Has anybody seen anything out of the Swiss re sanctions so far? Whilst the UK is a big player re Russian money it would help if the Swiss also clamped down or does their “neutrality” supersede this?
Also would be helpful if Greece and Turkey put pressure on their halves of Cyprus as a huge hub for Russian money and corporate structures along with Malta and Montenegro.
German banking is interesting to look at as well.
Well yes. Just this morning I turned down a project where the client was a Russian national using Commerzbank to hold ridiculous amounts of funds and I cannot tell you the sizes I’ve seen sitting at Deutsche in Frankfurt over the last few years.
I have seen some data in the past.....
When DB finally goes down, it's going to do to German politics what the Italian scandals did there - wipe out all the usual suspects.....
So now that Russia are the official baddies can we now have publication of the report into their meddling in our affairs? Surely we can all then collectively boo Putin and put right the damage he has done...
No, that is the limited ISC one that urged Downing Street to order a full enquiry and implement a framework to protect us from future attacks. Big Dog refused. We need the proper report that the ISC says we need to investigate Russian meddling in elections and referendums which Downing Street refuses to look at.
Why is Big Dog afraid of investigating Russia? Aren't they now the big bad who need to be Stopped? How can we stop them if he won't even look at it? Especially when the limited report showed meddling in the Scottish Independence vote - its totally logical to assume further meddling in the Brexit vote and both of the rerun elections of 2017 and 2019.
Here is the reality. The Tories take a lot of money from Russians. The Tories benefited from Russian state meddling in our democratic processes. The Tories say Russia is bad but are happy to take their money and their assistance because the Tories are brazenly corrupt.
So take everything the Big Dog says about Russia with a pinch of salt. They are his mates.
Do the Tories take Russian money though? I keep hearing this trotted out - is there any evidence of it? I'm tempted to treat this with a pinch of salt, like the Russia-interfered-in-the-2016-US-election meme. It seems on the face if it unlikely. And if so, money from which Russians? Money from the Russian state, or from their fugitives? I concede that it also seemed unlikely that Barry Gardiner was taking money from China, or that apparently everyone is taking money from Qatar.
That's one report. There are others. Temerko himself came to a hustings in Stockton South in 2015 to see what his money was being spent on.
If the government are serious about going after Russian money and influence to deter Putin, it would be a good start to stop taking Russian money and influence themselves.
Temerko is a British citizen.
Yes, and? Abramovich manages to be Israeli, Portuguese and Russian. Does each new nationality wipe a little more of his background away?
Your argument is truly in bad faith.
Yes, yes it does. That's the whole point of allowing people to acquire nationality.
Unless you're a blood and soil racist.
You're an absurdity on this front. Nationality does not supersede intent nor does it wash away uncomfortable backgrounds.
'Blood and soil racist' come on Phil. Some of us wonder where Russian energy moguls acquired their wealth.
As we have a right to when they are donating millions to the Conservative party.
Don't you see what has happened to the Russian state over the decades? Would you like aspects of it to appear here?
Sorry but this is nasty racism and xenophobia.
Do you accept that people who emigrate here and take citizenship here are real British citizens?
Or are they second class people with aspersions to be cast upon based upon where they were born?
Either you accept immigrants who've taken up a life and citizenship here or you don't. If Temerko is Russian to you, you're no better than the National Front.
I am asking:
Where did his wealth come from and why is he giving such a lot of it to the Conservative Party?
That he is a citizen has no bearing on these questions. And does not excuse anyone of actions under another passport.
(Can you argue more than one angle? Because you seem to have prepared heuristics that you beat the conversation down to. Not a man of nuances Mr Roberts)
He's the director of a British company and has been holding high positions in businesses for decades now.
What evidence do you have of dodgy money other than racism? Is it news to you that directors of successful businesses might be wealthy?
That's way below your usual standard of invective.
C--
Try harder.
Seems pretty par for the course. Malcolm is a perfect example of a Nationalist thug, except that instead of throwing rocks through fellow Scots' windows he frequently haunts a political site where he has no hope of engaging in articulate debate because he has zero capability in debating, which makes him amusing, though not in a way that he would like. I suppose the one thing you can say for Salmond is that though he is reputed (by his own QC) to be a sex pest and a bully he is/was pretty articulate unlike his thuggish followers. We can also add No1 Useful idiot to Putin to his dubious CV.
So now that Russia are the official baddies can we now have publication of the report into their meddling in our affairs? Surely we can all then collectively boo Putin and put right the damage he has done...
No, that is the limited ISC one that urged Downing Street to order a full enquiry and implement a framework to protect us from future attacks. Big Dog refused. We need the proper report that the ISC says we need to investigate Russian meddling in elections and referendums which Downing Street refuses to look at.
Why is Big Dog afraid of investigating Russia? Aren't they now the big bad who need to be Stopped? How can we stop them if he won't even look at it? Especially when the limited report showed meddling in the Scottish Independence vote - its totally logical to assume further meddling in the Brexit vote and both of the rerun elections of 2017 and 2019.
Here is the reality. The Tories take a lot of money from Russians. The Tories benefited from Russian state meddling in our democratic processes. The Tories say Russia is bad but are happy to take their money and their assistance because the Tories are brazenly corrupt.
So take everything the Big Dog says about Russia with a pinch of salt. They are his mates.
Do the Tories take Russian money though? I keep hearing this trotted out - is there any evidence of it? I'm tempted to treat this with a pinch of salt, like the Russia-interfered-in-the-2016-US-election meme. It seems on the face if it unlikely. And if so, money from which Russians? Money from the Russian state, or from their fugitives? I concede that it also seemed unlikely that Barry Gardiner was taking money from China, or that apparently everyone is taking money from Qatar.
That's one report. There are others. Temerko himself came to a hustings in Stockton South in 2015 to see what his money was being spent on.
If the government are serious about going after Russian money and influence to deter Putin, it would be a good start to stop taking Russian money and influence themselves.
Temerko is a British citizen.
Yes, and? Abramovich manages to be Israeli, Portuguese and Russian. Does each new nationality wipe a little more of his background away?
Your argument is truly in bad faith.
Yes, yes it does. That's the whole point of allowing people to acquire nationality.
Unless you're a blood and soil racist.
You're an absurdity on this front. Nationality does not supersede intent nor does it wash away uncomfortable backgrounds.
'Blood and soil racist' come on Phil. Some of us wonder where Russian energy moguls acquired their wealth.
As we have a right to when they are donating millions to the Conservative party.
Don't you see what has happened to the Russian state over the decades? Would you like aspects of it to appear here?
Sorry but this is nasty racism and xenophobia.
Do you accept that people who emigrate here and take citizenship here are real British citizens?
Or are they second class people with aspersions to be cast upon based upon where they were born?
Either you accept immigrants who've taken up a life and citizenship here or you don't. If Temerko is Russian to you, you're no better than the National Front.
I am asking:
Where did his wealth come from and why is he giving such a lot of it to the Conservative Party?
That he is a citizen has no bearing on these questions. And does not excuse anyone of actions under another passport.
(Can you argue more than one angle? Because you seem to have prepared heuristics that you beat the conversation down to. Not a man of nuances Mr Roberts)
He's the director of a British company and has been holding high positions in businesses for decades now.
What evidence do you have of dodgy money other than racism? Is it news to you that directors of successful businesses might be wealthy?
That's way below your usual standard of invective.
C--
Try harder.
Seems pretty par for the course. Malcolm is a perfect example of a Nationalist thug, except that instead of throwing rocks through fellow Scots' windows he frequently haunts a political site where he has no hope of engaging in articulate debate because he has zero capability in debating, which makes him amusing, though not in a way that he would like. I suppose the one thing you can say for Salmond is that though he is reputed (by his own QC) to be a sex pest and a bully he is/was pretty articulate unlike his thuggish followers. We can also add No1 Useful idiot to Putin to his dubious CV.
So now that Russia are the official baddies can we now have publication of the report into their meddling in our affairs? Surely we can all then collectively boo Putin and put right the damage he has done...
No, that is the limited ISC one that urged Downing Street to order a full enquiry and implement a framework to protect us from future attacks. Big Dog refused. We need the proper report that the ISC says we need to investigate Russian meddling in elections and referendums which Downing Street refuses to look at.
Why is Big Dog afraid of investigating Russia? Aren't they now the big bad who need to be Stopped? How can we stop them if he won't even look at it? Especially when the limited report showed meddling in the Scottish Independence vote - its totally logical to assume further meddling in the Brexit vote and both of the rerun elections of 2017 and 2019.
Here is the reality. The Tories take a lot of money from Russians. The Tories benefited from Russian state meddling in our democratic processes. The Tories say Russia is bad but are happy to take their money and their assistance because the Tories are brazenly corrupt.
So take everything the Big Dog says about Russia with a pinch of salt. They are his mates.
Do the Tories take Russian money though? I keep hearing this trotted out - is there any evidence of it? I'm tempted to treat this with a pinch of salt, like the Russia-interfered-in-the-2016-US-election meme. It seems on the face if it unlikely. And if so, money from which Russians? Money from the Russian state, or from their fugitives? I concede that it also seemed unlikely that Barry Gardiner was taking money from China, or that apparently everyone is taking money from Qatar.
That's one report. There are others. Temerko himself came to a hustings in Stockton South in 2015 to see what his money was being spent on.
If the government are serious about going after Russian money and influence to deter Putin, it would be a good start to stop taking Russian money and influence themselves.
Temerko is a British citizen.
Yes, and? Abramovich manages to be Israeli, Portuguese and Russian. Does each new nationality wipe a little more of his background away?
Your argument is truly in bad faith.
Yes, yes it does. That's the whole point of allowing people to acquire nationality.
Unless you're a blood and soil racist.
You're an absurdity on this front. Nationality does not supersede intent nor does it wash away uncomfortable backgrounds.
'Blood and soil racist' come on Phil. Some of us wonder where Russian energy moguls acquired their wealth.
As we have a right to when they are donating millions to the Conservative party.
Don't you see what has happened to the Russian state over the decades? Would you like aspects of it to appear here?
Sorry but this is nasty racism and xenophobia.
Do you accept that people who emigrate here and take citizenship here are real British citizens?
Or are they second class people with aspersions to be cast upon based upon where they were born?
Either you accept immigrants who've taken up a life and citizenship here or you don't. If Temerko is Russian to you, you're no better than the National Front.
I am asking:
Where did his wealth come from and why is he giving such a lot of it to the Conservative Party?
That he is a citizen has no bearing on these questions. And does not excuse anyone of actions under another passport.
(Can you argue more than one angle? Because you seem to have prepared heuristics that you beat the conversation down to. Not a man of nuances Mr Roberts)
He's the director of a British company and has been holding high positions in businesses for decades now.
What evidence do you have of dodgy money other than racism? Is it news to you that directors of successful businesses might be wealthy?
That's way below your usual standard of invective.
C--
Try harder.
Seems pretty par for the course. Malcolm is a perfect example of a Nationalist thug, except that instead of throwing rocks through fellow Scots' windows he frequently haunts a political site where he has no hope of engaging in articulate debate because he has zero capability in debating, which makes him amusing, though not in a way that he would like. I suppose the one thing you can say for Salmond is that though he is reputed (by his own QC) to be a sex pest and a bully he is/was pretty articulate unlike his thuggish followers. We can also add No1 Useful idiot to Putin to his dubious CV.
I quite like Malcolm.
He’s never rude to me.
Perhaps you have never said anything vaguely critical of Salmond or Scottish Nationalism. He is a vile and rude little man, but then what should one expect from the number 1 fanboy of someone as repulsive as Salmond?
Malc's been rude to me but I still quite like him. Strange, dunno why?
Salmond? Everyone knew what he was like, certainly Sturgeon will have done, but his chutzpah and indispensability pre-IndyRef, kept him safely in place. One of the ironies is the Nicola holier-than-thou act, given the way so many women were so badly let down by the whole avoidable Salmond charade which she, effectively, tolerated. And given her status as THE powerful woman in ScotGov, must have made so much more difficult for other women to challenge.
Who is a Russia watcher on here. Is there any world in which Russia has legitimate claims to The Ukraine.
Keep it short and to the point here pls.
tia
No.
But, outside the legitimate worldview, a Russian nationalist might claim that it was always part of their fantasy 'greater Russia' and would place great cultural importance to it, and no doubt Putin is playing on this emotional attachment.
Russia in the early Middle Ages had its capital in Kiev, and Kievan Rus was, by the standards of the day, relatively progressive and decentralised. Then the Mongols invaded, and ever since, Moscow became the centre of power and centralised autocracy the order of the day. As has already been said Kiev was for centuries part of Lithuania, later in personal union with Poland, until Catherine the Great's Russia partitioned it in the late 18th century.
THOSE WHO ARE FRIENDS AND APOLOGISTS OF THE AGGRESSOR ARE ALSO THE AGGRESSOR.
All sort of tough painful Decisions to be made today, for a range of governments and other organisations to prove, rather than say, they oppose Mad Vlad’s aggression (not just the tanks on someone else’s sovereign land, but his disgraceful remarks threatening everybody in his crazed address)
Gazprom feature heavily, as it’s four of their pipelines which now should not be used, but also they should be cut off from UEFA completely and champions league final moved. Ditto F1 have to take action pronto, strip Putin of his race and look at the funding from his regime.
Boris needs to do 2 things to prove he is serious, he needs to be vocal that Nord cannot be used by Europe, not just announce our sanctions today but speak up and say Gazprom/Putin pipelines cannot be used, but also be more straight with us that what he is calling for does impact us, as where UK gets it’s Gas must now have heavy competition for it, Boris already got off to a bad start today talking spin and bollocks about this part to the British People. He can’t try to make out the sanctions and counter sanctions won’t hurt us, he needs to be straight with us about this.
Western Europe (not the UK - we get most of our gas from North Sea and Norway) can't stop using Russian gas altogether. Going... er.. cold turkey would stuff a fair number of countries.
Not using Nord Stream 2 is the key - it is designed so that Russia can send gas to Western Europe, while cutting off the Near Abroad (aka the bits Russia wants to steal back). So if it goes into operation, Putin can play off Western and Eastern Europe.
Sounds like the German government is pausing that, according to a report in the Independent.
It sounds also that Germany is getting serious about changing the longer term direction of energy policy, too. While that won't make any immediate impact, it could significantly reduce dependency on Russian gas over time.
Germany keeping the nuclear plants running, at least until there’s other sources of electricity to replace them, might be a reasonable starting point.
Everyone getting their arses in gear with the deployment of renewables would also be a good idea, both for the climate and for geopolitical stability. Enough of the foot dragging.
With a supportive government, we could have 8-10 tidal power stations on stream by the early 2030's, many of them starting partial production sooner. Each when complete the energy output of a Sizewell C. Popular. Creating 80,000 jobs in the process. And dependable electricity for centuries to come, at a fraction of the cost of nuclear. Without the waste along the way, without the risk of Chernobyl/Fukushima disaster along the way, without the massive costs of dismantling them at the end of their useful life.
C'mon Boris, you said you supported them on your hustings tour of Wales. Now deliver them. That is the sharpest kick you can give to Putin's shins.
Have you tried bribing somebody? I'm joking but I'm not.
Sadly, new industries don't have the sort of money to out-compete with nuclear....
Has anybody seen anything out of the Swiss re sanctions so far? Whilst the UK is a big player re Russian money it would help if the Swiss also clamped down or does their “neutrality” supersede this?
Also would be helpful if Greece and Turkey put pressure on their halves of Cyprus as a huge hub for Russian money and corporate structures along with Malta and Montenegro.
German banking is interesting to look at as well.
Some people were talking up barrage of sanctions making Putin think twice or at least a strong punishment a few weeks ago. I think you are nailing in that post why sanctions been such a weak response in the past, too easily by passed. Not enough uniting as one, reacting firm as one.
Who is a Russia watcher on here. Is there any world in which Russia has legitimate claims to The Ukraine.
Keep it short and to the point here pls.
tia
No.* And "The Ukraine" is Putin's preferred term, not Ukraine's.
*well there is the world in which you get what you demand by overwhelming force.
Although of course when speaking Russian he can say no such thing.
The Ukrainian argument is based on English usage, not Russian or Ukrainian, neither of which languages have articles.
The argument is that as you do not generally use the word "the" to refer to countries in English, if you do so it makes it sound like a geographical area rather than a country.
Generally being the operative word there. There have always been a smattering, though over time they have fallen out of fashion. 'The Argentine' is the only other one which springs to mind in the vaguely modern era.
Not many articles attached to geographical areas either - the one which springs to mind is 'The Wirral'.
On a similar note, am I right that we have now started calling the capital city Kyiv rather than Kiev because the former is Ukrainian and the latter is Russian? If so, it isn't the only place where we call a city by the language its inhabitants don't use. In particular, we often seem to use French where the locals do not (e.g. we call it Bruges, as the French do, whereas the locals call it Brugge; we call it Basle, as the French do, while locals call it Basel.)
Interestingly, I think both German and French speakers refer to Switzerland with a definite article: Der Schweiz and La Suisse. In German, at least, it is not standard to do this to a country.
Also while I'm on about it: why does the Hague have a definite article?
And also why you're on about it what's up with street and road.
The Balls Pond Road and Carnaby Street as examples. Why is one "the" and the other not.
My theory is that roads which are named after their destination take the article, effectively "the road to Balls Pond". Streets don't normally go anywhere and are more purely intra-urban in nature.
The Hague is a direct translation, Den Hague or 's-Gravenhage, The (Count's) Hedge although haag probably means something more like enclosure or fortification in this context.
Only in London though. The Edgware Road, the Gloucester Road. You don't get that anywhere else. The Stockport Road, The Oldham Road? No.
That would explain my Liverpool Road. The East Lancs, mind.
How about the Scottie Road?
Indeed. And there's the Scotswood Road in Newcastle, too. And Westgate Road. Known as the West Road. Maybe it's just local habits?
Last wk the Home Sec announced she’s closing the T1 visa scheme saying it was a route for “kleptocrats” into the UK. On that basis for a piece on Friday we asked the Conservative Party if they plan to review money donated by T1s who have become UK citizens.This is what they said. https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1496148819028946957/photo/1
Who is a Russia watcher on here. Is there any world in which Russia has legitimate claims to The Ukraine.
Keep it short and to the point here pls.
tia
No.* And "The Ukraine" is Putin's preferred term, not Ukraine's.
*well there is the world in which you get what you demand by overwhelming force.
Although of course when speaking Russian he can say no such thing.
The Ukrainian argument is based on English usage, not Russian or Ukrainian, neither of which languages have articles.
The argument is that as you do not generally use the word "the" to refer to countries in English, if you do so it makes it sound like a geographical area rather than a country.
Generally being the operative word there. There have always been a smattering, though over time they have fallen out of fashion. 'The Argentine' is the only other one which springs to mind in the vaguely modern era.
Not many articles attached to geographical areas either - the one which springs to mind is 'The Wirral'.
On a similar note, am I right that we have now started calling the capital city Kyiv rather than Kiev because the former is Ukrainian and the latter is Russian? If so, it isn't the only place where we call a city by the language its inhabitants don't use. In particular, we often seem to use French where the locals do not (e.g. we call it Bruges, as the French do, whereas the locals call it Brugge; we call it Basle, as the French do, while locals call it Basel.)
Interestingly, I think both German and French speakers refer to Switzerland with a definite article: Der Schweiz and La Suisse. In German, at least, it is not standard to do this to a country.
Also while I'm on about it: why does the Hague have a definite article?
And also why you're on about it what's up with street and road.
The Balls Pond Road and Carnaby Street as examples. Why is one "the" and the other not.
My theory is that roads which are named after their destination take the article, effectively "the road to Balls Pond". Streets don't normally go anywhere and are more purely intra-urban in nature.
The Hague is a direct translation, Den Hague or 's-Gravenhage, The (Count's) Hedge although haag probably means something more like enclosure or fortification in this context.
Only in London though. The Edgware Road, the Gloucester Road. You don't get that anywhere else. The Stockport Road, The Oldham Road? No.
That would explain my Liverpool Road. The East Lancs, mind.
How about the Scottie Road?
Indeed. And there's the Scotswood Road in Newcastle, too. And Westgate Road. Known as the West Road. Maybe it's just local habits?
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
Anyone on the Scottish nationalist side of things who says "oh working for RT is no worse than working for the BBC", take a look at this mess of a wreck of a pigsty of a disgrace.
I do think tough sanctions and asset seizure is required. But if Putin goes no further (and I don't call this an invasion) I think we should stop right there. A lot of noise and then we hope that three, six, months from now the separatists states have been another casualty of oligarchy but war in Europe has been avoided.
I recognise however that we're dealing with a madman.
Putin apologist.
Russian troops are literally in Ukraine right now. How is that "not an invasion".
You are a disgrace.
If you're charging into the cannon's mouth yourself, I think you can justify calling someone else a disgrace. If you're playing armchair generals, not so much. It is a valid view that British blood and treasure should be kept to defend Britain and her vital interests.
Who is a Russia watcher on here. Is there any world in which Russia has legitimate claims to The Ukraine.
Keep it short and to the point here pls.
tia
No.* And "The Ukraine" is Putin's preferred term, not Ukraine's.
*well there is the world in which you get what you demand by overwhelming force.
Although of course when speaking Russian he can say no such thing.
The Ukrainian argument is based on English usage, not Russian or Ukrainian, neither of which languages have articles.
The argument is that as you do not generally use the word "the" to refer to countries in English, if you do so it makes it sound like a geographical area rather than a country.
Generally being the operative word there. There have always been a smattering, though over time they have fallen out of fashion. 'The Argentine' is the only other one which springs to mind in the vaguely modern era.
Not many articles attached to geographical areas either - the one which springs to mind is 'The Wirral'.
On a similar note, am I right that we have now started calling the capital city Kyiv rather than Kiev because the former is Ukrainian and the latter is Russian? If so, it isn't the only place where we call a city by the language its inhabitants don't use. In particular, we often seem to use French where the locals do not (e.g. we call it Bruges, as the French do, whereas the locals call it Brugge; we call it Basle, as the French do, while locals call it Basel.)
Interestingly, I think both German and French speakers refer to Switzerland with a definite article: Der Schweiz and La Suisse. In German, at least, it is not standard to do this to a country.
Also while I'm on about it: why does the Hague have a definite article?
And also why you're on about it what's up with street and road.
The Balls Pond Road and Carnaby Street as examples. Why is one "the" and the other not.
My theory is that roads which are named after their destination take the article, effectively "the road to Balls Pond". Streets don't normally go anywhere and are more purely intra-urban in nature.
The Hague is a direct translation, Den Hague or 's-Gravenhage, The (Count's) Hedge although haag probably means something more like enclosure or fortification in this context.
Only in London though. The Edgware Road, the Gloucester Road. You don't get that anywhere else. The Stockport Road, The Oldham Road? No.
That would explain my Liverpool Road. The East Lancs, mind.
How about the Scottie Road?
Indeed. And there's the Scotswood Road in Newcastle, too. And Westgate Road. Known as the West Road. Maybe it's just local habits?
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
I do think tough sanctions and asset seizure is required. But if Putin goes no further (and I don't call this an invasion) I think we should stop right there. A lot of noise and then we hope that three, six, months from now the separatists states have been another casualty of oligarchy but war in Europe has been avoided.
I recognise however that we're dealing with a madman.
Putin apologist.
Russian troops are literally in Ukraine right now. How is that "not an invasion".
You are a disgrace.
If you're charging into the cannon's mouth yourself, I think you can justify calling someone else a disgrace. If you're playing armchair generals, not so much. It is a valid view that British blood and treasure should be kept to defend Britain and her vital interests.
I'm surprised you don't remember, but Russia has launched chemical and nuclear attacks against Britain in the last couple of decades. Perhaps acting with others to restrain a Russia willing to perform such acts *is* a vital interest for us?
Then again, you always seem to pick the Russian side on things. Remember MH17?
Agreed. Anyone who hasn't figured out that all Johnson does is talk the talk but never walk the walk just hasn't been paying attention. He is the most vacuous PM we have ad in my lifetime. One great bag of wind.
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
I do think tough sanctions and asset seizure is required. But if Putin goes no further (and I don't call this an invasion) I think we should stop right there. A lot of noise and then we hope that three, six, months from now the separatists states have been another casualty of oligarchy but war in Europe has been avoided.
I recognise however that we're dealing with a madman.
Putin apologist.
Russian troops are literally in Ukraine right now. How is that "not an invasion".
You are a disgrace.
If you're charging into the cannon's mouth yourself, I think you can justify calling someone else a disgrace. If you're playing armchair generals, not so much. It is a valid view that British blood and treasure should be kept to defend Britain and her vital interests.
Whether the Russians have invaded Ukraine or not has nothing to do with direct British military intervention.
Anyone on the Scottish nationalist side of things who says "oh working for RT is no worse than working for the BBC", take a look at this mess of a wreck of a pigsty of a disgrace.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
Bitch slapped by The Greens for promised Barrage at Putin being nothing more than a Pea shooter response is very definition of trolling 😧
Not a good day for Boris and his government.
However I will cross reference this with Snookie, my green friend on the ground in Bristol and report back to you. 👍🏻
Lucas doesn’t give the slightest crap about Putin invading Ukraine, she’ll quite happily be cheering him on.
All she is interested in doing today, is making a narrow and partisan point about UK political party funding.
That’s what I suspect too, which is why I am going to talk to her ground troops…
"Lucas doesn’t give the slightest crap about Putin invading Ukraine, she’ll quite happily be cheering him on."
Evidence?
Sounds positively libellous to me.
"The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) is a military-oriented body, which imposes conflict cessation rather than encouraging peace building. As such, it is not a sustainable mechanism for maintaining peace in the world. In the long term, we would take the UK out of NATO. "
I do think tough sanctions and asset seizure is required. But if Putin goes no further (and I don't call this an invasion) I think we should stop right there. A lot of noise and then we hope that three, six, months from now the separatists states have been another casualty of oligarchy but war in Europe has been avoided.
I recognise however that we're dealing with a madman.
Putin apologist.
Russian troops are literally in Ukraine right now. How is that "not an invasion".
You are a disgrace.
No she's not. She has a point of view which is pragmatic but dangerous in the longer term.
Your boy nor the EU haven't exactly covered themselves with glory today. Sequester the dodgy Russian money now. All of it!
There's pragmatic and there's dishonest.
Russian troops have invaded Ukraine. They are literally in Ukraine right now.
You might want to say "I don't care that Russian troops have invaded Ukraine" or "we should accept Russia's invasion" or other similar statements and claim it is "pragmatic" - I'd disagree, but we can agree to disagree.
But to say this is not an invasion is a lie, pure and simple. Russia has invaded Ukraine, that is a fact.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
I do think tough sanctions and asset seizure is required. But if Putin goes no further (and I don't call this an invasion) I think we should stop right there. A lot of noise and then we hope that three, six, months from now the separatists states have been another casualty of oligarchy but war in Europe has been avoided.
I recognise however that we're dealing with a madman.
Putin apologist.
Russian troops are literally in Ukraine right now. How is that "not an invasion".
You are a disgrace.
No she's not. She has a point of view which is pragmatic but dangerous in the longer term.
Your boy nor the EU haven't exactly covered themselves with glory today. Sequester the dodgy Russian money now. All of it!
There's pragmatic and there's dishonest.
Russian troops have invaded Ukraine. They are literally in Ukraine right now.
You might want to say "I don't care that Russian troops have invaded Ukraine" or "we should accept Russia's invasion" or other similar statements and claim it is "pragmatic" - I'd disagree, but we can agree to disagree.
But to say this is not an invasion is a lie, pure and simple. Russia has invaded Ukraine, that is a fact.
She'll have to eat her words tomorrow however she defines today.
Agreed. Anyone who hasn't figured out that all Johnson does is talk the talk but never walk the walk just hasn't been paying attention. He is the most vacuous PM we have ad in my lifetime. One great bag of wind.
“ lacklustre, insipid, tepid, threadbare...BoZo has fluffed it again “
Did Big G really respond to that summing up of Boris today with “Putin apologist” or are there deleted bits just to make it look that bad?
A fortnight ago the #LevellingUp White Paper recognised that "the UK’s centralised governance model means local actors have too rarely been empowered". Last week, the Government announced it's "looking into concerns" after Haringey published its local magazine too frequently.
Isn't the actual allegation there (they it's not stated out loud) that a borough magazine acts as a party political publication for the party in power.
Apparently Pickles brought in legislation banning the publication of local magazines more than quarterly or something.
Probably because of the reasons you cite.
But it’s a good example of the utter lunacy of UK centralisation and why the country will never, in fact, level up.
Ah good old corpulent Pickles. ‘Town Hall Pravdas’ was his favourite term for them. What an idiot that fat fucker was. Now enobled. Naturally.
Agreed. Anyone who hasn't figured out that all Johnson does is talk the talk but never walk the walk just hasn't been paying attention. He is the most vacuous PM we have ad in my lifetime. One great bag of wind.
“ lacklustre, insipid, tepid, threadbare...BoZo has fluffed it again “
Did Big G really respond to that summing up of Boris today with “Putin apologist” or are there deleted bits just to make it look that bad?
He really did. It was a pretty thoughtless post given that Scott was essentially saying Boris should do more against Putin.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
Why does anyone give this old soak the time of day. He’d know all about lying. Architect of the dodgy dossier and helped the illegal war on Iraq and there was his evidence to the Hutton enquiry.
Weird flex that the country (capital) peaked a thousand years ago, but OK.
It's a response to Putin's questionable historical claims.
A dangerous one though: Kyiv (as I must get used to calling it) was basically the capital of Russia. Which in those days was one of the freer and more liberal countries of the world, in the Scandinavian tradition. To the extent that when the Mongols came knocking everyone left it to everyone else to defend the country and the cities got picked off one at a time. I'm not sure pointing this out actually helps the west's cause.
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
I do think tough sanctions and asset seizure is required. But if Putin goes no further (and I don't call this an invasion) I think we should stop right there. A lot of noise and then we hope that three, six, months from now the separatists states have been another casualty of oligarchy but war in Europe has been avoided.
I recognise however that we're dealing with a madman.
Putin apologist.
Russian troops are literally in Ukraine right now. How is that "not an invasion".
You are a disgrace.
If you're charging into the cannon's mouth yourself, I think you can justify calling someone else a disgrace. If you're playing armchair generals, not so much. It is a valid view that British blood and treasure should be kept to defend Britain and her vital interests.
I'm surprised you don't remember, but Russia has launched chemical and nuclear attacks against Britain in the last couple of decades. Perhaps acting with others to restrain a Russia willing to perform such acts *is* a vital interest for us?
Then again, you always seem to pick the Russian side on things. Remember MH17?
I am not delighted with the position in which Britain now finds herself, with a depleted army, and with what seem to be more than a few holes in our actual defence of the UK, and a nuclear deterrent that is dependent upon a foreign power. I would like us to have the world's best Navy, field a highly dangerous and adaptable airforce, and for when we said we were going to stop someone using the sea, for it to mean something. However, we are where we are, and it looks utterly stupid to make empty threats, or worse, to throw our limited resources at gaining some Ukrainian mud.
Like Mark said, building tidal capacity and no longer needing to import Russian gas (or have China build our nuclear), does a lot more for us in relation to Russia than riding around in a tank or barking at them from under a fur hat.
A fortnight ago the #LevellingUp White Paper recognised that "the UK’s centralised governance model means local actors have too rarely been empowered". Last week, the Government announced it's "looking into concerns" after Haringey published its local magazine too frequently.
Isn't the actual allegation there (they it's not stated out loud) that a borough magazine acts as a party political publication for the party in power.
Apparently Pickles brought in legislation banning the publication of local magazines more than quarterly or something.
Probably because of the reasons you cite.
But it’s a good example of the utter lunacy of UK centralisation and why the country will never, in fact, level up.
Ah good old corpulent Pickles. ‘Town Hall Pravdas’ was his favourite term for them. What an idiot that fat fucker was. Now enobled. Naturally.
Agreed. Anyone who hasn't figured out that all Johnson does is talk the talk but never walk the walk just hasn't been paying attention. He is the most vacuous PM we have ad in my lifetime. One great bag of wind.
“ lacklustre, insipid, tepid, threadbare...BoZo has fluffed it again “
Did Big G really respond to that summing up of Boris today with “Putin apologist” or are there deleted bits just to make it look that bad?
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
Bitch slapped by The Greens for promised Barrage at Putin being nothing more than a Pea shooter response is very definition of trolling 😧
Not a good day for Boris and his government.
However I will cross reference this with Snookie, my green friend on the ground in Bristol and report back to you. 👍🏻
Lucas doesn’t give the slightest crap about Putin invading Ukraine, she’ll quite happily be cheering him on.
All she is interested in doing today, is making a narrow and partisan point about UK political party funding.
That’s what I suspect too, which is why I am going to talk to her ground troops…
"Lucas doesn’t give the slightest crap about Putin invading Ukraine, she’ll quite happily be cheering him on."
Evidence?
Sounds positively libellous to me.
It's worth noting that I can't find any senior Green politicians in the UK on the list of signatories to the Stop the War Coalition statement on Ukraine.
I'm glad that the Greens can see the difference between Iraq and Ukraine, even if a worrying number of people don't.
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
Bitch slapped by The Greens for promised Barrage at Putin being nothing more than a Pea shooter response is very definition of trolling 😧
Not a good day for Boris and his government.
However I will cross reference this with Snookie, my green friend on the ground in Bristol and report back to you. 👍🏻
Lucas doesn’t give the slightest crap about Putin invading Ukraine, she’ll quite happily be cheering him on.
All she is interested in doing today, is making a narrow and partisan point about UK political party funding.
That’s what I suspect too, which is why I am going to talk to her ground troops…
"Lucas doesn’t give the slightest crap about Putin invading Ukraine, she’ll quite happily be cheering him on."
Evidence?
Sounds positively libellous to me.
"The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) is a military-oriented body, which imposes conflict cessation rather than encouraging peace building. As such, it is not a sustainable mechanism for maintaining peace in the world. In the long term, we would take the UK out of NATO. "
That ain't evidence for her cheering Putin on - just for her being deeply misguided.
Who is a Russia watcher on here. Is there any world in which Russia has legitimate claims to The Ukraine.
Keep it short and to the point here pls.
tia
No.* And "The Ukraine" is Putin's preferred term, not Ukraine's.
*well there is the world in which you get what you demand by overwhelming force.
Although of course when speaking Russian he can say no such thing.
The Ukrainian argument is based on English usage, not Russian or Ukrainian, neither of which languages have articles.
The argument is that as you do not generally use the word "the" to refer to countries in English, if you do so it makes it sound like a geographical area rather than a country.
Generally being the operative word there. There have always been a smattering, though over time they have fallen out of fashion. 'The Argentine' is the only other one which springs to mind in the vaguely modern era.
Not many articles attached to geographical areas either - the one which springs to mind is 'The Wirral'.
On a similar note, am I right that we have now started calling the capital city Kyiv rather than Kiev because the former is Ukrainian and the latter is Russian? If so, it isn't the only place where we call a city by the language its inhabitants don't use. In particular, we often seem to use French where the locals do not (e.g. we call it Bruges, as the French do, whereas the locals call it Brugge; we call it Basle, as the French do, while locals call it Basel.)
Interestingly, I think both German and French speakers refer to Switzerland with a definite article: Der Schweiz and La Suisse. In German, at least, it is not standard to do this to a country.
Also while I'm on about it: why does the Hague have a definite article?
And also why you're on about it what's up with street and road.
The Balls Pond Road and Carnaby Street as examples. Why is one "the" and the other not.
My theory is that roads which are named after their destination take the article, effectively "the road to Balls Pond". Streets don't normally go anywhere and are more purely intra-urban in nature.
The Hague is a direct translation, Den Hague or 's-Gravenhage, The (Count's) Hedge although haag probably means something more like enclosure or fortification in this context.
Only in London though. The Edgware Road, the Gloucester Road. You don't get that anywhere else. The Stockport Road, The Oldham Road? No.
That would explain my Liverpool Road. The East Lancs, mind.
How about the Scottie Road?
Indeed. And there's the Scotswood Road in Newcastle, too. And Westgate Road. Known as the West Road. Maybe it's just local habits?
I really think he missed his chance. Will we look back 5 years from now and say, 'Remember when Rishi Sunak was a shoo-in for PM?'
Another in a long line of bottlers.
To be fair to Rishi, and David Miliband, and others in the same boat, they were waiting for a moment which never quite came. It's relatively easy to be the most attractive candidate to replace a PM. It's hard, but not impossible, to engineer the downfall of a Prime Minister. It's very very hard to do both at once. The trick is to be the most attractive candidate to replace a Prime Minister at the point a vacancy arises.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
Putin is an implacable enemy of both the EU and the UK. Brexit was hitting two birds with one stone.
Agreed. Anyone who hasn't figured out that all Johnson does is talk the talk but never walk the walk just hasn't been paying attention. He is the most vacuous PM we have ad in my lifetime. One great bag of wind.
“ lacklustre, insipid, tepid, threadbare...BoZo has fluffed it again “
Did Big G really respond to that summing up of Boris today with “Putin apologist” or are there deleted bits just to make it look that bad?
I was about to explain... then I thought nah. I prefer the misinterpretation.
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
Weird flex that the country (capital) peaked a thousand years ago, but OK.
It's a response to Putin's questionable historical claims.
A dangerous one though: Kyiv (as I must get used to calling it) was basically the capital of Russia. Which in those days was one of the freer and more liberal countries of the world, in the Scandinavian tradition. To the extent that when the Mongols came knocking everyone left it to everyone else to defend the country and the cities got picked off one at a time. I'm not sure pointing this out actually helps the west's cause.
Except it wasn't Russia back then. What we now call Russia is something very different indeed.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all, that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
That's a load of rubbish I'm afraid. The UK government has been very careful not to let leaving the EU affect our commitment as a country to the defence of Europe. Our friends inside the EU in the Baltic and Poland are very grateful for the actions we've been taking.
There seems to be this view amongst some elements of the Remain camp that we're not even able to have a discussion with the EU any more because we left which is a total myth. Just because we're outside the club doesn't mean we don't have common interests that we can still pool together on.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
I’d like to be corrected, but I do believe when we Brexited we made EU weaker. We took away from the EU a wealth of foreign policy resources: membership in all the key global networks and institutions, a first-rate foreign service, our brilliant military and intelligence apparatus, world-class universities and media, and lots of money out of the EU coffers. We mustn’t air brush out of history that UK did have a great influence when inside the EU. UK was the driving and liberalising force when it came to the Single Market, enlargement, competition and trade, as well as good influence on EU foreign policy, particularly under Lady Thatcher and Mr Blair.
I do think tough sanctions and asset seizure is required. But if Putin goes no further (and I don't call this an invasion) I think we should stop right there. A lot of noise and then we hope that three, six, months from now the separatists states have been another casualty of oligarchy but war in Europe has been avoided.
I recognise however that we're dealing with a madman.
Putin apologist.
Russian troops are literally in Ukraine right now. How is that "not an invasion".
You are a disgrace.
If you're charging into the cannon's mouth yourself, I think you can justify calling someone else a disgrace. If you're playing armchair generals, not so much. It is a valid view that British blood and treasure should be kept to defend Britain and her vital interests.
I'm surprised you don't remember, but Russia has launched chemical and nuclear attacks against Britain in the last couple of decades. Perhaps acting with others to restrain a Russia willing to perform such acts *is* a vital interest for us?
Then again, you always seem to pick the Russian side on things. Remember MH17?
I am not delighted with the position in which Britain now finds herself, with a depleted army, and with what seem to be more than a few holes in our actual defence of the UK, and a nuclear deterrent that is dependent upon a foreign power. I would like us to have the world's best Navy, field a highly dangerous and adaptable airforce, and for when we said we were going to stop someone using the sea, for it to mean something. However, we are where we are, and it looks utterly stupid to make empty threats, or worse, to throw our limited resources at gaining some Ukrainian mud.
Like Mark said, building tidal capacity and no longer needing to import Russian gas (or have China build our nuclear), does a lot more for us in relation to Russia than riding around in a tank or barking at them from under a fur hat.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
Why does anyone give this old soak the time of day. He’d know all about lying. Architect of the dodgy dossier and helped the illegal war on Iraq and there was his evidence to the Hutton enquiry.
That doesn't make him wrong in this case, however. The real untold story here is the large number of names redacted from the Russia report, and the significant number of these linked to organisations like Vote Leave, through figures like Matthew Eliot, and others. There is a genuine Russian influence at work there.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
I’d like to be corrected, but I do believe when we Brexited we made EU weaker. We took away from the EU a wealth of foreign policy resources: membership in all the key global networks and institutions, a first-rate foreign service, our brilliant military and intelligence apparatus, world-class universities and media, and lots of money out of the EU coffers. We mustn’t air brush out of history that UK did have a great influence when inside the EU. UK was the driving and liberalising force when it came to the Single Market, enlargement, competition and trade, as well as good influence on EU foreign policy, particularly under Lady Thatcher and Mr Blair.
That argument might make sense if the UK were sitting on its hands, doing nothing. Instead it is taking a harder stance, or certainly a quicker stance, than the EU.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
I’d like to be corrected, but I do believe when we Brexited we made EU weaker. We took away from the EU a wealth of foreign policy resources: membership in all the key global networks and institutions, a first-rate foreign service, our brilliant military and intelligence apparatus, world-class universities and media, and lots of money out of the EU coffers. We mustn’t air brush out of history that UK did have a great influence when inside the EU. UK was the driving and liberalising force when it came to the Single Market, enlargement, competition and trade, as well as good influence on EU foreign policy, particularly under Lady Thatcher and Mr Blair.
I'd agree with a lot of that, although I have a lot more reservations about Kosovo than is the standard view. There's still total media silence in the UK, and in the EU more on generally, on Hashim Thaci, leader of the KLA and one time hero of the West, 's upcoming trial for war crimes, for instance.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all, that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
That's a load of rubbish I'm afraid. The UK government has been very careful not to let leaving the EU affect our commitment as a country to the defence of Europe. Our friends inside the EU in the Baltic and Poland are very grateful for the actions we've been taking.
There seems to be this view amongst some elements of the Remain camp that we're not even able to have a discussion with the EU any more because we left which is a total myth. Just because we're outside the club doesn't mean we don't have common interests that we can still pool together on.
Having a discussion isn't the same as defending or influencing a view within a large and powerful organisation, though.
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
Putin is an implacable enemy of both the EU and the UK. Brexit was hitting two birds with one stone.
Correction: Putin is an implacable enemy of both NATO and the UK.
I've never seen anything to say Putin is anti-EU, on the contrary he is extremely anti-NATO and the EU were undermining NATO.
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
Russia shouldn’t invade anyone but Ukraine isn’t a single unified country, in the same way Spain has its Basque problem. The EU stoked the fire burning in Eastern Ukraine on the Russia borders by pushing for membership & Nato expansion. https://t.co/TqF1xnLsPP
Weird flex that the country (capital) peaked a thousand years ago, but OK.
It's a response to Putin's questionable historical claims.
A dangerous one though: Kyiv (as I must get used to calling it) was basically the capital of Russia. Which in those days was one of the freer and more liberal countries of the world, in the Scandinavian tradition. To the extent that when the Mongols came knocking everyone left it to everyone else to defend the country and the cities got picked off one at a time. I'm not sure pointing this out actually helps the west's cause.
Except it wasn't Russia back then. What we now call Russia is something very different indeed.
Well yes. It was one of the freer and more liberal countries of the world, for example. And most countries are pretty different to their counterparts from 1000 years ago. The name has sort of endured. And the language, sort of. And the religion. Which is as much as you can say about many countries. I certainly don't want to be going down the Ukraine-is-part-of-Russia route. Historical ownership of land means very little. Ukraine is no more Russian than it is Lithuanian. My point is that the USA pointing to the dazzling splendour of 10th century Kyiv is a dangerous road to go down and doesn't necessarily serve their argument well. Which is daft, as Putin's rhetorical positions are so easy to take apart.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all, that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
That's a load of rubbish I'm afraid. The UK government has been very careful not to let leaving the EU affect our commitment as a country to the defence of Europe. Our friends inside the EU in the Baltic and Poland are very grateful for the actions we've been taking.
There seems to be this view amongst some elements of the Remain camp that we're not even able to have a discussion with the EU any more because we left which is a total myth. Just because we're outside the club doesn't mean we don't have common interests that we can still pool together on.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
Why does anyone give this old soak the time of day. He’d know all about lying. Architect of the dodgy dossier and helped the illegal war on Iraq and there was his evidence to the Hutton enquiry.
That doesn't make him wrong in this case, however. The real untold story here is the large number of names redacted from the Russia report, and the significant number of these linked to organisations like Vote Leave, through figures like Matthew Eliot, and others. There is a genuine Russian influence at work there.
There are *always* various networks at play.
The UK is a middle-ranked power, but definitely worth influencing. Of course Russia, China, Israel, various Gulf States and indeed the USA all have various networks at play.
The problem with Russia is that it is obviously affecting - even at the margins - the very thing thanks makes “us” different from “them”: our democracy.
I do think tough sanctions and asset seizure is required. But if Putin goes no further (and I don't call this an invasion) I think we should stop right there. A lot of noise and then we hope that three, six, months from now the separatists states have been another casualty of oligarchy but war in Europe has been avoided.
I recognise however that we're dealing with a madman.
Putin apologist.
Russian troops are literally in Ukraine right now. How is that "not an invasion".
You are a disgrace.
If you're charging into the cannon's mouth yourself, I think you can justify calling someone else a disgrace. If you're playing armchair generals, not so much. It is a valid view that British blood and treasure should be kept to defend Britain and her vital interests.
I'm surprised you don't remember, but Russia has launched chemical and nuclear attacks against Britain in the last couple of decades. Perhaps acting with others to restrain a Russia willing to perform such acts *is* a vital interest for us?
Then again, you always seem to pick the Russian side on things. Remember MH17?
I am not delighted with the position in which Britain now finds herself, with a depleted army, and with what seem to be more than a few holes in our actual defence of the UK, and a nuclear deterrent that is dependent upon a foreign power. I would like us to have the world's best Navy, field a highly dangerous and adaptable airforce, and for when we said we were going to stop someone using the sea, for it to mean something. However, we are where we are, and it looks utterly stupid to make empty threats, or worse, to throw our limited resources at gaining some Ukrainian mud.
Like Mark said, building tidal capacity and no longer needing to import Russian gas (or have China build our nuclear), does a lot more for us in relation to Russia than riding around in a tank or barking at them from under a fur hat.
That does not address my point.
It explains my original position, which you attacked.
To address your point further, yes, I do take the Russian side far more often than is usual here. I put that down to my starting point being that Russia and the USA are both foreign powers. Many, if not most here, are attached to 'The West' as a concept, with NATO as its military wing, but I question deeply whether 'The West' exists to support all its constituent parts or merely to cement American dominance. I do not see that dominance as necessarily a good thing, and back in the day, America didn't see British power as a good thing - they had a plan to invade the British Empire as late as the 30's.
Traditionally, the guiding aim of British foreign policy has always been the 'balance of powers', so I'm not afraid of a powerful Russia. However, I am strongly opposed to Russia invading its near neighbours, whilst being realistic about what we can achieve to stop them.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
I’d like to be corrected, but I do believe when we Brexited we made EU weaker. We took away from the EU a wealth of foreign policy resources: membership in all the key global networks and institutions, a first-rate foreign service, our brilliant military and intelligence apparatus, world-class universities and media, and lots of money out of the EU coffers. We mustn’t air brush out of history that UK did have a great influence when inside the EU. UK was the driving and liberalising force when it came to the Single Market, enlargement, competition and trade, as well as good influence on EU foreign policy, particularly under Lady Thatcher and Mr Blair.
I'd agree with a lot of that, although I have a lot more reservations about Kosovo than the standard view. There's still total media silence on Hashim Thaci, leader of the KLA, 's upcoming trial for war crimes, for instance.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all, that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
That's a load of rubbish I'm afraid. The UK government has been very careful not to let leaving the EU affect our commitment as a country to the defence of Europe. Our friends inside the EU in the Baltic and Poland are very grateful for the actions we've been taking.
There seems to be this view amongst some elements of the Remain camp that we're not even able to have a discussion with the EU any more because we left which is a total myth. Just because we're outside the club doesn't mean we don't have common interests that we can still pool together on.
Having a discussion isn't the same as defending or influencing a view within a large and powerful organisation, though.
But European defence isn't a primary competence of the European Union. Sanctions are, but as I'm sure you'll have noticed member states such as Germany are acting independently because it's quicker.
Putin might have gained through the political instability of Brexit as a process, but to suggest it's had anything more than a trivial impact on European defence is incorrect.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all, that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
That's a load of rubbish I'm afraid. The UK government has been very careful not to let leaving the EU affect our commitment as a country to the defence of Europe. Our friends inside the EU in the Baltic and Poland are very grateful for the actions we've been taking.
There seems to be this view amongst some elements of the Remain camp that we're not even able to have a discussion with the EU any more because we left which is a total myth. Just because we're outside the club doesn't mean we don't have common interests that we can still pool together on.
Well said.
There's no evidence at all Putin was anti-EU or wanted the UK out of the EU. There are die-hard Remain zealots who project their own viewpoints on it, but all Putin ever speaks about is NATO not the EU - and if anything the EU was undermining "braindead" NATO until Putin has just breathed new life into it.
Remainers may want to credit the EU with all NATO's successes but those of us in the real world know it is NATO that is the power that matters, not the EU.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
Why does anyone give this old soak the time of day. He’d know all about lying. Architect of the dodgy dossier and helped the illegal war on Iraq and there was his evidence to the Hutton enquiry.
That doesn't make him wrong in this case, however. The real untold story here is the large number of names redacted from the Russia report, and the significant number of these linked to organisations like Vote Leave, through figures like Matthew Eliot, and others. There is a genuine Russian influence at work there.
There are *always* various networks at play.
The UK is a middle-ranked power, but definitely worth influencing. Of course Russia, China, Israel, various Gulf States and indeed the USA all have various networks at play.
The problem with Russia is that it is obviously affecting - even at the margins - the very thing thanks makes “us” different from “them”: our democracy.
We need transparency.
There are always indeed, but this time, this particular group was linked to a once-in-a-century strategic change for Britain, which, their Head of State having openly declared his support for, definitely should have been further investigated.
That doesn't make him wrong in this case, however. The real untold story here is the large number of names redacted from the Russia report, and the significant number of these linked to organisations like Vote Leave, through figures like Matthew Eliot, and others. There is a genuine Russian influence at work there.
Exactly.
It's a measure of just how bad BoZo is that Alastair Fucking Campbell can reasonably criticise him
The general gist of the UKs approach (and others) is to try to punish the narrow strata that consist of Putin's friends. I think Boris said the other day that it was important that the Russian people didn't think that we thought of them as our enemy. This is surely a mistaken plan. I think we should start viewing all Russian citizens as responsible for Putin.
I do think tough sanctions and asset seizure is required. But if Putin goes no further (and I don't call this an invasion) I think we should stop right there. A lot of noise and then we hope that three, six, months from now the separatists states have been another casualty of oligarchy but war in Europe has been avoided.
I recognise however that we're dealing with a madman.
Putin apologist.
Russian troops are literally in Ukraine right now. How is that "not an invasion".
You are a disgrace.
If you're charging into the cannon's mouth yourself, I think you can justify calling someone else a disgrace. If you're playing armchair generals, not so much. It is a valid view that British blood and treasure should be kept to defend Britain and her vital interests.
I'm surprised you don't remember, but Russia has launched chemical and nuclear attacks against Britain in the last couple of decades. Perhaps acting with others to restrain a Russia willing to perform such acts *is* a vital interest for us?
Then again, you always seem to pick the Russian side on things. Remember MH17?
I am not delighted with the position in which Britain now finds herself, with a depleted army, and with what seem to be more than a few holes in our actual defence of the UK, and a nuclear deterrent that is dependent upon a foreign power. I would like us to have the world's best Navy, field a highly dangerous and adaptable airforce, and for when we said we were going to stop someone using the sea, for it to mean something. However, we are where we are, and it looks utterly stupid to make empty threats, or worse, to throw our limited resources at gaining some Ukrainian mud.
Like Mark said, building tidal capacity and no longer needing to import Russian gas (or have China build our nuclear), does a lot more for us in relation to Russia than riding around in a tank or barking at them from under a fur hat.
That does not address my point.
It explains my original position, which you attacked.
To address your point further, yes, I do take the Russian side far more often than is usual here. I put that down to my starting point being that Russia and the USA are both foreign powers. Many, if not most here, are attached to 'The West' as a concept, with NATO as its military wing, but I question deeply whether 'The West' exists to support all its constituent parts or merely to cement American dominance. I do not see that dominance as necessarily a good thing, and back in the day, America didn't see British power as a good thing - they had a plan to invade the British Empire as late as the 30's.
Traditionally, the guiding aim of British foreign policy has always been the 'balance of powers', so I'm not afraid of a powerful Russia. However, I am strongly opposed to Russia invading its near neighbours, whilst being realistic about what we can achieve to stop them.
Jessop keeps attacking people for their views on Russia but never states what actions he/she wants the West to take to stop them. Weak sanction announcement aside I think the West has taken as strong a line as it can on Ukraine.
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
Russia shouldn’t invade anyone but Ukraine isn’t a single unified country, in the same way Spain has its Basque problem. The EU stoked the fire burning in Eastern Ukraine on the Russia borders by pushing for membership & Nato expansion. https://t.co/TqF1xnLsPP
I’m surprised how much of that mad thinking is being expressed in UK these days. And by the right of centre, on GB news not the socialist left.
A new diplomatic inititiative by @EmmanuelMacron is now very unlikely. @Elysee believes Putin – after misleading Macron in three conversations on Sunday & Monday – has dynamited diplomatic route with his choregraphed security council meeting & apocalyptic TV address yesterday 1/
The Tory problem with the huge donations they have received from very wealthy Russians is that everyone knows these were not made out of any kind of disinterested benevolence. As money buys access, influence and favour, why would it also not buy freedom from sanctions?
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
I’d like to be corrected, but I do believe when we Brexited we made EU weaker. We took away from the EU a wealth of foreign policy resources: membership in all the key global networks and institutions, a first-rate foreign service, our brilliant military and intelligence apparatus, world-class universities and media, and lots of money out of the EU coffers. We mustn’t air brush out of history that UK did have a great influence when inside the EU. UK was the driving and liberalising force when it came to the Single Market, enlargement, competition and trade, as well as good influence on EU foreign policy, particularly under Lady Thatcher and Mr Blair.
I'd agree with a lot of that, although I have a lot more reservations about Kosovo than the standard view. There's still total media silence on Hashim Thaci, leader of the KLA, 's upcoming trial for war crimes, for instance.
Johnson is a tactical dilettante who bounces around from lie to lie, broken promise to broken promise, vacuous threat to vacuous threat. Putin plays the long game all the time and will be thanking those in 🇷🇺who worked so hard to buy the Tory Party, help get Brexit and weaken🇬🇧 https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
As much as I don't like Johnson, I'm tired of people like Campbell and Adonis trying to pin this crisis on Brexit. Considering the main competence of Western defence in Europe remains with NATO, I have little doubt that Russia would have continued regardless of whether Britain was in or out of the EU.
But it doesn't help at all, that Britain is out of the EU, and communication and co-ordination with a reasonable-size power is thus weakened .
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
That's a load of rubbish I'm afraid. The UK government has been very careful not to let leaving the EU affect our commitment as a country to the defence of Europe. Our friends inside the EU in the Baltic and Poland are very grateful for the actions we've been taking.
There seems to be this view amongst some elements of the Remain camp that we're not even able to have a discussion with the EU any more because we left which is a total myth. Just because we're outside the club doesn't mean we don't have common interests that we can still pool together on.
Having a discussion isn't the same as defending or influencing a view within a large and powerful organisation, though.
But European defence isn't a primary competence of the European Union. Sanctions are, but as I'm sure you'll have noticed member states such as Germany are acting independently because it's quicker.
Putin might have gained through the political instability of Brexit as a process, but to suggest it's had anything more than a trivial impact on European defence is incorrect.
But if Britain was in the EU now it would be arguing for a particular view *within EU institutions*, and influencing the tone of meetings, and such like. These things do matter, and there's no getting away from that, I would say.
Sky announcing a lot more sanctions up the UK's sleeve announced by Liz Truss.
Why didn't Boris announce them in Parliament? Weird.
Agree. I thought it a poor response and some confusing answers given. I accept what @Farooq says about diplomacy, but still not impressed with level of sanctions nor the confusing answers given to MPs questions.
On the other hand I thought the MPs were generally very good from all side with some very good questions asked.
The EU hasn't agreed their suite of sanctions yet (Hungary playing silly buggers).
And nobody has woken Biden up yet, so the Yanks can't tell us theirs either.....
I know, and although I am pro EU, they haven't always been good at strong responses (one of the problems when it is a compromise answer from a group, and where the individual countries can respond better).
However I am frustrated that Boris gave one particular answer that was so confusing and at the same time important re whether further sanctions only applied if Putin made further inroads into Ukraine and not if he stayed put. Umpteen MPs asked if he meant that or not and nobody got a straight answer. I think all the MPs thought he didn't mean it and that it would be unacceptable if Putin stayed where he was in Ukraine. However no answer actually cleared it up and if one answer started to clarify it the next would confuse matters again. The MPs on all sides seemed very frustrated.
Caroline Lucas @CarolineLucas · 40m PM's list of sanctions against Moscow doesn’t go nearly far enough. When I asked him for a proper investigation into Kremlin meddling in our own politics, he said he’s not aware of any
Presumably that's because he hasn't bothered to look. Has he even read the Russia Report?
Should have moved to just weekly updates. Really no need for the 5 days a week now.
Sure, if you want the anti-Tory wing of the media to bang on endlessly about "what are they hiding?"...
The same wing already claiming Boris is being totally reckless and happy for poor people to die, so I don't think it will add much to that particular narrative angle.
Comments
When DB finally goes down, it's going to do to German politics what the Italian scandals did there - wipe out all the usual suspects.....
Salmond? Everyone knew what he was like, certainly Sturgeon will have done, but his chutzpah and indispensability pre-IndyRef, kept him safely in place. One of the ironies is the Nicola holier-than-thou act, given the way so many women were so badly let down by the whole avoidable Salmond charade which she, effectively, tolerated. And given her status as THE powerful woman in ScotGov, must have made so much more difficult for other women to challenge.
Not very diplomatic.
https://twitter.com/USEmbassyKyiv/status/1496115593149358081
What's the rush?
All she is interested in doing today, is making a narrow and partisan point about UK political party funding.
Anyone on the Scottish nationalist side of things who says "oh working for RT is no worse than working for the BBC", take a look at this mess of a wreck of a pigsty of a disgrace.
Was it really because of the Olympics?
https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/1496146205985882117
https://ria.ru/20220222/sovfed-1774427106.html
Then again, you always seem to pick the Russian side on things. Remember MH17?
Evidence?
Sounds positively libellous to me.
Russian troops have invaded Ukraine. They are literally in Ukraine right now.
You might want to say "I don't care that Russian troops have invaded Ukraine" or "we should accept Russia's invasion" or other similar statements and claim it is "pragmatic" - I'd disagree, but we can agree to disagree.
But to say this is not an invasion is a lie, pure and simple. Russia has invaded Ukraine, that is a fact.
Just as Putin would have wanted, and indeed was very open about wanting.
Did Big G really respond to that summing up of Boris today with “Putin apologist” or are there deleted bits just to make it look that bad?
I'm not sure pointing this out actually helps the west's cause.
Although the odds aren't wildly generous, it's getting quite soon now, and Morrison looks to be toastier than over-toasted toast.
I put it down to verge-of-non-phoney-war hysteria.
Like Mark said, building tidal capacity and no longer needing to import Russian gas (or have China build our nuclear), does a lot more for us in relation to Russia than riding around in a tank or barking at them from under a fur hat.
I'm glad that the Greens can see the difference between Iraq and Ukraine, even if a worrying number of people don't.
It's relatively easy to be the most attractive candidate to replace a PM. It's hard, but not impossible, to engineer the downfall of a Prime Minister. It's very very hard to do both at once.
The trick is to be the most attractive candidate to replace a Prime Minister at the point a vacancy arises.
https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/1496129233302835207?t=SOyYzyTzBjTig97j8NM5uA&s=19
If you want an apologist for Russian aggression, you want Farage:
https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1493305167940313088?t=PlBLqf_Yh1aqZBix8bVYhw&s=19
What we now call Russia is something very different indeed.
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/whats-new/record/65a19809-ffac-4cf7-b4fd-f1a3dad5cac2
There seems to be this view amongst some elements of the Remain camp that we're not even able to have a discussion with the EU any more because we left which is a total myth. Just because we're outside the club doesn't mean we don't have common interests that we can still pool together on.
Nothing to say condemning Russia for invading Ukraine, everything to say about UK party funding.
I've never seen anything to say Putin is anti-EU, on the contrary he is extremely anti-NATO and the EU were undermining NATO.
https://twitter.com/Arron_banks/status/1496015423569022979?t=nonu79IcIBd0u1kpxx1Ffw&s=19
Russia shouldn’t invade anyone but Ukraine isn’t a single unified country, in the same way Spain has its Basque problem. The EU stoked the fire burning in Eastern Ukraine on the Russia borders by pushing for membership & Nato expansion. https://t.co/TqF1xnLsPP
And most countries are pretty different to their counterparts from 1000 years ago.
The name has sort of endured. And the language, sort of. And the religion. Which is as much as you can say about many countries.
I certainly don't want to be going down the Ukraine-is-part-of-Russia route. Historical ownership of land means very little. Ukraine is no more Russian than it is Lithuanian. My point is that the USA pointing to the dazzling splendour of 10th century Kyiv is a dangerous road to go down and doesn't necessarily serve their argument well. Which is daft, as Putin's rhetorical positions are so easy to take apart.
The UK is a middle-ranked power, but definitely worth influencing. Of course Russia, China, Israel, various Gulf States and indeed the USA all have various networks at play.
The problem with Russia is that it is obviously affecting - even at the margins - the very thing thanks makes “us” different from “them”: our democracy.
We need transparency.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-60479678
Another good day for the MET / CPS.
To address your point further, yes, I do take the Russian side far more often than is usual here. I put that down to my starting point being that Russia and the USA are both foreign powers. Many, if not most here, are attached to 'The West' as a concept, with NATO as its military wing, but I question deeply whether 'The West' exists to support all its constituent parts or merely to cement American dominance. I do not see that dominance as necessarily a good thing, and back in the day, America didn't see British power as a good thing - they had a plan to invade the British Empire as late as the 30's.
Traditionally, the guiding aim of British foreign policy has always been the 'balance of powers', so I'm not afraid of a powerful Russia. However, I am strongly opposed to Russia invading its near neighbours, whilst being realistic about what we can achieve to stop them.
Putin might have gained through the political instability of Brexit as a process, but to suggest it's had anything more than a trivial impact on European defence is incorrect.
There's no evidence at all Putin was anti-EU or wanted the UK out of the EU. There are die-hard Remain zealots who project their own viewpoints on it, but all Putin ever speaks about is NATO not the EU - and if anything the EU was undermining "braindead" NATO until Putin has just breathed new life into it.
Remainers may want to credit the EU with all NATO's successes but those of us in the real world know it is NATO that is the power that matters, not the EU.
It's a measure of just how bad BoZo is that Alastair Fucking Campbell can reasonably criticise him
https://twitter.com/mij_europe/status/1496139952966578181?s=21
However I am frustrated that Boris gave one particular answer that was so confusing and at the same time important re whether further sanctions only applied if Putin made further inroads into Ukraine and not if he stayed put. Umpteen MPs asked if he meant that or not and nobody got a straight answer. I think all the MPs thought he didn't mean it and that it would be unacceptable if Putin stayed where he was in Ukraine. However no answer actually cleared it up and if one answer started to clarify it the next would confuse matters again. The MPs on all sides seemed very frustrated.
"Outrageous Russian Aggression"
You just don't want to see it because you've convinced yourself the Greens are synonymous with Corbynites. But they aren't.