Actually, what has changed is that Scotland doesn't have oil to lie about now.
Lots and lots and lots of wind, tidal, and hydro potential and actual. Alrteady a major supplier to a neighbouring nation.
England and Wales can happily take their tidal range and meet all that Scotland provides and more.
Unfortunately, the tidal range in Scotland doesn't lend itself to tidal lagoons.....
Yes, every sizeable country on earth - especially those with long coastlines or ample sun - has vast renewable resources. All of the UK is good for wind power, England and Wales for tidal power
This will not make us renewable power super-exporters (like the old oil powers) as all of our neighbours have something similar. Scandinavia has vast wind resources. France ditto (plus nuclear). Spain has huge solar potential, likewise Italy (plus wind). Maybe Germany might still need some gas
Renewables are everywhere unlike old school hydrocarbons
I mean, it's very obviously a dog whistle (that THEY'RE ALL GOING TO COME HERE! arrow, jesus). But it's so fucking strange to boot. Where's Portugal? When did Sweden and Poland merge -- is this why Russia's so pissed off, because the EU closed off the Baltic?
Some of the other adverts are worse. "Countries that are joining the EU, and Syria & Iraq are highlighted on there. Oh, yeah, pink instead of red. Plausible deniability. But a conscious, targeted attempt to instil a false idea in the heads of voters. And Barty Boblette wants to to get all Wolfram & Hart on the technicalities of what is and isn't a lie.
About five per cent of Lithuanians moved to the UK. Five per cent of the Turkish population is about 4 million people.
The pink countries are countries which would then have borders with the EU. The implication is that refugees would come.
Those things being said, the advert was unnecessarily crude, and should not have been run.
Not sure the taxpayer/lottery funding of winter sports has been worth it given the performance of team GB in Beijing. Just send a curling team next time .The nation is going to have to start saving money sometime and a cut here cannto make anything worse can it
The alternative seems to be to replace most of the team with a load of Norwegians
Nope. Qualifying for the Olympics must be the highlight of every athlete’s career. Barely 1% will win a medal. Why is the Medal Table so important?
I mean, it's very obviously a dog whistle (that THEY'RE ALL GOING TO COME HERE! arrow, jesus). But it's so fucking strange to boot. Where's Portugal? When did Sweden and Poland merge -- is this why Russia's so pissed off, because the EU closed off the Baltic?
Some of the other adverts are worse. "Countries that are joining the EU, and Syria & Iraq are highlighted on there. Oh, yeah, pink instead of red. Plausible deniability. But a conscious, targeted attempt to instil a false idea in the heads of voters. And Barty Boblette wants to to get all Wolfram & Hart on the technicalities of what is and isn't a lie.
I'd be happy for 4m people to come to the UK if we built the housing and infrastructure for them. The problem is we haven't.
Free movement was a cake and eat it for the rich, while rapidly reducing the living standards of the working poor.
I mean, it's very obviously a dog whistle (that THEY'RE ALL GOING TO COME HERE! arrow, jesus). But it's so fucking strange to boot. Where's Portugal? When did Sweden and Poland merge -- is this why Russia's so pissed off, because the EU closed off the Baltic?
Some of the other adverts are worse. "Countries that are joining the EU, and Syria & Iraq are highlighted on there. Oh, yeah, pink instead of red. Plausible deniability. But a conscious, targeted attempt to instil a false idea in the heads of voters. And Barty Boblette wants to to get all Wolfram & Hart on the technicalities of what is and isn't a lie.
I'd be happy for 4m people to come to the UK if we built the housing and infrastructure for them. The problem is we haven't.
Free movement was a cake and eat it for the rich, while rapidly reducing the living standards of the working poor.
Turkey. Is not. Going to be. An EU country.
Everything you're talking about is predicted on a lie.
I think this is pb at work. I really like Penny which for a leftie like me is saying something.
And that's why I don't think she will get it. She's far too pleasant. Too much in touch with the common people. Too with it. Too savvy.
This isn't me being snide. It's because the people who elect the next Conservative leader are 1. Tory MPs and 2. Conservative Members.
If it was the public, or pb.com, very different story.
Oh and tory MPs are pretty misogynistic. After what they deem the nightmare of Theresa May (I thought she was okay) I don't believe they will elect another woman for a long time.
Frankly, you have no idea about the Conservative Party! We had a woman as Conservative leader in 1975. 47 years on, after two, the Labour Party still hasn't had one. You really want to talk misogyny in political parties?
Not only have they not had one, but no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
It seems scarcely believable when put that way.
Not when you look at the calibre of those involved.
As a woman let me be the first to say that this shouldn't be about tokenism and I don't think it's the place of men to call out misogynism.
I think Rachel Reeves looks a really good prospect. I personally really like Angela Rayner but she would be too gobby for the right wing media.
Penny Mordaunt would make a great Labour leader in the Keir Starmer real politik.
I found this on Penny Mordaunt "Passionate Brexiteer Mordaunt has committed one major political gaffe, when she wrongly claimed Britain would not be able to veto Turkey joining the EU, which got her a furious dressing-down from then boss Mr Cameron".
We need another lying Prime Minister like a hole in the head
Considering Britain was one of the leading countries advocating Turkish accession, its not remotely plausible that Britain would veto Turkey joining after advocating it for a long time period.
That's why the Turkish thing was able to cut through: Cameron was on the record as saying Turkey should join the EU, then suddenly people think Leavers were lying as saying Turkey could. Funny that.
It's all moot. There's no way France would let Turkey in.
Agreed, but that's not what either France or Cameron were saying until Vote Leave weaponised Turkish accession.
If anything it was lies by Cameron etc that Turkey would join the EU (pre-referendum) that came back to bite them in the ass years later.
Yes, yes, it's always the fault of Remainers.
Absoutely 100% yes the reason Remain lost is the fault of Remainers. Its not Leavers fault that Remain lost, since Leavers wanted Remain to lose.
You don't blame Harry Kane for Man City losing today, you might blame City players though - or give credit to Kane. Blame goes to those who cause their side to lose, not those who cause their side to win.
You're trying to pin Leave lies on Remainers though. Which is a little silly if you stop and think.
It wasn't a lie. Turkey were joining the EU, they had already begun the accession process. They were formerly listed on the EU's website as an accession nation.
Joining is a process and that process had already begun. To say that is 100% the truth. That the process has been aborted following the Referendum due to Erdogan isn't something anyone could have known during the referendum, but using Cameron's own words against him is not a lie by Leavers.
See how you finesse the lie into a more nuanced truth? "Turkey (population 76 million) is joining the EU" is a lie. If you said "Turkey has applied to join the EU, and that process might end up with them joining eventually if Turkey and every other EU country agrees"... that would be true.
I could put in an application to be the next Commissioner of Met Police, but if you put "Farooq is taking over at Scotland Yard", you'd be lying.
I was a leaver at the time, and could not defend the heavy implication that Turkey was imminent to join, which was the obvious intention though the process had taken decades and no one would think it likely. Each of the campaigns was generally better at making a point for their opponents than themselves with stuff like that. I think defending that shit is unnecessary and undignified, it's 'I am never wrong no matter what' style politics.
I am not sure that is true.
The Leave campaign painted a positive post Brexit picture of super trade deals with partners, free money for the NHS, the benefits of sending Eastern European migrants back to where they came from with no downside, if we remained we would be overrun with Turks, and if we left we wouldn't. No trade related, unnecessary "elf and safety" related red tape and an end to bureaucracy. Oh and "sovereignty", whatever "it's sovrinty innit" actually meant. The Remain side basically said that's all patently untrue (and in the main it appears now to be so- all except for "it's sovrinty innit"). In response, Leave exclaimed "lies, all lies" and that really was the sum total of the debate.
The side with the positive message won, even if that message turned out to be a total crock...
And as I have said earlier, the main advocate (Cameron) for Remain had spent the previous year making the case for Leave.
Joyce Karam @Joyce_Karam Alarming footage of Russian tanks & military vehicles reportedly advancing tonight to 5 km away from #Ukraine border (town of Shebekino).
Explosions reported in Donetsk. Biden convening national security meeting tomorrow [on a Sunday!]:
I think this is pb at work. I really like Penny which for a leftie like me is saying something.
And that's why I don't think she will get it. She's far too pleasant. Too much in touch with the common people. Too with it. Too savvy.
This isn't me being snide. It's because the people who elect the next Conservative leader are 1. Tory MPs and 2. Conservative Members.
If it was the public, or pb.com, very different story.
Oh and tory MPs are pretty misogynistic. After what they deem the nightmare of Theresa May (I thought she was okay) I don't believe they will elect another woman for a long time.
Frankly, you have no idea about the Conservative Party! We had a woman as Conservative leader in 1975. 47 years on, after two, the Labour Party still hasn't had one. You really want to talk misogyny in political parties?
Not only have they not had one, but no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
It seems scarcely believable when put that way.
Not when you look at the calibre of those involved.
As a woman let me be the first to say that this shouldn't be about tokenism and I don't think it's the place of men to call out misogynism.
I think Rachel Reeves looks a really good prospect. I personally really like Angela Rayner but she would be too gobby for the right wing media.
Penny Mordaunt would make a great Labour leader in the Keir Starmer real politik.
I found this on Penny Mordaunt "Passionate Brexiteer Mordaunt has committed one major political gaffe, when she wrongly claimed Britain would not be able to veto Turkey joining the EU, which got her a furious dressing-down from then boss Mr Cameron".
We need another lying Prime Minister like a hole in the head
Considering Britain was one of the leading countries advocating Turkish accession, its not remotely plausible that Britain would veto Turkey joining after advocating it for a long time period.
That's why the Turkish thing was able to cut through: Cameron was on the record as saying Turkey should join the EU, then suddenly people think Leavers were lying as saying Turkey could. Funny that.
It's all moot. There's no way France would let Turkey in.
Agreed, but that's not what either France or Cameron were saying until Vote Leave weaponised Turkish accession.
If anything it was lies by Cameron etc that Turkey would join the EU (pre-referendum) that came back to bite them in the ass years later.
Yes, yes, it's always the fault of Remainers.
Absoutely 100% yes the reason Remain lost is the fault of Remainers. Its not Leavers fault that Remain lost, since Leavers wanted Remain to lose.
You don't blame Harry Kane for Man City losing today, you might blame City players though - or give credit to Kane. Blame goes to those who cause their side to lose, not those who cause their side to win.
You're trying to pin Leave lies on Remainers though. Which is a little silly if you stop and think.
It wasn't a lie. Turkey were joining the EU, they had already begun the accession process. They were formerly listed on the EU's website as an accession nation.
Joining is a process and that process had already begun. To say that is 100% the truth. That the process has been aborted following the Referendum due to Erdogan isn't something anyone could have known during the referendum, but using Cameron's own words against him is not a lie by Leavers.
See how you finesse the lie into a more nuanced truth? "Turkey (population 76 million) is joining the EU" is a lie. If you said "Turkey has applied to join the EU, and that process might end up with them joining eventually if Turkey and every other EU country agrees"... that would be true.
I could put in an application to be the next Commissioner of Met Police, but if you put "Farooq is taking over at Scotland Yard", you'd be lying.
I was a leaver at the time, and could not defend the heavy implication that Turkey was imminent to join, which was the obvious intention though the process had taken decades and no one would think it likely. Each of the campaigns was generally better at making a point for their opponents than themselves with stuff like that. I think defending that shit is unnecessary and undignified, it's 'I am never wrong no matter what' style politics.
I am not sure that is true.
The Leave campaign painted a positive post Brexit picture of super trade deals with partners, free money for the NHS, the benefits of sending Eastern European migrants back to where they came from with no downside, if we remained we would be overrun with Turks, and if we left we wouldn't. No trade related, unnecessary "elf and safety" related red tape and an end to bureaucracy. Oh and "sovereignty", whatever "it's sovrinty innit" actually meant. The Remain side basically said that's all patently untrue (and in the main it appears now to be so- all except for "it's sovrinty innit"). In response, Leave exclaimed "lies, all lies" and that really was the sum total of the debate.
The side with the positive message won, even if that message turned out to be a total crock...
And as I have said earlier, the main advocate (Cameron) for Remain had spent the previous year making the case for Leave.
Pretending that tightening future immigration rules is the same as “sending them back” is exactly the kind of hyperbole which lost you the referendum. Less of that kind of thing, and you could have won.
Another bad sign is that we're increasingly seeing short-range air defense systems moving with different military columns, in this case two Tor SHORAD TLARs with a Msta-S howitzer battery. We've seen Tunguskas as well.
Just after the Winter Olympics medal ceremony (seriously) and just before the invasion of Taiwan (hopefully not seriously)? If so, does Johnson send in a snatch squad to rescue Adam Price?
I think this is pb at work. I really like Penny which for a leftie like me is saying something.
And that's why I don't think she will get it. She's far too pleasant. Too much in touch with the common people. Too with it. Too savvy.
This isn't me being snide. It's because the people who elect the next Conservative leader are 1. Tory MPs and 2. Conservative Members.
If it was the public, or pb.com, very different story.
Oh and tory MPs are pretty misogynistic. After what they deem the nightmare of Theresa May (I thought she was okay) I don't believe they will elect another woman for a long time.
Frankly, you have no idea about the Conservative Party! We had a woman as Conservative leader in 1975. 47 years on, after two, the Labour Party still hasn't had one. You really want to talk misogyny in political parties?
Not only have they not had one, but no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
It seems scarcely believable when put that way.
Not when you look at the calibre of those involved.
As a woman let me be the first to say that this shouldn't be about tokenism and I don't think it's the place of men to call out misogynism.
I think Rachel Reeves looks a really good prospect. I personally really like Angela Rayner but she would be too gobby for the right wing media.
Penny Mordaunt would make a great Labour leader in the Keir Starmer real politik.
I found this on Penny Mordaunt "Passionate Brexiteer Mordaunt has committed one major political gaffe, when she wrongly claimed Britain would not be able to veto Turkey joining the EU, which got her a furious dressing-down from then boss Mr Cameron".
We need another lying Prime Minister like a hole in the head
Considering Britain was one of the leading countries advocating Turkish accession, its not remotely plausible that Britain would veto Turkey joining after advocating it for a long time period.
That's why the Turkish thing was able to cut through: Cameron was on the record as saying Turkey should join the EU, then suddenly people think Leavers were lying as saying Turkey could. Funny that.
It's all moot. There's no way France would let Turkey in.
Agreed, but that's not what either France or Cameron were saying until Vote Leave weaponised Turkish accession.
If anything it was lies by Cameron etc that Turkey would join the EU (pre-referendum) that came back to bite them in the ass years later.
Yes, yes, it's always the fault of Remainers.
Absoutely 100% yes the reason Remain lost is the fault of Remainers. Its not Leavers fault that Remain lost, since Leavers wanted Remain to lose.
You don't blame Harry Kane for Man City losing today, you might blame City players though - or give credit to Kane. Blame goes to those who cause their side to lose, not those who cause their side to win.
You're trying to pin Leave lies on Remainers though. Which is a little silly if you stop and think.
It wasn't a lie. Turkey were joining the EU, they had already begun the accession process. They were formerly listed on the EU's website as an accession nation.
Joining is a process and that process had already begun. To say that is 100% the truth. That the process has been aborted following the Referendum due to Erdogan isn't something anyone could have known during the referendum, but using Cameron's own words against him is not a lie by Leavers.
See how you finesse the lie into a more nuanced truth? "Turkey (population 76 million) is joining the EU" is a lie. If you said "Turkey has applied to join the EU, and that process might end up with them joining eventually if Turkey and every other EU country agrees"... that would be true.
I could put in an application to be the next Commissioner of Met Police, but if you put "Farooq is taking over at Scotland Yard", you'd be lying.
I was a leaver at the time, and could not defend the heavy implication that Turkey was imminent to join, which was the obvious intention though the process had taken decades and no one would think it likely. Each of the campaigns was generally better at making a point for their opponents than themselves with stuff like that. I think defending that shit is unnecessary and undignified, it's 'I am never wrong no matter what' style politics.
I am not sure that is true.
The Leave campaign painted a positive post Brexit picture of super trade deals with partners, free money for the NHS, the benefits of sending Eastern European migrants back to where they came from with no downside, if we remained we would be overrun with Turks, and if we left we wouldn't. No trade related, unnecessary "elf and safety" related red tape and an end to bureaucracy. Oh and "sovereignty", whatever "it's sovrinty innit" actually meant. The Remain side basically said that's all patently untrue (and in the main it appears now to be so- all except for "it's sovrinty innit"). In response, Leave exclaimed "lies, all lies" and that really was the sum total of the debate.
The side with the positive message won, even if that message turned out to be a total crock...
And as I have said earlier, the main advocate (Cameron) for Remain had spent the previous year making the case for Leave.
Pretending that tightening future immigration rules is the same as “sending them back” is exactly the kind of hyperbole which lost you the referendum. Less of that kind of thing, and you could have won.
Trouble is, the last few years have shown that it's not just been about future immigration, but also about making life difficult for people already here. And this isn't just Brexit, it's also Windrush. That element was always a part of the Brexit project for some of its advocates.
I think this is pb at work. I really like Penny which for a leftie like me is saying something.
And that's why I don't think she will get it. She's far too pleasant. Too much in touch with the common people. Too with it. Too savvy.
This isn't me being snide. It's because the people who elect the next Conservative leader are 1. Tory MPs and 2. Conservative Members.
If it was the public, or pb.com, very different story.
Oh and tory MPs are pretty misogynistic. After what they deem the nightmare of Theresa May (I thought she was okay) I don't believe they will elect another woman for a long time.
Frankly, you have no idea about the Conservative Party! We had a woman as Conservative leader in 1975. 47 years on, after two, the Labour Party still hasn't had one. You really want to talk misogyny in political parties?
Not only have they not had one, but no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
It seems scarcely believable when put that way.
Not when you look at the calibre of those involved.
As a woman let me be the first to say that this shouldn't be about tokenism and I don't think it's the place of men to call out misogynism.
I think Rachel Reeves looks a really good prospect. I personally really like Angela Rayner but she would be too gobby for the right wing media.
Penny Mordaunt would make a great Labour leader in the Keir Starmer real politik.
I found this on Penny Mordaunt "Passionate Brexiteer Mordaunt has committed one major political gaffe, when she wrongly claimed Britain would not be able to veto Turkey joining the EU, which got her a furious dressing-down from then boss Mr Cameron".
We need another lying Prime Minister like a hole in the head
Considering Britain was one of the leading countries advocating Turkish accession, its not remotely plausible that Britain would veto Turkey joining after advocating it for a long time period.
That's why the Turkish thing was able to cut through: Cameron was on the record as saying Turkey should join the EU, then suddenly people think Leavers were lying as saying Turkey could. Funny that.
It's all moot. There's no way France would let Turkey in.
Agreed, but that's not what either France or Cameron were saying until Vote Leave weaponised Turkish accession.
If anything it was lies by Cameron etc that Turkey would join the EU (pre-referendum) that came back to bite them in the ass years later.
Yes, yes, it's always the fault of Remainers.
Absoutely 100% yes the reason Remain lost is the fault of Remainers. Its not Leavers fault that Remain lost, since Leavers wanted Remain to lose.
You don't blame Harry Kane for Man City losing today, you might blame City players though - or give credit to Kane. Blame goes to those who cause their side to lose, not those who cause their side to win.
You're trying to pin Leave lies on Remainers though. Which is a little silly if you stop and think.
It wasn't a lie. Turkey were joining the EU, they had already begun the accession process. They were formerly listed on the EU's website as an accession nation.
Joining is a process and that process had already begun. To say that is 100% the truth. That the process has been aborted following the Referendum due to Erdogan isn't something anyone could have known during the referendum, but using Cameron's own words against him is not a lie by Leavers.
See how you finesse the lie into a more nuanced truth? "Turkey (population 76 million) is joining the EU" is a lie. If you said "Turkey has applied to join the EU, and that process might end up with them joining eventually if Turkey and every other EU country agrees"... that would be true.
I could put in an application to be the next Commissioner of Met Police, but if you put "Farooq is taking over at Scotland Yard", you'd be lying.
I was a leaver at the time, and could not defend the heavy implication that Turkey was imminent to join, which was the obvious intention though the process had taken decades and no one would think it likely. Each of the campaigns was generally better at making a point for their opponents than themselves with stuff like that. I think defending that shit is unnecessary and undignified, it's 'I am never wrong no matter what' style politics.
I am not sure that is true.
The Leave campaign painted a positive post Brexit picture of super trade deals with partners, free money for the NHS, the benefits of sending Eastern European migrants back to where they came from with no downside, if we remained we would be overrun with Turks, and if we left we wouldn't. No trade related, unnecessary "elf and safety" related red tape and an end to bureaucracy. Oh and "sovereignty", whatever "it's sovrinty innit" actually meant. The Remain side basically said that's all patently untrue (and in the main it appears now to be so- all except for "it's sovrinty innit"). In response, Leave exclaimed "lies, all lies" and that really was the sum total of the debate.
The side with the positive message won, even if that message turned out to be a total crock...
And as I have said earlier, the main advocate (Cameron) for Remain had spent the previous year making the case for Leave.
Pretending that tightening future immigration rules is the same as “sending them back” is exactly the kind of hyperbole which lost you the referendum. Less of that kind of thing, and you could have won.
Please explain the significantly reduced numbers of Europeans currently paying UK taxes. Covid...ah I see
Many were suggesting the 21st had been pencilled in to keep the Chinese on board. It seemed a far fetched narrative three weeks ago, nonetheless I suspect you are correct.
I mean, it's very obviously a dog whistle (that THEY'RE ALL GOING TO COME HERE! arrow, jesus). But it's so fucking strange to boot. Where's Portugal? When did Sweden and Poland merge -- is this why Russia's so pissed off, because the EU closed off the Baltic?
Some of the other adverts are worse. "Countries that are joining the EU, and Syria & Iraq are highlighted on there. Oh, yeah, pink instead of red. Plausible deniability. But a conscious, targeted attempt to instil a false idea in the heads of voters. And Barty Boblette wants to to get all Wolfram & Hart on the technicalities of what is and isn't a lie.
I'd be happy for 4m people to come to the UK if we built the housing and infrastructure for them. The problem is we haven't.
Free movement was a cake and eat it for the rich, while rapidly reducing the living standards of the working poor.
Turkey. Is not. Going to be. An EU country.
Everything you're talking about is predicted on a lie.
I wouldn't have a problem with Turkey being an EU country, nor would I have a problem with half their population moving here. So long as we had a joined up policy that ensured there were adequate houses and jobs for people when they got here.
What we had was a situation for more than a decade where that wasn't the case. That's what the ad is playing off. It's not a fear of foreigners, it's a fear of further decreased living standards.
I mean, it's very obviously a dog whistle (that THEY'RE ALL GOING TO COME HERE! arrow, jesus). But it's so fucking strange to boot. Where's Portugal? When did Sweden and Poland merge -- is this why Russia's so pissed off, because the EU closed off the Baltic?
Some of the other adverts are worse. "Countries that are joining the EU, and Syria & Iraq are highlighted on there. Oh, yeah, pink instead of red. Plausible deniability. But a conscious, targeted attempt to instil a false idea in the heads of voters. And Barty Boblette wants to to get all Wolfram & Hart on the technicalities of what is and isn't a lie.
I'd be happy for 4m people to come to the UK if we built the housing and infrastructure for them. The problem is we haven't.
Free movement was a cake and eat it for the rich, while rapidly reducing the living standards of the working poor.
Turkey. Is not. Going to be. An EU country.
Everything you're talking about is predicted on a lie.
I wouldn't have a problem with Turkey being an EU country, nor would I have a problem with half their population moving here. So long as we had a joined up policy that ensured there were adequate houses and jobs for people when they got here.
What we had was a situation for more than a decade where that wasn't the case. That's what the ad is playing off. It's not a fear of foreigners, it's a fear of further decreased living standards.
Many were suggesting the 21st had been pencilled in to keep the Chinese on board. It seemed a far fetched narrative three weeks ago, nonetheless I suspect you are correct.
I clearly hope I’m wrong! But there is already significant fighting in the east. Why not a strike at Kiev? Seems the minimum he will do, now
Many were suggesting the 21st had been pencilled in to keep the Chinese on board. It seemed a far fetched narrative three weeks ago, nonetheless I suspect you are correct.
I clearly hope I’m wrong! But there is already significant fighting in the east. Why not a strike at Kiev? Seems the minimum he will do, now
Ensuring a puppet government
The economic maelstrom that will be visited on Russia if he does this will end his presidency/dictatorship imho.
What if Putin has just gone mad? Napoleon/Hitler went for Russia and that was always going to go wrong.
I think all this second-guessing incentive and motivation is nonsense. It's a bit a like when they cite mental health problems for terrorists - well, you kinda have to have one, don't you?
Ominous that Russian Reddit has suddenly transitioned from "the west is over-reacting" to "If the US can invade Iraq, why can't we do Ukraine?"
I don't think so. If he does, he has lost his mind.
There’s no point in semi-attacking Ukraine if the pro-western, pro-NATO/EU govt remains in place in Kiev (from Putin’s perspective)
For Putin to just nibble at the east then retreat would be the mother of all climb downs for this “man of action”. We can pray it happens
Madness would be a full scale assault on the whole country. A Barbarossa campaign. Don’t think he will do that
My guess - just a guess - he will annexe the east and do Shock & Awe on Kiev which will submit, and install a Russophile regime. Then he withdraws
The plan falls down on the "submit" bit.
Putin will be hiding body bags from cameras and grieving mothers in Moscow for the next decade if he does this.
Plus he can kiss goodbye to Nordstream 2 and any other exports his chums need to line their pockets.
I am not sure he operates in the same world of dynamic risk assessment as you or I do.
If he risks all this it reinforces the theories doing the rounds imho that there is some kind of internal threat, possibly from the military, to his rule and this is all a massive distraction.
Playing chess to get control of Eastern Ukraine makes some kind of sense. Attacking Kiev is off the scale nuts.
What if Putin has just gone mad? Napoleon/Hitler went for Russia and that was always going to go wrong.
I think all this second-guessing incentive and motivation is nonsense. It's a bit a like when they cite mental health problems for terrorists - well, you kinda have to have one, don't you?
Ominous that Russian Reddit has suddenly transitioned from "the west is over-reacting" to "If the US can invade Iraq, why can't we do Ukraine?"
Ironically, iirc Napoleon got to Moscow, let his troops burn most of it to the ground, and then realised he did not know what to do next.
What if Putin has just gone mad? Napoleon/Hitler went for Russia and that was always going to go wrong.
I think all this second-guessing incentive and motivation is nonsense. It's a bit a like when they cite mental health problems for terrorists - well, you kinda have to have one, don't you?
Ominous that Russian Reddit has suddenly transitioned from "the west is over-reacting" to "If the US can invade Iraq, why can't we do Ukraine?"
Ironically, iirc Napoleon got to Moscow, let his troops burn most of it to the ground, and then realised he did not know what to do next.
And then it started snowing...
"Tsar Alexander reached Paris!" - Stalin after the capture of Berlin, 1945.
I think this is pb at work. I really like Penny which for a leftie like me is saying something.
And that's why I don't think she will get it. She's far too pleasant. Too much in touch with the common people. Too with it. Too savvy.
This isn't me being snide. It's because the people who elect the next Conservative leader are 1. Tory MPs and 2. Conservative Members.
If it was the public, or pb.com, very different story.
Oh and tory MPs are pretty misogynistic. After what they deem the nightmare of Theresa May (I thought she was okay) I don't believe they will elect another woman for a long time.
Frankly, you have no idea about the Conservative Party! We had a woman as Conservative leader in 1975. 47 years on, after two, the Labour Party still hasn't had one. You really want to talk misogyny in political parties?
Not only have they not had one, but no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
It seems scarcely believable when put that way.
Not when you look at the calibre of those involved.
As a woman let me be the first to say that this shouldn't be about tokenism and I don't think it's the place of men to call out misogynism.
I think Rachel Reeves looks a really good prospect. I personally really like Angela Rayner but she would be too gobby for the right wing media.
Penny Mordaunt would make a great Labour leader in the Keir Starmer real politik.
I found this on Penny Mordaunt "Passionate Brexiteer Mordaunt has committed one major political gaffe, when she wrongly claimed Britain would not be able to veto Turkey joining the EU, which got her a furious dressing-down from then boss Mr Cameron".
We need another lying Prime Minister like a hole in the head
Considering Britain was one of the leading countries advocating Turkish accession, its not remotely plausible that Britain would veto Turkey joining after advocating it for a long time period.
That's why the Turkish thing was able to cut through: Cameron was on the record as saying Turkey should join the EU, then suddenly people think Leavers were lying as saying Turkey could. Funny that.
I'm not sure that's true.
Allowing Turkey into the EU would have been a massive vote loser, and plenty of MPs would have known that. You would need some kind of almighty majority to get around that.
(Of course, the reality is that you wouldn't need to have the UK veto it, as there is literally no way a Cyprus government would ever accept Turkish EU membership, and the Greeks wouldn't have been keen either.)
I think this is pb at work. I really like Penny which for a leftie like me is saying something.
And that's why I don't think she will get it. She's far too pleasant. Too much in touch with the common people. Too with it. Too savvy.
This isn't me being snide. It's because the people who elect the next Conservative leader are 1. Tory MPs and 2. Conservative Members.
If it was the public, or pb.com, very different story.
Oh and tory MPs are pretty misogynistic. After what they deem the nightmare of Theresa May (I thought she was okay) I don't believe they will elect another woman for a long time.
Frankly, you have no idea about the Conservative Party! We had a woman as Conservative leader in 1975. 47 years on, after two, the Labour Party still hasn't had one. You really want to talk misogyny in political parties?
Not only have they not had one, but no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
It seems scarcely believable when put that way.
Not when you look at the calibre of those involved.
As a woman let me be the first to say that this shouldn't be about tokenism and I don't think it's the place of men to call out misogynism.
I think Rachel Reeves looks a really good prospect. I personally really like Angela Rayner but she would be too gobby for the right wing media.
Penny Mordaunt would make a great Labour leader in the Keir Starmer real politik.
I found this on Penny Mordaunt "Passionate Brexiteer Mordaunt has committed one major political gaffe, when she wrongly claimed Britain would not be able to veto Turkey joining the EU, which got her a furious dressing-down from then boss Mr Cameron".
We need another lying Prime Minister like a hole in the head
Considering Britain was one of the leading countries advocating Turkish accession, its not remotely plausible that Britain would veto Turkey joining after advocating it for a long time period.
That's why the Turkish thing was able to cut through: Cameron was on the record as saying Turkey should join the EU, then suddenly people think Leavers were lying as saying Turkey could. Funny that.
It's all moot. There's no way France would let Turkey in.
More of an issue with Greece, wasn’t there?
The reality is:
(a) the Turks don't really want to join (b) the Europeans don't really want them to join (c) The Greeks and Cypriots would never let them join
But there has always been this fiction that the EU membership was on the table, which is a relic of the Cold War, when the EEC was all powerful in Europe and Turkey was even poorer.
.@thesundaytimes’ scoop reveals Lubov Chernukhin, the wife of Vladimir Chernukhin, the former Russian deputy finance minister under Vladimir Putin, donated almost £2m to the Tories since 2012.
The @Conservatives’ addiction to Russian money is endangering our democracy.
That will be British citizen Vladimir Chernukhin you're talking about? Who left Russia and came to the UK and has lived here since 2004?
Are you suggesting we should treat naturalised citizens in this country as second class citizens who're unable to engage in politics? Are you always so anti-immigrants, should all immigrants be treated as scum in your eyes? Should we deport all immigrants just to prevent anyone from engaging in politics?
The more pertinent point is this. Under AML rules he would be designated as a PEP - a politically exposed person. So any bank taking his money would need to do some pretty serious due diligence on him.
Now an obvious question to ask is this: what was his salary as deputy finance Minister? Did his wife work and, if so, where and at what salary? Given those salaries, how did they accumulate so much money that they had £2 million spare to spend on the Tory party. If the salary was not sufficiently large to explain it, what was the source of this money etc etc?
If a bank failed to ask these questions, they'd be in trouble. The Tory party should be asking the same questions. Did they?
Are you trying to put British banks out of business? You look a chap in the eye, and if he looks right, and if he's a member of the right clubs and knows the right people, well you take him at his word.
I think this is pb at work. I really like Penny which for a leftie like me is saying something.
And that's why I don't think she will get it. She's far too pleasant. Too much in touch with the common people. Too with it. Too savvy.
This isn't me being snide. It's because the people who elect the next Conservative leader are 1. Tory MPs and 2. Conservative Members.
If it was the public, or pb.com, very different story.
Oh and tory MPs are pretty misogynistic. After what they deem the nightmare of Theresa May (I thought she was okay) I don't believe they will elect another woman for a long time.
Frankly, you have no idea about the Conservative Party! We had a woman as Conservative leader in 1975. 47 years on, after two, the Labour Party still hasn't had one. You really want to talk misogyny in political parties?
Not only have they not had one, but no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
It seems scarcely believable when put that way.
Not when you look at the calibre of those involved.
As a woman let me be the first to say that this shouldn't be about tokenism and I don't think it's the place of men to call out misogynism.
I think Rachel Reeves looks a really good prospect. I personally really like Angela Rayner but she would be too gobby for the right wing media.
Penny Mordaunt would make a great Labour leader in the Keir Starmer real politik.
I found this on Penny Mordaunt "Passionate Brexiteer Mordaunt has committed one major political gaffe, when she wrongly claimed Britain would not be able to veto Turkey joining the EU, which got her a furious dressing-down from then boss Mr Cameron".
We need another lying Prime Minister like a hole in the head
Considering Britain was one of the leading countries advocating Turkish accession, its not remotely plausible that Britain would veto Turkey joining after advocating it for a long time period.
That's why the Turkish thing was able to cut through: Cameron was on the record as saying Turkey should join the EU, then suddenly people think Leavers were lying as saying Turkey could. Funny that.
It's all moot. There's no way France would let Turkey in.
More of an issue with Greece, wasn’t there?
The reality is:
(a) the Turks don't really want to join (b) the Europeans don't really want them to join (c) The Greeks and Cypriots would never let them join
But there has always been this fiction that the EU membership was on the table, which is a relic of the Cold War, when the EEC was all powerful in Europe and Turkey was even poorer.
This is all political interpretation and judgment. The reality is that Turkey was formally in the process for joining the EU. It is therefore accurate to say they were joining the EU. The idea this is a "lie" is completely ridiculous and showed the Remainer bias of the media. Meanwhile the BBC repeatedly claimed the EU was the biggest trading bloc in the world, even though NAFTA was 20% bigger. I complained to the BBC multiple times over this and they kept coming back with ridiculous arguments like citing the EU's press releases stating they were the biggest. That just shows the BBC complaints process is a bunch of biased hacks.
Speculation on the consequences of a Russian victory from a German IR scholar:
@LianaFix Russian suzerainty over Ukraine would open a vast zone of destabilization and insecurity from Estonia to Poland to Romania to Turkey. Order in Europe will have to be conceived of in primarily military terms, sidelining nonmilitary institutions such as the European Union. (4/11)
Germany‘s position as a marginal military power in Europe will be severely challenged. France & the UK will assume leading roles. Eastern members will have substantial numbers of NATO troops permanently on their soil. Some NATO members will bolster a Ukrainian insurgency. (5/11)
Speculation on the consequences of a Russian victory from a German IR scholar:
@LianaFix Russian suzerainty over Ukraine would open a vast zone of destabilization and insecurity from Estonia to Poland to Romania to Turkey. Order in Europe will have to be conceived of in primarily military terms, sidelining nonmilitary institutions such as the European Union. (4/11)
Germany‘s position as a marginal military power in Europe will be severely challenged. France & the UK will assume leading roles. Eastern members will have substantial numbers of NATO troops permanently on their soil. Some NATO members will bolster a Ukrainian insurgency. (5/11)
That's a good analysis, with one caveat. It's quite possible that Russia wins the immediate war, but then finds themselves - as America did in Iraq and Afghanistan - with a costly occupation. Often the deaths come after victory has been declared.
What if Putin has just gone mad? Napoleon/Hitler went for Russia and that was always going to go wrong.
I think all this second-guessing incentive and motivation is nonsense. It's a bit a like when they cite mental health problems for terrorists - well, you kinda have to have one, don't you?
Ominous that Russian Reddit has suddenly transitioned from "the west is over-reacting" to "If the US can invade Iraq, why can't we do Ukraine?"
Curling has to be the strangest sport in existence. I wonder how it was invented.
Stones and frozen ponds, presumably.
The general idea is similar to bowls and petanque and various other regional games. It’s all the rabid sweeping up that makes it weird; I assume this came later. Perhaps it would be a better game if you had to leave the ice alone?
Not sure the taxpayer/lottery funding of winter sports has been worth it given the performance of team GB in Beijing. Just send a curling team next time .The nation is going to have to start saving money sometime and a cut here cannto make anything worse can it
The alternative seems to be to replace most of the team with a load of Norwegians
Nope. Qualifying for the Olympics must be the highlight of every athlete’s career. Barely 1% will win a medal. Why is the Medal Table so important?
Its a KPI of how successful the public investment is?
What if Putin has just gone mad? Napoleon/Hitler went for Russia and that was always going to go wrong.
I think all this second-guessing incentive and motivation is nonsense. It's a bit a like when they cite mental health problems for terrorists - well, you kinda have to have one, don't you?
Ominous that Russian Reddit has suddenly transitioned from "the west is over-reacting" to "If the US can invade Iraq, why can't we do Ukraine?"
Curling has to be the strangest sport in existence. I wonder how it was invented.
Stones and frozen ponds, presumably.
The general idea is similar to bowls and petanque and various other regional games. It’s all the rabid sweeping up that makes it weird; I assume this came later. Perhaps it would be a better game if you had to leave the ice alone?
Nonsense. The sweeping is an essential part of the skill. It liquifies the surface in front of the stone increasing the speed and the effect of the turn given on the handle, helping to steer the stone in its desired direction. Conversely, not sweeping allows you to slow it down a tad. You might as well suggest that tennis would be better without backhand. It is a key part of the game.
Not sure the taxpayer/lottery funding of winter sports has been worth it given the performance of team GB in Beijing. Just send a curling team next time .The nation is going to have to start saving money sometime and a cut here cannto make anything worse can it
The alternative seems to be to replace most of the team with a load of Norwegians
Nope. Qualifying for the Olympics must be the highlight of every athlete’s career. Barely 1% will win a medal. Why is the Medal Table so important?
Its a KPI of how successful the public investment is?
Not sure the taxpayer/lottery funding of winter sports has been worth it given the performance of team GB in Beijing. Just send a curling team next time .The nation is going to have to start saving money sometime and a cut here cannto make anything worse can it
The alternative seems to be to replace most of the team with a load of Norwegians
Nope. Qualifying for the Olympics must be the highlight of every athlete’s career. Barely 1% will win a medal. Why is the Medal Table so important?
Its a KPI of how successful the public investment is?
Comments
This will not make us renewable power super-exporters (like the old oil powers) as all of our neighbours have something similar. Scandinavia has vast wind resources. France ditto (plus nuclear). Spain has huge solar potential, likewise Italy (plus wind). Maybe Germany might still need some gas
Renewables are everywhere unlike old school hydrocarbons
The pink countries are countries which would then have borders with the EU. The implication is that refugees would come.
Those things being said, the advert was unnecessarily crude, and should not have been run.
Free movement was a cake and eat it for the rich, while rapidly reducing the living standards of the working poor.
Did Putin make an arrangement with China?
Is not.
Going to be.
An EU country.
Everything you're talking about is predicted on a lie.
The Leave campaign painted a positive post Brexit picture of super trade deals with partners, free money for the NHS, the benefits of sending Eastern European migrants back to where they came from with no downside, if we remained we would be overrun with Turks, and if we left we wouldn't. No trade related, unnecessary "elf and safety" related red tape and an end to bureaucracy. Oh and "sovereignty", whatever "it's sovrinty innit" actually meant. The Remain side basically said that's all patently untrue (and in the main it appears now to be so- all except for "it's sovrinty innit"). In response, Leave exclaimed "lies, all lies" and that really was the sum total of the debate.
The side with the positive message won, even if that message turned out to be a total crock...
And as I have said earlier, the main advocate (Cameron) for Remain had spent the previous year making the case for Leave.
Meanwhile
Tracers are flying over Donetsk
#Donetsk #Ukraine #Russia #RussiaUkraineCrisis #UkraineConflict #war
https://twitter.com/fitnews24/status/1495181280010547214?s=21
Sunday. always worth watching.
@Joyce_Karam
Alarming footage of Russian tanks & military vehicles reportedly advancing tonight to 5 km away from #Ukraine border (town of Shebekino).
Explosions reported in Donetsk. Biden convening national security meeting tomorrow [on a Sunday!]:
https://twitter.com/Joyce_Karam/status/1495181345596837890
More troop movements even closer to the border. Tomorrow could be significant
Chunks of east Ukraine are already at war
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1495180715775959052
This is one of the most extensive and elaborate ruses ever…..or it’s real…
Explosions reported in Donetsk. Biden convening national security meeting tomorrow [on a Sunday!]:”
https://twitter.com/joyce_karam/status/1495181345596837890?s=21
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60448162
🔴 #BREAKING
Today, 39 Ukrainian towns and villages were bombed by Russian forces.
➖Kiev Post
#Russia #Ukraine
https://twitter.com/mutahmett/status/1495187221359517696?s=21
What we had was a situation for more than a decade where that wasn't the case. That's what the ad is playing off. It's not a fear of foreigners, it's a fear of further decreased living standards.
Ensuring a puppet government
Awful times.
For Putin to just nibble at the east then retreat would be the mother of all climb downs for this “man of action”. We can pray it happens
Madness would be a full scale assault on the whole country. A Barbarossa campaign. Don’t think he will do that
My guess - just a guess - he will annexe the east and do Shock & Awe on Kiev which will submit, and install a Russophile regime. Then he withdraws
If Putin thinks he has China on side he really won't give a ****, and to be honest he probably doesn't, even if they are not.
Putin will be hiding body bags from cameras and grieving mothers in Moscow for the next decade if he does this.
Plus he can kiss goodbye to Nordstream 2 and any other exports his chums need to line their pockets.
I think all this second-guessing incentive and motivation is nonsense. It's a bit a like when they cite mental health problems for terrorists - well, you kinda have to have one, don't you?
Ominous that Russian Reddit has suddenly transitioned from "the west is over-reacting" to "If the US can invade Iraq, why can't we do Ukraine?"
Playing chess to get control of Eastern Ukraine makes some kind of sense. Attacking Kiev is off the scale nuts.
And then it started snowing...
Mearsheimer on Ukraine from 3 weeks ago.
https://twitter.com/PrivateEyeNews/status/1493856356515856389
Allowing Turkey into the EU would have been a massive vote loser, and plenty of MPs would have known that. You would need some kind of almighty majority to get around that.
(Of course, the reality is that you wouldn't need to have the UK veto it, as there is literally no way a Cyprus government would ever accept Turkish EU membership, and the Greeks wouldn't have been keen either.)
(a) the Turks don't really want to join
(b) the Europeans don't really want them to join
(c) The Greeks and Cypriots would never let them join
But there has always been this fiction that the EU membership was on the table, which is a relic of the Cold War, when the EEC was all powerful in Europe and Turkey was even poorer.
@LianaFix
Russian suzerainty over Ukraine would open a vast zone of destabilization and insecurity from Estonia to Poland to Romania to Turkey. Order in Europe will have to be conceived of in primarily military terms, sidelining nonmilitary institutions such as the European Union. (4/11)
Germany‘s position as a marginal military power in Europe will be severely challenged. France & the UK will assume leading roles. Eastern members will have substantial numbers of NATO troops permanently on their soil. Some NATO members will bolster a Ukrainian insurgency. (5/11)
https://twitter.com/LianaFix/status/1494817582867750913
The general idea is similar to bowls and petanque and various other regional games. It’s all the rabid sweeping up that makes it weird; I assume this came later. Perhaps it would be a better game if you had to leave the ice alone?