politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

Three speeches at this critical time – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,161
edited March 2022 in General
imageThree speeches at this critical time – politicalbetting.com

In the space of a week we have heard two speeches which are changing the world we live in, certainly in Europe and, likely, elsewhere. This evening we will hear a third one.

Read the full story here

«13456789

Comments

  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    11111
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,032
    Hopefully a more united western alliance and an improved UK - EU relationship
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,652
    FPT, the three extreme-right candidates in the French presidential election have qualified for the first round. (Zemmour, Le Pen and Dupont-Aignan.) The Trot Philippe Poutou also received 99 signatures today, but he is still 158 short with a few days to go.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,890
    OT Philip Davies MP is the subject of this week's Betting People interview on Star Sports.

    Part one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2J_EBCXANJo
    Part two https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfvUGco_Bz8
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,035
    Alaska was historically Russian too. Indeed the West Coast right down to San Francisco was claimed by Russia for several decades.

    Not sure even Putin wants to reclaim that, but you never know ...
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,175
    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,133
    edited March 2022
    Interesting thread on geopolitics.

    On that theme - re ; the picture of the Communist-flagged tank in Kiev from the other day, FPT. Here's a interesting wildcard just to get a few thoughts going, as much as anything else.

    If you were an alliance of Lukashenko and his Belarussian communist supporters, the Oligarchs, and China - possibly the only alliance that could get rid of Putin - what would be the only thing you could work on ?

    Chinese-style communism.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,553
    "Opinion Russia
    The incoherence at the heart of anti-westernism
    Enemies of the west see it as an oppressor and a decadent pushover at the same time
    JANAN GANESH"

    https://www.ft.com/content/d1c99cbb-3494-45dc-87bc-1b76d5fca77b
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,249
    rcs1000 said:

    I really don't understand why you would want to occupy land filled with people who don't want you to be there.

    Unless you are going to expel all of them, then it's just going to cause you massive amounts of trouble.

    Smiles....

    I remember trying to explain to a youngster how the Really Real IRA, the Keepin' It Real IRA and the rest justified their position

    "But the whole solution of Ireland *voted*. South, North, Unionist, Nationalist" - she said

    "But they don't believe that voting decides whether Ireland is partitioned" - me

    "But... But..."

    She literally didn't conceive that they weren't interested in democracy. Didn't accept the "right of the people to do wrong". People in other far away countries, sure.... but not here.

    It's only since about 1989 that this universalist belief that democracy is the Only Answer has really taken root.

    I grew up with MPs saying, openly, that People's Democracies (Communist One Party Dictatorships) were more democratic than all that voting nonsense.

    It's just a call back to Olde Days when lines were drawn on maps, and the populations behind those lines just shut up and got on with it. If they didn't, well, they got tidied up. The Head Count are like other property - cherished if useful, slaughtered if not.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,401
    It's almost as if Germany had a brand new government.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,890
    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,625
    rcs1000 said:

    I really don't understand why you would want to occupy land filled with people who don't want you to be there.

    Unless you are going to expel all of them, then it's just going to cause you massive amounts of trouble.

    If your political system is based on intimidation, oppression and patronage, then you don't need to worry about the consent of the people.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,051
    edited March 2022
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    He would have been an odd pick anyway wouldn’t he? No Westminster experience. Is “pulling out” just self promotion to suggest he was ever in it in the way the likes of Sopel clearly would have been?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,818
    edited March 2022
    rcs1000 said:

    I really don't understand why you would want to occupy land filled with people who don't want you to be there.

    Unless you are going to expel all of them, then it's just going to cause you massive amounts of trouble.

    Edit: meant to be in response to Fishings Alaska post.

    Gets rid of Murkowski and some liberal Californians. Trump may be in favour.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153
    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,175
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    Rajan already earns close to what Laura K is on:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57733127

    So not much incentive to go for it.
  • MISTYMISTY Posts: 1,594
    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    Somebody should surely have noticed a while ago that the Germans weren't making Russia rich.

    They were making Putin rich.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,401
    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    Wasn't that the fundamental mistake of the entire West post-Berlin wall?
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,324
    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    Funny, when I was young there were traders in the East End who thought much the same about their dealings with Reggie and Ronnie Kray.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,175
    noneoftheabove said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    The establishment party threatening to defund the BBC if they don't appoint government lackeys. Exactly what should make us smile as we are defending against an authoritarian government who make full use of a controlled press.
    Oh come on, Guido's point is that not in a million years are the BBC appointing a Mirror journalist to that job.

    I've said it will be Sam Coates from day 1 and I'm sticking with that.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,051
    tlg86 said:

    noneoftheabove said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    The establishment party threatening to defund the BBC if they don't appoint government lackeys. Exactly what should make us smile as we are defending against an authoritarian government who make full use of a controlled press.
    Oh come on, Guido's point is that not in a million years are the BBC appointing a Mirror journalist to that job.

    I've said it will be Sam Coates from day 1 and I'm sticking with that.
    If he doesn’t fancy it. I wouldn’t seek the position for myself but if friends and colleagues were to press me, then I could cope.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,890
    edited March 2022
    tlg86 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    Rajan already earns close to what Laura K is on:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57733127

    So not much incentive to go for it.
    Not financially perhaps but even outside the BBC most internal transfers are surely about status and interest. What I'm wondering is if the BBC is redefining the job and this is why people are pulling out. Dunno really but we can bet on it.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,759
    tlg86 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    Rajan already earns close to what Laura K is on:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57733127

    So not much incentive to go for it.
    Maybe he's realised he'd not be very good at it. He's struggled on the today programme.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,215
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    OK, it's one of those "pinnacle of the profession" jobs. But under the present government, it's also painting a massive target on yourself. It has "set up to be a scapegoat" written all over it.

    As a science master who'd happily be much more provincial than I am, I admit that I simply don't get ambition. But I can fully understand people with sharp political antennae running a mile from the job.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,175
    Omnium said:

    tlg86 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    Rajan already earns close to what Laura K is on:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57733127

    So not much incentive to go for it.
    Maybe he's realised he'd not be very good at it. He's struggled on the today programme.
    Yep. It really needs to be someone who is used to doing that sort of job before.

    I like Adam Fleming, but I think it might be a bit too soon for him.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    rcs1000 said:

    I really don't understand why you would want to occupy land filled with people who don't want you to be there.

    Unless you are going to expel all of them, then it's just going to cause you massive amounts of trouble.

    I suppose China has done this successfully in Xinjiang and Tibet by flooding these places with surplus population. But most countries do not have the same demographic pressures.


  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    edited March 2022
    WhisperingOracle said:

    Interesting thread on geopolitics.

    On that theme - re ; the picture of the Communist-flagged tank in Kiev from the other day, FPT. Here's a interesting wildcard just to get a few thoughts going, as much as anything else.

    If you were an alliance of Lukashenko and his Belarussian communist supporters, the Oligarchs, and China - possibly the only alliance that could get rid of Putin - what would be the only thing you could work on ?

    Chinese-style communism.

    Well, to to adapt my reply FPT: The tank flying the Soviet flag is more of a "Make Russia Great Again" thing, harking back to the glory days of the Great Patriotic War etc, rather than a commitment to restoring Marxism-Leninism which probably wouldn't go down too well with the klept. The Russian Army has maintained a lot of the traditions and culture from the Soviet Army: IIRC a lot of units that can trace their lineage back to before 1991 still use Soviet-pattern unit banners (like colours in the British Army) with the hammer and sickle. cf Putin restoring the Soviet national anthem with non-communist lyrics.

    As to Big Hat, he certainly kept on more Soviet trappings than most of the post-Soviet states. Belarus's flag is that of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic minus the hammer and sickle, and their air force still uses the Soviet red star (as did Russia's until 2011 when they added a bit of white and blue, still mainly a red star though). Lukashanka's no more a communist than Putin is; he's just a bit more nostalgic about it.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,633
    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,051
    tlg86 said:

    Omnium said:

    tlg86 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    Rajan already earns close to what Laura K is on:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57733127

    So not much incentive to go for it.
    Maybe he's realised he'd not be very good at it. He's struggled on the today programme.
    Yep. It really needs to be someone who is used to doing that sort of job before.

    I like Adam Fleming, but I think it might be a bit too soon for him.
    Seems a real shame they couldn’t get Sopel. Would have been brilliant. A year or two back it would have been great to get John Pienaar and his awesome moustache.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070
    .
    rcs1000 said:

    I really don't understand why you would want to occupy land filled with people who don't want you to be there.

    Unless you are going to expel all of them, then it's just going to cause you massive amounts of trouble.

    Megalomaniacs got to megalo, I guess.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,986
    edited March 2022
    Theuniondivvie said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    And then there was the make rich Russians British approach..
    I have a quiet, probably unrealistic hope, that behind the scenes the so-far unsanctioned and in one case ennobled oligarchs here are counselling their patron Boris on how best to deal with Putin and working with him on the planned coup. That would be dodgy party funding well spent and solicited.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153
    darkage said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I really don't understand why you would want to occupy land filled with people who don't want you to be there.

    Unless you are going to expel all of them, then it's just going to cause you massive amounts of trouble.

    I suppose China has done this successfully in Xinjiang and Tibet by flooding these places with surplus population. But most countries do not have the same demographic pressures.


    Indeed, Russia has the opposite issue.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,051
    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
    Presumably a real desire to not see the USSR refounded though?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,175
    I didn't need to translate!

    https://twitter.com/PoliticalAP/status/1498417561280593926

    Political Partridge
    @PoliticalAP
    Да! Это расширитель!


  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,373
    rcs1000 said:

    I really don't understand why you would want to occupy land filled with people who don't want you to be there.

    Unless you are going to expel all of them, then it's just going to cause you massive amounts of trouble.

    Tell the Israelis that, as this is a lesson they have taken 55 years to not learn.

    Whether Russia will be quite so foolish with Ukraine remains to be seen.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,986
    darkage said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I really don't understand why you would want to occupy land filled with people who don't want you to be there.

    Unless you are going to expel all of them, then it's just going to cause you massive amounts of trouble.

    I suppose China has done this successfully in Xinjiang and Tibet by flooding these places with surplus population. But most countries do not have the same demographic pressures.


    Yes, one thing Russia definitely doesn’t need is lebensraum. That’s what makes this bloody nostalgia fest such a pointless tragedy.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    rcs1000 said:

    I really don't understand why you would want to occupy land filled with people who don't want you to be there.

    Unless you are going to expel all of them, then it's just going to cause you massive amounts of trouble.

    Well it used to be all the rage for most of human history. And transplanting people is still tried in some. But the slaughter them all and replace approach tends to be frowned on now.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,759
    tlg86 said:

    Omnium said:

    tlg86 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    Rajan already earns close to what Laura K is on:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57733127

    So not much incentive to go for it.
    Maybe he's realised he'd not be very good at it. He's struggled on the today programme.
    Yep. It really needs to be someone who is used to doing that sort of job before.

    I like Adam Fleming, but I think it might be a bit too soon for him.
    There are quite a few journalists that are looking good with their coverage of this crisis. The BBC's man in a tin hat for example. The lady (or should it be woman now) on sky who's in Ukraine is really outstanding. I'm not sure that the BBC's political editor needs to come from the ranks of those already in the game.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    He doesn’t want to spend the next decade talking exclusively to politicians…
    And become the butt of PB jokes ?
    I’m shocked.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    rcs1000 said:

    I really don't understand why you would want to occupy land filled with people who don't want you to be there.

    Unless you are going to expel all of them, then it's just going to cause you massive amounts of trouble.

    Depends, doesn't it. I resent most of the ways most UK governments interact with my life, but I accept that risk/reward wise it just ain't worth throwing molotov cocktails at police cars because there ain't no NATO cavalry over the hill coming to make life better. The USSR lasted quite a long time because people think like me.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,625
    The Russian government is blocking the two main non-regime media outlets Echo Moskvy and Dozhd, accusing them of inciting extremism and publishing false information about the 'special operation to protect the DNR and LNR'.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,955
    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
    Spread on how long before the first squawking about the old, bad, militaristic Germany on the rise starts? As I recall that was a primary factor in the blessed Margaret being against German reunification.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    edited March 2022
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
    Spread on how long before the first squawking about the old, bad, militaristic Germany on the rise starts? As I recall that was a primary factor in the blessed Margaret being against German reunification.
    It's time to move on, even that was 30 years ago for Christ's sake. I think the squawking may be less than you expect.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    The one thing about Ukraine that we may be overlooking is that it does have a part of the population that is Russian. We don't really know what they think about the current situation. Are they happy about starting talks to join the EU and being conscripted to fight the invading Russian Army? How representative is the government and the public face of Ukraine that we see in the western media?

    Apologies to peddle Kremlin talking points, but it does feel like we don't know very much about this country and make a lot of unexplored assumptions about it.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,931
    biggles said:

    tlg86 said:

    Omnium said:

    tlg86 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    Rajan already earns close to what Laura K is on:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57733127

    So not much incentive to go for it.
    Maybe he's realised he'd not be very good at it. He's struggled on the today programme.
    Yep. It really needs to be someone who is used to doing that sort of job before.

    I like Adam Fleming, but I think it might be a bit too soon for him.
    Seems a real shame they couldn’t get Sopel. Would have been brilliant. A year or two back it would have been great to get John Pienaar and his awesome moustache.
    The job’s being teed up for Guto Harri.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,133
    edited March 2022
    rpjs said:

    WhisperingOracle said:

    Interesting thread on geopolitics.

    On that theme - re ; the picture of the Communist-flagged tank in Kiev from the other day, FPT. Here's a interesting wildcard just to get a few thoughts going, as much as anything else.

    If you were an alliance of Lukashenko and his Belarussian communist supporters, the Oligarchs, and China - possibly the only alliance that could get rid of Putin - what would be the only thing you could work on ?

    Chinese-style communism.

    Well, to to adapt my reply FPT: The tank flying the Soviet flag is more of a "Make Russia Great Again" thing, harking back to the glory days of the Great Patriotic War etc, rather than a commitment to restoring Marxism-Leninism which probably wouldn't go down too well with the klept. The Russian Army has maintained a lot of the traditions and culture from the Soviet Army: IIRC a lot of units that can trace their lineage back to before 1991 still use Soviet-pattern unit banners (like colours in the British Army) with the hammer and sickle. cf Putin restoring the Soviet national anthem with non-communist lyrics.

    As to Big Hat, he certainly kept on more Soviet trappings than most of the post-Soviet states. Belarus's flag is that of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic minus the hammer and sickle, and their air force still uses the Soviet red star (as did Russia's until 2011 when they added a bit of white and blue, still mainly a red star though). Lukashanka's no more a communist than Putin is; he's just a bit more nostalgic about it.
    Certainly though, in Belarus, the Communist Party has been part of the official government support, whereas in Russia it's been part of the opposition. And a Chinese model is also still the only thing that could link that set-up with the oligarchs.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,368
    rcs1000 said:

    I really don't understand why you would want to occupy land filled with people who don't want you to be there.

    Unless you are going to expel all of them, then it's just going to cause you massive amounts of trouble.

    That is exactly what happened in Crimea - the Russians stayed and everyone else moved (some happily, some under duress) to other parts of the Ukraine or elsewhere in Europe.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,051
    kle4 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
    Spread on how long before the first squawking about the old, bad, militaristic Germany on the rise starts? As I recall that was a primary factor in the blessed Margaret being against German reunification.
    It's time to move on, even that was 30 years ago for Christ's sake. I think the squawking may be less than you expect.
    Yes. No one cares. Even those of us for whom it was our grandparents fight aren’t as young as we’d like to think we are. Modern Germany has no link to that era and I doubt any British politician (well maybe Farage) will raise the issue.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,931
    tlg86 said:

    I didn't need to translate!

    https://twitter.com/PoliticalAP/status/1498417561280593926

    Political Partridge
    @PoliticalAP
    Да! Это расширитель!


    Pass the vodka, please, comrade.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,494
    darkage said:

    The one thing about Ukraine that we may be overlooking is that it does have a part of the population that is Russian. We don't really know what they think about the current situation. Are they happy about starting talks to join the EU and being conscripted to fight the invading Russian Army? How representative is the government and the public face of Ukraine that we see in the western media?

    Apologies to peddle Kremlin talking points, but it does feel like we don't know very much about this country and make a lot of unexplored assumptions about it.

    From all of the reports I've seen, people all over Ukraine, even in the Russian speaking areas, have kept signing up for the militia.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    tlg86 said:

    Omnium said:

    tlg86 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    Rajan already earns close to what Laura K is on:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57733127

    So not much incentive to go for it.
    Maybe he's realised he'd not be very good at it. He's struggled on the today programme.
    Yep. It really needs to be someone who is used to doing that sort of job before.

    I like Adam Fleming, but I think it might be a bit too soon for him.
    Vicki Young is excellent.Look no further.

    Edit: Possibly a little too non-partisan.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    biggles said:

    kle4 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
    Spread on how long before the first squawking about the old, bad, militaristic Germany on the rise starts? As I recall that was a primary factor in the blessed Margaret being against German reunification.
    It's time to move on, even that was 30 years ago for Christ's sake. I think the squawking may be less than you expect.
    Yes. No one cares. Even those of us for whom it was our grandparents fight aren’t as young as we’d like to think we are. Modern Germany has no link to that era and I doubt any British politician (well maybe Farage) will raise the issue.
    There will be some. And comments online etc. But how often do people emphasise that a minority is not representative? Are we really going to see it as a mainstream opinion, and if not, will a few idiots saying it really mean anything?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,553
    darkage said:

    The one thing about Ukraine that we may be overlooking is that it does have a part of the population that is Russian. We don't really know what they think about the current situation. Are they happy about starting talks to join the EU and being conscripted to fight the invading Russian Army? How representative is the government and the public face of Ukraine that we see in the western media?

    Apologies to peddle Kremlin talking points, but it does feel like we don't know very much about this country and make a lot of unexplored assumptions about it.

    In a lot of Russian speaking areas they've given the invading troops an unfriendly welcome.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,051
    Fairliered said:

    biggles said:

    tlg86 said:

    Omnium said:

    tlg86 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    Rajan already earns close to what Laura K is on:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57733127

    So not much incentive to go for it.
    Maybe he's realised he'd not be very good at it. He's struggled on the today programme.
    Yep. It really needs to be someone who is used to doing that sort of job before.

    I like Adam Fleming, but I think it might be a bit too soon for him.
    Seems a real shame they couldn’t get Sopel. Would have been brilliant. A year or two back it would have been great to get John Pienaar and his awesome moustache.
    The job’s being teed up for Guto Harri.
    Lol. A stunning come back for Cummings. All future political editor comment to come in 70,000 word blog posts.

    Speaking of Cummings, his links to Russia are about to bite him in the arse I suspect; given the enemies he’s made in Government.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,955
    edited March 2022
    kle4 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
    Spread on how long before the first squawking about the old, bad, militaristic Germany on the rise starts? As I recall that was a primary factor in the blessed Margaret being against German reunification.
    It's time to move on, even that was 30 years ago for Christ's sake. I think the squawking may be less than you expect.
    Get back to me when squawking about the return of the Soviet Union (which was..gasp..dissolved 30 years ago) stops. People tend to resort to sterile cliché, here as much as anywhere else.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,553
    Theuniondivvie said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    And then there was the make rich Russians British approach..
    Although we were sensible enough not to become reliant on Russian energy, except very slightly.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,051
    edited March 2022
    Theuniondivvie said:

    kle4 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
    Spread on how long before the first squawking about the old, bad, militaristic Germany on the rise starts? As I recall that was a primary factor in the blessed Margaret being against German reunification.
    It's time to move on, even that was 30 years ago for Christ's sake. I think the squawking may be less than you expect.
    Get back to me when squawking about the return of the Soviet Union (which was..gasp..40 years ago) stops. People tend to resort to sterile cliché, here as much as anywhere else.
    I’d agree with you if the main person talking about the return of the Soviet Union (in form) wasn’t also the current President of the Russian Federation who had just invaded Ukraine.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,373
    Theuniondivvie said:

    kle4 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
    Spread on how long before the first squawking about the old, bad, militaristic Germany on the rise starts? As I recall that was a primary factor in the blessed Margaret being against German reunification.
    It's time to move on, even that was 30 years ago for Christ's sake. I think the squawking may be less than you expect.
    Get back to me when squawking about the return of the Soviet Union (which was..gasp..40 years ago) stops. People tend to resort to sterile cliché, here as much as anywhere else.
    30 years, two months and one day ago.

    Stop making me feel old!
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,759
    Fairliered said:

    tlg86 said:

    I didn't need to translate!

    https://twitter.com/PoliticalAP/status/1498417561280593926

    Political Partridge
    @PoliticalAP
    Да! Это расширитель!


    Pass the vodka, please, comrade.
    He really does look like the worlds greatest arse doesn't he. (Apologies to jack_w)
  • FossFoss Posts: 1,019
    Apparently there’s been one of those terrifyingly large explosions near Kharkiv.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1498726279494909957
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,175
    Mexicanpete said:

    tlg86 said:

    Omnium said:

    tlg86 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    Rajan already earns close to what Laura K is on:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57733127

    So not much incentive to go for it.
    Maybe he's realised he'd not be very good at it. He's struggled on the today programme.
    Yep. It really needs to be someone who is used to doing that sort of job before.

    I like Adam Fleming, but I think it might be a bit too soon for him.
    Vicki Young is excellent.Look no further.

    Edit: Possibly a little too non-partisan.
    She's ruled herself out:

    https://order-order.com/2022/01/16/vicki-young-wont-replace-laura-kuenssberg/
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,633
    darkage said:

    The one thing about Ukraine that we may be overlooking is that it does have a part of the population that is Russian. We don't really know what they think about the current situation. Are they happy about starting talks to join the EU and being conscripted to fight the invading Russian Army? How representative is the government and the public face of Ukraine that we see in the western media?

    Apologies to peddle Kremlin talking points, but it does feel like we don't know very much about this country and make a lot of unexplored assumptions about it.

    Worth noting that the President of Ukraine is Jewish, and a native Russian speaker, not an ethnic Ukranian, yet is clearly a patriot.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    Andy_JS said:

    darkage said:

    The one thing about Ukraine that we may be overlooking is that it does have a part of the population that is Russian. We don't really know what they think about the current situation. Are they happy about starting talks to join the EU and being conscripted to fight the invading Russian Army? How representative is the government and the public face of Ukraine that we see in the western media?

    Apologies to peddle Kremlin talking points, but it does feel like we don't know very much about this country and make a lot of unexplored assumptions about it.

    In a lot of Russian speaking areas they've given the invading troops an unfriendly welcome.
    I'm just thinking back to Konstantin Kisin last week on Triggernometry. He said one half of his family in Ukraine were very happy about the invasion, the other were against it. Perhaps there is a significant part of the population who are just keeping their heads down at the moment.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,373
    Foxy said:

    darkage said:

    The one thing about Ukraine that we may be overlooking is that it does have a part of the population that is Russian. We don't really know what they think about the current situation. Are they happy about starting talks to join the EU and being conscripted to fight the invading Russian Army? How representative is the government and the public face of Ukraine that we see in the western media?

    Apologies to peddle Kremlin talking points, but it does feel like we don't know very much about this country and make a lot of unexplored assumptions about it.

    Worth noting that the President of Ukraine is Jewish, and a native Russian speaker, not an ethnic Ukranian, yet is clearly a patriot.
    The double irony of course is he was elected on a platform of seeking a rapprochement with Russia.

    Hardly his fault it hasn't worked out, but still...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    edited March 2022
    Theuniondivvie said:

    kle4 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
    Spread on how long before the first squawking about the old, bad, militaristic Germany on the rise starts? As I recall that was a primary factor in the blessed Margaret being against German reunification.
    It's time to move on, even that was 30 years ago for Christ's sake. I think the squawking may be less than you expect.
    Get back to me when squawking about the return of the Soviet Union (which was..gasp..dissolved 30 years ago) stops. People tend to resort to sterile cliché, here as much as anywhere else.
    The Soviet Union cliche at least has some relevance, given Putin, while not ideologically a fan, is on record as lamenting its fall because of what it did to Russia, and his desire to expand Russia's sphere of influence in areas once covered by it is driving his actions right now.

    I am not a historical expert, but by comparison I am pretty sure there are additional elements at play in fears of German militarism which would not apply if they increase their defence spending to 2%, things like an aggressive government for a start. So your 'gasp' comment is just silly if you cannot figure out a difference between the two.

    I'm not saying there won't be squawking, but you like to trawl through twitter for examples of your opponent's idiotic comments (and why not, it is fun), but you surely know when it is a significant or representative opinion. And that does make a difference - if a Cabinet Minister or the First Minister says something it is more signidicant than if some random councillor in nowhereburg says something, and people trying to equate the two look like fools.

    Honestly, what is the problem here? I wasn't saying you need to move on, I was saying people in general need to, and that I am optimistic fewer will be fools than you think. I may be wrong, but we shall see. I can be optimistic about human nature occasionally.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,759
    darkage said:

    Andy_JS said:

    darkage said:

    The one thing about Ukraine that we may be overlooking is that it does have a part of the population that is Russian. We don't really know what they think about the current situation. Are they happy about starting talks to join the EU and being conscripted to fight the invading Russian Army? How representative is the government and the public face of Ukraine that we see in the western media?

    Apologies to peddle Kremlin talking points, but it does feel like we don't know very much about this country and make a lot of unexplored assumptions about it.

    In a lot of Russian speaking areas they've given the invading troops an unfriendly welcome.
    I'm just thinking back to Konstantin Kisin last week on Triggernometry. He said one half of his family in Ukraine were very happy about the invasion, the other were against it. Perhaps there is a significant part of the population who are just keeping their heads down at the moment.
    I don't think so.

    I've met a fair number of Ukrainians and they acknowledge the divisions in their country, but they all think it's their country.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,553
    "Opinion
    Putin has secured a Macron victory
    The French Right is on the wrong side of history
    BY JOHN LICHFIELD"

    https://unherd.com/2022/03/putin-has-secured-a-macron-victory/
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,633
    edited March 2022
    biggles said:

    kle4 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
    Spread on how long before the first squawking about the old, bad, militaristic Germany on the rise starts? As I recall that was a primary factor in the blessed Margaret being against German reunification.
    It's time to move on, even that was 30 years ago for Christ's sake. I think the squawking may be less than you expect.
    Yes. No one cares. Even those of us for whom it was our grandparents fight aren’t as young as we’d like to think we are. Modern Germany has no link to that era and I doubt any British politician (well maybe Farage) will raise the issue.
    We might not, but it is significant for many Germans. My sister in law lost 2 uncles on the Eastern front*. It looms in the conscience, like the Holocaust and rightly so. Lots of Slavs were slaughtered the same ways.

    * fortunately my father's thoughts on this were expressed out of her earshot!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,561
    tlg86 said:

    I didn't need to translate!

    https://twitter.com/PoliticalAP/status/1498417561280593926

    Political Partridge
    @PoliticalAP
    Да! Это расширитель!


    At least this time, Darth Vader isn't standing behind them....

    https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/02/28/putin-calls-west-empire-of-lies-as-sanctions-slam-russian-economy-a76652
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,134
    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    Russia becoming rich was great. The problem was the wealth was expropriated by a group of corrupt colluding men.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    tlg86 said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    tlg86 said:

    Omnium said:

    tlg86 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    Rajan already earns close to what Laura K is on:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57733127

    So not much incentive to go for it.
    Maybe he's realised he'd not be very good at it. He's struggled on the today programme.
    Yep. It really needs to be someone who is used to doing that sort of job before.

    I like Adam Fleming, but I think it might be a bit too soon for him.
    Vicki Young is excellent.Look no further.

    Edit: Possibly a little too non-partisan.
    She's ruled herself out:

    https://order-order.com/2022/01/16/vicki-young-wont-replace-laura-kuenssberg/
    Shame, she is very, very good. It seems to be a role no one wants. Although I daresay some third rater will be happy to sell their soul.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,717
    rcs1000 said:

    I really don't understand why you would want to occupy land filled with people who don't want you to be there.

    Unless you are going to expel all of them, then it's just going to cause you massive amounts of trouble.

    Been done before, by Uncle Joe no less.

  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,759
    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    Russia becoming rich was great. The problem was the wealth was expropriated by a group of corrupt colluding men.
    Russia becoming church-mouse poor is going to be better.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    On the subject of occupations, the story of eastern Karelia is fascinating. Finland evacuated the entire native speaking population of Vyborg, a large city, and the surrounding area at the end of the second world war. It became part of the Soviet Union, who repopulated it. Vyborg still has the appearance of a Finnish city, with some beautiful architecture (including some Alvar Aalto buildings), but is inhabited exclusively by Russians. Following the end of the cold war, Finland has never pursued any territorial claims on this area, and is very hesitant to inherit any native Russian population.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    darkage said:

    The one thing about Ukraine that we may be overlooking is that it does have a part of the population that is Russian. We don't really know what they think about the current situation. Are they happy about starting talks to join the EU and being conscripted to fight the invading Russian Army? How representative is the government and the public face of Ukraine that we see in the western media?

    Apologies to peddle Kremlin talking points, but it does feel like we don't know very much about this country and make a lot of unexplored assumptions about it.

    In what sense Russian? A member of the Ukraine population is by definition Ukrainian. Russian-speaking doesn't alter that basic fact, and is there any evidence of anyone thinking it does?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,955
    kle4 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    kle4 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
    Spread on how long before the first squawking about the old, bad, militaristic Germany on the rise starts? As I recall that was a primary factor in the blessed Margaret being against German reunification.
    It's time to move on, even that was 30 years ago for Christ's sake. I think the squawking may be less than you expect.
    Get back to me when squawking about the return of the Soviet Union (which was..gasp..dissolved 30 years ago) stops. People tend to resort to sterile cliché, here as much as anywhere else.
    The Soviet Union cliche at least has some relevance, given Putin, while not ideologically a fan, is on record as lamenting its fall because of what it did to Russia, and his desire to expand Russia's sphere of influence in areas once covered by it is driving his actions right now.

    I am not a historical expert, but by comparison I am pretty sure there are additional elements at play in fears of German militarism which would not apply if they increase their defence spending to 2%, things like an aggressive government for a start. So your 'gasp' comment is just silly if you cannot figure out a difference between the two.

    I'm not saying there won't be squawking, but you like to trawl through twitter for examples of your opponent's idiotic comments (and why not, it is fun), but you surely know when it is a significant or representative opinion. And that does make a difference - if a Cabinet Minister or the First Minister says something it is more signidicant than if some random councillor in nowhereburg says something, and people trying to equate the two look like fools.

    Honestly, what is the problem here? I wasn't saying you need to move on, I was saying people in general need to, and that I am optimistic fewer will be fools than you think. I may be wrong, but we shall see. I can be optimistic about human nature occasionally.
    Er, no problem, you leaped in with a word salad in response to an observation that you say has some accuracy. Chill oot.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070
    darkage said:

    Andy_JS said:

    darkage said:

    The one thing about Ukraine that we may be overlooking is that it does have a part of the population that is Russian. We don't really know what they think about the current situation. Are they happy about starting talks to join the EU and being conscripted to fight the invading Russian Army? How representative is the government and the public face of Ukraine that we see in the western media?

    Apologies to peddle Kremlin talking points, but it does feel like we don't know very much about this country and make a lot of unexplored assumptions about it.

    In a lot of Russian speaking areas they've given the invading troops an unfriendly welcome.
    I'm just thinking back to Konstantin Kisin last week on Triggernometry. He said one half of his family in Ukraine were very happy about the invasion, the other were against it. Perhaps there is a significant part of the population who are just keeping their heads down at the moment.
    Ever since they voted to leave Russia in 1991, there seems to be around 75% of the population which wants free of its interference.
    I suspect that number will have increased over the last week or so.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    New Irish poll:

    Sinn Féin 33% (+9)
    Fine Gael 20% (-1)
    Fianna Fáil 17% (-5)
    Greens 5% (-2)
    Social Democrats 4% (+1)
    Labour 4 (nc)
    People Before Profit/Solidarity 3% (nc)
    Aontú 2 (nc)
    others/independents 11% (-3)

    (Red C/Business Post; 23 February 2022; 1,001; change from GE 2020)
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,243
    darkage said:

    On the subject of occupations, the story of eastern Karelia is fascinating. Finland evacuated the entire native speaking population of Vyborg, a large city, and the surrounding area at the end of the second world war. It became part of the Soviet Union, who repopulated it. Vyborg still has the appearance of a Finnish city, with some beautiful architecture (including some Alvar Aalto buildings), but is inhabited exclusively by Russians. Following the end of the cold war, Finland has never pursued any territorial claims on this area, and is very hesitant to inherit any native Russian population.

    I wonder why…
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153
    darkage said:

    The one thing about Ukraine that we may be overlooking is that it does have a part of the population that is Russian. We don't really know what they think about the current situation. Are they happy about starting talks to join the EU and being conscripted to fight the invading Russian Army? How representative is the government and the public face of Ukraine that we see in the western media?

    Apologies to peddle Kremlin talking points, but it does feel like we don't know very much about this country and make a lot of unexplored assumptions about it.

    Only about 4% of Ukrainians voted for Rusophile political parties in the last elections - almost entirely in the far far East.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,175
    Mexicanpete said:

    tlg86 said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    tlg86 said:

    Omnium said:

    tlg86 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://order-order.com/2022/03/01/amol-rajan-rules-himself-out-for-bbc-political-editor/

    This bit made me lol:

    Guido thinks if the Mirror’s Pippa Crerar were to become the BBC’s political editor, Nadine Dorries would present a government Bill to privatise the BBC the next day.

    What is going on here? Amol Rajan rules himself out of the running for BBC Political Editor, the week after the presumed front-runners Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis leave the Corporation.
    Rajan already earns close to what Laura K is on:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57733127

    So not much incentive to go for it.
    Maybe he's realised he'd not be very good at it. He's struggled on the today programme.
    Yep. It really needs to be someone who is used to doing that sort of job before.

    I like Adam Fleming, but I think it might be a bit too soon for him.
    Vicki Young is excellent.Look no further.

    Edit: Possibly a little too non-partisan.
    She's ruled herself out:

    https://order-order.com/2022/01/16/vicki-young-wont-replace-laura-kuenssberg/
    Shame, she is very, very good. It seems to be a role no one wants. Although I daresay some third rater will be happy to sell their soul.
    https://smarkets.com/event/42433925/tv-and-entertainment/next-bbc-political-editor/next-bbc-political-editor

    Not much liquidity, but Smarkets has Alex Forsyth as favourite followed by Paul Brand. I don't know much about Paul Brand as I don't watch ITV News. I assume his sexuality is influencing the betting.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070
    Theuniondivvie said:

    kle4 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
    Spread on how long before the first squawking about the old, bad, militaristic Germany on the rise starts? As I recall that was a primary factor in the blessed Margaret being against German reunification.
    It's time to move on, even that was 30 years ago for Christ's sake. I think the squawking may be less than you expect.
    Get back to me when squawking about the return of the Soviet Union (which was..gasp..dissolved 30 years ago) stops. People tend to resort to sterile cliché, here as much as anywhere else.
    Not exactly sterile, when the loony in the Kremlin is trying to resuscitate the empire by force.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    Russia becoming rich was great. The problem was the wealth was expropriated by a group of corrupt colluding men.
    Tragic. Why didn't I ever get the chance to become a corript oligarch in my 20s?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153
    edited March 2022
    Andy_JS said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    And then there was the make rich Russians British approach..
    Although we were sensible enough not to become reliant on Russian energy, except very slightly.
    Although don't forget that cargoes are fungible. If it's both us and Germany bidding on LNG from the US, Qatar and Australia, then we're both going to be hit equally.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,590
    Omnium said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    Russia becoming rich was great. The problem was the wealth was expropriated by a group of corrupt colluding men.
    Russia becoming church-mouse poor is going to be better.
    I'd prefer a country moderately well off with a comfortable,.prosperous general population and gangster-driven wealth concentration.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    edited March 2022
    Theuniondivvie said:

    kle4 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    kle4 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    There was too the memory of the horrible historic crimes in the East too, and an understandable reluctance to be even slightly militaristic there.
    Spread on how long before the first squawking about the old, bad, militaristic Germany on the rise starts? As I recall that was a primary factor in the blessed Margaret being against German reunification.
    It's time to move on, even that was 30 years ago for Christ's sake. I think the squawking may be less than you expect.
    Get back to me when squawking about the return of the Soviet Union (which was..gasp..dissolved 30 years ago) stops. People tend to resort to sterile cliché, here as much as anywhere else.
    The Soviet Union cliche at least has some relevance, given Putin, while not ideologically a fan, is on record as lamenting its fall because of what it did to Russia, and his desire to expand Russia's sphere of influence in areas once covered by it is driving his actions right now.

    I am not a historical expert, but by comparison I am pretty sure there are additional elements at play in fears of German militarism which would not apply if they increase their defence spending to 2%, things like an aggressive government for a start. So your 'gasp' comment is just silly if you cannot figure out a difference between the two.

    I'm not saying there won't be squawking, but you like to trawl through twitter for examples of your opponent's idiotic comments (and why not, it is fun), but you surely know when it is a significant or representative opinion. And that does make a difference - if a Cabinet Minister or the First Minister says something it is more signidicant than if some random councillor in nowhereburg says something, and people trying to equate the two look like fools.

    Honestly, what is the problem here? I wasn't saying you need to move on, I was saying people in general need to, and that I am optimistic fewer will be fools than you think. I may be wrong, but we shall see. I can be optimistic about human nature occasionally.
    Er, no problem, you leaped in with a word salad in response to an observation that you say has some accuracy. Chill oot.
    Word salad is my default state, it denotes nothing. Chilling out is also good advice, if curious when you're getting pre-outraged and/or mocking about comments that haven't even happened yet! Perhaps we should both take your advice, and also wait for said comments in order to be chill?
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,243
    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    Russia becoming rich was great. The problem was the wealth was expropriated by a group of corrupt colluding men.
    Tragic. Why didn't I ever get the chance to become a corript oligarch in my 20s?
    Because you are a fundamentally decent human being.

    I’ve met many in my various peregrinations. I don’t like any of them.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,401
    IshmaelZ said:

    darkage said:

    The one thing about Ukraine that we may be overlooking is that it does have a part of the population that is Russian. We don't really know what they think about the current situation. Are they happy about starting talks to join the EU and being conscripted to fight the invading Russian Army? How representative is the government and the public face of Ukraine that we see in the western media?

    Apologies to peddle Kremlin talking points, but it does feel like we don't know very much about this country and make a lot of unexplored assumptions about it.

    In what sense Russian? A member of the Ukraine population is by definition Ukrainian. Russian-speaking doesn't alter that basic fact, and is there any evidence of anyone thinking it does?
    Almost every Ukrainian is a Russian speaker anyway.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,759
    mwadams said:

    Omnium said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    Russia becoming rich was great. The problem was the wealth was expropriated by a group of corrupt colluding men.
    Russia becoming church-mouse poor is going to be better.
    I'd prefer a country moderately well off with a comfortable,.prosperous general population and gangster-driven wealth concentration.
    Why do you want the latter?
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,915
    I just read a pair of tweets that made me really laugh. I haven't yet read any of the replies to the first tweet.

    Hannah
    @teaforpterosaur
    1pm
    Hang on is meatloaf just a massive sausage

    Hannah
    @teaforpterosaur
    8m
    Guys stop this if I meant Meat Loaf that's what I would have said
  • Gary_BurtonGary_Burton Posts: 737
    StuartDickson said:

    New Irish poll:

    Sinn Féin 33% (+9)
    Fine Gael 20% (-1)
    Fianna Fáil 17% (-5)
    Greens 5% (-2)
    Social Democrats 4% (+1)
    Labour 4 (nc)
    People Before Profit/Solidarity 3% (nc)
    Aontú 2 (nc)
    others/independents 11% (-3)

    (Red C/Business Post; 23 February 2022; 1,001; change from GE 2020)

    That is a terrible poll for both FG and FF even though Sinn Fein is 'only' on 33% . Would be nice to see some properly detailed seat/constituency projections.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,373
    BlancheLivermore said:

    I just read a pair of tweets that made me really laugh. I haven't yet read any of the replies to the first tweet.

    Hannah
    @teaforpterosaur
    1pm
    Hang on is meatloaf just a massive sausage

    Hannah
    @teaforpterosaur
    8m
    Guys stop this if I meant Meat Loaf that's what I would have said

    It looks like a big cock up.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153
    mwadams said:

    Omnium said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Germany, they made a massive fundamental mistake: they thought that by drawing Russia close to them, they would help pacify them. Trade would make Russia rich, and as Russia became richer it would become more peaceful.

    Russia becoming rich was great. The problem was the wealth was expropriated by a group of corrupt colluding men.
    Russia becoming church-mouse poor is going to be better.
    I'd prefer a country moderately well off with a comfortable,.prosperous general population and gangster-driven wealth concentration.
    Sorry.

    You want gangster driven wealth concentration?

    Are you secretly @HYUFD?
This discussion has been closed.