Wikipedia's list of states recognised by at least one UN Member state is Russia heavy now.
Republic of China Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic Northern Cyprus South Ossetia Abkhazia Kosovo Donetsk Luhansk
Transnistra and Artsakh aren't recognised by any UN Member state, but recognise each other so that is something, but poor old Somaliland still gets no recognition even from them. What a weird situation for over £5 million people to be in. Way more than any of the others bar Taiwan, who at least get some attention.
It's disgraceful how Somaliland has been treated for decades now for wanting to be clear of the shitehole that is Somalia. How many of us can blame them? As their former colonial power we have a particular responsibility to drop this and recognise them asap.
I would honestly love to know for what reason we haven't. It can't be because of fear about upsetting those ruling Somalia, they essentially had no internationally recognised government for ages, so is there some complex international relations thing where if we didn't acknowledge the official Somalia's total claim we'd face a whole bunch of aggravation?
I don't know how genuinely democratic the place is, but they at the least seem to have changed presidents several times and had different parties running things, so it clearly isn't at the bottom of the table when it comes to democracy.
Remarkable recording of Hitler’s conversational voice on BBC’s Rise of the Nazis (which is somewhat florid but interesting nevertheless) just now. Deeper than I would have expected.
I am drunk, slightly low (don't worry), and fed up to the sick teeth with people who defend bullies who ruin lives.
Bullies are bad.
I’m feeling same as you after that today Josias. Russia has had a bad day in its history. No wonder Putin keeps distance avoids people, tricked into a room with two doctors and they will have a straight jacket on him in no time. He’s a nut.
His address to the nation wouldn’t pass gcse history - as I mentioned months ago I played a Ukrainian Nationalist/saucy serving wench in the house of pettly yura in a play based on Bulgakov’s White Guard, Ukraine a free sovereign country before Lenin even controlled Russia - yet Putin used his fantasy’s as a base to threaten every single former soviet country with “non of them should have been allowed to leave in first place.”
I’m torn between on one hand not wanting war - certainly not one where Ukraine people likely to lose without proper assistance - on the other hand give war a chance to slap Putin across his face. Though I’d rather he didn’t get his aloof face slapped if such suffering of Ukrainians can still be avoided.
Flat and dejected now, like you, as I said all week it’s not happening because he doesn’t have a clear achievable military objective he can quickly succeed without getting bogged down. But now he clearly has, flooding the disputed Ukraine bits with “troops to keep the peace”. Keep yet another piece in salami action more like ☹️
To make it clear: I don't want war.
But 24 years and 1 week ago, a friend of mine died because of a bully (*). On Saturday I took my son to the grave, and wondered how I could explain how it still deeply effect me and my view of the world.
Which is why I am now pissed.
I was never particularly bullied at school, but I have a visceral hatred of the scum who find the need to bully others who are, or choose to be, 'different'. Bullies are bad. People who excuse bullies are as bad as the bullies.
(*) At least, to be fair, I blame the bully. The situation was complex, but the bully did not help.
Remarkable recording of Hitler’s conversational voice on BBC’s Rise of the Nazis (which is somewhat florid but interesting nevertheless) just now. Deeper than I would have expected.
More than that as well - Georgia was invaded on 08/08/08, today is 22/2/22, and when did Yanukovych resign? 22nd of February 2014. Putin likes his numerology. Let's hope he doesn't push for 33 days in March in '33.
Pigeon - Russian speaking does not equal Russian. Just ask the English speaking Irish. Every single region of Ukraine voted to secede from the Soviet Union. It may be true that Russian clients have stood and won Ukrainian Presidential elections - but not recently. The annexation of Crimea has helped foster a true sense of Ukrainian nationhood.
I thought that was the really significant story of the 2019 election. More so than a comedian becoming president. The pro-Moscow figures were nowhere to be seen.
OTOH Putin is an angry, expansionist autocrat with a prepared list of justifications and grievances and a very large army. If he decides he wants to conquer half of Ukraine and install a fascist puppet in the other then he possesses the means to do it.
Wikipedia's list of states recognised by at least one UN Member state is Russia heavy now.
Republic of China Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic Northern Cyprus South Ossetia Abkhazia Kosovo Donetsk Luhansk
Transnistra and Artsakh aren't recognised by any UN Member state, but recognise each other so that is something, but poor old Somaliland still gets no recognition even from them. What a weird situation for over £5 million people to be in. Way more than any of the others bar Taiwan, who at least get some attention.
It's disgraceful how Somaliland has been treated for decades now for wanting to be clear of the shitehole that is Somalia. How many of us can blame them? As their former colonial power we have a particular responsibility to drop this and recognise them asap.
Somaliland used to be a well run country, at least considering the neighbourhood. A friend of mine worked there for 4 years. Dirt poor but fairly safe, unlike Puntland or Somalia.
Wikipedia's list of states recognised by at least one UN Member state is Russia heavy now.
Republic of China Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic Northern Cyprus South Ossetia Abkhazia Kosovo Donetsk Luhansk
Transnistra and Artsakh aren't recognised by any UN Member state, but recognise each other so that is something, but poor old Somaliland still gets no recognition even from them. What a weird situation for over £5 million people to be in. Way more than any of the others bar Taiwan, who at least get some attention.
It's disgraceful how Somaliland has been treated for decades now for wanting to be clear of the shitehole that is Somalia. How many of us can blame them? As their former colonial power we have a particular responsibility to drop this and recognise them asap.
I would honestly love to know for what reason we haven't. It can't be because of fear about upsetting those ruling Somalia, they essentially had no internationally recognised government for ages, so is there some complex international relations thing where if we didn't acknowledge the official Somalia's total claim we'd face a whole bunch of aggravation?
I don't know how genuinely democratic the place is, but they at the least seem to have changed presidents several times and had different parties running things, so it clearly isn't at the bottom of the table when it comes to democracy.
It gets impressively more complex with regards to the Kurds, who are a people whose land is split between four or five countries. They are a distinct people who don't have a country, and yet have distinct regional voices within their diaspora.
IMV the Kurds deserve a country of their own, but there's now bugger-all chance of them getting one, and if they did there might be a civil war about which part gets power. The Iraqi Kurds? The Turkish Kurds? The Iranian Kurds?
Pigeon - Russian speaking does not equal Russian. Just ask the English speaking Irish. Every single region of Ukraine voted to secede from the Soviet Union. It may be true that Russian clients have stood and won Ukrainian Presidential elections - but not recently. The annexation of Crimea has helped foster a true sense of Ukrainian nationhood.
I thought that was the really significant story of the 2019 election. More so than a comedian becoming president. The pro-Moscow figures were nowhere to be seen.
IIRC from a BBC report the other day Zelensky promised to engage in dialogue with Putin to end the conflict. That was probably optimistic.
It had a clip of him during his campaign talking about practicing the Ukranian language, so I presume he is a native Russian speaker.
Does this mean that Putin is likely to go for the option of annexing the two breakaway areas, as some predicted as his 'face saving' strategy, whilst avoiding a full on invasion of Ukraine?
Lord alone knows. He's giving his justification right now which, broadly, amounts to "Ukraine was invented by the Bolsheviks and they nicked loads of bits of Russia to make it." He's granting himself, surprise surprise, an excuse to chew off any part of Ukraine with Russians living in it. That could easily end up being half or two-thirds of the country.
This is exactly what I said would happen. If there is war, more than Donetsk and Luhansk will be chewed off.
Ukraine has a problem with a noisy, large Russian minority and -- truth to tell -- little legitimate claim to Crimea.
Ukraine refused to take any steps to compromise or to fix the problems.
So a worse solution is likely to be imposed.
A bit like the Palestinians. By arguing for the whole of pre-1947 Palestine & refusing to compromise, they have had ended up with some tiny bits.
No realistic blame can be put on Ukraine for this. They are faced by a larger, more powerful bully whatever they did, the bully would take as an excuse to escalate. Give Crimea? Sure, we'll take more. Don't defend Donbass? Thanks, how's about the rest? Fight to defend Donbass? Well, aren't you aggressive! We'll have to defend ourselves.
Russia is the aggressive bully here. It has very few parallels workable with the much more complex situation in Palestine.
Although I expect STW will still try to make the parallels ...
Well exactly. What sort of compromise could have been offered here? By agreement, choice or inability they haven't sought to end the rebellion in the east.
Let's say there was an armed rebellion in a part of Russia, would Putin argue someone outside Russia should tell him to compromise over it, or they'd attack?
Many borders don't make massive sense, but nations have until now mostly gotten over the idea of invading to correct that.
And in any case the whole 'Ukraine is not a real country' stuff rather gives the game away that there was anything Kyiv could have done to avoid this.
But we should avoid 'poking' Russia, lest we cause them to do something bad. If the bully steals a boy's lunch money after we warned them not to, it's obviously our fault.
(C) Nick Palmer.
A slightly stupid analogy unless you think having a sandwich stolen is worth risking a nuclear war.
So you are saying we should just surrender to the bully who has the biggest firepower and the will to use it?
It explains why you've said that women who don't want to get abused by the 'talent' in the entertainment industry should just become hairdressers. You defend big, hard men who his powers to abuse others.
People like you really worry me because you have no conception of the reality of nuclear weapons. If you really think Russia is likely to use nuclear weapons then of course you surrender. The alternative is unimaginably worse. Why do you think the West didn't liberate West Germany or intervene when the Soviets crushed Hungary? Because to do so would be the end of humanity. Now I don't think Putin is going to nuke the west and the response so far has been right and proper. However, there are very good reasons why no other country will send troops to Ukraine if the Russians invade. It's simply not worth the end of the world.
I very much have a conception of nuclear weapons. I did not bring nuclear weapons into the conversation.
But I'd also add chemical and biological weapons into the mix: one of which Putin has used in the past - in our country.
Do you feel the same way? Or is death by chemical weapon all flowers and unicorns?
But my point remains: at what point do you stand up to a bully and say: "no more?"
And BTW, I've not called for troops to Ukraine.
Does anyone remember an old Amiga game called Balance of Power? You were presented with a series of scenarios and you had to decide to confront the USSR or let the situation go. If you kept pushing and Russia didn't back down then eventually it lead to nuclear war and it was game over. If you objected to Russia stationing more troops in Hungary then you lost quickly. If you challenged them sending millitary advisers to India you were likely to win.
This in simple form is how diplomacy still works. We're pushing the object button for as long as we can in Ukraine but there will be a time when we have to stop.
Remarkable recording of Hitler’s conversational voice on BBC’s Rise of the Nazis (which is somewhat florid but interesting nevertheless) just now. Deeper than I would have expected.
He didn't speak entirely in screeching monologues or Downfall rants? Our school system really is for shit.
Remarkable recording of Hitler’s conversational voice on BBC’s Rise of the Nazis (which is somewhat florid but interesting nevertheless) just now. Deeper than I would have expected.
Hisler, as Nostradamus imagined him to be. Supposedly the old French mystic's prediction for the spring of this year was that 'the fish in the black sea will burn."
Let's hope the old pessimist was wrong, but it's not looking good, I'm afraid.
Does this mean that Putin is likely to go for the option of annexing the two breakaway areas, as some predicted as his 'face saving' strategy, whilst avoiding a full on invasion of Ukraine?
Lord alone knows. He's giving his justification right now which, broadly, amounts to "Ukraine was invented by the Bolsheviks and they nicked loads of bits of Russia to make it." He's granting himself, surprise surprise, an excuse to chew off any part of Ukraine with Russians living in it. That could easily end up being half or two-thirds of the country.
This is exactly what I said would happen. If there is war, more than Donetsk and Luhansk will be chewed off.
Ukraine has a problem with a noisy, large Russian minority and -- truth to tell -- little legitimate claim to Crimea.
Ukraine refused to take any steps to compromise or to fix the problems.
So a worse solution is likely to be imposed.
A bit like the Palestinians. By arguing for the whole of pre-1947 Palestine & refusing to compromise, they have had ended up with some tiny bits.
No realistic blame can be put on Ukraine for this. They are faced by a larger, more powerful bully whatever they did, the bully would take as an excuse to escalate. Give Crimea? Sure, we'll take more. Don't defend Donbass? Thanks, how's about the rest? Fight to defend Donbass? Well, aren't you aggressive! We'll have to defend ourselves.
Russia is the aggressive bully here. It has very few parallels workable with the much more complex situation in Palestine.
Although I expect STW will still try to make the parallels ...
Well exactly. What sort of compromise could have been offered here? By agreement, choice or inability they haven't sought to end the rebellion in the east.
Let's say there was an armed rebellion in a part of Russia, would Putin argue someone outside Russia should tell him to compromise over it, or they'd attack?
Many borders don't make massive sense, but nations have until now mostly gotten over the idea of invading to correct that.
And in any case the whole 'Ukraine is not a real country' stuff rather gives the game away that there was anything Kyiv could have done to avoid this.
But we should avoid 'poking' Russia, lest we cause them to do something bad. If the bully steals a boy's lunch money after we warned them not to, it's obviously our fault.
(C) Nick Palmer.
A slightly stupid analogy unless you think having a sandwich stolen is worth risking a nuclear war.
So you are saying we should just surrender to the bully who has the biggest firepower and the will to use it?
It explains why you've said that women who don't want to get abused by the 'talent' in the entertainment industry should just become hairdressers. You defend big, hard men who his powers to abuse others.
People like you really worry me because you have no conception of the reality of nuclear weapons. If you really think Russia is likely to use nuclear weapons then of course you surrender. The alternative is unimaginably worse. Why do you think the West didn't liberate West Germany or intervene when the Soviets crushed Hungary? Because to do so would be the end of humanity. Now I don't think Putin is going to nuke the west and the response so far has been right and proper. However, there are very good reasons why no other country will send troops to Ukraine if the Russians invade. It's simply not worth the end of the world.
I very much have a conception of nuclear weapons. I did not bring nuclear weapons into the conversation.
But I'd also add chemical and biological weapons into the mix: one of which Putin has used in the past - in our country.
Do you feel the same way? Or is death by chemical weapon all flowers and unicorns?
But my point remains: at what point do you stand up to a bully and say: "no more?"
And BTW, I've not called for troops to Ukraine.
Does anyone remember an old Amiga game called Balance of Power? You were presented with a series of scenarios and you had to decide to confront the USSR or let the situation go. If you kept pushing and Russia didn't back down then eventually it lead to nuclear war and it was game over. If you objected to Russia stationing more troops in Hungary then you lost quickly. If you challenged them sending millitary advisers to India you were likely to win.
This in simple form is how diplomacy still works. We're pushing the object button for as long as we can in Ukraine but there will be a time when we have to stop.
Hmmm. I guess you're in the Nick Palmer grouping of saying this is in any way 'our' fault?
It's quite simple: you have values. What are those values, and when you see those values being trampled on, when do you shout: "No!".
What are your values?
I don't think Nick has said that at all, unless I missed something over the last weeks.
Indeed, I think there is a fake division being created here. It seems universal on PB that: Putin is being unreasonable and aggressive, that people are supportive of Ukranian sovereignty and aspirations, but do not want to deploy British troops to defend Ukraine, though willing to do so for NATO countries.
The only person able to stop war is Putin himself, and he doesn't seem to want to. All we can do is react to whatever happens, probably by non military means. We have no capability to do much different.
I think you missed Nick's comment. I swore in response, calling his view 'bullshit'.
Which I stand by.
But of course we do have a capability: why don't you and your fellow protestors go and glue yourself to a tank rather than a tube train? Weren't you trained for that?
(And the sad thing is that if Russia does invade, people will be doing the equivalent.)
Do the Russian people expect their troops to be welcomed as liberators? There has to be a moment Putin overplays his hand. I don't think he expected a united Western response. This may be his last roll of the dice.
Pigeon - Russian speaking does not equal Russian. Just ask the English speaking Irish. Every single region of Ukraine voted to secede from the Soviet Union. It may be true that Russian clients have stood and won Ukrainian Presidential elections - but not recently. The annexation of Crimea has helped foster a true sense of Ukrainian nationhood.
I thought that was the really significant story of the 2019 election. More so than a comedian becoming president. The pro-Moscow figures were nowhere to be seen.
OTOH Putin is an angry, expansionist autocrat with a prepared list of justifications and grievances and a very large army. If he decides he wants to conquer half of Ukraine and install a fascist puppet in the other then he possesses the means to do it.
Not convinced. Russian troops would have to stay there long term for 'nation building'. The internal resistance would be getting support from the west. And how would he sell it to his own people? Those who know Russia reckon they'll be pretty sensitive to body bags coming home.
Does this mean that Putin is likely to go for the option of annexing the two breakaway areas, as some predicted as his 'face saving' strategy, whilst avoiding a full on invasion of Ukraine?
Lord alone knows. He's giving his justification right now which, broadly, amounts to "Ukraine was invented by the Bolsheviks and they nicked loads of bits of Russia to make it." He's granting himself, surprise surprise, an excuse to chew off any part of Ukraine with Russians living in it. That could easily end up being half or two-thirds of the country.
This is exactly what I said would happen. If there is war, more than Donetsk and Luhansk will be chewed off.
Ukraine has a problem with a noisy, large Russian minority and -- truth to tell -- little legitimate claim to Crimea.
Ukraine refused to take any steps to compromise or to fix the problems.
So a worse solution is likely to be imposed.
A bit like the Palestinians. By arguing for the whole of pre-1947 Palestine & refusing to compromise, they have had ended up with some tiny bits.
No realistic blame can be put on Ukraine for this. They are faced by a larger, more powerful bully whatever they did, the bully would take as an excuse to escalate. Give Crimea? Sure, we'll take more. Don't defend Donbass? Thanks, how's about the rest? Fight to defend Donbass? Well, aren't you aggressive! We'll have to defend ourselves.
Russia is the aggressive bully here. It has very few parallels workable with the much more complex situation in Palestine.
Although I expect STW will still try to make the parallels ...
Well exactly. What sort of compromise could have been offered here? By agreement, choice or inability they haven't sought to end the rebellion in the east.
Let's say there was an armed rebellion in a part of Russia, would Putin argue someone outside Russia should tell him to compromise over it, or they'd attack?
Many borders don't make massive sense, but nations have until now mostly gotten over the idea of invading to correct that.
And in any case the whole 'Ukraine is not a real country' stuff rather gives the game away that there was anything Kyiv could have done to avoid this.
But we should avoid 'poking' Russia, lest we cause them to do something bad. If the bully steals a boy's lunch money after we warned them not to, it's obviously our fault.
(C) Nick Palmer.
A slightly stupid analogy unless you think having a sandwich stolen is worth risking a nuclear war.
So you are saying we should just surrender to the bully who has the biggest firepower and the will to use it?
It explains why you've said that women who don't want to get abused by the 'talent' in the entertainment industry should just become hairdressers. You defend big, hard men who his powers to abuse others.
People like you really worry me because you have no conception of the reality of nuclear weapons. If you really think Russia is likely to use nuclear weapons then of course you surrender. The alternative is unimaginably worse. Why do you think the West didn't liberate West Germany or intervene when the Soviets crushed Hungary? Because to do so would be the end of humanity. Now I don't think Putin is going to nuke the west and the response so far has been right and proper. However, there are very good reasons why no other country will send troops to Ukraine if the Russians invade. It's simply not worth the end of the world.
I very much have a conception of nuclear weapons. I did not bring nuclear weapons into the conversation.
But I'd also add chemical and biological weapons into the mix: one of which Putin has used in the past - in our country.
Do you feel the same way? Or is death by chemical weapon all flowers and unicorns?
But my point remains: at what point do you stand up to a bully and say: "no more?"
And BTW, I've not called for troops to Ukraine.
Does anyone remember an old Amiga game called Balance of Power? You were presented with a series of scenarios and you had to decide to confront the USSR or let the situation go. If you kept pushing and Russia didn't back down then eventually it lead to nuclear war and it was game over. If you objected to Russia stationing more troops in Hungary then you lost quickly. If you challenged them sending millitary advisers to India you were likely to win.
This in simple form is how diplomacy still works. We're pushing the object button for as long as we can in Ukraine but there will be a time when we have to stop.
Hmmm. I guess you're in the Nick Palmer grouping of saying this is in any way 'our' fault?
It's quite simple: you have values. What are those values, and when you see those values being trampled on, when do you shout: "No!".
What are your values?
Of course I don't think this is 'our fault'. Russia is a menace that needs to be curtailed but it doesn't do any good trying to pretend things that you have no intention of doing. No one is really prepared to let Ukraine join NATO so who does it benefit to pretend we might? Diplomacy works when both sides know what the consequences of their actions are. The western alliance has mostly got this right so far. I just find some of the belligerence on here frightening.
And I find the surrender to the might of Russia on here frightening. But sadly predictable from experience.
Remarkable recording of Hitler’s conversational voice on BBC’s Rise of the Nazis (which is somewhat florid but interesting nevertheless) just now. Deeper than I would have expected.
Agreed. That was quite amazing
My partner who speaks German said he didn’t have an Austrian accent which is apparently very distinctive and where she learned her German. I wonder if he adopted whatever the German version of RP is to help his career?
Pigeon - Russian speaking does not equal Russian. Just ask the English speaking Irish. Every single region of Ukraine voted to secede from the Soviet Union. It may be true that Russian clients have stood and won Ukrainian Presidential elections - but not recently. The annexation of Crimea has helped foster a true sense of Ukrainian nationhood.
I thought that was the really significant story of the 2019 election. More so than a comedian becoming president. The pro-Moscow figures were nowhere to be seen.
OTOH Putin is an angry, expansionist autocrat with a prepared list of justifications and grievances and a very large army. If he decides he wants to conquer half of Ukraine and install a fascist puppet in the other then he possesses the means to do it.
Not convinced. Russian troops would have to stay there long term for 'nation building'. The internal resistance would be getting support from the west. And how would he sell it to his own people? Those who know Russia reckon they'll be pretty sensitive to body bags coming home.
Yes. And remember. He's just occupied Belarus too. Ukraine would need a.serious "pacifying". Over a serious period of time.
Curiously, or perhaps not, very good polls for governing centre-left parties in both Spain and Sweden respectively.
In Sweden, which votes on 11th September, the Social Democrats have opened a 12-point lead on the Moderates and Sweden Democrats. In Spain, despite last week's disappointing result in Castile & Leon, the ruling PSOE are nearly 10 points ahead of PP and VOX thought the combined shares of PSOE/United Podemos and PP/VOX are effectively tied with PP/VOX on 41% and PP/Podemos on 40.7%. The latter would probably form the next Government given the support of smaller centre-left and left parties such as ERC and MP.
This depends critically on the nature of the targets. If it means Gazprom then we're getting somewhere. If it means a ban on visits by touring ballet companies and freezing the bank accounts of a handful of obscure officials (who weren't clever enough to hide their money somewhere really shady, like Zurich or London,) not so much.
To be honest the scary thing, listening to that Putin rant earlier, is that he has such a warped view of it all now with Ukraine essentially being the buffer zone between NATO and Russia, that you wonder how bad things would be if Russia sweeps Ukraine and then we're literally staring at each other across the new Russian border.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h Did Putin's speech explain to the Russian people how much poorer they're going to get & how much less access to goods & services they're going to get as a consequence of his Ukraine adventurism?
I am drunk, slightly low (don't worry), and fed up to the sick teeth with people who defend bullies who ruin lives.
Bullies are bad.
I’m feeling same as you after that today Josias. Russia has had a bad day in its history. No wonder Putin keeps distance avoids people, tricked into a room with two doctors and they will have a straight jacket on him in no time. He’s a nut.
His address to the nation wouldn’t pass gcse history - as I mentioned months ago I played a Ukrainian Nationalist/saucy serving wench in the house of pettly yura in a play based on Bulgakov’s White Guard, Ukraine a free sovereign country before Lenin even controlled Russia - yet Putin used his fantasy’s as a base to threaten every single former soviet country with “non of them should have been allowed to leave in first place.”
I’m torn between on one hand not wanting war - certainly not one where Ukraine people likely to lose without proper assistance - on the other hand give war a chance to slap Putin across his face. Though I’d rather he didn’t get his aloof face slapped if such suffering of Ukrainians can still be avoided.
Flat and dejected now, like you, as I said all week it’s not happening because he doesn’t have a clear achievable military objective he can quickly succeed without getting bogged down. But now he clearly has, flooding the disputed Ukraine bits with “troops to keep the peace”. Keep yet another piece in salami action more like ☹️
Does this mean that Putin is likely to go for the option of annexing the two breakaway areas, as some predicted as his 'face saving' strategy, whilst avoiding a full on invasion of Ukraine?
Lord alone knows. He's giving his justification right now which, broadly, amounts to "Ukraine was invented by the Bolsheviks and they nicked loads of bits of Russia to make it." He's granting himself, surprise surprise, an excuse to chew off any part of Ukraine with Russians living in it. That could easily end up being half or two-thirds of the country.
This is exactly what I said would happen. If there is war, more than Donetsk and Luhansk will be chewed off.
Ukraine has a problem with a noisy, large Russian minority and -- truth to tell -- little legitimate claim to Crimea.
Ukraine refused to take any steps to compromise or to fix the problems.
So a worse solution is likely to be imposed.
A bit like the Palestinians. By arguing for the whole of pre-1947 Palestine & refusing to compromise, they have had ended up with some tiny bits.
No realistic blame can be put on Ukraine for this. They are faced by a larger, more powerful bully whatever they did, the bully would take as an excuse to escalate. Give Crimea? Sure, we'll take more. Don't defend Donbass? Thanks, how's about the rest? Fight to defend Donbass? Well, aren't you aggressive! We'll have to defend ourselves.
Russia is the aggressive bully here. It has very few parallels workable with the much more complex situation in Palestine.
Although I expect STW will still try to make the parallels ...
Well exactly. What sort of compromise could have been offered here? By agreement, choice or inability they haven't sought to end the rebellion in the east.
Let's say there was an armed rebellion in a part of Russia, would Putin argue someone outside Russia should tell him to compromise over it, or they'd attack?
Many borders don't make massive sense, but nations have until now mostly gotten over the idea of invading to correct that.
And in any case the whole 'Ukraine is not a real country' stuff rather gives the game away that there was anything Kyiv could have done to avoid this.
But we should avoid 'poking' Russia, lest we cause them to do something bad. If the bully steals a boy's lunch money after we warned them not to, it's obviously our fault.
(C) Nick Palmer.
A slightly stupid analogy unless you think having a sandwich stolen is worth risking a nuclear war.
So you are saying we should just surrender to the bully who has the biggest firepower and the will to use it?
It explains why you've said that women who don't want to get abused by the 'talent' in the entertainment industry should just become hairdressers. You defend big, hard men who his powers to abuse others.
People like you really worry me because you have no conception of the reality of nuclear weapons. If you really think Russia is likely to use nuclear weapons then of course you surrender. The alternative is unimaginably worse. Why do you think the West didn't liberate West Germany or intervene when the Soviets crushed Hungary? Because to do so would be the end of humanity. Now I don't think Putin is going to nuke the west and the response so far has been right and proper. However, there are very good reasons why no other country will send troops to Ukraine if the Russians invade. It's simply not worth the end of the world.
I very much have a conception of nuclear weapons. I did not bring nuclear weapons into the conversation.
But I'd also add chemical and biological weapons into the mix: one of which Putin has used in the past - in our country.
Do you feel the same way? Or is death by chemical weapon all flowers and unicorns?
But my point remains: at what point do you stand up to a bully and say: "no more?"
And BTW, I've not called for troops to Ukraine.
Does anyone remember an old Amiga game called Balance of Power? You were presented with a series of scenarios and you had to decide to confront the USSR or let the situation go. If you kept pushing and Russia didn't back down then eventually it lead to nuclear war and it was game over. If you objected to Russia stationing more troops in Hungary then you lost quickly. If you challenged them sending millitary advisers to India you were likely to win.
This in simple form is how diplomacy still works. We're pushing the object button for as long as we can in Ukraine but there will be a time when we have to stop.
Hmmm. I guess you're in the Nick Palmer grouping of saying this is in any way 'our' fault?
It's quite simple: you have values. What are those values, and when you see those values being trampled on, when do you shout: "No!".
What are your values?
I think values are where all policies should start, foreign policy included. But reality and limitations have to be recognized, and factored into policy.
Fwiw, the UK has no real history of values-driven foreign policy, no matter the lip service. We are recognized worldwide for our pragmatism in diplomacy.
You make a very good point. If Russia takes over Ukraine, then I expect the UK government will be dealing with that new position pragmatically. That does not mean we need to stand by and let it happen, or that it is correct when it does happen. Or that our dealing with it is the correct position in the medium- or long-term.
Does this mean that Putin is likely to go for the option of annexing the two breakaway areas, as some predicted as his 'face saving' strategy, whilst avoiding a full on invasion of Ukraine?
Lord alone knows. He's giving his justification right now which, broadly, amounts to "Ukraine was invented by the Bolsheviks and they nicked loads of bits of Russia to make it." He's granting himself, surprise surprise, an excuse to chew off any part of Ukraine with Russians living in it. That could easily end up being half or two-thirds of the country.
This is exactly what I said would happen. If there is war, more than Donetsk and Luhansk will be chewed off.
Ukraine has a problem with a noisy, large Russian minority and -- truth to tell -- little legitimate claim to Crimea.
Ukraine refused to take any steps to compromise or to fix the problems.
So a worse solution is likely to be imposed.
A bit like the Palestinians. By arguing for the whole of pre-1947 Palestine & refusing to compromise, they have had ended up with some tiny bits.
No realistic blame can be put on Ukraine for this. They are faced by a larger, more powerful bully whatever they did, the bully would take as an excuse to escalate. Give Crimea? Sure, we'll take more. Don't defend Donbass? Thanks, how's about the rest? Fight to defend Donbass? Well, aren't you aggressive! We'll have to defend ourselves.
Russia is the aggressive bully here. It has very few parallels workable with the much more complex situation in Palestine.
Although I expect STW will still try to make the parallels ...
Well exactly. What sort of compromise could have been offered here? By agreement, choice or inability they haven't sought to end the rebellion in the east.
Let's say there was an armed rebellion in a part of Russia, would Putin argue someone outside Russia should tell him to compromise over it, or they'd attack?
Many borders don't make massive sense, but nations have until now mostly gotten over the idea of invading to correct that.
And in any case the whole 'Ukraine is not a real country' stuff rather gives the game away that there was anything Kyiv could have done to avoid this.
But we should avoid 'poking' Russia, lest we cause them to do something bad. If the bully steals a boy's lunch money after we warned them not to, it's obviously our fault.
(C) Nick Palmer.
A slightly stupid analogy unless you think having a sandwich stolen is worth risking a nuclear war.
So you are saying we should just surrender to the bully who has the biggest firepower and the will to use it?
It explains why you've said that women who don't want to get abused by the 'talent' in the entertainment industry should just become hairdressers. You defend big, hard men who his powers to abuse others.
People like you really worry me because you have no conception of the reality of nuclear weapons. If you really think Russia is likely to use nuclear weapons then of course you surrender. The alternative is unimaginably worse. Why do you think the West didn't liberate West Germany or intervene when the Soviets crushed Hungary? Because to do so would be the end of humanity. Now I don't think Putin is going to nuke the west and the response so far has been right and proper. However, there are very good reasons why no other country will send troops to Ukraine if the Russians invade. It's simply not worth the end of the world.
I very much have a conception of nuclear weapons. I did not bring nuclear weapons into the conversation.
But I'd also add chemical and biological weapons into the mix: one of which Putin has used in the past - in our country.
Do you feel the same way? Or is death by chemical weapon all flowers and unicorns?
But my point remains: at what point do you stand up to a bully and say: "no more?"
And BTW, I've not called for troops to Ukraine.
Does anyone remember an old Amiga game called Balance of Power? You were presented with a series of scenarios and you had to decide to confront the USSR or let the situation go. If you kept pushing and Russia didn't back down then eventually it lead to nuclear war and it was game over. If you objected to Russia stationing more troops in Hungary then you lost quickly. If you challenged them sending millitary advisers to India you were likely to win.
This in simple form is how diplomacy still works. We're pushing the object button for as long as we can in Ukraine but there will be a time when we have to stop.
Hmmm. I guess you're in the Nick Palmer grouping of saying this is in any way 'our' fault?
It's quite simple: you have values. What are those values, and when you see those values being trampled on, when do you shout: "No!".
What are your values?
I think values are where all policies should start, foreign policy included. But reality and limitations have to be recognized, and factored into policy.
Fwiw, the UK has no real history of values-driven foreign policy, no matter the lip service. We are recognized worldwide for our pragmatism in diplomacy.
You make a very good point. If Russia takes over Ukraine, then I expect the UK government will be dealing with that new position pragmatically. That does not mean we need to stand by and let it happen, or that it is correct when it does happen.
Or, even though we will respond pragmatically as we do the world over, that criticising it is not better than not doing so.
Wikipedia's list of states recognised by at least one UN Member state is Russia heavy now.
Republic of China Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic Northern Cyprus South Ossetia Abkhazia Kosovo Donetsk Luhansk
Transnistra and Artsakh aren't recognised by any UN Member state, but recognise each other so that is something, but poor old Somaliland still gets no recognition even from them. What a weird situation for over £5 million people to be in. Way more than any of the others bar Taiwan, who at least get some attention.
It's disgraceful how Somaliland has been treated for decades now for wanting to be clear of the shitehole that is Somalia. How many of us can blame them? As their former colonial power we have a particular responsibility to drop this and recognise them asap.
I would honestly love to know for what reason we haven't. It can't be because of fear about upsetting those ruling Somalia, they essentially had no internationally recognised government for ages, so is there some complex international relations thing where if we didn't acknowledge the official Somalia's total claim we'd face a whole bunch of aggravation?
I don't know how genuinely democratic the place is, but they at the least seem to have changed presidents several times and had different parties running things, so it clearly isn't at the bottom of the table when it comes to democracy.
It gets impressively more complex with regards to the Kurds, who are a people whose land is split between four or five countries. They are a distinct people who don't have a country, and yet have distinct regional voices within their diaspora.
IMV the Kurds deserve a country of their own, but there's now bugger-all chance of them getting one, and if they did there might be a civil war about which part gets power. The Iraqi Kurds? The Turkish Kurds? The Iranian Kurds?
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
And so much more. Has anyone got a favourite secret corner of Europe?
Although I am Derbyshire born and bred, I have to say the Llŷn Peninsula. Never mentioned in tourist pieces, but can be sublime. Suffers because of its position in the far west, and the close proximity of Snowdonia. In some ways I prefer it to Pembrokeshire.
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
And so much more. Has anyone got a favourite secret corner of Europe?
Although I am Derbyshire born and bred, I have to say the Llŷn Peninsula. Never mentioned in tourist pieces, but can be sublime. Suffers because of its position in the far west, and the close proximity of Snowdonia. In some ways I prefer it to Pembrokeshire.
I hear Penarth is nice in March... (innocent face)
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
I might as well come clean. My name is not @YBarddCwsc
I am a Russian troll called Sergei Krasnevin. I work in a gigantic troll factory near the Arbatskaya, pumping out falsified news articles to deceive the West.
Putin really misses the Soviet Union, doesn't he? It's sad when old farts spend all their time on nostalgia.
I saw an interesting video a couple of weeks ago examining old essays by Putin about this. It isn't quite he wants the Soviet Union, it is he believes a lot of the former USSR countries are ethnically Russian and they have been brain washed by the West that they would be better off working closely with Europe, rather than their ethnic "tribe", they are family, and he believes that really they / should be Russian or at very least it should be like US / Canada scenario.
Yes taken at first glance it's more like Putin wants the Russian Empire back not the USSR. Which is properly bloody nuts, and hard to believe that it could be happening in the 21st century, but the evidence unfortunately suggests that could be Putin's intent.
So if Boris appears at some point with Whitty and Vallance does that mean the implication from some tweets earlier that he was operating with no regard to advice incorrect? Whether they support this move or not, if they appear that surely means
LOL - Sky News are torn between Boris's ramble or Vlad's ramble.
Perhaps they could decide the whole thing by rap battle.
My name is Big Vlad and I'm here to say Ukraine is a geopolitical fiction created in the 1920s by Bolsheviks to encourage nationalist ambitions on the imperial periphery and has no statehood traditions of its own.
Could use some work
They call me Big Vlad, but not the Impaler, I'm drawin' the map of Russia on a bigger scaler, When they see my military build up, they be hatin' hard, But I tell 'em the breakaway provinces of Donetsk and Lugansk are Russia's back yard! The video evidence from my homiez is shaky, Biden's up in my grill saying the attacks is fakey, So I've gathered the world's press and I'm givin em my takey, 'Ukraine only exists cause of Stalin's mistakey!'
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
And so much more. Has anyone got a favourite secret corner of Europe?
Cilento is amazing, but known for being so. And not unvisited.
Areas unjustly neglected by travellers are most common in the vicinity of tourism mega-draws. Thus the rest of Veneto, because of Venice and Verona, or inland Catalonia because of Barcelona and the coast.
Other under visited places by Brits are often those well on the visitor trail for other nationalities, notably Germans. For example attractive Polish cities like Wroclaw, or almost anywhere around the Baltic coast. Or any Italian beach resort, almost all Italians, French and Russians there.
In the US, few places between Chicago and California get many British visitors, although those worth visiting get lots of domestic tourists. South Dakota per example.
An area worth visiting that is unjustly neglected is Friuli in Italy. But stay away from there, as I’ll be there myself in a couple of months.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h Did Putin's speech explain to the Russian people how much poorer they're going to get & how much less access to goods & services they're going to get as a consequence of his Ukraine adventurism?
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico I tell you now, if Putin blows up the world before we find out how Attack on Titan ends, I'm going to be seriously hacked off.
Never pictured Andrew Lilico as someone who watches anime.
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
So if Boris appears at some point with Whitty and Vallance does that mean the implication from some tweets earlier that he was operating with no regard to advice incorrect? Whether they support this move or not, if they appear that surely means
LOL - Sky News are torn between Boris's ramble or Vlad's ramble.
Perhaps they could decide the whole thing by rap battle.
My name is Big Vlad and I'm here to say Ukraine is a geopolitical fiction created in the 1920s by Bolsheviks to encourage nationalist ambitions on the imperial periphery and has no statehood traditions of its own.
Could use some work
They call me Big Vlad, but not the Impaler, I'm drawin' the map of Russia on a bigger scaler, When they see my military build up, they be hatin' hard, But I tell 'em the breakaway provinces of Donetsk and Lugansk are Russia's back yard! The video evidence from my homiez is shaky, Biden's up in my grill saying the attacks is fakey, So I've gathered the world's press and I'm givin em my takey, 'Ukraine only exists cause of Stalin's mistakey!'
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
So if Boris appears at some point with Whitty and Vallance does that mean the implication from some tweets earlier that he was operating with no regard to advice incorrect? Whether they support this move or not, if they appear that surely means
LOL - Sky News are torn between Boris's ramble or Vlad's ramble.
Perhaps they could decide the whole thing by rap battle.
My name is Big Vlad and I'm here to say Ukraine is a geopolitical fiction created in the 1920s by Bolsheviks to encourage nationalist ambitions on the imperial periphery and has no statehood traditions of its own.
Could use some work
They call me Big Vlad, but not the Impaler, I'm drawin' the map of Russia on a bigger scaler, When they see my military build up, they be hatin' hard, But I tell 'em the breakaway provinces of Donetsk and Lugansk are Russia's back yard! The video evidence from my homiez is shaky, Biden's up in my grill saying the attacks is fakey, So I've gathered the world's press and I'm givin em my takey, 'Ukraine only exists cause of Stalin's mistakey!'
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
And so much more. Has anyone got a favourite secret corner of Europe?
Cilento is amazing, but known for being so. And not unvisited.
Areas unjustly neglected by travellers are most common in the vicinity of tourism mega-draws. Thus the rest of Veneto, because of Venice and Verona, or inland Catalonia because of Barcelona and the coast.
Other under visited places by Brits are often those well on the visitor trail for other nationalities, notably Germans. For example attractive Polish cities like Wroclaw, or almost anywhere around the Baltic coast. Or any Italian beach resort, almost all Italians, French and Russians there.
In the US, few places between Chicago and California get many British visitors, although those worth visiting get lots of domestic tourists. South Dakota per example.
An area worth visiting that is unjustly neglected is Friuli in Italy. But stay away from there, as I’ll be there myself in a couple of months.
Cilento is a wild, backward kind of place full of mafioso, lunatics, and other brigands. Christ Stopped at Eboli, wrote Carlo Levi who was exiled to these parts by Mussolini.
I believe there people living in caves a bit further south until relatively recently.
I am drunk, slightly low (don't worry), and fed up to the sick teeth with people who defend bullies who ruin lives.
Bullies are bad.
I’m feeling same as you after that today Josias. Russia has had a bad day in its history. No wonder Putin keeps distance avoids people, tricked into a room with two doctors and they will have a straight jacket on him in no time. He’s a nut.
His address to the nation wouldn’t pass gcse history - as I mentioned months ago I played a Ukrainian Nationalist/saucy serving wench in the house of pettly yura in a play based on Bulgakov’s White Guard, Ukraine a free sovereign country before Lenin even controlled Russia - yet Putin used his fantasy’s as a base to threaten every single former soviet country with “non of them should have been allowed to leave in first place.”
I’m torn between on one hand not wanting war - certainly not one where Ukraine people likely to lose without proper assistance - on the other hand give war a chance to slap Putin across his face. Though I’d rather he didn’t get his aloof face slapped if such suffering of Ukrainians can still be avoided.
Flat and dejected now, like you, as I said all week it’s not happening because he doesn’t have a clear achievable military objective he can quickly succeed without getting bogged down. But now he clearly has, flooding the disputed Ukraine bits with “troops to keep the peace”. Keep yet another piece in salami action more like ☹️
Putin really misses the Soviet Union, doesn't he? It's sad when old farts spend all their time on nostalgia.
I saw an interesting video a couple of weeks ago examining old essays by Putin about this. It isn't quite he wants the Soviet Union, it is he believes a lot of the former USSR countries are ethnically Russian and they have been brain washed by the West that they would be better off working closely with Europe, rather than their ethnic "tribe", they are family, and he believes that really they / should be Russian or at very least it should be like US / Canada scenario.
Yes taken at first glance it's more like Putin wants the Russian Empire back not the USSR. Which is properly bloody nuts, and hard to believe that it could be happening in the 21st century, but the evidence unfortunately suggests that could be Putin's intent.
Putin really misses the Soviet Union, doesn't he? It's sad when old farts spend all their time on nostalgia.
I saw an interesting video a couple of weeks ago examining old essays by Putin about this. It isn't quite he wants the Soviet Union, it is he believes a lot of the former USSR countries are ethnically Russian and they have been brain washed by the West that they would be better off working closely with Europe, rather than their ethnic "tribe", they are family, and he believes that really they / should be Russian or at very least it should be like US / Canada scenario.
Yes taken at first glance it's more like Putin wants the Russian Empire back not the USSR. Which is properly bloody nuts, and hard to believe that it could be happening in the 21st century, but the evidence unfortunately suggests that could be Putin's intent.
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
And so much more. Has anyone got a favourite secret corner of Europe?
What about places which domestic tourists go to, but foreign tourists don’t? I’m sure plenty of dutch, for example, don’t holiday abroad, so where do they go?
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
And so much more. Has anyone got a favourite secret corner of Europe?
What about places which domestic tourists go to, but foreign tourists don’t? I’m sure plenty of dutch, for example, don’t holiday abroad, so where do they go?
The wrong side of the Bosphorus, but the Gulf of Edremit in Turkey used to be a major Turkish tourism destination with no foreigners. But I was there in the 1980s, so God knows what it is like now.
More than that as well - Georgia was invaded on 08/08/08, today is 22/2/22, and when did Yanukovych resign? 22nd of February 2014. Putin likes his numerology. Let's hope he doesn't push for 33 days in March in '33.
I don't know if Putin will still be around by 2033. Sure, he keeps changing the rules of Russian President such that he's virtually President for life (under the current rules, he's now allowed to run as President until 2036) but he'll be 81 in 2033 and didn't look so great today. I reckon he'll either have passed on, or been replaced by some crony by then.
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
And so much more. Has anyone got a favourite secret corner of Europe?
What about places which domestic tourists go to, but foreign tourists don’t? I’m sure plenty of dutch, for example, don’t holiday abroad, so where do they go?
The Fresian Islands are quite lovely. A lot like North Norfolk but with fewer Londoners.
Gotland is very popular for Swedes on their holidays, quite rustic, but also a long summer party.
In undiscovered Greece, The area around Ioannina is great for foodies. Greener too.
Following Russia’s latest assault on Ukrainian sovereignty I spoke to @JosepBorrellF tonight. We agreed 🇬🇧 and 🇪🇺 will coordinate to deliver swift sanctions against Putin’s regime and stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Ukraine.
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
And so much more. Has anyone got a favourite secret corner of Europe?
Cilento is amazing, but known for being so. And not unvisited.
Areas unjustly neglected by travellers are most common in the vicinity of tourism mega-draws. Thus the rest of Veneto, because of Venice and Verona, or inland Catalonia because of Barcelona and the coast.
Other under visited places by Brits are often those well on the visitor trail for other nationalities, notably Germans. For example attractive Polish cities like Wroclaw, or almost anywhere around the Baltic coast. Or any Italian beach resort, almost all Italians, French and Russians there.
In the US, few places between Chicago and California get many British visitors, although those worth visiting get lots of domestic tourists. South Dakota per example.
An area worth visiting that is unjustly neglected is Friuli in Italy. But stay away from there, as I’ll be there myself in a couple of months.
Cilento is a wild, backward kind of place full of mafioso, lunatics, and other brigands. Christ Stopped at Eboli, wrote Carlo Levi who was exiled to these parts by Mussolini.
I believe there people living in caves a bit further south until relatively recently.
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
And so much more. Has anyone got a favourite secret corner of Europe?
What about places which domestic tourists go to, but foreign tourists don’t? I’m sure plenty of dutch, for example, don’t holiday abroad, so where do they go?
The Dutch go everywhere. First rule of any European road trip; wherever you go, however far or remote, at some point you will find yourself on a windy road following a Dutch camper van.
Being so low-lying, there’s a weight limit on how many people can be at home in the Netherlands at any one time, hence there is always a generous quota of them forced to go travelling in search of higher ground.
Does this mean that Putin is likely to go for the option of annexing the two breakaway areas, as some predicted as his 'face saving' strategy, whilst avoiding a full on invasion of Ukraine?
Lord alone knows. He's giving his justification right now which, broadly, amounts to "Ukraine was invented by the Bolsheviks and they nicked loads of bits of Russia to make it." He's granting himself, surprise surprise, an excuse to chew off any part of Ukraine with Russians living in it. That could easily end up being half or two-thirds of the country.
This is exactly what I said would happen. If there is war, more than Donetsk and Luhansk will be chewed off.
Ukraine has a problem with a noisy, large Russian minority and -- truth to tell -- little legitimate claim to Crimea.
Ukraine refused to take any steps to compromise or to fix the problems.
So a worse solution is likely to be imposed.
A bit like the Palestinians. By arguing for the whole of pre-1947 Palestine & refusing to compromise, they have had ended up with some tiny bits.
No realistic blame can be put on Ukraine for this. They are faced by a larger, more powerful bully whatever they did, the bully would take as an excuse to escalate. Give Crimea? Sure, we'll take more. Don't defend Donbass? Thanks, how's about the rest? Fight to defend Donbass? Well, aren't you aggressive! We'll have to defend ourselves.
Russia is the aggressive bully here. It has very few parallels workable with the much more complex situation in Palestine.
Although I expect STW will still try to make the parallels ...
Well exactly. What sort of compromise could have been offered here? By agreement, choice or inability they haven't sought to end the rebellion in the east.
Let's say there was an armed rebellion in a part of Russia, would Putin argue someone outside Russia should tell him to compromise over it, or they'd attack?
Many borders don't make massive sense, but nations have until now mostly gotten over the idea of invading to correct that.
And in any case the whole 'Ukraine is not a real country' stuff rather gives the game away that there was anything Kyiv could have done to avoid this.
But we should avoid 'poking' Russia, lest we cause them to do something bad. If the bully steals a boy's lunch money after we warned them not to, it's obviously our fault.
(C) Nick Palmer.
A slightly stupid analogy unless you think having a sandwich stolen is worth risking a nuclear war.
So you are saying we should just surrender to the bully who has the biggest firepower and the will to use it?
It explains why you've said that women who don't want to get abused by the 'talent' in the entertainment industry should just become hairdressers. You defend big, hard men who his powers to abuse others.
People like you really worry me because you have no conception of the reality of nuclear weapons. If you really think Russia is likely to use nuclear weapons then of course you surrender. The alternative is unimaginably worse. Why do you think the West didn't liberate West Germany or intervene when the Soviets crushed Hungary? Because to do so would be the end of humanity. Now I don't think Putin is going to nuke the west and the response so far has been right and proper. However, there are very good reasons why no other country will send troops to Ukraine if the Russians invade. It's simply not worth the end of the world.
I very much have a conception of nuclear weapons. I did not bring nuclear weapons into the conversation.
But I'd also add chemical and biological weapons into the mix: one of which Putin has used in the past - in our country.
Do you feel the same way? Or is death by chemical weapon all flowers and unicorns?
But my point remains: at what point do you stand up to a bully and say: "no more?"
And BTW, I've not called for troops to Ukraine.
Does anyone remember an old Amiga game called Balance of Power? You were presented with a series of scenarios and you had to decide to confront the USSR or let the situation go. If you kept pushing and Russia didn't back down then eventually it lead to nuclear war and it was game over. If you objected to Russia stationing more troops in Hungary then you lost quickly. If you challenged them sending millitary advisers to India you were likely to win.
This in simple form is how diplomacy still works. We're pushing the object button for as long as we can in Ukraine but there will be a time when we have to stop.
Hmmm. I guess you're in the Nick Palmer grouping of saying this is in any way 'our' fault?
It's quite simple: you have values. What are those values, and when you see those values being trampled on, when do you shout: "No!".
What are your values?
Of course I don't think this is 'our fault'. Russia is a menace that needs to be curtailed but it doesn't do any good trying to pretend things that you have no intention of doing. No one is really prepared to let Ukraine join NATO so who does it benefit to pretend we might? Diplomacy works when both sides know what the consequences of their actions are. The western alliance has mostly got this right so far. I just find some of the belligerence on here frightening.
And I find the surrender to the might of Russia on here frightening. But sadly predictable from experience.
Where is your red line?
Like I said before, only Putin can stop this war. It is not "surrender to the might of Russia" to acknowledge that the balance of forces and capabilities is such that if Russia invades it will overrun large parts of Ukraine. We cannot stop it, short of nukes and I don't think that would be wise.
It becomes then a question of a new Cold War with a new Iron Curtain, and how we conduct it economically or militarily.
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
And so much more. Has anyone got a favourite secret corner of Europe?
What about places which domestic tourists go to, but foreign tourists don’t? I’m sure plenty of dutch, for example, don’t holiday abroad, so where do they go?
The Fresian Islands are quite lovely. A lot like North Norfolk but with fewer Londoners.
Gotland is very popular for Swedes on their holidays, quite rustic, but also a long summer party.
In undiscovered Greece, The area around Ioannina is great for foodies. Greener too.
Pigeon - Russian speaking does not equal Russian. Just ask the English speaking Irish. Every single region of Ukraine voted to secede from the Soviet Union. It may be true that Russian clients have stood and won Ukrainian Presidential elections - but not recently. The annexation of Crimea has helped foster a true sense of Ukrainian nationhood.
I thought that was the really significant story of the 2019 election. More so than a comedian becoming president. The pro-Moscow figures were nowhere to be seen.
OTOH Putin is an angry, expansionist autocrat with a prepared list of justifications and grievances and a very large army. If he decides he wants to conquer half of Ukraine and install a fascist puppet in the other then he possesses the means to do it.
Sure, but he might not have the means to maintain an occupation against determined guerilla resistance.
Comments
I don't know how genuinely democratic the place is, but they at the least seem to have changed presidents several times and had different parties running things, so it clearly isn't at the bottom of the table when it comes to democracy.
But 24 years and 1 week ago, a friend of mine died because of a bully (*). On Saturday I took my son to the grave, and wondered how I could explain how it still deeply effect me and my view of the world.
Which is why I am now pissed.
I was never particularly bullied at school, but I have a visceral hatred of the scum who find the need to bully others who are, or choose to be, 'different'. Bullies are bad. People who excuse bullies are as bad as the bullies.
(*) At least, to be fair, I blame the bully. The situation was complex, but the bully did not help.
https://twitter.com/snowden/status/1495848959335706630
I don't think I've ever seen anything like that.
IMV the Kurds deserve a country of their own, but there's now bugger-all chance of them getting one, and if they did there might be a civil war about which part gets power. The Iraqi Kurds? The Turkish Kurds? The Iranian Kurds?
It had a clip of him during his campaign talking about practicing the Ukranian language, so I presume he is a native Russian speaker.
Let's hope the old pessimist was wrong, but it's not looking good, I'm afraid.
Which I stand by.
But of course we do have a capability: why don't you and your fellow protestors go and glue yourself to a tank rather than a tube train? Weren't you trained for that?
(And the sad thing is that if Russia does invade, people will be doing the equivalent.)
This may be his last roll of the dice.
Where is your red line?
Ukraine would need a.serious "pacifying". Over a serious period of time.
Curiously, or perhaps not, very good polls for governing centre-left parties in both Spain and Sweden respectively.
In Sweden, which votes on 11th September, the Social Democrats have opened a 12-point lead on the Moderates and Sweden Democrats. In Spain, despite last week's disappointing result in Castile & Leon, the ruling PSOE are nearly 10 points ahead of PP and VOX thought the combined shares of PSOE/United Podemos and PP/VOX are effectively tied with PP/VOX on 41% and PP/Podemos on 40.7%. The latter would probably form the next Government given the support of smaller centre-left and left parties such as ERC and MP.
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1495870495534821382
This depends critically on the nature of the targets. If it means Gazprom then we're getting somewhere. If it means a ban on visits by touring ballet companies and freezing the bank accounts of a handful of obscure officials (who weren't clever enough to hide their money somewhere really shady, like Zurich or London,) not so much.
Andrew Lilico
@andrew_lilico
·
1h
Did Putin's speech explain to the Russian people how much poorer they're going to get & how much less access to goods & services they're going to get as a consequence of his Ukraine adventurism?
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico
Any amateur photographers on here understand why they pop so much? The light in the chamber really good?
But maybe we need some cheering distraction
The Dildo Knapper's Gazette wants to send me write about flintwork in some corner of Europe, Australia or north America that they feel has been unjustly neglected by travellers
Does anyone have any ideas?
I've just been looking at the list of national parks in Europe for some inspiration. There are 500 or more, most of which I've barely or never heard of
eg these new ones in France:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forêts_National_Park
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calanques_National_Park
How many others must be out there? -
Italy has a zillion national parks:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollino_National_Park
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parco_Nazionale_del_Cilento,_Vallo_di_Diano_e_Alburni
?
Germany:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxon_Switzerland_National_Park
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasmund_National_Park
And so much more. Has anyone got a favourite secret corner of Europe?
Edit. Ooops. Missed the Europe bit
I'm drawin' the map of Russia on a bigger scaler,
When they see my military build up, they be hatin' hard,
But I tell 'em the breakaway provinces of Donetsk and Lugansk are Russia's back yard!
The video evidence from my homiez is shaky,
Biden's up in my grill saying the attacks is fakey,
So I've gathered the world's press and I'm givin em my takey,
'Ukraine only exists cause of Stalin's mistakey!'
Oh, my coat, how kind.
Areas unjustly neglected by travellers are most common in the vicinity of tourism mega-draws. Thus the rest of Veneto, because of Venice and Verona, or inland Catalonia because of Barcelona and the coast.
Other under visited places by Brits are often those well on the visitor trail for other nationalities, notably Germans. For example attractive Polish cities like Wroclaw, or almost anywhere around the Baltic coast. Or any Italian beach resort, almost all Italians, French and Russians there.
In the US, few places between Chicago and California get many British visitors, although those worth visiting get lots of domestic tourists. South Dakota per example.
An area worth visiting that is unjustly neglected is Friuli in Italy. But stay away from there, as I’ll be there myself in a couple of months.
@andrew_lilico
I tell you now, if Putin blows up the world before we find out how Attack on Titan ends, I'm going to be seriously hacked off.
Never pictured Andrew Lilico as someone who watches anime.
Jura in France is another possibility, to add to my list. Undervisted because of the alps.
Christ Stopped at Eboli, wrote Carlo Levi who was exiled to these parts by Mussolini.
I believe there people living in caves a bit further south until relatively recently.
That has cheered me up. 😆
After all those have often been Putin's tactics.
Elba
St Helena
There must be others… Skye? (BP Charlie - I know a stretch)
I saw Manzini and Bolivar the other day
https://www.chathamhouse.org/2021/05/myths-and-misconceptions-debate-russia
Gotland is very popular for Swedes on their holidays, quite rustic, but also a long summer party.
In undiscovered Greece, The area around Ioannina is great for foodies. Greener too.
Have any PBers been here?
https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1495882615680868355?s=20&t=MzncHllgDmYvkVigoWmn1A
The gist of them is that Russian troops are going to guard the separatist borders, and the treaties are for 10 years.
https://twitter.com/maxseddon/status/1495886097192300552
The Dutch go everywhere. First rule of any European road trip; wherever you go, however far or remote, at some point you will find yourself on a windy road following a Dutch camper van.
Being so low-lying, there’s a weight limit on how many people can be at home in the Netherlands at any one time, hence there is always a generous quota of them forced to go travelling in search of higher ground.
It becomes then a question of a new Cold War with a new Iron Curtain, and how we conduct it economically or militarily.