politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

Back home Rentoul thinks the betting markets are wrong on Sunak – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,161
edited March 2022 in General
imageBack home Rentoul thinks the betting markets are wrong on Sunak – politicalbetting.com

I think Sunak has a better chance of being PM than the betting markets suggest pic.twitter.com/cNyLatUwBz

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,714
    And if war still rages in eastern europe next year? Will Tory MPs really ditch a sitting PM?
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    OK fine but get on with it already

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz64hWng2vM&ab_channel=GreyRevell
  • LordWakefieldLordWakefield Posts: 144
    edited February 2022
    Considering the Wests short attention span, if Putin can wrap this up by next week this will all be forgotten by mid-March when we can go back to claiming the world's biggest threat is climate change and the patriarchy. Meanwhile the CCP will make plans for Taiwan. Well why wouldn't they?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    Farooq said:

    "Who else is there?"
    Well, if you just want someone better than almost anybody. Just not Williamson, Patel, Mogg, or Dorries.

    Or Cleverly, or...
    rottenborough said:

    And if war still rages in eastern europe next year? Will Tory MPs really ditch a sitting PM?

    No they won't, but as has been historically proven that shouldn't be a reason to not ditch a sitting PM, if they consider that PM unacceptable for the time. A crisis makes him yet more unsuitable.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,714
    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Certainly struck me as odd. I thought markets dont like uncertainty?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    LordWakefield said:

    Considering the Wests short attention span, if Putin can wrap this up by next week this will all be forgotten by mid-March when we can go back to claiming the world's biggest threat is climate change and the patriarchy. Meanwhile the CCP will make plans for Taiwan. Well why wouldn't they?

    In my darker moments I'd agree that is unfortunately plausible. Though even this lot would put not let things go back to normal quite so soon.
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,915
    Does Germany hate everybody to the East except Russia?

    @visegrad24
    During a visit to Poland yesterday, German Environment Minister
    @SteffiLemke
    (the Green Party) said Germany will take Poland to court if the country tries to build nuclear power plants.

    Poland wants to build 6 reactors since EU has demanded that it transitions away from coal.

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1496392433113907200
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    rottenborough said:

    ...


    will give the invading Russian conscripts a bit of a shock.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    Farooq said:

    rottenborough said:

    ...


    If you're going into combat, please wear boots.
    But Commander Putin told me Ukraine in February is super mild!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153
    LordWakefield said:

    Considering the Wests short attention span, if Putin can wrap this up by next week this will all be forgotten by mid-March when we can go back to claiming the world's biggest threat is climate change and the patriarchy. Meanwhile the CCP will make plans for Taiwan. Well why wouldn't they?

    Because (a) invading over 100 miles of ocean is very difficult, and (b) Taiwan (unlike Ukraine) has a modern airforce and a large and well trained army. (Not to mention that they're also working with the French to produce 15 nuclear subs.)

    Oh yeah, and the geography sucks too. They would have to go around Taiwan and land on the other side of the island.

    Now, could they invade Kinmen, which is only about 10 miles off the coast of China? Yes. That would be a relatively easy task. But the main island? That would be extremely difficult.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,780
    FPT. [And with respect, Mike, there are more important things to consider at this point in history than whether the betting markets are understating Sunak's chances.]
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Chris Bryant is a legend, totally agree with him, seize Everton and Chelsea and close them down.

    Roman Abramovich and Alisher Usmanov have been told to condemn Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine if they want to avoid repeated calls for sanctions in parliament.

    Chris Bryant, the Labour MP who declared in the Commons on Thursday that Abramovich is unfit to own Chelsea, has also implored on fans and players to join protests.

    The Chelsea owner and influential Everton investor should already be among those to have assets frozen in retaliation for the outbreak of war in Europe, he told Telegraph Sport.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/02/25/roman-abramovich-alisher-usmanov-told-condemn-vladimir-putin/

    Condemn the invasion plus both change the colour of their first team shorts to yellow with immediate effect.

  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 1,874
    Curse of the new thread:

    I was really hoping the UK wouldn't come last this year, and it was pretty much guaranteed but then I heard this news:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-60530513
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Why? Defence spending is surely the bees knees for arms exporting economies like the UK, US, France etc?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    darkage said:

    On the subject of Putin and Russia, there are some positive signs today, but I would be very cautious about ever thinking that things are going well. For the last decade or so, he has always managed to turn things around to his advantage. I fear that will be the case here. Having been able to carry out an invasion without any meaningful opposition, his worst case scenario at the moment is to do some kind of ceasefire that gets him control of more of the country than he had before plus agreement that Ukraine will not join NATO. This will probably be celebrated as 'peace in our time' by the rest of the world, sanctions dropped, gas back on tap, business as usual. Sorry to be depressing.

    That seems pretty plausible. He will probably still end up considering what was achieved to be positive. But nevertheless if that scenario does happen it would still be something - the scale of his assaults indicates he's hoping for so much more, since he could presumably have gone for the seperatist regions and a corridor to Crimea much more simply.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,779
    On Sunak's competence I think the jury is out - he has a slick operation and a genuine talent for self promotion, but the Treasury under his watch came up with the dumb Eat Out to Catch Covid campaign and unnecessarily juiced the housing market with a pointless stamp duty holiday. But a centrist? He is an avowed slash and burn Thatcherite and committed Brexiteer. On economic questions his current boss has a more credible claim to being a centrist, although it would perhaps be more accurate to describe Johnson's economic philosophy as confused.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874
    edited February 2022
    Evening all :)

    Interesting to read Sunak's comments at the Mais Lecture. Unfortunately, it sounds like re-hashed Thatcherism which will fit in nicely with Labour's re-hashed Blairism (apparently).

    I was interested in this comment:

    “The marginal pound our country produces is far better spent by individuals and businesses than government.”

    I'm not wholly convinced - if that "marginal pound" goes into capital investment, r&d or some form of longer-term spending, it can achieve a lot more than if spent immediately on imported goods.

    We can all support the notion of a "market economy" but that doesn't mean laissez-faire economics - the State has a role to play in allocating the national resources whether on defence, care for vulnerable adults/children, education or silly walks and that's a big part of the political and democratic process.

    It's the balance between the economic power of the State and the individual that cuts to the heart of our politics and society.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153
    IshmaelZ said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Why? Defence spending is surely the bees knees for arms exporting economies like the UK, US, France etc?
    It's particularly good news for France who, one would note, have not been shy to sell arms to Ukraine.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,486
    FPT
    Chameleon said:

    https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1497285592207429633/photo/1

    "⚡️BREAKING: Kyiv home guard, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade, now operate British-provided NLAWs.
    Welcome to hell, motherfuckers."

    It's pretty notable how much Russia has been unwilling/unable to make headway into urban areas. If they do it is going to be horrifically bloody for all involved.


    It’s interesting and like a horrible bloody Petri dish for weapons - for the US/UK they can provide all sorts of weapons that have never been tried in real life situations, and they could never be otherwise be tested against Russian armour in real life conditions/testing.

    If they didn’t work then back to the drawing board but if they are working, and they seem to be, then it changes the balance of NATO/Russian military planning. If Russian tanks are vulnerable then the idea of them sweeping across the Baltic is obsolete and it swings to air power. So HYUFD’s tank requirement might be fighting the last war.

    A bit like the Turkish drones proving more than useful and making military planners have to rethink.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153
    BlancheLivermore said:

    Does Germany hate everybody to the East except Russia?

    @visegrad24
    During a visit to Poland yesterday, German Environment Minister
    @SteffiLemke
    (the Green Party) said Germany will take Poland to court if the country tries to build nuclear power plants.

    Poland wants to build 6 reactors since EU has demanded that it transitions away from coal.

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1496392433113907200

    I wonder who the French bribed to get the Poles building nuclear reactors?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    LordWakefield said:

    Considering the Wests short attention span, if Putin can wrap this up by next week this will all be forgotten by mid-March when we can go back to claiming the world's biggest threat is climate change and the patriarchy. Meanwhile the CCP will make plans for Taiwan. Well why wouldn't they?

    It's very telling that the last word of that post was "he" before you edited it. Please feel free to post in your first language.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,553
    FPT
    FrankBooth said:

    Just seeing a former US Ambassador being surprisingly chipper about things. Putin's got enough forces to take Kiev and maybe one other city but that's about it. The question is what then? He has next to no hope of installing a puppet government that can hold power. So what will it be? The one thing he always has is enormous air power to blow the place to smithereens.

    The thing is that like Trump, Putin is a bad loser. That's what worries me.

    If he orders carpet bombing on civilians, maybe that'll be the point when someone steps in.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,779
    LordWakefield said:

    Considering the Wests short attention span, if Putin can wrap this up by next week this will all be forgotten by mid-March when we can go back to claiming the world's biggest threat is climate change and the patriarchy. Meanwhile the CCP will make plans for Taiwan. Well why wouldn't they?

    Vladimir Putin is the patriarchy.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,572
    boulay said:

    FPT

    Chameleon said:

    https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1497285592207429633/photo/1

    "⚡️BREAKING: Kyiv home guard, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade, now operate British-provided NLAWs.
    Welcome to hell, motherfuckers."

    It's pretty notable how much Russia has been unwilling/unable to make headway into urban areas. If they do it is going to be horrifically bloody for all involved.


    It’s interesting and like a horrible bloody Petri dish for weapons - for the US/UK they can provide all sorts of weapons that have never been tried in real life situations, and they could never be otherwise be tested against Russian armour in real life conditions/testing.

    If they didn’t work then back to the drawing board but if they are working, and they seem to be, then it changes the balance of NATO/Russian military planning. If Russian tanks are vulnerable then the idea of them sweeping across the Baltic is obsolete and it swings to air power. So HYUFD’s tank requirement might be fighting the last war.

    A bit like the Turkish drones proving more than useful and making military planners have to rethink.
    This will be a testing ground for conventional non-conventional weapons.

    The side that tried to fight a 1940s war will lose badly (though both sides might lose).
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,572
    rottenborough said:

    ...


    Decades ago, I came home from a school with a form stating whether I could learn to shoot.

    My dad's reaction was: "Sure, when there's a war I want my kids to learn to shoot."

    Times like this I realise he was correct.

    (I haven't fired a gun in thirty years.)
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,521
    BlancheLivermore said:

    Does Germany hate everybody to the East except Russia?

    @visegrad24
    During a visit to Poland yesterday, German Environment Minister
    @SteffiLemke
    (the Green Party) said Germany will take Poland to court if the country tries to build nuclear power plants.

    Poland wants to build 6 reactors since EU has demanded that it transitions away from coal.

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1496392433113907200

    I think it is the fact they want to put them all down the German border that is causing concern :)
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,241
    Andy_JS said:

    FPT

    FrankBooth said:

    Just seeing a former US Ambassador being surprisingly chipper about things. Putin's got enough forces to take Kiev and maybe one other city but that's about it. The question is what then? He has next to no hope of installing a puppet government that can hold power. So what will it be? The one thing he always has is enormous air power to blow the place to smithereens.

    The thing is that like Trump, Putin is a bad loser. That's what worries me.

    If he orders carpet bombing on civilians, maybe that'll be the point when someone steps in.
    We've seen little sign of Russian air superiority. Are they holding back, or have we given the Ukies something to help them?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874
    Another poor poll for Pecresse, this time from Ifop-Fiducial.

    Changes from equivalent result/candidate in 2017:

    Macron 26.5% (+2)
    Le Pen 16.5% (-4.5)
    Zemmour 15.5% (new)
    Pecresse 14% (-6)
    Melanchon 11% (-9)
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    rcs1000 said:

    BlancheLivermore said:

    Does Germany hate everybody to the East except Russia?

    @visegrad24
    During a visit to Poland yesterday, German Environment Minister
    @SteffiLemke
    (the Green Party) said Germany will take Poland to court if the country tries to build nuclear power plants.

    Poland wants to build 6 reactors since EU has demanded that it transitions away from coal.

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1496392433113907200

    I wonder who the French bribed to get the Poles building nuclear reactors?
    I just have to collect my jaw from the ground at the thought of the Germans objecting to the construction of industrial buildings in Poland.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,572
    OnlyLivingBoy said:

    LordWakefield said:

    Considering the Wests short attention span, if Putin can wrap this up by next week this will all be forgotten by mid-March when we can go back to claiming the world's biggest threat is climate change and the patriarchy. Meanwhile the CCP will make plans for Taiwan. Well why wouldn't they?

    Vladimir Putin is the patriarchy.
    We all know lesbians are the greatest enemy of the patriarchy,

    We should therefore send our lesbians in against Russia.

    To prove they are the best, they will send in their best lesbians against ours.

    And whilst their male troops are watching the resultant videos, we shall send in the asexuals!

    Yes, LGBT will save civilised society!

    (runs for cover.)
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,497
    kle4 said:

    pigeon said:

    MoonRabbit said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    What should we do?

    What strikes me is what we are asking of the Ukrainian, to fight alone in a war of survival, but with extra weaponry. In essence, we are asking them to make the war more brutal, more attritional, more bloody to deter Russia. Some of what we provide might help shield the civilians in cities, but on average the emphasis of our defence help is not immediately humanitarian in nature.

    Whatever the rights, wrongs and realpolitic of the eastern expansion of NATO over the last 3 decades - too far, correct or not far enough, that, bluntly, is our ask, as allies, of the Ukrainian people.

    So, when I turn to sanctions, narrow based sanctions on the Russian elites don't cut it. Our ask of our ordinary Ukranian friends is way more of our ask on ordinary Russians living on the other side of this war. Hit the elites hard, yes, definitely, but we should not shy from impact on ordinary Russians, nor indeed of some impact on ourselves.

    There’s a lot of posts on here urging and willing the Ukrainians to fight on, and trying to paint it as a fight they are doing well in, which I think disguises this is, in truth and fact leading to something just as horrible and difficult to except as the end of the Prague Spring with that invasion.

    Someone posted here other day, after Russia went into Czechoslovakia, over next ten years they pilfered it.

    At the crunch the Western world did not stand shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine this time. The dream of poor Ukrainians being in EU and getting wealthier and having nice things like western everyday people is over now, for time being, more days of terror and war in their country (not ours) won’t change that at all. In fact brilliant people like Zelenskiy and Klitchko and others we don’t even know their name might die.

    I don’t feel as gung ho as PB today. It suddenly seems pointless to me. Is this anti Russian bloodlust just trying to hide the guilt? Carry on calling me a traitor and surrender monkey if you want, I would rather wake up tomorrow to a ceasefire and Zelenskiy in Minsk talking with Putin, than wake up to find it still going on.
    The Ukrainians, or a great many of them anyway, may simply have decided that they prefer to gamble on a military solution and potentially die fighting than to suffer the slow garrotting that comes from being turned into another Belarus, and who are we to say that they're wrong?
    Indeed. I don't know how this mess can be made better, but I'm not really inclined to over analyse people expressing hopes that the Ukrainians manage to undetake a spirited defence of their country.

    The world and this situation remains a complex one, but is it being gung ho to find some hope at the sight, however brief it may be, of people fighting back against an aggressor? Is it not the height of navel gazing to analyse that as some deep message of seemingly sinister character, rather than just instinctive sympathy for an underdog?
    One things not complex. Obviously Russia is the aggressor here. Or just the twisted Putin regime (though people do think differently in sticks than cities, older, less cosmo). And if it was this country, I would take a machine gun and fight, at least until PM called a ceasefire. So I am right behind the Ukrainians who choose to do the same. I suspect most will.

    But should leadership lead their people that far into the meat grinder? So when I said ceasefire and Zelenskiy talking, it was as a good leader not weak one I was thinking. Do you see what I mean? For how long should he let them get ground up? 😕

    But We aren’t fighting Putin. Our country is not there with them, just trying to convince itself it is. That’s the bottom line I’m trying to say. We are armchair generals miles away urging others to fight and die against Putin for our relief? Relief from our anger our guilt? Do you really get hope from watching them die today, whilst you are far away in an armchair, and if Sunday’s ceasefire came Saturday, they could have gone home to their families?

    I’m not getting any hope or satisfaction from knowing it ends in broken families and a nations loss of freedom. Knowing that most powerful countries in the world standing by watching it, leaving them feeling betrayed. I’m just feeling more and more sad.

    I should switch it off. But I feel guilty about turning my head away from this fight too.

    😕
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,590
    JohnLilburne said:

    Andy_JS said:

    FPT

    FrankBooth said:

    Just seeing a former US Ambassador being surprisingly chipper about things. Putin's got enough forces to take Kiev and maybe one other city but that's about it. The question is what then? He has next to no hope of installing a puppet government that can hold power. So what will it be? The one thing he always has is enormous air power to blow the place to smithereens.

    The thing is that like Trump, Putin is a bad loser. That's what worries me.

    If he orders carpet bombing on civilians, maybe that'll be the point when someone steps in.
    We've seen little sign of Russian air superiority. Are they holding back, or have we given the Ukies something to help them?
    It is possible that Russian intelligence is poor and they don't know whether or not we have given them something spicy in the AA line.

    And the experience of their tanks and APCs is making the military err on the side of caution.
  • PJohnsonPJohnson Posts: 90
    rottenborough said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Certainly struck me as odd. I thought markets dont like uncertainty?
    its a mechanical move. Too many people shorted the invasion....market never gives money away that trade was too obvious..those shorts have to be squeezed out...also the market had been falling for weeks before too
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,714

    Jim Pickard
    @PickardJE
    ·
    1h
    “if Russia controls Ukraine and Belarus then all of a sudden the Nato-Russia border jumps from around 1,300km to [around] 3,700km"


    https://twitter.com/PickardJE

    ===

    We are going to have to spend a hell of a lot more on military in the next decade.

    Sunak can forget all his current budget plans.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,714
    stodge said:

    Another poor poll for Pecresse, this time from Ifop-Fiducial.

    Changes from equivalent result/candidate in 2017:

    Macron 26.5% (+2)
    Le Pen 16.5% (-4.5)
    Zemmour 15.5% (new)
    Pecresse 14% (-6)
    Melanchon 11% (-9)

    Was this before Zemmour said Putin was right to invade Ukr?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,521
    boulay said:

    FPT

    Chameleon said:

    https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1497285592207429633/photo/1

    "⚡️BREAKING: Kyiv home guard, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade, now operate British-provided NLAWs.
    Welcome to hell, motherfuckers."

    It's pretty notable how much Russia has been unwilling/unable to make headway into urban areas. If they do it is going to be horrifically bloody for all involved.


    It’s interesting and like a horrible bloody Petri dish for weapons - for the US/UK they can provide all sorts of weapons that have never been tried in real life situations, and they could never be otherwise be tested against Russian armour in real life conditions/testing.

    If they didn’t work then back to the drawing board but if they are working, and they seem to be, then it changes the balance of NATO/Russian military planning. If Russian tanks are vulnerable then the idea of them sweeping across the Baltic is obsolete and it swings to air power. So HYUFD’s tank requirement might be fighting the last war.

    A bit like the Turkish drones proving more than useful and making military planners have to rethink.
    Am I right that this is the first time NLAWs have been used in anger? From what I am reading I am getting the impression they are proving remarkably effective
  • PJohnsonPJohnson Posts: 90
    if it was as easy as shorting the market on an invasion to make money everyone would be rich
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,590
    mwadams said:

    JohnLilburne said:

    Andy_JS said:

    FPT

    FrankBooth said:

    Just seeing a former US Ambassador being surprisingly chipper about things. Putin's got enough forces to take Kiev and maybe one other city but that's about it. The question is what then? He has next to no hope of installing a puppet government that can hold power. So what will it be? The one thing he always has is enormous air power to blow the place to smithereens.

    The thing is that like Trump, Putin is a bad loser. That's what worries me.

    If he orders carpet bombing on civilians, maybe that'll be the point when someone steps in.
    We've seen little sign of Russian air superiority. Are they holding back, or have we given the Ukies something to help them?
    It is possible that Russian intelligence is poor and they don't know whether or not we have given them something spicy in the AA line.

    And the experience of their tanks and APCs is making the military err on the side of caution.
    (A tank is $4m but a plane is $40m)
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,028
    mwadams said:

    JohnLilburne said:

    Andy_JS said:

    FPT

    FrankBooth said:

    Just seeing a former US Ambassador being surprisingly chipper about things. Putin's got enough forces to take Kiev and maybe one other city but that's about it. The question is what then? He has next to no hope of installing a puppet government that can hold power. So what will it be? The one thing he always has is enormous air power to blow the place to smithereens.

    The thing is that like Trump, Putin is a bad loser. That's what worries me.

    If he orders carpet bombing on civilians, maybe that'll be the point when someone steps in.
    We've seen little sign of Russian air superiority. Are they holding back, or have we given the Ukies something to help them?
    It is possible that Russian intelligence is poor and they don't know whether or not we have given them something spicy in the AA line.

    And the experience of their tanks and APCs is making the military err on the side of caution.
    Haven’t we sent them anti air weapons as well? Presumably worried more would be shot down - a few Russian jets have gone down already I think
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Why? Defence spending is surely the bees knees for arms exporting economies like the UK, US, France etc?
    It's particularly good news for France who, one would note, have not been shy to sell arms to Ukraine.
    I hate to use the phrase as I am the first to admit it is shallow and perhaps callous but after a dubious start I think Macron is having a 'good war' so far. He was right to try and find a diplomatic solution to all of this whilst also preparing for failure and his pronouncements and his support for tough sanctions against Russia (which go beyond what is proposed by the EU) as well as supplying the Ukrainians with defence equipment and his move to speed up putting French forces into Romania all show he is taking this seriously and acting accordingly.

    Much as I am not a big fan of Macron normally, given a choice between him and his likely opponents, most of whom seem to be Putin apologists, I would choose him every time.
    The thing I was most impressed with is that he's allowed French arms manufacturers to use the government export finance facility - that is the Ukrainians don't actually need to hand over money now.

    Cynically, of course, this is very good news for France's arms industry. But I also appreciate that - unlike some countries - the French were very willing to change their stance when Russia invaded.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,714
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    BlancheLivermore said:

    Does Germany hate everybody to the East except Russia?

    @visegrad24
    During a visit to Poland yesterday, German Environment Minister
    @SteffiLemke
    (the Green Party) said Germany will take Poland to court if the country tries to build nuclear power plants.

    Poland wants to build 6 reactors since EU has demanded that it transitions away from coal.

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1496392433113907200

    I think it is the fact they want to put them all down the German border that is causing concern :)
    That is an amazing map. I had no idea there were that many scattered across europe.

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,821
    darkage said:

    rottenborough said:

    ...


    will give the invading Russian conscripts a bit of a shock.
    The Germans invading Stalingrad got a bit of a shock to discover many of the Soviet flak guns (used in anti-tank mode) were "manned" by young women.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,918
    edited February 2022
    The Ukraine crisis likely secures Boris until the local elections. Provided the Tories avoid massive losses there he will likely survive beyond that too.

    If he is fined by the Met then it will be hard for him to survive, however if Sunak is also fined his leadership chances would also be over too. That would leave Hunt or Truss as the likely new PM
  • jonny83jonny83 Posts: 1,270
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    boulay said:

    FPT

    Chameleon said:

    https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1497285592207429633/photo/1

    "⚡️BREAKING: Kyiv home guard, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade, now operate British-provided NLAWs.
    Welcome to hell, motherfuckers."

    It's pretty notable how much Russia has been unwilling/unable to make headway into urban areas. If they do it is going to be horrifically bloody for all involved.


    It’s interesting and like a horrible bloody Petri dish for weapons - for the US/UK they can provide all sorts of weapons that have never been tried in real life situations, and they could never be otherwise be tested against Russian armour in real life conditions/testing.

    If they didn’t work then back to the drawing board but if they are working, and they seem to be, then it changes the balance of NATO/Russian military planning. If Russian tanks are vulnerable then the idea of them sweeping across the Baltic is obsolete and it swings to air power. So HYUFD’s tank requirement might be fighting the last war.

    A bit like the Turkish drones proving more than useful and making military planners have to rethink.
    Am I right that this is the first time NLAWs have been used in anger? From what I am reading I am getting the impression they are proving remarkably effective
    They seem to be doing some damage and their ability to use them in tight spaces could be effective in city block fighting.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    rottenborough said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Certainly struck me as odd. I thought markets dont like uncertainty?
    Usual cliche is Business doesn't like uncertainty, which is different. Also, no uncertainty = no volatility = no short-term trading opportunities = market halved in size. Also also, like it or not, uncertainty is the human condition.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,918
    boulay said:

    FPT

    Chameleon said:

    https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1497285592207429633/photo/1

    "⚡️BREAKING: Kyiv home guard, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade, now operate British-provided NLAWs.
    Welcome to hell, motherfuckers."

    It's pretty notable how much Russia has been unwilling/unable to make headway into urban areas. If they do it is going to be horrifically bloody for all involved.


    It’s interesting and like a horrible bloody Petri dish for weapons - for the US/UK they can provide all sorts of weapons that have never been tried in real life situations, and they could never be otherwise be tested against Russian armour in real life conditions/testing.

    If they didn’t work then back to the drawing board but if they are working, and they seem to be, then it changes the balance of NATO/Russian military planning. If Russian tanks are vulnerable then the idea of them sweeping across the Baltic is obsolete and it swings to air power. So HYUFD’s tank requirement might be fighting the last war.

    A bit like the Turkish drones proving more than useful and making military planners have to rethink.
    As Russia also has the largest airforce in Europe without heavy US air support the point remains, European NATO powers need more military hardware, whether tanks or fighter jets and bombers
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,572
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    boulay said:

    FPT

    Chameleon said:

    https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1497285592207429633/photo/1

    "⚡️BREAKING: Kyiv home guard, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade, now operate British-provided NLAWs.
    Welcome to hell, motherfuckers."

    It's pretty notable how much Russia has been unwilling/unable to make headway into urban areas. If they do it is going to be horrifically bloody for all involved.


    It’s interesting and like a horrible bloody Petri dish for weapons - for the US/UK they can provide all sorts of weapons that have never been tried in real life situations, and they could never be otherwise be tested against Russian armour in real life conditions/testing.

    If they didn’t work then back to the drawing board but if they are working, and they seem to be, then it changes the balance of NATO/Russian military planning. If Russian tanks are vulnerable then the idea of them sweeping across the Baltic is obsolete and it swings to air power. So HYUFD’s tank requirement might be fighting the last war.

    A bit like the Turkish drones proving more than useful and making military planners have to rethink.
    Am I right that this is the first time NLAWs have been used in anger? From what I am reading I am getting the impression they are proving remarkably effective
    When else has there been a conflict where they're likely to have been used? Iraq and Afghanistan were rather poor in armour after 2003. I don't know if NLAWs are practical against hardened static targets (e.g. bunkers), but I bet they're the first time they've been used in their designed role.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,572
    HYUFD said:

    boulay said:

    FPT

    Chameleon said:

    https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1497285592207429633/photo/1

    "⚡️BREAKING: Kyiv home guard, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade, now operate British-provided NLAWs.
    Welcome to hell, motherfuckers."

    It's pretty notable how much Russia has been unwilling/unable to make headway into urban areas. If they do it is going to be horrifically bloody for all involved.


    It’s interesting and like a horrible bloody Petri dish for weapons - for the US/UK they can provide all sorts of weapons that have never been tried in real life situations, and they could never be otherwise be tested against Russian armour in real life conditions/testing.

    If they didn’t work then back to the drawing board but if they are working, and they seem to be, then it changes the balance of NATO/Russian military planning. If Russian tanks are vulnerable then the idea of them sweeping across the Baltic is obsolete and it swings to air power. So HYUFD’s tank requirement might be fighting the last war.

    A bit like the Turkish drones proving more than useful and making military planners have to rethink.
    As Russia also has the largest airforce in Europe without heavy US air support the point remains, European NATO powers need more military hardware, whether tanks or fighter jets and bombers
    And we are all going to have to pay higher taxes.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,486
    PJohnson said:

    rottenborough said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Certainly struck me as odd. I thought markets dont like uncertainty?
    its a mechanical move. Too many people shorted the invasion....market never gives money away that trade was too obvious..those shorts have to be squeezed out...also the market had been falling for weeks before too
    I haven’t looked at the stats but always be sceptical about market moves on a Friday as liquidity is lower so small trades move markets disproportionately.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,355
    JosiasJessop said:

    rottenborough said:

    ...


    Decades ago, I came home from a school with a form stating whether I could learn to shoot.

    My dad's reaction was: "Sure, when there's a war I want my kids to learn to shoot."

    Times like this I realise he was correct.

    (I haven't fired a gun in thirty years.)
    When I was a teenager, in the 90s, I went on a Scout exchange trip to New York State. At the insistence of my parents I was taken to do archery while all the other Scouts went to a shooting range. Much as I enjoy using a bow, the visit to a shooting range is currently feeling like it would have been modestly more useful.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,572
    HYUFD said:

    The Ukraine crisis likely secures Boris until the local elections. Provided the Tories avoid massive losses there he will likely survive beyond that too.

    If he is fined by the Met then it will be hard for him to survive, however if Sunak is also fined his leadership chances would also be over too. That would leave Hunt or Truss as the likely new PM

    I think that's very fair. It's not what I want to happen, but seems realistic.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,241
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    darkage said:

    rottenborough said:

    ...


    will give the invading Russian conscripts a bit of a shock.
    The Germans invading Stalingrad got a bit of a shock to discover many of the Soviet flak guns (used in anti-tank mode) were "manned" by young women.
    Our ack ack guns were served by women too
  • PJohnsonPJohnson Posts: 90
    boulay said:

    PJohnson said:

    rottenborough said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Certainly struck me as odd. I thought markets dont like uncertainty?
    its a mechanical move. Too many people shorted the invasion....market never gives money away that trade was too obvious..those shorts have to be squeezed out...also the market had been falling for weeks before too
    I haven’t looked at the stats but always be sceptical about market moves on a Friday as liquidity is lower so small trades move markets disproportionately.
    wall street has had 2 days of big rallies now...its the next move that will be telling as stocks are still well down on the year
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,486
    HYUFD said:

    boulay said:

    FPT

    Chameleon said:

    https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1497285592207429633/photo/1

    "⚡️BREAKING: Kyiv home guard, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade, now operate British-provided NLAWs.
    Welcome to hell, motherfuckers."

    It's pretty notable how much Russia has been unwilling/unable to make headway into urban areas. If they do it is going to be horrifically bloody for all involved.


    It’s interesting and like a horrible bloody Petri dish for weapons - for the US/UK they can provide all sorts of weapons that have never been tried in real life situations, and they could never be otherwise be tested against Russian armour in real life conditions/testing.

    If they didn’t work then back to the drawing board but if they are working, and they seem to be, then it changes the balance of NATO/Russian military planning. If Russian tanks are vulnerable then the idea of them sweeping across the Baltic is obsolete and it swings to air power. So HYUFD’s tank requirement might be fighting the last war.

    A bit like the Turkish drones proving more than useful and making military planners have to rethink.
    As Russia also has the largest airforce in Europe without heavy US air support the point remains, European NATO powers need more military hardware, whether tanks or fighter jets and bombers
    Agreed re Russia having the largest airforce however it’s possible that over two days reliance on heavy armour has been shown to be wrong/outdated which then asks the question that if new weapons have made tanks obsolete what’s in the pipeline against air power.

    Also whilst Russia has greater air power than Europe firstly - it doesn’t have greater air power than NATO, and secondly - it’s only good if the planes and helicopters are good and the right combo.

    But I absolutely agree that Europe as a whole needs to stop leaning on the US.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    HYUFD said:

    The Ukraine crisis likely secures Boris until the local elections. Provided the Tories avoid massive losses there he will likely survive beyond that too.

    If he is fined by the Met then it will be hard for him to survive, however if Sunak is also fined his leadership chances would also be over too. That would leave Hunt or Truss as the likely new PM

    Clearly, the country needs Hunt in the job asap. Your job is to help make it happen.
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,915
    edited February 2022
    Anonymous TV 🌐@YourAnonTV
    JUST IN: Hacktivist group #Anonymous has successfully breached and leaked the database of the Russian Ministry of Defence website | mil[.] ru |. You can download all private data of the Russian MOD here: https://mega.nz/file/U3JAGRKL#fvwxJOQgODvHTKK37d5vaU3eCi8E3B5atDe1fXu_Zjs…
    https://twitter.com/YourAnonTV/status/1497273131567828992
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,572
    LostPassword said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    rottenborough said:

    ...


    Decades ago, I came home from a school with a form stating whether I could learn to shoot.

    My dad's reaction was: "Sure, when there's a war I want my kids to learn to shoot."

    Times like this I realise he was correct.

    (I haven't fired a gun in thirty years.)
    When I was a teenager, in the 90s, I went on a Scout exchange trip to New York State. At the insistence of my parents I was taken to do archery while all the other Scouts went to a shooting range. Much as I enjoy using a bow, the visit to a shooting range is currently feeling like it would have been modestly more useful.
    Many moons ago I was invited to represent a charity group! against some army cadets in a shooting competition.

    4v4.

    On our side there was myself, someone who lived on a farm, his gf, and someone who had never shot before.

    We won.

    The cadets were not happy.

    (I nearly made it to Bisley for the interschools shooting competition one year. Mainly because I spent a long time not being able to do any other sport bar shooting. If I tried to shoot now I'd probably end up with one leg. And still be able to beat the cadets.)
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    rcs1000 said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Why? Defence spending is surely the bees knees for arms exporting economies like the UK, US, France etc?
    It's particularly good news for France who, one would note, have not been shy to sell arms to Ukraine.
    I hate to use the phrase as I am the first to admit it is shallow and perhaps callous but after a dubious start I think Macron is having a 'good war' so far. He was right to try and find a diplomatic solution to all of this whilst also preparing for failure and his pronouncements and his support for tough sanctions against Russia (which go beyond what is proposed by the EU) as well as supplying the Ukrainians with defence equipment and his move to speed up putting French forces into Romania all show he is taking this seriously and acting accordingly.

    Much as I am not a big fan of Macron normally, given a choice between him and his likely opponents, most of whom seem to be Putin apologists, I would choose him every time.
    The thing I was most impressed with is that he's allowed French arms manufacturers to use the government export finance facility - that is the Ukrainians don't actually need to hand over money now.

    Cynically, of course, this is very good news for France's arms industry. But I also appreciate that - unlike some countries - the French were very willing to change their stance when Russia invaded.
    It is of course the case - and I can only say this because @TSE seems not to be here - that the Falklands war was effectively won by the French in that they sold us exocet missiles, and declined to sell thewm to Argentinia.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,572
    BlancheLivermore said:

    Anonymous TV 🌐@YourAnonTV
    JUST IN: Hacktivist group #Anonymous has successfully breached and leaked the database of the Russian Ministry of Defence website | mil[.] ru |. You can download all private data of the Russian MOD here: https://mega.nz/file/U3JAGRKL#fvwxJOQgODvHTKK37d5vaU3eCi8E3B5atDe1fXu_Zjs…
    https://twitter.com/YourAnonTV/status/1497273131567828992

    On one hand, I hate this sort of hacker.

    On the other.... LOL.
  • PJohnsonPJohnson Posts: 90
    Farooq said:

    PJohnson said:

    boulay said:

    PJohnson said:

    rottenborough said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Certainly struck me as odd. I thought markets dont like uncertainty?
    its a mechanical move. Too many people shorted the invasion....market never gives money away that trade was too obvious..those shorts have to be squeezed out...also the market had been falling for weeks before too
    I haven’t looked at the stats but always be sceptical about market moves on a Friday as liquidity is lower so small trades move markets disproportionately.
    wall street has had 2 days of big rallies now...its the next move that will be telling as stocks are still well down on the year
    I'll bet you're a fan of rallies, right?
    as in to make money off of...sure who wouldnt be
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,714
    TEL AVIV — President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine has asked the Israeli prime minister, Naftali Bennett, to mediate negotiations in Jerusalem between Ukraine and Russia.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,780
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    boulay said:

    FPT

    Chameleon said:

    https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1497285592207429633/photo/1

    "⚡️BREAKING: Kyiv home guard, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade, now operate British-provided NLAWs.
    Welcome to hell, motherfuckers."

    It's pretty notable how much Russia has been unwilling/unable to make headway into urban areas. If they do it is going to be horrifically bloody for all involved.


    It’s interesting and like a horrible bloody Petri dish for weapons - for the US/UK they can provide all sorts of weapons that have never been tried in real life situations, and they could never be otherwise be tested against Russian armour in real life conditions/testing.

    If they didn’t work then back to the drawing board but if they are working, and they seem to be, then it changes the balance of NATO/Russian military planning. If Russian tanks are vulnerable then the idea of them sweeping across the Baltic is obsolete and it swings to air power. So HYUFD’s tank requirement might be fighting the last war.

    A bit like the Turkish drones proving more than useful and making military planners have to rethink.
    Am I right that this is the first time NLAWs have been used in anger? From what I am reading I am getting the impression they are proving remarkably effective
    It's not the first time in the sense that they are just latest upgrade in a line that started with PIATs, Bazookas and Panzerfausts. The former two weren't that effective but the latter were, so much so that Allied troops made use of any they could capture intact. The development of hand held AT weapons in WW2 rendered tanks pretty vulnerable in theatres offering any reasonable amount of cover, so tanks had then to be used in tandem with infantry to first flush out opposing industry in places of ambush.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,572
    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Why? Defence spending is surely the bees knees for arms exporting economies like the UK, US, France etc?
    It's particularly good news for France who, one would note, have not been shy to sell arms to Ukraine.
    I hate to use the phrase as I am the first to admit it is shallow and perhaps callous but after a dubious start I think Macron is having a 'good war' so far. He was right to try and find a diplomatic solution to all of this whilst also preparing for failure and his pronouncements and his support for tough sanctions against Russia (which go beyond what is proposed by the EU) as well as supplying the Ukrainians with defence equipment and his move to speed up putting French forces into Romania all show he is taking this seriously and acting accordingly.

    Much as I am not a big fan of Macron normally, given a choice between him and his likely opponents, most of whom seem to be Putin apologists, I would choose him every time.
    The thing I was most impressed with is that he's allowed French arms manufacturers to use the government export finance facility - that is the Ukrainians don't actually need to hand over money now.

    Cynically, of course, this is very good news for France's arms industry. But I also appreciate that - unlike some countries - the French were very willing to change their stance when Russia invaded.
    It is of course the case - and I can only say this because @TSE seems not to be here - that the Falklands war was effectively won by the French in that they sold us exocet missiles, and declined to sell thewm to Argentinia.
    Isn't the history of the Falklands and Exocet rather more complex than that?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,918
    stodge said:

    Another poor poll for Pecresse, this time from Ifop-Fiducial.

    Changes from equivalent result/candidate in 2017:

    Macron 26.5% (+2)
    Le Pen 16.5% (-4.5)
    Zemmour 15.5% (new)
    Pecresse 14% (-6)
    Melanchon 11% (-9)

    Le Pen now does best v Macron in the runoff, she gets 44% to 42% for Pecresse and 38% for Zemmour
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,714
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Ukraine crisis likely secures Boris until the local elections. Provided the Tories avoid massive losses there he will likely survive beyond that too.

    If he is fined by the Met then it will be hard for him to survive, however if Sunak is also fined his leadership chances would also be over too. That would leave Hunt or Truss as the likely new PM

    Clearly, the country needs Hunt in the job asap. Your job is to help make it happen.
    Johnson will probably not be fined. Even if he is - no way he is going during this crisis.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    BlancheLivermore said:

    Anonymous TV 🌐@YourAnonTV
    JUST IN: Hacktivist group #Anonymous has successfully breached and leaked the database of the Russian Ministry of Defence website | mil[.] ru |. You can download all private data of the Russian MOD here: https://mega.nz/file/U3JAGRKL#fvwxJOQgODvHTKK37d5vaU3eCi8E3B5atDe1fXu_Zjs…
    https://twitter.com/YourAnonTV/status/1497273131567828992

    anything interesting in there?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    JosiasJessop said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Why? Defence spending is surely the bees knees for arms exporting economies like the UK, US, France etc?
    It's particularly good news for France who, one would note, have not been shy to sell arms to Ukraine.
    I hate to use the phrase as I am the first to admit it is shallow and perhaps callous but after a dubious start I think Macron is having a 'good war' so far. He was right to try and find a diplomatic solution to all of this whilst also preparing for failure and his pronouncements and his support for tough sanctions against Russia (which go beyond what is proposed by the EU) as well as supplying the Ukrainians with defence equipment and his move to speed up putting French forces into Romania all show he is taking this seriously and acting accordingly.

    Much as I am not a big fan of Macron normally, given a choice between him and his likely opponents, most of whom seem to be Putin apologists, I would choose him every time.
    The thing I was most impressed with is that he's allowed French arms manufacturers to use the government export finance facility - that is the Ukrainians don't actually need to hand over money now.

    Cynically, of course, this is very good news for France's arms industry. But I also appreciate that - unlike some countries - the French were very willing to change their stance when Russia invaded.
    It is of course the case - and I can only say this because @TSE seems not to be here - that the Falklands war was effectively won by the French in that they sold us exocet missiles, and declined to sell thewm to Argentinia.
    Isn't the history of the Falklands and Exocet rather more complex than that?
    Yeah that wasn't pretending to be a book-length treatment of the subject. There was also Prince Andrew.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990
    ** EXCLUSIVE **

    Boris Johnson is quietly getting his house in order in 10 Downing Street.
    David Canzini starts on Monday as the Prime Minister’s deputy chief of staff, I can reveal.
    Tory MPs will be delighted.
    We first revealed this plan in December. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/12/12/boris-johnson-talks-hire-hard-man-ally-sir-lynton-crosby-no/
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,630
    edited February 2022
    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Why? Defence spending is surely the bees knees for arms exporting economies like the UK, US, France etc?
    It's particularly good news for France who, one would note, have not been shy to sell arms to Ukraine.
    I hate to use the phrase as I am the first to admit it is shallow and perhaps callous but after a dubious start I think Macron is having a 'good war' so far. He was right to try and find a diplomatic solution to all of this whilst also preparing for failure and his pronouncements and his support for tough sanctions against Russia (which go beyond what is proposed by the EU) as well as supplying the Ukrainians with defence equipment and his move to speed up putting French forces into Romania all show he is taking this seriously and acting accordingly.

    Much as I am not a big fan of Macron normally, given a choice between him and his likely opponents, most of whom seem to be Putin apologists, I would choose him every time.
    The thing I was most impressed with is that he's allowed French arms manufacturers to use the government export finance facility - that is the Ukrainians don't actually need to hand over money now.

    Cynically, of course, this is very good news for France's arms industry. But I also appreciate that - unlike some countries - the French were very willing to change their stance when Russia invaded.
    It is of course the case - and I can only say this because @TSE seems not to be here - that the Falklands war was effectively won by the French in that they sold us exocet missiles, and declined to sell thewm to Argentinia.
    The nation of collaborators were perfidious during the Falklands.

    But Mitterrand's policy of supporting Britain provoked dissent among some senior officials in the French foreign ministry.

    In a stinging memo dated 7 April 1982, France's then ambassador to London, Emmanuel de Margerie, described British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher as "Victorian, imperialist and obstinate". He went on to add that she had a "tendency to get carried away by combative instincts".

    In another document entitled The Falklands: Lessons from a Fiasco, senior French official Bernard Dorin accused Britain of "superpower arrogance" and claimed the country had shown "profound contempt for Latinos".

    Behind the scenes, actions were speaking louder than words. In what would appear to be a clear breach of President Mitterrand's embargo, a French technical team - mainly working for a company 51% owned by the French government - stayed in Argentina throughout the war.

    In an interview carried out in 1982 by Sunday Times journalist Isabel Hilton, the team's leader, Herve Colin, admitted carrying out one particular test that proved invaluable to Argentinian forces.

    "The verification process involves determining if the missile launcher was functioning correctly or not. Three of the launchers failed. We located the source of the problem and that was it. The rest was simple."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17256975

    Once the Falklands were secure the returning task force should have nuked or invaded France.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,028
    BlancheLivermore said:

    Anonymous TV 🌐@YourAnonTV
    JUST IN: Hacktivist group #Anonymous has successfully breached and leaked the database of the Russian Ministry of Defence website | mil[.] ru |. You can download all private data of the Russian MOD here: https://mega.nz/file/U3JAGRKL#fvwxJOQgODvHTKK37d5vaU3eCi8E3B5atDe1fXu_Zjs…
    https://twitter.com/YourAnonTV/status/1497273131567828992

    Lol. I’m not clicking that link but good for them
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,572
    IshmaelZ said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Why? Defence spending is surely the bees knees for arms exporting economies like the UK, US, France etc?
    It's particularly good news for France who, one would note, have not been shy to sell arms to Ukraine.
    I hate to use the phrase as I am the first to admit it is shallow and perhaps callous but after a dubious start I think Macron is having a 'good war' so far. He was right to try and find a diplomatic solution to all of this whilst also preparing for failure and his pronouncements and his support for tough sanctions against Russia (which go beyond what is proposed by the EU) as well as supplying the Ukrainians with defence equipment and his move to speed up putting French forces into Romania all show he is taking this seriously and acting accordingly.

    Much as I am not a big fan of Macron normally, given a choice between him and his likely opponents, most of whom seem to be Putin apologists, I would choose him every time.
    The thing I was most impressed with is that he's allowed French arms manufacturers to use the government export finance facility - that is the Ukrainians don't actually need to hand over money now.

    Cynically, of course, this is very good news for France's arms industry. But I also appreciate that - unlike some countries - the French were very willing to change their stance when Russia invaded.
    It is of course the case - and I can only say this because @TSE seems not to be here - that the Falklands war was effectively won by the French in that they sold us exocet missiles, and declined to sell thewm to Argentinia.
    Isn't the history of the Falklands and Exocet rather more complex than that?
    Yeah that wasn't pretending to be a book-length treatment of the subject. There was also Prince Andrew.
    Were them some attractive young lambs that needed love-bombing?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,419
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Why? Defence spending is surely the bees knees for arms exporting economies like the UK, US, France etc?
    It's particularly good news for France who, one would note, have not been shy to sell arms to Ukraine.
    I hate to use the phrase as I am the first to admit it is shallow and perhaps callous but after a dubious start I think Macron is having a 'good war' so far. He was right to try and find a diplomatic solution to all of this whilst also preparing for failure and his pronouncements and his support for tough sanctions against Russia (which go beyond what is proposed by the EU) as well as supplying the Ukrainians with defence equipment and his move to speed up putting French forces into Romania all show he is taking this seriously and acting accordingly.

    Much as I am not a big fan of Macron normally, given a choice between him and his likely opponents, most of whom seem to be Putin apologists, I would choose him every time.
    The thing I was most impressed with is that he's allowed French arms manufacturers to use the government export finance facility - that is the Ukrainians don't actually need to hand over money now.

    Cynically, of course, this is very good news for France's arms industry. But I also appreciate that - unlike some countries - the French were very willing to change their stance when Russia invaded.
    It is of course the case - and I can only say this because @TSE seems not to be here - that the Falklands war was effectively won by the French in that they sold us exocet missiles, and declined to sell thewm to Argentinia.
    The nation of collaborators were perfidious during the Falklands.

    But Mitterrand's policy of supporting Britain provoked dissent among some senior officials in the French foreign ministry.

    In a stinging memo dated 7 April 1982, France's then ambassador to London, Emmanuel de Margerie, described British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher as "Victorian, imperialist and obstinate". He went on to add that she had a "tendency to get carried away by combative instincts".

    In another document entitled The Falklands: Lessons from a Fiasco, senior French official Bernard Dorin accused Britain of "superpower arrogance" and claimed the country had shown "profound contempt for Latinos".

    Behind the scenes, actions were speaking louder than words. In what would appear to be a clear breach of President Mitterrand's embargo, a French technical team - mainly working for a company 51% owned by the French government - stayed in Argentina throughout the war.

    In an interview carried out in 1982 by Sunday Times journalist Isabel Hilton, the team's leader, Herve Colin, admitted carrying out one particular test that proved invaluable to Argentinian forces.

    "The verification process involves determining if the missile launcher was functioning correctly or not. Three of the launchers failed. We located the source of the problem and that was it. The rest was simple."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17256975

    Once the Falklands were secure the returning task force should have nuked or invaded France.
    I do wish we had her now, Victorian obstinacy and all.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990
    NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg said the alliance was deploying parts of its combat-ready response force and would continue to send weapons to Ukraine, including air defences "We are now deploying the NATO response force for the first time in the context of collective defence"
    https://twitter.com/phildstewart/status/1497271044889100292
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,821
    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Why? Defence spending is surely the bees knees for arms exporting economies like the UK, US, France etc?
    It's particularly good news for France who, one would note, have not been shy to sell arms to Ukraine.
    I hate to use the phrase as I am the first to admit it is shallow and perhaps callous but after a dubious start I think Macron is having a 'good war' so far. He was right to try and find a diplomatic solution to all of this whilst also preparing for failure and his pronouncements and his support for tough sanctions against Russia (which go beyond what is proposed by the EU) as well as supplying the Ukrainians with defence equipment and his move to speed up putting French forces into Romania all show he is taking this seriously and acting accordingly.

    Much as I am not a big fan of Macron normally, given a choice between him and his likely opponents, most of whom seem to be Putin apologists, I would choose him every time.
    The thing I was most impressed with is that he's allowed French arms manufacturers to use the government export finance facility - that is the Ukrainians don't actually need to hand over money now.

    Cynically, of course, this is very good news for France's arms industry. But I also appreciate that - unlike some countries - the French were very willing to change their stance when Russia invaded.
    It is of course the case - and I can only say this because @TSE seems not to be here - that the Falklands war was effectively won by the French in that they sold us exocet missiles, and declined to sell thewm to Argentinia.
    Type 42 destroyers were sold by the UK to both the Argentine Navy and the Royal Navy, albeit back in the 1970s.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    rottenborough said:

    TEL AVIV — President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine has asked the Israeli prime minister, Naftali Bennett, to mediate negotiations in Jerusalem between Ukraine and Russia.

    I have no idea what to think about that, but in a less fraught context I would have no problem with identifying top trolling. Here's Dmitry Medvedev last November

    "Russia’s rage at and frustration with Ukraine has become very clearly visible. On October 11, former president and current Deputy Chairman of the Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, published an expletive-laden article aimed at Ukraine and at President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, describing his country as a vassal state of the US with whom it is impossible to negotiate.

    He accused the Ukrainian people of losing their identity (which for him and his colleagues is Russian) and described Zelenskyy as disgusting, corrupt, and faithless, having repudiated his (Jewish) identity to serve rabid nationalists. This, Medvedev continued, meant Ukraine’s head of state resembled a Jewish Sonderkommando, a reference to those incarcerated Jews forced on pain of death to dispose of gas chamber victims during the Holocaust. Negotiations with such people and such a state are, therefore, “pointless,” he said."

    https://cepa.org/russia-plays-the-antisemitic-card-in-ukraine/
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 3,078
    rottenborough said:

    TEL AVIV — President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine has asked the Israeli prime minister, Naftali Bennett, to mediate negotiations in Jerusalem between Ukraine and Russia.

    The Mossad are probably the only organisation that could "get" to Putin, so there may be other questions being raised.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,419
    rottenborough said:

    TEL AVIV — President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine has asked the Israeli prime minister, Naftali Bennett, to mediate negotiations in Jerusalem between Ukraine and Russia.

    That is somewhat positive, if unexpected.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,647
    Razedabode said:

    BlancheLivermore said:

    Anonymous TV 🌐@YourAnonTV
    JUST IN: Hacktivist group #Anonymous has successfully breached and leaked the database of the Russian Ministry of Defence website | mil[.] ru |. You can download all private data of the Russian MOD here: https://mega.nz/file/U3JAGRKL#fvwxJOQgODvHTKK37d5vaU3eCi8E3B5atDe1fXu_Zjs…
    https://twitter.com/YourAnonTV/status/1497273131567828992

    Lol. I’m not clicking that link but good for them
    Wonder if that was actually GCHQ/NSA? (If that really is a hack).
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,630
    On topic, I'll say it again.

    Rishi Sunak is the Indian heritage David Miliband.

    Lest we forget he is a coward who is only Chancellor because he was prepared to wear the political gimp mask handed to him by Dom Cummings.

    He will not feature in any profiles in courage.

    #MissedHisChance
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,553
    "Furious Putin prepares to use 'father of all bombs' as brave Ukrainians hold up advance: West warns Russia could use terror weapon that vaporizes bodies alongside a massive Amphibious assault as invaders run into fierce resistance in Kyiv"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10552743/Furious-Putin-prepares-use-father-bombs-brave-Ukrainians-hold-advance.html
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,664
    edited February 2022
    HYUFD said:

    boulay said:

    FPT

    Chameleon said:

    https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1497285592207429633/photo/1

    "⚡️BREAKING: Kyiv home guard, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade, now operate British-provided NLAWs.
    Welcome to hell, motherfuckers."

    It's pretty notable how much Russia has been unwilling/unable to make headway into urban areas. If they do it is going to be horrifically bloody for all involved.


    It’s interesting and like a horrible bloody Petri dish for weapons - for the US/UK they can provide all sorts of weapons that have never been tried in real life situations, and they could never be otherwise be tested against Russian armour in real life conditions/testing.

    If they didn’t work then back to the drawing board but if they are working, and they seem to be, then it changes the balance of NATO/Russian military planning. If Russian tanks are vulnerable then the idea of them sweeping across the Baltic is obsolete and it swings to air power. So HYUFD’s tank requirement might be fighting the last war.

    A bit like the Turkish drones proving more than useful and making military planners have to rethink.
    As Russia also has the largest airforce in Europe without heavy US air support the point remains, European NATO powers need more military hardware, whether tanks or fighter jets and bombers
    How much of that air force is actually working or doesn't need stripping down after 3 flights?

    They have all sorts of things on paper, but the reality doesn't seem to match.

    The problem is not their conventional forces. It is what they would do when the conventional forces lose.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,821
    Just watching RT for the LOLs :)
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,355
    I've been googling to see if there is a campaign for British re-armament, and came across an old Simon Jenkins column, which has been rendered largely ridiculous by recent events. It closes with these lines:

    "The best defence of a free country in the 21st century is a robust economy, an open border and civil rights. They do need defending – sometimes against their own government – but they cost nothing."
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,630
    If her detractors are right, the wider of invasion of Ukraine will give Nicola Sturgeon the perfect excuse to delay Indyref2.

    I mean holding Indyref2 during a European war isn't appropriate and in the circumstances the mood music would be it is better to be part of a great union and nuclear power to deal with the likes of Putin.

    Ooh, that's Sunday's thread sorted out.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Cicero said:

    rottenborough said:

    TEL AVIV — President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine has asked the Israeli prime minister, Naftali Bennett, to mediate negotiations in Jerusalem between Ukraine and Russia.

    The Mossad are probably the only organisation that could "get" to Putin, so there may be other questions being raised.
    Foreigners, not a hope. It's NKVD/KGB/SMERSH which Putin needs to watch out for
  • PJohnsonPJohnson Posts: 90
    seems like russian troops are amassing on the Polish border. Maybe Putin is planning shock and awe ala Hitler 1940
    https://twitter.com/fideidefensor/status/1497301356067045382?s=20&t=6zU79TZSNhBXXR5TXygXDQ
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,759
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Why? Defence spending is surely the bees knees for arms exporting economies like the UK, US, France etc?
    It's particularly good news for France who, one would note, have not been shy to sell arms to Ukraine.
    I hate to use the phrase as I am the first to admit it is shallow and perhaps callous but after a dubious start I think Macron is having a 'good war' so far. He was right to try and find a diplomatic solution to all of this whilst also preparing for failure and his pronouncements and his support for tough sanctions against Russia (which go beyond what is proposed by the EU) as well as supplying the Ukrainians with defence equipment and his move to speed up putting French forces into Romania all show he is taking this seriously and acting accordingly.

    Much as I am not a big fan of Macron normally, given a choice between him and his likely opponents, most of whom seem to be Putin apologists, I would choose him every time.
    The thing I was most impressed with is that he's allowed French arms manufacturers to use the government export finance facility - that is the Ukrainians don't actually need to hand over money now.

    Cynically, of course, this is very good news for France's arms industry. But I also appreciate that - unlike some countries - the French were very willing to change their stance when Russia invaded.
    It is of course the case - and I can only say this because @TSE seems not to be here - that the Falklands war was effectively won by the French in that they sold us exocet missiles, and declined to sell thewm to Argentinia.
    The nation of collaborators were perfidious during the Falklands.

    But Mitterrand's policy of supporting Britain provoked dissent among some senior officials in the French foreign ministry.

    In a stinging memo dated 7 April 1982, France's then ambassador to London, Emmanuel de Margerie, described British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher as "Victorian, imperialist and obstinate". He went on to add that she had a "tendency to get carried away by combative instincts".

    In another document entitled The Falklands: Lessons from a Fiasco, senior French official Bernard Dorin accused Britain of "superpower arrogance" and claimed the country had shown "profound contempt for Latinos".

    Behind the scenes, actions were speaking louder than words. In what would appear to be a clear breach of President Mitterrand's embargo, a French technical team - mainly working for a company 51% owned by the French government - stayed in Argentina throughout the war.

    In an interview carried out in 1982 by Sunday Times journalist Isabel Hilton, the team's leader, Herve Colin, admitted carrying out one particular test that proved invaluable to Argentinian forces.

    "The verification process involves determining if the missile launcher was functioning correctly or not. Three of the launchers failed. We located the source of the problem and that was it. The rest was simple."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17256975

    Once the Falklands were secure the returning task force should have nuked or invaded France.
    I do wish we had her now, Victorian obstinacy and all.
    We still have her. We always will.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,521
    Wulfrun_Phil said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    boulay said:

    FPT

    Chameleon said:

    https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1497285592207429633/photo/1

    "⚡️BREAKING: Kyiv home guard, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade, now operate British-provided NLAWs.
    Welcome to hell, motherfuckers."

    It's pretty notable how much Russia has been unwilling/unable to make headway into urban areas. If they do it is going to be horrifically bloody for all involved.


    It’s interesting and like a horrible bloody Petri dish for weapons - for the US/UK they can provide all sorts of weapons that have never been tried in real life situations, and they could never be otherwise be tested against Russian armour in real life conditions/testing.

    If they didn’t work then back to the drawing board but if they are working, and they seem to be, then it changes the balance of NATO/Russian military planning. If Russian tanks are vulnerable then the idea of them sweeping across the Baltic is obsolete and it swings to air power. So HYUFD’s tank requirement might be fighting the last war.

    A bit like the Turkish drones proving more than useful and making military planners have to rethink.
    Am I right that this is the first time NLAWs have been used in anger? From what I am reading I am getting the impression they are proving remarkably effective
    It's not the first time in the sense that they are just latest upgrade in a line that started with PIATs, Bazookas and Panzerfausts. The former two weren't that effective but the latter were, so much so that Allied troops made use of any they could capture intact. The development of hand held AT weapons in WW2 rendered tanks pretty vulnerable in theatres offering any reasonable amount of cover, so tanks had then to be used in tandem with infantry to first flush out opposing industry in places of ambush.
    Yes but these things are very different, not least in their ability to manoeuvre over a target vehicle and attack it fro above. There is a good summary of the weapon here:

    https://www.military-today.com/missiles/nlaw.htm

    They are at pains to point out that this is a missile rather than a rocket.

    "Cognizant of threats posed by modern active protection systems and reactive armor, the NLAW operator can opt for an overfly top attack mode. This launches the missile toward the tank turret, where it explodes. Its downward-angled HEAT warhead perforates the thin upper armor even if it’s covered with Explosive Reactive Armor (ERA)."
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,991
    edited February 2022
    When are we going to learn China can't be trusted....

    U.S. Officials Repeatedly Urged China to Help Avert War in Ukraine
    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/25/us/politics/us-china-russia-ukraine.html
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    Putin has made a fatal error
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,590
    Andy_JS said:

    "Furious Putin prepares to use 'father of all bombs' as brave Ukrainians hold up advance: West warns Russia could use terror weapon that vaporizes bodies alongside a massive Amphibious assault as invaders run into fierce resistance in Kyiv"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10552743/Furious-Putin-prepares-use-father-bombs-brave-Ukrainians-hold-advance.html

    I rather suspect that the realistic threat of using a (non-nuclear) WMD would be enough for the Kremlin glitterati to cause Mr Putin to have an unfortunate coronary complication brought on by the stress of standing up to the neo-facist Ukrainian terrorists.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,572
    It turns out that a cousin of mine works for a charitable organisation based in Kiev.

    He was due to fly out there this week.

    Instead they flew him out to Armenia (war involving Russia in 2020).

    This weekend he is flying out to Georgia (invaded by Russia in 2008).

    I think he must collect warzones.

    But seriously, I hope he still has a job in a few weeks... :( I know it's minor in the scale of everything that's happening over there, but it is a minor personal connection.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,821
    IshmaelZ said:

    Cicero said:

    rottenborough said:

    TEL AVIV — President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine has asked the Israeli prime minister, Naftali Bennett, to mediate negotiations in Jerusalem between Ukraine and Russia.

    The Mossad are probably the only organisation that could "get" to Putin, so there may be other questions being raised.
    Foreigners, not a hope. It's NKVD/KGB/SMERSH which Putin needs to watch out for
    [Karl Urban voice] FSB! FSB!
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,572
    Flatlander said:

    HYUFD said:

    boulay said:

    FPT

    Chameleon said:

    https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1497285592207429633/photo/1

    "⚡️BREAKING: Kyiv home guard, the 112th Territorial Defense Brigade, now operate British-provided NLAWs.
    Welcome to hell, motherfuckers."

    It's pretty notable how much Russia has been unwilling/unable to make headway into urban areas. If they do it is going to be horrifically bloody for all involved.


    It’s interesting and like a horrible bloody Petri dish for weapons - for the US/UK they can provide all sorts of weapons that have never been tried in real life situations, and they could never be otherwise be tested against Russian armour in real life conditions/testing.

    If they didn’t work then back to the drawing board but if they are working, and they seem to be, then it changes the balance of NATO/Russian military planning. If Russian tanks are vulnerable then the idea of them sweeping across the Baltic is obsolete and it swings to air power. So HYUFD’s tank requirement might be fighting the last war.

    A bit like the Turkish drones proving more than useful and making military planners have to rethink.
    As Russia also has the largest airforce in Europe without heavy US air support the point remains, European NATO powers need more military hardware, whether tanks or fighter jets and bombers
    How much of that air force is actually working or doesn't need stripping down after 3 flights?

    They have all sorts of things on paper, but the reality doesn't seem to match.

    The problem is not their conventional forces. It is what they would do when the conventional forces lose.
    As I said earlier: Russia has some forces that are world-class. It also has a lot of very poor quality forces.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,779
    Omnium said:

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Why? Defence spending is surely the bees knees for arms exporting economies like the UK, US, France etc?
    It's particularly good news for France who, one would note, have not been shy to sell arms to Ukraine.
    I hate to use the phrase as I am the first to admit it is shallow and perhaps callous but after a dubious start I think Macron is having a 'good war' so far. He was right to try and find a diplomatic solution to all of this whilst also preparing for failure and his pronouncements and his support for tough sanctions against Russia (which go beyond what is proposed by the EU) as well as supplying the Ukrainians with defence equipment and his move to speed up putting French forces into Romania all show he is taking this seriously and acting accordingly.

    Much as I am not a big fan of Macron normally, given a choice between him and his likely opponents, most of whom seem to be Putin apologists, I would choose him every time.
    The thing I was most impressed with is that he's allowed French arms manufacturers to use the government export finance facility - that is the Ukrainians don't actually need to hand over money now.

    Cynically, of course, this is very good news for France's arms industry. But I also appreciate that - unlike some countries - the French were very willing to change their stance when Russia invaded.
    It is of course the case - and I can only say this because @TSE seems not to be here - that the Falklands war was effectively won by the French in that they sold us exocet missiles, and declined to sell thewm to Argentinia.
    The nation of collaborators were perfidious during the Falklands.

    But Mitterrand's policy of supporting Britain provoked dissent among some senior officials in the French foreign ministry.

    In a stinging memo dated 7 April 1982, France's then ambassador to London, Emmanuel de Margerie, described British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher as "Victorian, imperialist and obstinate". He went on to add that she had a "tendency to get carried away by combative instincts".

    In another document entitled The Falklands: Lessons from a Fiasco, senior French official Bernard Dorin accused Britain of "superpower arrogance" and claimed the country had shown "profound contempt for Latinos".

    Behind the scenes, actions were speaking louder than words. In what would appear to be a clear breach of President Mitterrand's embargo, a French technical team - mainly working for a company 51% owned by the French government - stayed in Argentina throughout the war.

    In an interview carried out in 1982 by Sunday Times journalist Isabel Hilton, the team's leader, Herve Colin, admitted carrying out one particular test that proved invaluable to Argentinian forces.

    "The verification process involves determining if the missile launcher was functioning correctly or not. Three of the launchers failed. We located the source of the problem and that was it. The rest was simple."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17256975

    Once the Falklands were secure the returning task force should have nuked or invaded France.
    I do wish we had her now, Victorian obstinacy and all.
    We still have her. We always will.
    We should dig her up. Her rotting corpse would be a more effective leader than Boris Johnson in these difficult times.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,625
    Russia has finally won some international support: Abkhazia has recognised the independence of Donetsk and Lugansk.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,496
    rottenborough said:

    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Ukraine crisis likely secures Boris until the local elections. Provided the Tories avoid massive losses there he will likely survive beyond that too.

    If he is fined by the Met then it will be hard for him to survive, however if Sunak is also fined his leadership chances would also be over too. That would leave Hunt or Truss as the likely new PM

    Clearly, the country needs Hunt in the job asap. Your job is to help make it happen.
    Johnson will probably not be fined. Even if he is - no way he is going during this crisis.
    Agree. Circumstances, even ghastly ones, keep being on his side. FWIW I, generally a Tory voter, will not vote Tory while he is leader (Patersongate, cover up of Partygate, smearing SKS, obvious terminological inexactitudes) but I think there is a +50% chance he will lead into the next election, a nearly 50% chance that the Tories will form the next government, and a roughly 25% chance that Boris will lead and win. It would be grossly undeserved, but as Napoleon said:

    "I would rather have my generals be lucky than able"

  • LordWakefieldLordWakefield Posts: 144
    PJohnson said:

    Farooq said:

    PJohnson said:

    boulay said:

    PJohnson said:

    rottenborough said:

    ping said:

    Surprised at the market moves today.

    If there’s one thing that seems likely to come out of this, it’s a notable jump in the % of GDP that will need to be spent on defence, throughout the west, in the coming decade. That should be enough to knock a few % off the valuation of global stock markets. Instead, they seem to have discounted the war as economically irrelevant.

    Certainly struck me as odd. I thought markets dont like uncertainty?
    its a mechanical move. Too many people shorted the invasion....market never gives money away that trade was too obvious..those shorts have to be squeezed out...also the market had been falling for weeks before too
    I haven’t looked at the stats but always be sceptical about market moves on a Friday as liquidity is lower so small trades move markets disproportionately.
    wall street has had 2 days of big rallies now...its the next move that will be telling as stocks are still well down on the year
    I'll bet you're a fan of rallies, right?
    as in to make money off of...sure who wouldnt be
    It's clear the Markets are predicting a quick win for Vlad with fuck all consequences.
This discussion has been closed.