Boris Johnson shouldn't have to resign if he receives a fixed penalty notice for breaching his coronavirus laws, James Cleverly tells @RidgeOnSunday: “I don’t think what the country needs at the moment is a vacuum at the centre of government.” https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1495320446702694400
Utter bollocks from Cleverly. He should resign if he receives one.
He should resign anyway. All this talk of fines is just shifting the Overton window.
Why? The Overton window was always that rule makers can't be rule breakers. If he's received a fine, it means he's broken the rules, so he should go.
If he's not broken the rules (which I find exceedingly unlikely) then he's not broken the rules and he's not lied to Parliament. In which case, why should he go?
Same with a speeding fine. Amiright?
We've been over this before: If the PM had introduced the speeding rules himself, then daily been reprimanding the nation saying how important it is that the speeding rules have to be obeyed - then yes.
This isn't a parking ticket and you're disingenuous to try to conflate the two.
Exactly. We have been over this and you were wrong.
You said "rules". If he has broken the rules, all of which his government "made" (and if they didn't draft them then they have a superior obligation surely to follow them), then he should resign. Which includes speeding fines.
No, it doesn't.
Just because you attempt whatabouterism doesn't make it true. This government didn't make the speeding rule - and its long been culturally acceptable that you can speed and pay a fine if caught so long as you don't end up with a driving ban.
Enforcing new rules, stripping away existing liberties and then breaking those new rules . . . that is an order of magnitude more serious than paying a fine for a pre-existing offence and you know it.
All of which are trumped by a Minister MISLEADING PARLIAMENT!
If he didn't think that anything he knew about was a party, then how has he misled Parliament?
Its only a lie if he thought what he'd been to was a party at the time he said it.
There may well be 54 Tory MPs who want a change of PM, letters or no letters - but I‘m not sure there’s anything close to the 185 required to actually effect the change.
Some seem to think that if a challenge happens he is doomed. Possible, sure, he lacks many natural allies, but rather ignores that the one example of modern times disproves it. May's days were numbered but she eked on for a long time. And had poll leads to boot.
Retuned home from Southwold to carnage. Two enormous neighbours firs have fallen into my garden. One has sheered through an ancient ash taking off a branch the size of most trees. The other has fallen into our Walnut tree (another huge tree taller than our house) Half the Walnut tree is devastated but it is holding the fir up which may or may not be useful as underneath it is a large shed, 3 water butts, wood store, wheel barrows etc and in the shed is a motor mower and all my hedge cutting power tools. I have no idea if any of this still exists or smashed to bits.
Oh crap. Good luck getting everything sorted and hope there isn’t too much damage. Whatever you do, don’t risk being under a half-fallen tree, have the insurance company send a lumberjack out, even if there’s a bit of a wait at the moment.
Thanks for that advice. I had already thought about trying to get to the shed and then decided it was far too dangerous. Unless they prop the tree over the shed up when they cut it the shed will become matchwood (if it isn't already).
Good to hear. Sadly, we’ll probably hear of fatalities caused by such secondary accidents in the coming days, a combination of frustration with delays and thinking that it’s no longer dangerous as the storm has passed. Definitely something best left to the professionals with the right cutting and strapping equipment. If the contents of the shed are worth more than the cost of getting a crane to hold up the tree while they empty it out…
Thanks. No real value, but did want to get on with hedge cutting before birds nest. On further investigation in the light it is 3 firs down.
@RochdalePioneers thanks for post. I'm looking on the positive as I hate the firs so go to see them go. My Ash is huge (3 metre girth) so the loss of one branch is fine even if it is huge. More worried about die back. The walnut looks a bit odd being mainly one sided now. And there will be plenty of firewood.
I'm just relieved that when my ridge tiles came crashing down into the street, there wasn't someone driving or walking by at the time. As it was, a passing car a short while later had to stop to clear the debris.
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
Genuine question from someone who reads a lot of history but has no idea about the current military. How useful are tanks in modern warfare? In the battle of the bulge the Germans were fine when weather conditions precluded the British and American fighter-bombers from flying. When clear conditions returned it was a slaughter. Are tanks now not essentially obsolete in the era of jets and laser targeting?
Depends on the theatre. For Gulf 1 as an example everyone sent their special forces units over prompting the officer in charge to make the plea for no more SF; they needed heavy armour.
Surely now the best thing to have in that situation would be SF, each with their own allocated drone support to call upon?
Again depends on the enemy. If you are facing what (at that time was thought to be) significant armoured forces in a contested invasion and the aim was to take and hold ground then that was not something that SF can do.
But we have the munitions to clear out such armoured forces now, surely?
Yes it's interesting. Perhaps. But facts on the ground are sometimes different to the theory. You would have to ask @Dura for the latest take on anti-tank warfare. I note that we are supplying anti-tank weapons to the Ukraine which I presume are something like or even exactly MILAN). And MILAN platoons (bonjour) are part of an infantry battalion which are part of a battlegroup with armoured support.
So a blanket destruction from the air would probably do it but do we have the ability (or of course inclination) to do that? In Ukraine, say?
But StillWaters I think the other point you missed, or chose to ignore, was that we were commenting specifically on Boris Johnson's blatantly obvious attempts to raise WWII rhetoric and channel the spirit of Churchill.
Which has bugger all to do with whether he cares about Ukrainian skins and everything to do with his own skin.
You do realise that this is all careful choreographed?
Oh god, ok, tell us what's going to happen then.
I don’t know
But the idea that Boris is riffing on his own without constant communication with the White House is ridiculous.
We’ve consistently seen Boris play the emotional / principal / freedom line while Biden follows up with intelligence-led bald statements of fact.
That way round is probably more effective than vice versa…
Boris Johnson shouldn't have to resign if he receives a fixed penalty notice for breaching his coronavirus laws, James Cleverly tells @RidgeOnSunday: “I don’t think what the country needs at the moment is a vacuum at the centre of government.” https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1495320446702694400
Utter bollocks from Cleverly. He should resign if he receives one.
He should resign anyway. All this talk of fines is just shifting the Overton window.
Why? The Overton window was always that rule makers can't be rule breakers. If he's received a fine, it means he's broken the rules, so he should go.
If he's not broken the rules (which I find exceedingly unlikely) then he's not broken the rules and he's not lied to Parliament. In which case, why should he go?
Same with a speeding fine. Amiright?
We've been over this before: If the PM had introduced the speeding rules himself, then daily been reprimanding the nation saying how important it is that the speeding rules have to be obeyed - then yes.
This isn't a parking ticket and you're disingenuous to try to conflate the two.
Exactly. We have been over this and you were wrong.
You said "rules". If he has broken the rules, all of which his government "made" (and if they didn't draft them then they have a superior obligation surely to follow them), then he should resign. Which includes speeding fines.
No, it doesn't.
Just because you attempt whatabouterism doesn't make it true. This government didn't make the speeding rule - and its long been culturally acceptable that you can speed and pay a fine if caught so long as you don't end up with a driving ban.
Enforcing new rules, stripping away existing liberties and then breaking those new rules . . . that is an order of magnitude more serious than paying a fine for a pre-existing offence and you know it.
All of which are trumped by a Minister MISLEADING PARLIAMENT!
If he didn't think that anything he knew about was a party, then how has he misled Parliament?
Its only a lie if he thought what he'd been to was a party at the time he said it.
Problem is, that line/lie isn't credible.....
People try the 'I'm a fool' defence when they have to, but they are in trouble if people won't believe you could be so stupid.
The PM lied repeatedly to parliament. But parliament can't remove him as the arbiter is the PM.
It only takes a vote of no confidence to remove him.
We're talking about two different things. Sanctions against ministers for breaking the ministerial code are imposed by the PM. Which is how we had Patel break the ministerial code and then the PM decide that she didn't (prompting the resignation of his own standards advisor). Sanctions against members for lying to parliament still go through the PM - a report is put to the house which is still controlled and whipped by the PM.
So the problem here is that when the PM breaks the ministerial code and when the PM lies to the house, there is no way the system can act. These are not directly related to Tory MPs chosing to write letters to the 1922 committee.
There may well be 54 Tory MPs who want a change of PM, letters or no letters - but I‘m not sure there’s anything close to the 185 required to actually effect the change.
Once the process starts, we can only hope it gathers it's own momentum.
Not wanting the vote doesn't rule out not wanting the PM to continue, if forced to decide.
Boris Johnson shouldn't have to resign if he receives a fixed penalty notice for breaching his coronavirus laws, James Cleverly tells @RidgeOnSunday: “I don’t think what the country needs at the moment is a vacuum at the centre of government.”
I always love that latter quote, "don't think we need a change of leadership at this current time...."
The problem with that is that there is NEVER a good time to change leadership. You can always find something going on to trot out that line. Whether it be war in Ukraine or simply Post Office trials, you can always invent something.
On that basis, we shouldn't have general elections, shouldn't have democracy. It's a cop out to mean either: "I don't believe in democracy" or "I can't think of any other good reason why the current incumbant should stay, so I'll trot out the tired old line about change of leadership."
I hope for Cleverly's sake its the latter rather than the former.
Retuned home from Southwold to carnage. Two enormous neighbours firs have fallen into my garden. One has sheered through an ancient ash taking off a branch the size of most trees. The other has fallen into our Walnut tree (another huge tree taller than our house) Half the Walnut tree is devastated but it is holding the fir up which may or may not be useful as underneath it is a large shed, 3 water butts, wood store, wheel barrows etc and in the shed is a motor mower and all my hedge cutting power tools. I have no idea if any of this still exists or smashed to bits.
Oh crap. Good luck getting everything sorted and hope there isn’t too much damage. Whatever you do, don’t risk being under a half-fallen tree, have the insurance company send a lumberjack out, even if there’s a bit of a wait at the moment.
Thanks for that advice. I had already thought about trying to get to the shed and then decided it was far too dangerous. Unless they prop the tree over the shed up when they cut it the shed will become matchwood (if it isn't already).
Good to hear. Sadly, we’ll probably hear of fatalities caused by such secondary accidents in the coming days, a combination of frustration with delays and thinking that it’s no longer dangerous as the storm has passed. Definitely something best left to the professionals with the right cutting and strapping equipment. If the contents of the shed are worth more than the cost of getting a crane to hold up the tree while they empty it out…
Thanks. No real value, but did want to get on with hedge cutting before birds nest. On further investigation in the light it is 3 firs down.
@RochdalePioneers thanks for post. I'm looking on the positive as I hate the firs so go to see them go. My Ash is huge (3 metre girth) so the loss of one branch is fine even if it is huge. More worried about die back. The walnut looks a bit odd being mainly one sided now. And there will be plenty of firewood.
Yes, my firewood pile has been guesstimate valued at £2-3,000! Will take me a while to segment it all...
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
To a certain extent are tanks just targets for drones to fire at now?
I wonder whether they're a tethered cat in a modern military. Ireland recently published a military review, which proposed a huge increase in spending, and would involve adding all sorts of new capability, including combat aircraft, attack helicopters, etc - but they don't mention main battle tanks at all.
I'd have thought Russia would have plenty of drones of their own and also anti-drone capabilities. Azerbaijan won its recent short war with Armenia based on drone tech, and I can't see the Ruskies having worse tech than them
Boris Johnson shouldn't have to resign if he receives a fixed penalty notice for breaching his coronavirus laws, James Cleverly tells @RidgeOnSunday: “I don’t think what the country needs at the moment is a vacuum at the centre of government.” https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1495320446702694400
Utter bollocks from Cleverly. He should resign if he receives one.
He should resign anyway. All this talk of fines is just shifting the Overton window.
Why? The Overton window was always that rule makers can't be rule breakers. If he's received a fine, it means he's broken the rules, so he should go.
If he's not broken the rules (which I find exceedingly unlikely) then he's not broken the rules and he's not lied to Parliament. In which case, why should he go?
Same with a speeding fine. Amiright?
We've been over this before: If the PM had introduced the speeding rules himself, then daily been reprimanding the nation saying how important it is that the speeding rules have to be obeyed - then yes.
This isn't a parking ticket and you're disingenuous to try to conflate the two.
Exactly. We have been over this and you were wrong.
You said "rules". If he has broken the rules, all of which his government "made" (and if they didn't draft them then they have a superior obligation surely to follow them), then he should resign. Which includes speeding fines.
No, it doesn't.
Just because you attempt whatabouterism doesn't make it true. This government didn't make the speeding rule - and its long been culturally acceptable that you can speed and pay a fine if caught so long as you don't end up with a driving ban.
Enforcing new rules, stripping away existing liberties and then breaking those new rules . . . that is an order of magnitude more serious than paying a fine for a pre-existing offence and you know it.
All of which are trumped by a Minister MISLEADING PARLIAMENT!
If he didn't think that anything he knew about was a party, then how has he misled Parliament?
Its only a lie if he thought what he'd been to was a party at the time he said it.
Problem is, that line/lie isn't credible.....
Exactly. Unlike most political scandals, there aren't any intricacies or technicalities here that ordinary people can't understand. People know you don't send out a hundred "bring your own bottle" invitations to a meeting at work.
Everyone already knows that he didn't take a blind bit of notice of his own regulations - indeed there is enough circumstantial evidence from his character and past history to come to a reasonable conclusion without any facts about what happened during lockdown.
The only question is whether enough people still care about it, when he runs out of things to hide behind.
Retuned home from Southwold to carnage. Two enormous neighbours firs have fallen into my garden. One has sheered through an ancient ash taking off a branch the size of most trees. The other has fallen into our Walnut tree (another huge tree taller than our house) Half the Walnut tree is devastated but it is holding the fir up which may or may not be useful as underneath it is a large shed, 3 water butts, wood store, wheel barrows etc and in the shed is a motor mower and all my hedge cutting power tools. I have no idea if any of this still exists or smashed to bits.
Oh crap. Good luck getting everything sorted and hope there isn’t too much damage. Whatever you do, don’t risk being under a half-fallen tree, have the insurance company send a lumberjack out, even if there’s a bit of a wait at the moment.
Thanks for that advice. I had already thought about trying to get to the shed and then decided it was far too dangerous. Unless they prop the tree over the shed up when they cut it the shed will become matchwood (if it isn't already).
Good to hear. Sadly, we’ll probably hear of fatalities caused by such secondary accidents in the coming days, a combination of frustration with delays and thinking that it’s no longer dangerous as the storm has passed. Definitely something best left to the professionals with the right cutting and strapping equipment. If the contents of the shed are worth more than the cost of getting a crane to hold up the tree while they empty it out…
Thanks. No real value, but did want to get on with hedge cutting before birds nest. On further investigation in the light it is 3 firs down.
@RochdalePioneers thanks for post. I'm looking on the positive as I hate the firs so go to see them go. My Ash is huge (3 metre girth) so the loss of one branch is fine even if it is huge. More worried about die back. The walnut looks a bit odd being mainly one sided now. And there will be plenty of firewood.
I'm just relieved that when my ridge tiles came crashing down into the street, there wasn't someone driving or walking by at the time. As it was, a passing car a short while later had to stop to clear the debris.
We also have broken and missing roof tiles thanks to Arwen which the roofer still hasn't fixed. We did have one fall into the road which like yours managed not to hit anyone or anything. Another looks precarious up there but hasn't budged. Yet.
There may well be 54 Tory MPs who want a change of PM, letters or no letters - but I‘m not sure there’s anything close to the 185 required to actually effect the change.
Some seem to think that if a challenge happens he is doomed. Possible, sure, he lacks many natural allies, but rather ignores that the one example of modern times disproves it. May's days were numbered but she eked on for a long time. And had poll leads to boot.
May managed to successfully split her own party in three, with only the payroll vote in the middle actually supporting her only policy. She won the confidence vote but was always a dead woman walking, as the actual policy issue hadn’t gone away.
The issues with the current PM are mostly personal rather than policy, and a successful vote of confidence emboldens him. The policy stuff (green crap, levelling up) is actually much more likely to get him, which is why he needs to sort out the top team around him.
Neither does the country need a PM who deliberately mislead Paiament.
Time for Mr Sunak to step up to the plate just before his window of opportunity closes.
More importantly, do we really want Johnson running a war? We need someone with attention to detail who can be arsed to deal with bad and difficult stuff 24/7 and who understands reality.
Time for a super quick leadership change. Sunak or Hunt.
Boris Johnson shouldn't have to resign if he receives a fixed penalty notice for breaching his coronavirus laws, James Cleverly tells @RidgeOnSunday: “I don’t think what the country needs at the moment is a vacuum at the centre of government.” https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1495320446702694400
Utter bollocks from Cleverly. He should resign if he receives one.
He should resign anyway. All this talk of fines is just shifting the Overton window.
Why? The Overton window was always that rule makers can't be rule breakers. If he's received a fine, it means he's broken the rules, so he should go.
If he's not broken the rules (which I find exceedingly unlikely) then he's not broken the rules and he's not lied to Parliament. In which case, why should he go?
Same with a speeding fine. Amiright?
We've been over this before: If the PM had introduced the speeding rules himself, then daily been reprimanding the nation saying how important it is that the speeding rules have to be obeyed - then yes.
This isn't a parking ticket and you're disingenuous to try to conflate the two.
Exactly. We have been over this and you were wrong.
You said "rules". If he has broken the rules, all of which his government "made" (and if they didn't draft them then they have a superior obligation surely to follow them), then he should resign. Which includes speeding fines.
No, it doesn't.
Just because you attempt whatabouterism doesn't make it true. This government didn't make the speeding rule - and its long been culturally acceptable that you can speed and pay a fine if caught so long as you don't end up with a driving ban.
Enforcing new rules, stripping away existing liberties and then breaking those new rules . . . that is an order of magnitude more serious than paying a fine for a pre-existing offence and you know it.
That is just your hobby horse. You don't get to pick and choose which laws you think it ok for the government to break.
If you break any you're out = coherent position If you break any it's all good stay as long as you like = coherent position If you break only the ones I don't like you're out, there rest it's all good = not coherent position
Its not that I don't like the rules, its that Boris created the one he [allegedly] broke himself.
If you break any you create yourself then you're out = coherent position
No that is an invented category. All rules are government-sponsored; it makes no difference when they were introduced. New ones, old ones, all of them. Just that (now, finally, welcome) you don't like this particular one.
Yes, it's true, I was working with an anarchist terror cell to overthrow the government. But I'd like to point out that I was not an MP in 1998 when the Crime and Disorder Act was passed, so I do not believe I should resign. At this point, I would like remind you that I have already expressed heartfelt regrets for the perception that there are those who feel offended by what has happened and I hope they can finally move on.
Boris Johnson shouldn't have to resign if he receives a fixed penalty notice for breaching his coronavirus laws, James Cleverly tells @RidgeOnSunday: “I don’t think what the country needs at the moment is a vacuum at the centre of government.” https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1495320446702694400
Utter bollocks from Cleverly. He should resign if he receives one.
He should resign anyway. All this talk of fines is just shifting the Overton window.
Why? The Overton window was always that rule makers can't be rule breakers. If he's received a fine, it means he's broken the rules, so he should go.
If he's not broken the rules (which I find exceedingly unlikely) then he's not broken the rules and he's not lied to Parliament. In which case, why should he go?
Same with a speeding fine. Amiright?
We've been over this before: If the PM had introduced the speeding rules himself, then daily been reprimanding the nation saying how important it is that the speeding rules have to be obeyed - then yes.
This isn't a parking ticket and you're disingenuous to try to conflate the two.
Exactly. We have been over this and you were wrong.
You said "rules". If he has broken the rules, all of which his government "made" (and if they didn't draft them then they have a superior obligation surely to follow them), then he should resign. Which includes speeding fines.
No, it doesn't.
Just because you attempt whatabouterism doesn't make it true. This government didn't make the speeding rule - and its long been culturally acceptable that you can speed and pay a fine if caught so long as you don't end up with a driving ban.
Enforcing new rules, stripping away existing liberties and then breaking those new rules . . . that is an order of magnitude more serious than paying a fine for a pre-existing offence and you know it.
That is just your hobby horse. You don't get to pick and choose which laws you think it ok for the government to break.
If you break any you're out = coherent position If you break any it's all good stay as long as you like = coherent position If you break only the ones I don't like you're out, there rest it's all good = not coherent position
Its not that I don't like the rules, its that Boris created the one he [allegedly] broke himself.
If you break any you create yourself then you're out = coherent position
No that is an invented category. All rules are government-sponsored; it makes no difference when they were introduced. New ones, old ones, all of them. Just that (now, finally, welcome) you don't like this particular one.
The problem is that if you are caught breaking rules you introduced yourself you have lost credibility.
Boris's credibility never was very high, partly on account of having been sacked a couple of times for lying, but on this one countless ordinary folk were adversely affected.
That's not a great cv on which to fight an election.
It is not particularly that this is a law he introduced.
The problems are in order
1. Lying 2. This was not just one of several thousand laws but the ones we were told on a daily basis were vital to the health of the nation. 3. Considering themselves above the law
Each of those is more important than who introduced the law.
Retuned home from Southwold to carnage. Two enormous neighbours firs have fallen into my garden. One has sheered through an ancient ash taking off a branch the size of most trees. The other has fallen into our Walnut tree (another huge tree taller than our house) Half the Walnut tree is devastated but it is holding the fir up which may or may not be useful as underneath it is a large shed, 3 water butts, wood store, wheel barrows etc and in the shed is a motor mower and all my hedge cutting power tools. I have no idea if any of this still exists or smashed to bits.
Oh crap. Good luck getting everything sorted and hope there isn’t too much damage. Whatever you do, don’t risk being under a half-fallen tree, have the insurance company send a lumberjack out, even if there’s a bit of a wait at the moment.
Thanks for that advice. I had already thought about trying to get to the shed and then decided it was far too dangerous. Unless they prop the tree over the shed up when they cut it the shed will become matchwood (if it isn't already).
Good to hear. Sadly, we’ll probably hear of fatalities caused by such secondary accidents in the coming days, a combination of frustration with delays and thinking that it’s no longer dangerous as the storm has passed. Definitely something best left to the professionals with the right cutting and strapping equipment. If the contents of the shed are worth more than the cost of getting a crane to hold up the tree while they empty it out…
Thanks. No real value, but did want to get on with hedge cutting before birds nest. On further investigation in the light it is 3 firs down.
@RochdalePioneers thanks for post. I'm looking on the positive as I hate the firs so go to see them go. My Ash is huge (3 metre girth) so the loss of one branch is fine even if it is huge. More worried about die back. The walnut looks a bit odd being mainly one sided now. And there will be plenty of firewood.
Yes, my firewood pile has been guesstimate valued at £2-3,000! Will take me a while to segment it all...
I have acquaintances who work with trees (etc) from tree surgeons downwards. It is apparently, an ill wind!
The PM lied repeatedly to parliament. But parliament can't remove him as the arbiter is the PM.
It only takes a vote of no confidence to remove him.
We're talking about two different things. Sanctions against ministers for breaking the ministerial code are imposed by the PM. Which is how we had Patel break the ministerial code and then the PM decide that she didn't (prompting the resignation of his own standards advisor). Sanctions against members for lying to parliament still go through the PM - a report is put to the house which is still controlled and whipped by the PM.
So the problem here is that when the PM breaks the ministerial code and when the PM lies to the house, there is no way the system can act. These are not directly related to Tory MPs chosing to write letters to the 1922 committee.
The democratic system can act by expressing no confidence in the PM. Which other system do you have in mind?
Retuned home from Southwold to carnage. Two enormous neighbours firs have fallen into my garden. One has sheered through an ancient ash taking off a branch the size of most trees. The other has fallen into our Walnut tree (another huge tree taller than our house) Half the Walnut tree is devastated but it is holding the fir up which may or may not be useful as underneath it is a large shed, 3 water butts, wood store, wheel barrows etc and in the shed is a motor mower and all my hedge cutting power tools. I have no idea if any of this still exists or smashed to bits.
Sounds as though your house is safe (?), but sad news for what sound like rather splendid trees on your property. As others have said, don’t be tempted to investigate too closely, and leave it to the professionals.
And don’t argue with the enormous neighbours.
Very good😀. I once had a chap doing some work and I asked if it was going ok. At the time I had been chopping wood and was carrying an axe. He replied that everything was going fine but regardless he had a policy of giving that answer to anyone carrying an axe.
With airlines stopping flights to Ukraine is there a tipping point where, for example, the UK gov “advises” British airlines to not fly into Russia and to bring home any planes and crew there?
If a war starts in Ukraine and we impose sanctions surely we don’t want British planes etc sitting in Russia where they can be seized in retaliation?
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
Genuine question from someone who reads a lot of history but has no idea about the current military. How useful are tanks in modern warfare? In the battle of the bulge the Germans were fine when weather conditions precluded the British and American fighter-bombers from flying. When clear conditions returned it was a slaughter. Are tanks now not essentially obsolete in the era of jets and laser targeting?
Depends on the theatre. For Gulf 1 as an example everyone sent their special forces units over prompting the officer in charge to make the plea for no more SF; they needed heavy armour.
Even Gulf War I was thirty years ago now. I wonder if things have changed more since then.
Yes, it was very largely before drones. A lot will depend on how many drones Turkey has supplied and how well trained the Ukrainians are in using them. I really don't see the Russians not having air superiority which is an essential prerequiste of using heavy armour.
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
Genuine question from someone who reads a lot of history but has no idea about the current military. How useful are tanks in modern warfare? In the battle of the bulge the Germans were fine when weather conditions precluded the British and American fighter-bombers from flying. When clear conditions returned it was a slaughter. Are tanks now not essentially obsolete in the era of jets and laser targeting?
Depends on the theatre. For Gulf 1 as an example everyone sent their special forces units over prompting the officer in charge to make the plea for no more SF; they needed heavy armour.
Even Gulf War I was thirty years ago now. I wonder if things have changed more since then.
Well from the pictures we are all seeing in Eastern Europe you still need tanks and the infantry to take and hold ground. If we (the UK? the West?) are saying that we can't get involved in those conflicts then that is fine by me we just need to set out clearly what we do want our forces to be for and to do.
Well the war, if it happens, might not turn out how the Russians, with their massed armour, expect.
It seems to me possible that the Ukrainians have enough drone and man-portable anti-armour firepower that the imminent conflict would prove to be a bookend to the age of the tank in warfare.
But I did just listen to the BBC radio programme on drones, so maybe I'm overreacting.
The thread header is remarkable in itself but I do not see a conservative lead in the next few weeks
On Boris it seems he has taken the part of the leader the EU are obviously missing and has become very popular in the Baltic states and elsewhere which is remarkable
I hope that this may help to warm relationships with the EU going forward
I think he may well survive but how that shapes politics between now and GE 24 is very much up in the air but the responsibility is directly at the door of his mps
Boris Johnson shouldn't have to resign if he receives a fixed penalty notice for breaching his coronavirus laws, James Cleverly tells @RidgeOnSunday: “I don’t think what the country needs at the moment is a vacuum at the centre of government.”
I see Cleverly has been wheeled out as this weekend's punchbag for the Government. I notice Dowden is keeping his head down - if you want a definition of a vacuum at the centre of Government, he epitomises it.
To be fair, we're coping with a moral vacuum at the heart of Government now.
As to replacing Prime Ministers, we often do it at times of crisis - 1916, 1940 and 1990 come readily to mind. In 1940, German tanks were sweeping towards the Channel and we decided to change Prime Minister so hiding behind the "it's not a time for change" argument is spurious nonsense to be charitable.
Then you remember it's coming from a James Cleverly or an Oliver Dowden and the irony slaps you in the face like a wet fish.
Retuned home from Southwold to carnage. Two enormous neighbours firs have fallen into my garden. One has sheered through an ancient ash taking off a branch the size of most trees. The other has fallen into our Walnut tree (another huge tree taller than our house) Half the Walnut tree is devastated but it is holding the fir up which may or may not be useful as underneath it is a large shed, 3 water butts, wood store, wheel barrows etc and in the shed is a motor mower and all my hedge cutting power tools. I have no idea if any of this still exists or smashed to bits.
Sounds as though your house is safe (?), but sad news for what sound like rather splendid trees on your property. As others have said, don’t be tempted to investigate too closely, and leave it to the professionals.
And don’t argue with the enormous neighbours.
Very good😀. I once had a chap doing some work and I asked if it was going ok. At the time I had been chopping wood and was carrying an axe. He replied that everything was going fine but regardless he had a policy of giving that answer to anyone carrying an axe.
Maybe it was your full viking outfit that spooked him?
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
Genuine question from someone who reads a lot of history but has no idea about the current military. How useful are tanks in modern warfare? In the battle of the bulge the Germans were fine when weather conditions precluded the British and American fighter-bombers from flying. When clear conditions returned it was a slaughter. Are tanks now not essentially obsolete in the era of jets and laser targeting?
Depends on the theatre. For Gulf 1 as an example everyone sent their special forces units over prompting the officer in charge to make the plea for no more SF; they needed heavy armour.
We’ll only be able to deploy about 50 of the new Challenger at any given time, so another Gulf War type contribution won’t happen. Given the real lack of MBTs in Europe, there’s arguably a role for them helping to plug the gap. There needs to be something between special forces and going nuclear to deter Putin, as the Ukraine situation makes very clear.
The upgrade will be a lot more survivable against AT weapons, and the lightweight weapons carried by drones, than the old tanks.
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
To a certain extent are tanks just targets for drones to fire at now?
I wonder whether they're a tethered cat in a modern military. Ireland recently published a military review, which proposed a huge increase in spending, and would involve adding all sorts of new capability, including combat aircraft, attack helicopters, etc - but they don't mention main battle tanks at all.
I'd have thought Russia would have plenty of drones of their own and also anti-drone capabilities. Azerbaijan won its recent short war with Armenia based on drone tech, and I can't see the Ruskies having worse tech than them
iirc Russia claims its new tanks can shoot drones.
There may well be 54 Tory MPs who want a change of PM, letters or no letters - but I‘m not sure there’s anything close to the 185 required to actually effect the change.
Once the process starts, we can only hope it gathers it's own momentum.
Not wanting the vote doesn't rule out not wanting the PM to continue, if forced to decide.
They are not going to do it now. Too many of them can be talked out of it by mentioning the grim situation in Ukraine and is this the right time etc etc.
Personally the thought of Johnson running a war situation is proper scary. Just the thought of him getting to grips with detail of a map of Donetsk is scary enough. Get Sunak or Hunt in now. But it wont happen.
Hitchens calls Liz Truss a lefty liberal, and has a pop at army cuts:-
Now, as we posture as the defenders of Europe against a much-touted Russian threat which may or may not exist, Britain has a mere 227 Challenger tanks and is busy reducing its Army from 82,000 personnel – already a record low in modern times – to 73,000.
"I note there is also an official drive to double the number of women in the British Army and to ‘tackle its male-dominated culture’. Well, such quotas usually lead to a lowering of physical standards, and, as most women aren’t especially keen on being soldiers, the main outcome is that more weedy men can join up.
I can promise you that the Russian Army continues to have a ‘male-dominated culture’, to put it gently, and does not plan to tackle it any time soon, and I am concerned about what might happen if our feminist forces ever actually clash with it."
The Uk does not have the numbers to fight a full scale war - the PBI is largely irrelevant these days. What we excel at is special operations - niche roles - and our standards have not been diluted there.
All the army needs is the SAS and some nukes. That appears to be the guiding principle behind decades of Tory defence cuts.
To some extent that reflects the nature of the wars we are going to get involved in future.
The PM lied repeatedly to parliament. But parliament can't remove him as the arbiter is the PM.
It only takes a vote of no confidence to remove him.
We're talking about two different things. Sanctions against ministers for breaking the ministerial code are imposed by the PM. Which is how we had Patel break the ministerial code and then the PM decide that she didn't (prompting the resignation of his own standards advisor). Sanctions against members for lying to parliament still go through the PM - a report is put to the house which is still controlled and whipped by the PM.
So the problem here is that when the PM breaks the ministerial code and when the PM lies to the house, there is no way the system can act. These are not directly related to Tory MPs chosing to write letters to the 1922 committee.
The PM only continues in post for as long as they retain support of the House. So the situation shouldn't be a problem, because the PM does not have the job security that comes with being a directly-elected President.
Unfortunately, it's the MPs in the House who have failed to play the part assigned to them.
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
To a certain extent are tanks just targets for drones to fire at now?
I wonder whether they're a tethered cat in a modern military. Ireland recently published a military review, which proposed a huge increase in spending, and would involve adding all sorts of new capability, including combat aircraft, attack helicopters, etc - but they don't mention main battle tanks at all.
I'd have thought Russia would have plenty of drones of their own and also anti-drone capabilities. Azerbaijan won its recent short war with Armenia based on drone tech, and I can't see the Ruskies having worse tech than them
Wasn't the story with that war that Azerbaijan had Turkish support and drone technology, while the Armenians were backed by Russia?
Boris Johnson shouldn't have to resign if he receives a fixed penalty notice for breaching his coronavirus laws, James Cleverly tells @RidgeOnSunday: “I don’t think what the country needs at the moment is a vacuum at the centre of government.” https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1495320446702694400
Utter bollocks from Cleverly. He should resign if he receives one.
He should resign anyway. All this talk of fines is just shifting the Overton window.
Why? The Overton window was always that rule makers can't be rule breakers. If he's received a fine, it means he's broken the rules, so he should go.
If he's not broken the rules (which I find exceedingly unlikely) then he's not broken the rules and he's not lied to Parliament. In which case, why should he go?
Same with a speeding fine. Amiright?
We've been over this before: If the PM had introduced the speeding rules himself, then daily been reprimanding the nation saying how important it is that the speeding rules have to be obeyed - then yes.
This isn't a parking ticket and you're disingenuous to try to conflate the two.
Exactly. We have been over this and you were wrong.
You said "rules". If he has broken the rules, all of which his government "made" (and if they didn't draft them then they have a superior obligation surely to follow them), then he should resign. Which includes speeding fines.
No, it doesn't.
Just because you attempt whatabouterism doesn't make it true. This government didn't make the speeding rule - and its long been culturally acceptable that you can speed and pay a fine if caught so long as you don't end up with a driving ban.
Enforcing new rules, stripping away existing liberties and then breaking those new rules . . . that is an order of magnitude more serious than paying a fine for a pre-existing offence and you know it.
All of which are trumped by a Minister MISLEADING PARLIAMENT!
If he didn't think that anything he knew about was a party, then how has he misled Parliament?
Its only a lie if he thought what he'd been to was a party at the time he said it.
Problem is, that line/lie isn't credible.....
Yes, it’s the ‘Boris didn’t lie if he says he didn’t’ argument. Versus every one knows he lied.
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
To a certain extent are tanks just targets for drones to fire at now?
I wonder whether they're a tethered cat in a modern military. Ireland recently published a military review, which proposed a huge increase in spending, and would involve adding all sorts of new capability, including combat aircraft, attack helicopters, etc - but they don't mention main battle tanks at all.
I'd have thought Russia would have plenty of drones of their own and also anti-drone capabilities. Azerbaijan won its recent short war with Armenia based on drone tech, and I can't see the Ruskies having worse tech than them
I believe that the drones there were Turkish ones, and that Russia supported Armenia, so it appears that they didn't have anything to match them. They will have learned the lesson I think but I don't think they will have had enough time to do much about it.
Hitchens calls Liz Truss a lefty liberal, and has a pop at army cuts:-
Now, as we posture as the defenders of Europe against a much-touted Russian threat which may or may not exist, Britain has a mere 227 Challenger tanks and is busy reducing its Army from 82,000 personnel – already a record low in modern times – to 73,000.
"I note there is also an official drive to double the number of women in the British Army and to ‘tackle its male-dominated culture’. Well, such quotas usually lead to a lowering of physical standards, and, as most women aren’t especially keen on being soldiers, the main outcome is that more weedy men can join up.
I can promise you that the Russian Army continues to have a ‘male-dominated culture’, to put it gently, and does not plan to tackle it any time soon, and I am concerned about what might happen if our feminist forces ever actually clash with it."
The Uk does not have the numbers to fight a full scale war - the PBI is largely irrelevant these days. What we excel at is special operations - niche roles - and our standards have not been diluted there.
All the army needs is the SAS and some nukes. That appears to be the guiding principle behind decades of Tory defence cuts.
To some extent that reflects the nature of the wars we are going to get involved in future.
I agree somewhat, but we also need a large and capable Navy.
The PM lied repeatedly to parliament. But parliament can't remove him as the arbiter is the PM.
It only takes a vote of no confidence to remove him.
We're talking about two different things. Sanctions against ministers for breaking the ministerial code are imposed by the PM. Which is how we had Patel break the ministerial code and then the PM decide that she didn't (prompting the resignation of his own standards advisor). Sanctions against members for lying to parliament still go through the PM - a report is put to the house which is still controlled and whipped by the PM.
So the problem here is that when the PM breaks the ministerial code and when the PM lies to the house, there is no way the system can act. These are not directly related to Tory MPs chosing to write letters to the 1922 committee.
The PM only continues in post for as long as they retain support of the House. So the situation shouldn't be a problem, because the PM does not have the job security that comes with being a directly-elected President.
Unfortunately, it's the MPs in the House who have failed to play the part assigned to them.
Not so much failed to play, as waited for it to play out. Which requires the Met/Grey reports.
The thread header is remarkable in itself but I do not see a conservative lead in the next few weeks
On Boris it seems he has taken the part of the leader the EU are obviously missing and has become very popular in the Baltic states and elsewhere which is remarkable
I hope that this may help to warm relationships with the EU going forward
I think he may well survive but how that shapes politics between now and GE 24 is very much up in the air but the responsibility is directly at the door of his mps
I'm not sure what "part" Johnson is playing if I'm being honest and neither you nor I know what is really going on behind the scenes in terms of diplomacy and negotiation in which the EU may be taking a far bigger role than the UK for example.
I'm still struggling with the notion Putin intends to go through with this - on any kind of risk/reward balance, I don't see the benefits.
Johnson's playing the role Biden and others are asking him to play and to his credit he's doing it well. The "we know what you're going to do" card plays strongly in the court of global opinion and, like it or not, Putin will have to deal with the consequences as will we.
Are we actually going to impose the kind of sanctions which will hurt us as well as Russia? That's the thing about sanctions - to be effective, the pain has to work both ways. I'd like us to forcibly sequester the assets of certain Russian nationals in the UK - will we do it? Can we kick the methadone of money?
The thread header is remarkable in itself but I do not see a conservative lead in the next few weeks
On Boris it seems he has taken the part of the leader the EU are obviously missing and has become very popular in the Baltic states and elsewhere which is remarkable
I hope that this may help to warm relationships with the EU going forward
I think he may well survive but how that shapes politics between now and GE 24 is very much up in the air but the responsibility is directly at the door of his mps
I do.
As events in the East of our Continent become more worrysome, British families will huddle around the fire and listen to the PM's proclamations on the wireless as to how he proposes to ensure the safety of his subjects... I mean citizens.
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
Genuine question from someone who reads a lot of history but has no idea about the current military. How useful are tanks in modern warfare? In the battle of the bulge the Germans were fine when weather conditions precluded the British and American fighter-bombers from flying. When clear conditions returned it was a slaughter. Are tanks now not essentially obsolete in the era of jets and laser targeting?
Depends on the theatre. For Gulf 1 as an example everyone sent their special forces units over prompting the officer in charge to make the plea for no more SF; they needed heavy armour.
We’ll only be able to deploy about 50 of the new Challenger at any given time, so another Gulf War type contribution won’t happen. Given the real lack of MBTs in Europe, there’s arguably a role for them helping to plug the gap. There needs to be something between special forces and going nuclear to deter Putin, as the Ukraine situation makes very clear.
The upgrade will be a lot more survivable against AT weapons, and the lightweight weapons carried by drones, than the old tanks.
My understanding is that upgrades can have great armour on the front and sides, but all tanks are very vulnerable to drone weapons which hit through the topside, the weakest point of the tank.
Not so much failed to play, as waited for it to play out. Which requires the Met/Grey reports.
My local MP replied to my letter with this
"While acknowledging the seriousness of this matter, I do believe it is important that, in the meantime, the Government does not become paralysed and is still able to prioritise delivery, as well as being able to respond to events whenever they arise. For example, we face the largest military build-up in Europe in decades on the border of Ukraine. It is right that the focus of our Prime Minister, who visited Ukraine on 1 February, is on peace in Europe, rather than party politics at home."
The problem with that of course is that instead of concentrating on Ukraine BoZo was closeted with his lawyers working on his Partygate excuses
- ”If we see a Conservative poll lead this month then it might keep Boris Johnson in office for the rest of the parliament.”
In that case, time for Smarkets or AN Other to put up a market on next Scottish Conservative leader, because Douglas Ross’s jaiket is on a shooglie peg.
Apart from his enmity with the Prime Minister, he’s doing a dire job of challenging the First Minister and her team:
Best prices - Next First Minister
Angus Robertson (SNP) 5/2 Kate Forbes (SNP) 8/1 John Swinney (SNP) 9/1 Humza Yousaf (SNP) 10/1 Joanna Cherry (SNP) 16/1 Anas Sarwar (SLab) 16/1 Keith Brown (SNP) 17/1 Douglas Ross (SCon) 18/1
What a joke it should be 18,000,000-1 and fanciful even at that
- ”If we see a Conservative poll lead this month then it might keep Boris Johnson in office for the rest of the parliament.”
In that case, time for Smarkets or AN Other to put up a market on next Scottish Conservative leader, because Douglas Ross’s jaiket is on a shooglie peg.
Apart from his enmity with the Prime Minister, he’s doing a dire job of challenging the First Minister and her team:
Best prices - Next First Minister
Angus Robertson (SNP) 5/2 Kate Forbes (SNP) 8/1 John Swinney (SNP) 9/1 Humza Yousaf (SNP) 10/1 Joanna Cherry (SNP) 16/1 Anas Sarwar (SLab) 16/1 Keith Brown (SNP) 17/1 Douglas Ross (SCon) 18/1
What a joke it should be 18,000,000-1 and fanciful even at that
Not so much failed to play, as waited for it to play out. Which requires the Met/Grey reports.
My local MP replied to my letter with this
"While acknowledging the seriousness of this matter, I do believe it is important that, in the meantime, the Government does not become paralysed and is still able to prioritise delivery, as well as being able to respond to events whenever they arise. For example, we face the largest military build-up in Europe in decades on the border of Ukraine. It is right that the focus of our Prime Minister, who visited Ukraine on 1 February, is on peace in Europe, rather than party politics at home."
The problem with that of course is that instead of concentrating on Ukraine BoZo was closeted with his lawyers working on his Partygate excuses
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
Genuine question from someone who reads a lot of history but has no idea about the current military. How useful are tanks in modern warfare? In the battle of the bulge the Germans were fine when weather conditions precluded the British and American fighter-bombers from flying. When clear conditions returned it was a slaughter. Are tanks now not essentially obsolete in the era of jets and laser targeting?
Depends on the theatre. For Gulf 1 as an example everyone sent their special forces units over prompting the officer in charge to make the plea for no more SF; they needed heavy armour.
Even Gulf War I was thirty years ago now. I wonder if things have changed more since then.
Well from the pictures we are all seeing in Eastern Europe you still need tanks and the infantry to take and hold ground. If we (the UK? the West?) are saying that we can't get involved in those conflicts then that is fine by me we just need to set out clearly what we do want our forces to be for and to do.
Well the war, if it happens, might not turn out how the Russians, with their massed armour, expect.
It seems to me possible that the Ukrainians have enough drone and man-portable anti-armour firepower that the imminent conflict would prove to be a bookend to the age of the tank in warfare.
But I did just listen to the BBC radio programme on drones, so maybe I'm overreacting.
"Man portable anti-armour firepower" is unlikely to stop the massed tanks of The Russian Federation. Trust me that was my job for a while and no one thought we would last more than a few minutes if 3SA crossed the start line.
Hitchens calls Liz Truss a lefty liberal, and has a pop at army cuts:-
Now, as we posture as the defenders of Europe against a much-touted Russian threat which may or may not exist, Britain has a mere 227 Challenger tanks and is busy reducing its Army from 82,000 personnel – already a record low in modern times – to 73,000.
"I note there is also an official drive to double the number of women in the British Army and to ‘tackle its male-dominated culture’. Well, such quotas usually lead to a lowering of physical standards, and, as most women aren’t especially keen on being soldiers, the main outcome is that more weedy men can join up.
I can promise you that the Russian Army continues to have a ‘male-dominated culture’, to put it gently, and does not plan to tackle it any time soon, and I am concerned about what might happen if our feminist forces ever actually clash with it."
Considering the recruitment and retention problems of the forces, recruiting from a wider population pool seems wise. In many technical branches brute strength is not the key performance.
Worth noting that the male dominated army hasn't had a great track record in recent times.
Last time they made a mess in Iran they were crying because their ipods got taken away and that was just hte guys. Think if their makeup is confiscated as well.
I like a lot of what Starmer is saying there. However what is 'Russian' cash exactly? Money from anyone who is or has been a Russian national? Someone linked to Putin? We need to be a little careful that we aren't tainting everyone with the same brush. Anyone who remains on friendly terms with Mr Putin should be automatically disqualified.
The security services ought to be on the ball when it comes to party donors and monitoring wealthy foreign donors carefully. So take Russian/whatever cash if you want. But be aware it might come back to bite you.
A most peculiar feature on the weather maps today, a pencil thin tsunami line of paricularly heavy rain moving south eastwards and giving an intense 10-30 minute rainstorm for much of England (EDIT: and Wales).
At the moment it is organising ifrom the Atlantic Ocean and into Galway, but the organisation increases by the hour:
Limerick to Calf of Man by 11 Kerry, Dublin, Lancaster at 12 Cork, Waterford, Preston, Ripon at 1 Menai, Liverpool, Burnley, Skipton, Scarborough at 2 Pembroke, Aberystwyth, Chester, Macclesfield. Barnsley, Selby, Bridlington at 3 Southampton. Heathrow, Luton, Cambridge, Norwich at 6 Along Northern France to Dutch coast at 9
Not so much failed to play, as waited for it to play out. Which requires the Met/Grey reports.
My local MP replied to my letter with this
"While acknowledging the seriousness of this matter, I do believe it is important that, in the meantime, the Government does not become paralysed and is still able to prioritise delivery, as well as being able to respond to events whenever they arise. For example, we face the largest military build-up in Europe in decades on the border of Ukraine. It is right that the focus of our Prime Minister, who visited Ukraine on 1 February, is on peace in Europe, rather than party politics at home."
The problem with that of course is that instead of concentrating on Ukraine BoZo was closeted with his lawyers working on his Partygate excuses
Wow! How long did he remove his head from Johnson's trousers to write that nonsense?
The PM lied repeatedly to parliament. But parliament can't remove him as the arbiter is the PM.
It only takes a vote of no confidence to remove him.
We're talking about two different things. Sanctions against ministers for breaking the ministerial code are imposed by the PM. Which is how we had Patel break the ministerial code and then the PM decide that she didn't (prompting the resignation of his own standards advisor). Sanctions against members for lying to parliament still go through the PM - a report is put to the house which is still controlled and whipped by the PM.
So the problem here is that when the PM breaks the ministerial code and when the PM lies to the house, there is no way the system can act. These are not directly related to Tory MPs chosing to write letters to the 1922 committee.
The democratic system can act by expressing no confidence in the PM. Which other system do you have in mind?
The legislative system to which we elect MPs having actual rules, actual checks and balances. That cannot just be bypassed and ignored because the guy at the top is a crook.
Yes it's interesting. Perhaps. But facts on the ground are sometimes different to the theory. You would have to ask @Dura for the latest take on anti-tank warfare.
I have little experience in land warfare beyond driving chalks of RM to their next scheduled bloodbath in a Lynx.
However, it is still a fact that you need armour and infantry to take and hold ground. Can you kill MBTs with UAS? Yes. But there are also plenty of ways to kill UAS.
The thread header is remarkable in itself but I do not see a conservative lead in the next few weeks
On Boris it seems he has taken the part of the leader the EU are obviously missing and has become very popular in the Baltic states and elsewhere which is remarkable
I hope that this may help to warm relationships with the EU going forward
I think he may well survive but how that shapes politics between now and GE 24 is very much up in the air but the responsibility is directly at the door of his mps
I'm not sure what "part" Johnson is playing if I'm being honest and neither you nor I know what is really going on behind the scenes in terms of diplomacy and negotiation in which the EU may be taking a far bigger role than the UK for example.
I'm still struggling with the notion Putin intends to go through with this - on any kind of risk/reward balance, I don't see the benefits.
Johnson's playing the role Biden and others are asking him to play and to his credit he's doing it well. The "we know what you're going to do" card plays strongly in the court of global opinion and, like it or not, Putin will have to deal with the consequences as will we.
Are we actually going to impose the kind of sanctions which will hurt us as well as Russia? That's the thing about sanctions - to be effective, the pain has to work both ways. I'd like us to forcibly sequester the assets of certain Russian nationals in the UK - will we do it? Can we kick the methadone of money?
To be fair Boris has been in the lead on this and of course is in close contact with Biden, but you only need to listen to the anger by the President of Ukraine to Germany to understand that all is not well inside the EU
I do not think any of us know how this develops but Putin is the wrongdoer here and he has to be confronted for the sake of the security of the whole of Europe and beyond
Yes, it’s the ‘Boris didn’t lie if he says he didn’t’ argument. Versus every one knows he lied.
He didn't lie.
Well, he did lie but he didn't break the law.
Well, he did break the law but he didn't lie about it.
Well, he did lie about it, but it doesn't matter...
Boris and the spin team have done brilliantly in putting out multiple excuses that are so spurious they are irrelevant individually but each excuse brings back 1% of the electorate so cumulatively they are getting closer to parity.
Ukraine > integrity and Economy > integrity should bring back another couple of % each in the next few weeks, so a Tory lead is good value.
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
To a certain extent are tanks just targets for drones to fire at now?
I wonder whether they're a tethered cat in a modern military. Ireland recently published a military review, which proposed a huge increase in spending, and would involve adding all sorts of new capability, including combat aircraft, attack helicopters, etc - but they don't mention main battle tanks at all.
I'd have thought Russia would have plenty of drones of their own and also anti-drone capabilities. Azerbaijan won its recent short war with Armenia based on drone tech, and I can't see the Ruskies having worse tech than them
I believe that the drones there were Turkish ones, and that Russia supported Armenia, so it appears that they didn't have anything to match them. They will have learned the lesson I think but I don't think they will have had enough time to do much about it.
Russia has a rather more capable airforce than does Armenia. And massively greater numbers of forces deployed against a relative handful of drones. Add to that Ukraine is not going to start hostilities until Putin has made a move.
Around a score of Turkish drones is not going to make any significant difference to the outcome.
The PM lied repeatedly to parliament. But parliament can't remove him as the arbiter is the PM.
It only takes a vote of no confidence to remove him.
We're talking about two different things. Sanctions against ministers for breaking the ministerial code are imposed by the PM. Which is how we had Patel break the ministerial code and then the PM decide that she didn't (prompting the resignation of his own standards advisor). Sanctions against members for lying to parliament still go through the PM - a report is put to the house which is still controlled and whipped by the PM.
So the problem here is that when the PM breaks the ministerial code and when the PM lies to the house, there is no way the system can act. These are not directly related to Tory MPs chosing to write letters to the 1922 committee.
The PM only continues in post for as long as they retain support of the House. So the situation shouldn't be a problem, because the PM does not have the job security that comes with being a directly-elected President.
Unfortunately, it's the MPs in the House who have failed to play the part assigned to them.
Yes it is that. Ultimately any government only functions as such by holding the confidence of the house. But Once in place there have to be rules, laws, checks and balances. Otherwise we elect a government who could do literally anything with a supplicant house acquiescing.
I like a lot of what Starmer is saying there. However what is 'Russian' cash exactly? Money from anyone who is or has been a Russian national? Someone linked to Putin? We need to be a little careful that we aren't tainting everyone with the same brush. Anyone who remains on friendly terms with Mr Putin should be automatically disqualified.
The security services ought to be on the ball when it comes to party donors and monitoring wealthy foreign donors carefully. So take Russian/whatever cash if you want. But be aware it might come back to bite you.
An awful lot of the Russian money buying property in London, is people getting it away from the reach of Putin, who has something of a habit of confiscating businesses and closing bank accounts of those who cross him.
Agree on political donations though, donors of more than a few thousand should pass a fit and proper test, and clearly not be acting on behalf of a foreign government.
Neither does the country need a PM who deliberately mislead Paiament.
Time for Mr Sunak to step up to the plate just before his window of opportunity closes.
Surely it has passed.
The MPs are waiting until May. There'll very likely be a VONC then. Whether he wins or loses may depend on the voters.
The MPs are waiting on the Met/Grey. The issue is not whether the PM gets a FPN/fine. It is whether he lied to Parliament.
Sunak is waiting on having that to justify Boris's removal before making his move. I think he is playing it very smart....
It is all a fix to give time for the dense public to go back to eastenders , coronation street etc, plod will string it out and it will be kicked down the road , slimeball will continue as is. All the Tory MP's are interested in is their bankbooks, vile cowardly scumbags.
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
Genuine question from someone who reads a lot of history but has no idea about the current military. How useful are tanks in modern warfare? In the battle of the bulge the Germans were fine when weather conditions precluded the British and American fighter-bombers from flying. When clear conditions returned it was a slaughter. Are tanks now not essentially obsolete in the era of jets and laser targeting?
Depends on the theatre. For Gulf 1 as an example everyone sent their special forces units over prompting the officer in charge to make the plea for no more SF; they needed heavy armour.
We’ll only be able to deploy about 50 of the new Challenger at any given time, so another Gulf War type contribution won’t happen. Given the real lack of MBTs in Europe, there’s arguably a role for them helping to plug the gap. There needs to be something between special forces and going nuclear to deter Putin, as the Ukraine situation makes very clear.
The upgrade will be a lot more survivable against AT weapons, and the lightweight weapons carried by drones, than the old tanks.
My understanding is that upgrades can have great armour on the front and sides, but all tanks are very vulnerable to drone weapons which hit through the topside, the weakest point of the tank.
The new machines will have very effective active defence against such things (as the Israelis have already demonstrated). Most of the Russian tank fleet doesn’t.
Not so much failed to play, as waited for it to play out. Which requires the Met/Grey reports.
My local MP replied to my letter with this
"While acknowledging the seriousness of this matter, I do believe it is important that, in the meantime, the Government does not become paralysed and is still able to prioritise delivery, as well as being able to respond to events whenever they arise. For example, we face the largest military build-up in Europe in decades on the border of Ukraine. It is right that the focus of our Prime Minister, who visited Ukraine on 1 February, is on peace in Europe, rather than party politics at home."
The problem with that of course is that instead of concentrating on Ukraine BoZo was closeted with his lawyers working on his Partygate excuses
Well, my local MP has put his letter in....
Mine has said that he will discuss it with the chairman of his association first, and I know that my nearby mp has not done so yet as they cannot coalesce around a candidate
The Turkey situation is a quite good example of why pro-EU politicians here greatly aided the cause of those who wanted us to leave.
There was an understanding Turkey would never join, because Greece would say no, meaning the UK and others didn't really have to do anything. But they ostensibly supported Turkey joining at some point. Then grew annoyed with this was pointed out during the campaign.
Too clever by half.
They were stuffed by Turkey.
Their sauce bread contempt.
Their problems sprouted from Brussels.
The whole thing was a plum pudding (that's enough - Ed).
The PM lied repeatedly to parliament. But parliament can't remove him as the arbiter is the PM.
It only takes a vote of no confidence to remove him.
We're talking about two different things. Sanctions against ministers for breaking the ministerial code are imposed by the PM. Which is how we had Patel break the ministerial code and then the PM decide that she didn't (prompting the resignation of his own standards advisor). Sanctions against members for lying to parliament still go through the PM - a report is put to the house which is still controlled and whipped by the PM.
So the problem here is that when the PM breaks the ministerial code and when the PM lies to the house, there is no way the system can act. These are not directly related to Tory MPs chosing to write letters to the 1922 committee.
The PM only continues in post for as long as they retain support of the House. So the situation shouldn't be a problem, because the PM does not have the job security that comes with being a directly-elected President.
Unfortunately, it's the MPs in the House who have failed to play the part assigned to them.
Yes it is that. Ultimately any government only functions as such by holding the confidence of the house. But Once in place there have to be rules, laws, checks and balances. Otherwise we elect a government who could do literally anything with a supplicant house acquiescing.
That has, unfortunately, always been the case. We operate in what is, effectively an elective dictatorship for 5 years. Since all laws are made and unmade by Parliament any attempt to change that would run into the issue that a Parliament that was acquiescent to the extent you are talking about could prevent or introduce any necessary changes to maintain the elective dictatorship.
I am not saying it is a good thing, only that I don't see anyway around it without scraping the system of Parliamentary democracy.
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
To a certain extent are tanks just targets for drones to fire at now?
I wonder whether they're a tethered cat in a modern military. Ireland recently published a military review, which proposed a huge increase in spending, and would involve adding all sorts of new capability, including combat aircraft, attack helicopters, etc - but they don't mention main battle tanks at all.
I'd have thought Russia would have plenty of drones of their own and also anti-drone capabilities. Azerbaijan won its recent short war with Armenia based on drone tech, and I can't see the Ruskies having worse tech than them
Wasn't the story with that war that Azerbaijan had Turkish support and drone technology, while the Armenians were backed by Russia?
Maybe the Russians are vulnerable to drones?
It's an interesting question, and it'll be interesting (although tragic) to see the results.
Drones might well be a big problem for Russia; on the other hand the Azerbaijan / Armenia conflict gave them experience of this warfare, and there has been time to develop counter strategies.
The side that tries to go most 'conventional' in this conflict will end up losing. If you just send thousands of tanks in with infantry, you may well end up with thousands of dead tanks. New tech like drones might be very, very good force multipliers.
Also remember that Ukraine has a rather large defence industry of its own, e.g. Malyshev and Lviv, with experience of manufacturing and renovating modernish tanks such as the T-84. Whilst they could not hope to match Soviet production, they have the equipment and technical know-how to produce some 'interesting' weapons designs, if they wanted.
Not so much failed to play, as waited for it to play out. Which requires the Met/Grey reports.
My local MP replied to my letter with this
"While acknowledging the seriousness of this matter, I do believe it is important that, in the meantime, the Government does not become paralysed and is still able to prioritise delivery, as well as being able to respond to events whenever they arise. For example, we face the largest military build-up in Europe in decades on the border of Ukraine. It is right that the focus of our Prime Minister, who visited Ukraine on 1 February, is on peace in Europe, rather than party politics at home."
The problem with that of course is that instead of concentrating on Ukraine BoZo was closeted with his lawyers working on his Partygate excuses
Well, my local MP has put his letter in....
Mine has said that he will discuss it with the chairman of his association first, and I know that my nearby mp has not done so yet as they cannot coalesce around a candidate
Alun is waiting for the Gray Report before deciding not to submit a letter.
Not so much failed to play, as waited for it to play out. Which requires the Met/Grey reports.
My local MP replied to my letter with this
"While acknowledging the seriousness of this matter, I do believe it is important that, in the meantime, the Government does not become paralysed and is still able to prioritise delivery, as well as being able to respond to events whenever they arise. For example, we face the largest military build-up in Europe in decades on the border of Ukraine. It is right that the focus of our Prime Minister, who visited Ukraine on 1 February, is on peace in Europe, rather than party politics at home."
The problem with that of course is that instead of concentrating on Ukraine BoZo was closeted with his lawyers working on his Partygate excuses
Well, my local MP has put his letter in....
Mine has said that he will discuss it with the chairman of his association first, and I know that my nearby mp has not done so yet as they cannot coalesce around a candidate
And thus they locked Boris in for a year, all to avoid locking him in for a year.
The PM lied repeatedly to parliament. But parliament can't remove him as the arbiter is the PM.
It only takes a vote of no confidence to remove him.
We're talking about two different things. Sanctions against ministers for breaking the ministerial code are imposed by the PM. Which is how we had Patel break the ministerial code and then the PM decide that she didn't (prompting the resignation of his own standards advisor). Sanctions against members for lying to parliament still go through the PM - a report is put to the house which is still controlled and whipped by the PM.
So the problem here is that when the PM breaks the ministerial code and when the PM lies to the house, there is no way the system can act. These are not directly related to Tory MPs chosing to write letters to the 1922 committee.
The PM only continues in post for as long as they retain support of the House. So the situation shouldn't be a problem, because the PM does not have the job security that comes with being a directly-elected President.
Unfortunately, it's the MPs in the House who have failed to play the part assigned to them.
Yes it is that. Ultimately any government only functions as such by holding the confidence of the house. But Once in place there have to be rules, laws, checks and balances. Otherwise we elect a government who could do literally anything with a supplicant house acquiescing.
You seem, implicitly, to be suggesting an independent ministerial code regulator, with the power to dismiss the PM - that is, to override the will of Parliament. But what if the individual appointed to that post is crooked?
Ultimately, our system is one where, "we elect a government who could do literally anything with a supplicant house acquiescing" and the ultimate check and balance on that is the voters at the next general election.
I think this could work well when MPs were elected primarily as individuals, with an individual mandate from their constituents, but I think it breaks down at the current time when the party label is so powerful, political divisions are exaggerated by social media and FPTP forces most voters to choose between two options, neither of which they like. I genuinely believe that STV could help to dig us out of this hole.
Yes it's interesting. Perhaps. But facts on the ground are sometimes different to the theory. You would have to ask @Dura for the latest take on anti-tank warfare.
I have little experience in land warfare beyond driving chalks of RM to their next scheduled bloodbath in a Lynx.
However, it is still a fact that you need armour and infantry to take and hold ground. Can you kill MBTs with UAS? Yes. But there are also plenty of ways to kill UAS.
TB2 splashed over Donetsk.
How much cheaper is an armed drone than a battle tank, and how many tanks did that drone take out before they got it?
Bonus point, for no dead or captured servicemen after the drones get shot down.
Not so much failed to play, as waited for it to play out. Which requires the Met/Grey reports.
My local MP replied to my letter with this
"While acknowledging the seriousness of this matter, I do believe it is important that, in the meantime, the Government does not become paralysed and is still able to prioritise delivery, as well as being able to respond to events whenever they arise. For example, we face the largest military build-up in Europe in decades on the border of Ukraine. It is right that the focus of our Prime Minister, who visited Ukraine on 1 February, is on peace in Europe, rather than party politics at home."
The problem with that of course is that instead of concentrating on Ukraine BoZo was closeted with his lawyers working on his Partygate excuses
Well, my local MP has put his letter in....
Mine has said that he will discuss it with the chairman of his association first, and I know that my nearby mp has not done so yet as they cannot coalesce around a candidate
Alun is waiting for the Gray Report before deciding not to submit a letter.
I think it is becoming extremely unlikely there are sufficient conservative mps for Boris to lose a vonc and in the end they are responsible for their own futures
- ”If we see a Conservative poll lead this month then it might keep Boris Johnson in office for the rest of the parliament.”
In that case, time for Smarkets or AN Other to put up a market on next Scottish Conservative leader, because Douglas Ross’s jaiket is on a shooglie peg.
Apart from his enmity with the Prime Minister, he’s doing a dire job of challenging the First Minister and her team:
Best prices - Next First Minister
Angus Robertson (SNP) 5/2 Kate Forbes (SNP) 8/1 John Swinney (SNP) 9/1 Humza Yousaf (SNP) 10/1 Joanna Cherry (SNP) 16/1 Anas Sarwar (SLab) 16/1 Keith Brown (SNP) 17/1 Douglas Ross (SCon) 18/1
What a joke it should be 18,000,000-1 and fanciful even at that
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
To a certain extent are tanks just targets for drones to fire at now?
I wonder whether they're a tethered cat in a modern military. Ireland recently published a military review, which proposed a huge increase in spending, and would involve adding all sorts of new capability, including combat aircraft, attack helicopters, etc - but they don't mention main battle tanks at all.
I'd have thought Russia would have plenty of drones of their own and also anti-drone capabilities. Azerbaijan won its recent short war with Armenia based on drone tech, and I can't see the Ruskies having worse tech than them
iirc Russia claims its new tanks can shoot drones.
Like others I struggle to see what Putin thinks he's getting out of all this. But a question not often discussed is what the military leaders think. There's one retired (pro-communist) general who has rather surprisingly been allowed to criticise the aggressive policy, but what do the current generation think? I wonder if "let's try out all our shiny new hardware" is beating "let's not do reckless stuff with our troops", especially since the backlash is likely to be not massive losses of troops but economic, which is not their department to worry about.
One of my British Army relatives admitted that, much though he preferred the idea of world peace, at a personal level he enjoyed actually getting into a fighting war - "you don't want to spend your whole life training and never find out if it worked".
Yes it's interesting. Perhaps. But facts on the ground are sometimes different to the theory. You would have to ask @Dura for the latest take on anti-tank warfare.
I have little experience in land warfare beyond driving chalks of RM to their next scheduled bloodbath in a Lynx.
However, it is still a fact that you need armour and infantry to take and hold ground. Can you kill MBTs with UAS? Yes. But there are also plenty of ways to kill UAS.
TB2 splashed over Donetsk.
How much cheaper is an armed drone than a battle tank, and how many tanks did that drone take out before they got it?
Bonus point, for no dead or captured servicemen after the drones get shot down.
Would have like to hear Jerry from Big Jet TV commentate that one down.
The PM lied repeatedly to parliament. But parliament can't remove him as the arbiter is the PM.
It only takes a vote of no confidence to remove him.
We're talking about two different things. Sanctions against ministers for breaking the ministerial code are imposed by the PM. Which is how we had Patel break the ministerial code and then the PM decide that she didn't (prompting the resignation of his own standards advisor). Sanctions against members for lying to parliament still go through the PM - a report is put to the house which is still controlled and whipped by the PM.
So the problem here is that when the PM breaks the ministerial code and when the PM lies to the house, there is no way the system can act. These are not directly related to Tory MPs chosing to write letters to the 1922 committee.
The PM only continues in post for as long as they retain support of the House. So the situation shouldn't be a problem, because the PM does not have the job security that comes with being a directly-elected President.
Unfortunately, it's the MPs in the House who have failed to play the part assigned to them.
Yes it is that. Ultimately any government only functions as such by holding the confidence of the house. But Once in place there have to be rules, laws, checks and balances. Otherwise we elect a government who could do literally anything with a supplicant house acquiescing.
That has, unfortunately, always been the case. We operate in what is, effectively an elective dictatorship for 5 years. Since all laws are made and unmade by Parliament any attempt to change that would run into the issue that a Parliament that was acquiescent to the extent you are talking about could prevent or introduce any necessary changes to maintain the elective dictatorship.
I am not saying it is a good thing, only that I don't see anyway around it without scraping the system of Parliamentary democracy.
Whilst its true that parliament is sovereign, it also has well established rules and procedures. When an MP breaks the rules things happen. When a minister breaks their rules other things happen. The difference - uniquely - in this case is that it is the PM breaking both, and the PM is the arbiter.
Remember the now blocked standards commissioner probe into bribegate (formerly wallpapergate). Number 10 confirmed that the Prime Minister would retain his role to decide whether the person being investigated (Boris Johnson) broke the rules or not.
Our system is not set up to cope with dealing with a crook in Downing Street. That is the problem.
- ”If we see a Conservative poll lead this month then it might keep Boris Johnson in office for the rest of the parliament.”
In that case, time for Smarkets or AN Other to put up a market on next Scottish Conservative leader, because Douglas Ross’s jaiket is on a shooglie peg.
Apart from his enmity with the Prime Minister, he’s doing a dire job of challenging the First Minister and her team:
Best prices - Next First Minister
Angus Robertson (SNP) 5/2 Kate Forbes (SNP) 8/1 John Swinney (SNP) 9/1 Humza Yousaf (SNP) 10/1 Joanna Cherry (SNP) 16/1 Anas Sarwar (SLab) 16/1 Keith Brown (SNP) 17/1 Douglas Ross (SCon) 18/1
What a joke it should be 18,000,000-1 and fanciful even at that
Well it has to tempt some people to put money on.
Not at 18-1 unless you are deranged.
Better a chance people are 18-1 deranged than 18,000,000-1 deranged.
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
To a certain extent are tanks just targets for drones to fire at now?
I wonder whether they're a tethered cat in a modern military. Ireland recently published a military review, which proposed a huge increase in spending, and would involve adding all sorts of new capability, including combat aircraft, attack helicopters, etc - but they don't mention main battle tanks at all.
I'd have thought Russia would have plenty of drones of their own and also anti-drone capabilities. Azerbaijan won its recent short war with Armenia based on drone tech, and I can't see the Ruskies having worse tech than them
iirc Russia claims its new tanks can shoot drones.
Like others I struggle to see what Putin thinks he's getting out of all this. But a question not often discussed is what the military leaders think. There's one retired (pro-communist) general who has rather surprisingly been allowed to criticise the aggressive policy, but what do the current generation think? I wonder if "let's try out all our shiny new hardware" is beating "let's not do reckless stuff with our troops", especially since the backlash is likely to be not massive losses of troops but economic, which is not their department to worry about.
One of my British Army relatives admitted that, much though he preferred the idea of world peace, at a personal level he enjoyed actually getting into a fighting war - "you don't want to spend your whole life training and never find out if it worked".
Which latter thinking was at the heart of the British catastrophic failures in Afghan and Iraq. Together with a use it or lose it attitude and failing to stand up to the politicians when it came to telling truth to power.
Perhaps Lt-Gen Palmer (if it is him you are talking about) should take a long hard look at himself in the mirror about such an opinion.
The PM lied repeatedly to parliament. But parliament can't remove him as the arbiter is the PM.
It only takes a vote of no confidence to remove him.
We're talking about two different things. Sanctions against ministers for breaking the ministerial code are imposed by the PM. Which is how we had Patel break the ministerial code and then the PM decide that she didn't (prompting the resignation of his own standards advisor). Sanctions against members for lying to parliament still go through the PM - a report is put to the house which is still controlled and whipped by the PM.
So the problem here is that when the PM breaks the ministerial code and when the PM lies to the house, there is no way the system can act. These are not directly related to Tory MPs chosing to write letters to the 1922 committee.
The PM only continues in post for as long as they retain support of the House. So the situation shouldn't be a problem, because the PM does not have the job security that comes with being a directly-elected President.
Unfortunately, it's the MPs in the House who have failed to play the part assigned to them.
Yes it is that. Ultimately any government only functions as such by holding the confidence of the house. But Once in place there have to be rules, laws, checks and balances. Otherwise we elect a government who could do literally anything with a supplicant house acquiescing.
You seem, implicitly, to be suggesting an independent ministerial code regulator, with the power to dismiss the PM - that is, to override the will of Parliament. But what if the individual appointed to that post is crooked?
Ultimately, our system is one where, "we elect a government who could do literally anything with a supplicant house acquiescing" and the ultimate check and balance on that is the voters at the next general election.
I think this could work well when MPs were elected primarily as individuals, with an individual mandate from their constituents, but I think it breaks down at the current time when the party label is so powerful, political divisions are exaggerated by social media and FPTP forces most voters to choose between two options, neither of which they like. I genuinely believe that STV could help to dig us out of this hole.
Language like "with the power to dismiss the PM" is the problem. This is not about having a faceless bureaucrat choosing the government. But it is about policing the rules that have been universally agreed by parliament.
The ministerial rulebook has a very clear process for investigating alleged breeches of the ministerial code. It is then convention that an errant minister would resign - or would be fired by the PM. The problem is when the PM decides said minister is more important that the rules.
So this is about the arbiter, which needs to be parliament not the Prime Minister. Yes I know and fully accept that some Tory MPs would want to defend Patel or Johnson at a motion to remove them from office for breeching the code. It would certainly be a different and much more democratic system than parliament voting through rules and then the PM choosing to declare that they were not broken despite the proof that they were.
This isn't even about Johnson. The system was broken by the Patel case.
Yes it's interesting. Perhaps. But facts on the ground are sometimes different to the theory. You would have to ask @Dura for the latest take on anti-tank warfare.
I have little experience in land warfare beyond driving chalks of RM to their next scheduled bloodbath in a Lynx.
However, it is still a fact that you need armour and infantry to take and hold ground. Can you kill MBTs with UAS? Yes. But there are also plenty of ways to kill UAS.
TB2 splashed over Donetsk.
How much cheaper is an armed drone than a battle tank, and how many tanks did that drone take out before they got it?
Bonus point, for no dead or captured servicemen after the drones get shot down.
Would have like to hear Jerry from Big Jet TV commentate that one down.
I still find it rather amusing that a planespotter got a quarter of a million viewers on Friday. In the right place at the right time as many of us had predicted, Heathrow was always going to be a fun place to be. He got lucky, that the storm was never so bad that everyone diverted, and there was just the right mix of missed approaches and landings to keep everyone entertained for about six hours!
Yes it's interesting. Perhaps. But facts on the ground are sometimes different to the theory. You would have to ask @Dura for the latest take on anti-tank warfare.
I have little experience in land warfare beyond driving chalks of RM to their next scheduled bloodbath in a Lynx.
However, it is still a fact that you need armour and infantry to take and hold ground. Can you kill MBTs with UAS? Yes. But there are also plenty of ways to kill UAS.
TB2 splashed over Donetsk.
How much cheaper is an armed drone than a battle tank, and how many tanks did that drone take out before they got it?
Bonus point, for no dead or captured servicemen after the drones get shot down.
Would have like to hear Jerry from Big Jet TV commentate that one down.
I still find it rather amusing that a planespotter got a quarter of a million viewers on Friday. In the right place at the right time as many of us had predicted, Heathrow was always going to be a fun place to be. He got lucky, that the storm was never so bad that everyone diverted, and there was just the right mix of missed approaches and landings to keep everyone entertained for about six hours!
Enough has been written about it all; suffice to say it was cracking entertainment. Some very funny twitters about it also.
In the process of being cut to 148 with the Challenger 3 upgrade. Although the tories have only ordered 48 sets of Trophy APS which gives an indication of the final destination...
To a certain extent are tanks just targets for drones to fire at now?
I wonder whether they're a tethered cat in a modern military. Ireland recently published a military review, which proposed a huge increase in spending, and would involve adding all sorts of new capability, including combat aircraft, attack helicopters, etc - but they don't mention main battle tanks at all.
I'd have thought Russia would have plenty of drones of their own and also anti-drone capabilities. Azerbaijan won its recent short war with Armenia based on drone tech, and I can't see the Ruskies having worse tech than them
iirc Russia claims its new tanks can shoot drones.
One of my British Army relatives admitted that, much though he preferred the idea of world peace, at a personal level he enjoyed actually getting into a fighting war - "you don't want to spend your whole life training and never find out if it worked".
I presume that's also why there are a small number of Republic of Ireland citizens in the British Army too, or used to be.
Tadeusz Giczan @TadeuszGiczan · 51m Russian troops stay in Belarus indefinitely. Belarus Defence Minister Khrenin just made an official statement: "Due to increased military activity near the borders and escalation in Donbas, Belarus and Russia decided to continue joint inspections of response forces".
Firstly he's damaged the Ukrainian economy and reminded them that their freedom from Moscow comes at a price - the threat of military action. He's also helped to prop up mini me Lukashenko who's been under pressure from protesters who believe that he rigged the 2020 election.
Not so much failed to play, as waited for it to play out. Which requires the Met/Grey reports.
My local MP replied to my letter with this
"While acknowledging the seriousness of this matter, I do believe it is important that, in the meantime, the Government does not become paralysed and is still able to prioritise delivery, as well as being able to respond to events whenever they arise. For example, we face the largest military build-up in Europe in decades on the border of Ukraine. It is right that the focus of our Prime Minister, who visited Ukraine on 1 February, is on peace in Europe, rather than party politics at home."
The problem with that of course is that instead of concentrating on Ukraine BoZo was closeted with his lawyers working on his Partygate excuses
Well, my local MP has put his letter in....
Mine has said that he will discuss it with the chairman of his association first, and I know that my nearby mp has not done so yet as they cannot coalesce around a candidate
Alun is waiting for the Gray Report before deciding not to submit a letter.
I think it is becoming extremely unlikely there are sufficient conservative mps for Boris to lose a vonc and in the end they are responsible for their own futures
BigG. as you know I am an anyone but Conservative voter, which I know is rather irrational. However, I would be comfortable for Johnson to be replaced by any one of Hunt, Sunak, Tugendhadt or Mordaunt. I have left out Truss as she is cut from the same cloth as Johnson.
I wouldn't vote for these people against a reasonably centrist Opposition as I am opposed to their key ideology. Nonetheless wouldn't it be reassuring to be navigated through this potentially lengthy crisis by someone with at least an element of gravitas.
Tadeusz Giczan @TadeuszGiczan · 51m Russian troops stay in Belarus indefinitely. Belarus Defence Minister Khrenin just made an official statement: "Due to increased military activity near the borders and escalation in Donbas, Belarus and Russia decided to continue joint inspections of response forces".
This stuff is almost comic. Due to the increased military activity at the borders, from Russian forces being there, Russian forces are needed at the borders.
Yes it's interesting. Perhaps. But facts on the ground are sometimes different to the theory. You would have to ask @Dura for the latest take on anti-tank warfare.
I have little experience in land warfare beyond driving chalks of RM to their next scheduled bloodbath in a Lynx.
However, it is still a fact that you need armour and infantry to take and hold ground. Can you kill MBTs with UAS? Yes. But there are also plenty of ways to kill UAS.
TB2 splashed over Donetsk.
How much cheaper is an armed drone than a battle tank, and how many tanks did that drone take out before they got it?
Bonus point, for no dead or captured servicemen after the drones get shot down.
UAS are not cheap! That is never the motivation for acquiring or using them.
Boris Johnson shouldn't have to resign if he receives a fixed penalty notice for breaching his coronavirus laws, James Cleverly tells @RidgeOnSunday: “I don’t think what the country needs at the moment is a vacuum at the centre of government.” https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1495320446702694400
I don’t think what the country needs at the moment is a moral vacuum at the centre of government, but here we are anyway.
Good piece today from Rawnsley. It isn't just our government that is a moral vacuum, but all our major institutions. The culture of an elite who can behave with impunity and cover up for each other is a characteristic of all our power structures.
What took him so long to realise? I've been saying this on here for years.
See here from autumn 2018 -
"Meanwhile, the Tories, lumbered with a dutiful leader doggedly pursuing an ill-thought through policy which its main proponents can now barely explain, let alone implement competently, pathetically latch onto the latest saviour politician for the post-May deluge......
Or Johnson with his messy hair, ill-fitting clothes, classical aphorisms, rather-too-pleased-with-itself wit and carefully crafted bumbling persona. That either of them should be viewed as serious contenders for the highest office suggests a failure to listen to what they say, to see that they mostly talk nonsense, sometimes dangerous, ill thought-out and harmful nonsense. It is a measure of how out of ideas and talent the Tories seem to be that amateurish eccentricity, incompetence in office and Boys Own enthusiasm are even thought of as serious contenders."
"Perhaps ...it is time to realise that even successful or vital sectors or professions can in reality be really rather more second-rate than we like to pretend. Perhaps we should stop deluding ourselves that our key institutions are as good as we sometimes rather vaingloriously claim. The police are not the only body of which this could be said, of course."
"What will it take for those in leadership positions to realise that being a leader is not about taking the money and the glory, not about using one position to lever yourself into other lucrative, high profile positions, not about walking away with a mealy-mouthed apology or self-exculpatory explanation but about taking responsibility for what happens when you are in charge?
For all the management books, courses, training, policies and procedures which infest corporate and public life these days, too many people in positions of responsibility behave as if they do not understand this fundamental fact. Too many behave like small children coming up with implausible stories for why their behaviour should be excused. Or think that somehow it has nothing to do with them. Too many don’t care because they know they will be indulged and get their sweeties no matter what. We wonder why the performance of so many of our institutions and services and companies is really rather mediocre. Is this any surprise when the tone from the top is, too often, “nothing to do with me” and “let me get out while the going’s good”?"
Firstly he's damaged the Ukrainian economy and reminded them that their freedom from Moscow comes at a price - the threat of military action. He's also helped to prop up mini me Lukashenko who's been under pressure from protesters who believe that he rigged the 2020 election.
To be fair, they are also likely mad Lukashenko probably rigged the 2015, 2010, 2006 and 2001 elections too.
Comments
So a blanket destruction from the air would probably do it but do we have the ability (or of course inclination) to do that? In Ukraine, say?
But the idea that Boris is riffing on his own without constant communication with the White House is ridiculous.
We’ve consistently seen Boris play the emotional / principal / freedom line while Biden follows up with intelligence-led bald statements of fact.
That way round is probably more effective than vice versa…
So the problem here is that when the PM breaks the ministerial code and when the PM lies to the house, there is no way the system can act. These are not directly related to Tory MPs chosing to write letters to the 1922 committee.
Not wanting the vote doesn't rule out not wanting the PM to continue, if forced to decide.
The problem with that is that there is NEVER a good time to change leadership. You can always find something going on to trot out that line. Whether it be war in Ukraine or simply Post Office trials, you can always invent something.
On that basis, we shouldn't have general elections, shouldn't have democracy.
It's a cop out to mean either:
"I don't believe in democracy" or
"I can't think of any other good reason why the current incumbant should stay, so I'll trot out the tired old line about change of leadership."
I hope for Cleverly's sake its the latter rather than the former.
Azerbaijan won its recent short war with Armenia based on drone tech, and I can't see the Ruskies having worse tech than them
Everyone already knows that he didn't take a blind bit of notice of his own regulations - indeed there is enough circumstantial evidence from his character and past history to come to a reasonable conclusion without any facts about what happened during lockdown.
The only question is whether enough people still care about it, when he runs out of things to hide behind.
https://aviationsourcenews.com/airline/breaking-lufthansa-suspends-all-services-to-ukraine/
The issues with the current PM are mostly personal rather than policy, and a successful vote of confidence emboldens him. The policy stuff (green crap, levelling up) is actually much more likely to get him, which is why he needs to sort out the top team around him.
Time for a super quick leadership change. Sunak or Hunt.
At this point, I would like remind you that I have already expressed heartfelt regrets for the perception that there are those who feel offended by what has happened and I hope they can finally move on.
The problems are in order
1. Lying
2. This was not just one of several thousand laws but the ones we were told on a daily basis were vital to the health of the nation.
3. Considering themselves above the law
Each of those is more important than who introduced the law.
If a war starts in Ukraine and we impose sanctions surely we don’t want British planes etc sitting in Russia where they can be seized in retaliation?
It seems to me possible that the Ukrainians have enough drone and man-portable anti-armour firepower that the imminent conflict would prove to be a bookend to the age of the tank in warfare.
But I did just listen to the BBC radio programme on drones, so maybe I'm overreacting.
Even if Johnson survives any possible VONC- how will he get his agenda through the Commons with a fractious party increasingly used to rebelling across a range of issues? https://twitter.com/instituteforgov/status/1495322333661122566
The thread header is remarkable in itself but I do not see a conservative lead in the next few weeks
On Boris it seems he has taken the part of the leader the EU are obviously missing and has become very popular in the Baltic states and elsewhere which is remarkable
I hope that this may help to warm relationships with the EU going forward
I think he may well survive but how that shapes politics between now and GE 24 is very much up in the air but the responsibility is directly at the door of his mps
To be fair, we're coping with a moral vacuum at the heart of Government now.
As to replacing Prime Ministers, we often do it at times of crisis - 1916, 1940 and 1990 come readily to mind. In 1940, German tanks were sweeping towards the Channel and we decided to change Prime Minister so hiding behind the "it's not a time for change" argument is spurious nonsense to be charitable.
Then you remember it's coming from a James Cleverly or an Oliver Dowden and the irony slaps you in the face like a wet fish.
Given the real lack of MBTs in Europe, there’s arguably a role for them helping to plug the gap. There needs to be something between special forces and going nuclear to deter Putin, as the Ukraine situation makes very clear.
The upgrade will be a lot more survivable against AT weapons, and the lightweight weapons carried by drones, than the old tanks.
Personally the thought of Johnson running a war situation is proper scary. Just the thought of him getting to grips with detail of a map of Donetsk is scary enough. Get Sunak or Hunt in now. But it wont happen.
Unfortunately, it's the MPs in the House who have failed to play the part assigned to them.
Maybe the Russians are vulnerable to drones?
Versus every one knows he lied.
Well, he did lie but he didn't break the law.
Well, he did break the law but he didn't lie about it.
Well, he did lie about it, but it doesn't matter...
I'm still struggling with the notion Putin intends to go through with this - on any kind of risk/reward balance, I don't see the benefits.
Johnson's playing the role Biden and others are asking him to play and to his credit he's doing it well. The "we know what you're going to do" card plays strongly in the court of global opinion and, like it or not, Putin will have to deal with the consequences as will we.
Are we actually going to impose the kind of sanctions which will hurt us as well as Russia? That's the thing about sanctions - to be effective, the pain has to work both ways. I'd like us to forcibly sequester the assets of certain Russian nationals in the UK - will we do it? Can we kick the methadone of money?
As events in the East of our Continent become more worrysome, British families will huddle around the fire and listen to the PM's proclamations on the wireless as to how he proposes to ensure the safety of his subjects... I mean citizens.
"While acknowledging the seriousness of this matter, I do believe it is important that, in the meantime, the Government does not become paralysed and is still able to prioritise delivery, as well as being able to respond to events whenever they arise. For example, we face the largest military build-up in Europe in decades on the border of Ukraine. It is right that the focus of our Prime Minister, who visited Ukraine on 1 February, is on peace in Europe, rather than party politics at home."
The problem with that of course is that instead of concentrating on Ukraine BoZo was closeted with his lawyers working on his Partygate excuses
The security services ought to be on the ball when it comes to party donors and monitoring wealthy foreign donors carefully. So take Russian/whatever cash if you want. But be aware it might come back to bite you.
At the moment it is organising ifrom the Atlantic Ocean and into Galway, but the organisation increases by the hour:
Limerick to Calf of Man by 11
Kerry, Dublin, Lancaster at 12
Cork, Waterford, Preston, Ripon at 1
Menai, Liverpool, Burnley, Skipton, Scarborough at 2
Pembroke, Aberystwyth, Chester, Macclesfield. Barnsley, Selby, Bridlington at 3
Southampton. Heathrow, Luton, Cambridge, Norwich at 6
Along Northern France to Dutch coast at 9
However, it is still a fact that you need armour and infantry to take and hold ground. Can you kill MBTs with UAS? Yes. But there are also plenty of ways to kill UAS.
TB2 splashed over Donetsk.
I do not think any of us know how this develops but Putin is the wrongdoer here and he has to be confronted for the sake of the security of the whole of Europe and beyond
Ukraine > integrity and Economy > integrity should bring back another couple of % each in the next few weeks, so a Tory lead is good value.
Around a score of Turkish drones is not going to make any significant difference to the outcome.
Agree on political donations though, donors of more than a few thousand should pass a fit and proper test, and clearly not be acting on behalf of a foreign government.
Most of the Russian tank fleet doesn’t.
I am not saying it is a good thing, only that I don't see anyway around it without scraping the system of Parliamentary democracy.
Drones might well be a big problem for Russia; on the other hand the Azerbaijan / Armenia conflict gave them experience of this warfare, and there has been time to develop counter strategies.
The side that tries to go most 'conventional' in this conflict will end up losing. If you just send thousands of tanks in with infantry, you may well end up with thousands of dead tanks. New tech like drones might be very, very good force multipliers.
Also remember that Ukraine has a rather large defence industry of its own, e.g. Malyshev and Lviv, with experience of manufacturing and renovating modernish tanks such as the T-84. Whilst they could not hope to match Soviet production, they have the equipment and technical know-how to produce some 'interesting' weapons designs, if they wanted.
Ultimately, our system is one where, "we elect a government who could do literally anything with a supplicant house acquiescing" and the ultimate check and balance on that is the voters at the next general election.
I think this could work well when MPs were elected primarily as individuals, with an individual mandate from their constituents, but I think it breaks down at the current time when the party label is so powerful, political divisions are exaggerated by social media and FPTP forces most voters to choose between two options, neither of which they like. I genuinely believe that STV could help to dig us out of this hole.
Bonus point, for no dead or captured servicemen after the drones get shot down.
One of my British Army relatives admitted that, much though he preferred the idea of world peace, at a personal level he enjoyed actually getting into a fighting war - "you don't want to spend your whole life training and never find out if it worked".
Remember the now blocked standards commissioner probe into bribegate (formerly wallpapergate). Number 10 confirmed that the Prime Minister would retain his role to decide whether the person being investigated (Boris Johnson) broke the rules or not.
Our system is not set up to cope with dealing with a crook in Downing Street. That is the problem.
Perhaps Lt-Gen Palmer (if it is him you are talking about) should take a long hard look at himself in the mirror about such an opinion.
The ministerial rulebook has a very clear process for investigating alleged breeches of the ministerial code. It is then convention that an errant minister would resign - or would be fired by the PM. The problem is when the PM decides said minister is more important that the rules.
So this is about the arbiter, which needs to be parliament not the Prime Minister. Yes I know and fully accept that some Tory MPs would want to defend Patel or Johnson at a motion to remove them from office for breeching the code. It would certainly be a different and much more democratic system than parliament voting through rules and then the PM choosing to declare that they were not broken despite the proof that they were.
This isn't even about Johnson. The system was broken by the Patel case.
@TadeuszGiczan
·
51m
Russian troops stay in Belarus indefinitely. Belarus Defence Minister Khrenin just made an official statement: "Due to increased military activity near the borders and escalation in Donbas, Belarus and Russia decided to continue joint inspections of response forces".
https://twitter.com/TadeuszGiczan/status/1495340843183616004
Firstly he's damaged the Ukrainian economy and reminded them that their freedom from Moscow comes at a price - the threat of military action. He's also helped to prop up mini me Lukashenko who's been under pressure from protesters who believe that he rigged the 2020 election.
I wouldn't vote for these people against a reasonably centrist Opposition as I am opposed to their key ideology. Nonetheless wouldn't it be reassuring to be navigated through this potentially lengthy crisis by someone with at least an element of gravitas.
The moment for PM Benny Hill has passed.
TB2: $5m
T-90 Armata MBT: $4m-ish
Intelligence gathering on the latest war....
What took him so long to realise? I've been saying this on here for years.
See here from autumn 2018 -
"Meanwhile, the Tories, lumbered with a dutiful leader doggedly pursuing an ill-thought through policy which its main proponents can now barely explain, let alone implement competently, pathetically latch onto the latest saviour politician for the post-May deluge......
Or Johnson with his messy hair, ill-fitting clothes, classical aphorisms, rather-too-pleased-with-itself wit and carefully crafted bumbling persona. That either of them should be viewed as serious contenders for the highest office suggests a failure to listen to what they say, to see that they mostly talk nonsense, sometimes dangerous, ill thought-out and harmful nonsense. It is a measure of how out of ideas and talent the Tories seem to be that amateurish eccentricity, incompetence in office and Boys Own enthusiasm are even thought of as serious contenders."
(https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/09/03/the-dangers-of-polite-demagogues/)
Or here from January 2020 -
"Perhaps ...it is time to realise that even successful or vital sectors or professions can in reality be really rather more second-rate than we like to pretend. Perhaps we should stop deluding ourselves that our key institutions are as good as we sometimes rather vaingloriously claim. The police are not the only body of which this could be said, of course."
(https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/01/17/a-toxic-culture/)
Or from June 2020
"What will it take for those in leadership positions to realise that being a leader is not about taking the money and the glory, not about using one position to lever yourself into other lucrative, high profile positions, not about walking away with a mealy-mouthed apology or self-exculpatory explanation but about taking responsibility for what happens when you are in charge?
For all the management books, courses, training, policies and procedures which infest corporate and public life these days, too many people in positions of responsibility behave as if they do not understand this fundamental fact. Too many behave like small children coming up with implausible stories for why their behaviour should be excused. Or think that somehow it has nothing to do with them. Too many don’t care because they know they will be indulged and get their sweeties no matter what. We wonder why the performance of so many of our institutions and services and companies is really rather mediocre. Is this any surprise when the tone from the top is, too often, “nothing to do with me” and “let me get out while the going’s good”?"
(https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/06/16/rewards-for-failure/)