Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
And that is before they even get near to Kyiv.....
As I said earlier, I suspect Ukrainians are largely telling it how it is. They must have been expecting to be telling of much worse- and they may yet have to. But they are further distancing themselves from Russia - by giving straight-talking information about what is going on.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
$150 in the next week or so according to CNBC finance.
We will see.
Inflation is going to keep on going higher.
We’re going to keep testing central banker’s models.
Some of the inflation is a covid supply shock. Some of it is a russian supply shock. And some of it is “expectations”.
Only the last bit is responsive to interest rate rises.
Lucky we have Andrew Bailey at the helm.
Oh.
That's not true.
Raising interest rates increases the attractiveness of saving relative to spending, and therefore suppresses aggregate demand. Lower aggregate demand reduces demand for oil & gas and everything else.
Higher prices will reduce aggregate demand and thus reduce inflation. Oh, hold on.
Higher prices are inflation.
But there are two things at work here. One the higher prices mean that savings go less far, and therefore that aggregate demand falls. The other is that people expect inflation to continue and therefore seek to spend their cash now while it still has value.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
I’m afraid I with those who say that Spring starts March 20. March is, in the main, still a dreary month in the UK at least.
You can define the seasons on the basis of how dreary the weather is if you want, but if you were to do that systematically you wouldn't end up with dates that matched the solstices and the equinoxes, since they don't have a direct connection to how dreary the weather is.
Edward Lucas (Lib Dem candidate) has just said one solution would be for a Chinese peacekeeping force to replace the Russians. My thoughts are wtf?
How could you get the Ukrainians to accept troops from one of the world's most despotic regimes? And if the Russians have left what is the point of them being there anyway? I may have misunderstood.
Impose sanctions 83% (+5) Let refugees come UK 76% (+23) Send weapons 76% (+12) Obligation to help refugees 65% (+15) Troops to NATO E Europe 62% (+2) Strike Russia in Ukr 29% (+1) Troops to Ukr 26% (+1)
At what price do oil fields west of Shetland become economically viable?
They already are. I was the Operations Geologist drilling some of them.
Yeah... but what long term oil price assumption do you need in there to make it work? Is it $60, $80, or $100?
A lot less. On average around half the lowest figure you quote.
I remember back during the last oil price crash in the late 90s Christiane Amanpour was doing a piece on the Norwegian oil industry for CNN. At the time she quoted that the break even price for Statoil across their whole operation was $9 a barrel. And they operate in some of the most difficult waters in the world. I always remember that because I was sat on one of their rigs on Haltenbank between the North and Norwegian seas at the time drilling wells for Statoil
If Corbyn had won in 2019 and become PM the UK would almost certainly have abstained on the UN resolution tonight at the General Assembly rather than voted to condemn Russia's invasion as it has done on the Security Council and in the General Assembly
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
I suggest it will be months. How are they going to afford the kind of commitment needed to maintain the place? As Petraeus has said, how can you control a city when the vast majority of people don't want you there and when the troops probably don't want to be there either?
If Corbyn had won in 2019 and become PM the UK would almost certainly have abstained on the UN resolution tonight at the General Assembly rather than voted to condemn Russia's invasion as it has done on the Security Council and in the General Assembly
Edward Lucas (Lib Dem candidate) has just said one solution would be for a Chinese peacekeeping force to replace the Russians. My thoughts are wtf?
How could you get the Ukrainians to accept troops from one of the world's most despotic regimes? And if the Russians have left what is the point of them being there anyway? I may have misunderstood.
Ed Lucas is not just a Lib Dem candidate, he is an acknowledged expert in the region. The point is that the war is stopped, the Russians removed and the Chinese are on side, so it is not as ojutlandish as all that.
Edward Lucas (Lib Dem candidate) has just said one solution would be for a Chinese peacekeeping force to replace the Russians. My thoughts are wtf?
How could you get the Ukrainians to accept troops from one of the world's most despotic regimes? And if the Russians have left what is the point of them being there anyway? I may have misunderstood.
Operation Cyclone supplied a couple of thousand Stingers to Afghanistan's mujahideen, but that was over many years. If Russia occupies and defeats Ukraine they will be taking losses for years to come.
If Corbyn had won in 2019 and become PM the UK would almost certainly have abstained on the UN resolution tonight at the General Assembly rather than voted to condemn Russia's invasion as it has done on the Security Council and in the General Assembly
However crap, a liar and a cheat Boris is, the other option on the ballot was this man. The UK dodged a bullet.
Did you watch it? Corbyn opposed Russia's Chechen war while Putin was feted in London, and called out Russian donations to the Conservatives before it was fashionable. We need to guard against alternative histories, or "I'm ashamed to have voted for Boris but the other guy would have started ww3 or sold Buckingham Palace to the Kremlin".
At what price do oil fields west of Shetland become economically viable?
They already are. I was the Operations Geologist drilling some of them.
Yeah... but what long term oil price assumption do you need in there to make it work? Is it $60, $80, or $100?
A lot less. On average around half the lowest figure you quote.
I remember back during the last oil price crash in the late 90s Christiane Amanpour was doing a piece on the Norwegian oil industry for CNN. At the time she quoted that the break even price for Statoil across their whole operation was $9 a barrel. And they operate in some of the most difficult waters in the world. I always remember that because I was sat on one of their rigs on Haltenbank between the North and Norwegian seas at the time drilling wells for Statoil
We used to run economics at $12, $16 and $20. At $20, we used to be in clover.
I was doing a deal once and ran the numbers out to $45 a barrel. Showed them to the other side. How we all laughed....
Edward Lucas (Lib Dem candidate) has just said one solution would be for a Chinese peacekeeping force to replace the Russians. My thoughts are wtf?
How could you get the Ukrainians to accept troops from one of the world's most despotic regimes? And if the Russians have left what is the point of them being there anyway? I may have misunderstood.
The only peacekeeping duties needed will be in Russian territory.
My wife found this on a twitter feed and we hunted it down to a Ukrainian website. Thought it was of interest although all the normal warnings apply given its source.
If Corbyn had won in 2019 and become PM the UK would almost certainly have abstained on the UN resolution tonight at the General Assembly rather than voted to condemn Russia's invasion as it has done on the Security Council and in the General Assembly
However crap, a liar and a cheat Boris is, the other option on the ballot was this man. The UK dodged a bullet.
Did you watch it? Corbyn opposed Russia's Chechen war while Putin was feted in London, and called out Russian donations to the Conservatives before it was fashionable. We need to guard against alternative histories, or "I'm ashamed to have voted for Boris but the other guy would have started ww3 or sold Buckingham Palace to the Kremlin".
Yes, its appalling from Corbyn, with attempts to justify his crazy world view with nonsense.
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.
Sinn Féin 63 +26 Fine Gael 40 +6 Fianna Fáil 34 -3 Independents 8 -12 Social Democrats 5 -1 Green Party 3 -9 PBP/Solidarity 3 -2 Labour 3 -4 Aontú 1 nc Right2Change 0 -
Parliament has 160 members, so 81 needed for a majority.
So in other words the governing Fine Gael and Fianna Fail are on 74 and SF are on 63.
Add in the Independents to FG and FF and they have 82 seats and a majority
LOL.
Not the remotest chance.
The only stable coalition on those figures would be SF + FF, on the assumption that FF are much more likely to form a coalition with SF than FG.
Why would they do that when they are already in government with FG and could govern with them again with Independents.
FG and FF may even move closer to form one united party of the centre right in the Republic of Ireland with SF the main party of the left
The Independents are not a homogenous group. You'd never get all of them supporting the same government, and any prospective Taoiseach would have to be certifiable to entertain the possibility of relying on the Healy-Raes for support.
The suggestion is instant proof that you know nothing about Irish politics.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
I suggest it will be months. How are they going to afford the kind of commitment needed to maintain the place? As Petraeus has said, how can you control a city when the vast majority of people don't want you there and when the troops probably don't want to be there either?
The worry is as the military expert on Sky hypothesised that Russia will go back to their tried and trusted approach, encircle cities and bomb the crap out of them. That will also mean huge loss of life from Ukrainians.
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.
Sinn Féin 63 +26 Fine Gael 40 +6 Fianna Fáil 34 -3 Independents 8 -12 Social Democrats 5 -1 Green Party 3 -9 PBP/Solidarity 3 -2 Labour 3 -4 Aontú 1 nc Right2Change 0 -
Parliament has 160 members, so 81 needed for a majority.
So in other words the governing Fine Gael and Fianna Fail are on 74 and SF are on 63.
Add in the Independents to FG and FF and they have 82 seats and a majority
LOL.
Not the remotest chance.
The only stable coalition on those figures would be SF + FF, on the assumption that FF are much more likely to form a coalition with SF than FG.
Why would they do that when they are already in government with FG and could govern with them again with Independents.
FG and FF may even move closer to form one united party of the centre right in the Republic of Ireland with SF the main party of the left
The Independents are not a homogenous group. You'd never get all of them supporting the same government, and any prospective Taoiseach would have to be certifiable to entertain the possibility of relying on the Healy-Raes for support.
The suggestion is instant proof that you know nothing about Irish politics.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
When?
Don't you mean if?
If NATO can keep supplying munitions to Ukraine and if Russian troops can't do any more than get ensnared in a 40 mile traffic jam with no fuel, no food and no money, then who says Russia is going to win even the first stage of this conflict?
Richard_Tyndall said Whilst I do like Housman, my preference is for John Clare
The Spring comes in with all her hues and smells, In freshness breathing over hills and dells; O’er woods where May her gorgeous drapery flings, And meads washed fragrant by their laughing springs. Fresh are new opened flowers, untouched and free From the bold rifling of the amorous bee. The happy time of singing birds is come, And Love’s lone pilgrimage now finds a home; Among the mossy oaks now coos the dove, And the hoarse crow finds softer notes for love. The foxes play around their dens, and bark In joy’s excess, ’mid woodland shadows dark. The flowers join lips below; the leaves above; And every sound that meets the ear is Love.
Yes. Poems like that make me want to get out and blend with the countryside, just as Clare was inspired and calmed to do.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
When?
Don't you mean if?
If NATO can keep supplying munitions to Ukraine and if Russian troops can't do any more than get ensnared in a 40 mile traffic jam with no fuel, no food and no money, then who says Russia is going to win even the first stage of this conflict?
Every military expert I have seen on the media have said they balls up the initial invasion, but still made progress and will have encircled most of the major cities shortly. Then they will just pound the crap out of them. I don't think I have seen one who thinks that the Ukrainians can realistically hold off the Russia long term.
$150 in the next week or so according to CNBC finance.
We will see.
Inflation is going to keep on going higher.
We’re going to keep testing central banker’s models.
Some of the inflation is a covid supply shock. Some of it is a russian supply shock. And some of it is “expectations”.
Only the last bit is responsive to interest rate rises.
Lucky we have Andrew Bailey at the helm.
Oh.
That's not true.
Raising interest rates increases the attractiveness of saving relative to spending, and therefore suppresses aggregate demand. Lower aggregate demand reduces demand for oil & gas and everything else.
Higher prices will reduce aggregate demand and thus reduce inflation. Oh, hold on.
Higher prices are inflation.
But there are two things at work here. One the higher prices mean that savings go less far, and therefore that aggregate demand falls. The other is that people expect inflation to continue and therefore seek to spend their cash now while it still has value.
What is at work here is that *this* inflation is almost entirely due to supply-side factors, whether lost production of chips or the Russians playing silly beggars with gas. As Gardenwalker suggests, this is not the usual sort of inflation and so the textbook remedy of increasing interest rates is not useful. Warmer weather in spring and summer might do the trick though.
Impose sanctions 83% (+5) Let refugees come UK 76% (+23) Send weapons 76% (+12) Obligation to help refugees 65% (+15) Troops to NATO E Europe 62% (+2) Strike Russia in Ukr 29% (+1) Troops to Ukr 26% (+1)
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Moving Russian supplies by air and the transports and choppers are going to be crashing out the sky at an unsustainable rate. Because Stingers.
Moving Russian supplies by land and the lorries and tankers are going to be exploding in fireballs. Because Javelins, NLAws, whatever other exotic kit has been sent.
It's a good job Ukraine isn't a country the size of Fran.....oh.
At what price do oil fields west of Shetland become economically viable?
They already are. I was the Operations Geologist drilling some of them.
Yeah... but what long term oil price assumption do you need in there to make it work? Is it $60, $80, or $100?
A lot less. On average around half the lowest figure you quote.
I remember back during the last oil price crash in the late 90s Christiane Amanpour was doing a piece on the Norwegian oil industry for CNN. At the time she quoted that the break even price for Statoil across their whole operation was $9 a barrel. And they operate in some of the most difficult waters in the world. I always remember that because I was sat on one of their rigs on Haltenbank between the North and Norwegian seas at the time drilling wells for Statoil
Albeit the Norwegian tax system encourages you to take risks - they really move the variable cost element so its shared with their government.
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.
Sinn Féin 63 +26 Fine Gael 40 +6 Fianna Fáil 34 -3 Independents 8 -12 Social Democrats 5 -1 Green Party 3 -9 PBP/Solidarity 3 -2 Labour 3 -4 Aontú 1 nc Right2Change 0 -
Parliament has 160 members, so 81 needed for a majority.
So in other words the governing Fine Gael and Fianna Fail are on 74 and SF are on 63.
Add in the Independents to FG and FF and they have 82 seats and a majority
LOL.
Not the remotest chance.
The only stable coalition on those figures would be SF + FF, on the assumption that FF are much more likely to form a coalition with SF than FG.
Why would they do that when they are already in government with FG and could govern with them again with Independents.
FG and FF may even move closer to form one united party of the centre right in the Republic of Ireland with SF the main party of the left
The Independents are not a homogenous group. You'd never get all of them supporting the same government, and any prospective Taoiseach would have to be certifiable to entertain the possibility of relying on the Healy-Raes for support.
The suggestion is instant proof that you know nothing about Irish politics.
Given FG and FF are 11 seats ahead of SF they do not even need all Independents to back them.
The fact you are a leftwing SF supporter who gets annoyed when facts are pointed out to them does not change that. Ideologically too FG and FF are far closer to each other than SF now, hence they are both in government
Back from a most enjoyable evening at Smarkets. Excellent hospitality for which many thanks to Shadsy and OGH on good form. Aaron also said some very kind words and while we had to mingle with the flotsam and jetsam of pollsters and the like, a good time was had (and was still being had when I left) by all.
Edward Lucas (Lib Dem candidate) has just said one solution would be for a Chinese peacekeeping force to replace the Russians. My thoughts are wtf?
How could you get the Ukrainians to accept troops from one of the world's most despotic regimes? And if the Russians have left what is the point of them being there anyway? I may have misunderstood.
You could let them police the border once the Russians have left…
Impose sanctions 83% (+5) Let refugees come UK 76% (+23) Send weapons 76% (+12) Obligation to help refugees 65% (+15) Troops to NATO E Europe 62% (+2) Strike Russia in Ukr 29% (+1) Troops to Ukr 26% (+1)
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
I suggest it will be months. How are they going to afford the kind of commitment needed to maintain the place? As Petraeus has said, how can you control a city when the vast majority of people don't want you there and when the troops probably don't want to be there either?
The worry is as the military expert on Sky hypothesised that Russia will go back to their tried and trusted approach, encircle cities and bomb the crap out of them. That will also mean huge loss of life from Ukrainians.
It's possible. But they've been squeamish about civilian casualties so far. Would their own armed forces really do that? What is their air force doing? A few Turkish made drones could do a lot of damage to the big convoy.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
When?
Don't you mean if?
If NATO can keep supplying munitions to Ukraine and if Russian troops can't do any more than get ensnared in a 40 mile traffic jam with no fuel, no food and no money, then who says Russia is going to win even the first stage of this conflict?
Every military expert I have seen on the media have said they balls up the initial invasion, but still made progress and will have encircled most of the major cities shortly. Then they will just pound the crap out of them. I don't think I have seen one who thinks that the Ukrainians can realistically hold off the Russia long term.
I'm somewhat in between you guys: the Russians are still favourites, but it's not clear they will be able to hold the whole of the Ukraine. It's a long way to Lviv in the West, and Russian supply lines are rubbish. They also need to garrison cities once they capture them.
If the Ukrainians don't surrender, and the West keeps supplying the defenders with arms, then they will really be very stretched holding the whole country.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
When?
Don't you mean if?
If NATO can keep supplying munitions to Ukraine and if Russian troops can't do any more than get ensnared in a 40 mile traffic jam with no fuel, no food and no money, then who says Russia is going to win even the first stage of this conflict?
Every military expert I have seen on the media have said they balls up the initial invasion, but still made progress and will have encircled most of the major cities shortly. Then they will just pound the crap out of them. I don't think I have seen one who thinks that the Ukrainians can realistically hold off the Russia long term.
I am not a military expert by any means, but it seems to me some that are, are being very conservative in their predictions which errs to the side of saying that of course Russia will win this.
If they've already got issues of lacking food and logistics then that is only going to get worse, not better.
An army marches on its stomach and the Russians have serious concerns there. The Ukrainians may not need to hold off the Russians long term, if the Russians can't feed their troops.
If Corbyn had won in 2019 and become PM the UK would almost certainly have abstained on the UN resolution tonight at the General Assembly rather than voted to condemn Russia's invasion as it has done on the Security Council and in the General Assembly
However crap, a liar and a cheat Boris is, the other option on the ballot was this man. The UK dodged a bullet.
I just watched that video. Corbyn's solution to the war in Ukraine is to support the stop the war protests in Russia. It relies on an idea that, by renouncing war, humanity can ascend beyond it.
Is that really a bad idea? There should be space in our discourse for this view, even if I disagree with it. I wouldn't want him to be a significant decision maker of any kind though.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
16,000 German dead in Poland (!939) 27,000 German dead in France (1940)
The Germans invaded France with something like 3.5m men. 100k or so losses, and the French 200k or so with a million or so surrendering. (Obviously just look it up if you want the real numbers - just my recollection)
With the greatest of respect to the French I think the Ukrainians will fight harder (In my experiance they're a pretty cool bunch). I'd not imagine the UK would fight as hard either, although in both cases it'd never end.
My thoughts are that you now need more troops to hold down a populace. Many more.
Martial Law requires troops and the Russian troops are busy. If this is true then the collapse can not be long behind.
Navalnys tweet thread may be a clue:
12/12 Everything has a price, and now, in the spring of 2022, we must pay this price. There's no one to do it for us. Let's not "be against the war." Let's fight against the war.
Impose sanctions 83% (+5) Let refugees come UK 76% (+23) Send weapons 76% (+12) Obligation to help refugees 65% (+15) Troops to NATO E Europe 62% (+2) Strike Russia in Ukr 29% (+1) Troops to Ukr 26% (+1)
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.
Sinn Féin 63 +26 Fine Gael 40 +6 Fianna Fáil 34 -3 Independents 8 -12 Social Democrats 5 -1 Green Party 3 -9 PBP/Solidarity 3 -2 Labour 3 -4 Aontú 1 nc Right2Change 0 -
Parliament has 160 members, so 81 needed for a majority.
So in other words the governing Fine Gael and Fianna Fail are on 74 and SF are on 63.
Add in the Independents to FG and FF and they have 82 seats and a majority
LOL.
Not the remotest chance.
The only stable coalition on those figures would be SF + FF, on the assumption that FF are much more likely to form a coalition with SF than FG.
Why would they do that when they are already in government with FG and could govern with them again with Independents.
FG and FF may even move closer to form one united party of the centre right in the Republic of Ireland with SF the main party of the left
The Independents are not a homogenous group. You'd never get all of them supporting the same government, and any prospective Taoiseach would have to be certifiable to entertain the possibility of relying on the Healy-Raes for support.
The suggestion is instant proof that you know nothing about Irish politics.
Are the independent the Irish we were told about who’d be demanding to rejoin the United Kingdom?
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
I suggest it will be months. How are they going to afford the kind of commitment needed to maintain the place? As Petraeus has said, how can you control a city when the vast majority of people don't want you there and when the troops probably don't want to be there either?
The worry is as the military expert on Sky hypothesised that Russia will go back to their tried and trusted approach, encircle cities and bomb the crap out of them. That will also mean huge loss of life from Ukrainians.
It's possible. But they've been squeamish about civilian casualties so far. Would their own armed forces really do that? What is their air force doing? A few Turkish made drones could do a lot of damage to the big convoy.
They don't seem to be particular squeamish about employing this tactic in Mariupol. Kharkiv is getting the same treatment.
Heavy shelling of Mariupol leaves dozens injured, mayor says Fierce fighting is continuing around Mariupol, as Russian and Russian-backed separatist forces have surrounded the southern Ukrainian city of about 400,000 people on three sides.
Residents reported heavy shelling overnight, but Mariupol Mayor Vadym Boychenko said Ukrainian authorities were able to restore some mobile communications despite working as the city was being shelled and shot at.
Mariupol Mayor Vadym Boychenko said early Wednesday that the number of wounded civilians "is growing every day."
If Corbyn had won in 2019 and become PM the UK would almost certainly have abstained on the UN resolution tonight at the General Assembly rather than voted to condemn Russia's invasion as it has done on the Security Council and in the General Assembly
However crap, a liar and a cheat Boris is, the other option on the ballot was this man. The UK dodged a bullet.
I just watched that video. Corbyn's solution to the war in Ukraine is to support the stop the war protests in Russia. It relies on an idea that, by renouncing war, humanity can ascend beyond it.
Is that really a bad idea? There should be space in our discourse for this view, even if I disagree with it. I wouldn't want him to be a significant decision maker of any kind though.
That is the way this war ends, when the Russians turn on their masters. They do have form.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
I suggest it will be months. How are they going to afford the kind of commitment needed to maintain the place? As Petraeus has said, how can you control a city when the vast majority of people don't want you there and when the troops probably don't want to be there either?
The worry is as the military expert on Sky hypothesised that Russia will go back to their tried and trusted approach, encircle cities and bomb the crap out of them. That will also mean huge loss of life from Ukrainians.
It's possible. But they've been squeamish about civilian casualties so far. Would their own armed forces really do that? What is their air force doing? A few Turkish made drones could do a lot of damage to the big convoy.
They don't seem to be particular squeamish about employing this tactic in Mariupol.
Heavy shelling of Mariupol leaves dozens injured, mayor says Fierce fighting is continuing around Mariupol, as Russian and Russian-backed separatist forces have surrounded the southern Ukrainian city of about 400,000 people on three sides.
Residents reported heavy shelling overnight, but Mariupol Mayor Vadym Boychenko said Ukrainian authorities were able to restore some mobile communications despite working as the city was being shelled and shot at.
Mariupol Mayor Vadym Boychenko said early Wednesday that the number of wounded civilians "is growing every day."
Dozens injured while bad isn't pounding and levelling a city.
They're not doing anything, yet, like they did in Chechnya.
When the defenders are so heavily armed, that's still "squeamish" compared to what they'd need to do to suppress the defenders.
Impose sanctions 83% (+5) Let refugees come UK 76% (+23) Send weapons 76% (+12) Obligation to help refugees 65% (+15) Troops to NATO E Europe 62% (+2) Strike Russia in Ukr 29% (+1) Troops to Ukr 26% (+1)
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
When?
Don't you mean if?
If NATO can keep supplying munitions to Ukraine and if Russian troops can't do any more than get ensnared in a 40 mile traffic jam with no fuel, no food and no money, then who says Russia is going to win even the first stage of this conflict?
Every military expert I have seen on the media have said they balls up the initial invasion, but still made progress and will have encircled most of the major cities shortly. Then they will just pound the crap out of them. I don't think I have seen one who thinks that the Ukrainians can realistically hold off the Russia long term.
I'm somewhat in between you guys: the Russians are still favourites, but it's not clear they will be able to hold the whole of the Ukraine. It's a long way to Lviv in the West, and Russian supply lines are rubbish. They also need to garrison cities once they capture them.
If the Ukrainians don't surrender, and the West keeps supplying the defenders with arms, then they will really be very stretched holding the whole country.
That is why I said step 1. They can overrun 2-3 major cities and cut off the South, but then I don't think the Ukrainians are just going to give up, and it seems from the US they envision supplying an insurgency for years to come.
6,000 dead is implausible. 3,000 dead with another 3k having suffered injuries that will prevent them from fighting in this war again/deserted sounds more realistic.
Still an astonishing amount of attrition, and one that is surely not sustainable long term.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
I suggest it will be months. How are they going to afford the kind of commitment needed to maintain the place? As Petraeus has said, how can you control a city when the vast majority of people don't want you there and when the troops probably don't want to be there either?
The worry is as the military expert on Sky hypothesised that Russia will go back to their tried and trusted approach, encircle cities and bomb the crap out of them. That will also mean huge loss of life from Ukrainians.
It's possible. But they've been squeamish about civilian casualties so far. Would their own armed forces really do that? What is their air force doing? A few Turkish made drones could do a lot of damage to the big convoy.
They don't seem to be particular squeamish about employing this tactic in Mariupol.
Heavy shelling of Mariupol leaves dozens injured, mayor says Fierce fighting is continuing around Mariupol, as Russian and Russian-backed separatist forces have surrounded the southern Ukrainian city of about 400,000 people on three sides.
Residents reported heavy shelling overnight, but Mariupol Mayor Vadym Boychenko said Ukrainian authorities were able to restore some mobile communications despite working as the city was being shelled and shot at.
Mariupol Mayor Vadym Boychenko said early Wednesday that the number of wounded civilians "is growing every day."
Dozens injured while bad isn't pounding and levelling a city.
They're not doing anything, yet, like they did in Chechnya.
When the defenders are so heavily armed, that's still "squeamish" compared to what they'd need to do to suppress the defenders.
I didn't say they had gone full tonto yet. The military experts have said actually the initial idea was they could do this quickly and easily, with rapid attacks. But now they are starting to encircle cities and then they have the really big stuff being sent into Ukraine.
My point was more they don't seem squeamish about shelling civilian areas. They have met resistance and quickly moved to just bombard from the air.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
What the Russian government probably will be fretting over more is the amount of equipment, fuel, food and money that they've lost in that time, rather than the butcher's bill.
I think the ratio of wounded to dead is normally about 3-to-1, so if they do have 6,000 dead, they have 18,000 wounded, and then more captured. So you would be looking at 25,000+ soldiers no longer on the active duty list. That's a large proportion of their starting numbers for just one week in.
It's one reason why I find it hard to accept the number of Russian dead is yet that high. Can they really have lost that many?
Martial Law requires troops and the Russian troops are busy. If this is true then the collapse can not be long behind.
Navalnys tweet thread may be a clue:
12/12 Everything has a price, and now, in the spring of 2022, we must pay this price. There's no one to do it for us. Let's not "be against the war." Let's fight against the war.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
When?
Don't you mean if?
If NATO can keep supplying munitions to Ukraine and if Russian troops can't do any more than get ensnared in a 40 mile traffic jam with no fuel, no food and no money, then who says Russia is going to win even the first stage of this conflict?
Every military expert I have seen on the media have said they balls up the initial invasion, but still made progress and will have encircled most of the major cities shortly. Then they will just pound the crap out of them. I don't think I have seen one who thinks that the Ukrainians can realistically hold off the Russia long term.
They’ve been wrong before. And of course the war can, and quite possibly will take different courses east and west of the Dnieper - and/or in the north and south.
6,000 dead is implausible. 3,000 dead with another 3k having suffered injuries that will prevent them from fighting in this war again/deserted sounds more realistic.
Still an astonishing amount of attrition, and one that is surely not sustainable long term.
6,000 dead is implausible. 3,000 dead with another 3k having suffered injuries that will prevent them from fighting in this war again/deserted sounds more realistic.
Still an astonishing amount of attrition, and one that is surely not sustainable long term.
I don't think it's at all implausible. I think the Ukrainians are really trying to tell the true story. We've seen footage that would easily cover the 500 the Kremlin suggests. Battlefield reports will be a bit over, but unreported deaths are quite a big thing too. Russians are dieing, unrecorded, in woods.
6,000 dead is implausible. 3,000 dead with another 3k having suffered injuries that will prevent them from fighting in this war again/deserted sounds more realistic.
Still an astonishing amount of attrition, and one that is surely not sustainable long term.
I don't think it's at all implausible. I think the Ukrainians are really trying to tell the true story. We've seen footage that would easily cover the 500 the Kremlin suggests. Battlefield reports will be a bit over, but unreported deaths are quite a big thing too. Russians are dieing, unrecorded, in woods.
The truth is never likely to come out, considering the Russians have invested in mobile crematorium so they don't need to bring body bags home.
6,000 dead is implausible. 3,000 dead with another 3k having suffered injuries that will prevent them from fighting in this war again/deserted sounds more realistic.
Still an astonishing amount of attrition, and one that is surely not sustainable long term.
I don't think it's at all implausible. I think the Ukrainians are really trying to tell the true story. We've seen footage that would easily cover the 500 the Kremlin suggests. Battlefield reports will be a bit over, but unreported deaths are quite a big thing too. Russians are dieing, unrecorded, in woods.
Isn't it times or divide by 3 for real figures? So real figure is 1500-2000
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
When?
Don't you mean if?
If NATO can keep supplying munitions to Ukraine and if Russian troops can't do any more than get ensnared in a 40 mile traffic jam with no fuel, no food and no money, then who says Russia is going to win even the first stage of this conflict?
Every military expert I have seen on the media have said they balls up the initial invasion, but still made progress and will have encircled most of the major cities shortly. Then they will just pound the crap out of them. I don't think I have seen one who thinks that the Ukrainians can realistically hold off the Russia long term.
They’ve been wrong before. And of course the war can, and quite possibly will take different courses east and west of the Dnieper - and/or in the north and south.
We can but hope. Unfortunately, I think the only way this happens is that the resistance keeps it up, lots of Ukrainians will be killed in the meantime, but the loses the Russian take continue to be so substantial that the high command tell Putin we are significantly weakening our national defences.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
When?
Don't you mean if?
If NATO can keep supplying munitions to Ukraine and if Russian troops can't do any more than get ensnared in a 40 mile traffic jam with no fuel, no food and no money, then who says Russia is going to win even the first stage of this conflict?
Every military expert I have seen on the media have said they balls up the initial invasion, but still made progress and will have encircled most of the major cities shortly. Then they will just pound the crap out of them. I don't think I have seen one who thinks that the Ukrainians can realistically hold off the Russia long term.
I'm somewhat in between you guys: the Russians are still favourites, but it's not clear they will be able to hold the whole of the Ukraine. It's a long way to Lviv in the West, and Russian supply lines are rubbish. They also need to garrison cities once they capture them.
If the Ukrainians don't surrender, and the West keeps supplying the defenders with arms, then they will really be very stretched holding the whole country.
Yes, it doesn't seem as though it will be easy for Russia to hold any significant part of Ukraine that they didn't already have. Worse if the losses inflicted on Russia are significant they may even need to withdraw from areas their pet thugs held before all of this.
It's quite depressing to think that every fallen Russian conscript is someone's husband, brother, son or dad and yet the only way out of this is for Ukraine to inflict even greater losses. I really hope by the end of next week Putin is hanging from a lamppost outside the Kremlin and the new leader withdraws.
On the years to come narrative - how are Russians now going to afford a years long campaign when their economy is screwed. Putin survives due to a huge security state that he pays for. He won't be able to pay them anymore. Unless they take the Aleppo approach (heaven help us) they will be run out very very quickly.
6,000 dead is implausible. 3,000 dead with another 3k having suffered injuries that will prevent them from fighting in this war again/deserted sounds more realistic.
Still an astonishing amount of attrition, and one that is surely not sustainable long term.
I don't think it's at all implausible. I think the Ukrainians are really trying to tell the true story. We've seen footage that would easily cover the 500 the Kremlin suggests. Battlefield reports will be a bit over, but unreported deaths are quite a big thing too. Russians are dieing, unrecorded, in woods.
Isn't it times or divide by 3 for real figures? So real figure is 1500-2000
I wondered if there has been some mistranslation of the equivalent word to 'casualties'.
Martial Law requires troops and the Russian troops are busy. If this is true then the collapse can not be long behind.
Navalnys tweet thread may be a clue:
12/12 Everything has a price, and now, in the spring of 2022, we must pay this price. There's no one to do it for us. Let's not "be against the war." Let's fight against the war.
6,000 dead is implausible. 3,000 dead with another 3k having suffered injuries that will prevent them from fighting in this war again/deserted sounds more realistic.
Still an astonishing amount of attrition, and one that is surely not sustainable long term.
I don't think it's at all implausible. I think the Ukrainians are really trying to tell the true story. We've seen footage that would easily cover the 500 the Kremlin suggests. Battlefield reports will be a bit over, but unreported deaths are quite a big thing too. Russians are dieing, unrecorded, in woods.
Isn't it times or divide by 3 for real figures? So real figure is 1500-2000
If you're a Russian soldier in Ukraine how do you rate your life expectancy?
My guess would be that the Ukranian government's figures are about right.
On the years to come narrative - how are Russians now going to afford a years long campaign when their economy is screwed. Putin survives due to a huge security state that he pays for. He won't be able to pay them anymore. Unless they take the Aleppo approach (heaven help us) they will be run out very very quickly.
I guess here the key is China. On the face of it, a war is bad for business, when the global supply chain is already messed up. But loaning Russia money, like they do in Africa, that might be rather tempting. Also China don't have any issue doing business with dodgy regimes under the table, like they do with North Korea (often via Russia).
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.
Sinn Féin 63 +26 Fine Gael 40 +6 Fianna Fáil 34 -3 Independents 8 -12 Social Democrats 5 -1 Green Party 3 -9 PBP/Solidarity 3 -2 Labour 3 -4 Aontú 1 nc Right2Change 0 -
Parliament has 160 members, so 81 needed for a majority.
So in other words the governing Fine Gael and Fianna Fail are on 74 and SF are on 63.
Add in the Independents to FG and FF and they have 82 seats and a majority
LOL.
Not the remotest chance.
The only stable coalition on those figures would be SF + FF, on the assumption that FF are much more likely to form a coalition with SF than FG.
Why would they do that when they are already in government with FG and could govern with them again with Independents.
FG and FF may even move closer to form one united party of the centre right in the Republic of Ireland with SF the main party of the left
The Independents are not a homogenous group. You'd never get all of them supporting the same government, and any prospective Taoiseach would have to be certifiable to entertain the possibility of relying on the Healy-Raes for support.
The suggestion is instant proof that you know nothing about Irish politics.
Given FG and FF are 11 seats ahead of SF they do not even need all Independents to back them.
The fact you are a leftwing SF supporter who gets annoyed when facts are pointed out to them does not change that. Ideologically too FG and FF are far closer to each other than SF now, hence they are both in government
I'm not a left-wing SF supporter. If I was voting in an Irish election my initial choices on the ballot would most likely be the Greens, SocDems and Labour (not sure in what order), and I'm not sure if I would include SF lower down in my preference list at all - some of the stories about the way in which they treat party members who "step out of line" have me a bit concerned about their lack of tolerance for dissent.
If there wasn't a coalition between FF and SF there would soon be another election.
Around 6000 Russians killed in Ukraine so far. “two Western officials tell @NBCNews that about 5,800 Russians have been killed, a number in line with Ukraine’s estimates.” @JoshNBCNews
Of course, the Germans lost 40,000 when they invaded Poland.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
6000 in a week and they aren't even close to winning step 1. When they do finally overrun Ukraine major cities they then will be losing regular numbers of soldiers to insurgents for years to come.
When?
Don't you mean if?
If NATO can keep supplying munitions to Ukraine and if Russian troops can't do any more than get ensnared in a 40 mile traffic jam with no fuel, no food and no money, then who says Russia is going to win even the first stage of this conflict?
Every military expert I have seen on the media have said they balls up the initial invasion, but still made progress and will have encircled most of the major cities shortly. Then they will just pound the crap out of them. I don't think I have seen one who thinks that the Ukrainians can realistically hold off the Russia long term.
I'm somewhat in between you guys: the Russians are still favourites, but it's not clear they will be able to hold the whole of the Ukraine. It's a long way to Lviv in the West, and Russian supply lines are rubbish. They also need to garrison cities once they capture them.
If the Ukrainians don't surrender, and the West keeps supplying the defenders with arms, then they will really be very stretched holding the whole country.
Yes, it doesn't seem as though it will be easy for Russia to hold any significant part of Ukraine that they didn't already have. Worse if the losses inflicted on Russia are significant they may even need to withdraw from areas their pet thugs held before all of this.
It's quite depressing to think that every fallen Russian conscript is someone's husband, brother, son or dad and yet the only way out of this is for Ukraine to inflict even greater losses. I really hope by the end of next week Putin is hanging from a lamppost outside the Kremlin and the new leader withdraws.
The question is what happens to the person who kills Putin? Since fear of Putin is the only thing that keeps people in line what would be the harm in killing him?
I’m upset we’ve not had any more photos of Vlad’s supersized table collection today.
Because he's Billy No-mates.
And they only went into Ukraine because somebody mentioned to Putin that they had the biggest table in the world there....
Putin should take up snooker. He’d love it. Big table. Careful positioning required. More reds than yellows and blue. He might even learn to speak softly and carry a big stick.
Whatever the exact number of loses for Russia in terms of men and equipment, I think it is very clear it is much higher than their initial projections.
If Corbyn had won in 2019 and become PM the UK would almost certainly have abstained on the UN resolution tonight at the General Assembly rather than voted to condemn Russia's invasion as it has done on the Security Council and in the General Assembly
However crap, a liar and a cheat Boris is, the other option on the ballot was this man. The UK dodged a bullet.
I just watched that video. Corbyn's solution to the war in Ukraine is to support the stop the war protests in Russia. It relies on an idea that, by renouncing war, humanity can ascend beyond it.
Is that really a bad idea? There should be space in our discourse for this view, even if I disagree with it. I wouldn't want him to be a significant decision maker of any kind though. which
His attitude which strongly implied equivalence between Russia and Ukraine was particularly offensive to me.
I’m upset we’ve not had any more photos of Vlad’s supersized table collection today.
Because he's Billy No-mates.
And they only went into Ukraine because somebody mentioned to Putin that they had the biggest table in the world there....
Putin should take up snooker. He’d love it. Big table. Careful positioning required. More reds than yellows and blue. He might.even learn to speak softly and carry a big stick.
On the years to come narrative - how are Russians now going to afford a years long campaign when their economy is screwed. Putin survives due to a huge security state that he pays for. He won't be able to pay them anymore. Unless they take the Aleppo approach (heaven help us) they will be run out very very quickly.
I guess here the key is China. On the face of it, a war is bad for business, when the global supply chain is already messed up. But loaning Russia money, like they do in Africa, that might be rather tempting. Also China don't have any issue doing business with dodgy regimes under the table, like they do with North Korea (often via Russia).
Russia has money. They have massive USD reserves they saved up just for this.
The problem they have is that no-one will sell them stuff. So, those oil wells are dependent on Schlumberger and Halliburton kit: without it, output starts to dip.
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.
Sinn Féin 63 +26 Fine Gael 40 +6 Fianna Fáil 34 -3 Independents 8 -12 Social Democrats 5 -1 Green Party 3 -9 PBP/Solidarity 3 -2 Labour 3 -4 Aontú 1 nc Right2Change 0 -
Parliament has 160 members, so 81 needed for a majority.
So in other words the governing Fine Gael and Fianna Fail are on 74 and SF are on 63.
Add in the Independents to FG and FF and they have 82 seats and a majority
LOL.
Not the remotest chance.
The only stable coalition on those figures would be SF + FF, on the assumption that FF are much more likely to form a coalition with SF than FG.
Why would they do that when they are already in government with FG and could govern with them again with Independents.
FG and FF may even move closer to form one united party of the centre right in the Republic of Ireland with SF the main party of the left
The Independents are not a homogenous group. You'd never get all of them supporting the same government, and any prospective Taoiseach would have to be certifiable to entertain the possibility of relying on the Healy-Raes for support.
The suggestion is instant proof that you know nothing about Irish politics.
Are the independent the Irish we were told about who’d be demanding to rejoin the United Kingdom?
They're all sorts. Some of them are ex-FF or FG who manage to have enough of a personal vote to hold on. Some of them have made a career out of being local champions who can win money for their client vote (I think this type are all pub owners). It's a real mix, and the idea that HYUFD can slot them in to support his favoured coalition is *almost* as silly as basing your season start and end dates on the solstices and equinoxes.
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.
Sinn Féin 63 +26 Fine Gael 40 +6 Fianna Fáil 34 -3 Independents 8 -12 Social Democrats 5 -1 Green Party 3 -9 PBP/Solidarity 3 -2 Labour 3 -4 Aontú 1 nc Right2Change 0 -
Parliament has 160 members, so 81 needed for a majority.
So in other words the governing Fine Gael and Fianna Fail are on 74 and SF are on 63.
Add in the Independents to FG and FF and they have 82 seats and a majority
LOL.
Not the remotest chance.
The only stable coalition on those figures would be SF + FF, on the assumption that FF are much more likely to form a coalition with SF than FG.
Why would they do that when they are already in government with FG and could govern with them again with Independents.
FG and FF may even move closer to form one united party of the centre right in the Republic of Ireland with SF the main party of the left
The Independents are not a homogenous group. You'd never get all of them supporting the same government, and any prospective Taoiseach would have to be certifiable to entertain the possibility of relying on the Healy-Raes for support.
The suggestion is instant proof that you know nothing about Irish politics.
Given FG and FF are 11 seats ahead of SF they do not even need all Independents to back them.
The fact you are a leftwing SF supporter who gets annoyed when facts are pointed out to them does not change that. Ideologically too FG and FF are far closer to each other than SF now, hence they are both in government
I'm not a left-wing SF supporter. If I was voting in an Irish election my initial choices on the ballot would most likely be the Greens, SocDems and Labour (not sure in what order), and I'm not sure if I would include SF lower down in my preference list at all - some of the stories about the way in which they treat party members who "step out of line" have me a bit concerned about their lack of tolerance for dissent.
If there wasn't a coalition between FF and SF there would soon be another election.
A FG and FF and SocDem and some Independents deal is more likely.
In fact within 10 years FF and FG may merge to form a new centre right party v SF. Given they no longer are the first and second party in Ireland and ideologically there was never much difference between them anyway bar FG was a little more economically liberal and FF a little more socially conservative, that would make sense
6,000 dead is implausible. 3,000 dead with another 3k having suffered injuries that will prevent them from fighting in this war again/deserted sounds more realistic.
Still an astonishing amount of attrition, and one that is surely not sustainable long term.
I don't think it's at all implausible. I think the Ukrainians are really trying to tell the true story. We've seen footage that would easily cover the 500 the Kremlin suggests. Battlefield reports will be a bit over, but unreported deaths are quite a big thing too. Russians are dieing, unrecorded, in woods.
Isn't it times or divide by 3 for real figures? So real figure is 1500-2000
I wondered if there has been some mistranslation of the equivalent word to 'casualties'.
Russian "casualties" are those who ceased to have a pulse since the numbers were collated....
Whatever the exact number of loses for Russia in terms of men and equipment, I think it is very clear it is much higher than their initial projections.
On the years to come narrative - how are Russians now going to afford a years long campaign when their economy is screwed. Putin survives due to a huge security state that he pays for. He won't be able to pay them anymore. Unless they take the Aleppo approach (heaven help us) they will be run out very very quickly.
I guess here the key is China. On the face of it, a war is bad for business, when the global supply chain is already messed up. But loaning Russia money, like they do in Africa, that might be rather tempting. Also China don't have any issue doing business with dodgy regimes under the table, like they do with North Korea (often via Russia).
Russia has money. They have massive USD reserves they saved up just for this.
The problem they have is that no-one will sell them stuff. So, those oil wells are dependent on Schlumberger and Halliburton kit: without it, output starts to dip.
Some very shaken Russians out there. The sanctions have only been hitting for a day or so and the situation is already quite bad, the banks are on their knees and no payment system is working. The Russian economy is coming to a standstill, all contracts void and no money in or out. The revenge of Western Capitalism has been next level in how to crush a medium sized power. There is real shell shock. There is still the possibility that the gas contracts with Germany are concelled and then there will be no foreign exchange at all and that will bring total chaos.
The vote in the UN was another utter disaster and has rammed home the effective cancellation of Russia around the planet. Eritrea, North Korea, Belarus and Syria are all basket cases and it is a complete diplomatic rout for Russia.
Meanwhile the Ukrainians are not only holding on, but actually able to mount offensive operations, albeit limited. Hundreds of Stingers will end any advantage Russia has in the air, and soon the long range artilliary that is pounding Kharkhiv will itself come under attack. The steady flow of kit and other support for the Ukrainians is gathering force, even as the Russian forces face increasing problems in the north and east. The longer "the column" is stationary the closer we are getting to a what could become a comprehensive defeat of Russian forces. They are two days away from Kyiv, but have been now for four days.
Navalny´s call for protest will have an impact. We watch and pray, but something big seems to be brewing across the border.
< I guess here the key is China. On the face of it, a war is bad for business, when the global supply chain is already messed up. But loaning Russia money, like they do in Africa, that might be rather tempting. Also China don't have any issue doing business with dodgy regimes under the table, like they do with North Korea (often via Russia).
We were discussing this at the PB "do" this evening.
This is a real opportunity for Xi - IF he can broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine (even if that involves splashing the Chinese cash freely) he will emerge with a seriously enhanced reputation.
That could also open the door for a genuine Sino-American rapprochement in the Pacific or at least a toning down of the Taiwan rhetoric which may not be comfortable for Pyongyang (one of the "naughty five"). At the very least, we may be at the dawn of a new bi-polar world order with the Americans and Chinese facing each other (hopefully in amity) in the Pacific and poor old Eurasia, for the first time in centuries, on the wrong side of the world.
There's also the question of Eritrea, another country on the naughty step. Will we see a more concerted effort against that deeply unpleasant regime of Afwerki perhaps involving direct military aid to Ethiopia and Tigray?
Some very shaken Russians out there. The sanctions have only been hitting for a day or so and the situation is already quite bad, the banks are on their knees and no payment system is working. The Russian economy is coming to a standstill, all contracts void and no money in or out. The revenge of Western Capitalism has been next level in how to crush a medium sized power. There is real shell shock. There is still the possibility that the gas contracts with Germany are concelled and then there will be no foreign exchange at all and that will bring total chaos.
The vote in the UN was another utter disaster and has rammed home the effective cancellation of Russia around the planet. Eritrea, North Korea, Belarus and Syria are all basket cases and it is a complete diplomatic rout for Russia.
Meanwhile the Ukrainians are not only holding on, but actually able to mount offensive operations, albeit limited. Hundreds of Stingers will end any advantage Russia has in the air, and soon the long range artilliary that is pounding Kharkhiv will itself come under attack. The steady flow of kit and other support for the Ukrainians is gathering force, even as the Russian forces face increasing problems in the north and east. The longer "the column" is stationary the closer we are getting to a what could become a comprehensive defeat of Russian forces. They are two days away from Kyiv, but have been now for four days.
Navalny´s call for protest will have an impact. We watch and pray, but something big seems to be brewing across the border.
It seems to me those convoy troops must be getting rather fed up, and cold. How motivated will they be when they get there?
Some very shaken Russians out there. The sanctions have only been hitting for a day or so and the situation is already quite bad, the banks are on their knees and no payment system is working. The Russian economy is coming to a standstill, all contracts void and no money in or out. The revenge of Western Capitalism has been next level in how to crush a medium sized power. There is real shell shock. There is still the possibility that the gas contracts with Germany are concelled and then there will be no foreign exchange at all and that will bring total chaos.
The vote in the UN was another utter disaster and has rammed home the effective cancellation of Russia around the planet. Eritrea, North Korea, Belarus and Syria are all basket cases and it is a complete diplomatic rout for Russia.
Meanwhile the Ukrainians are not only holding on, but actually able to mount offensive operations, albeit limited. Hundreds of Stingers will end any advantage Russia has in the air, and soon the long range artilliary that is pounding Kharkhiv will itself come under attack. The steady flow of kit and other support for the Ukrainians is gathering force, even as the Russian forces face increasing problems in the north and east. The longer "the column" is stationary the closer we are getting to a what could become a comprehensive defeat of Russian forces. They are two days away from Kyiv, but have been now for four days.
Navalny´s call for protest will have an impact. We watch and pray, but something big seems to be brewing across the border.
It seems to me those convoy troops must be getting rather fed up, and cold. How motivated will they be when they get there?
On the years to come narrative - how are Russians now going to afford a years long campaign when their economy is screwed. Putin survives due to a huge security state that he pays for. He won't be able to pay them anymore. Unless they take the Aleppo approach (heaven help us) they will be run out very very quickly.
I guess here the key is China. On the face of it, a war is bad for business, when the global supply chain is already messed up. But loaning Russia money, like they do in Africa, that might be rather tempting. Also China don't have any issue doing business with dodgy regimes under the table, like they do with North Korea (often via Russia).
Russia has money. They have massive USD reserves they saved up just for this.
The problem they have is that no-one will sell them stuff. So, those oil wells are dependent on Schlumberger and Halliburton kit: without it, output starts to dip.
Have the Chinese not stolen their tech yet?
It's not just the tech, it's the trained operators. (Plus the Chinese don't really have a big indigenous oil industry, so they haven't had the feedback loops.)
The reality is that oil services is dominated by the US, with the UK, France and Norway all having decent but subsidiary roles. (And Schlumberger is largely American now anyway, so you might really say it's the US for on-shore, Norway for off-shore, and us with some decent stuff around the edges.)
Comments
As I said earlier, I suspect Ukrainians are largely telling it how it is. They must have been expecting to be telling of much worse- and they may yet have to. But they are further distancing themselves from Russia - by giving straight-talking information about what is going on.
Armies were bigger then, mind.
But there are two things at work here. One the higher prices mean that savings go less far, and therefore that aggregate demand falls. The other is that people expect inflation to continue and therefore seek to spend their cash now while it still has value.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1499137668332101647
How could you get the Ukrainians to accept troops from one of the world's most despotic regimes? And if the Russians have left what is the point of them being there anyway? I may have misunderstood.
I remember back during the last oil price crash in the late 90s Christiane Amanpour was doing a piece on the Norwegian oil industry for CNN. At the time she quoted that the break even price for Statoil across their whole operation was $9 a barrel. And they operate in some of the most difficult waters in the world. I always remember that because I was sat on one of their rigs on Haltenbank between the North and Norwegian seas at the time drilling wells for Statoil
I was doing a deal once and ran the numbers out to $45 a barrel. Showed them to the other side. How we all laughed....
https://informnapalm.org/en/jan13-russia-generals/
The suggestion is instant proof that you know nothing about Irish politics.
Don't you mean if?
If NATO can keep supplying munitions to Ukraine and if Russian troops can't do any more than get ensnared in a 40 mile traffic jam with no fuel, no food and no money, then who says Russia is going to win even the first stage of this conflict?
Whilst I do like Housman, my preference is for John Clare
The Spring comes in with all her hues and smells,
In freshness breathing over hills and dells;
O’er woods where May her gorgeous drapery flings,
And meads washed fragrant by their laughing springs.
Fresh are new opened flowers, untouched and free
From the bold rifling of the amorous bee.
The happy time of singing birds is come,
And Love’s lone pilgrimage now finds a home;
Among the mossy oaks now coos the dove,
And the hoarse crow finds softer notes for love.
The foxes play around their dens, and bark
In joy’s excess, ’mid woodland shadows dark.
The flowers join lips below; the leaves above;
And every sound that meets the ear is Love.
Yes. Poems like that make me want to get out and blend with the countryside, just as Clare was inspired and calmed to do.
27,000 German dead in France (1940)
Moving Russian supplies by land and the lorries and tankers are going to be exploding in fireballs. Because Javelins, NLAws, whatever other exotic kit has been sent.
It's a good job Ukraine isn't a country the size of Fran.....oh.
In the UK, it's nowhere near as sensible.
The fact you are a leftwing SF supporter who gets annoyed when facts are pointed out to them does not change that. Ideologically too FG and FF are far closer to each other than SF now, hence they are both in government
Back from a most enjoyable evening at Smarkets. Excellent hospitality for which many thanks to Shadsy and OGH on good form. Aaron also said some very kind words and while we had to mingle with the flotsam and jetsam of pollsters and the like, a good time was had (and was still being had when I left) by all.
Voters are thick.
If the Ukrainians don't surrender, and the West keeps supplying the defenders with arms, then they will really be very stretched holding the whole country.
If they've already got issues of lacking food and logistics then that is only going to get worse, not better.
An army marches on its stomach and the Russians have serious concerns there. The Ukrainians may not need to hold off the Russians long term, if the Russians can't feed their troops.
Is that really a bad idea? There should be space in our discourse for this view, even if I disagree with it. I wouldn't want him to be a significant decision maker of any kind though.
With the greatest of respect to the French I think the Ukrainians will fight harder (In my experiance they're a pretty cool bunch). I'd not imagine the UK would fight as hard either, although in both cases it'd never end.
My thoughts are that you now need more troops to hold down a populace. Many more.
12/12 Everything has a price, and now, in the spring of 2022, we must pay this price. There's no one to do it for us. Let's not "be against the war." Let's fight against the war.
https://twitter.com/navalny/status/1498949516778774529?t=2EU4M2xed7kt_UbW3ONf0Q&s=19
Heavy shelling of Mariupol leaves dozens injured, mayor says
Fierce fighting is continuing around Mariupol, as Russian and Russian-backed separatist forces have surrounded the southern Ukrainian city of about 400,000 people on three sides.
Residents reported heavy shelling overnight, but Mariupol Mayor Vadym Boychenko said Ukrainian authorities were able to restore some mobile communications despite working as the city was being shelled and shot at.
Mariupol Mayor Vadym Boychenko said early Wednesday that the number of wounded civilians "is growing every day."
They're not doing anything, yet, like they did in Chechnya.
When the defenders are so heavily armed, that's still "squeamish" compared to what they'd need to do to suppress the defenders.
Don't interrupt your enemy when he's making mistakes... and oh he's making mistakes.
Still an astonishing amount of attrition, and one that is surely not sustainable long term.
My point was more they don't seem squeamish about shelling civilian areas. They have met resistance and quickly moved to just bombard from the air.
It's one reason why I find it hard to accept the number of Russian dead is yet that high. Can they really have lost that many?
And of course the war can, and quite possibly will take different courses east and west of the Dnieper - and/or in the north and south.
And they only went into Ukraine because somebody mentioned to Putin that they had the biggest table in the world there....
It's quite depressing to think that every fallen Russian conscript is someone's husband, brother, son or dad and yet the only way out of this is for Ukraine to inflict even greater losses. I really hope by the end of next week Putin is hanging from a lamppost outside the Kremlin and the new leader withdraws.
https://navalny.com/
My guess would be that the Ukranian government's figures are about right.
If there wasn't a coalition between FF and SF there would soon be another election.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1499148337613881350?s=20&t=61XuAGCjLGIrIrEtt0DeAw
The problem they have is that no-one will sell them stuff. So, those oil wells are dependent on Schlumberger and Halliburton kit: without it, output starts to dip.
In fact within 10 years FF and FG may merge to form a new centre right party v SF. Given they no longer are the first and second party in Ireland and ideologically there was never much difference between them anyway bar FG was a little more economically liberal and FF a little more socially conservative, that would make sense
The vote in the UN was another utter disaster and has rammed home the effective cancellation of Russia around the planet. Eritrea, North Korea, Belarus and Syria are all basket cases and it is a complete diplomatic rout for Russia.
Meanwhile the Ukrainians are not only holding on, but actually able to mount offensive operations, albeit limited. Hundreds of Stingers will end any advantage Russia has in the air, and soon the long range artilliary that is pounding Kharkhiv will itself come under attack. The steady flow of kit and other support for the Ukrainians is gathering force, even as the Russian forces face increasing problems in the north and east. The longer "the column" is stationary the closer we are getting to a what could become a comprehensive defeat of Russian forces. They are two days away from Kyiv, but have been now for four days.
Navalny´s call for protest will have an impact. We watch and pray, but something big seems to be brewing across the border.
This is a real opportunity for Xi - IF he can broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine (even if that involves splashing the Chinese cash freely) he will emerge with a seriously enhanced reputation.
That could also open the door for a genuine Sino-American rapprochement in the Pacific or at least a toning down of the Taiwan rhetoric which may not be comfortable for Pyongyang (one of the "naughty five"). At the very least, we may be at the dawn of a new bi-polar world order with the Americans and Chinese facing each other (hopefully in amity) in the Pacific and poor old Eurasia, for the first time in centuries, on the wrong side of the world.
There's also the question of Eritrea, another country on the naughty step. Will we see a more concerted effort against that deeply unpleasant regime of Afwerki perhaps involving direct military aid to Ethiopia and Tigray?
The reality is that oil services is dominated by the US, with the UK, France and Norway all having decent but subsidiary roles. (And Schlumberger is largely American now anyway, so you might really say it's the US for on-shore, Norway for off-shore, and us with some decent stuff around the edges.)