I don't that that tweet makes the critical point you seem to think it does.
I've been vocal in dislike of Boris, including that the current situation should not mean he sticks around - quite the opposite in fact.
But that tweet to me shows that he could see things are serious and for once cut out the showmanship and bluster, and made as reasonable a pledge as he could make. NOT seeking to embody the spirit of Churchill in such a moment or indulge in grandiose verbosity would be one of the more professional, serious things Boris will have done as PM.
Zelensky doesn't need a faux-Churchill, he needs help. Boris cannot really give him much, but within the bounds of diplomatic support he's offered what he can.
I doubt Zelensky wanted to hear funny stories about trips to Peppa Pig world....or false promises about the British coming to fight the Russian on the beaches.
Ultimately Boris reaction will be judged by what kit they get to the Ukrainians and how effective sanctions are.
I certainly don’t see much political upside for the PM in providing some warm words and allowing a few buildings to be lit up in blue and yellow, if the outcome is a disaster for Ukraine and its people. The upside for him is simply in pushing his inadequacies and dishonesty off the news agenda.
No matter Boris and the UK are greatly appreciated by the president and people's of Ukraine together with the Baltic states
You sound like one of Putin's fawning sycophants. It makes difficult reading
I don't that that tweet makes the critical point you seem to think it does.
I've been vocal in dislike of Boris, including that the current situation should not mean he sticks around - quite the opposite in fact.
But that tweet to me shows that he could see things are serious and for once cut out the showmanship and bluster, and made as reasonable a pledge as he could make. NOT seeking to embody the spirit of Churchill in such a moment or indulge in grandiose verbosity would be one of the more professional, serious things Boris will have done as PM.
Zelensky doesn't need a faux-Churchill, he needs help. Boris cannot really give him much, but within the bounds of diplomatic support he's offered what he can.
I doubt Zelensky wanted to hear funny stories about trips to Peppa Pig world....or false promises about the British coming to fight the Russian on the beaches.
Ultimately Boris reaction will be judged by what kit they get to the Ukrainians and how effective sanctions are.
I certainly don’t see much political upside for the PM in providing some warm words and allowing a few buildings to be lit up in blue and yellow, if the outcome is a disaster for Ukraine and its people. The upside for him is simply in pushing his inadequacies and dishonesty off the news agenda.
No matter Boris and the UK are greatly appreciated by the president and people's of Ukraine together with the Baltic states
You sound like one of Putin's fawning sycophants. It makes difficult reading
It must be difficult for you to read something which upsets your view of the UK
Maybe listen to the president of Ukraine and earlier today the Latvian Deputy PM who named the UK as the one country who has been very supportive
I don't that that tweet makes the critical point you seem to think it does.
I've been vocal in dislike of Boris, including that the current situation should not mean he sticks around - quite the opposite in fact.
But that tweet to me shows that he could see things are serious and for once cut out the showmanship and bluster, and made as reasonable a pledge as he could make. NOT seeking to embody the spirit of Churchill in such a moment or indulge in grandiose verbosity would be one of the more professional, serious things Boris will have done as PM.
Zelensky doesn't need a faux-Churchill, he needs help. Boris cannot really give him much, but within the bounds of diplomatic support he's offered what he can.
I doubt Zelensky wanted to hear funny stories about trips to Peppa Pig world....or false promises about the British coming to fight the Russian on the beaches.
Ultimately Boris reaction will be judged by what kit they get to the Ukrainians and how effective sanctions are.
I certainly don’t see much political upside for the PM in providing some warm words and allowing a few buildings to be lit up in blue and yellow, if the outcome is a disaster for Ukraine and its people. The upside for him is simply in pushing his inadequacies and dishonesty off the news agenda.
No matter Boris and the UK are greatly appreciated by the president and people's of Ukraine together with the Baltic states
Like the rest of the West we are doing the square root of zip for the Ukrainian people. The Ukrainians have begged for our help and we have left them wanting. Europe should hang its head in shame.
Now there might be a good reason for that, namely Putin is likely to retaliate with a nuclear strike. Meanwhile, women, children and babies are being massacred and we look on helplessly.
I am a dove, but this looks wrong.
We have provided weapons and training taking out Russian tanks as we post
We are providing further weapons and are very much favoured by them
I think the most useful thing that we are providing are signals interception and satellite intelligence.
I believe we made Russian.troop movements publicly available. But we really are falling short on the sanctions. We are the country who could really hit the Russian elite hard. We don't seem to have the will. We should.
We should but I am sceptical it will do any good. Stopping some oligarchs' wives shopping in Harrods is unlikely to trouble Putin's conscience.
There are military actions the West could take that below threshold, offensive electronic and cyber warfare has its uses. Admittedly some of the former depends on being closer to the relevant area than NATO wants to fly but something is sill doable.
Our sanctions are weaker than any of them by far. Is that a fair metric?
Not true
What isn't?
Our sanctions are equal to anyone's and indeed way ahead of Germany and are pushing for Russia to be thrown out of Switt
Germany doesn't.have sanctions. The EU does. They've been strengthened three times already in as many days. Meanwhile, the elite are free to swan around Kensington. With their kids in boarding schools.
How depressingly English it is to be impressed by a fat lying soj when he turns out to be a flsoj who can string together three rehearsed sentences in a foreign language. Even if he could take and answer questions in that language which I bet he couldn't, that's standard in politicians anywhere else in the world, USA excepted.
It's probably got worse over the last 50 years or so. It used to be common for a lot of middle-class people to be able to at least speak French. Today most of them can't.
Everyone should learn Mandarin. It's a piece of piss in comparison.*
*No way connected to my qualification to teach it. Reasonable rates.
Our sanctions are weaker than any of them by far. Is that a fair metric?
Not true
What isn't?
Our sanctions are equal to anyone's and indeed way ahead of Germany and are pushing for Russia to be thrown out of Switt
We've also banned Russian aircraft which along with Poland, Czechia and Bulgaria is still a minority approach.
That's nice, but a more key tactical problem is Russian aircraft over Ukraine rather than Aeroflot over East Midlands Airport. Banning passenger flights feels a bit.. futzy.
21:33 BREAKING Zelensky - Ukraine ready to discuss ceasefire A spokesman for Ukrainian President Zelensky has just said the country is prepared to hold ceasefire and peace talks with Russia immediately.
He said Russian and Ukrainian officials are currently discussing a time and place for talks to be held.
21:41 Ukraine denies reports it rebuffed offer of peace talks Ukraine has denied reports that it rebuffed a Russian offer to explore peace talks.
The Ukrainian president's spokesman, Serhiy Nykyforov, said on Facebook: "I have to deny statements that we have refused to hold talks.
"Ukraine was and remains ready to talk about the end to fighting and about peace. This is our unchanged position.
"We agreed to the offer by the Russian president. Right at this moment, the sides are consulting on the place and time of holding the negotiating process.
"The sooner the talks begin, the more chances there will be to restore normal life."
I don’t think this means that talks have been agreed - rather that Ukraine has countered Putin’s suggestion of talks, which carried absurd preconditions (effectively unconditional surrender), with their own more rational offer.
I’m praying for a ceasefire when I go to bed tonight.
Building on what Boris has said, Russian people we don’t blame you, if Sunday’s ceasefire comes Saturday, a lot of people on both sides can go home to their families and live to see a Putinless future. That’s what I want for them. Though I still listen to and respect you if you disagree. But I’m wanting quick ceasefire.
I think a ceasefire is premature. A ceasefire favours the belligerent on top. At the moment it would favour the Russians. Get them into Kyiv and start murdering them street by street and a ceasefire might start to favour the Ukies.
My Dad told me when Arthur Scargill called the miners strike off, they had a big booze up in the con club. I asked, why did he call it off. The answer, leaders can only lead their people so far into a lost cause.
I’m not saying you are wrong for enjoying it and wanting it to carry on. I’m saying I can see the sad end result so I am not enjoying it.
I don’t see myself as too soft or anti war, I’ve supported all UK action in my lifetime, and ones I have read up on. I even support Suez because we had to draw a line in the sand on US influence somewhere somehow.
when I said ceasefire and Zelenskiy talking, it was as a good leader not weak one I was thinking. At some point I’m sure he is thinking, (but the PB armchair generals to their shame definitely are nott) hOw far should good leadership lead their people into a meat grinder?
Whatever you think, it's politically impossible for him to back down now. Legends are being born.
Snake Island The Ghost Klitschko
I don’t share your views on this at all.
I don’t think you are in the bunker with them tonight, but miles away in comfort behind a posting alias.
What a responsibility on leaders in situations like this? My view is, anyone who wants more martyrs from both sides this weekend must have the same view of humanity as Putin. You are over egging the Ukraine position and how this likely now to go for your own enjoyment 😠
You're missing the point made somewhat...
The Scargill - Putin comparison is interesting and provocative.
Both are evil, hubristic men. Scargill lost because he was a demagogue and arrogant thinking that he could impose his will on his perceived followers.
I wonder if Putin will make a similar mistake?
Putin has expressed his admiration for the USSR. Scargill remains a fanboy of Stalin.
AFAIK, Scargill has not suborned assassinations, and instigated mass murder.
21:33 BREAKING Zelensky - Ukraine ready to discuss ceasefire A spokesman for Ukrainian President Zelensky has just said the country is prepared to hold ceasefire and peace talks with Russia immediately.
He said Russian and Ukrainian officials are currently discussing a time and place for talks to be held.
21:41 Ukraine denies reports it rebuffed offer of peace talks Ukraine has denied reports that it rebuffed a Russian offer to explore peace talks.
The Ukrainian president's spokesman, Serhiy Nykyforov, said on Facebook: "I have to deny statements that we have refused to hold talks.
"Ukraine was and remains ready to talk about the end to fighting and about peace. This is our unchanged position.
"We agreed to the offer by the Russian president. Right at this moment, the sides are consulting on the place and time of holding the negotiating process.
"The sooner the talks begin, the more chances there will be to restore normal life."
I don’t think this means that talks have been agreed - rather that Ukraine has countered Putin’s suggestion of talks, which carried absurd preconditions (effectively unconditional surrender), with their own more rational offer.
I’m praying for a ceasefire when I go to bed tonight.
Building on what Boris has said, Russian people we don’t blame you, if Sunday’s ceasefire comes Saturday, a lot of people on both sides can go home to their families and live to see a Putinless future. That’s what I want for them. Though I still listen to and respect you if you disagree. But I’m wanting quick ceasefire.
I think a ceasefire is premature. A ceasefire favours the belligerent on top. At the moment it would favour the Russians. Get them into Kyiv and start murdering them street by street and a ceasefire might start to favour the Ukies.
My Dad told me when Arthur Scargill called the miners strike off, they had a big booze up in the con club. I asked, why did he call it off. The answer, leaders can only lead their people so far into a lost cause.
I’m not saying you are wrong for enjoying it and wanting it to carry on. I’m saying I can see the sad end result so I am not enjoying it.
I don’t see myself as too soft or anti war, I’ve supported all UK action in my lifetime, and ones I have read up on. I even support Suez because we had to draw a line in the sand on US influence somewhere somehow.
when I said ceasefire and Zelenskiy talking, it was as a good leader not weak one I was thinking. At some point I’m sure he is thinking, (but the PB armchair generals to their shame definitely are nott) hOw far should good leadership lead their people into a meat grinder?
Whatever you think, it's politically impossible for him to back down now. Legends are being born.
Snake Island The Ghost Klitschko
I don’t share your views on this at all.
I don’t think you are in the bunker with them tonight, but miles away in comfort behind a posting alias.
What a responsibility on leaders in situations like this? My view is, anyone who wants more martyrs from both sides this weekend must have the same view of humanity as Putin. You are over egging the Ukraine position and how this likely now to go for your own enjoyment 😠
You're missing the point made somewhat...
The Scargill - Putin comparison is interesting and provocative.
Both are evil, hubristic men. Scargill lost because he was a demagogue and arrogant thinking that he could impose his will on his perceived followers.
I wonder if Putin will make a similar mistake?
Putin has expressed his admiration for the USSR. Scargill remains a fanboy of Stalin.
AFAIK, Scargill has not suborned assassinations, and instigated mass murder.
Quite the video from Sumy, the largest (only?) encircled city so far, especially at the end. The clusterbombs sent to their hospitals and orphanages clearly haven't weakened their resolve yet.
How depressingly English it is to be impressed by a fat lying soj when he turns out to be a flsoj who can string together three rehearsed sentences in a foreign language. Even if he could take and answer questions in that language which I bet he couldn't, that's standard in politicians anywhere else in the world, USA excepted.
It's probably got worse over the last 50 years or so. It used to be common for a lot of middle-class people to be able to at least speak French. Today most of them can't.
Everyone should learn Mandarin. It's a piece of piss in comparison.*
*No way connected to my qualification to teach it. Reasonable rates.
Do you actually teach Mandarin?
Can do yeah. Am qualified. Don't actually teach at the moment, mind. But could do.
21:33 BREAKING Zelensky - Ukraine ready to discuss ceasefire A spokesman for Ukrainian President Zelensky has just said the country is prepared to hold ceasefire and peace talks with Russia immediately.
He said Russian and Ukrainian officials are currently discussing a time and place for talks to be held.
21:41 Ukraine denies reports it rebuffed offer of peace talks Ukraine has denied reports that it rebuffed a Russian offer to explore peace talks.
The Ukrainian president's spokesman, Serhiy Nykyforov, said on Facebook: "I have to deny statements that we have refused to hold talks.
"Ukraine was and remains ready to talk about the end to fighting and about peace. This is our unchanged position.
"We agreed to the offer by the Russian president. Right at this moment, the sides are consulting on the place and time of holding the negotiating process.
"The sooner the talks begin, the more chances there will be to restore normal life."
I don’t think this means that talks have been agreed - rather that Ukraine has countered Putin’s suggestion of talks, which carried absurd preconditions (effectively unconditional surrender), with their own more rational offer.
I’m praying for a ceasefire when I go to bed tonight.
Building on what Boris has said, Russian people we don’t blame you, if Sunday’s ceasefire comes Saturday, a lot of people on both sides can go home to their families and live to see a Putinless future. That’s what I want for them. Though I still listen to and respect you if you disagree. But I’m wanting quick ceasefire.
I think a ceasefire is premature. A ceasefire favours the belligerent on top. At the moment it would favour the Russians. Get them into Kyiv and start murdering them street by street and a ceasefire might start to favour the Ukies.
My Dad told me when Arthur Scargill called the miners strike off, they had a big booze up in the con club. I asked, why did he call it off. The answer, leaders can only lead their people so far into a lost cause.
I’m not saying you are wrong for enjoying it and wanting it to carry on. I’m saying I can see the sad end result so I am not enjoying it.
I don’t see myself as too soft or anti war, I’ve supported all UK action in my lifetime, and ones I have read up on. I even support Suez because we had to draw a line in the sand on US influence somewhere somehow.
when I said ceasefire and Zelenskiy talking, it was as a good leader not weak one I was thinking. At some point I’m sure he is thinking, (but the PB armchair generals to their shame definitely are nott) hOw far should good leadership lead their people into a meat grinder?
Whatever you think, it's politically impossible for him to back down now. Legends are being born.
Snake Island The Ghost Klitschko
I don’t share your views on this at all.
I don’t think you are in the bunker with them tonight, but miles away in comfort behind a posting alias.
What a responsibility on leaders in situations like this? My view is, anyone who wants more martyrs from both sides this weekend must have the same view of humanity as Putin. You are over egging the Ukraine position and how this likely now to go for your own enjoyment 😠
You're missing the point made somewhat...
The Scargill - Putin comparison is interesting and provocative.
Both are evil, hubristic men. Scargill lost because he was a demagogue and arrogant thinking that he could impose his will on his perceived followers.
I wonder if Putin will make a similar mistake?
Putin has expressed his admiration for the USSR. Scargill remains a fanboy of Stalin.
I wasn’t making a Scargill Putin comparison - a Scargill Zelenskiy comparison. Thinking in my mind analysing what I’m seeing Ukraine losing this to a martyrdom ending, at what point does a leader halt the suffering of his people, allowing victors (like my family were) to have a beer up whilst others in hardship?
From the point of view so sad and sorry for Zelenskiy 😔
I do share the smart view whoever in weaker position has to eat all sorts of💩in talks, so it’s picking the moment to talk. I’m not convinced it tilts much in favour of Ukraine government after today. I remember camera on front of lead tank going to Baghdad, it took days for convoy to get there, but when it did it tilted balance? And Putin got so much stuff moving in on ground and air power now ☹️
But I can’t convince anyone so will leave it for tonight. 😴
The long way home. The Aeroflot flight from Zagreb to St Petersburg is having to dodge Czechia and Polish air space.....Germany (of course) is still open:
I don't that that tweet makes the critical point you seem to think it does.
I've been vocal in dislike of Boris, including that the current situation should not mean he sticks around - quite the opposite in fact.
But that tweet to me shows that he could see things are serious and for once cut out the showmanship and bluster, and made as reasonable a pledge as he could make. NOT seeking to embody the spirit of Churchill in such a moment or indulge in grandiose verbosity would be one of the more professional, serious things Boris will have done as PM.
Zelensky doesn't need a faux-Churchill, he needs help. Boris cannot really give him much, but within the bounds of diplomatic support he's offered what he can.
I doubt Zelensky wanted to hear funny stories about trips to Peppa Pig world....or false promises about the British coming to fight the Russian on the beaches.
Ultimately Boris reaction will be judged by what kit they get to the Ukrainians and how effective sanctions are.
I certainly don’t see much political upside for the PM in providing some warm words and allowing a few buildings to be lit up in blue and yellow, if the outcome is a disaster for Ukraine and its people. The upside for him is simply in pushing his inadequacies and dishonesty off the news agenda.
No matter Boris and the UK are greatly appreciated by the president and people's of Ukraine together with the Baltic states
Like the rest of the West we are doing the square root of zip for the Ukrainian people. The Ukrainians have begged for our help and we have left them wanting. Europe should hang its head in shame.
Now there might be a good reason for that, namely Putin is likely to retaliate with a nuclear strike. Meanwhile, women, children and babies are being massacred and we look on helplessly.
I am a dove, but this looks wrong.
I feel the same way. But intervention after fighting has started involves a far greater risk of nuclear escalation that would fighting to defend an attack NATO territory. Putin’s paranoia guarantees that. The US simply isn’t going to risk it.
I know.
Anyway BigG. and HY (oh and indirectly Carlotta) keep telling me that our house is in order because, although the EU have dragged their heels (which to their shame, they have) Johnson has gone the extra mile. What a hero!
The broad thrust of this analysis - annex Southern Ukraine and thus link up with Crimea and Transnistria, and turn rump Ukraine to the North into a puppet state akin to Belarus - sounds very much like what I was predicting the Russians might try before the invasion got underway. I know, stopped clocks and all that.
Anyhow, whether or not Putin will find this so smart and easy is very much open to question. Firstly, the occupied half of Ukraine (probably rechristened as Novorossiya) is still an awful lot of territory to try to suppress militarily. Secondly, it seems doubtful in the extreme, given what we have seen of Ukrainian resistance so far, that the Vichy regime in rump Ukraine would be able to assert its authority without a lot of Russian security personnel in any event.
Our sanctions are weaker than any of them by far. Is that a fair metric?
Not true
What isn't?
Our sanctions are equal to anyone's and indeed way ahead of Germany and are pushing for Russia to be thrown out of Switt
Germany doesn't.have sanctions. The EU does. They've been strengthened three times already in as many days. Meanwhile, the elite are free to swan around Kensington. With their kids in boarding schools.
Seems you are not upto date with UK sanctions
We could do an awful lot more. At the moment we're doing things which we are good at. Such as supplying weapons and intelligence. We're doing too little of what we could do which would actually hurt us. Such as the money propping up the City and London property market, and private schools. We may do it. And when and if we do I will applaud it. But we aren't as yet.
I don't that that tweet makes the critical point you seem to think it does.
I've been vocal in dislike of Boris, including that the current situation should not mean he sticks around - quite the opposite in fact.
But that tweet to me shows that he could see things are serious and for once cut out the showmanship and bluster, and made as reasonable a pledge as he could make. NOT seeking to embody the spirit of Churchill in such a moment or indulge in grandiose verbosity would be one of the more professional, serious things Boris will have done as PM.
Zelensky doesn't need a faux-Churchill, he needs help. Boris cannot really give him much, but within the bounds of diplomatic support he's offered what he can.
I doubt Zelensky wanted to hear funny stories about trips to Peppa Pig world....or false promises about the British coming to fight the Russian on the beaches.
Ultimately Boris reaction will be judged by what kit they get to the Ukrainians and how effective sanctions are.
I certainly don’t see much political upside for the PM in providing some warm words and allowing a few buildings to be lit up in blue and yellow, if the outcome is a disaster for Ukraine and its people. The upside for him is simply in pushing his inadequacies and dishonesty off the news agenda.
No matter Boris and the UK are greatly appreciated by the president and people's of Ukraine together with the Baltic states
Like the rest of the West we are doing the square root of zip for the Ukrainian people. The Ukrainians have begged for our help and we have left them wanting. Europe should hang its head in shame.
Now there might be a good reason for that, namely Putin is likely to retaliate with a nuclear strike. Meanwhile, women, children and babies are being massacred and we look on helplessly.
I am a dove, but this looks wrong.
Do you think the US is getting the message to someone in the Kremlin that if Putin goes nuclear over Ukraine Moscow will be obliterated in return?
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
Our sanctions are weaker than any of them by far. Is that a fair metric?
Not true
What isn't?
Our sanctions are equal to anyone's and indeed way ahead of Germany and are pushing for Russia to be thrown out of Switt
Germany doesn't.have sanctions. The EU does. They've been strengthened three times already in as many days. Meanwhile, the elite are free to swan around Kensington. With their kids in boarding schools.
Seems you are not upto date with UK sanctions
We could do an awful lot more. At the moment we're doing things which we are good at. Such as supplying weapons and intelligence. We're doing too little of what we could do which would actually hurt us. Such as the money propping up the City and London property market, and private schools. We may do it. And when and if we do I will applaud it. But we aren't as yet.
The legislation is being laid on Monday and to be fair Labour are backing it
Our first offer was poor, but tonight it is the equal of anybody and indeed is only being prevented in throwing Russia out of swift by Germany
Our sanctions are weaker than any of them by far. Is that a fair metric?
Not true
What isn't?
Our sanctions are equal to anyone's and indeed way ahead of Germany and are pushing for Russia to be thrown out of Switt
Germany doesn't.have sanctions. The EU does. They've been strengthened three times already in as many days. Meanwhile, the elite are free to swan around Kensington. With their kids in boarding schools.
Germany has suspended NS2, which is not an EU competence.
(They went to the European Court to try, and Germany won).
I don't that that tweet makes the critical point you seem to think it does.
I've been vocal in dislike of Boris, including that the current situation should not mean he sticks around - quite the opposite in fact.
But that tweet to me shows that he could see things are serious and for once cut out the showmanship and bluster, and made as reasonable a pledge as he could make. NOT seeking to embody the spirit of Churchill in such a moment or indulge in grandiose verbosity would be one of the more professional, serious things Boris will have done as PM.
Zelensky doesn't need a faux-Churchill, he needs help. Boris cannot really give him much, but within the bounds of diplomatic support he's offered what he can.
I doubt Zelensky wanted to hear funny stories about trips to Peppa Pig world....or false promises about the British coming to fight the Russian on the beaches.
Ultimately Boris reaction will be judged by what kit they get to the Ukrainians and how effective sanctions are.
I certainly don’t see much political upside for the PM in providing some warm words and allowing a few buildings to be lit up in blue and yellow, if the outcome is a disaster for Ukraine and its people. The upside for him is simply in pushing his inadequacies and dishonesty off the news agenda.
No matter Boris and the UK are greatly appreciated by the president and people's of Ukraine together with the Baltic states
Like the rest of the West we are doing the square root of zip for the Ukrainian people. The Ukrainians have begged for our help and we have left them wanting. Europe should hang its head in shame.
Now there might be a good reason for that, namely Putin is likely to retaliate with a nuclear strike. Meanwhile, women, children and babies are being massacred and we look on helplessly.
I am a dove, but this looks wrong.
Do you think the US is getting the message to someone in the Kremlin that if Putin goes nuclear over Ukraine Moscow will be obliterated in return?
It is unbelievable that you have penned your last sentence but it is succinct
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
I don't that that tweet makes the critical point you seem to think it does.
I've been vocal in dislike of Boris, including that the current situation should not mean he sticks around - quite the opposite in fact.
But that tweet to me shows that he could see things are serious and for once cut out the showmanship and bluster, and made as reasonable a pledge as he could make. NOT seeking to embody the spirit of Churchill in such a moment or indulge in grandiose verbosity would be one of the more professional, serious things Boris will have done as PM.
Zelensky doesn't need a faux-Churchill, he needs help. Boris cannot really give him much, but within the bounds of diplomatic support he's offered what he can.
I doubt Zelensky wanted to hear funny stories about trips to Peppa Pig world....or false promises about the British coming to fight the Russian on the beaches.
Ultimately Boris reaction will be judged by what kit they get to the Ukrainians and how effective sanctions are.
I certainly don’t see much political upside for the PM in providing some warm words and allowing a few buildings to be lit up in blue and yellow, if the outcome is a disaster for Ukraine and its people. The upside for him is simply in pushing his inadequacies and dishonesty off the news agenda.
No matter Boris and the UK are greatly appreciated by the president and people's of Ukraine together with the Baltic states
Like the rest of the West we are doing the square root of zip for the Ukrainian people. The Ukrainians have begged for our help and we have left them wanting. Europe should hang its head in shame.
Now there might be a good reason for that, namely Putin is likely to retaliate with a nuclear strike. Meanwhile, women, children and babies are being massacred and we look on helplessly.
I am a dove, but this looks wrong.
Do you think the US is getting the message to someone in the Kremlin that if Putin goes nuclear over Ukraine Moscow will be obliterated in return?
If Putin were to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine then it would effectively be a declaration of war against all the neighbours anyway, given the resultant radioactive fallout that would likely end up pissing all over Europe, as well as Russia's own territory. Even the Chinese would struggle to justify fence sitting faced with such transparently psychotic lunacy.
The big problem being, of course, that it Tsar Vladimir I finds himself in a sufficiently desperate position to push the button on the Ukrainians then he might also start using his vast stockpile of ICBMs on everyone else, too. If he can't win and he's going to die anyway, might as well burn the world along with him. Then we're reliant on the Russian military being willing and able to stop him. I wish I could feel confident in the prospects of their success. But I'm not.
Our sanctions are weaker than any of them by far. Is that a fair metric?
Not true
What isn't?
Our sanctions are equal to anyone's and indeed way ahead of Germany and are pushing for Russia to be thrown out of Switt
Germany doesn't.have sanctions. The EU does. They've been strengthened three times already in as many days. Meanwhile, the elite are free to swan around Kensington. With their kids in boarding schools.
Seems you are not upto date with UK sanctions
We could do an awful lot more. At the moment we're doing things which we are good at. Such as supplying weapons and intelligence. We're doing too little of what we could do which would actually hurt us. Such as the money propping up the City and London property market, and private schools. We may do it. And when and if we do I will applaud it. But we aren't as yet.
The legislation is being laid on Monday and to be fair Labour are backing it
Our first offer was poor, but tonight it is the equal of anybody and indeed is only being prevented in throwing Russia out of swift by Germany
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Interesting that roughly half the world didn't support the resolution.
We started strong, but I'd say Macron has caught BJ up. The French are allowing the state export finance back to underwrite Ukrainian arms purchases, which is something that neither the US or the UK have done.
I'll repeat this idea I threw in a lot of days ago then set context to why, because its going to offend some.
Do not sanction Putin's globe trotting oligarch friends, kill them
There is little doubt that Putin and the oligarchs are tight, whether voluntarily or not so voluntarily. Its all part of the shared kleptocracy in Russia. They do matter, Putin provides them space (in some cases concessions) to trade and they quid pro quo (adding to Putin's personal wealth & power). Its a classic all noses in the trough situation.
I'm nearly sure a long time ago I posted on here that many months after the Salisbury incident, UK & Russian officials met to try to thaw out the relationship a bit. Reportedly, a key Russian request was do not touch the oligarchs. That perhaps gives an indication of their importance.
These boys both live under Putin's patronage and to some extent his protection. If they start dying, you might break that circle and you may create a rupture
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Per Biden administration and congressional aides: The White House asked Congress on Friday to approve $6.4 billion in aid to address the Ukraine crisis after an invasion by Russia, including $2.9 billion in security and humanitarian assistance and $3.5 billion for the DoD.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Interesting that roughly half the world didn't support the resolution.
Only 1 country voted against , Russia the world's pariah
The Hollywood-ification of the Russian invasion gathers apace .
The Ukrainian freedom fighters including the now much loved blond bombshell Ukrainian MP wielding a kalashnikov , the handsome President and merry band of ordinary Joes out on the streets determined to carry on fighting v the evil Russian regime .
What I’m getting at is the cheering on fanfare by some in the media and on Twitter ignores the sad reality that Russia will pummel Kiev into the ground if Putin’s patience snaps .
Whilst some of those following the coverage don’t want Ukraine the Invasion to end , or seem to be living in some alternate universe where the plucky freedom fighters can hold out against Russia .
There is no happy ending here , no Indiana Jones , just varying degrees of bloodshed and destruction .
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Interesting that roughly half the world didn't support the resolution.
Well not really, when two nations amount for such a huge portion of the world population, and it's not as though votes on UK resolutions from any nation are driven primarily by public opinion.
The broad thrust of this analysis - annex Southern Ukraine and thus link up with Crimea and Transnistria, and turn rump Ukraine to the North into a puppet state akin to Belarus - sounds very much like what I was predicting the Russians might try before the invasion got underway. I know, stopped clocks and all that.
Anyhow, whether or not Putin will find this so smart and easy is very much open to question. Firstly, the occupied half of Ukraine (probably rechristened as Novorossiya) is still an awful lot of territory to try to suppress militarily. Secondly, it seems doubtful in the extreme, given what we have seen of Ukrainian resistance so far, that the Vichy regime in rump Ukraine would be able to assert its authority without a lot of Russian security personnel in any event.
One of the talking heads on Newsnight, I forget which one, doubted a partition plan, on the basis that they thought Putin probably actually believed a lot of rubbish he has been talking about recently, and so would likely be crazy enough to go for the whole country.
I'm trying to think of a conflict involving western countries where ground operations were not preceded by a major aerial bombardment. Bearing in mind that the Ukrainian armed forces are probably the strongest to be attacked in any major conflict since, I guess, the Israeli armed forces in 1973, it's very strange that Russia didn't use its clear advantage in the air/missiles/artillery to degrade Ukrainian defences before sending ground forces in.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
The Hollywood-ification of the Russian invasion gathers apace .
The Ukrainian freedom fighters including the now much loved blond bombshell Ukrainian MP wielding a kalashnikov , the handsome President and merry band of ordinary Joes out on the streets determined to carry on fighting v the evil Russian regime .
What I’m getting at is the cheering on fanfare by some in the media and on Twitter and ignores the sad reality that Russia will pummel Kiev into the ground if Putin’s patience snaps .
Whilst some of those following the coverage don’t want Ukraine the Invasion to end , or seem to be living in some alternate universe where the plucky freedom fighters can hold out against Russia .
There is no happy ending here , no Indiana Jones , just varying degrees of bloodshed and destruction .
Of course no happy end, there's a war on. A media war is also being waged, presumably in part as morale boosting. Even if defeat is inevitable surely there are degrees of defeat, or victory? How long it takes, what it costs? Ukrainian morale boosting might not make much difference, but would it also make no difference?
The Hollywood-ification of the Russian invasion gathers apace .
The Ukrainian freedom fighters including the now much loved blond bombshell Ukrainian MP wielding a kalashnikov , the handsome President and merry band of ordinary Joes out on the streets determined to carry on fighting v the evil Russian regime .
What I’m getting at is the cheering on fanfare by some in the media and on Twitter ignores the sad reality that Russia will pummel Kiev into the ground if Putin’s patience snaps .
Whilst some of those following the coverage don’t want Ukraine the Invasion to end , or seem to be living in some alternate universe where the plucky freedom fighters can hold out against Russia .
There is no happy ending here , no Indiana Jones , just varying degrees of bloodshed and destruction .
Yes, civilian militias vs tanks are not going to win. Destroying supporting vehicles, artillery, fuel tankers etc, perhaps so. Even so casualties and reprisals huge. Urban partisan warfare is an awful war to fight,
If you'd told me 48 hours ago that there would be even a question about Russia winning this War.
Depends what winning is considered to be, doesn't it
Presumably it'd be hard for Russia to not come out ahead in terms of gained territory etc, given the disparities, but the ambition shown by the initial assaults would suggest limited gains (or failure to exact regime change etc) would be a failure?
But the 'disputed' territory is held by Russia already. Surely everywhere else would face massive resistance?
The area claimed by the 'independent' republics was not entirely held by them. I'd assumed if a limited goal was intended it was to expand that area so that the entire areas claimed by them would be under their control. Even if that was all they managed, it would still be a gain.
Not much of one. Considering what has been lost.
Russia has lost all credibility in the civilised world. I really don't know where it goes from here.
Maybe it might as well go for broke invade Eastern Europe see where the chips land
Given it hasn't managed to successfully invade Ukraine, I suspect its chances in the rest of Eastern Europe would be... poor.
I'll repeat this idea I threw in a lot of days ago then set context to why, because its going to offend some.
Do not sanction Putin's globe trotting oligarch friends, kill them
There is little doubt that Putin and the oligarchs are tight, whether voluntarily or not so voluntarily. Its all part of the shared kleptocracy in Russia. They do matter, Putin provides them space (in some cases concessions) to trade and they quid pro quo (adding to Putin's personal wealth & power). Its a classic all noses in the trough situation.
I'm nearly sure a long time ago I posted on here that many months after the Salisbury incident, UK & Russian officials met to try to thaw out the relationship a bit. Reportedly, a key Russian request was do not touch the oligarchs. That perhaps gives an indication of their importance.
These boys both live under Putin's patronage and to some extent his protection. If they start dying, you might break that circle and you may create a rupture
Quite. We know how to win this, we just need the balls. As a wise man once said, they put one of ours in the hospital? We put one of theirs in the morgue.
NATO is bigger and more powerful than Russia. For a time, we must be willing to be a tougher street fighter as well.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
I suppose, being quite anal, I can deplore you without choosing to condemn you. But that distinction disappears in the context of a resolution put to a vote.
The long way home. The Aeroflot flight from Zagreb to St Petersburg is having to dodge Czechia and Polish air space.....Germany (of course) is still open:
German behaviour has been unconscionable. (France on the other hand has been pretty good.)
If you'd told me 48 hours ago that there would be even a question about Russia winning this War.
Depends what winning is considered to be, doesn't it
Presumably it'd be hard for Russia to not come out ahead in terms of gained territory etc, given the disparities, but the ambition shown by the initial assaults would suggest limited gains (or failure to exact regime change etc) would be a failure?
But the 'disputed' territory is held by Russia already. Surely everywhere else would face massive resistance?
The area claimed by the 'independent' republics was not entirely held by them. I'd assumed if a limited goal was intended it was to expand that area so that the entire areas claimed by them would be under their control. Even if that was all they managed, it would still be a gain.
Not much of one. Considering what has been lost.
Russia has lost all credibility in the civilised world. I really don't know where it goes from here.
Maybe it might as well go for broke invade Eastern Europe see where the chips land
Given it hasn't managed to successfully invade Ukraine, I suspect its chances in the rest of Eastern Europe would be... poor.
One worry emerging from all of this is that even before the West inevitably reinvests in defence, NATO is clearly capable of easily kicking Russia’s arse with conventional force. That means we are now in the reverse of the Cold War, when we knew the red army was unstoppable and we would eventually need to go (tactically) nuclear to slow it down, thus causing MAD. These days we’d push them back in no time, and Putin would be the one who felt cornered. And he’s mad.
The broad thrust of this analysis - annex Southern Ukraine and thus link up with Crimea and Transnistria, and turn rump Ukraine to the North into a puppet state akin to Belarus - sounds very much like what I was predicting the Russians might try before the invasion got underway. I know, stopped clocks and all that.
Anyhow, whether or not Putin will find this so smart and easy is very much open to question. Firstly, the occupied half of Ukraine (probably rechristened as Novorossiya) is still an awful lot of territory to try to suppress militarily. Secondly, it seems doubtful in the extreme, given what we have seen of Ukrainian resistance so far, that the Vichy regime in rump Ukraine would be able to assert its authority without a lot of Russian security personnel in any event.
One of the talking heads on Newsnight, I forget which one, doubted a partition plan, on the basis that they thought Putin probably actually believed a lot of rubbish he has been talking about recently, and so would likely be crazy enough to go for the whole country.
I'm trying to think of a conflict involving western countries where ground operations were not preceded by a major aerial bombardment. Bearing in mind that the Ukrainian armed forces are probably the strongest to be attacked in any major conflict since, I guess, the Israeli armed forces in 1973, it's very strange that Russia didn't use its clear advantage in the air/missiles/artillery to degrade Ukrainian defences before sending ground forces in.
It feels like a very reckless decision.
The Russian army gives a strong impression of being brutal but incompetent. AIUI they only foiled the Chechen insurgency in the end by blasting Grozny to rubble - but even that was in a postage stamp little backwater province with a population of a million, not the second largest nation in Europe after Russia itself.
If they're not terribly careful they're going to be bled white - though the great tragedy, of course, is that the Ukrainian people will suffer even worse for their resistance, as the unhinged autocrat and his henchmen desperately grasp for more and more extreme measures.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
I suppose, being quite anal, I can deplore you without choosing to condemn you. But that distinction disappears in the context of a resolution put to a vote.
Perhaps the chinese transliteration of ‘condemn’ involves action. For example if one is ‘condemned’ one loses some privilege. Like shunning. Whereas the chinese version of ‘deplore’ may involve mere opinion.
I don't that that tweet makes the critical point you seem to think it does.
I've been vocal in dislike of Boris, including that the current situation should not mean he sticks around - quite the opposite in fact.
But that tweet to me shows that he could see things are serious and for once cut out the showmanship and bluster, and made as reasonable a pledge as he could make. NOT seeking to embody the spirit of Churchill in such a moment or indulge in grandiose verbosity would be one of the more professional, serious things Boris will have done as PM.
Zelensky doesn't need a faux-Churchill, he needs help. Boris cannot really give him much, but within the bounds of diplomatic support he's offered what he can.
I doubt Zelensky wanted to hear funny stories about trips to Peppa Pig world....or false promises about the British coming to fight the Russian on the beaches.
Ultimately Boris reaction will be judged by what kit they get to the Ukrainians and how effective sanctions are.
I certainly don’t see much political upside for the PM in providing some warm words and allowing a few buildings to be lit up in blue and yellow, if the outcome is a disaster for Ukraine and its people. The upside for him is simply in pushing his inadequacies and dishonesty off the news agenda.
No matter Boris and the UK are greatly appreciated by the president and people's of Ukraine together with the Baltic states
Like the rest of the West we are doing the square root of zip for the Ukrainian people. The Ukrainians have begged for our help and we have left them wanting. Europe should hang its head in shame.
Now there might be a good reason for that, namely Putin is likely to retaliate with a nuclear strike. Meanwhile, women, children and babies are being massacred and we look on helplessly.
I am a dove, but this looks wrong.
I feel the same way. But intervention after fighting has started involves a far greater risk of nuclear escalation that would fighting to defend an attack NATO territory. Putin’s paranoia guarantees that. The US simply isn’t going to risk it.
I know.
Anyway BigG. and HY (oh and indirectly Carlotta) keep telling me that our house is in order because, although the EU have dragged their heels (which to their shame, they have) Johnson has gone the extra mile. What a hero!
What are you talking about? I've been criticising UK’s feeble initial response from the get-go. It’s the Johnson-phobes who have trouble recognising when the UK gets ahead of the pack - see flight restrictions.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
We started strong, but I'd say Macron has caught BJ up. The French are allowing the state export finance back to underwrite Ukrainian arms purchases, which is something that neither the US or the UK have done.
But in the case of the UK that's because we are giving them the weapons for free,
surely free weapons is better that sold for weapons on credit?
I don't that that tweet makes the critical point you seem to think it does.
I've been vocal in dislike of Boris, including that the current situation should not mean he sticks around - quite the opposite in fact.
But that tweet to me shows that he could see things are serious and for once cut out the showmanship and bluster, and made as reasonable a pledge as he could make. NOT seeking to embody the spirit of Churchill in such a moment or indulge in grandiose verbosity would be one of the more professional, serious things Boris will have done as PM.
Zelensky doesn't need a faux-Churchill, he needs help. Boris cannot really give him much, but within the bounds of diplomatic support he's offered what he can.
I doubt Zelensky wanted to hear funny stories about trips to Peppa Pig world....or false promises about the British coming to fight the Russian on the beaches.
Ultimately Boris reaction will be judged by what kit they get to the Ukrainians and how effective sanctions are.
I certainly don’t see much political upside for the PM in providing some warm words and allowing a few buildings to be lit up in blue and yellow, if the outcome is a disaster for Ukraine and its people. The upside for him is simply in pushing his inadequacies and dishonesty off the news agenda.
No matter Boris and the UK are greatly appreciated by the president and people's of Ukraine together with the Baltic states
Like the rest of the West we are doing the square root of zip for the Ukrainian people. The Ukrainians have begged for our help and we have left them wanting. Europe should hang its head in shame.
Now there might be a good reason for that, namely Putin is likely to retaliate with a nuclear strike. Meanwhile, women, children and babies are being massacred and we look on helplessly.
I am a dove, but this looks wrong.
Do you think the US is getting the message to someone in the Kremlin that if Putin goes nuclear over Ukraine Moscow will be obliterated in return?
The problem as I see it is Putin has a death wish. Going down in a blaze of glory and taking a million citizens of Moscow with him is quite possibly the last item on his bucket list.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
I know this a rabbit hole to come down vs. what’s happening in Ukraine, but this is where diplomacy and the art of understanding how language is perceived and interpreted culturally is fascinating.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
That astonishes me. I would've assumed that English was a young language in comparison to Chinese, and Chinese has evolved in the context of a great ancient civilization (as opposed to English which, for most of its history, was the vernacular of a backwater island) to boot.
The Hollywood-ification of the Russian invasion gathers apace .
The Ukrainian freedom fighters including the now much loved blond bombshell Ukrainian MP wielding a kalashnikov , the handsome President and merry band of ordinary Joes out on the streets determined to carry on fighting v the evil Russian regime .
What I’m getting at is the cheering on fanfare by some in the media and on Twitter ignores the sad reality that Russia will pummel Kiev into the ground if Putin’s patience snaps .
Whilst some of those following the coverage don’t want Ukraine the Invasion to end , or seem to be living in some alternate universe where the plucky freedom fighters can hold out against Russia .
There is no happy ending here , no Indiana Jones , just varying degrees of bloodshed and destruction .
Yes, civilian militias vs tanks are not going to win. Destroying supporting vehicles, artillery, fuel tankers etc, perhaps so. Even so casualties and reprisals huge. Urban partisan warfare is an awful war to fight,
I don't that that tweet makes the critical point you seem to think it does.
I've been vocal in dislike of Boris, including that the current situation should not mean he sticks around - quite the opposite in fact.
But that tweet to me shows that he could see things are serious and for once cut out the showmanship and bluster, and made as reasonable a pledge as he could make. NOT seeking to embody the spirit of Churchill in such a moment or indulge in grandiose verbosity would be one of the more professional, serious things Boris will have done as PM.
Zelensky doesn't need a faux-Churchill, he needs help. Boris cannot really give him much, but within the bounds of diplomatic support he's offered what he can.
I doubt Zelensky wanted to hear funny stories about trips to Peppa Pig world....or false promises about the British coming to fight the Russian on the beaches.
Ultimately Boris reaction will be judged by what kit they get to the Ukrainians and how effective sanctions are.
I certainly don’t see much political upside for the PM in providing some warm words and allowing a few buildings to be lit up in blue and yellow, if the outcome is a disaster for Ukraine and its people. The upside for him is simply in pushing his inadequacies and dishonesty off the news agenda.
No matter Boris and the UK are greatly appreciated by the president and people's of Ukraine together with the Baltic states
Like the rest of the West we are doing the square root of zip for the Ukrainian people. The Ukrainians have begged for our help and we have left them wanting. Europe should hang its head in shame.
Now there might be a good reason for that, namely Putin is likely to retaliate with a nuclear strike. Meanwhile, women, children and babies are being massacred and we look on helplessly.
I am a dove, but this looks wrong.
Do you think the US is getting the message to someone in the Kremlin that if Putin goes nuclear over Ukraine Moscow will be obliterated in return?
The problem as I see it is Putin has a death wish. Going down in a blaze of glory and taking a million citizens of Moscow with him is quite possibly the last item on his bucket list.
I’ve never seen any proper analysis of whether he’s religious. I know he cloaks himself in it (and I’ve read some superficial articles about his faith) but when a man is this mad the question of whether he believes in eternal life and that he has God on his side matters.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
There really isn't a good phrase for " You're out of order there, my mate."
We started strong, but I'd say Macron has caught BJ up. The French are allowing the state export finance back to underwrite Ukrainian arms purchases, which is something that neither the US or the UK have done.
But in the case of the UK that's because we are giving them the weapons for free,
surely free weapons is better that sold for weapons on credit?
Both are good: we are sending what we have in stock that we don't need, and the French are financing the purchase of whatever the Ukrainians want.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
There really isn't a good phrase for " You're out of order there, my mate."
You haven’t gone quite far enough. He’s not “out of order” he’s tipped into “bang out of order”.
If you'd told me 48 hours ago that there would be even a question about Russia winning this War.
Depends what winning is considered to be, doesn't it
Presumably it'd be hard for Russia to not come out ahead in terms of gained territory etc, given the disparities, but the ambition shown by the initial assaults would suggest limited gains (or failure to exact regime change etc) would be a failure?
But the 'disputed' territory is held by Russia already. Surely everywhere else would face massive resistance?
The area claimed by the 'independent' republics was not entirely held by them. I'd assumed if a limited goal was intended it was to expand that area so that the entire areas claimed by them would be under their control. Even if that was all they managed, it would still be a gain.
Not much of one. Considering what has been lost.
Russia has lost all credibility in the civilised world. I really don't know where it goes from here.
Maybe it might as well go for broke invade Eastern Europe see where the chips land
Given it hasn't managed to successfully invade Ukraine, I suspect its chances in the rest of Eastern Europe would be... poor.
One worry emerging from all of this is that even before the West inevitably reinvests in defence, NATO is clearly capable of easily kicking Russia’s arse with conventional force. That means we are now in the reverse of the Cold War, when we knew the red army was unstoppable and we would eventually need to go (tactically) nuclear to slow it down, thus causing MAD. These days we’d push them back in no time, and Putin would be the one who felt cornered. And he’s mad.
What's your view on NATO capability minus the US?
I have no confidence that the US will still be interested in defending Europe against Putin after the next Presidential election, and then there's China for them to contend with.
LONDON, Feb 25 (Reuters) - Britain imposed sanctions to freeze the assets of Russia's President Vladimir Putin for launching an invasion of Ukraine, and of Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who it said was a key decision maker in Russia's government, according to its UK sanctions list.
We started strong, but I'd say Macron has caught BJ up. The French are allowing the state export finance back to underwrite Ukrainian arms purchases, which is something that neither the US or the UK have done.
Did the UK ever withdraw finance?
The Statutory Instrument went through Parliament in December 2021,
We started strong, but I'd say Macron has caught BJ up. The French are allowing the state export finance back to underwrite Ukrainian arms purchases, which is something that neither the US or the UK have done.
But in the case of the UK that's because we are giving them the weapons for free,
surely free weapons is better that sold for weapons on credit?
Both are good: we are sending what we have in stock that we don't need, and the French are financing the purchase of whatever the Ukrainians want.
On a side note, rumours have it that the first couple of thousand NLAWs we sent across had an expiry date of before 2025. It's nice to see £40,000,000 of our taxes go to defending a democracy under attack rather than just get scrapped.
If you'd told me 48 hours ago that there would be even a question about Russia winning this War.
Depends what winning is considered to be, doesn't it
Presumably it'd be hard for Russia to not come out ahead in terms of gained territory etc, given the disparities, but the ambition shown by the initial assaults would suggest limited gains (or failure to exact regime change etc) would be a failure?
But the 'disputed' territory is held by Russia already. Surely everywhere else would face massive resistance?
The area claimed by the 'independent' republics was not entirely held by them. I'd assumed if a limited goal was intended it was to expand that area so that the entire areas claimed by them would be under their control. Even if that was all they managed, it would still be a gain.
Not much of one. Considering what has been lost.
Russia has lost all credibility in the civilised world. I really don't know where it goes from here.
Maybe it might as well go for broke invade Eastern Europe see where the chips land
Given it hasn't managed to successfully invade Ukraine, I suspect its chances in the rest of Eastern Europe would be... poor.
One worry emerging from all of this is that even before the West inevitably reinvests in defence, NATO is clearly capable of easily kicking Russia’s arse with conventional force. That means we are now in the reverse of the Cold War, when we knew the red army was unstoppable and we would eventually need to go (tactically) nuclear to slow it down, thus causing MAD. These days we’d push them back in no time, and Putin would be the one who felt cornered. And he’s mad.
What's your view on NATO capability minus the US?
I have no confidence that the US will still be interested in defending Europe against Putin after the next Presidential election, and then there's China for them to contend with.
Well, clearly not as strong, but the Russian Federation isn’t the Soviet Union. I’d guess AirPower would become the issue. I’m rather hoping this Ukraine business kills off Trump and the worst of his acolytes and let’s a sane Republican (are there any left?) stand. Because you’re right, absent the USA the equation rather changes….
We started strong, but I'd say Macron has caught BJ up. The French are allowing the state export finance back to underwrite Ukrainian arms purchases, which is something that neither the US or the UK have done.
But in the case of the UK that's because we are giving them the weapons for free,
surely free weapons is better that sold for weapons on credit?
That's how Lend-Lease worked.
In practice no one expects to be paid.
A fairly hefty convoy from Poland too. Russia wins, not paid, Ukraine wins, paid for by Russian reparations.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
That astonishes me. I would've assumed that English was a young language in comparison to Chinese, and Chinese has evolved in the context of a great ancient civilization (as opposed to English which, for most of its history, was the vernacular of a backwater island) to boot.
I think English has so many words because it's absorbed them from so many different languages (well, German and French, mainly). The whole China is the world mentality probably militates against adding loan words, as does, I suppose, not using an alphabet.
We started strong, but I'd say Macron has caught BJ up. The French are allowing the state export finance back to underwrite Ukrainian arms purchases, which is something that neither the US or the UK have done.
But in the case of the UK that's because we are giving them the weapons for free,
surely free weapons is better that sold for weapons on credit?
That's how Lend-Lease worked.
In practice no one expects to be paid.
I have this vision of like when you return a leased car, some squaddie inspecting all the weapons at the end of the lease period for battle damage....you scratched it, that will cost you your deposit.
We started strong, but I'd say Macron has caught BJ up. The French are allowing the state export finance back to underwrite Ukrainian arms purchases, which is something that neither the US or the UK have done.
But in the case of the UK that's because we are giving them the weapons for free,
surely free weapons is better that sold for weapons on credit?
That's how Lend-Lease worked.
In practice no one expects to be paid.
I think you also have to allow for the fact that some of the mechanisms are going to look different between western nations because of the domestic legislation in play. The objective is the same. As you say - I doubt the French are after cash here.
We started strong, but I'd say Macron has caught BJ up. The French are allowing the state export finance back to underwrite Ukrainian arms purchases, which is something that neither the US or the UK have done.
But in the case of the UK that's because we are giving them the weapons for free,
surely free weapons is better that sold for weapons on credit?
That's how Lend-Lease worked.
In practice no one expects to be paid.
I have this vision of like when you return a leased car, some squaddie inspecting all the weapons at the end of the lease period for battle damage....you scratched it, that will cost you your deposit.
Nah, we’ve all upsold the Ukrainians gap insurance.
We started strong, but I'd say Macron has caught BJ up. The French are allowing the state export finance back to underwrite Ukrainian arms purchases, which is something that neither the US or the UK have done.
But in the case of the UK that's because we are giving them the weapons for free,
surely free weapons is better that sold for weapons on credit?
That's how Lend-Lease worked.
In practice no one expects to be paid.
A fairly hefty convoy from Poland too. Russia wins, not paid, Ukraine wins, paid for by Russian reparations.
Good luck getting reparations out of Russia under any circumstances! Although, frankly, one imagines that the whole world would breathe a sigh of relief if a palace coup at the Kremlin ended with the Russian army simply pissing off out of Ukraine, and a less poisonous autocrat sending Putin's head on a spike to Zelenskyy as a gesture of rapprochement.
The photos and videos of women and children hiding in the underground singing the Ukrainian anthem are quite something. I used to be so naïve to assume such scenes would remain memories of my grandparents, and just stills in my Blitz history books. Instead just under 1000 miles away this continent is seeing those scenes again.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
That astonishes me. I would've assumed that English was a young language in comparison to Chinese, and Chinese has evolved in the context of a great ancient civilization (as opposed to English which, for most of its history, was the vernacular of a backwater island) to boot.
The vast majority of Chinese are not native speakers of Mandarin*. In a way it's a pidgin language. Taught at school for ease of communication. Similar to Indian English. Actual native Chinese languages are much richer and more nuanced. I speak virtually no Taiwanese. But if I need to swear...then you can't really in Mandarin. So you do in Taiwanese. Stupid egg is about as far as you can go.
* There are actually.native Mandarins. The dialect around Beijing. But there are.several of them, and.none.of them are standard. *You may be able to swear in those. Probably you can.
We started strong, but I'd say Macron has caught BJ up. The French are allowing the state export finance back to underwrite Ukrainian arms purchases, which is something that neither the US or the UK have done.
But in the case of the UK that's because we are giving them the weapons for free,
surely free weapons is better that sold for weapons on credit?
That's how Lend-Lease worked.
In practice no one expects to be paid.
I think you also have to allow for the fact that some of the mechanisms are going to look different between western nations because of the domestic legislation in play. The objective is the same. As you say - I doubt the French are after cash here.
I think the French are behaving admirably. As are the British and most other EU countries. Sadly there are clearly constraints and no one is going to thank NATO for starting a nuclear exchange with the Russians so I am not inclined to be too critical of most countries in the Western alliance.
This does not mean we let our own Government off the hook over Russian money in the city but that does not negate all the very good work they are doing right now.
The photos and videos of women and children hiding in the underground singing the Ukrainian anthem are quite something. I used to be so naïve to assume such scenes would remain memories of my grandparents, and just stills in my Blitz history books. Instead just under 1000 miles away this continent is seeing those scenes again.
I’ve never felt quite these emotions before. You can see it in the debate on here. I think we are all united by a desire to do SOMETHING. It’s heartbreaking to feel so useless as a nation. There’s a clear right and a wrong for a change, and we can’t completely back “right”, which feels wrong.
I don't that that tweet makes the critical point you seem to think it does.
I've been vocal in dislike of Boris, including that the current situation should not mean he sticks around - quite the opposite in fact.
But that tweet to me shows that he could see things are serious and for once cut out the showmanship and bluster, and made as reasonable a pledge as he could make. NOT seeking to embody the spirit of Churchill in such a moment or indulge in grandiose verbosity would be one of the more professional, serious things Boris will have done as PM.
Zelensky doesn't need a faux-Churchill, he needs help. Boris cannot really give him much, but within the bounds of diplomatic support he's offered what he can.
I doubt Zelensky wanted to hear funny stories about trips to Peppa Pig world....or false promises about the British coming to fight the Russian on the beaches.
Ultimately Boris reaction will be judged by what kit they get to the Ukrainians and how effective sanctions are.
I certainly don’t see much political upside for the PM in providing some warm words and allowing a few buildings to be lit up in blue and yellow, if the outcome is a disaster for Ukraine and its people. The upside for him is simply in pushing his inadequacies and dishonesty off the news agenda.
No matter Boris and the UK are greatly appreciated by the president and people's of Ukraine together with the Baltic states
Like the rest of the West we are doing the square root of zip for the Ukrainian people. The Ukrainians have begged for our help and we have left them wanting. Europe should hang its head in shame.
Now there might be a good reason for that, namely Putin is likely to retaliate with a nuclear strike. Meanwhile, women, children and babies are being massacred and we look on helplessly.
I am a dove, but this looks wrong.
I feel the same way. But intervention after fighting has started involves a far greater risk of nuclear escalation that would fighting to defend an attack NATO territory. Putin’s paranoia guarantees that. The US simply isn’t going to risk it.
I know.
Anyway BigG. and HY (oh and indirectly Carlotta) keep telling me that our house is in order because, although the EU have dragged their heels (which to their shame, they have) Johnson has gone the extra mile. What a hero!
What are you talking about? I've been criticising UK’s feeble initial response from the get-go. It’s the Johnson-phobes who have trouble recognising when the UK gets ahead of the pack - see flight restrictions.
It is true, I am a Johnson-phobe. I genuinely cannot stand the sight of the man. I have in the past grudgingly conceded his victories, like the vaccination programme, whilst still calling out his manifold failures.
The abject failure of the EU (and I say that as an enthusiastic former Remainer) and their pathetic range of sanctions is immoral, but in this contest for racing snails, Johnson, if he actually is ahead, is barely Infront of the pack.
Ukraine is crying out for our help, and we have our fingers in our ears.
We started strong, but I'd say Macron has caught BJ up. The French are allowing the state export finance back to underwrite Ukrainian arms purchases, which is something that neither the US or the UK have done.
But in the case of the UK that's because we are giving them the weapons for free,
surely free weapons is better that sold for weapons on credit?
That's how Lend-Lease worked.
In practice no one expects to be paid.
I think you also have to allow for the fact that some of the mechanisms are going to look different between western nations because of the domestic legislation in play. The objective is the same. As you say - I doubt the French are after cash here.
I think the French are behaving admirably. As are the British and most other EU countries. Sadly there are clearly constraints and no one is going to thank NATO for starting a nuclear exchange with the Russians so I am not inclined to be too critical of most countries in the Western alliance.
This does not mean we let our own Government off the hook over Russian money in the city but that does not negate all the very good work they are doing right now.
Oh I quite agree. We all must do the maximum we can do short of causing WWIII and I don’t pretend to know what that is across all sectors, but we need to work it out. And I do mean “us” because if our Governments do that then it will hurt us. But we must bear that cost.
Her name is Elena Kovalskaya. She just resigned from Director of Moscow Meyerhold Theatre saying "it's impossible to work for the Government of a murderer and get paid by them". Btw, any criticism for Putin is banned within the theatre considering it as betrayal. Brave woman. https://t.co/rcOasIrgU8
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
That astonishes me. I would've assumed that English was a young language in comparison to Chinese, and Chinese has evolved in the context of a great ancient civilization (as opposed to English which, for most of its history, was the vernacular of a backwater island) to boot.
The vast majority of Chinese are not native speakers of Mandarin*. In a way it's a pidgin language. Taught at school for ease of communication. Similar to Indian English. Actual native Chinese languages are much richer and more nuanced. I speak virtually no Taiwanese. But if I need to swear...then you can't really in Mandarin. So you do in Taiwanese. Stupid egg is about as far as you can go.
* There are actually.native Mandarins. The dialect around Beijing. But there are.several of them, and.none.of them are standard. *You may be able to swear in those. Probably you can.
So you’re saying those mandarins split into segments…?
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
That astonishes me. I would've assumed that English was a young language in comparison to Chinese, and Chinese has evolved in the context of a great ancient civilization (as opposed to English which, for most of its history, was the vernacular of a backwater island) to boot.
I think English has so many words because it's absorbed them from so many different languages (well, German and French, mainly). The whole China is the world mentality probably militates against adding loan words, as does, I suppose, not using an alphabet.
I don't think your idea of how words are absorbed is quite right. Certainly it's true of a lot of late borrowations from Latin that they wouldn't have happened without widespread literacy -- many of these later imports are of a scientific-technical nature where writing is an absolute must.
But the great majority of English's hybrid nature is, I understand, not predicted on literacy. The fact that we have a Latinate word-list grafted onto a Germanic rootstock is deep in the history of English, and it's that French influence that catalysed the change from Old to Middle English. All of this is before the era of mass literacy, so the heavy borrowing of words is probably largely unrelated to the writing system. Indeed, we see during this time a number of letters dropping out of the English language - æ, þ, ƿ, and ð all vanished under the influence of scribes without the words themselves changing in the spoken language. So the oldest English words would have been written very differently in the 800s compared to today.
The photos and videos of women and children hiding in the underground singing the Ukrainian anthem are quite something. I used to be so naïve to assume such scenes would remain memories of my grandparents, and just stills in my Blitz history books. Instead just under 1000 miles away this continent is seeing those scenes again.
I’ve never felt quite these emotions before. You can see it in the debate on here. I think we are all united by a desire to do SOMETHING. It’s heartbreaking to feel so useless as a nation. There’s a clear right and a wrong for a change, and we can’t completely back “right”, which feels wrong.
It's rubbish and awful, so many mothers have unknowingly seen their sons for the last time, and so many sons will return to see their family home razed to the ground with no survivors. It's just been this continual gutwreching feeling all week.
At the same time, as someone right in the sweet spot for recruitment and conscription in the UK (early 20s, went to one of those public schools who loved sending people to Sandhurst), the knowledge that intervening would result in, at best, me consoling families of longtime friends also feels unbelievably grim.
It'd be just my luck to spend the first part of my early 20s getting locked down for something that wouldn't have given me a sniffle, only to spend the second half in a Lithuanian municipality I can't even spell, eventually making a corner of a foreign field forever Britain.
I see Turkey has joined the Ukraine support parade in South East Poland
Presumably fairly handy, given they produce a lot of stuff domestically that will require fewer sign offs from other partners? For one thing, one imagines that drone order might be accelerated given the record they have vs. Russian kit.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
That astonishes me. I would've assumed that English was a young language in comparison to Chinese, and Chinese has evolved in the context of a great ancient civilization (as opposed to English which, for most of its history, was the vernacular of a backwater island) to boot.
The vast majority of Chinese are not native speakers of Mandarin*. In a way it's a pidgin language. Taught at school for ease of communication. Similar to Indian English. Actual native Chinese languages are much richer and more nuanced. I speak virtually no Taiwanese. But if I need to swear...then you can't really in Mandarin. So you do in Taiwanese. Stupid egg is about as far as you can go.
* There are actually.native Mandarins. The dialect around Beijing. But there are.several of them, and.none.of them are standard. *You may be able to swear in those. Probably you can.
So you’re saying those mandarins split into segments…?
Provinces, possibly. Speaking of chinese translations, chinese translated into English over-uses the word ‘province’, where almost no english-speaking country has them, at least under that name.
The photos and videos of women and children hiding in the underground singing the Ukrainian anthem are quite something. I used to be so naïve to assume such scenes would remain memories of my grandparents, and just stills in my Blitz history books. Instead just under 1000 miles away this continent is seeing those scenes again.
I’ve never felt quite these emotions before. You can see it in the debate on here. I think we are all united by a desire to do SOMETHING. It’s heartbreaking to feel so useless as a nation. There’s a clear right and a wrong for a change, and we can’t completely back “right”, which feels wrong.
It's rubbish and awful, so many mothers have unknowingly seen their sons for the last time, and so many sons will return to see their family home razed to the ground with no survivors. It's just been this continual gutwreching feeling all week.
At the same time, as someone right in the sweet spot for recruitment and conscription in the UK (early 20s, went to one of those public schools who loved sending people to Sandhurst), the knowledge that intervening would result in, at best, me consoling families of longtime friends also feels unbelievably grim.
It'd be just my luck to spend the first part of my early 20s getting locked down for something that wouldn't have given me a sniffle, only to spend the second half in a Lithuanian municipality I can't even spell, eventually making a corner of a foreign field forever Britain.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
That astonishes me. I would've assumed that English was a young language in comparison to Chinese, and Chinese has evolved in the context of a great ancient civilization (as opposed to English which, for most of its history, was the vernacular of a backwater island) to boot.
The vast majority of Chinese are not native speakers of Mandarin*. In a way it's a pidgin language. Taught at school for ease of communication. Similar to Indian English. Actual native Chinese languages are much richer and more nuanced. I speak virtually no Taiwanese. But if I need to swear...then you can't really in Mandarin. So you do in Taiwanese. Stupid egg is about as far as you can go.
* There are actually.native Mandarins. The dialect around Beijing. But there are.several of them, and.none.of them are standard. *You may be able to swear in those. Probably you can.
So you’re saying those mandarins split into segments…?
Provinces, possibly. Speaking of chinese translations, chinese translated into English over-uses the word ‘province’, where almost no english-speaking country has them, at least under that name.
To be honest, in English the word just makes me think of Northern Ireland - and then mostly of the issues you cause when you call it “the province”.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
That astonishes me. I would've assumed that English was a young language in comparison to Chinese, and Chinese has evolved in the context of a great ancient civilization (as opposed to English which, for most of its history, was the vernacular of a backwater island) to boot.
The vast majority of Chinese are not native speakers of Mandarin*. In a way it's a pidgin language. Taught at school for ease of communication. Similar to Indian English. Actual native Chinese languages are much richer and more nuanced. I speak virtually no Taiwanese. But if I need to swear...then you can't really in Mandarin. So you do in Taiwanese. Stupid egg is about as far as you can go.
* There are actually.native Mandarins. The dialect around Beijing. But there are.several of them, and.none.of them are standard. *You may be able to swear in those. Probably you can.
So you’re saying those mandarins split into segments…?
Provinces, possibly. Speaking of chinese translations, chinese translated into English over-uses the word ‘province’, where almost no english-speaking country has them, at least under that name.
Russia vetoes the UN Security Council resolution that condemns the invasion of Ukraine. China, India and UAE have abstained from vetoing and 11 more countries voted in favour.
What's weird is that obviously everyone knew Russia would veto it, it was a gesture is all, but China still felt it necessary to demand changing the resolution from 'condemn' to 'deplore' in order to abstain and not vote against.
Is condemn stronger than deplore? Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that. Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
Indeed, unless the distinction is greater in Chinese it's a rather minor linguistic difference on which to hang an objection. Unless it was trivial, it was just necessary to extract some kind of change in order to confirm their position, so it didn't look like they bend easily.
There's almost always a bigger distinction in Chinese than in English. The vocabulary is so much smaller. 痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really. There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce". There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
That astonishes me. I would've assumed that English was a young language in comparison to Chinese, and Chinese has evolved in the context of a great ancient civilization (as opposed to English which, for most of its history, was the vernacular of a backwater island) to boot.
The vast majority of Chinese are not native speakers of Mandarin*. In a way it's a pidgin language. Taught at school for ease of communication. Similar to Indian English. Actual native Chinese languages are much richer and more nuanced. I speak virtually no Taiwanese. But if I need to swear...then you can't really in Mandarin. So you do in Taiwanese. Stupid egg is about as far as you can go.
* There are actually.native Mandarins. The dialect around Beijing. But there are.several of them, and.none.of them are standard. *You may be able to swear in those. Probably you can.
So you’re saying those mandarins split into segments…?
Provinces, possibly. Speaking of chinese translations, chinese translated into English over-uses the word ‘province’, where almost no english-speaking country has them, at least under that name.
We started strong, but I'd say Macron has caught BJ up. The French are allowing the state export finance back to underwrite Ukrainian arms purchases, which is something that neither the US or the UK have done.
But in the case of the UK that's because we are giving them the weapons for free,
surely free weapons is better that sold for weapons on credit?
That's how Lend-Lease worked.
In practice no one expects to be paid.
I have this vision of like when you return a leased car, some squaddie inspecting all the weapons at the end of the lease period for battle damage....you scratched it, that will cost you your deposit.
On the other hand, if you have video of it blowing up a tank - full deposit returned, rental refunded, please take another for free.
I don't that that tweet makes the critical point you seem to think it does.
I've been vocal in dislike of Boris, including that the current situation should not mean he sticks around - quite the opposite in fact.
But that tweet to me shows that he could see things are serious and for once cut out the showmanship and bluster, and made as reasonable a pledge as he could make. NOT seeking to embody the spirit of Churchill in such a moment or indulge in grandiose verbosity would be one of the more professional, serious things Boris will have done as PM.
Zelensky doesn't need a faux-Churchill, he needs help. Boris cannot really give him much, but within the bounds of diplomatic support he's offered what he can.
I doubt Zelensky wanted to hear funny stories about trips to Peppa Pig world....or false promises about the British coming to fight the Russian on the beaches.
Ultimately Boris reaction will be judged by what kit they get to the Ukrainians and how effective sanctions are.
I certainly don’t see much political upside for the PM in providing some warm words and allowing a few buildings to be lit up in blue and yellow, if the outcome is a disaster for Ukraine and its people. The upside for him is simply in pushing his inadequacies and dishonesty off the news agenda.
No matter Boris and the UK are greatly appreciated by the president and people's of Ukraine together with the Baltic states
Like the rest of the West we are doing the square root of zip for the Ukrainian people. The Ukrainians have begged for our help and we have left them wanting. Europe should hang its head in shame.
Now there might be a good reason for that, namely Putin is likely to retaliate with a nuclear strike. Meanwhile, women, children and babies are being massacred and we look on helplessly.
I am a dove, but this looks wrong.
Do you think the US is getting the message to someone in the Kremlin that if Putin goes nuclear over Ukraine Moscow will be obliterated in return?
If Putin were to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine then it would effectively be a declaration of war against all the neighbours anyway, given the resultant radioactive fallout that would likely end up pissing all over Europe, as well as Russia's own territory. Even the Chinese would struggle to justify fence sitting faced with such transparently psychotic lunacy.
The big problem being, of course, that it Tsar Vladimir I finds himself in a sufficiently desperate position to push the button on the Ukrainians then he might also start using his vast stockpile of ICBMs on everyone else, too. If he can't win and he's going to die anyway, might as well burn the world along with him. Then we're reliant on the Russian military being willing and able to stop him. I wish I could feel confident in the prospects of their success. But I'm not.
He won't go nuclear. He'll go chemical. He has a track record with using chemical and nucleotide agents, and it is much easier to do an Assad and blame the other side for using them.
The apologists for Assad have contributed to this mess.
Comments
Next week would see Russia have the most astonishing Bank run.
Then phase 2. Freeze all transferred assets until provenance is proven.
Phase 3. Assets linked to the Putin regime are confiscated and loaned to the Ukranian government.
Maybe listen to the president of Ukraine and earlier today the Latvian Deputy PM who named the UK as the one country who has been very supportive
Marco Rubio
@marcorubio
·
41m
Tonight and for weeks to come #Ukraine has a few “Welcome to #Kyiv” surprise gifts for their uninvited guests
https://twitter.com/marcorubio
https://old.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t1fbfm/someone_played_the_ukrainian_national_anthem_on/
Am qualified.
Don't actually teach at the moment, mind.
But could do.
From the point of view so sad and sorry for Zelenskiy 😔
I do share the smart view whoever in weaker position has to eat all sorts of💩in talks, so it’s picking the moment to talk. I’m not convinced it tilts much in favour of Ukraine government after today. I remember camera on front of lead tank going to Baghdad, it took days for convoy to get there, but when it did it tilted balance? And Putin got so much stuff moving in on ground and air power now ☹️
But I can’t convince anyone so will leave it for tonight. 😴
Anyway BigG. and HY (oh and indirectly Carlotta) keep telling me that our house is in order because, although the EU have dragged their heels (which to their shame, they have) Johnson has gone the extra mile. What a hero!
https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1497357057950945286
The broad thrust of this analysis - annex Southern Ukraine and thus link up with Crimea and Transnistria, and turn rump Ukraine to the North into a puppet state akin to Belarus - sounds very much like what I was predicting the Russians might try before the invasion got underway. I know, stopped clocks and all that.
Anyhow, whether or not Putin will find this so smart and easy is very much open to question. Firstly, the occupied half of Ukraine (probably rechristened as Novorossiya) is still an awful lot of territory to try to suppress militarily. Secondly, it seems doubtful in the extreme, given what we have seen of Ukrainian resistance so far, that the Vichy regime in rump Ukraine would be able to assert its authority without a lot of Russian security personnel in any event.
We're doing too little of what we could do which would actually hurt us. Such as the money propping up the City and London property market, and private schools.
We may do it. And when and if we do I will applaud it. But we aren't as yet.
Our first offer was poor, but tonight it is the equal of anybody and indeed is only being prevented in throwing Russia out of swift by Germany
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/
🟨⬜⬜🟨🟨
🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
Puerile starting words can work sometimes.
(They went to the European Court to try, and Germany won).
EU countries do still have a few powers left !
https://twitter.com/elliottengage/status/1497358892795318272
The big problem being, of course, that it Tsar Vladimir I finds himself in a sufficiently desperate position to push the button on the Ukrainians then he might also start using his vast stockpile of ICBMs on everyone else, too. If he can't win and he's going to die anyway, might as well burn the world along with him. Then we're reliant on the Russian military being willing and able to stop him. I wish I could feel confident in the prospects of their success. But I'm not.
We'll wait to see what it is.
Do not sanction Putin's globe trotting oligarch friends, kill them
There is little doubt that Putin and the oligarchs are tight, whether voluntarily or not so voluntarily. Its all part of the shared kleptocracy in Russia. They do matter, Putin provides them space (in some cases concessions) to trade and they quid pro quo (adding to Putin's personal wealth & power). Its a classic all noses in the trough situation.
I'm nearly sure a long time ago I posted on here that many months after the Salisbury incident, UK & Russian officials met to try to thaw out the relationship a bit. Reportedly, a key Russian request was do not touch the oligarchs. That perhaps gives an indication of their importance.
These boys both live under Putin's patronage and to some extent his protection. If they start dying, you might break that circle and you may create a rupture
Would be interesting to see the Chinese for that.
Almost certainly there's a much bigger difference.
https://twitter.com/girlsreallyrule/status/1497357444854403079?t=FRDHXgN0aAM1QJmWA9-9vg&s=19
The Ukrainian freedom fighters including the now much loved blond bombshell Ukrainian MP wielding a kalashnikov , the handsome President and merry band of ordinary Joes out on the streets determined to carry on fighting v the evil Russian regime .
What I’m getting at is the cheering on fanfare by some in the media and on Twitter ignores the sad reality that Russia will pummel Kiev into the ground if Putin’s patience snaps .
Whilst some of those following the coverage don’t want Ukraine the Invasion to end , or seem to be living in some alternate universe where the plucky freedom fighters can hold out against Russia .
There is no happy ending here , no Indiana Jones , just varying degrees of bloodshed and destruction .
I'm trying to think of a conflict involving western countries where ground operations were not preceded by a major aerial bombardment. Bearing in mind that the Ukrainian armed forces are probably the strongest to be attacked in any major conflict since, I guess, the Israeli armed forces in 1973, it's very strange that Russia didn't use its clear advantage in the air/missiles/artillery to degrade Ukrainian defences before sending ground forces in.
It feels like a very reckless decision.
NATO is bigger and more powerful than Russia. For a time, we must be willing to be a tougher street fighter as well.
If they're not terribly careful they're going to be bled white - though the great tragedy, of course, is that the Ukrainian people will suffer even worse for their resistance, as the unhinged autocrat and his henchmen desperately grasp for more and more extreme measures.
痛惜 deplore. You can use this for the number of homeless. Or a child being sick. Effectively. It's a shame really.
There are a number of possible variations of condemn. But most carry serious moral implications. The kind that end with you in a re-education camp or with a bullet in your head. Most are nearer "denounce".
There really isn't the nuance of incremental gradation.
The Royal Opera House has cancelled Russia's Bolshoi Ballet tour following the attacks on Ukraine
https://twitter.com/Metro_Ents/status/1497361262296113155
surely free weapons is better that sold for weapons on credit?
I have no confidence that the US will still be interested in defending Europe against Putin after the next Presidential election, and then there's China for them to contend with.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/uk-imposes-asset-freeze-russias-putin-lavrov-2022-02-25/
The Statutory Instrument went through Parliament in December 2021,
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-12-08/debates/21120876000009/UKExportFinanceUkraine
In practice no one expects to be paid.
A fairly hefty convoy from Poland too. Russia wins, not paid, Ukraine wins, paid for by Russian reparations.
https://twitter.com/PolishHistory_/status/1497265605308829697?t=8p-CktLXE-qxdpmAdh84Jw&s=19
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQsZIBHw2io
Actual native Chinese languages are much richer and more nuanced.
I speak virtually no Taiwanese. But if I need to swear...then you can't really in Mandarin. So you do in Taiwanese.
Stupid egg is about as far as you can go.
* There are actually.native Mandarins. The dialect around Beijing. But there are.several of them, and.none.of them are standard.
*You may be able to swear in those. Probably you can.
This does not mean we let our own Government off the hook over Russian money in the city but that does not negate all the very good work they are doing right now.
The abject failure of the EU (and I say that as an enthusiastic former Remainer) and their pathetic range of sanctions is immoral, but in this contest for racing snails, Johnson, if he actually is ahead, is barely Infront of the pack.
Ukraine is crying out for our help, and we have our fingers in our ears.
Her name is Elena Kovalskaya. She just resigned from Director of Moscow Meyerhold Theatre saying "it's impossible to work for the Government of a murderer and get paid by them".
Btw, any criticism for Putin is banned within the theatre considering it as betrayal.
Brave woman. https://t.co/rcOasIrgU8
But the great majority of English's hybrid nature is, I understand, not predicted on literacy. The fact that we have a Latinate word-list grafted onto a Germanic rootstock is deep in the history of English, and it's that French influence that catalysed the change from Old to Middle English. All of this is before the era of mass literacy, so the heavy borrowing of words is probably largely unrelated to the writing system. Indeed, we see during this time a number of letters dropping out of the English language - æ, þ, ƿ, and ð all vanished under the influence of scribes without the words themselves changing in the spoken language. So the oldest English words would have been written very differently in the 800s compared to today.
At the same time, as someone right in the sweet spot for recruitment and conscription in the UK (early 20s, went to one of those public schools who loved sending people to Sandhurst), the knowledge that intervening would result in, at best, me consoling families of longtime friends also feels unbelievably grim.
It'd be just my luck to spend the first part of my early 20s getting locked down for something that wouldn't have given me a sniffle, only to spend the second half in a Lithuanian municipality I can't even spell, eventually making a corner of a foreign field forever Britain.
https://samf.substack.com/p/a-reckless-gamble?r=15i4j0&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=url
NEW THREAD
The apologists for Assad have contributed to this mess.