okay -
So the Scot Nats give that basic support TO THE TORIES in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
🤔 not much of a rush to deny a soul equates to 40 pieces of silver and legislation for a referendum.
I think it's seen not so much as 30 (not 40) 5p bits but more as the Temptation by Satan. But equally even Tories have their standards, from their point of view. Can you ever see Mr Johnson ever allowing a referendum? He'd have to do some work and to keep his tongue under total control.
I would support a VONC in any Tory leader and PM who allowed an indyref2, as I expect would most Tory MPs and members.
If the only way a Tory government can stay in power is with SNP support we should go into opposition. There is zero chance the SNP would do a deal with the Tories anyway
But you didn’t vonc Cameron, and he did it?
Cameron was not leading a Tory majority government in 2014, it was a coalition with the LDs. We now have a Tory majority government.
The SNP had also won a Holyrood majority in 2011, there is no such SNP majority at Holyrood now.
The 2014 referendum was held on the basis it would be a 'once in a generation referendum.' Any Tory PM who allowed an indyref2 referendum before such a generation elapsed and did a deal with the SNP would not be fit to serve and must be removed.
But there is a pro-referendum majority at Holyrood now. So you are misleading on that.
And you are also wrong on indiyref 1 being held on a generation basis. Where does it say that in the Edinburgh Agreement? As you have been asked very many times.
Implicit in paragraph 30, since both sides were clear before the referendum that it was once in a generation.
They look forward to a referendum that is legal and fair producing a decisive and respected outcome.
The SNP have clearly broken this part of the agreement.
They have not. Different parliament, electoral mandate asked for and given to then and the SGs, driven in large part by the lies of Cameron and Co during the refertendum (vote No to stay in the EU and all that).
A Scottish Parliament election cannot give a mandate for a referendum (or independence) as the constitution is a reserved matter.
I want to ask a hypothetical. Suppose a vast majority of people in Scotland wanted independence. Let's say 75% in favour to make it totally unambiguous. What should happen?
The Scottish government needs to convince Westminster to grant a referendum. They have to do this through argument - they have no right to one. If the situation is as clear as you suggest then I think they could come up with a convincing case because what you describe is not sustainable.
I personally do not find the fact that they won a bare majority of votes in a Scottish election a convincing argument and, to date, neither does Westminster
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
On a point of order, I am not delighted by France and Germany behaviour rather very disappointed
IF you are disappointed we can only imagine how the eastern EU states feel. What's the point of this club? Our best mate seems to be bloke what left it?
Its that the real intention of Johnson and Truss here? undermine the club? If so, its a dangerous and foolish game I reckon.
The Eastern states are really not impressed by the idea of Western powers doing deals about how the neighbourhood gets carved up, against their wishes.
I wonder why?
Are you saying the Poles, Lithuanians etc don't want our help? Good. Britain is on its uppers and with big issues at home. We can't cash these cheques. Putin surely knows that.
Did you know that the UK spends substantially more of defence than Russia? India does too as well as the big boys of US and China.
Now I do not dispute for a second that the Kremlin gets many more bangs for its bucks than the MoD and that frightening amounts of our Defence budget is wasted but we do have the third largest defence budget in the world and it’s not all wasted.
I've posted before about the problem facing the Russian military. The US has half as many again regular troops as Russia, but Russia far exceed them if you count reserves. Russia has far more battle tanks and infantry fighting vehicles. It has about as many nukes. Yet its military budget is between a seventh and a tenth of the US's.
Frankly, they are trying to do a lot with very little money. Even with their better purchasing power, something has to give. And that will be combat effectiveness.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
On a point of order, I am not delighted by France and Germany behaviour rather very disappointed
IF you are disappointed we can only imagine how the eastern EU states feel. What's the point of this club? Our best mate seems to be bloke what left it?
Its that the real intention of Johnson and Truss here? undermine the club? If so, its a dangerous and foolish game I reckon.
The Eastern states are really not impressed by the idea of Western powers doing deals about how the neighbourhood gets carved up, against their wishes.
I wonder why?
Are you saying the Poles, Lithuanians etc don't want our help? Good. Britain is on its uppers and with big issues at home. We can't cash these cheques. Putin surely knows that.
Did you know that the UK spends substantially more of defence than Russia? India does too as well as the big boys of US and China.
Now I do not dispute for a second that the Kremlin gets many more bangs for its bucks than the MoD and that frightening amounts of our Defence budget is wasted but we do have the third largest defence budget in the world and it’s not all wasted.
For a comparison, if you do it by PPP Russia gets around 250% of the UK's outturn.
The trilateral memorandum of cooperation between Poland, Ukraine and the UK is interesting. Warm words about supporting democracy, shortly after the European Court ruling that Poland (and Hungary) could be financially penalised by the EU over their breaches of democratic norms.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
I'm not sure what you are arguing here. Some think that the UK's stance isn't especially sensible and it should be more closely aligned with the EU members France and Germany. Others think it's more sensible and it's correctly aligned with the EU members Poland & the Baltic states. The fact that different EU members have a different stance shows that the UK could have taken either approach when it was a member of the EU, so what has this got to do with the UK having left?
I simply do no agree that within the EU we could have charted our own path in this
Of course we could. Poland has for example.
And Poland is currently being fined the thick end of £1m a day by the CJE for the privilege. Yeah, that sounds the way to go. Not.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
On a point of order, I am not delighted by France and Germany behaviour rather very disappointed
IF you are disappointed we can only imagine how the eastern EU states feel. What's the point of this club? Our best mate seems to be bloke what left it?
Its that the real intention of Johnson and Truss here? undermine the club? If so, its a dangerous and foolish game I reckon.
The Eastern states are really not impressed by the idea of Western powers doing deals about how the neighbourhood gets carved up, against their wishes.
I wonder why?
Are you saying the Poles, Lithuanians etc don't want our help? Good. Britain is on its uppers and with big issues at home. We can't cash these cheques. Putin surely knows that.
Did you know that the UK spends substantially more of defence than Russia? India does too as well as the big boys of US and China.
Now I do not dispute for a second that the Kremlin gets many more bangs for its bucks than the MoD and that frightening amounts of our Defence budget is wasted but we do have the third largest defence budget in the world and it’s not all wasted.
For a comparison, if you do it by PPP Russia gets around 250% of the UK's outturn.
Yeah but can the Russians do anything well these days? They can't even cheat properly.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
I'm not sure what you are arguing here. Some think that the UK's stance isn't especially sensible and it should be more closely aligned with the EU members France and Germany. Others think it's more sensible and it's correctly aligned with the EU members Poland & the Baltic states. The fact that different EU members have a different stance shows that the UK could have taken either approach when it was a member of the EU, so what has this got to do with the UK having left?
The last couple of weeks does prove EU-UK cooperation on foreign policy is being hampered by emotional and political fallout from brexit, and Global Britains need for transatlantic relationship (parrot what Washington says) in order for influence and to remain relevant does it not?
Fact is When UK brexited it took away from the EU a wealth of foreign policy resources: membership in all the key global networks and institutions, a first-rate foreign service, our brilliant military and intelligence apparatus, world-class universities and media, and lots of money out of the EU coffers.
What did UK lose in return?
You have Winston Churchill, the Conservatives best ever Europhile, and his dream of European and world security being ripped to shreds?
“Peace and prosperity in Europe can only come if the greater European nations put aside their mistrust and oneupmanship and start operating as partners. This structure of a United States of Europe, if well and truly built, will be such as to make the material strength of a single state less important. And that is to be welcomed. Small nations will count as much as large ones and gain their honour by their contribution to the common cause. The safety of the world requires this unity in Europe from which no nation should be permanently outcast.”
We mustn’t air brush out of history that UK did have a great influence when inside the EU. UK was the driving and liberalising force when it came to the Single Market, enlargement, competition and trade, as well as good influence EU foreign policy, particularly under Lady Thatcher and Mr Blair.
The reaction of some of the left on here would be laughable if it was not horrible: "Of course Russia is behaving badly, but we should just let them do what they want because Johnson is in charge. And we should stop poking Russia by telling them not to invade. Instead we should just remain silent and tut-tut behind our hands."
I do wonder if some om here secretly quite like the idea of Russia invading ...
Ah, I see we're at that time-honoured stage in the electoral cycle when the Lib-Lab pact comes out to play.
I can't vote Conservative at the moment. However, Oxfordshire Country Council is a useful foreshadow of what we can expect under a left-wing Government; just think of what more could be done on a national scale with all the levers of Government.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
I'm not sure what you are arguing here. Some think that the UK's stance isn't especially sensible and it should be more closely aligned with the EU members France and Germany. Others think it's more sensible and it's correctly aligned with the EU members Poland & the Baltic states. The fact that different EU members have a different stance shows that the UK could have taken either approach when it was a member of the EU, so what has this got to do with the UK having left?
I simply do no agree that within the EU we could have charted our own path in this
Sorry, so the conclusion you are drawing from different EU members charting different paths is that the UK as a member could not have done so? I mean which of the different EU views would we have been compelled to follow? I'm genuinely confused how France and Germany could have forced the UK to follow them, despite not having a similar level of influence over e.g. Poland.
ps just seen your flood warning - hope all is OK tomorrow. Our coast is generally alright except with a south/south-easterly but I wouldn't fancy being over the moor on the north coast tomorrow morning.
We have just received our warning and the sea is likely to breach the sea wall about 500 yards away
I've just had a look at the latest UKMO model - which has changed the exact timings again - and I can see now why they have issued a warning.
The wind does swing to the NW earlier on the N Wales coast and peaks at around midday with gusts to 80mph+.
Take all precautions, but don't panic. Not all forecasts agree.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
We’d nevertheless be safer with a PM interested in more than his own self preservation.
Again, not helpful
I want Boris replaced but sniping at each other is not the best action at present and to be fair to Starmer he is very much supporting Boris on this
You are clearly more relaxed about our country being represented on the international stage by this dishonest narcissistic numpty than I am. But then you actually voted for him (despite warning us for months about his weaknesses), whereas I did not.
On this there is no choice and yes I voted conservative in 2019 and upto Paterson and partygate etc he had my support as he took us out of EU and handled covid well
Taking us out of the EU in the way that he did was a disastrous mistake, and he didn’t handle covid well at all.
In your opinion
Bob & Brad.
Then stick to the facts. You voted for this s**tshow of a government, whereas I did not.
So, PB managed to turn the Russian-Ukrainian contretemps into an excuse to argue about Brexit and Scotland?
I'm shocked, I tell you. Shocked.
It’s PB’s very own version of ‘Godwins Law’
Actually you are all wrong. I started it with a perfectly ON TOPIC question, in a hung Parliament could SNP keep Tory’s in power for a Indy ref rejected by the Starmer coalition?
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
The US UK and Nato are all on the same page, pity France and Germany are not
Strange. I could have sworn that France and Germany are Nato members.
Yes, but consider eg Macron's words on NATO:
President Emmanuel Macron of France has described Nato as "brain dead", stressing what he sees as waning commitment to the transatlantic alliance by its main guarantor, the US. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50335257
There *are* different attitudes, and a lot of politics overlaying. Mons. Macron wants to build up the concept of an EU army patterned on the French view, and defined over against NATO, and what he calls the Anglosphere.
There are other politics elsewhere - Merkel has pursued a version of Ostpolitik, and certain of the wheels have come off it. But there are still parts of the German coalition (mainly SPD) that are more attached to the previous view.
US-UK-Canada, Scandis, the EUs frontline states, and some Mediterraneans have a more robust view.
Despite all of that there is much more practical alignment than even say 3 months ago.
Overlaid on that for us are tensions about Brexit or opposition to Brexit, and a political need to diss BJ and the UK for some. I'm not keen on Boris, but I do tend to hold up the UK view on Brexit.
It was Trump that turned NATO brain dead.
Whereas, it was Macron that turned Covid-sufferers dead....
@YBarddCwsc - In a way, the West's reaction - or lack of - after the annexation of Crimea suggests that if that was the only motive of Russia, then there wouldn't be quite so much concern. But it clearly isn't. They want to have control over the whole of Ukraine.
I'm sure it's a braoder issue than that. They just don't want a successful country that is more liberal and democratic than Russia on their border. It would destabilise dangerously the dirty little Mafia that runs the place.
The same people moaning about the EU becoming a superstate are now moaning that it isn’t acting like a superstate !
There seems to be a divide rising in the EU, and angst among some that the UK is firmly supporting Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries when others in the EU are not so committed
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
I'm not sure what you are arguing here. Some think that the UK's stance isn't especially sensible and it should be more closely aligned with the EU members France and Germany. Others think it's more sensible and it's correctly aligned with the EU members Poland & the Baltic states. The fact that different EU members have a different stance shows that the UK could have taken either approach when it was a member of the EU, so what has this got to do with the UK having left?
The last couple of weeks does prove EU-UK cooperation on foreign policy is being hampered by emotional and political fallout from brexit, and Global Britains need for transatlantic relationship (parrot what Washington says) in order for influence and to remain relevant does it not?
Fact is When UK brexited it took away from the EU a wealth of foreign policy resources: membership in all the key global networks and institutions, a first-rate foreign service, our brilliant military and intelligence apparatus, world-class universities and media, and lots of money out of the EU coffers.
What did UK lose in return?
You have Winston Churchill, the Conservatives best ever Europhile, and his dream of European and world security being ripped to shreds?
“Peace and prosperity in Europe can only come if the greater European nations put aside their mistrust and oneupmanship and start operating as partners. This structure of a United States of Europe, if well and truly built, will be such as to make the material strength of a single state less important. And that is to be welcomed. Small nations will count as much as large ones and gain their honour by their contribution to the common cause. The safety of the world requires this unity in Europe from which no nation should be permanently outcast.”
We mustn’t air brush out of history that UK did have a great influence when inside the EU. UK was the driving and liberalising force when it came to the Single Market, enlargement, competition and trade, as well as good influence EU foreign policy, particularly under Lady Thatcher and Mr Blair.
"Global Britain" ............. has me rolling about the floor chuckling.
Ah, I see we're at that time-honoured stage in the electoral cycle when the Lib-Lab pact comes out to play.
I can't vote Conservative at the moment. However, Oxfordshire Country Council is a useful foreshadow of what we can expect under a left-wing Government; just think of what more could be done on a national scale with all the levers of Government.
It's not a free lunch.
AIUI the tax burden is already at its highest level since the 1950s, so we're not exactly getting a "free lunch" out of the current lot. And the population is bound to be asked to cough up even more as Mr & Mrs Average keep getting older and sicker with every passing year.
At least with a change of Government a bit more of the money might be screwed out of plutocrats and rich elderly homeowners and a bit less out of put-upon workers, who will keep being used as the state's principal cash machines so long as the Grey Conservative Party remains in charge.
Breaking: Ukraine, the UK and Poland announce a creation of a trilateral alliance during the UK foreign secretary @trussliz visit to Kyiv. Countries will cooperate in the areas of defense, economy, trade and countering disinformation. More information to follow soon
Is it? That rather depends on what the terms of the arrangement are.
UK standing with Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States in a way France and Germany are not
Yes you have hit the nail on the head Big G. That’s the mental bit. We need to be standing, voicing and acting in Union on these things don’t we?
Why is that mental?
Or should we just offer Putin Schleswig-Holstein, for traditions sake?
Because if his plan all along is to split - first making us gas junkies, then sabre rattling - where there is more impact us all acting as one against him, it means he’s winning. Do you see my point?
Well, unanimity in sacrificing Ukraine will only mean that Putin moves onto the Baltics. Ask @Cicero....
Unanimity is nice. But stopping people from re-drawing maps with guns is more important.
If we are going to live in a world where re-drawing the maps with guns is cool, I have a list of territorial demands of my own.
Don't worry - they are absolutely my last set of demands.
If Putin’s design is to split us - like with how much money and resources Putin pumped into cheap gas pipelines and allegedly into securing Brexit vote he wanted, and now people as moderate and sensible as Big G are posting on here delighted we are split from EU allies, Putin’s useful idiots and traitors - straight away I’m not comfortable with that. We shouldn’t be should we? If What is ranged against him is weaker going forward?
Are we not influencing France and Germany enough because we’ve brexited? Genuine question that and deserves more than insults when asked.
Putin has spent a long time and a lot of money undermining western societies. Having us all fighting with each other is precisely what his money was trying to achieve.
This is true, which is why over this I tend to think twice over dishing criticism too liberally over this issue. I think the UK has got it more right than Germany, but I don't think it's helpful to be attacking anyone other than Russia right now. The eagerness with which some people are seizing upon this situation to attack Boris, Macron, the EU, Ukraine, Biden, NATO, etc. is a disturbing sign. It feels like arguing over whose deckchair is whose on the deck of a ship when we're at risk of hitting an iceberg. Lift your eyes up, people. If you think this crisis is useful ammunition in your longstanding grudge against [whoever], you're not seeing the big picture.
Which is not to say there aren't valid criticisms to be made here, but most of the criticisms I see on here about this are low-energy partisan snipes by people who probably couldn't even point to Kyiv on a map.
Hard to disagree with this analysis.
I disagree with @Farooq 's analysis. And I can point to Kyiv on map.
What Russia is doing over Crimea, Luhansk & Donetsk is not any different to what Britain did over Antrim, Armagh, Down, Derry, Fermanagh & Tyrone.
In fact, Russia probably has a far better claim to these territories than Britain to the Six Counties.
We should sort out our own dreadful record first. Then we will have earned the right to lecture Russia.
And I love the way pb.com has recently discovered there was a famine in the Ukraine and this was genocide. (Pretty sure it was wider than the Ukraine).
I have never, ever heard anyone on pb.com refer to the Irish Genocide of 1845-1849 or the Bengal Genocide of 1943-1945.
pb.com is in the mood for a lynching.
Er, no that's a load of bollocks and whataboutery, like most pro-Putin posts.
… I care about elderly people more than I do pigs, but the principle is the same. Both are victims not – repeat not – of the UK’s decision to leave the European Union. They are victims of Boris Johnson’s subsequent decision, to aid him in toppling Theresa May, to interpret Brexit as requiring Britain to depart the world’s most efficient and benign economic entity, the single market…
Leaving the EU had some arguments for it. Leaving the single market had none. “Soft” Brexit within that market would have been far been easier to negotiate. Leaving it has meant wrecked supply chains and terminated scientific collaboration. It has undermined recruitment patterns and destabilised Northern Ireland. It has crippled the fish industry and impeded billions of pounds of UK trade. Its consequences have wavered between nuisance and disaster.
The reaction of some of the left on here would be laughable if it was not horrible: "Of course Russia is behaving badly, but we should just let them do what they want because Johnson is in charge. And we should stop poking Russia by telling them not to invade. Instead we should just remain silent and tut-tut behind our hands."
I do wonder if some om here secretly quite like the idea of Russia invading ...
Who are you talking about???
Nick Palmer especially, a couple of others and, sadly, yourself - at least that's the way it reads.
And no, before anyone says, I do not want troops on the ground. But I do think that Russia grabbing (or trying to grab) substantial portions of Ukraine would be very bad, not just for Ukraine, but for neighbouring countries, Europe, and ourselves.
Russia (and prominent Russians) have had various sanctions placed on them for years. They haven't worked, or dissuaded them from taking evil paths. Threatening sanctions and their money alone probably will not work this time either. So we need to try something else.
Also remember that the UK has suffered uniquely from Putin's aggression in the Litvinenko and Salisbury cases.
What about Tory pacts with other parties to maintain power? They need to lose lot more than 47?
The only viable coalition partner for the Conservatives is the DUP. The DUP are highly unlikely to win more than 10 seats, so the Conservatives can't fall below 312.
I seriously doubt any other party would consider a coalition with the Conservatives, certainly none would consider it under a Johnson-led Conservative party.
The Lib Dems clearly have history, but I can't see them picking the Conservatives. In 2010, the momentum was behind the Conservatives consigning Labour to the dustbin. If the situation is such that the Conservatives lose enough seats to be unable to form a majority even with the DUP, the momentum will be against them and I think the LDs will support Labour. Of course, this could, depending on the seats total and vote total, result in the Conservatives being the largest party both in terms of seats and votes, but losing power.
But that's the system.
Incidently, depending on the results, if Labour + LD aren't enough either, I can't see a Lab/LD/SNP alliance lasting long. We'd have to have another election within a couple of years (hurrah!).
I agree with all the replies to me. I am playing a bit of devil’s advocate 😈 Truth is though, there are plenty ifs and buts to kick around on this thread. Here’s a good one. Support can come in different ways, at its basic level support defeating LOTO vonc and support to pass budget in return to for certain bit of legislation put to Parliament? So the Scot Nats give that basic support in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
Puts on tin hat and expects plenty NEVER NEVER NEVER in Scottish, and Swedish, tone 🙂
Far too quiet… did I need to insert the word Torys? Okay -
So the Scot Nats give that basic support TO THE TORIES in return for an independence referendum they are not going to get from alternative government. Even that promise can come with sweeteners, like choose your own wording?
🤔 not much of a rush to deny a soul equates to 40 pieces of silver and legislation for a referendum.
I think it's seen not so much as 30 (not 40) 5p bits but more as the Temptation by Satan. But equally even Tories have their standards, from their point of view. Can you ever see Mr Johnson ever allowing a referendum? He'd have to do some work and to keep his tongue under total control.
I would support a VONC in any Tory leader and PM who allowed an indyref2, as I expect would most Tory MPs and members.
If the only way a Tory government can stay in power is with SNP support we should go into opposition. There is zero chance the SNP would do a deal with the Tories anyway
But you didn’t vonc Cameron, and he did it?
Cameron was not leading a Tory majority government in 2014, it was a coalition with the LDs. We now have a Tory majority government.
The SNP had also won a Holyrood majority in 2011, there is no such SNP majority at Holyrood now.
The 2014 referendum was held on the basis it would be a 'once in a generation referendum.' Any Tory PM who allowed an indyref2 referendum before such a generation elapsed and did a deal with the SNP would not be fit to serve and must be removed.
But there is a pro-referendum majority at Holyrood now. So you are misleading on that.
And you are also wrong on indiyref 1 being held on a generation basis. Where does it say that in the Edinburgh Agreement? As you have been asked very many times.
Implicit in paragraph 30, since both sides were clear before the referendum that it was once in a generation.
They look forward to a referendum that is legal and fair producing a decisive and respected outcome.
The SNP have clearly broken this part of the agreement.
They have not. Different parliament, electoral mandate asked for and given to then and the SGs, driven in large part by the lies of Cameron and Co during the refertendum (vote No to stay in the EU and all that).
A Scottish Parliament election cannot give a mandate for a referendum (or independence) as the constitution is a reserved matter.
I want to ask a hypothetical. Suppose a vast majority of people in Scotland wanted independence. Let's say 75% in favour to make it totally unambiguous. What should happen?
The Scottish government needs to convince Westminster to grant a referendum. They have to do this through argument - they have no right to one. If the situation is as clear as you suggest then I think they could come up with a convincing case because what you describe is not sustainable.
I personally do not find the fact that they won a bare majority of votes in a Scottish election a convincing argument and, to date, neither does Westminster
Or. They get one in hung paraliment at Westminster wheeling dealing… simples. Only got to give Sunak’s moderate Tories who got about 310 votes in the election confidence a supply for a while. How difficult can that be 🤷♀️
Comments
“What we are currently experiencing is the brain death of NATO,” Mr Macron declares in a blunt interview with The Economist.
https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/11/07/emmanuel-macron-warns-europe-nato-is-becoming-brain-dead
TBH I think it's a challenge to get a feeler gauge between the two.
I find it difficult to accept you actually believe that countries cannot criticise another's reprehensible actions without a perfect record in international relations ie probably no one.
Who is permitted to criticise Russia's actions? Can Estonia do it, and we support them?
As to the references to genocide, there is a lot of attention about Ukraine right now, you are seriously surprised people are bringing up the history of Ukraine? Come on, that's not even serious.
And thank you.
Putin got what he paid for - a chaotic and divided west.
You actually seem (from earlier in the thread) to believe that we should insist Crimea is returned to the Ukraine. This is lunacy.
The most we should insist is that there is an independent plebiscite in the Crimea (and also Luhansk and Donetsk)
The plebiscite in the Crimea will confirm that the now largely Russian population in Crimea wants to join Russia.
I appreciate that Crimea's demographics have changed a lot over the centuries ... but the population in Crimea now is largely Russian.
I suspect that Luhansk and Donetsk would also want to join Russia -- but I am happy if there is a plebiscite & Ukraine/Russia abide by the results.
That is what we should be trying to do.
First half was a piece moaning about dropping Covid restrictions (Pagel et al) and talking up new Omicron variants.
Second half was a talking to a Chinese journalist who had interviewed the head of the bat virus research in Wuhan. Apparently the lab had been wronged by all these conspiracy theories and western media was to blame for how the 'bat woman' was presented.
Neither had any counter arguments.
Do better, BBC.
In an ideal situation everyone would be on the same page and maybe it will be resolved, but it is not surprising that the biggest critics of the UK in this seems to be coming from those who regret the UK leaving the EU the most
That Crimea is gone from Ukraine probably forever, but obviously will not be ceded by Ukraine officially, is one reason NATO surely wants no piece of this if they can avoid it, since that issue will persist.
(Also, having been to the Crimea, it is really beautiful. It is actually worth fighting over, whereas Luhansk is not).
We are raised from the promenade but many will be worried tonight
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=322321963267480&id=100064690356344&sfnsn=scwspmo
It's not even as if the Ukrainians can get rid of Russia's malign influence by ceding substantial chunks of their territory. Russia would insist on treating what was left of the country as a tributary vassal regardless. So they've no incentive at all to co-operate with such a stitch-up. This is quite understandable.
Putin has divided the west asunder. Nobody is right. Which is what he paid for.
Ukraine would not have agreed to such a plan unless forced by invasion, and Russia has already tipped the scales by (in effect) invading in the first place making a fair plebiscite likely impossible.
27 countries will often have differing views on foreign policy .
C.f. Wales and England, or Scotland and England. (Neatly returning to Pigeon-kle4's Law)
He just loves the big gesture and if Ukraine and Poland have been paying attention at all they will know it's all puff and wind, like his empty gesture to lie down in front of the bulldozers if the 3rd runway at Heathrow was approved. If they are expecting Boris to actually do anything they are in for a shock
Good to see somebody is still falling for it though BigG!
A couple of weather models have been trying to weaken the storm a little and possibly shift it slightly north but the exact path remains uncertain. Other models have been hinting at some nastiness in SE England later in the day.
It will be almost a case of 'nowcasting' when it comes to plotting the worst of it tomorrow. Best to be prepared.
You do a good job with your covid data updates but sorry to say your last post was nonsense !
1. Let them go.
2. Let them have a huge amount of autonomy to run their own affairs.
3. Civil War.
If Ukraine cannot countenance 1 or 2, then the only other option is 3.
My prayer tonight is my son does not get a 'shout' in the next 24 hours
Better to just own it and not bother with elections.
But we are wrong to promise military help to Ukraine that we cannot deliver. If we are genuinely going to send forces to support Ukraine then that is a very risky thing to do, particularly without US forces.
Churchill famously said "jaw-jaw is better than war war" after all.
I personally do not find the fact that they won a bare majority of votes in a Scottish election a convincing argument and, to date, neither does Westminster
What the UK has already done, and will probably continue to do, is ship weapons to Ukraine. This is a good idea. We can't make Ukraine as strong as Russia, but it may be possible to elevate the cost of invading Ukraine - at least on a large scale - to the point at which the number of Russians likely to come home in body bags should Putin be tempted grows too high for his comfort.
Tugendhadt, who I admire very much, states that Putin respects strength, he doesn't care for weakness. Which is why NATO should have been involved at Ukraine's invitation a long time ago.
I accept unlike yourself, I know not what I am talking about, I am not a military strategist like the Churchillian Johnson and Truss, but what Tugendhadt writes makes perfect sense to me.
Your main protection is Snowdonia. There will be some strong NW winds once the worst has passed but hopefully the waves won't get too big and with any luck it will be after high tide.
As an aside, the Met Office was of course 'invented' after the Royal Charter wreck on NE Anglesey. Despite all the criticism, forecasters do a decent job these days.
ps just seen your flood warning - hope all is OK tomorrow. Our coast is generally alright except with a south/south-easterly but I wouldn't fancy being over the moor on the north coast tomorrow morning.
But apparently they had no idea he was a genocidal war criminal.
Consider how the response to ignoring EU Law varies by which country does it.
Or the attitude taken to varying responses to the Conference on the Future of Europe last summer.
Divisions illustrated here, written from the 'Brussels establishment' viewpoint, for example:
https://www.politico.eu/article/conference-on-the-future-of-europe-citizens-ideas-online-participation/
Losing to a Scottish team that has only been existence for a decade is utterly embarrassing,
Unsurprisingly, there are slightly different views on how to achieve what I've set out above.
I do wonder if some om here secretly quite like the idea of Russia invading ...
Now I do not dispute for a second that the Kremlin gets many more bangs for its bucks than the MoD and that frightening amounts of our Defence budget is wasted but we do have the third largest defence budget in the world and it’s not all wasted.
He has recently qualified to crew the All-weather boat but I do not want him out tomorrow if at all possible
North West winds for us can be very serious
Frankly, they are trying to do a lot with very little money. Even with their better purchasing power, something has to give. And that will be combat effectiveness.
I hope some good comes of it.
Fact is When UK brexited it took away from the EU a wealth of foreign policy resources: membership in all the key global networks and institutions, a first-rate foreign service, our brilliant military and intelligence apparatus, world-class universities and media, and lots of money out of the EU coffers.
What did UK lose in return?
You have Winston Churchill, the Conservatives best ever Europhile, and his dream of European and world security being ripped to shreds?
“Peace and prosperity in Europe can only come if the greater European nations put aside their mistrust and oneupmanship and start operating as partners. This structure of a United States of Europe, if well and truly built, will be such as to make the material strength of a single state less important. And that is to be welcomed. Small nations will count as much as large ones and gain their honour by their contribution to the common cause. The safety of the world requires this unity in Europe from which no nation should be permanently outcast.”
We mustn’t air brush out of history that UK did have a great influence when inside the EU. UK was the driving and liberalising force when it came to the Single Market, enlargement, competition and trade, as well as good influence EU foreign policy, particularly under Lady Thatcher and Mr Blair.
I can't vote Conservative at the moment. However, Oxfordshire Country Council is a useful foreshadow of what we can expect under a left-wing Government; just think of what more could be done on a national scale with all the levers of Government.
It's not a free lunch.
The wind does swing to the NW earlier on the N Wales coast and peaks at around midday with gusts to 80mph+.
Take all precautions, but don't panic. Not all forecasts agree.
Then stick to the facts. You voted for this s**tshow of a government, whereas I did not.
At least with a change of Government a bit more of the money might be screwed out of plutocrats and rich elderly homeowners and a bit less out of put-upon workers, who will keep being used as the state's principal cash machines so long as the Grey Conservative Party remains in charge.
… I care about elderly people more than I do pigs, but the principle is the same. Both are victims not – repeat not – of the UK’s decision to leave the European Union. They are victims of Boris Johnson’s subsequent decision, to aid him in toppling Theresa May, to interpret Brexit as requiring Britain to depart the world’s most efficient and benign economic entity, the single market…
Leaving the EU had some arguments for it. Leaving the single market had none. “Soft” Brexit within that market would have been far been easier to negotiate. Leaving it has meant wrecked supply chains and terminated scientific collaboration. It has undermined recruitment patterns and destabilised Northern Ireland. It has crippled the fish industry and impeded billions of pounds of UK trade. Its consequences have wavered between nuisance and disaster.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/17/brexit-life-outside-single-market-utter-disaster
And no, before anyone says, I do not want troops on the ground. But I do think that Russia grabbing (or trying to grab) substantial portions of Ukraine would be very bad, not just for Ukraine, but for neighbouring countries, Europe, and ourselves.
Russia (and prominent Russians) have had various sanctions placed on them for years. They haven't worked, or dissuaded them from taking evil paths. Threatening sanctions and their money alone probably will not work this time either. So we need to try something else.
Also remember that the UK has suffered uniquely from Putin's aggression in the Litvinenko and Salisbury cases.
As I have also commented we hope our son will not get a 'shout' as we know they will launch if life is in danger at sea