Nice bit of profiteering going on here, on the part of the Home office.
"Ms Klymova crossed the border from Ukraine to Hungary and then flew to Paris to meet her mother, where they are grappling with a slow and bureaucratic process.
After a lot of confusion, they have now applied for a standard visitor's visa - their only option - which came with what she described as a "horrendous fee".
The family was told that a fast-track, next-working-day visa costs €1,312 (£1,100), while a five-day processing visa costs €394 (£329) - plus a €120 (£100) appointment fee.
Ms Klymova did not qualify for the fee waiver recently announced by the Home Office because she is not a British citizen."
There was a story on the radio yesterday of someone trying to arrange visas for family fleeing Ukraine over the weekend. The department dealing with visas in our embassy was shut all day Saturday and Sunday!
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
UPDATE — Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.
I don't know want to unsettle everyone even more unecessarily, but there's another fact, maybe to be accustomed to from now ; Putin's ships have been sniffing around undersea internet cables for a couple of years now, and no one's known why.
This is all somewhat of a surreal nightmare, which i hope we're all about to wake up from with the help of some Russian insiders.
One of the oligarch's "yachts" Ragnok was recently boarded in Norway amidst suspicions it had a cable-cutting capability within it....
UPDATE — Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.
How many times does it need to be said NATO and the EU are simply not going to become directly involved in the defence of Ukraine.
Any such assistance would need to come through Poland and that would mean possible if not likely targeting of Poland by Russia. That is not a game that anyone wants to play.
UPDATE — Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.
I wonder if some of the confusion is due to a misunderstanding about how the aircraft would get to Ukraine?
Obviously they won't be flying sorties over Ukraine from Polish bases - the prospect of that, understandably, generated enormous concern.
But I imagine that Ukrainian pilots would have to fly the planes from Poland to bases in Ukraine, in the first place.
During WWII, IIRC, America got round some of the restrictions on neutrals providing arms, by pushing aircraft across into Canada, without engines or guns.....
UPDATE — Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.
Why on earth would Poland send their military jets in to Ukraine? That would be very silly indeed.
Much easier to sell them for $1 each to the Ukranians, missiles loaded and fuelled to the gunnels, and invite the new owners to send over some pilots to collect them, after some careful application of blue and yellow paint…
No idea how valid this is, but US officials briefing NBC news...
"The US has solid intelligence that Putin is frustrated and expressing unusual bursts of anger at people in his inner circle over the state of the military campaign so far and the worldwide condemnation of his actions," according to 2 current US officials. https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1498491928471654400
This means the US has someone senior on the inside. Either that or (less likely) extremely good bugging capabilities. The detailed shared intel ahead of the invasion suggested similar.
That will, presumably, make Putin even more paranoid about his inner circle.
I have to say so far the US has done very well, including the way they've avoided excessive escalation rhetoric. I hope it continues.
Nice bit of profiteering going on here, on the part of the Home office.
"Ms Klymova crossed the border from Ukraine to Hungary and then flew to Paris to meet her mother, where they are grappling with a slow and bureaucratic process.
After a lot of confusion, they have now applied for a standard visitor's visa - their only option - which came with what she described as a "horrendous fee".
The family was told that a fast-track, next-working-day visa costs €1,312 (£1,100), while a five-day processing visa costs €394 (£329) - plus a €120 (£100) appointment fee.
Ms Klymova did not qualify for the fee waiver recently announced by the Home Office because she is not a British citizen."
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
I guess he's not being paid in roubles.
He is still correct. Whatever he is being paid in.
The SNP have chosen today to launch their 10-year masterplan for the Scottish economy.
On Covid grounds, they have excluded all journalists from the event, so no questions could be asked. (Although mysteriously, there was no problem in letting business reps attend).
I do wonder if these provocations will eventually lead to the supine Scottish media actually holding ScotGov to account for its multiple failings. Not holding my breath.
"In her speech, the Finance Secretary made one passing mention of a second referendum on independence, which the Scottish Government is aiming to hold next year."
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
I guess he's not being paid in roubles.
I guess he's not being paid in roubles now. Fixed it for you.
The SNP have chosen today to launch their 10-year masterplan for the Scottish economy.
On Covid grounds, they have excluded all journalists from the event, so no questions could be asked. (Although mysteriously, there was no problem in letting business reps attend).
I do wonder if these provocations will eventually lead to the supine Scottish media actually holding ScotGov to account for its multiple failings. Not holding my breath.
"In her speech, the Finance Secretary made one passing mention of a second referendum on independence, which the Scottish Government is aiming to hold next year."
LOL
Probably a good time to publish if you want no-one to read it / not really serious about holding a referendum anyway
Two of my disliked teams in trouble because they sold their souls assets to Russians. Hope they both go bust, then it’s just Glasgow Rangers to get rid of.
Rangers have already come back from the dead once. They would probably survive a nuclear war.
Rangers fans get very upset when naughty opposition fans call them zombies, perhaps cockroaches might go down better?
Careful; someone here might be a Celtic fan who'd LOVE that!
Why do you think Hollywood likes filming zombie and vampire films in Glasgow?
Then again when Holywood chose to film Batman, set of course in Gotham City infamous for its crime and corruption where else to film that than Liverpool?
The 'Moscow' bits of Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy [BBC version] were apparently filmed in Dundee.
Maybe TTSS as well (I think Glasgow also figured), but An Englishman Abroad was the big one. The Caird Hall festooned in Soviet banners gave quite a lot of the locals a warm fuzzy feeling.
No idea how valid this is, but US officials briefing NBC news...
"The US has solid intelligence that Putin is frustrated and expressing unusual bursts of anger at people in his inner circle over the state of the military campaign so far and the worldwide condemnation of his actions," according to 2 current US officials. https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1498491928471654400
It must have come as a huge shock to Putin. Perhaps instead, Russia should have as its leader somebody whose entire career was in intelli....oh.
There's been a lot of backslapping about good intelligence, but in the long-run this is the biggest intelligence failure in history.
Putin has been planning something vile for years, and the Western intelligence agencies haven't had the first sniff of it.
Alternatively, in the defence of our hard pressed security people you are trying to smear on behalf of our politicians, they weren’t listened to, Russia Report and all that. A senior Tory MP had whip withdrawn for trying to get Russia report into public knowledge.
Here’s a person saying “careful there” here’s another person offering out lovely rubles and rens.
I'm not trying the smear the intelligence services; they have done an excellent job in the last two months, and the incredible naivety of the west in allowing so much money in has definitely played a big role, but something's clearly gone very badly wrong there.
GCHQ has long been recognised as world-class. Its reputation is, if anything, being enhanced by the current conflict.
It is only about five miles down the road from where I live. I've been past many times but they don't encourage casual callers so I've never got closer than the A40. I'm never completely sure whether it is good or bad to be close to such a key facility in the event of nuclear war. Perhaps other PBers could let me have their views.
I suspect on balance it is good, because it will be better protected than most of the UK, but if it is bad I'll just say 'So long...and thanks for all the fish.'
Didn't the Dolphins live?
Being the second most intelligent species on the planet (mice were the most intelligent\0 they legged it just before the Vogons arrived.
- Economic prosperity, or at least stability, to compare with the chaotic 1990s - Have a ukraine friendly or at least neutral to Moscow - Create divides in the West to undermine any sanctions or other hostile policies
All up in smoke in six days.
If I were China, I might be tempted to move my armed forces up to the Russian border.
It would cause Putin a big headache, because he can't keep all his troops tied up in Ukraine. China gets to be seen to be a good guy by us in working to protect its European markets (and not insignificant investments in Ukraine).
And who knows, whilst everyone thinks they are after Taiwan, a blitzkrieg of their own could steal all of Russia's hydrocarbons east of the Urals....
Too much nuclear risk, what with him being a bit loopy. They could cause him all sorts of trouble, though, and probably bring him down very quickly if and when they want, with a mix of economic and military manoeuvres. China is the last major economic pillar standing for him.
Exactly why would China risk war with a current ally and nuclear armed military superpower when Xi clearly has Putin's support to invade Taiwan which is what he really wants while Putin has distracted the west by invading Ukraine and when he knows Biden would do little bar economic sanctions about it anyway?
Because they'll never have a better chance to have a massive mineral-rich land grab?
They may consider that currently, Russia is a spent force. China isn't going to be selling much to Russia for the next decade. No-one is.
Of course I'm not saying it is very likely. But I'd be surprised if there weren't a massive planning exercise going on in Beijing right now, just to consider all their options.
China isn't playing Civ and trying to grab all the land and resources it can wherever they are. Their priority is Taiwan and it's not clear how nobbling Russia helps them get that.
China regards the 19th century treaties with Russia that gave up some Chinese land to Russia as unequal treaties - equivalent to the treaties that ended the Opium Wars.
Taiwan is certainly a higher priority, but they certainly regard some land currently held by Russia as rightfully their own.
Two of my disliked teams in trouble because they sold their souls assets to Russians. Hope they both go bust, then it’s just Glasgow Rangers to get rid of.
Rangers have already come back from the dead once. They would probably survive a nuclear war.
Rangers fans get very upset when naughty opposition fans call them zombies, perhaps cockroaches might go down better?
Careful; someone here might be a Celtic fan who'd LOVE that!
Why do you think Hollywood likes filming zombie and vampire films in Glasgow?
Then again when Holywood chose to film Batman, set of course in Gotham City infamous for its crime and corruption where else to film that than Liverpool?
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
Until this war started I was watching a lot of GB News because I agreed with their stance on the Woke stuff. Stopped watching now because I don't like their attitude on Putin and Russia.
Somebody on Twitter this morning claims they are owned/funded by Gazprom
Lots of rethinking going on at both ends of the spectrum. Finnish opinion polls suggest a complete reversal of attitudes to NATO from solid opposition to solid support. Swedish polls also moving that way. Here, the Morning Star is highlighting campaigners' claims of Russian use of illegal cluster munitions. Sabine Wageknecht, who leads the communist wing of Die Linke in Germany, has apologised for mistakenly thinking that Putin wouldn't invade and says she is rethinking her attitude towards Russia. And so on across the continent. A side-effect of all this may be a pretty broad consensus across Western Europe on the need for solid defence policies. Not quite what Putin had in mind, I imagine.
UK Green Party policy is, I believe, to leave NATO.
Point of information: there is no such thing as a UK Green Party. There are 3 parties: E&W, NI and S.
UPDATE — Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.
How many times does it need to be said NATO and the EU are simply not going to become directly involved in the defence of Ukraine.
Any such assistance would need to come through Poland and that would mean possible if not likely targeting of Poland by Russia. That is not a game that anyone wants to play.
I agree there appears that a lot of the nervousness seems to centre around the “what ifs” that are unlikely to come about.
What if NATO forces directly intervene? What if there is a no fly zone?
The simple fact remains that we see absolutely no indication from the US that it is even considering that option. It has on the other hand been very quick to say that is not on the table.
I think that in the social media and Internet age we are quick to jump upon utterances from all and sundry about these decisions, but the fact remains that any decision to make such commitment is a NATO commitment, and without the US that will not happen.
I would be more concerned of the danger of stray missiles etc than I would be about escalation via this route.
Nice bit of profiteering going on here, on the part of the Home office.
"Ms Klymova crossed the border from Ukraine to Hungary and then flew to Paris to meet her mother, where they are grappling with a slow and bureaucratic process.
After a lot of confusion, they have now applied for a standard visitor's visa - their only option - which came with what she described as a "horrendous fee".
The family was told that a fast-track, next-working-day visa costs €1,312 (£1,100), while a five-day processing visa costs €394 (£329) - plus a €120 (£100) appointment fee.
Ms Klymova did not qualify for the fee waiver recently announced by the Home Office because she is not a British citizen."
Nice bit of profiteering going on here, on the part of the Home office.
"Ms Klymova crossed the border from Ukraine to Hungary and then flew to Paris to meet her mother, where they are grappling with a slow and bureaucratic process.
After a lot of confusion, they have now applied for a standard visitor's visa - their only option - which came with what she described as a "horrendous fee".
The family was told that a fast-track, next-working-day visa costs €1,312 (£1,100), while a five-day processing visa costs €394 (£329) - plus a €120 (£100) appointment fee.
Ms Klymova did not qualify for the fee waiver recently announced by the Home Office because she is not a British citizen."
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I don't agree. The West has launched a series of extremely strong economic and financial sanctions on Russia, which will take days or weeks to take full effect. Meanwhile Ukraine is fighting a very clever war of physical attrition, particularly on logistics and fuel supplies, and is winning the cyber and propaganda war hands down.
These take time to take effect. Any escalation now needs to be considered carefully, and calculated to deliver the most impact for least loss of hearts and minds and moral high ground and least risk of Russian military escalation.
Best case strategy seems to be to allow Russian troops and public lose heart and give up.
The Taliban didn't keep escalating in Afghanistan until the US were defeated. They kept nibbling away, relentlessly, for 20 years until the US left of their own accord, and then strolled in unopposed and took control. The West needs to Be More Taliban.
Nice bit of profiteering going on here, on the part of the Home office.
"Ms Klymova crossed the border from Ukraine to Hungary and then flew to Paris to meet her mother, where they are grappling with a slow and bureaucratic process.
After a lot of confusion, they have now applied for a standard visitor's visa - their only option - which came with what she described as a "horrendous fee".
The family was told that a fast-track, next-working-day visa costs €1,312 (£1,100), while a five-day processing visa costs €394 (£329) - plus a €120 (£100) appointment fee.
Ms Klymova did not qualify for the fee waiver recently announced by the Home Office because she is not a British citizen."
Nice bit of profiteering going on here, on the part of the Home office.
"Ms Klymova crossed the border from Ukraine to Hungary and then flew to Paris to meet her mother, where they are grappling with a slow and bureaucratic process.
After a lot of confusion, they have now applied for a standard visitor's visa - their only option - which came with what she described as a "horrendous fee".
The family was told that a fast-track, next-working-day visa costs €1,312 (£1,100), while a five-day processing visa costs €394 (£329) - plus a €120 (£100) appointment fee.
Ms Klymova did not qualify for the fee waiver recently announced by the Home Office because she is not a British citizen."
That's changes since Oct 2021 so not really surprising at all, but yes that's utterly irrelevant just as October's Con 40, Lab 32 was utterly irrelevant as well.
No election until May 2024 nailed on.
Anyone want to say how our politics is going to look in May 2022, never mind 2024?
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
Exactly my thoughts. Moral high ground is an extremely valuable commodity that we currently have in abundance. We should avoid frittering it away.
Phil Stewart @phildstewart · 16m Public health experts say Ukraine is running low on critical medical supplies and fears of a wider public health crisis are growing as people flee their homes and health services and supplies are interrupted.
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I don't agree. The West has launched a series of extremely strong economic and financial sanctions on Russia, which will take days or weeks to take full effect. Meanwhile Ukraine is fighting a very clever war of physical attrition, particularly on logistics and fuel supplies, and is winning the cyber and propaganda war hands down.
These take time to take effect. Any escalation now needs to be considered carefully, and calculated to deliver the most impact for least loss of hearts and minds and moral high ground and least risk of Russian military escalation.
Best case strategy seems to be to allow Russian troops and public lose heart and give up.
The Taliban didn't keep escalating in Afghanistan until the US were defeated. They kept nibbling away, relentlessly, for 20 years until the US left of their own accord, and then strolled in unopposed and took control. The West needs to Be More Taliban.
Good post, not sure about the Taliban analogy but yes we have Russia in a bear squeeze that is working. Squeezing too tight could can be as bad as not squeezing at all.
GCHQ has long been recognised as world-class. Its reputation is, if anything, being enhanced by the current conflict.
It is only about five miles down the road from where I live. I've been past many times but they don't encourage casual callers so I've never got closer than the A40.
UPDATE — Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.
How many times does it need to be said NATO and the EU are simply not going to become directly involved in the defence of Ukraine.
Any such assistance would need to come through Poland and that would mean possible if not likely targeting of Poland by Russia. That is not a game that anyone wants to play.
I agree there appears that a lot of the nervousness seems to centre around the “what ifs” that are unlikely to come about.
What if NATO forces directly intervene? What if there is a no fly zone?
The simple fact remains that we see absolutely no indication from the US that it is even considering that option. It has on the other hand been very quick to say that is not on the table.
I think that in the social media and Internet age we are quick to jump upon utterances from all and sundry about these decisions, but the fact remains that any decision to make such commitment is a NATO commitment, and without the US that will not happen.
I would be more concerned of the danger of stray missiles etc than I would be about escalation via this route.
Johnson is easily stupid and impulsive enough to think an NFZ is a good idea. Fortunately he'll be told to stay in his lane by Biden.
Until this war started I was watching a lot of GB News because I agreed with their stance on the Woke stuff. Stopped watching now because I don't like their attitude on Putin and Russia.
Somebody on Twitter this morning claims they are owned/funded by Gazprom
Lots of rethinking going on at both ends of the spectrum. Finnish opinion polls suggest a complete reversal of attitudes to NATO from solid opposition to solid support. Swedish polls also moving that way. Here, the Morning Star is highlighting campaigners' claims of Russian use of illegal cluster munitions. Sabine Wageknecht, who leads the communist wing of Die Linke in Germany, has apologised for mistakenly thinking that Putin wouldn't invade and says she is rethinking her attitude towards Russia. And so on across the continent. A side-effect of all this may be a pretty broad consensus across Western Europe on the need for solid defence policies. Not quite what Putin had in mind, I imagine.
UK Green Party policy is, I believe, to leave NATO.
Point of information: there is no such thing as a UK Green Party. There are 3 parties: E&W, NI and S.
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
That's changes since Oct 2021 so not really surprising at all, but yes that's utterly irrelevant just as October's Con 40, Lab 32 was utterly irrelevant as well.
No election until May 2024 nailed on.
Anyone want to say how our politics is going to look in May 2022, never mind 2024?
The European sub-continent might not be inhabitable for Homo sapiens by May 2022.
Phil Stewart @phildstewart · 16m Public health experts say Ukraine is running low on critical medical supplies and fears of a wider public health crisis are growing as people flee their homes and health services and supplies are interrupted.
I don't know want to unsettle everyone even more unecessarily, but there's another fact, maybe to be accustomed to from now ; Putin's ships have been sniffing around undersea internet cables for a couple of years now, and no one's known why.
This is all somewhat of a surreal nightmare, which i hope we're all about to wake up from with the help of some Russian insiders.
One of the oligarch's "yachts" Ragnok was recently boarded in Norway amidst suspicions it had a cable-cutting capability within it....
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
There is some degree of nuance, in that a slow defeat for Putin would involve less escalation from the West, and so less risk of WWIII, but at the price of higher Ukrainian casualties, and a greater risk of victory for Putin.
The key thing, though, is that we either defeat Putin now, which necessarily involves escalation to an extent, or we will have to defeat Putin later.
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
St Pete's is a possibility.
It's always been a very 'european' city. We'd probably have quite a few of the locals on our side, a factor which Putin might acknowledge as making a bit of a difference.
Nice bit of profiteering going on here, on the part of the Home office.
"Ms Klymova crossed the border from Ukraine to Hungary and then flew to Paris to meet her mother, where they are grappling with a slow and bureaucratic process.
After a lot of confusion, they have now applied for a standard visitor's visa - their only option - which came with what she described as a "horrendous fee".
The family was told that a fast-track, next-working-day visa costs €1,312 (£1,100), while a five-day processing visa costs €394 (£329) - plus a €120 (£100) appointment fee.
Ms Klymova did not qualify for the fee waiver recently announced by the Home Office because she is not a British citizen."
Nice bit of profiteering going on here, on the part of the Home office.
"Ms Klymova crossed the border from Ukraine to Hungary and then flew to Paris to meet her mother, where they are grappling with a slow and bureaucratic process.
After a lot of confusion, they have now applied for a standard visitor's visa - their only option - which came with what she described as a "horrendous fee".
The family was told that a fast-track, next-working-day visa costs €1,312 (£1,100), while a five-day processing visa costs €394 (£329) - plus a €120 (£100) appointment fee.
Ms Klymova did not qualify for the fee waiver recently announced by the Home Office because she is not a British citizen."
Wasn't that the woman featured on the BBC, about whom Priti Patel told Yvette Cooper in the Commons that everything would be sorted?
She's not coming in. Sorted.
Its for a relative of a Ukrainian who lives in the UK.
I said before that the UK shouldn't 'open the doors' to refugees and still hold that position. But the Home Office insistence that Ukranians must pay extortionate visa fees is a catastrophic own PR goal. The eye watering visa fees become the story, not the other more positive stuff the government is doing regarding Ukraine. The Home Office is a dinosaur and absolutely clueless in relation to PR, it is a major liability for the government in all sorts of ways.
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
Then the Communist world was supported by belief in an ideology supported by many globally. Mafia kleptocracy and might is right won't attract that level of support (outside the world of Trump and Fox). Also everything is accelerated in life now.
Fairly confident Russia wont be in Kiev in 5 years time, and think it more likely than not, that they leave within a month or two.
Until this war started I was watching a lot of GB News because I agreed with their stance on the Woke stuff. Stopped watching now because I don't like their attitude on Putin and Russia.
Somebody on Twitter this morning claims they are owned/funded by Gazprom
Lots of rethinking going on at both ends of the spectrum. Finnish opinion polls suggest a complete reversal of attitudes to NATO from solid opposition to solid support. Swedish polls also moving that way. Here, the Morning Star is highlighting campaigners' claims of Russian use of illegal cluster munitions. Sabine Wageknecht, who leads the communist wing of Die Linke in Germany, has apologised for mistakenly thinking that Putin wouldn't invade and says she is rethinking her attitude towards Russia. And so on across the continent. A side-effect of all this may be a pretty broad consensus across Western Europe on the need for solid defence policies. Not quite what Putin had in mind, I imagine.
UK Green Party policy is, I believe, to leave NATO.
Point of information: there is no such thing as a UK Green Party. There are 3 parties: E&W, NI and S.
And all three want to leave NATO....
It is the word “Party” which is incongruous… and redundant.
GCHQ has long been recognised as world-class. Its reputation is, if anything, being enhanced by the current conflict.
It is only about five miles down the road from where I live. I've been past many times but they don't encourage casual callers so I've never got closer than the A40.
Nice bit of profiteering going on here, on the part of the Home office.
"Ms Klymova crossed the border from Ukraine to Hungary and then flew to Paris to meet her mother, where they are grappling with a slow and bureaucratic process.
After a lot of confusion, they have now applied for a standard visitor's visa - their only option - which came with what she described as a "horrendous fee".
The family was told that a fast-track, next-working-day visa costs €1,312 (£1,100), while a five-day processing visa costs €394 (£329) - plus a €120 (£100) appointment fee.
Ms Klymova did not qualify for the fee waiver recently announced by the Home Office because she is not a British citizen."
Nice bit of profiteering going on here, on the part of the Home office.
"Ms Klymova crossed the border from Ukraine to Hungary and then flew to Paris to meet her mother, where they are grappling with a slow and bureaucratic process.
After a lot of confusion, they have now applied for a standard visitor's visa - their only option - which came with what she described as a "horrendous fee".
The family was told that a fast-track, next-working-day visa costs €1,312 (£1,100), while a five-day processing visa costs €394 (£329) - plus a €120 (£100) appointment fee.
Ms Klymova did not qualify for the fee waiver recently announced by the Home Office because she is not a British citizen."
Roland Oliphant @RolandOliphant · 3h Needless to say, they are speaking Russian. Because Kharkiv is a Russian speaking city, full of ethnic Russians, who must be killed by the Russian army to save them from not living in the Russian Federation. It is a cliche that war is madness, but this one really is psychotic
UPDATE — Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.
How many times does it need to be said NATO and the EU are simply not going to become directly involved in the defence of Ukraine.
Any such assistance would need to come through Poland and that would mean possible if not likely targeting of Poland by Russia. That is not a game that anyone wants to play.
I agree there appears that a lot of the nervousness seems to centre around the “what ifs” that are unlikely to come about.
What if NATO forces directly intervene? What if there is a no fly zone?
The simple fact remains that we see absolutely no indication from the US that it is even considering that option. It has on the other hand been very quick to say that is not on the table.
I think that in the social media and Internet age we are quick to jump upon utterances from all and sundry about these decisions, but the fact remains that any decision to make such commitment is a NATO commitment, and without the US that will not happen.
I would be more concerned of the danger of stray missiles etc than I would be about escalation via this route.
Yep. There was an explicit declaration (can't find it) by the US and NATO to this effect.
And yes also; a mistake can always push things in the very wrong direction.
No idea how valid this is, but US officials briefing NBC news...
"The US has solid intelligence that Putin is frustrated and expressing unusual bursts of anger at people in his inner circle over the state of the military campaign so far and the worldwide condemnation of his actions," according to 2 current US officials. https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1498491928471654400
This means the US has someone senior on the inside. Either that or (less likely) extremely good bugging capabilities. The detailed shared intel ahead of the invasion suggested similar.
That will, presumably, make Putin even more paranoid about his inner circle.
I have to say so far the US has done very well, including the way they've avoided excessive escalation rhetoric. I hope it continues.
It may well be a sensible attempt to feed his paranoia even if they do not have bugs or someone on the inside. It wouldn't be a difficult guess that he "is frustrated and expressing unusual bursts of anger at people", as this is what despots do when things don't go their way
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
Then the Communist world was supported by belief in an ideology supported by many globally. Mafia kleptocracy and might is right won't attract that level of support (outside the world of Trump and Fox). Also everything is accelerated in life now.
Fairly confident Russia wont be in Kiev in 5 years time, and think it more likely than not, that they leave within a month or two.
Optimistic.
The main opposition party to Putin's United Russia party in the Russian Duma is indeed the Communist Party and combined the 2 got 69% of the vote in the Russian legislative elections last year.
The war is building into a massacre of Ukrainian civilians. It is proof how desparate the Russian side now is. They are pushing on all fronts and sadly they are making progress just through simple savagery. However this is a very short window. The inability of Russia to pay for anything will impact their fighting capability, but not overnight or even in a few days. The Ukrainian army and state needs to survive for weeks or even months and feeding the cities will become a problem. Only if they can stand firm will the Russian attack abate and it is asking a lot. We are entering a point of maximum danger for the Ukrainians and the Russian high command will do to Kharkiv or Kyiv what they already did to Grozny and Aleppo. War crimes indictments will surely follow.
This marks a comprehensive break between the West and the current form of Russia. These are not sanctions, they mark the utter shunning of Russia in every single sphere of contact. The reputation of Russia and the Russians has been totally trashed and, even if the war stops tomorrow, the change in perception will be lasting.
Johnson is arriving in Tallinn later today, but I am not sure calling for Putin´s head is such a good move. Even those who also want him gone in the regime won´t want to be pushed around so obviously, so it is likely to be counter productive, even though it is now quite clear that VVP is not a man we can do (any) business with.
Now the tide has gone out, at least we now know who picked the wrong side: Farage, Salmond, Trump, various Tories and many others. I said that the day of reckoning would be delayed until the crisis cools, but when that happens, the reckoning should be sure and complete.
In the meantime, Happy St. David´s Day!
War crime indictments didn’t follow after Grozny or Aleppo did they? I’m a bit skeptical that they would now, unless Ukrainians being ‘people like us’ makes a difference. The only way Putin will face justice is at the hands of Russians.
There was some threadbare legal coverage for those, though, as they were internal conflicts, and in the latter case Putin was invited in by the Assad regime. And as both Assad and Putin remain in power, investigation is complicated.
Ukraine has the additional factor of being a clear war of aggression. I'm sceptical about indictments happening any time soon, too, but that last factor does make them a bit more likely in practical terms, particularly if Ukraine does not end up under full control of Putin.
A stark statistic (this was 2016 so dunno if this has changed)
‘In the court’s 14-year history it has only brought charges against Africans’
Rubbish. Most of their actual trials have been of people from the former Yugoslavia.
Yugoslavia was a specially set up Tribunal, like Nuremburg. (But did it form the triggering precedent for the ICC ?)
Map's a bit of a mess colour-coding awry; Myanmar's in green, should be 'light red' and Sudan seems to be in the wrong place. And why light and dark red. Why not red and blue or some other clear distinction.
Being a Wiki map, you are free to edit it over lunch
UPDATE — Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.
How many times does it need to be said NATO and the EU are simply not going to become directly involved in the defence of Ukraine.
Any such assistance would need to come through Poland and that would mean possible if not likely targeting of Poland by Russia. That is not a game that anyone wants to play.
I agree there appears that a lot of the nervousness seems to centre around the “what ifs” that are unlikely to come about.
What if NATO forces directly intervene? What if there is a no fly zone?
The simple fact remains that we see absolutely no indication from the US that it is even considering that option. It has on the other hand been very quick to say that is not on the table.
I think that in the social media and Internet age we are quick to jump upon utterances from all and sundry about these decisions, but the fact remains that any decision to make such commitment is a NATO commitment, and without the US that will not happen.
I would be more concerned of the danger of stray missiles etc than I would be about escalation via this route.
Johnson is easily stupid and impulsive enough to think an NFZ is a good idea. Fortunately he'll be told to stay in his lane by Biden.
In his live press conference just now in Warsaw he has just publicly rejected it in response to an understandably very passionate Ukrainian journalist's appeal for it, to save all the children being slaughtered by Putin
Astonishing pressure must be on Johnson at moment. One slip from him and Biden and we are in WWIII.
For all that many of us loathe his character and his way of doing business we must put that all aside for time being and hope and pray he makes the right calls.
Media starting to call for no-fly zone. Really, really terribly dangerous times.
no-fly zone isn't going to happen. UN administered safe passage corridors for refugees out and humanitarian supplies in will almost certainly happen IMO
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
Then the Communist world was supported by belief in an ideology supported by many globally. Mafia kleptocracy and might is right won't attract that level of support (outside the world of Trump and Fox). Also everything is accelerated in life now.
Fairly confident Russia wont be in Kiev in 5 years time, and think it more likely than not, that they leave within a month or two.
I agree - partly because our ability to wage economic war is far greater than it was in the 80s. Globalization (and the integration of China into the Western economies) has seen to that.
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated
what would you see as the next steps in this escalation.
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I don't agree. The West has launched a series of extremely strong economic and financial sanctions on Russia, which will take days or weeks to take full effect. Meanwhile Ukraine is fighting a very clever war of physical attrition, particularly on logistics and fuel supplies, and is winning the cyber and propaganda war hands down.
These take time to take effect. Any escalation now needs to be considered carefully, and calculated to deliver the most impact for least loss of hearts and minds and moral high ground and least risk of Russian military escalation.
Best case strategy seems to be to allow Russian troops and public lose heart and give up.
The Taliban didn't keep escalating in Afghanistan until the US were defeated. They kept nibbling away, relentlessly, for 20 years until the US left of their own accord, and then strolled in unopposed and took control. The West needs to Be More Taliban.
Good post, not sure about the Taliban analogy but yes we have Russia in a bear squeeze that is working. Squeezing too tight could can be as bad as not squeezing at all.
The Ukrainian army seems to be being very Taliban at the moment. Obviously not on the religious fundamentalist front (although National pride under attack can be a strong religion). Interesting difference in tactics between what the Taliban did in Afghanistan and what the various Sunni insurgents and then ISIS did in Iraq.
The Taliban made sure occupying armies or pro-Western politicians were never safe. They nibbled away, laying IEDs on roads, launching ambushes then melting away. They inserted themselves into communities, and became middlemen in the narcotics trade. Classic guerrilla warfare. In the end, after 2 decades, they won - easily.
The Sunni insurgents in Iraq shared some of the same tactics but they went for far bloodier and larger set piece attacks, and then took and held territory. They didn't melt away in the same way, and didn't use the countryside preferring to stick to built up areas. They kept escalating, and got ahead of themselves with their dreams of caliphates. They then were comprehensively defeated firstly in the surge on Fallujah and later as ISIS during the Syrian war. They ultimately lost heavily. (Unlike the Shia militias in the South who quite cleverly combined physical insurgency with political manoeuvring, more akin to Sinn-Fein/IRA).
That US report about his mental state is the one bit of news that's making me feel a bit a more positive today, perhaps surprisingly for some people. Together with the strangenesses around Lukashenko, something could clearly be brewing.
I also think that the US may have got a real line of communication right into a disgruntled element of the regime, with that report. I don't think it's propaganda, and that may be why Biden has been calmer in his public signals.
His government has been impeccably professional throughout, and he must have three decades' worth of cold war experience in his political life.
I'm getting disturbed by all this talk of "escalation". COVID has affected us all, but I can't see what the practical route is here. And there seems a touching certainty that Putin will automatically be replaced by something better. I don't think that's nailed on. The whole thing needs the greatest care. I hope we are talking with the Chinese.
Astonishing pressure must be on Johnson at moment. One slip from him and Biden and we are in WWIII.
For all that many of us loathe his character and his way of doing business we must put that all aside for time being and hope and pray he makes the right calls.
Media starting to call for no-fly zone. Really, really terribly dangerous times.
Plus Macron of course, he also has nuclear weapons.
Johnson is effectively a bridge between Macron and Scholz, who will lead the EU military and economic responses to Putin with UDVL and Biden who will lead the US military and economic response.
At the moment it is still largely economic and will be as long as Putin just sticks to Ukraine
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
Then the Communist world was supported by belief in an ideology supported by many globally. Mafia kleptocracy and might is right won't attract that level of support (outside the world of Trump and Fox). Also everything is accelerated in life now.
Fairly confident Russia wont be in Kiev in 5 years time, and think it more likely than not, that they leave within a month or two.
Optimistic.
The main opposition party to Putin's United Russia party in the Russian Duma is indeed the Communist Party and combined the 2 got 69% of the vote in the Russian legislative elections last year.
Events.....there have been some developments over the last week that will change lives drastically and negatively, support can only ebb away.
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
St Pete's is a possibility.
It's always been a very 'european' city. We'd probably have quite a few of the locals on our side, a factor which Putin might acknowledge as making a bit of a difference.
So what is the future for Russia - should the west 'win'? Is Russia a nation state? What, in an ideal world, would we do with it? There's probably bits of it which might want to be independent - possibly few or none of them terribly viable or helpful to the west. Do we just put them back where they were and say 'don't do it again'? Because I can't really think of anything else. I can see a future in which the Ukraine and Belarus join the west. Could Russia join the west? Would we want it to? Would we trust it? Is it just too big?
UPDATE — Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.
How many times does it need to be said NATO and the EU are simply not going to become directly involved in the defence of Ukraine.
Any such assistance would need to come through Poland and that would mean possible if not likely targeting of Poland by Russia. That is not a game that anyone wants to play.
I agree there appears that a lot of the nervousness seems to centre around the “what ifs” that are unlikely to come about.
What if NATO forces directly intervene? What if there is a no fly zone?
The simple fact remains that we see absolutely no indication from the US that it is even considering that option. It has on the other hand been very quick to say that is not on the table.
I think that in the social media and Internet age we are quick to jump upon utterances from all and sundry about these decisions, but the fact remains that any decision to make such commitment is a NATO commitment, and without the US that will not happen.
I would be more concerned of the danger of stray missiles etc than I would be about escalation via this route.
Johnson is easily stupid and impulsive enough to think an NFZ is a good idea. Fortunately he'll be told to stay in his lane by Biden.
In his live press conference just now in Warsaw he has just publicly rejected it in response to an understandably very passionate Ukrainian journalist's appeal for it, to save all the children being slaughtered by Putin
I am very grateful that happened. He is, shall we say, not averse to promising things he can't deliver when put on the spot so I am glad that someone (Biden perhaps) was keeping him in check.
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
Yes - use everything that happens to isolate his regime. Was working brilliantly for a while.
The only people that can ultimately defeat Putin are the Russians. Assuming this happens, we need to think seriously about how to avoid another Putin a few years down the line.
I'm getting disturbed by all this talk of "escalation". COVID has affected us all, but I can't see what the practical route is here. And there seems a touching certainty that Putin will automatically be replaced by something better. I don't think that's nailed on. The whole thing needs the greatest care. I hope we are talking with the Chinese.
@BartholomewRoberts is about to lay out his blueprint for the escalation. I am very much looking forward to seeing it. .
Until this war started I was watching a lot of GB News because I agreed with their stance on the Woke stuff. Stopped watching now because I don't like their attitude on Putin and Russia.
Somebody on Twitter this morning claims they are owned/funded by Gazprom
Lots of rethinking going on at both ends of the spectrum. Finnish opinion polls suggest a complete reversal of attitudes to NATO from solid opposition to solid support. Swedish polls also moving that way. Here, the Morning Star is highlighting campaigners' claims of Russian use of illegal cluster munitions. Sabine Wageknecht, who leads the communist wing of Die Linke in Germany, has apologised for mistakenly thinking that Putin wouldn't invade and says she is rethinking her attitude towards Russia. And so on across the continent. A side-effect of all this may be a pretty broad consensus across Western Europe on the need for solid defence policies. Not quite what Putin had in mind, I imagine.
UK Green Party policy is, I believe, to leave NATO.
Point of information: there is no such thing as a UK Green Party. There are 3 parties: E&W, NI and S.
And all three want to leave NATO....
It is the word “Party” which is incongruous… and redundant.
"The Green Party, also known as the Green Party UK, was a Green political party in the United Kingdom.
Prior to 1985 it was called the Ecology Party, and before that PEOPLE. In 1990, it separated into three political parties:
the Green Party of England and Wales
the Scottish Greens
the Green Party Northern Ireland
Despite the UK Green Party no longer existing as an entity, "Green Party" (singular) is still used colloquially to refer collectively to the three separate parties; for example, in the reporting of opinion polls and election results." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Party_(UK)
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
St Pete's is a possibility.
It's always been a very 'european' city. We'd probably have quite a few of the locals on our side, a factor which Putin might acknowledge as making a bit of a difference.
They missed a trick in not calling them Grim Reaper drones.
The failure so far to use drones on that mega convoy suggests that restraint might be part of ongoing back channel discussions. Such restraint has a very limited time-line. This announcement - likely after the things have actually been delivered in theatre - cranks that notion up more.
Or Russian local air superiority?
Depends on the closing distances. Air superiority does not mean you have aircraft in the air 100% of time. The calculation will be how quickly you can get a drone to the target before interception. The drone effectively becomes a kamikaze, because it wont make the return part of the mission..
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
St Pete's is a possibility.
It's always been a very 'european' city. We'd probably have quite a few of the locals on our side, a factor which Putin might acknowledge as making a bit of a difference.
A CNN poll finds 83% of US voters favour increased economic sanctions on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine, including 84% of Democrats and Republicans and 81% of Independents.
UPDATE — Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.
How many times does it need to be said NATO and the EU are simply not going to become directly involved in the defence of Ukraine.
Any such assistance would need to come through Poland and that would mean possible if not likely targeting of Poland by Russia. That is not a game that anyone wants to play.
I agree there appears that a lot of the nervousness seems to centre around the “what ifs” that are unlikely to come about.
What if NATO forces directly intervene? What if there is a no fly zone?
The simple fact remains that we see absolutely no indication from the US that it is even considering that option. It has on the other hand been very quick to say that is not on the table.
I think that in the social media and Internet age we are quick to jump upon utterances from all and sundry about these decisions, but the fact remains that any decision to make such commitment is a NATO commitment, and without the US that will not happen.
I would be more concerned of the danger of stray missiles etc than I would be about escalation via this route.
Johnson is easily stupid and impulsive enough to think an NFZ is a good idea. Fortunately he'll be told to stay in his lane by Biden.
In his live press conference just now in Warsaw he has just publicly rejected it in response to an understandably very passionate Ukrainian journalist's appeal for it, to save all the children being slaughtered by Putin
I am very grateful that happened. He is, shall we say, not averse to promising things he can't deliver when put on the spot so I am glad that someone (Biden perhaps) was keeping him in check.
Here is the video - very tough question to be fair
I'm getting disturbed by all this talk of "escalation". COVID has affected us all, but I can't see what the practical route is here. And there seems a touching certainty that Putin will automatically be replaced by something better. I don't think that's nailed on. The whole thing needs the greatest care. I hope we are talking with the Chinese.
@BartholomewRoberts is about to lay out his blueprint for the escalation. I am very much looking forward to seeing it. .
He is writing a new book called "Armchair General-ing for Dummies". It is probably in there somewhere
Astonishing pressure must be on Johnson at moment. One slip from him and Biden and we are in WWIII.
For all that many of us loathe his character and his way of doing business we must put that all aside for time being and hope and pray he makes the right calls.
Media starting to call for no-fly zone. Really, really terribly dangerous times.
Plus Macron of course, he also has nuclear weapons.
Johnson is effectively a bridge between Macron and Scholz, who will lead the EU military and economic responses to Putin with UDVL and Biden who will lead the US military and economic response.
At the moment it is still largely economic and will be as long as Putin just sticks to Ukraine
Why does Biden need a bridge - or rather, how does UKGov provide it? When we were in the EU, having a US-aligned partner with voting rights and policy influence was a huge benefit to the US. We're outside all that now, just like the US, so what do we bring to the party?
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated
what would you see as the next steps in this escalation.
Send Frosty (other 35+ BMI gammony tories are available) to negotiate with Lavrov.
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
St Pete's is a possibility.
It's always been a very 'european' city. We'd probably have quite a few of the locals on our side, a factor which Putin might acknowledge as making a bit of a difference.
So what is the future for Russia - should the west 'win'? Is Russia a nation state? What, in an ideal world, would we do with it? There's probably bits of it which might want to be independent - possibly few or none of them terribly viable or helpful to the west. Do we just put them back where they were and say 'don't do it again'? Because I can't really think of anything else. I can see a future in which the Ukraine and Belarus join the west. Could Russia join the west? Would we want it to? Would we trust it? Is it just too big?
Optimistic reading is that this is Russia's Suez, or (perhaps closer to the truth) Algeria. A post -imperial moment where it is forced to come to terms with its relative decline and give up an empire. Britain and France have had to go through this very painful process (and Zemmour in France and elements of the far right in the UK show we're not completely over it yet), but have done so while remaining important and economically successful world players.
UPDATE — Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.
How many times does it need to be said NATO and the EU are simply not going to become directly involved in the defence of Ukraine.
Any such assistance would need to come through Poland and that would mean possible if not likely targeting of Poland by Russia. That is not a game that anyone wants to play.
I agree there appears that a lot of the nervousness seems to centre around the “what ifs” that are unlikely to come about.
What if NATO forces directly intervene? What if there is a no fly zone?
The simple fact remains that we see absolutely no indication from the US that it is even considering that option. It has on the other hand been very quick to say that is not on the table.
I think that in the social media and Internet age we are quick to jump upon utterances from all and sundry about these decisions, but the fact remains that any decision to make such commitment is a NATO commitment, and without the US that will not happen.
I would be more concerned of the danger of stray missiles etc than I would be about escalation via this route.
Johnson is easily stupid and impulsive enough to think an NFZ is a good idea. Fortunately he'll be told to stay in his lane by Biden.
In his live press conference just now in Warsaw he has just publicly rejected it in response to an understandably very passionate Ukrainian journalist's appeal for it, to save all the children being slaughtered by Putin
I am very grateful that happened. He is, shall we say, not averse to promising things he can't deliver when put on the spot so I am glad that someone (Biden perhaps) was keeping him in check.
Here is the video - very tough question to be fair
The war is building into a massacre of Ukrainian civilians. It is proof how desparate the Russian side now is. They are pushing on all fronts and sadly they are making progress just through simple savagery. However this is a very short window. The inability of Russia to pay for anything will impact their fighting capability, but not overnight or even in a few days. The Ukrainian army and state needs to survive for weeks or even months and feeding the cities will become a problem. Only if they can stand firm will the Russian attack abate and it is asking a lot. We are entering a point of maximum danger for the Ukrainians and the Russian high command will do to Kharkiv or Kyiv what they already did to Grozny and Aleppo. War crimes indictments will surely follow.
This marks a comprehensive break between the West and the current form of Russia. These are not sanctions, they mark the utter shunning of Russia in every single sphere of contact. The reputation of Russia and the Russians has been totally trashed and, even if the war stops tomorrow, the change in perception will be lasting.
Johnson is arriving in Tallinn later today, but I am not sure calling for Putin´s head is such a good move. Even those who also want him gone in the regime won´t want to be pushed around so obviously, so it is likely to be counter productive, even though it is now quite clear that VVP is not a man we can do (any) business with.
Now the tide has gone out, at least we now know who picked the wrong side: Farage, Salmond, Trump, various Tories and many others. I said that the day of reckoning would be delayed until the crisis cools, but when that happens, the reckoning should be sure and complete.
In the meantime, Happy St. David´s Day!
War crime indictments didn’t follow after Grozny or Aleppo did they? I’m a bit skeptical that they would now, unless Ukrainians being ‘people like us’ makes a difference. The only way Putin will face justice is at the hands of Russians.
A bit skeptical is putting it mildly.
Regretfully I don't think people like Putin ever face justice. We can but hope that at least he can lose power though.
Astonishing pressure must be on Johnson at moment. One slip from him and Biden and we are in WWIII.
For all that many of us loathe his character and his way of doing business we must put that all aside for time being and hope and pray he makes the right calls.
Media starting to call for no-fly zone. Really, really terribly dangerous times.
Plus Macron of course, he also has nuclear weapons.
Johnson is effectively a bridge between Macron and Scholz, who will lead the EU military and economic responses to Putin with UDVL and Biden who will lead the US military and economic response.
At the moment it is still largely economic and will be as long as Putin just sticks to Ukraine
Why does Biden need a bridge - or rather, how does UKGov provide it? When we were in the EU, having a US-aligned partner with voting rights and policy influence was a huge benefit to the US. We're outside all that now, just like the US, so what do we bring to the party?
We are also in NATO and still the only western nation in Europe other than France with nuclear weapons
It's taken the Government 3 days to get to the lowest sane asylum offer for Ukrainians
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 7m NEW: No 10 confirms that Ukraine refugee visa scheme has now been extended to wider family.
Home Sec Priti Patel to announce that adult parents, grandparents, children over 18 and siblings of those settled in the UK will be permitted entry.
Hopefully that does not actually mean "Permitted if they manage to get fingerprints taken at embassies that are working Mon-Fri 9-5 and overloaded, and pay £1k+ fees per person".
UPDATE — Polish President Duda just said: "We are not going to send any [fighter] jets to the Ukrainian airspace" because "that would suggest an open military interference in the Ukrainian conflict." NATO is not a party to this conflict, Duda said.
How many times does it need to be said NATO and the EU are simply not going to become directly involved in the defence of Ukraine.
Any such assistance would need to come through Poland and that would mean possible if not likely targeting of Poland by Russia. That is not a game that anyone wants to play.
I agree there appears that a lot of the nervousness seems to centre around the “what ifs” that are unlikely to come about.
What if NATO forces directly intervene? What if there is a no fly zone?
The simple fact remains that we see absolutely no indication from the US that it is even considering that option. It has on the other hand been very quick to say that is not on the table.
I think that in the social media and Internet age we are quick to jump upon utterances from all and sundry about these decisions, but the fact remains that any decision to make such commitment is a NATO commitment, and without the US that will not happen.
I would be more concerned of the danger of stray missiles etc than I would be about escalation via this route.
Johnson is easily stupid and impulsive enough to think an NFZ is a good idea. Fortunately he'll be told to stay in his lane by Biden.
In his live press conference just now in Warsaw he has just publicly rejected it in response to an understandably very passionate Ukrainian journalist's appeal for it, to save all the children being slaughtered by Putin
I am very grateful that happened. He is, shall we say, not averse to promising things he can't deliver when put on the spot so I am glad that someone (Biden perhaps) was keeping him in check.
For a period of months, now, the US and UK have been repeating that
- They won't intervene militarily in the Ukraine - They will arm the Ukrainians - They will impose increasing sanctions on Russia as it escalates the situation in Ukraine.
Astonishing pressure must be on Johnson at moment. One slip from him and Biden and we are in WWIII.
For all that many of us loathe his character and his way of doing business we must put that all aside for time being and hope and pray he makes the right calls.
Media starting to call for no-fly zone. Really, really terribly dangerous times.
Plus Macron of course, he also has nuclear weapons.
Johnson is effectively a bridge between Macron and Scholz, who will lead the EU military and economic responses to Putin with UDVL and Biden who will lead the US military and economic response.
At the moment it is still largely economic and will be as long as Putin just sticks to Ukraine
Why does the US need to talk to FR/DE via the UK? It's not like Biden doesn't have their phone numbers. We are in the mix in terms of discussions (I am not saying we are irrelevant by any means) but I don't see that we are needed as an intermediary in US/EU discussions, not since we left the EU.
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
Then the Communist world was supported by belief in an ideology supported by many globally. Mafia kleptocracy and might is right won't attract that level of support (outside the world of Trump and Fox). Also everything is accelerated in life now.
Fairly confident Russia wont be in Kiev in 5 years time, and think it more likely than not, that they leave within a month or two.
Optimistic.
The main opposition party to Putin's United Russia party in the Russian Duma is indeed the Communist Party and combined the 2 got 69% of the vote in the Russian legislative elections last year.
Events.....there have been some developments over the last week that will change lives drastically and negatively, support can only ebb away.
A CNN poll finds 83% of US voters favour increased economic sanctions on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine, including 84% of Democrats and Republicans and 81% of Independents.
Until this war started I was watching a lot of GB News because I agreed with their stance on the Woke stuff. Stopped watching now because I don't like their attitude on Putin and Russia.
Somebody on Twitter this morning claims they are owned/funded by Gazprom
Lots of rethinking going on at both ends of the spectrum. Finnish opinion polls suggest a complete reversal of attitudes to NATO from solid opposition to solid support. Swedish polls also moving that way. Here, the Morning Star is highlighting campaigners' claims of Russian use of illegal cluster munitions. Sabine Wageknecht, who leads the communist wing of Die Linke in Germany, has apologised for mistakenly thinking that Putin wouldn't invade and says she is rethinking her attitude towards Russia. And so on across the continent. A side-effect of all this may be a pretty broad consensus across Western Europe on the need for solid defence policies. Not quite what Putin had in mind, I imagine.
UK Green Party policy is, I believe, to leave NATO.
Point of information: there is no such thing as a UK Green Party. There are 3 parties: E&W, NI and S.
And all three want to leave NATO....
I think all members of the Green Party (ies) of the UK and Extinction Rebellion should be encouraged to go to Ukraine and wave flowers at the Russian convoy and sing "We will overcome". The really brave ones can glue themselves to the tarmac. In fact I might even offer to crowd fund the travel costs and the superglue!
A CNN poll finds 83% of US voters favour increased economic sanctions on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine, including 84% of Democrats and Republicans and 81% of Independents.
I’m also getting increasingly worried about the head of steam that seems to have built, especially in Europe (less so the US). People need to cool it.
Speak softly and carry a big stick. Let Russia run out of cash, fuel and tanks, and the will to fight. It was working quite well. Stay on the moral high ground and try to get China on side.
The ramping up of WW3 rhetoric might cause a rallying to the flag in Russia. Has happened several times in Iran in response to Western pressure.
My brother is the same.
But I think it's too late. The escalation is occurring. That's in large measure because Russian forces are not succeeding on the ground and the more they escalate the style of campaign the more our horror turns to indignation and then to action. Russian forces have gone from waltzing in as apparent liberators now to carpet bombing.
Surely we have little choice? We cannot sit back and let this deranged lunatic annihilate a country just because he shouts at us not to get involved. Perhaps I'm wrong and we just sit on our hands and let him do it. Let him destroy an entire country. But he won't stop there.
Europe has irrevocably altered.
I don't think we have a choice but to face him down. He's not going to stop here. And it would embolden others (like China) if we didn't.
The alternative is all of Eastern Europe falls and we're subject to permanent geopolitical blackmail across Europe and the World by authoritarian states.
I said this a few days ago and was called a moron. Funny how the zeitgeist has shifted.
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
Then the Communist world was supported by belief in an ideology supported by many globally. Mafia kleptocracy and might is right won't attract that level of support (outside the world of Trump and Fox). Also everything is accelerated in life now.
Fairly confident Russia wont be in Kiev in 5 years time, and think it more likely than not, that they leave within a month or two.
Optimistic.
The main opposition party to Putin's United Russia party in the Russian Duma is indeed the Communist Party and combined the 2 got 69% of the vote in the Russian legislative elections last year.
Thankfully nothing much has happened since then, that might have made ordinary Russians change their minds…
I’m also getting increasingly worried about the head of steam that seems to have built, especially in Europe (less so the US). People need to cool it.
Speak softly and carry a big stick. Let Russia run out of cash, fuel and tanks, and the will to fight. It was working quite well. Stay on the moral high ground and try to get China on side.
The ramping up of WW3 rhetoric might cause a rallying to the flag in Russia. Has happened several times in Iran in response to Western pressure.
My brother is the same.
But I think it's too late. The escalation is occurring. That's in large measure because Russian forces are not succeeding on the ground and the more they escalate the style of campaign the more our horror turns to indignation and then to action. Russian forces have gone from waltzing in as apparent liberators now to carpet bombing.
Surely we have little choice? We cannot sit back and let this deranged lunatic annihilate a country just because he shouts at us not to get involved. Perhaps I'm wrong and we just sit on our hands and let him do it. Let him destroy an entire country. But he won't stop there.
Europe has irrevocably altered.
I don't think we have a choice but to face him down. He's not going to stop here. And it would embolden others (like China) if we didn't.
The alternative is all of Eastern Europe falls and we're subject to permanent geopolitical blackmail across Europe and the World by authoritarian states.
I said this a few days ago and was called a moron. Funny how the zeitgeist has shifted.
Not for me or the majority of public opinion, if the latest polls are to believed, it hasn't.
Astonishing pressure must be on Johnson at moment. One slip from him and Biden and we are in WWIII.
For all that many of us loathe his character and his way of doing business we must put that all aside for time being and hope and pray he makes the right calls.
Media starting to call for no-fly zone. Really, really terribly dangerous times.
Plus Macron of course, he also has nuclear weapons.
Johnson is effectively a bridge between Macron and Scholz, who will lead the EU military and economic responses to Putin with UDVL and Biden who will lead the US military and economic response.
At the moment it is still largely economic and will be as long as Putin just sticks to Ukraine
Why does Biden need a bridge - or rather, how does UKGov provide it? When we were in the EU, having a US-aligned partner with voting rights and policy influence was a huge benefit to the US. We're outside all that now, just like the US, so what do we bring to the party?
We are also in NATO and still the only western nation in Europe other than France with nuclear weapons
Yup - that's NATO. We're not global non-entities.
But what do we do to "bridge" into the EU that the US can't do equally well itself now we don't have a seat at the EU table?
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I don't agree. The West has launched a series of extremely strong economic and financial sanctions on Russia, which will take days or weeks to take full effect. Meanwhile Ukraine is fighting a very clever war of physical attrition, particularly on logistics and fuel supplies, and is winning the cyber and propaganda war hands down.
These take time to take effect. Any escalation now needs to be considered carefully, and calculated to deliver the most impact for least loss of hearts and minds and moral high ground and least risk of Russian military escalation.
Best case strategy seems to be to allow Russian troops and public lose heart and give up.
The Taliban didn't keep escalating in Afghanistan until the US were defeated. They kept nibbling away, relentlessly, for 20 years until the US left of their own accord, and then strolled in unopposed and took control. The West needs to Be More Taliban.
The problem with that strategy is that it's a sentence of years of creating rubble and dead civilians in Ukraine.
If we fail to provide sufficient support to ensure the survival of Zelenskyy and the central government in Kyiv then Ukraine may never recover from the damage inflicted by the war.
Dominic Cummings @Dominic2306 · 1h A No Fly Zone enforced by NATO is an act of war that could *easily start A NUCLEAR WAR*. It is INSANE & coming from many of the same people who gave us Iraq/Afghan disasters. People who suggest it/similar shd be nowhere near power. Make your voice heard today
This is an example of the phenomenon I was warning about earlier. There is a vast amount of momentum in support of Ukraine. However, it is taking the form of a campaign that seeks to force governments in to doing things that escalate the conflict, and do not resolve it.
The only way to resolve the conflict is to escalate it until Russia is defeated.
The only alternative is appeasement and let Russia take whatever they want.
Some idealised version of "de-escalation" is off there in the land of unicorns and rainbows along with unilateral nuclear disarmament, which Ukraine of course did.
I am absolutely in agreement with the "fight now" school of thought, in relation to Putin. However, tactics come in to play. Putin is saying that we started the war, and also that we are the aggressor. This is absurd. But every wild, unfiltered, statement by a western politician on twitter feeds this narrative, until it starts to look to an outsider like Russia have a point, and the west really do want to annihilate Russia. Then we lose the high ground, are in to a 'two sides' problem.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
He won't be defeated militarily. We aren't going to go and occupy St Petersburg and Moscow and Vladivostok.
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
Then the Communist world was supported by belief in an ideology supported by many globally. Mafia kleptocracy and might is right won't attract that level of support (outside the world of Trump and Fox). Also everything is accelerated in life now.
Fairly confident Russia wont be in Kiev in 5 years time, and think it more likely than not, that they leave within a month or two.
Optimistic.
The main opposition party to Putin's United Russia party in the Russian Duma is indeed the Communist Party and combined the 2 got 69% of the vote in the Russian legislative elections last year.
Events.....there have been some developments over the last week that will change lives drastically and negatively, support can only ebb away.
Until this war started I was watching a lot of GB News because I agreed with their stance on the Woke stuff. Stopped watching now because I don't like their attitude on Putin and Russia.
Somebody on Twitter this morning claims they are owned/funded by Gazprom
Lots of rethinking going on at both ends of the spectrum. Finnish opinion polls suggest a complete reversal of attitudes to NATO from solid opposition to solid support. Swedish polls also moving that way. Here, the Morning Star is highlighting campaigners' claims of Russian use of illegal cluster munitions. Sabine Wageknecht, who leads the communist wing of Die Linke in Germany, has apologised for mistakenly thinking that Putin wouldn't invade and says she is rethinking her attitude towards Russia. And so on across the continent. A side-effect of all this may be a pretty broad consensus across Western Europe on the need for solid defence policies. Not quite what Putin had in mind, I imagine.
UK Green Party policy is, I believe, to leave NATO.
Mujtaba (Mij) Rahman@Mij_EuropeSenior EU officials tell me the EU is considering offering qualified Russian 🇷🇺 citizens EU 🇪🇺 passports - to accelerate Russian economic brain drain
This is just one of many innovative measures being considered to complement economic sanctions now in place 🇪🇺🇺🇦
- Economic prosperity, or at least stability, to compare with the chaotic 1990s - Have a ukraine friendly or at least neutral to Moscow - Create divides in the West to undermine any sanctions or other hostile policies
All up in smoke in six days.
If I were China, I might be tempted to move my armed forces up to the Russian border.
It would cause Putin a big headache, because he can't keep all his troops tied up in Ukraine. China gets to be seen to be a good guy by us in working to protect its European markets (and not insignificant investments in Ukraine).
And who knows, whilst everyone thinks they are after Taiwan, a blitzkrieg of their own could steal all of Russia's hydrocarbons east of the Urals....
Long-term, I am sure they would love to do that (and a lot of other valuable minerals there as well).
Too much threat of nuclear war though. Vlad would almost certainly use nukes, if not strategic, at least tactical.
Xi is a Greater China Nationalist - he wants all the territory that the Chinese Empire ruled. I doubt he is interested in world conquest.
A CNN poll finds 83% of US voters favour increased economic sanctions on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine, including 84% of Democrats and Republicans and 81% of Independents.
Mujtaba (Mij) Rahman@Mij_EuropeSenior EU officials tell me the EU is considering offering qualified Russian 🇷🇺 citizens EU 🇪🇺 passports - to accelerate Russian economic brain drain
This is just one of many innovative measures being considered to complement economic sanctions now in place 🇪🇺🇺🇦
Interesting again, because that could also be a more conciliatory signal to elements of the regime, not just general propaganda for the population at large. The Putin oligarchy has a lot of highly qualified people.
Comments
Obviously they won't be flying sorties over Ukraine from Polish bases - the prospect of that, understandably, generated enormous concern.
But I imagine that Ukrainian pilots would have to fly the planes from Poland to bases in Ukraine, in the first place.
Any such assistance would need to come through Poland and that would mean possible if not likely targeting of Poland by Russia. That is not a game that anyone wants to play.
Much easier to sell them for $1 each to the Ukranians, missiles loaded and fuelled to the gunnels, and invite the new owners to send over some pilots to collect them, after some careful application of blue and yellow paint…
That will, presumably, make Putin even more paranoid about his inner circle.
I have to say so far the US has done very well, including the way they've avoided excessive escalation rhetoric. I hope it continues.
The SNP have chosen today to launch their 10-year masterplan for the Scottish economy.
On Covid grounds, they have excluded all journalists from the event, so no questions could be asked. (Although mysteriously, there was no problem in letting business reps attend).
I do wonder if these provocations will eventually lead to the supine Scottish media actually holding ScotGov to account for its multiple failings. Not holding my breath.
https://twitter.com/ChrisGreenNews/status/1498607085960843268
"In her speech, the Finance Secretary made one passing mention of a second referendum on independence, which the Scottish Government is aiming to hold next year."
LOL
Fixed it for you.
Taiwan is certainly a higher priority, but they certainly regard some land currently held by Russia as rightfully their own.
Tactically it is far better to isolate and starve the bear, than fight it whilst it thinks it is winning. It is a long game and won't be over in a week.
What if NATO forces directly intervene? What if there is a no fly zone?
The simple fact remains that we see absolutely no indication from the US that it is even considering that option. It has on the other hand been very quick to say that is not on the table.
I think that in the social media and Internet age we are quick to jump upon utterances from all and sundry about these decisions, but the fact remains that any decision to make such commitment is a NATO commitment, and without the US that will not happen.
I would be more concerned of the danger of stray missiles etc than I would be about escalation via this route.
Sorted.
These take time to take effect. Any escalation now needs to be considered carefully, and calculated to deliver the most impact for least loss of hearts and minds and moral high ground and least risk of Russian military escalation.
Best case strategy seems to be to allow Russian troops and public lose heart and give up.
The Taliban didn't keep escalating in Afghanistan until the US were defeated. They kept nibbling away, relentlessly, for 20 years until the US left of their own accord, and then strolled in unopposed and took control. The West needs to Be More Taliban.
Lab 311
Con 245
SNP 59
LD 10
PC 5
Grn 1
Speaker 1
NI 18
Labour short 15 seats of majority
Anyone want to say how our politics is going to look in May 2022, never mind 2024?
@phildstewart
·
16m
Public health experts say Ukraine is running low on critical medical supplies and fears of a wider public health crisis are growing as people flee their homes and health services and supplies are interrupted.
https://twitter.com/phildstewart
Nice chicken curry in the canteen
So he has to be contained militarily at the lowest possible cost to us, and maximum possible cost to him, while he is defeated economically and socially.
That was the whole Cold War strategy (which took ~40 years).
The key thing, though, is that we either defeat Putin now, which necessarily involves escalation to an extent, or we will have to defeat Putin later.
It's always been a very 'european' city. We'd probably have quite a few of the locals on our side, a factor which Putin might acknowledge as making a bit of a difference.
I said before that the UK shouldn't 'open the doors' to refugees and still hold that position. But the Home Office insistence that Ukranians must pay extortionate visa fees is a catastrophic own PR goal. The eye watering visa fees become the story, not the other more positive stuff the government is doing regarding Ukraine. The Home Office is a dinosaur and absolutely clueless in relation to PR, it is a major liability for the government in all sorts of ways.
Fairly confident Russia wont be in Kiev in 5 years time, and think it more likely than not, that they leave within a month or two.
@RolandOliphant
·
3h
Needless to say, they are speaking Russian. Because Kharkiv is a Russian speaking city, full of ethnic Russians, who must be killed by the Russian army to save them from not living in the Russian Federation. It is a cliche that war is madness, but this one really is psychotic
https://twitter.com/RolandOliphant
And yes also; a mistake can always push things in the very wrong direction.
The main opposition party to Putin's United Russia party in the Russian Duma is indeed the Communist Party and combined the 2 got 69% of the vote in the Russian legislative elections last year.
The Taliban made sure occupying armies or pro-Western politicians were never safe. They nibbled away, laying IEDs on roads, launching ambushes then melting away. They inserted themselves into communities, and became middlemen in the narcotics trade. Classic guerrilla warfare. In the end, after 2 decades, they won - easily.
The Sunni insurgents in Iraq shared some of the same tactics but they went for far bloodier and larger set piece attacks, and then took and held territory. They didn't melt away in the same way, and didn't use the countryside preferring to stick to built up areas. They kept escalating, and got ahead of themselves with their dreams of caliphates. They then were comprehensively defeated firstly in the surge on Fallujah and later as ISIS during the Syrian war. They ultimately lost heavily. (Unlike the Shia militias in the South who quite cleverly combined physical insurgency with political manoeuvring, more akin to Sinn-Fein/IRA).
I also think that the US may have got a real line of communication right into a disgruntled element of the regime, with that report. I don't think it's propaganda, and that may be why Biden has been calmer in his public signals.
His government has been impeccably professional throughout, and he must have three decades' worth of cold war experience in his political life.
And there seems a touching certainty that Putin will automatically be replaced by something better.
I don't think that's nailed on.
The whole thing needs the greatest care.
I hope we are talking with the Chinese.
Johnson is effectively a bridge between Macron and Scholz, who will lead the EU military and economic responses to Putin with UDVL and Biden who will lead the US military and economic response.
At the moment it is still largely economic and will be as long as Putin just sticks to Ukraine
I can see a future in which the Ukraine and Belarus join the west. Could Russia join the west? Would we want it to? Would we trust it? Is it just too big?
The only people that can ultimately defeat Putin are the Russians. Assuming this happens, we need to think seriously about how to avoid another Putin a few years down the line.
.
Pippa Crerar
@PippaCrerar
· 7m
NEW: No 10 confirms that Ukraine refugee visa scheme has now been extended to wider family.
Home Sec Priti Patel to announce that adult parents, grandparents, children over 18 and siblings of those settled in the UK will be permitted entry.
Prior to 1985 it was called the Ecology Party, and before that PEOPLE. In 1990, it separated into three political parties:
- the Green Party of England and Wales
- the Scottish Greens
- the Green Party Northern Ireland
Despite the UK Green Party no longer existing as an entity, "Green Party" (singular) is still used colloquially to refer collectively to the three separate parties; for example, in the reporting of opinion polls and election results."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Party_(UK)
However only 42% back military action against Russia by the US, with 58% opposed, even if sanctions fail. 60% of Independents and 56% of Democrats and Republicans oppose US military action in Ukraine
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/28/politics/cnn-poll-russia-ukraine-us-aid/index.html
PM berated over Ukraine
https://news.sky.com/video/share-12554735
Regretfully I don't think people like Putin ever face justice. We can but hope that at least he can lose power though.
- They won't intervene militarily in the Ukraine
- They will arm the Ukrainians
- They will impose increasing sanctions on Russia as it escalates the situation in Ukraine.
https://thehill.com/policy/international/russia/595523-twice-as-many-russians-in-new-poll-say-military-use-justified-to
I wouldn't express it like that.
But what do we do to "bridge" into the EU that the US can't do equally well itself now we don't have a seat at the EU table?
If we fail to provide sufficient support to ensure the survival of Zelenskyy and the central government in Kyiv then Ukraine may never recover from the damage inflicted by the war.
Not at all is the answer. Their views will inevitably change as these events play out.
Mujtaba (Mij) Rahman@Mij_EuropeSenior EU officials tell me the EU is considering offering qualified Russian 🇷🇺 citizens EU 🇪🇺 passports - to accelerate Russian economic brain drain
This is just one of many innovative measures being considered to complement economic sanctions now in place 🇪🇺🇺🇦