Labour 40% (+2) Conservative 37% (+2) Liberal Democrat 10% (-2) Green 5% (–) Scottish National Party 4% (-1) Reform UK 2% (-2) Other 1% (–)
Changes +/- 28 Feb Redfield and Wilton
If the Tories can't get ahead during a war, when can they?
Of course they can. Wars are probably the best type of circumstance for the Tories, as strange as that may sound. The Falklands War was the event that pushed the Tories up from 3rd to 1st place at that time.
Did it, the Tories led with Mori and Gallup before the invasion.
Ahghhhhh....Reports of "Truckloads of Ukrainian Aid stuck in UK due to post-Brexit paperwork: charity workers who are trying to send aid to people in war-torn Ukraine say their donations are spending days stuck at Dover due to complex post-Brexit checks." (PoliticsHome) https://twitter.com/militaryhistori/status/1500889381166587904
Why are they in trucks in Dover
They should be airlifted direct to Poland
The sane approach would be to send money and purchase everything from Poland and or Germany / Surrounding countries.
The second approach is then to ship the stuff by lorry as that is cheaper than air freight.
The head of a charity actually made that point that by donating £40 they would have an immediate impact
And if humanitarian aid convoys are being held by red tape then the EU should exempt such convoys
It is HMRC holding them - and indeed every truck - up, not the EU. The sheer length of time it takes our customs to do our checks is why Dover gridlocks as it does.
But, seriously, the trend for Boris looks quite promising (for him) judging by a quick scan I had of the figures. I think that is worrying because for everyone's sakes he really needs to go. But it just ain't happening is it?
I'm not brave enough to predict he definitely fights the 2024 election but I cannot see how he departs before summer 2023 (May 2023 elections are admittedly a much more pivotal set of elections for the Tories).
Boris has risen from -31 to -7 (+24) in two weeks and Rishi is +15 (+12)
That's an incredible surge for Boris. Is he actually going to shrug off Partygate?
I guess a huge war in Europe, and potential nuclear apocalypse, is the kind of thing that might just do that. And he is having a good war. Involved, animated, sensible
I suspect some of the hysterical shrieking about Ukrainian refugees cruelly stuck in, er, France, by Bojo's insane Nazism, is actually sublimated anger that Boris seems to be escaping his Nemesis
Wishful thinking on your part. He is still shit, he is still compromised. His humiliation and defenestration is as certain as Putin's, it is just a question, as it is with Putin, as to how long it will take. Putin is likely to be hanging from a lamp post or condemned to a dingey apartment in Vladivostok, whereas Bozo will be condemned to doing after dinner speeches about Peppa Pig to hostile and incredulous pensioners. Not sure which is worse.
Perhaps indeed we are close to my suggested “deal”.
Secession of Crimea. Agreement not to join NATO. Some kind of deal in the Donbas (beefed up federal status and perhaps plebiscites on independence).
It's been proposed from the beginning, and is clearly more achievable than the broader stated goals of the Russians. The last one is tricky for both - from Ukraine it effectively gives up those areas for ever, since its not like Russia would permit a plebescite it would not win, and for Russia it requires them to reverse their recognition of the areas as independent (a minor concession, given they would still be de facto independent, but would still be a formal reversal).
"⚡️Ukraine: Russians shoot fake video in Chornobyl.
Ukraine’s state company Energoatom said that after the Chornobyl plant staff refused to participate, the invaders filmed their troops dressed in the uniform of the French company Novarka, which had left the zone in 2020."
Nuclear weapon lies coming I guess. Every aspect of the russian operation has been so sloppy.
They just keep coming: "#UkraineRussianWar: The Russian military is so incompetent it releases footage of Su-34 ‘24’ taking off for a new sortie a day after it was shot down over Ukraine." https://twitter.com/oryxspioenkop/status/1500902154994921476
Crikey, if the Russians can't even get their disinformatsiya right, they really are in trouble!
Ahghhhhh....Reports of "Truckloads of Ukrainian Aid stuck in UK due to post-Brexit paperwork: charity workers who are trying to send aid to people in war-torn Ukraine say their donations are spending days stuck at Dover due to complex post-Brexit checks." (PoliticsHome) https://twitter.com/militaryhistori/status/1500889381166587904
Why are they in trucks in Dover
They should be airlifted direct to Poland
The sane approach would be to send money and purchase everything from Poland and or Germany / Surrounding countries.
The second approach is then to ship the stuff by lorry as that is cheaper than air freight.
The head of a charity actually made that point that by donating £40 they would have an immediate impact
And if humanitarian aid convoys are being held by red tape then the EU should exempt such convoys
It is HMRC holding them - and indeed every truck - up, not the EU. The sheer length of time it takes our customs to do our checks is why Dover gridlocks as it does.
This is humanitarian aid and should be waved through
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
Ah, so we shouldn't stand up to dictators invading other countries, because it might lead to (temporarily) higher costs for consumers.
I fear a more common view that we'd like. Few so direct though.
It's hilarious how these pro-Russian posters are cycling through PB, lasting about three days each before getting humiliated. Do we really believe they are different people?
This particular forum is genuinely unusual, in both the level of debate, intellectual curiosity and longevity of posters.
A Russian bot sticks out like a sore thumb here, in a way they don’t in most other forums.
I, like many others, have been dismayed at some of the reports about how the UK is managing Ukrainian refugees. If Priti Patel really has screwed this up in the way it has been reported then she needs to be removed ASAP. Emergencies like this soon sort the wheat from the chaff.
Fortunately, it doesn't seem to be affecting the positive way UK is seen in Ukraine itself, where the early efforts to support, supply and train seem to be appreciated. Looks like that investment was well worth it, to say the least.
It isn't if. Its a fact. We are not letting refugees in without an approved visa which they have to complete somewhere else. This is a unique way to handle refugees where HM Border Force turn away people fleeing the war and stop them coming to stay with friends / relatives.
Ah, there you go again, pretending that the situation of people in Ukraine trying to get into Poland is identical to people in France trying to get into the UK.
Every country in Europe, not just Poland.
If you think the forrin should be kept away that's fine - Patel is doing this for you. Some of us have humanity still.
No she isn't. She has completely failed to stop immigration. We haven't even got to the point of being able to distinguish between the immigrants we want and the immigrants we don't.
Listen to Sir Edward Leigh. A stack of people don't want *any* immigrants. At all.
That’s true, but they are a tiny minority.
They way you go on about this, and normally you’re pretty level headed, is as if we’re an island of Tommy Robinson’s which we clearly are not.
I am really disappointed in @RochdalePioneers recent rants which do not relate to the discussions in the HOC and the contributions by conservative mps
I was directly quoting from a contribution by a Conservative MP. Then posted verbatim his entire contribution and a link.
How is posting Sir Edward Leigh's entire diatribe me "ranting" in a way which does not relate to contributions by Conservative MPs like Sir Edward Leigh?
Its very very simple. Every country in Europe has opened its doors to Ukrainian refugees. All of them. Except one. Personally I am disgusted by this. Others are not. Me posting verbatim comments by Tory MPs demonstrating why we stand alone in closing our door to refugees is not me performing "recent rants".
You are demonising conservatives by highlighting one disgusting mp who does nor represent HMG
You may as well attack labour who have pro Putin mps on their benches
You are better than this
You are whining about how unfair Rochdale is highlighting Edward Leigh and how his view dovetails with Priti Patel's "current" Ukrainian refugee policy. You then claim Leigh is not representative of the wider Conservative Party. And I would hope he isn't. Yet you yourself last week were demanding Starmer's head for his failure to expel his "Stop the War" MPs.
What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander?
Apple with Goose? Or a cherry and wine sauce?
I last week made the point that while I strongly disagree with the Stop the War lot, it's a point if view which at least merits the space to articulate it, and which also merits representation. It shouldn't be unsayable. I'd make the same point about Edward Leigh. I don't agree with what I think his point is, but simply saying that that point of view is beyond the pale and unsayable is dangerous (and moreover, doesn't work).
No one is deplatforming him nor trying to stop him saying whatever he wants. But we do reserve the absolute right to point out that saying stuff like that makes him an odious xenophobic fuckwit. Free speech and all that.
I don't know why freedom of speech has morphed into demands for freedom of speech without other people judging you for your words. I don't remember freedom of speech being viewed in that way even ten years ago.
The fact that people who have fled Ukraine are being slowed down in France while they wait to apply for British visas is simply not a humanitarian tragedy or the end of the world. They are out of the warzone and have various options including free rail travel. Unlike other refugees from various global conflicts, they also benefit from enormous public sympathy and goodwill across Europe. People need to get things in to a bit of perspective. It is overly bureaucratic and annoying, but insignificant compared with what the people left in Ukraine are having to deal with. Also, there has to be a long term plan, because we can't simply lift 40+ million people out of danger (and dogs, pets etc) and just hand over the country to the invading Russians. Such a situation would obviously be brilliant for Putin and terrible for us.
Yes, quite
And of course, while the government may be guilty of inertia, red tape, bureaucracy, they actually aren't Nazis, and they probably ARE dealing with tricky issues helping the real Ukrainians, when there are people traffickers who would love to pretend they have boatloads of Ukrainians, but they're actually from Somalia
Meanwhile, half the people whining about it on here do not give an actual fuck, it's yet another proxy battle in the endless Brexit war in their stupid heads, everything Britain does is bad, Patel is a Leaver, Boris got Russian money for his campaign, blah blah fucking blah
Nauseating
There you go with your Brexit thing again. I seriously believe you experience (perhaps subconscious) guilt about your vote, and this compels you to go on about it in every second post.
lol. I refer you to this sentence in your immediately preceding comment:
"this government in particular is still instinctively beholden to its brain dead Brexit ideology about migration, even in the face of opinion polling that shows it is unpopular"
You just can't help yourself. You're so sunk in this toxic madness you aren't even aware that you're doing it
But you want to see a massive fallout between France and Germany, possibly involving skirmishes. Not all of you feels that way, I won't be unfair here, but there's a big part of you that does. This is a more crazy and reprehensible sentiment than being unreconciled to Brexit.
Yes. Of course. I am desperate to see an actual war between France and Germany.
Do you actually believe this bilge?
Not that. Just more how I put it. That's why I put it how I put it.
A few unconfirmed reports from various sources which people may not all have seen (Guardian, NZZ (Swiss, pro-Ukrainian), Haaretz (Israeli), Interfax (pro-Russian):
"Small positive signs" in the peace talks (Ukrainian source), but agreement not to discuss details in public. Russian allies inching forward in the south, with several suburbs of Mariopol taken. Rumoured big assaults on Kyiv and Odessa haven't happened. Mariopol situation particularly grim, with no utilities. Very little change around Kyiv - Russians picking up a few villages but the main column still stalled All Russian ground forces now committed, but not main air power yet so no overall control in the air. Zero Belorussian troops involved. Ukrainians carried out a successful attack on an airfield, knocking out numerous Russian helicopters. Evacuations from Kharkiv now going relatively well, but everywhere else still stalled with both side blaming each other for local violations.
FWIW I think the Russians are going to capture a cohesive land link from the East to Crimea. but it's not obvious that they're trying to advance much anywhere else at the moment. Possibly they are genuinely stuck, or alternatively waiting to see if the peace talks progress, with the aim of settling for Ukrainian neutrality and acceptance of the "southern corridor"? The former is on the table, the latter still very hard for Ukraine to accept.
You still keep bigging up this neutrality option, but I still don't see how it could possibly work. Leaving aside that promising not to formally align with NATO etc is not a neutral choice if it is done only because they'll be killed if they do not, I don't see what it really gains the Russians either - Ukraine is already not in NATO or the EU but is clearly western aligned now, so other than pettily holding Ukraine back it doesn't achieve anything for Russia in terms of preventing Ukraine from leaving its orbit.
I can see Ukraine agreeing to it, reluctantly, but even though Russia claims to want it it doesn't seem to obtain much.
It gives Russia an out.
Yes, an important one. If they agree to not apply for a "generation" they can be like Scots Nats and reapply again in about 8 years. It has never occurred to me before but maybe 8 is the maximum mental age a Scots Nat ever becomes?
But, seriously, the trend for Boris looks quite promising (for him) judging by a quick scan I had of the figures. I think that is worrying because for everyone's sakes he really needs to go. But it just ain't happening is it?
I'm not brave enough to predict he definitely fights the 2024 election but I cannot see how he departs before summer 2023 (May 2023 elections are admittedly a much more pivotal set of elections for the Tories).
Boris has risen from -31 to -7 (+24) in two weeks and Rishi is +15 (+12)
That's an incredible surge for Boris. Is he actually going to shrug off Partygate?
I guess a huge war in Europe, and potential nuclear apocalypse, is the kind of thing that might just do that. And he is having a good war. Involved, animated, sensible
I suspect some of the hysterical shrieking about Ukrainian refugees cruelly stuck in, er, France, by Bojo's insane Nazism, is actually sublimated anger that Boris seems to be escaping his Nemesis
... Bozo will be condemned to doing after dinner speeches about Peppa Pig to hostile and incredulous pensioners...
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
Ah, so we shouldn't stand up to dictators invading other countries, because it might lead to (temporarily) higher costs for consumers.
I fear a more common view that we'd like. Few so direct though.
It's hilarious how these pro-Russian posters are cycling through PB, lasting about three days each before getting humiliated. Do we really believe they are different people?
This particular forum is genuinely unusual, in both the level of debate, intellectual curiosity and longevity of posters.
A Russian bot sticks out like a sore thumb here, in a way they don’t in most other forums.
A few unconfirmed reports from various sources which people may not all have seen (Guardian, NZZ (Swiss, pro-Ukrainian), Haaretz (Israeli), Interfax (pro-Russian):
"Small positive signs" in the peace talks (Ukrainian source), but agreement not to discuss details in public. Russian allies inching forward in the south, with several suburbs of Mariopol taken. Rumoured big assaults on Kyiv and Odessa haven't happened. Mariopol situation particularly grim, with no utilities. Very little change around Kyiv - Russians picking up a few villages but the main column still stalled All Russian ground forces now committed, but not main air power yet so no overall control in the air. Zero Belorussian troops involved. Ukrainians carried out a successful attack on an airfield, knocking out numerous Russian helicopters. Evacuations from Kharkiv now going relatively well, but everywhere else still stalled with both side blaming each other for local violations.
FWIW I think the Russians are going to capture a cohesive land link from the East to Crimea. but it's not obvious that they're trying to advance much anywhere else at the moment. Possibly they are genuinely stuck, or alternatively waiting to see if the peace talks progress, with the aim of settling for Ukrainian neutrality and acceptance of the "southern corridor"? The former is on the table, the latter still very hard for Ukraine to accept.
You still keep bigging up this neutrality option, but I still don't see how it could possibly work. Leaving aside that promising not to formally align with NATO etc is not a neutral choice if it is done only because they'll be killed if they do not, I don't see what it really gains the Russians either - Ukraine is already not in NATO or the EU but is clearly western aligned now, so other than pettily holding Ukraine back it doesn't achieve anything for Russia in terms of preventing Ukraine from leaving its orbit.
I can see Ukraine agreeing to it, reluctantly, but even though Russia claims to want it it doesn't seem to obtain much.
Agree. “Neutrality” is a nonsense when you just got invaded. What are you supposed to be “neutral” about? If I was Ukrainian I’d want nothing so much at NATO membership when the smoke clears. Putin did that - previously it was never really going to happen.
A few unconfirmed reports from various sources which people may not all have seen (Guardian, NZZ (Swiss, pro-Ukrainian), Haaretz (Israeli), Interfax (pro-Russian):
"Small positive signs" in the peace talks (Ukrainian source), but agreement not to discuss details in public. Russian allies inching forward in the south, with several suburbs of Mariopol taken. Rumoured big assaults on Kyiv and Odessa haven't happened. Mariopol situation particularly grim, with no utilities. Very little change around Kyiv - Russians picking up a few villages but the main column still stalled All Russian ground forces now committed, but not main air power yet so no overall control in the air. Zero Belorussian troops involved. Ukrainians carried out a successful attack on an airfield, knocking out numerous Russian helicopters. Evacuations from Kharkiv now going relatively well, but everywhere else still stalled with both side blaming each other for local violations.
FWIW I think the Russians are going to capture a cohesive land link from the East to Crimea. but it's not obvious that they're trying to advance much anywhere else at the moment. Possibly they are genuinely stuck, or alternatively waiting to see if the peace talks progress, with the aim of settling for Ukrainian neutrality and acceptance of the "southern corridor"? The former is on the table, the latter still very hard for Ukraine to accept.
You still keep bigging up this neutrality option, but I still don't see how it could possibly work. Leaving aside that promising not to formally align with NATO etc is not a neutral choice if it is done only because they'll be killed if they do not, I don't see what it really gains the Russians either - Ukraine is already not in NATO or the EU but is clearly western aligned now, so other than pettily holding Ukraine back it doesn't achieve anything for Russia in terms of preventing Ukraine from leaving its orbit.
I can see Ukraine agreeing to it, reluctantly, but even though Russia claims to want it it doesn't seem to obtain much.
If Ukraine is to rebuild, it needs to be in NATO and/or EU or be very much aliened, e.g. NATO troops stationed there.
If not it will find it very hard to attract investment, who would what to build a factory, office building or develop a block of flats, if they thought there was a risk of another Russian invasion blowing it all up?
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
Ah, so we shouldn't stand up to dictators invading other countries, because it might lead to (temporarily) higher costs for consumers.
I fear a more common view that we'd like. Few so direct though.
It's hilarious how these pro-Russian posters are cycling through PB, lasting about three days each before getting humiliated. Do we really believe they are different people?
This particular forum is genuinely unusual, in both the level of debate, intellectual curiosity and longevity of posters.
A Russian bot sticks out like a sore thumb here, in a way they don’t in most other forums.
True story, comrade.
Of course the Russians are also known for sleeper agents and playing the long game. Wait for agent Smithson to be unearthed as the ultimate Putin supporter.
A few unconfirmed reports from various sources which people may not all have seen (Guardian, NZZ (Swiss, pro-Ukrainian), Haaretz (Israeli), Interfax (pro-Russian):
"Small positive signs" in the peace talks (Ukrainian source), but agreement not to discuss details in public. Russian allies inching forward in the south, with several suburbs of Mariopol taken. Rumoured big assaults on Kyiv and Odessa haven't happened. Mariopol situation particularly grim, with no utilities. Very little change around Kyiv - Russians picking up a few villages but the main column still stalled All Russian ground forces now committed, but not main air power yet so no overall control in the air. Zero Belorussian troops involved. Ukrainians carried out a successful attack on an airfield, knocking out numerous Russian helicopters. Evacuations from Kharkiv now going relatively well, but everywhere else still stalled with both side blaming each other for local violations.
FWIW I think the Russians are going to capture a cohesive land link from the East to Crimea. but it's not obvious that they're trying to advance much anywhere else at the moment. Possibly they are genuinely stuck, or alternatively waiting to see if the peace talks progress, with the aim of settling for Ukrainian neutrality and acceptance of the "southern corridor"? The former is on the table, the latter still very hard for Ukraine to accept.
You still keep bigging up this neutrality option, but I still don't see how it could possibly work. Leaving aside that promising not to formally align with NATO etc is not a neutral choice if it is done only because they'll be killed if they do not, I don't see what it really gains the Russians either - Ukraine is already not in NATO or the EU but is clearly western aligned now, so other than pettily holding Ukraine back it doesn't achieve anything for Russia in terms of preventing Ukraine from leaving its orbit.
I can see Ukraine agreeing to it, reluctantly, but even though Russia claims to want it it doesn't seem to obtain much.
It gives Russia an out.
Yes, an important one. If they agree to not apply for a "generation" they can be like Scots Nats and reapply again in about 8 years. It has never occurred to me before but maybe 8 is the maximum mental age a Scots Nat ever becomes?
Ahghhhhh....Reports of "Truckloads of Ukrainian Aid stuck in UK due to post-Brexit paperwork: charity workers who are trying to send aid to people in war-torn Ukraine say their donations are spending days stuck at Dover due to complex post-Brexit checks." (PoliticsHome) https://twitter.com/militaryhistori/status/1500889381166587904
Why are they in trucks in Dover
They should be airlifted direct to Poland
The sane approach would be to send money and purchase everything from Poland and or Germany / Surrounding countries.
The second approach is then to ship the stuff by lorry as that is cheaper than air freight.
The head of a charity actually made that point that by donating £40 they would have an immediate impact
And if humanitarian aid convoys are being held by red tape then the EU should exempt such convoys
It is HMRC holding them - and indeed every truck - up, not the EU. The sheer length of time it takes our customs to do our checks is why Dover gridlocks as it does.
This is humanitarian aid and should be waved through
Indeed. So why aren't we? You mentioned the EU - again it is British customs checks and requirements that hold up trucks in Dover.
I have to come on here to apologise for inadvertently misleading PB when I posted yesterday that a Ukrainian woman had downed a Russian drone with a jar of gherkins. This was wrong, she downed it with a jar of pickled tomatoes.
I, like many others, have been dismayed at some of the reports about how the UK is managing Ukrainian refugees. If Priti Patel really has screwed this up in the way it has been reported then she needs to be removed ASAP. Emergencies like this soon sort the wheat from the chaff.
Fortunately, it doesn't seem to be affecting the positive way UK is seen in Ukraine itself, where the early efforts to support, supply and train seem to be appreciated. Looks like that investment was well worth it, to say the least.
It isn't if. Its a fact. We are not letting refugees in without an approved visa which they have to complete somewhere else. This is a unique way to handle refugees where HM Border Force turn away people fleeing the war and stop them coming to stay with friends / relatives.
Ah, there you go again, pretending that the situation of people in Ukraine trying to get into Poland is identical to people in France trying to get into the UK.
Every country in Europe, not just Poland.
If you think the forrin should be kept away that's fine - Patel is doing this for you. Some of us have humanity still.
No she isn't. She has completely failed to stop immigration. We haven't even got to the point of being able to distinguish between the immigrants we want and the immigrants we don't.
Listen to Sir Edward Leigh. A stack of people don't want *any* immigrants. At all.
That’s true, but they are a tiny minority.
They way you go on about this, and normally you’re pretty level headed, is as if we’re an island of Tommy Robinson’s which we clearly are not.
I am really disappointed in @RochdalePioneers recent rants which do not relate to the discussions in the HOC and the contributions by conservative mps
I was directly quoting from a contribution by a Conservative MP. Then posted verbatim his entire contribution and a link.
How is posting Sir Edward Leigh's entire diatribe me "ranting" in a way which does not relate to contributions by Conservative MPs like Sir Edward Leigh?
Its very very simple. Every country in Europe has opened its doors to Ukrainian refugees. All of them. Except one. Personally I am disgusted by this. Others are not. Me posting verbatim comments by Tory MPs demonstrating why we stand alone in closing our door to refugees is not me performing "recent rants".
You are demonising conservatives by highlighting one disgusting mp who does nor represent HMG
You may as well attack labour who have pro Putin mps on their benches
You are better than this
You are whining about how unfair Rochdale is highlighting Edward Leigh and how his view dovetails with Priti Patel's "current" Ukrainian refugee policy. You then claim Leigh is not representative of the wider Conservative Party. And I would hope he isn't. Yet you yourself last week were demanding Starmer's head for his failure to expel his "Stop the War" MPs.
What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander?
Apple with Goose? Or a cherry and wine sauce?
I last week made the point that while I strongly disagree with the Stop the War lot, it's a point if view which at least merits the space to articulate it, and which also merits representation. It shouldn't be unsayable. I'd make the same point about Edward Leigh. I don't agree with what I think his point is, but simply saying that that point of view is beyond the pale and unsayable is dangerous (and moreover, doesn't work).
No one is deplatforming him nor trying to stop him saying whatever he wants. But we do reserve the absolute right to point out that saying stuff like that makes him an odious xenophobic fuckwit. Free speech and all that.
I don't know why freedom of speech has morphed into demands for freedom of speech without other people judging you for your words. I don't remember freedom of speech being viewed in that way even ten years ago.
Because people have been hounded out of their jobs for saying that a woman is an adult human female, and there are professional mobs of extremists trying to remove others from the political debate because of their views which are generally uncontroversial among the wider population.
A few unconfirmed reports from various sources which people may not all have seen (Guardian, NZZ (Swiss, pro-Ukrainian), Haaretz (Israeli), Interfax (pro-Russian):
"Small positive signs" in the peace talks (Ukrainian source), but agreement not to discuss details in public. Russian allies inching forward in the south, with several suburbs of Mariopol taken. Rumoured big assaults on Kyiv and Odessa haven't happened. Mariopol situation particularly grim, with no utilities. Very little change around Kyiv - Russians picking up a few villages but the main column still stalled All Russian ground forces now committed, but not main air power yet so no overall control in the air. Zero Belorussian troops involved. Ukrainians carried out a successful attack on an airfield, knocking out numerous Russian helicopters. Evacuations from Kharkiv now going relatively well, but everywhere else still stalled with both side blaming each other for local violations.
FWIW I think the Russians are going to capture a cohesive land link from the East to Crimea. but it's not obvious that they're trying to advance much anywhere else at the moment. Possibly they are genuinely stuck, or alternatively waiting to see if the peace talks progress, with the aim of settling for Ukrainian neutrality and acceptance of the "southern corridor"? The former is on the table, the latter still very hard for Ukraine to accept.
You still keep bigging up this neutrality option, but I still don't see how it could possibly work. Leaving aside that promising not to formally align with NATO etc is not a neutral choice if it is done only because they'll be killed if they do not, I don't see what it really gains the Russians either - Ukraine is already not in NATO or the EU but is clearly western aligned now, so other than pettily holding Ukraine back it doesn't achieve anything for Russia in terms of preventing Ukraine from leaving its orbit.
I can see Ukraine agreeing to it, reluctantly, but even though Russia claims to want it it doesn't seem to obtain much.
It gives Russia an out.
But wouldn't they need to demand no EU membership either to get that 'win'? And that seems harder to demand when simultaneously they demand the right for parts of Ukraine to secede to Russia. If Ukraine can turn the tide their own willingness to concede may drop.
A few unconfirmed reports from various sources which people may not all have seen (Guardian, NZZ (Swiss, pro-Ukrainian), Haaretz (Israeli), Interfax (pro-Russian):
"Small positive signs" in the peace talks (Ukrainian source), but agreement not to discuss details in public. Russian allies inching forward in the south, with several suburbs of Mariopol taken. Rumoured big assaults on Kyiv and Odessa haven't happened. Mariopol situation particularly grim, with no utilities. Very little change around Kyiv - Russians picking up a few villages but the main column still stalled All Russian ground forces now committed, but not main air power yet so no overall control in the air. Zero Belorussian troops involved. Ukrainians carried out a successful attack on an airfield, knocking out numerous Russian helicopters. Evacuations from Kharkiv now going relatively well, but everywhere else still stalled with both side blaming each other for local violations.
FWIW I think the Russians are going to capture a cohesive land link from the East to Crimea. but it's not obvious that they're trying to advance much anywhere else at the moment. Possibly they are genuinely stuck, or alternatively waiting to see if the peace talks progress, with the aim of settling for Ukrainian neutrality and acceptance of the "southern corridor"? The former is on the table, the latter still very hard for Ukraine to accept.
You still keep bigging up this neutrality option, but I still don't see how it could possibly work. Leaving aside that promising not to formally align with NATO etc is not a neutral choice if it is done only because they'll be killed if they do not, I don't see what it really gains the Russians either - Ukraine is already not in NATO or the EU but is clearly western aligned now, so other than pettily holding Ukraine back it doesn't achieve anything for Russia in terms of preventing Ukraine from leaving its orbit.
I can see Ukraine agreeing to it, reluctantly, but even though Russia claims to want it it doesn't seem to obtain much.
If Ukraine is to rebuild, it needs to be in NATO and/or EU or be very much aliened, e.g. NATO troops stationed there.
If not it will find it very hard to attract investment, who would what to build a factory, office building or develop a block of flats, if they thought there was a risk of another Russian invasion blowing it all up?
I don’t think you need to be inside NATO to have a prosperous, Western-aligned economy.
That’s why an agreement not to join NATO or even be neutral (like Austria, like Ireland) is totally do-able, whereas an agreement not to join the EU would not be acceptable.
I have to come on here to apologise for inadvertently misleading PB when I posted yesterday that a Ukrainian woman had downed a Russian drone with a jar of gherkins. This was wrong, she downed it with a jar of picked tomatoes.
That might be the best correction since Sky Sports News apologised to David Goodwillie for calling him a racist, they wanted to correct the record and tell the world that David Goodwillie was in fact a rapist.
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
How happy will be a French consumer ? - How happy will a French consumer be? And geniusness would be an OK comic formulation by a native speaker if you otherwise passed muster, which you don't.
I don't understand you guys being so bad at what you do. Is Vlad sending out the useless conscript cyberwarriors in the first wave to lull us into a false sense of security?
his name is Vladimir, not Vlad.
Vladimir Vladimirovich to you, tovarisch. Vlad to his mates.
Labour 40% (+2) Conservative 37% (+2) Liberal Democrat 10% (-2) Green 5% (–) Scottish National Party 4% (-1) Reform UK 2% (-2) Other 1% (–)
Changes +/- 28 Feb Redfield and Wilton
If the Tories can't get ahead during a war, when can they?
Of course they can. Wars are probably the best type of circumstance for the Tories, as strange as that may sound. The Falklands War was the event that pushed the Tories up from 3rd to 1st place at that time.
Yes but this is a very different affair. We’re not fighting it.
A few unconfirmed reports from various sources which people may not all have seen (Guardian, NZZ (Swiss, pro-Ukrainian), Haaretz (Israeli), Interfax (pro-Russian):
"Small positive signs" in the peace talks (Ukrainian source), but agreement not to discuss details in public. Russian allies inching forward in the south, with several suburbs of Mariopol taken. Rumoured big assaults on Kyiv and Odessa haven't happened. Mariopol situation particularly grim, with no utilities. Very little change around Kyiv - Russians picking up a few villages but the main column still stalled All Russian ground forces now committed, but not main air power yet so no overall control in the air. Zero Belorussian troops involved. Ukrainians carried out a successful attack on an airfield, knocking out numerous Russian helicopters. Evacuations from Kharkiv now going relatively well, but everywhere else still stalled with both side blaming each other for local violations.
FWIW I think the Russians are going to capture a cohesive land link from the East to Crimea. but it's not obvious that they're trying to advance much anywhere else at the moment. Possibly they are genuinely stuck, or alternatively waiting to see if the peace talks progress, with the aim of settling for Ukrainian neutrality and acceptance of the "southern corridor"? The former is on the table, the latter still very hard for Ukraine to accept.
You still keep bigging up this neutrality option, but I still don't see how it could possibly work. Leaving aside that promising not to formally align with NATO etc is not a neutral choice if it is done only because they'll be killed if they do not, I don't see what it really gains the Russians either - Ukraine is already not in NATO or the EU but is clearly western aligned now, so other than pettily holding Ukraine back it doesn't achieve anything for Russia in terms of preventing Ukraine from leaving its orbit.
I can see Ukraine agreeing to it, reluctantly, but even though Russia claims to want it it doesn't seem to obtain much.
It gives Russia an out.
But wouldn't they need to demand no EU membership either to get that 'win'? And that seems harder to demand when simultaneously they demand the right for parts of Ukraine to secede to Russia. If Ukraine can turn the tide their own willingness to concede may drop.
I don’t know.
If one takes Russia at its word (hard, since the country is run by an evil c***), their concern is demilitarisation.
I have to come on here to apologise for inadvertently misleading PB when I posted yesterday that a Ukrainian woman had downed a Russian drone with a jar of gherkins. This was wrong, she downed it with a jar of picked tomatoes.
Washington Post (via Seattle Times $) - Anti-Russian hate in Europe is making chefs and schoolchildren out to be enemies
LONDON — Russian chef Alexei Zimin is donating part of his London restaurant’s revenue to support Red Cross work with Ukrainian refugees. He has been singing songs by a Russian dissident poet on Instagram, posting messages such as: “Stop the war. Withdraw troops. Bring our soldiers home.” He knows that in speaking out this way, he may never be able to return to Russia, where he has been credited with leading a gastronomic revolution and owns two more restaurants.
And yet angry messages are filling his restaurant’s voice-mail inbox. “Russians are killers,” one declared. “You’re Putin’s Russians,” another accused.
Zimin, 50, is among those who have been hit by a sudden and rapidly rising tide of anti-Russian sentiment in Europe. While governments have moved to punish Russian President Vladimir Putin and sanction oligarchs, while societies have been calling for cultural figures – from hockey stars to opera singers – to denounce the war, Russian expats who have never had sympathy for Putin and who are horrified by what’s happening in Ukraine say they are facing a wave of generalized hostility.
“Across Europe, people who have no involvement with the war are being targeted and removed from positions,” said Aleksandra Lewicki, a sociologist at the University of Sussex. “There’s a sense of a clear enemy, it’s Russians, from all walks of life, who are being targeted by racist hate crimes and derogatory comments.”
SSI - note that some of the same anti-Russian bigotry has featured here on PB in recent days. Including calls for extermination of all Russians.
To my mind, suchlike are playing Putin's game, either deliberately or ignorantly, not that THAT matters.
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
How happy will be a French consumer ? - How happy will a French consumer be? And geniusness would be an OK comic formulation by a native speaker if you otherwise passed muster, which you don't.
I don't understand you guys being so bad at what you do. Is Vlad sending out the useless conscript cyberwarriors in the first wave to lull us into a false sense of security?
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
Ah, so we shouldn't stand up to dictators invading other countries, because it might lead to (temporarily) higher costs for consumers.
I fear a more common view that we'd like. Few so direct though.
It's hilarious how these pro-Russian posters are cycling through PB, lasting about three days each before getting humiliated. Do we really believe they are different people?
This particular forum is genuinely unusual, in both the level of debate, intellectual curiosity and longevity of posters.
A Russian bot sticks out like a sore thumb here, in a way they don’t in most other forums.
so you were betting on Hillary, good to know
You didn’t respond to my question about the risk of cucumber inflation.
It’s quite exciting to have some real Russian Intel on here, so perhaps you could answer this one.
I, like many others, have been dismayed at some of the reports about how the UK is managing Ukrainian refugees. If Priti Patel really has screwed this up in the way it has been reported then she needs to be removed ASAP. Emergencies like this soon sort the wheat from the chaff.
Fortunately, it doesn't seem to be affecting the positive way UK is seen in Ukraine itself, where the early efforts to support, supply and train seem to be appreciated. Looks like that investment was well worth it, to say the least.
It isn't if. Its a fact. We are not letting refugees in without an approved visa which they have to complete somewhere else. This is a unique way to handle refugees where HM Border Force turn away people fleeing the war and stop them coming to stay with friends / relatives.
Ah, there you go again, pretending that the situation of people in Ukraine trying to get into Poland is identical to people in France trying to get into the UK.
Every country in Europe, not just Poland.
If you think the forrin should be kept away that's fine - Patel is doing this for you. Some of us have humanity still.
No she isn't. She has completely failed to stop immigration. We haven't even got to the point of being able to distinguish between the immigrants we want and the immigrants we don't.
Listen to Sir Edward Leigh. A stack of people don't want *any* immigrants. At all.
That’s true, but they are a tiny minority.
They way you go on about this, and normally you’re pretty level headed, is as if we’re an island of Tommy Robinson’s which we clearly are not.
I am really disappointed in @RochdalePioneers recent rants which do not relate to the discussions in the HOC and the contributions by conservative mps
I was directly quoting from a contribution by a Conservative MP. Then posted verbatim his entire contribution and a link.
How is posting Sir Edward Leigh's entire diatribe me "ranting" in a way which does not relate to contributions by Conservative MPs like Sir Edward Leigh?
Its very very simple. Every country in Europe has opened its doors to Ukrainian refugees. All of them. Except one. Personally I am disgusted by this. Others are not. Me posting verbatim comments by Tory MPs demonstrating why we stand alone in closing our door to refugees is not me performing "recent rants".
You are demonising conservatives by highlighting one disgusting mp who does nor represent HMG
You may as well attack labour who have pro Putin mps on their benches
You are better than this
You are whining about how unfair Rochdale is highlighting Edward Leigh and how his view dovetails with Priti Patel's "current" Ukrainian refugee policy. You then claim Leigh is not representative of the wider Conservative Party. And I would hope he isn't. Yet you yourself last week were demanding Starmer's head for his failure to expel his "Stop the War" MPs.
What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander?
Apple with Goose? Or a cherry and wine sauce?
I last week made the point that while I strongly disagree with the Stop the War lot, it's a point if view which at least merits the space to articulate it, and which also merits representation. It shouldn't be unsayable. I'd make the same point about Edward Leigh. I don't agree with what I think his point is, but simply saying that that point of view is beyond the pale and unsayable is dangerous (and moreover, doesn't work).
No one is deplatforming him nor trying to stop him saying whatever he wants. But we do reserve the absolute right to point out that saying stuff like that makes him an odious xenophobic fuckwit. Free speech and all that.
I don't know why freedom of speech has morphed into demands for freedom of speech without other people judging you for your words. I don't remember freedom of speech being viewed in that way even ten years ago.
Because people have been hounded out of their jobs for saying that a woman is an adult human female, and there are professional mobs of extremists trying to remove others from the political debate because of their views which are generally uncontroversial among the wider population.
The first is an issue for employment tribunals, perhaps employees need better protection from silly bosses.
The second has always been the case, in the past something like unilateral disarmament is a clear example that had many supporters across the country but a no-no for people who wanted to succeed in politics.
A few unconfirmed reports from various sources which people may not all have seen (Guardian, NZZ (Swiss, pro-Ukrainian), Haaretz (Israeli), Interfax (pro-Russian):
"Small positive signs" in the peace talks (Ukrainian source), but agreement not to discuss details in public. Russian allies inching forward in the south, with several suburbs of Mariopol taken. Rumoured big assaults on Kyiv and Odessa haven't happened. Mariopol situation particularly grim, with no utilities. Very little change around Kyiv - Russians picking up a few villages but the main column still stalled All Russian ground forces now committed, but not main air power yet so no overall control in the air. Zero Belorussian troops involved. Ukrainians carried out a successful attack on an airfield, knocking out numerous Russian helicopters. Evacuations from Kharkiv now going relatively well, but everywhere else still stalled with both side blaming each other for local violations.
FWIW I think the Russians are going to capture a cohesive land link from the East to Crimea. but it's not obvious that they're trying to advance much anywhere else at the moment. Possibly they are genuinely stuck, or alternatively waiting to see if the peace talks progress, with the aim of settling for Ukrainian neutrality and acceptance of the "southern corridor"? The former is on the table, the latter still very hard for Ukraine to accept.
You still keep bigging up this neutrality option, but I still don't see how it could possibly work. Leaving aside that promising not to formally align with NATO etc is not a neutral choice if it is done only because they'll be killed if they do not, I don't see what it really gains the Russians either - Ukraine is already not in NATO or the EU but is clearly western aligned now, so other than pettily holding Ukraine back it doesn't achieve anything for Russia in terms of preventing Ukraine from leaving its orbit.
I can see Ukraine agreeing to it, reluctantly, but even though Russia claims to want it it doesn't seem to obtain much.
It gives Russia an out.
But wouldn't they need to demand no EU membership either to get that 'win'? And that seems harder to demand when simultaneously they demand the right for parts of Ukraine to secede to Russia. If Ukraine can turn the tide their own willingness to concede may drop.
I don’t know.
If one takes Russia at its word (hard, since the country is run by an evil c***), their concern is demilitarisation.
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
How happy will be a French consumer ? - How happy will a French consumer be? And geniusness would be an OK comic formulation by a native speaker if you otherwise passed muster, which you don't.
I don't understand you guys being so bad at what you do. Is Vlad sending out the useless conscript cyberwarriors in the first wave to lull us into a false sense of security?
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
Ah, so we shouldn't stand up to dictators invading other countries, because it might lead to (temporarily) higher costs for consumers.
I fear a more common view that we'd like. Few so direct though.
It's hilarious how these pro-Russian posters are cycling through PB, lasting about three days each before getting humiliated. Do we really believe they are different people?
This particular forum is genuinely unusual, in both the level of debate, intellectual curiosity and longevity of posters.
A Russian bot sticks out like a sore thumb here, in a way they don’t in most other forums.
so you were betting on Hillary, good to know
You didn’t respond to my question about the risk of cucumber inflation.
It’s quite exciting to have some real Russian Intel on here, so perhaps you could answer this one.
A rebuttal to the view that the diplomatic end game will / should be recognition of Crimea and/or Donbass as Russian (or “independent”), with NATO aspirations stripped out Ukraine’s constitution.
“All western strategy over Ukraine has to send the right messages to China.
This has become about much more than Crimea and the Donbas.
Everyone looking for a fudge or a climb down for Putin that includes those regions needs to understand that this is all about the international security order, for which Ukrainian sovereignty will be held up as the reason.
All fudges and off ramps need to be designed around Putin rather than around Ukrainian territory.”
Washington Post (via Seattle Times $) - Anti-Russian hate in Europe is making chefs and schoolchildren out to be enemies
LONDON — Russian chef Alexei Zimin is donating part of his London restaurant’s revenue to support Red Cross work with Ukrainian refugees. He has been singing songs by a Russian dissident poet on Instagram, posting messages such as: “Stop the war. Withdraw troops. Bring our soldiers home.” He knows that in speaking out this way, he may never be able to return to Russia, where he has been credited with leading a gastronomic revolution and owns two more restaurants.
And yet angry messages are filling his restaurant’s voice-mail inbox. “Russians are killers,” one declared. “You’re Putin’s Russians,” another accused.
Zimin, 50, is among those who have been hit by a sudden and rapidly rising tide of anti-Russian sentiment in Europe. While governments have moved to punish Russian President Vladimir Putin and sanction oligarchs, while societies have been calling for cultural figures – from hockey stars to opera singers – to denounce the war, Russian expats who have never had sympathy for Putin and who are horrified by what’s happening in Ukraine say they are facing a wave of generalized hostility.
“Across Europe, people who have no involvement with the war are being targeted and removed from positions,” said Aleksandra Lewicki, a sociologist at the University of Sussex. “There’s a sense of a clear enemy, it’s Russians, from all walks of life, who are being targeted by racist hate crimes and derogatory comments.”
SSI - note that some of the same anti-Russian bigotry has featured here on PB in recent days. Including calls for extermination of all Russians.
To my mind, suchlike are playing Putin's game, either deliberately or ignorantly, not that THAT matters.
With a Russian population up here I had been concerned that similar anti-Russian hate might be stirred up. Haven't seen anything yet and nothing in the news happily.
The fact that people who have fled Ukraine are being slowed down in France while they wait to apply for British visas is simply not a humanitarian tragedy or the end of the world. They are out of the warzone and have various options including free rail travel. Unlike other refugees from various global conflicts, they also benefit from enormous public sympathy and goodwill across Europe. People need to get things in to a bit of perspective. It is overly bureaucratic and annoying, but insignificant compared with what the people left in Ukraine are having to deal with. Also, there has to be a long term plan, because we can't simply lift 40+ million people out of danger (and dogs, pets etc) and just hand over the country to the invading Russians. Such a situation would obviously be brilliant for Putin and terrible for us.
Yes, quite
And of course, while the government may be guilty of inertia, red tape, bureaucracy, they actually aren't Nazis, and they probably ARE dealing with tricky issues helping the real Ukrainians, when there are people traffickers who would love to pretend they have boatloads of Ukrainians, but they're actually from Somalia
Meanwhile, half the people whining about it on here do not give an actual fuck, it's yet another proxy battle in the endless Brexit war in their stupid heads, everything Britain does is bad, Patel is a Leaver, Boris got Russian money for his campaign, blah blah fucking blah
Nauseating
There you go with your Brexit thing again. I seriously believe you experience (perhaps subconscious) guilt about your vote, and this compels you to go on about it in every second post.
lol. I refer you to this sentence in your immediately preceding comment:
"this government in particular is still instinctively beholden to its brain dead Brexit ideology about migration, even in the face of opinion polling that shows it is unpopular"
You just can't help yourself. You're so sunk in this toxic madness you aren't even aware that you're doing it
But you want to see a massive fallout between France and Germany, possibly involving skirmishes. Not all of you feels that way, I won't be unfair here, but there's a big part of you that does. This is a more crazy and reprehensible sentiment than being unreconciled to Brexit.
Yes. Of course. I am desperate to see an actual war between France and Germany.
Do you actually believe this bilge?
Not that. Just more how I put it. That's why I put it how I put it.
A few unconfirmed reports from various sources which people may not all have seen (Guardian, NZZ (Swiss, pro-Ukrainian), Haaretz (Israeli), Interfax (pro-Russian):
"Small positive signs" in the peace talks (Ukrainian source), but agreement not to discuss details in public. Russian allies inching forward in the south, with several suburbs of Mariopol taken. Rumoured big assaults on Kyiv and Odessa haven't happened. Mariopol situation particularly grim, with no utilities. Very little change around Kyiv - Russians picking up a few villages but the main column still stalled All Russian ground forces now committed, but not main air power yet so no overall control in the air. Zero Belorussian troops involved. Ukrainians carried out a successful attack on an airfield, knocking out numerous Russian helicopters. Evacuations from Kharkiv now going relatively well, but everywhere else still stalled with both side blaming each other for local violations.
FWIW I think the Russians are going to capture a cohesive land link from the East to Crimea. but it's not obvious that they're trying to advance much anywhere else at the moment. Possibly they are genuinely stuck, or alternatively waiting to see if the peace talks progress, with the aim of settling for Ukrainian neutrality and acceptance of the "southern corridor"? The former is on the table, the latter still very hard for Ukraine to accept.
You still keep bigging up this neutrality option, but I still don't see how it could possibly work. Leaving aside that promising not to formally align with NATO etc is not a neutral choice if it is done only because they'll be killed if they do not, I don't see what it really gains the Russians either - Ukraine is already not in NATO or the EU but is clearly western aligned now, so other than pettily holding Ukraine back it doesn't achieve anything for Russia in terms of preventing Ukraine from leaving its orbit.
I can see Ukraine agreeing to it, reluctantly, but even though Russia claims to want it it doesn't seem to obtain much.
It gives Russia an out.
But wouldn't they need to demand no EU membership either to get that 'win'? And that seems harder to demand when simultaneously they demand the right for parts of Ukraine to secede to Russia. If Ukraine can turn the tide their own willingness to concede may drop.
I don’t know.
If one takes Russia at its word (hard, since the country is run by an evil cunt), their concern is demilitarisation.
That's going great.
Yeah, at current rates of losses within the month the Russian army will be completely demilitarised 😀😀😀
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
How happy will be a French consumer ? - How happy will a French consumer be? And geniusness would be an OK comic formulation by a native speaker if you otherwise passed muster, which you don't.
I don't understand you guys being so bad at what you do. Is Vlad sending out the useless conscript cyberwarriors in the first wave to lull us into a false sense of security?
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
Ah, so we shouldn't stand up to dictators invading other countries, because it might lead to (temporarily) higher costs for consumers.
I fear a more common view that we'd like. Few so direct though.
It's hilarious how these pro-Russian posters are cycling through PB, lasting about three days each before getting humiliated. Do we really believe they are different people?
This particular forum is genuinely unusual, in both the level of debate, intellectual curiosity and longevity of posters.
A Russian bot sticks out like a sore thumb here, in a way they don’t in most other forums.
so you were betting on Hillary, good to know
You didn’t respond to my question about the risk of cucumber inflation.
It’s quite exciting to have some real Russian Intel on here, so perhaps you could answer this one.
Rishi does indeed seem a busted flush. It’s possible he’d be a better PM than Chancellor though.
His Mais lecture was very interesting in that it demonstrated real attention to detail about various micro-economic policy instruments, but a woeful ignorance about macroeconomics.
His strategy for the UK? Build an “enterprise culture.”
As Martin Wolf asks in the FT, what the fuck has Britain been doing for the past 40 years?
Weird poll. He’s been pretty invisible during the current crisis (rightly so).
I was somewhat surprised but Boris rise by 24 points to -7 in two weeks indicates the war effect
And perhaps also skew in polling question, as OGH pointed out several threads ago?
My guess is that both are operative, the war more so, but the skew is not nothing.
This is a huge change and Rishi as well
It has surprising me and it will be interesting to see how this plays out in the next few weeks
And backed up by other pollsters.
I wonder if the support for Boris in the conservative papers is aiding his recovery as pre Ukraine they were not at all happy with him
That’s a good point. Certainly the change in media narrative is helping someone who looked like they might be sacked. It’s a good bounce back in popularity signalled by the poll. But supportive front pages can be ethereal. I wonder what is really thought about him under the surface now, how quickly war bounce rally round flag in crisis, and this is a genuine crisis, can fade. Appears Marquee Mark not won back yet, nor other conservatives who felt let down. The phantom leaker against Boris shut up weeks ago, not wishing to waste revelations beneath current media narrative I suspect. The Met might feel they can’t rock the boat with a revelation in a genuine crisis. so I wonder to what extent normal business is merely on hold? Are the conservatives even having a good crisis overall, it’s not just todays problems in the political news beneath the main news, they started the sanction response off by misjudging the mood to go further and being outflanked by US and EU. Is this why the gaps still three and Labour going up two during war bounce, an indication public not happy with how their government handling what’s in their gift to control?
And then there’s other aspects of government competence we won’t be able to judge for ages, such as Alan Duncan’s today interview this morning, in a nutshell the economic danger of going too quick to fast
“There is this auction of indignation, which all of us totally understand, against anything to do with Russia. "So they ban this, ban that and ban everything, but in the end, we’re going to end up banning our own supplies.”
Ahghhhhh....Reports of "Truckloads of Ukrainian Aid stuck in UK due to post-Brexit paperwork: charity workers who are trying to send aid to people in war-torn Ukraine say their donations are spending days stuck at Dover due to complex post-Brexit checks." (PoliticsHome) https://twitter.com/militaryhistori/status/1500889381166587904
Why are they in trucks in Dover
They should be airlifted direct to Poland
The sane approach would be to send money and purchase everything from Poland and or Germany / Surrounding countries.
The second approach is then to ship the stuff by lorry as that is cheaper than air freight.
The head of a charity actually made that point that by donating £40 they would have an immediate impact
And if humanitarian aid convoys are being held by red tape then the EU should exempt such convoys
It is HMRC holding them - and indeed every truck - up, not the EU. The sheer length of time it takes our customs to do our checks is why Dover gridlocks as it does.
This is humanitarian aid and should be waved through
But it might be a lorry load of naughty boys moonlighting from Hereford. We have to show we have done all we can to stop that....
A few unconfirmed reports from various sources which people may not all have seen (Guardian, NZZ (Swiss, pro-Ukrainian), Haaretz (Israeli), Interfax (pro-Russian):
"Small positive signs" in the peace talks (Ukrainian source), but agreement not to discuss details in public. Russian allies inching forward in the south, with several suburbs of Mariopol taken. Rumoured big assaults on Kyiv and Odessa haven't happened. Mariopol situation particularly grim, with no utilities. Very little change around Kyiv - Russians picking up a few villages but the main column still stalled All Russian ground forces now committed, but not main air power yet so no overall control in the air. Zero Belorussian troops involved. Ukrainians carried out a successful attack on an airfield, knocking out numerous Russian helicopters. Evacuations from Kharkiv now going relatively well, but everywhere else still stalled with both side blaming each other for local violations.
FWIW I think the Russians are going to capture a cohesive land link from the East to Crimea. but it's not obvious that they're trying to advance much anywhere else at the moment. Possibly they are genuinely stuck, or alternatively waiting to see if the peace talks progress, with the aim of settling for Ukrainian neutrality and acceptance of the "southern corridor"? The former is on the table, the latter still very hard for Ukraine to accept.
You still keep bigging up this neutrality option, but I still don't see how it could possibly work. Leaving aside that promising not to formally align with NATO etc is not a neutral choice if it is done only because they'll be killed if they do not, I don't see what it really gains the Russians either - Ukraine is already not in NATO or the EU but is clearly western aligned now, so other than pettily holding Ukraine back it doesn't achieve anything for Russia in terms of preventing Ukraine from leaving its orbit.
I can see Ukraine agreeing to it, reluctantly, but even though Russia claims to want it it doesn't seem to obtain much.
It gives Russia an out.
But wouldn't they need to demand no EU membership either to get that 'win'? And that seems harder to demand when simultaneously they demand the right for parts of Ukraine to secede to Russia. If Ukraine can turn the tide their own willingness to concede may drop.
I don’t know.
If one takes Russia at its word (hard, since the country is run by an evil c***), their concern is demilitarisation.
If they carry on like this, Russia will end up completely demilitarised.
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
How happy will be a French consumer ? - How happy will a French consumer be? And geniusness would be an OK comic formulation by a native speaker if you otherwise passed muster, which you don't.
I don't understand you guys being so bad at what you do. Is Vlad sending out the useless conscript cyberwarriors in the first wave to lull us into a false sense of security?
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
Ah, so we shouldn't stand up to dictators invading other countries, because it might lead to (temporarily) higher costs for consumers.
I fear a more common view that we'd like. Few so direct though.
It's hilarious how these pro-Russian posters are cycling through PB, lasting about three days each before getting humiliated. Do we really believe they are different people?
This particular forum is genuinely unusual, in both the level of debate, intellectual curiosity and longevity of posters.
A Russian bot sticks out like a sore thumb here, in a way they don’t in most other forums.
so you were betting on Hillary, good to know
You’ve not been here long, and won’t be for much longer, but pb does love a nickname. You may notice that the current U.K. pm is rarely referred to as Prime Minister Johnson. Still, enjoy your brief stay with us. You may learn stuff...
Ahghhhhh....Reports of "Truckloads of Ukrainian Aid stuck in UK due to post-Brexit paperwork: charity workers who are trying to send aid to people in war-torn Ukraine say their donations are spending days stuck at Dover due to complex post-Brexit checks." (PoliticsHome) https://twitter.com/militaryhistori/status/1500889381166587904
Why are they in trucks in Dover
They should be airlifted direct to Poland
The sane approach would be to send money and purchase everything from Poland and or Germany / Surrounding countries.
The second approach is then to ship the stuff by lorry as that is cheaper than air freight.
The head of a charity actually made that point that by donating £40 they would have an immediate impact
And if humanitarian aid convoys are being held by red tape then the EU should exempt such convoys
Sorry to be a bit of a sceptic but the problem with that head of a charity stuff is the question of how much they are getting paid out of that charity money. The UK Red Cross accounts for 2020 show they had an income of £305 million of which £103 million was spent on staff costs. They employ over 4,300 people of whom only 28 are working internationally.
I am not saying don't give your money to them but it seems to me they have a vested interest in making sure charity passes through their hands rather than going direct to the people in need.
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
How happy will be a French consumer ? - How happy will a French consumer be? And geniusness would be an OK comic formulation by a native speaker if you otherwise passed muster, which you don't.
I don't understand you guys being so bad at what you do. Is Vlad sending out the useless conscript cyberwarriors in the first wave to lull us into a false sense of security?
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
Ah, so we shouldn't stand up to dictators invading other countries, because it might lead to (temporarily) higher costs for consumers.
I fear a more common view that we'd like. Few so direct though.
It's hilarious how these pro-Russian posters are cycling through PB, lasting about three days each before getting humiliated. Do we really believe they are different people?
This particular forum is genuinely unusual, in both the level of debate, intellectual curiosity and longevity of posters.
A Russian bot sticks out like a sore thumb here, in a way they don’t in most other forums.
so you were betting on Hillary, good to know
You didn’t respond to my question about the risk of cucumber inflation.
It’s quite exciting to have some real Russian Intel on here, so perhaps you could answer this one.
I have to come on here to apologise for inadvertently misleading PB when I posted yesterday that a Ukrainian woman had downed a Russian drone with a jar of gherkins. This was wrong, she downed it with a jar of picked tomatoes.
That might be the best correction since Sky Sports News apologised to David Goodwillie for calling him a racist, they wanted to correct the record and tell the world that David Goodwillie was in fact a rapist.
Ahghhhhh....Reports of "Truckloads of Ukrainian Aid stuck in UK due to post-Brexit paperwork: charity workers who are trying to send aid to people in war-torn Ukraine say their donations are spending days stuck at Dover due to complex post-Brexit checks." (PoliticsHome) https://twitter.com/militaryhistori/status/1500889381166587904
Why are they in trucks in Dover
They should be airlifted direct to Poland
The sane approach would be to send money and purchase everything from Poland and or Germany / Surrounding countries.
The second approach is then to ship the stuff by lorry as that is cheaper than air freight.
The head of a charity actually made that point that by donating £40 they would have an immediate impact
And if humanitarian aid convoys are being held by red tape then the EU should exempt such convoys
Sorry to be a bit of a sceptic but the problem with that head of a charity stuff is the question of how much they are getting paid out of that charity money. The UK Red Cross accounts for 2020 show they had an income of £305 million of which £103 million was spent on staff costs. They employ over 4,300 people of whom only 28 are working internationally.
I am not saying don't give your money to them but it seems to me they have a vested interest in making sure charity passes through their hands rather than going direct to the people in need.
Not to mention dissing Ukrainians who are desperate to bring material aid & comfort to their homeland. That is equally outrageous IMHO.
Like saying the small ships that helped save the BEF from beach at Dunkirk, should have left the job to RN.
Rishi does indeed seem a busted flush. It’s possible he’d be a better PM than Chancellor though.
His Mais lecture was very interesting in that it demonstrated real attention to detail about various micro-economic policy instruments, but a woeful ignorance about macroeconomics.
His strategy for the UK? Build an “enterprise culture.”
As Martin Wolf asks in the FT, what the fuck has Britain been doing for the past 40 years?
I'm not convinced that the best PM question is very meaningful at a time like this. Unless the PM in situ is doing things very badly, I suspect that many people think that during a crisis as serious as the current one that the best PM is the one we've got. Not a time for a change.
Ahghhhhh....Reports of "Truckloads of Ukrainian Aid stuck in UK due to post-Brexit paperwork: charity workers who are trying to send aid to people in war-torn Ukraine say their donations are spending days stuck at Dover due to complex post-Brexit checks." (PoliticsHome) https://twitter.com/militaryhistori/status/1500889381166587904
Why are they in trucks in Dover
They should be airlifted direct to Poland
The sane approach would be to send money and purchase everything from Poland and or Germany / Surrounding countries.
The second approach is then to ship the stuff by lorry as that is cheaper than air freight.
The head of a charity actually made that point that by donating £40 they would have an immediate impact
And if humanitarian aid convoys are being held by red tape then the EU should exempt such convoys
Sorry to be a bit of a sceptic but the problem with that head of a charity stuff is the question of how much they are getting paid out of that charity money. The UK Red Cross accounts for 2020 show they had an income of £305 million of which £103 million was spent on staff costs. They employ over 4,300 people of whom only 28 are working internationally.
I am not saying don't give your money to them but it seems to me they have a vested interest in making sure charity passes through their hands rather than going direct to the people in need.
Not to mention dissing Ukrainians who are desperate to bring material aid & comfort to their homeland. That is equally outrageous IMHO.
Like saying the small ships that helped save the BEF from beach at Dunkirk, should have left the job to RN.
I don't entirely disagree. Some larger entities in particular do seem to have become rather top heavy.
But, seriously, the trend for Boris looks quite promising (for him) judging by a quick scan I had of the figures. I think that is worrying because for everyone's sakes he really needs to go. But it just ain't happening is it?
I'm not brave enough to predict he definitely fights the 2024 election but I cannot see how he departs before summer 2023 (May 2023 elections are admittedly a much more pivotal set of elections for the Tories).
Boris has risen from -31 to -7 (+24) in two weeks and Rishi is +15 (+12)
That's an incredible surge for Boris. Is he actually going to shrug off Partygate?
I guess a huge war in Europe, and potential nuclear apocalypse, is the kind of thing that might just do that. And he is having a good war. Involved, animated, sensible
I suspect some of the hysterical shrieking about Ukrainian refugees cruelly stuck in, er, France, by Bojo's insane Nazism, is actually sublimated anger that Boris seems to be escaping his Nemesis
Or maybe just a rally round the flag bounce that could blow away in an instant on a different breeze. 🙂
If anything it has brought a focus on Boris governments closeness to Putin money in the lead up to Putin’s barbarity, in a way that might not even have been scrutinised till a change of government, without this war.
Is there a volunteer role out on the Ukraine borders that fits a person like yourself, man with a suitcase loves foreign travel and experiences, got all the patter for meeting and empathising with strangers? It must be a 24hrs chaos on the bordering countries. Have you ever been close to a war zone?
I totally have.
I was once held at gunpoint, with a photographer mate, by Hezbollah, in a Hezbollah safe house in the cold mountains of south Lebanon, in a village - Machgarah - which was simultaneously being shelled and strafed by the Israelis. I heard the screams of people dying, and saw the bombs explode. They kept us for hours
Miraculously, Hezbollah did not briskly execute us (despite suspecting we were Israeli agents). When I got home I told some experienced Middle East hacks what happened to me and they fell off their chairs. Apparently our chances of surviving that were about 1%. We got very very very lucky
I'm getting a modest cold sweat even now, thinking about it. FFFFFuck
Held at gunpoint by hezzbollah with 99% chance of death whilst simultaneously shelled by the Israeli’s. 😲
@PJohnson had this wonderful schtick about how he really cared about the Ukrainian people, and they'd all be much happier if they just laid down their weapons, and the Katyn massacre definitely didn't happen.
@d_d seems to be peddling this line that the (soft, decadent) West would be much happier if we just laid down our weapons.
And you know what, people would prefer lower commodity prices. But we'd also prefer it that countries in Europe didn't get invaded for... for... not being real countries in the first place. And we've also seen this movie before: you need to stand up for democratic countries invaded by tyrants, because (selfishly) they never stop at just one country.
Labour 40% (+2) Conservative 37% (+2) Liberal Democrat 10% (-2) Green 5% (–) Scottish National Party 4% (-1) Reform UK 2% (-2) Other 1% (–)
Changes +/- 28 Feb Redfield and Wilton
If the Tories can't get ahead during a war, when can they?
Of course they can. Wars are probably the best type of circumstance for the Tories, as strange as that may sound. The Falklands War was the event that pushed the Tories up from 3rd to 1st place at that time.
Yes but this is a very different affair. We’re not fighting it.
I have to come on here to apologise for inadvertently misleading PB when I posted yesterday that a Ukrainian woman had downed a Russian drone with a jar of gherkins. This was wrong, she downed it with a jar of picked tomatoes.
That might be the best correction since Sky Sports News apologised to David Goodwillie for calling him a racist, they wanted to correct the record and tell the world that David Goodwillie was in fact a rapist.
Which, of course, is also incorrect.
BBC - Footballers Goodwillie and Robertson ruled as rapists
'Lord Armstrong said: "In the result, therefore, I find that in the early hours of Sunday 2 January 2011, at the flat in Greig Crescent, Armadale, both defenders (the footballers) took advantage of the pursuer when she was vulnerable through an excessive intake of alcohol and, because her cognitive functioning and decision-making processes were so impaired, was incapable of giving meaningful consent; and that they each raped her."'
Rishi does indeed seem a busted flush. It’s possible he’d be a better PM than Chancellor though.
His Mais lecture was very interesting in that it demonstrated real attention to detail about various micro-economic policy instruments, but a woeful ignorance about macroeconomics.
His strategy for the UK? Build an “enterprise culture.”
As Martin Wolf asks in the FT, what the fuck has Britain been doing for the past 40 years?
Perhaps indeed we are close to my suggested “deal”.
Secession of Crimea. Agreement not to join NATO. Some kind of deal in the Donbas (beefed up federal status and perhaps plebiscites on independence).
It's been proposed from the beginning, and is clearly more achievable than the broader stated goals of the Russians. The last one is tricky for both - from Ukraine it effectively gives up those areas for ever, since its not like Russia would permit a plebescite it would not win, and for Russia it requires them to reverse their recognition of the areas as independent (a minor concession, given they would still be de facto independent, but would still be a formal reversal).
Yes, and also Russia would need to recognise the whole of Ukraine formally and permanently, none of this "not a real country" stuff - I think Putin will find that harder than chucking the "independent" republics under the bus. Conversely Ukraine would need to give up Crimea and give proper devolution to the Donbas. In both cases difficult but not inconceivable, and would be vastly better than continuing this horror for months, and although Ukraine would promise not to join NATO they'd be able to join the EU, which economically matter infinitely more.
But, seriously, the trend for Boris looks quite promising (for him) judging by a quick scan I had of the figures. I think that is worrying because for everyone's sakes he really needs to go. But it just ain't happening is it?
I'm not brave enough to predict he definitely fights the 2024 election but I cannot see how he departs before summer 2023 (May 2023 elections are admittedly a much more pivotal set of elections for the Tories).
Boris has risen from -31 to -7 (+24) in two weeks and Rishi is +15 (+12)
That's an incredible surge for Boris. Is he actually going to shrug off Partygate?
I guess a huge war in Europe, and potential nuclear apocalypse, is the kind of thing that might just do that. And he is having a good war. Involved, animated, sensible
I suspect some of the hysterical shrieking about Ukrainian refugees cruelly stuck in, er, France, by Bojo's insane Nazism, is actually sublimated anger that Boris seems to be escaping his Nemesis
Or maybe just a rally round the flag bounce that could blow away in an instant on a different breeze. 🙂
If anything it has brought a focus on Boris governments closeness to Putin money in the lead up to Putin’s barbarity, in a way that might not even have been scrutinised till a change of government, without this war.
Is there a volunteer role out on the Ukraine borders that fits a person like yourself, man with a suitcase loves foreign travel and experiences, got all the patter for meeting and empathising with strangers? It must be a 24hrs chaos on the bordering countries. Have you ever been close to a war zone?
I totally have.
I was once held at gunpoint, with a photographer mate, by Hezbollah, in a Hezbollah safe house in the cold mountains of south Lebanon, in a village - Machgarah - which was simultaneously being shelled and strafed by the Israelis. I heard the screams of people dying, and saw the bombs explode. They kept us for hours
Miraculously, Hezbollah did not briskly execute us (despite suspecting we were Israeli agents). When I got home I told some experienced Middle East hacks what happened to me and they fell off their chairs. Apparently our chances of surviving that were about 1%. We got very very very lucky
I'm getting a modest cold sweat even now, thinking about it. FFFFFuck
Held at gunpoint by hezzbollah with 99% chance of death whilst simultaneously shelled by the Israeli’s. 😲
How did you answer their questions?
A local teacher heroically ‘volunteered’ to interpret.
At first he was almost genial, but as he realised what was probably coming down the line, he got increasingly agitated. Finally he fled, ashen faced, after soulfully clasping our hands and whispering ‘good luck’
Ahghhhhh....Reports of "Truckloads of Ukrainian Aid stuck in UK due to post-Brexit paperwork: charity workers who are trying to send aid to people in war-torn Ukraine say their donations are spending days stuck at Dover due to complex post-Brexit checks." (PoliticsHome) https://twitter.com/militaryhistori/status/1500889381166587904
Why are they in trucks in Dover
They should be airlifted direct to Poland
The sane approach would be to send money and purchase everything from Poland and or Germany / Surrounding countries.
The second approach is then to ship the stuff by lorry as that is cheaper than air freight.
The head of a charity actually made that point that by donating £40 they would have an immediate impact
And if humanitarian aid convoys are being held by red tape then the EU should exempt such convoys
Sorry to be a bit of a sceptic but the problem with that head of a charity stuff is the question of how much they are getting paid out of that charity money. The UK Red Cross accounts for 2020 show they had an income of £305 million of which £103 million was spent on staff costs. They employ over 4,300 people of whom only 28 are working internationally.
I am not saying don't give your money to them but it seems to me they have a vested interest in making sure charity passes through their hands rather than going direct to the people in need.
Not to mention dissing Ukrainians who are desperate to bring material aid & comfort to their homeland. That is equally outrageous IMHO.
Like saying the small ships that helped save the BEF from beach at Dunkirk, should have left the job to RN.
Don't be a twit. Trucking a random mixture of low cost garbage from UK to Ukr costs as much as the cargo itself.
here's what the Disasters Emergency Committee says about dosh you give it
"Approximately 93% of what you donate is divided between our 14 member agencies. Of this amount, they can use up to 7% to cover their own management costs related to the appeal (this includes things such as overheads relating to staff working on the response and monitoring and evaluation of their programmes). The remainder will then go directly towards the response programme. Of this, 50% minimum will pay for supplying items such as medicines, water, food, hygiene items, temporary shelters, tarpaulins etc. The rest will cover costs such as transporting these materials, the costs of staff carrying out distributions or providing health care (the majority of whom are locals from the affected area), or communications costs to ensure good coordination and information sharing."
So that's 90% of the money directed to the response program, which knows what is needed and how to bulk buy it.
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
How happy will be a French consumer ? - How happy will a French consumer be? And geniusness would be an OK comic formulation by a native speaker if you otherwise passed muster, which you don't.
I don't understand you guys being so bad at what you do. Is Vlad sending out the useless conscript cyberwarriors in the first wave to lull us into a false sense of security?
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
Ah, so we shouldn't stand up to dictators invading other countries, because it might lead to (temporarily) higher costs for consumers.
I fear a more common view that we'd like. Few so direct though.
It's hilarious how these pro-Russian posters are cycling through PB, lasting about three days each before getting humiliated. Do we really believe they are different people?
This particular forum is genuinely unusual, in both the level of debate, intellectual curiosity and longevity of posters.
A Russian bot sticks out like a sore thumb here, in a way they don’t in most other forums.
so you were betting on Hillary, good to know
You’ve not been here long, and won’t be for much longer, but pb does love a nickname. You may notice that the current U.K. pm is rarely referred to as Prime Minister Johnson. Still, enjoy your brief stay with us. You may learn stuff...
The diminutive of Vladimir is Vova. So we can call him Vova the Carcinoma is p_p prefers.
@PJohnson had this wonderful schtick about how he really cared about the Ukrainian people, and they'd all be much happier if they just laid down their weapons, and the Katyn massacre definitely didn't happen.
@d_d seems to be peddling this line that the (soft, decadent) West would be much happier if we just laid down our weapons.
And you know what, people would prefer lower commodity prices. But we'd also prefer it that countries in Europe didn't get invaded for... for... not being real countries in the first place. And we've also seen this movie before: you need to stand up for democratic countries invaded by tyrants, because (selfishly) they never stop at just one country.
On the subject of cucumbers. I was getting 80 rubles to the pound in June 2018 while at the World Cup. It hit 185 today.
I wonder how the price of salted cucumbers in Moscow had been impacted.
Ahghhhhh....Reports of "Truckloads of Ukrainian Aid stuck in UK due to post-Brexit paperwork: charity workers who are trying to send aid to people in war-torn Ukraine say their donations are spending days stuck at Dover due to complex post-Brexit checks." (PoliticsHome) https://twitter.com/militaryhistori/status/1500889381166587904
Why are they in trucks in Dover
They should be airlifted direct to Poland
The sane approach would be to send money and purchase everything from Poland and or Germany / Surrounding countries.
The second approach is then to ship the stuff by lorry as that is cheaper than air freight.
The head of a charity actually made that point that by donating £40 they would have an immediate impact
And if humanitarian aid convoys are being held by red tape then the EU should exempt such convoys
Sorry to be a bit of a sceptic but the problem with that head of a charity stuff is the question of how much they are getting paid out of that charity money. The UK Red Cross accounts for 2020 show they had an income of £305 million of which £103 million was spent on staff costs. They employ over 4,300 people of whom only 28 are working internationally.
I am not saying don't give your money to them but it seems to me they have a vested interest in making sure charity passes through their hands rather than going direct to the people in need.
Not to mention dissing Ukrainians who are desperate to bring material aid & comfort to their homeland. That is equally outrageous IMHO.
Like saying the small ships that helped save the BEF from beach at Dunkirk, should have left the job to RN.
Don't be a twit. Trucking a random mixture of low cost garbage from UK to Ukr costs as much as the cargo itself.
here's what the Disasters Emergency Committee says about dosh you give it
"Approximately 93% of what you donate is divided between our 14 member agencies. Of this amount, they can use up to 7% to cover their own management costs related to the appeal (this includes things such as overheads relating to staff working on the response and monitoring and evaluation of their programmes). The remainder will then go directly towards the response programme. Of this, 50% minimum will pay for supplying items such as medicines, water, food, hygiene items, temporary shelters, tarpaulins etc. The rest will cover costs such as transporting these materials, the costs of staff carrying out distributions or providing health care (the majority of whom are locals from the affected area), or communications costs to ensure good coordination and information sharing."
So that's 90% of the money directed to the response program, which knows what is needed and how to bulk buy it.
DONATE
Yup. Donating “stuff” sounds great but is inefficient, and also means things are not sourced locally where possible, which is part of what the DEC response will try and do so the money ends up in local hands too.
I have to come on here to apologise for inadvertently misleading PB when I posted yesterday that a Ukrainian woman had downed a Russian drone with a jar of gherkins. This was wrong, she downed it with a jar of picked tomatoes.
That might be the best correction since Sky Sports News apologised to David Goodwillie for calling him a racist, they wanted to correct the record and tell the world that David Goodwillie was in fact a rapist.
Which, of course, is also incorrect.
He was just subjecting the woman to the old Goodwillie, bad willy routine.
Perhaps indeed we are close to my suggested “deal”.
Secession of Crimea. Agreement not to join NATO. Some kind of deal in the Donbas (beefed up federal status and perhaps plebiscites on independence).
It's been proposed from the beginning, and is clearly more achievable than the broader stated goals of the Russians. The last one is tricky for both - from Ukraine it effectively gives up those areas for ever, since its not like Russia would permit a plebescite it would not win, and for Russia it requires them to reverse their recognition of the areas as independent (a minor concession, given they would still be de facto independent, but would still be a formal reversal).
Yes, and also Russia would need to recognise the whole of Ukraine formally and permanently, none of this "not a real country" stuff - I think Putin will find that harder than chucking the "independent" republics under the bus. Conversely Ukraine would need to give up Crimea and give proper devolution to the Donbas. In both cases difficult but not inconceivable, and would be vastly better than continuing this horror for months, and although Ukraine would promise not to join NATO they'd be able to join the EU, which economically matter infinitely more.
This is insane and just shows why Labour governments have been so appalling at negotiations historically. Russia already recognized the full territorial integrity of Ukraine in 1991. For them to launch an unprovoked attack on them just twenty years later, fail miserably militarily, be facing economic armageddon, and STILL get territorial gains, all in exchange for a promise of good behaviour, is pure insanity. It is a reward for warmongering and an incentive for every autocratic regime the world over to commit as many war crimes as possible so they can be rewarded for stopping. Thank God you aren't in parliament any more.
Perhaps indeed we are close to my suggested “deal”.
Secession of Crimea. Agreement not to join NATO. Some kind of deal in the Donbas (beefed up federal status and perhaps plebiscites on independence).
It's been proposed from the beginning, and is clearly more achievable than the broader stated goals of the Russians. The last one is tricky for both - from Ukraine it effectively gives up those areas for ever, since its not like Russia would permit a plebescite it would not win, and for Russia it requires them to reverse their recognition of the areas as independent (a minor concession, given they would still be de facto independent, but would still be a formal reversal).
Yes, and also Russia would need to recognise the whole of Ukraine formally and permanently, none of this "not a real country" stuff - I think Putin will find that harder than chucking the "independent" republics under the bus. Conversely Ukraine would need to give up Crimea and give proper devolution to the Donbas. In both cases difficult but not inconceivable, and would be vastly better than continuing this horror for months, and although Ukraine would promise not to join NATO they'd be able to join the EU, which economically matter infinitely more.
If Trump wins WH24 and Germany ramp up defence spending as indicated then it may well be that before the end of the decade EU membership is more important from a military defence point of view as well.
@PJohnson had this wonderful schtick about how he really cared about the Ukrainian people, and they'd all be much happier if they just laid down their weapons, and the Katyn massacre definitely didn't happen.
@d_d seems to be peddling this line that the (soft, decadent) West would be much happier if we just laid down our weapons.
And you know what, people would prefer lower commodity prices. But we'd also prefer it that countries in Europe didn't get invaded for... for... not being real countries in the first place. And we've also seen this movie before: you need to stand up for democratic countries invaded by tyrants, because (selfishly) they never stop at just one country.
Plus the West is already pulling its punches (because of the nuclear threat) and is feeling guilty about it - if ever a politician coudl get away with peopel facing higher commodity prices it is now.
But, seriously, the trend for Boris looks quite promising (for him) judging by a quick scan I had of the figures. I think that is worrying because for everyone's sakes he really needs to go. But it just ain't happening is it?
I'm not brave enough to predict he definitely fights the 2024 election but I cannot see how he departs before summer 2023 (May 2023 elections are admittedly a much more pivotal set of elections for the Tories).
Boris has risen from -31 to -7 (+24) in two weeks and Rishi is +15 (+12)
That's an incredible surge for Boris. Is he actually going to shrug off Partygate?
I guess a huge war in Europe, and potential nuclear apocalypse, is the kind of thing that might just do that. And he is having a good war. Involved, animated, sensible
I suspect some of the hysterical shrieking about Ukrainian refugees cruelly stuck in, er, France, by Bojo's insane Nazism, is actually sublimated anger that Boris seems to be escaping his Nemesis
Or maybe just a rally round the flag bounce that could blow away in an instant on a different breeze. 🙂
If anything it has brought a focus on Boris governments closeness to Putin money in the lead up to Putin’s barbarity, in a way that might not even have been scrutinised till a change of government, without this war.
Is there a volunteer role out on the Ukraine borders that fits a person like yourself, man with a suitcase loves foreign travel and experiences, got all the patter for meeting and empathising with strangers? It must be a 24hrs chaos on the bordering countries. Have you ever been close to a war zone?
I totally have.
I was once held at gunpoint, with a photographer mate, by Hezbollah, in a Hezbollah safe house in the cold mountains of south Lebanon, in a village - Machgarah - which was simultaneously being shelled and strafed by the Israelis. I heard the screams of people dying, and saw the bombs explode. They kept us for hours
Miraculously, Hezbollah did not briskly execute us (despite suspecting we were Israeli agents). When I got home I told some experienced Middle East hacks what happened to me and they fell off their chairs. Apparently our chances of surviving that were about 1%. We got very very very lucky
I'm getting a modest cold sweat even now, thinking about it. FFFFFuck
Held at gunpoint by hezzbollah with 99% chance of death whilst simultaneously shelled by the Israeli’s. 😲
How did you answer their questions?
A local teacher heroically ‘volunteered’ to interpret.
At first he was almost genial, but as he realised what was probably coming down the line, he got increasingly agitated. Finally he fled, ashen faced, after soulfully clasping our hands and whispering ‘good luck’
An unnerving moment, to be sure
The interpreter fled wishing you good luck? 🥵. What happened then?
What if the tie break question was Liverpool or Manchester United and your life depended on it 🤭
You still keep bigging up this neutrality option, but I still don't see how it could possibly work. Leaving aside that promising not to formally align with NATO etc is not a neutral choice if it is done only because they'll be killed if they do not, I don't see what it really gains the Russians either - Ukraine is already not in NATO or the EU but is clearly western aligned now, so other than pettily holding Ukraine back it doesn't achieve anything for Russia in terms of preventing Ukraine from leaving its orbit.
I can see Ukraine agreeing to it, reluctantly, but even though Russia claims to want it it doesn't seem to obtain much.
What it achieves is preventing what's happened in the Balkan States and Poland, with NATO troops right up to the Russian border. Neutrality would mean no Russian, American or other foreign troops there, ever - Ukrainer would be the Switzerland of Eastern Europe. My reading of Putin and Russian public opinion (insofar as we can judge from polls of doubtful validity) is that that's what they really want. Everything else is secondary.
Conversely, Ukraine wants to be in the EU, Western and prosperous. They don't really care about having foreign troops and missiles, except as a deterrent to precisely what's happening now. So part of the deal for them has to be security guarantees that they can rely on - a NATO statement that yes, we'll stay out, but not if Ukraine is violated again. In return the West could gradually wind its sanctions down if the Russians withdraw and the deal holds.
In other words, sooner or later the West will need to play a part in getting a lasting deal.
Perhaps indeed we are close to my suggested “deal”.
Secession of Crimea. Agreement not to join NATO. Some kind of deal in the Donbas (beefed up federal status and perhaps plebiscites on independence).
It's been proposed from the beginning, and is clearly more achievable than the broader stated goals of the Russians. The last one is tricky for both - from Ukraine it effectively gives up those areas for ever, since its not like Russia would permit a plebescite it would not win, and for Russia it requires them to reverse their recognition of the areas as independent (a minor concession, given they would still be de facto independent, but would still be a formal reversal).
Yes, and also Russia would need to recognise the whole of Ukraine formally and permanently, none of this "not a real country" stuff - I think Putin will find that harder than chucking the "independent" republics under the bus. Conversely Ukraine would need to give up Crimea and give proper devolution to the Donbas. In both cases difficult but not inconceivable, and would be vastly better than continuing this horror for months, and although Ukraine would promise not to join NATO they'd be able to join the EU, which economically matter infinitely more.
I accept that it is up to Ukraine to agree whatever they want with Russia as they are the ones fighting this war.
But I am highly sceptical of any 'deal' that gives any benefit to Russia. Isn't that just appeasement? We'd better use the time carefully if so, as it is just a matter of time until Russia act again.
Ahghhhhh....Reports of "Truckloads of Ukrainian Aid stuck in UK due to post-Brexit paperwork: charity workers who are trying to send aid to people in war-torn Ukraine say their donations are spending days stuck at Dover due to complex post-Brexit checks." (PoliticsHome) https://twitter.com/militaryhistori/status/1500889381166587904
Why are they in trucks in Dover
They should be airlifted direct to Poland
The sane approach would be to send money and purchase everything from Poland and or Germany / Surrounding countries.
The second approach is then to ship the stuff by lorry as that is cheaper than air freight.
The head of a charity actually made that point that by donating £40 they would have an immediate impact
And if humanitarian aid convoys are being held by red tape then the EU should exempt such convoys
Sorry to be a bit of a sceptic but the problem with that head of a charity stuff is the question of how much they are getting paid out of that charity money. The UK Red Cross accounts for 2020 show they had an income of £305 million of which £103 million was spent on staff costs. They employ over 4,300 people of whom only 28 are working internationally.
I am not saying don't give your money to them but it seems to me they have a vested interest in making sure charity passes through their hands rather than going direct to the people in need.
Not to mention dissing Ukrainians who are desperate to bring material aid & comfort to their homeland. That is equally outrageous IMHO.
Like saying the small ships that helped save the BEF from beach at Dunkirk, should have left the job to RN.
Don't be a twit. Trucking a random mixture of low cost garbage from UK to Ukr costs as much as the cargo itself.
here's what the Disasters Emergency Committee says about dosh you give it
"Approximately 93% of what you donate is divided between our 14 member agencies. Of this amount, they can use up to 7% to cover their own management costs related to the appeal (this includes things such as overheads relating to staff working on the response and monitoring and evaluation of their programmes). The remainder will then go directly towards the response programme. Of this, 50% minimum will pay for supplying items such as medicines, water, food, hygiene items, temporary shelters, tarpaulins etc. The rest will cover costs such as transporting these materials, the costs of staff carrying out distributions or providing health care (the majority of whom are locals from the affected area), or communications costs to ensure good coordination and information sharing."
So that's 90% of the money directed to the response program, which knows what is needed and how to bulk buy it.
DONATE
Perhaps you should scurry down to Dover so you can explain your superior wisdom to Ukrainians stuck there?
As for your quotation, I well remember how I donated a largish sum (for me anyway) to the Red Cross for Katrina relief. Turned out percentage of my & other donations was FAR less than 90%. Cannot remember actual figure, but it was a national scandal
@PJohnson had this wonderful schtick about how he really cared about the Ukrainian people, and they'd all be much happier if they just laid down their weapons, and the Katyn massacre definitely didn't happen.
@d_d seems to be peddling this line that the (soft, decadent) West would be much happier if we just laid down our weapons.
And you know what, people would prefer lower commodity prices. But we'd also prefer it that countries in Europe didn't get invaded for... for... not being real countries in the first place. And we've also seen this movie before: you need to stand up for democratic countries invaded by tyrants, because (selfishly) they never stop at just one country.
We're just not getting the same quality of Russian Bot that we used to.
Do you think it's because they are paid in roubles, and they just can't get the staff anymore?
I have to come on here to apologise for inadvertently misleading PB when I posted yesterday that a Ukrainian woman had downed a Russian drone with a jar of gherkins. This was wrong, she downed it with a jar of picked tomatoes.
That might be the best correction since Sky Sports News apologised to David Goodwillie for calling him a racist, they wanted to correct the record and tell the world that David Goodwillie was in fact a rapist.
Which, of course, is also incorrect.
BBC - Footballers Goodwillie and Robertson ruled as rapists
'Lord Armstrong said: "In the result, therefore, I find that in the early hours of Sunday 2 January 2011, at the flat in Greig Crescent, Armadale, both defenders (the footballers) took advantage of the pursuer when she was vulnerable through an excessive intake of alcohol and, because her cognitive functioning and decision-making processes were so impaired, was incapable of giving meaningful consent; and that they each raped her."'
I suspect our new pro-Putin poster is not actually a Russian bot, but is Eric Zemmour. That would explain his obsession with M. Macron, among other things. It's a bit desperate seeking attention on a UK forum, but Zemmour is desperate.
@PJohnson had this wonderful schtick about how he really cared about the Ukrainian people, and they'd all be much happier if they just laid down their weapons, and the Katyn massacre definitely didn't happen.
@d_d seems to be peddling this line that the (soft, decadent) West would be much happier if we just laid down our weapons.
And you know what, people would prefer lower commodity prices. But we'd also prefer it that countries in Europe didn't get invaded for... for... not being real countries in the first place. And we've also seen this movie before: you need to stand up for democratic countries invaded by tyrants, because (selfishly) they never stop at just one country.
We're just not getting the same quality of Russian Bot that we used to.
Do you think it's because they are paid in roubles, and they just can't get the staff anymore?
Perhaps they are short-staffed, with many of them stuck for days in a traffic jam north-west of Kyiv.
Before you lose access to the global internet and are stuck with Rus-net, I thought you would enjoy this humorous video. It asks “Are We The Baddies?”.
And yes. You are the baddies. You are the modern Nazis in fact. Anyway good day to you sir(s).
By the way the post war financial bail out of your bankrupt country won’t come without cost. I should think the decommissioning of 90% of your nuclear arsenal would be a reasonable starting point.
But, seriously, the trend for Boris looks quite promising (for him) judging by a quick scan I had of the figures. I think that is worrying because for everyone's sakes he really needs to go. But it just ain't happening is it?
I'm not brave enough to predict he definitely fights the 2024 election but I cannot see how he departs before summer 2023 (May 2023 elections are admittedly a much more pivotal set of elections for the Tories).
Boris has risen from -31 to -7 (+24) in two weeks and Rishi is +15 (+12)
That's an incredible surge for Boris. Is he actually going to shrug off Partygate?
I guess a huge war in Europe, and potential nuclear apocalypse, is the kind of thing that might just do that. And he is having a good war. Involved, animated, sensible
I suspect some of the hysterical shrieking about Ukrainian refugees cruelly stuck in, er, France, by Bojo's insane Nazism, is actually sublimated anger that Boris seems to be escaping his Nemesis
Or maybe just a rally round the flag bounce that could blow away in an instant on a different breeze. 🙂
If anything it has brought a focus on Boris governments closeness to Putin money in the lead up to Putin’s barbarity, in a way that might not even have been scrutinised till a change of government, without this war.
Is there a volunteer role out on the Ukraine borders that fits a person like yourself, man with a suitcase loves foreign travel and experiences, got all the patter for meeting and empathising with strangers? It must be a 24hrs chaos on the bordering countries. Have you ever been close to a war zone?
I totally have.
I was once held at gunpoint, with a photographer mate, by Hezbollah, in a Hezbollah safe house in the cold mountains of south Lebanon, in a village - Machgarah - which was simultaneously being shelled and strafed by the Israelis. I heard the screams of people dying, and saw the bombs explode. They kept us for hours
Miraculously, Hezbollah did not briskly execute us (despite suspecting we were Israeli agents). When I got home I told some experienced Middle East hacks what happened to me and they fell off their chairs. Apparently our chances of surviving that were about 1%. We got very very very lucky
I'm getting a modest cold sweat even now, thinking about it. FFFFFuck
Held at gunpoint by hezzbollah with 99% chance of death whilst simultaneously shelled by the Israeli’s. 😲
How did you answer their questions?
A local teacher heroically ‘volunteered’ to interpret.
At first he was almost genial, but as he realised what was probably coming down the line, he got increasingly agitated. Finally he fled, ashen faced, after soulfully clasping our hands and whispering ‘good luck’
An unnerving moment, to be sure
The interpreter fled wishing you good luck? 🥵. What happened then?
What if the tie break question was Liverpool or Manchester United and your life depended on it 🤭
I have to come on here to apologise for inadvertently misleading PB when I posted yesterday that a Ukrainian woman had downed a Russian drone with a jar of gherkins. This was wrong, she downed it with a jar of picked tomatoes.
That might be the best correction since Sky Sports News apologised to David Goodwillie for calling him a racist, they wanted to correct the record and tell the world that David Goodwillie was in fact a rapist.
Which, of course, is also incorrect.
BBC - Footballers Goodwillie and Robertson ruled as rapists
'Lord Armstrong said: "In the result, therefore, I find that in the early hours of Sunday 2 January 2011, at the flat in Greig Crescent, Armadale, both defenders (the footballers) took advantage of the pursuer when she was vulnerable through an excessive intake of alcohol and, because her cognitive functioning and decision-making processes were so impaired, was incapable of giving meaningful consent; and that they each raped her."'
“Ruled as rapists” not “rapists”.
Found to be rapists. Judges make findings of fact, rulings as to the law.
Now, found to be x != actually is x, but = is x within the systems which matter for practical purposes (liability for defamation mainly) and is the best evidence we are likely to get that in fact, is x.
I have to come on here to apologise for inadvertently misleading PB when I posted yesterday that a Ukrainian woman had downed a Russian drone with a jar of gherkins. This was wrong, she downed it with a jar of picked tomatoes.
That might be the best correction since Sky Sports News apologised to David Goodwillie for calling him a racist, they wanted to correct the record and tell the world that David Goodwillie was in fact a rapist.
Which, of course, is also incorrect.
BBC - Footballers Goodwillie and Robertson ruled as rapists
'Lord Armstrong said: "In the result, therefore, I find that in the early hours of Sunday 2 January 2011, at the flat in Greig Crescent, Armadale, both defenders (the footballers) took advantage of the pursuer when she was vulnerable through an excessive intake of alcohol and, because her cognitive functioning and decision-making processes were so impaired, was incapable of giving meaningful consent; and that they each raped her."'
Before you lose access to the global internet and are stuck with Rus-net, I thought you would enjoy this humorous video. It asks “Are We The Baddies?”.
And yes. You are the baddies. You are the modern Nazis in fact. Anyway good day to you sir(s).
By the way the post war financial bail out of your bankrupt country won’t come without cost. I should think the decommissioning of 90% of your nuclear arsenal would be a reasonable starting point.
Yeah, maybe the Russians should sign the deal in a small railway carriage.
Seriously when this is over Russia must pay for sure and some disarmament would be a good idea but let’s not make the same mistake as after world war 1.
Perhaps indeed we are close to my suggested “deal”.
Secession of Crimea. Agreement not to join NATO. Some kind of deal in the Donbas (beefed up federal status and perhaps plebiscites on independence).
It's been proposed from the beginning, and is clearly more achievable than the broader stated goals of the Russians. The last one is tricky for both - from Ukraine it effectively gives up those areas for ever, since its not like Russia would permit a plebescite it would not win, and for Russia it requires them to reverse their recognition of the areas as independent (a minor concession, given they would still be de facto independent, but would still be a formal reversal).
Yes, and also Russia would need to recognise the whole of Ukraine formally and permanently, none of this "not a real country" stuff - I think Putin will find that harder than chucking the "independent" republics under the bus. Conversely Ukraine would need to give up Crimea and give proper devolution to the Donbas. In both cases difficult but not inconceivable, and would be vastly better than continuing this horror for months, and although Ukraine would promise not to join NATO they'd be able to join the EU, which economically matter infinitely more.
The trouble is that Russia is not a reliable partner. Why would you believe any of their assurances? As for devolution in the Donbass - do you think Putin has been reading the 1997 Labour manifesto? He doesn't care about that. What he wants is to be able to use his clients to cause trouble in Kiev.
Still this wouldn't be a terrible holding position whilst we wait for economic collapse in Russia. We can then demand reparations to Ukraine as a condition for unfreezing the foreign reserves and a peacekeeping force on the Russian side of the border. I'd also like to see them removed from their position on the UN Security council but don't know how easy that would be?
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
How happy will be a French consumer ? - How happy will a French consumer be? And geniusness would be an OK comic formulation by a native speaker if you otherwise passed muster, which you don't.
I don't understand you guys being so bad at what you do. Is Vlad sending out the useless conscript cyberwarriors in the first wave to lull us into a false sense of security?
Regarding peacekeeping in Ukraine Macron has achieved nothing so far. The rising commodities prices hitting French consumers will take its tall on his re-election odds
What peace is there to keep in Ukraine, exactly?
Preventing war was a lost cause, but going to Moscow to have a go at that was a sensible thing to try.
so what exactly Macron has achieved there?
UPDATE 3-SocGen warns it could be stripped of Russian business
* French bank has $20 billion of Russia exposure. This is a clear political liability for him
And yet Macron's polling has gone up since the start of the Ukraine crisis. In mid-February, he was on 24-25% in the polls, and now he's 29-30%.
So, when you say "political liability", do you mean "great thing for his polling"?
The polling is absurd. I expect the polling figures to change dramatically in early April. What exactly has Macron won for France? Ukrainian refuges ? sky-high gas prices? the possibility of a nuclear conflict/incident in Europe?
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.
Also - don't you perhaps think that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the Ukrainian refugees, rather than Emmanuel Macron?
Macron is weak, that's why Putin attacked. If the French prefer to see Macron as a hero and great administrator, well, let's see...
So, Putin attacked Ukraine because Macron is weak?
It's all Macron's fault, huh?
God, there was me thinking it was Putin's fault for sending troops in, and killing civilians, when it was actually all Macron's fault all along.
Well, you live and learn.
Thanks @d_d for being such an asset to this site. How do you do it? This penetrating analysis is beyond compare.
so you still don't get it, huh
Putin is responsible for Putin's actions.
No-one else.
this question is not about Putin. What exactly Macron is supposed to do to combat commodity and food supply shocks ? How happy will be a French consumer ? But wait perhaps Macron will be re-elected for the third time for his geniusness
Ah, so we shouldn't stand up to dictators invading other countries, because it might lead to (temporarily) higher costs for consumers.
I fear a more common view that we'd like. Few so direct though.
It's hilarious how these pro-Russian posters are cycling through PB, lasting about three days each before getting humiliated. Do we really believe they are different people?
This particular forum is genuinely unusual, in both the level of debate, intellectual curiosity and longevity of posters.
A Russian bot sticks out like a sore thumb here, in a way they don’t in most other forums.
so you were betting on Hillary, good to know
You didn’t respond to my question about the risk of cucumber inflation.
It’s quite exciting to have some real Russian Intel on here, so perhaps you could answer this one.
Is V Putin really a massive, screaming, gay?
Ser-gay?
“ It’s quite exciting to have some real Russian Intel on here, so perhaps you could answer this one.”
Talking of real intel, I haven’t seen a Yokes posts for ages. I think the last was a week ago, something like don’t get carried away with how bad Russia doing, they may have planned for a longer timetable than a win in just a few days. Have I missed a more recent one? Surely we should be feeling a bit more confident Ukraine in better position now for negotiation? Is this the optimal moment for Ukraine striking a deal or can it get better still?
Ahghhhhh....Reports of "Truckloads of Ukrainian Aid stuck in UK due to post-Brexit paperwork: charity workers who are trying to send aid to people in war-torn Ukraine say their donations are spending days stuck at Dover due to complex post-Brexit checks." (PoliticsHome) https://twitter.com/militaryhistori/status/1500889381166587904
Why are they in trucks in Dover
They should be airlifted direct to Poland
The sane approach would be to send money and purchase everything from Poland and or Germany / Surrounding countries.
The second approach is then to ship the stuff by lorry as that is cheaper than air freight.
The head of a charity actually made that point that by donating £40 they would have an immediate impact
And if humanitarian aid convoys are being held by red tape then the EU should exempt such convoys
Sorry to be a bit of a sceptic but the problem with that head of a charity stuff is the question of how much they are getting paid out of that charity money. The UK Red Cross accounts for 2020 show they had an income of £305 million of which £103 million was spent on staff costs. They employ over 4,300 people of whom only 28 are working internationally.
I am not saying don't give your money to them but it seems to me they have a vested interest in making sure charity passes through their hands rather than going direct to the people in need.
Not to mention dissing Ukrainians who are desperate to bring material aid & comfort to their homeland. That is equally outrageous IMHO.
Like saying the small ships that helped save the BEF from beach at Dunkirk, should have left the job to RN.
Don't be a twit. Trucking a random mixture of low cost garbage from UK to Ukr costs as much as the cargo itself.
here's what the Disasters Emergency Committee says about dosh you give it
"Approximately 93% of what you donate is divided between our 14 member agencies. Of this amount, they can use up to 7% to cover their own management costs related to the appeal (this includes things such as overheads relating to staff working on the response and monitoring and evaluation of their programmes). The remainder will then go directly towards the response programme. Of this, 50% minimum will pay for supplying items such as medicines, water, food, hygiene items, temporary shelters, tarpaulins etc. The rest will cover costs such as transporting these materials, the costs of staff carrying out distributions or providing health care (the majority of whom are locals from the affected area), or communications costs to ensure good coordination and information sharing."
So that's 90% of the money directed to the response program, which knows what is needed and how to bulk buy it.
DONATE
Yup. Donating “stuff” sounds great but is inefficient, and also means things are not sourced locally where possible, which is part of what the DEC response will try and do so the money ends up in local hands too.
I find it faintly astonishing that everyone in this thread blames the humanitarian effort for attempting to deliver stuff across the Channel, rather than the shitshow of post-Brexit incompetence for making sure the stuff gets stuck at the border.
You still keep bigging up this neutrality option, but I still don't see how it could possibly work. Leaving aside that promising not to formally align with NATO etc is not a neutral choice if it is done only because they'll be killed if they do not, I don't see what it really gains the Russians either - Ukraine is already not in NATO or the EU but is clearly western aligned now, so other than pettily holding Ukraine back it doesn't achieve anything for Russia in terms of preventing Ukraine from leaving its orbit.
I can see Ukraine agreeing to it, reluctantly, but even though Russia claims to want it it doesn't seem to obtain much.
What it achieves is preventing what's happened in the Balkan States and Poland, with NATO troops right up to the Russian border. Neutrality would mean no Russian, American or other foreign troops there, ever - Ukrainer would be the Switzerland of Eastern Europe. My reading of Putin and Russian public opinion (insofar as we can judge from polls of doubtful validity) is that that's what they really want. Everything else is secondary.
Conversely, Ukraine wants to be in the EU, Western and prosperous. They don't really care about having foreign troops and missiles, except as a deterrent to precisely what's happening now. So part of the deal for them has to be security guarantees that they can rely on - a NATO statement that yes, we'll stay out, but not if Ukraine is violated again. In return the West could gradually wind its sanctions down if the Russians withdraw and the deal holds.
In other words, sooner or later the West will need to play a part in getting a lasting deal.
Russia surely wouldn't regard EU membership as being neutral. What if the EU, rather than NATO, decided to put troops there? So neutrality which does not prevent EU membership would be pointless.
Been out the loop parts of today, but has it been confirmed about the attack on the Russian helicopters that took out 30 of them?
There was confirmation that the helicopters were there, and there was a video that purported to show a series of explosions at the airfield from a distance.
@NickPalmer "In other words, sooner or later the West will need to play a part in getting a lasting deal. "
How do you do a deal with a country that habitually lies about its intentions, and breaks its treaties?
Come on, Nick. You're a Diplomacy player, a good one by all accounts. You know that once you've shown you cannot be trusted you can't do any type of deal. Nobody is going to be gulled by you anymore.
If I were d_d the point I'd be hammering is, we never see tweets saying Two Ukrainian aircraft have been downed over the city, the military says, and bear in mind the US has the best cyberwar/disinfo capability in the free world, with native English speakers on its books for starters, so praps we are being painted a picture and Russia is in fact winning a war against people who are in fact fascists.
I have to come on here to apologise for inadvertently misleading PB when I posted yesterday that a Ukrainian woman had downed a Russian drone with a jar of gherkins. This was wrong, she downed it with a jar of picked tomatoes.
That might be the best correction since Sky Sports News apologised to David Goodwillie for calling him a racist, they wanted to correct the record and tell the world that David Goodwillie was in fact a rapist.
Which, of course, is also incorrect.
BBC - Footballers Goodwillie and Robertson ruled as rapists
'Lord Armstrong said: "In the result, therefore, I find that in the early hours of Sunday 2 January 2011, at the flat in Greig Crescent, Armadale, both defenders (the footballers) took advantage of the pursuer when she was vulnerable through an excessive intake of alcohol and, because her cognitive functioning and decision-making processes were so impaired, was incapable of giving meaningful consent; and that they each raped her."'
“Ruled as rapists” not “rapists”.
Is that a meaningful distinction?
Very much so!
I doubt they’re likely to sue anyone anytime soon, but we should be very careful when talking about such civil cases.
Trial by jury is sacrosanct in my opinion. Best we don’t undermine it.
As the prospect of a red wave grows, a series of Republican missteps including recruiting stumbles, weak fundraising and intense infighting is threatening the GOP’s path to the Senate majority.
Arizona’s Republican Gov. Doug Ducey dealt his party its latest setback late last week by announcing he would not challenge Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly this fall. His decision, which leaves no obvious front-runner in a crowded Republican primary, disappointed Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell and his allies who had spent months privately encouraging Ducey to run. . . .
Republican candidates in Arizona, Georgia and Nevada are struggling to keep pace with Democratic fundraising. Recruiting failures have dashed GOP hopes in reach states like Maryland and threaten a prime pickup opportunity in New Hampshire. And a recent plan that would raise taxes on low-income Americans and seniors, released by the Republican Senate midterm chief, Florida Sen. Rick Scott, is putting GOP candidates in a difficult position across states like Wisconsin, Ohio and Florida. . . .
Scott, the leader of the GOP’s Senate midterm efforts, released an 11-point plan late last month that would impose a modest tax increase for many of the lowest paid Americans, while opening the door for cutting Social Security and Medicare. The Senate Democrats’ political arm released a radio ad within 24 hours declaring, “If Senate Republicans win, we pay the price.” . . .
The Senate Republican leader forcefully rebuked Scott’s plan during the Republican leadership’s weekly news conference, which Scott was part of.
“Let me tell you what would not be a part of our agenda,” McConnell said moments after Scott stepped away from the event. “We will not have as part of our agenda a bill that raises taxes on half of the American people and sunsets Social Security and Medicare within five years.” . . .
In Nevada, Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, one of the nation’s most endangered Democrats, reported $10.5 million cash on hand at the end of last year, compared to Republican former state Attorney General Adam Laxalt’s $1.7 million.
Georgia Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock finished the year with $22.9 million in the bank, while likely Republican challenger Herschel Walker, the former football star who has been endorsed by Trump, reported $5.4 million.
And Arizona Democrat Kelly, a former astronaut who won a 2020 special election to serve out the final two years of the late Sen. John McCain’s term, reported $18.6 million in the bank. Arizona’s Republican state Attorney General Mark Brnovich, the best-known Republican in a crowded primary field, reported less than $800,000 in the bank. . . .
Its numbers like those that make the Conservatives look even more contemptible for the donations they accept from people they shouldn't.
You still keep bigging up this neutrality option, but I still don't see how it could possibly work. Leaving aside that promising not to formally align with NATO etc is not a neutral choice if it is done only because they'll be killed if they do not, I don't see what it really gains the Russians either - Ukraine is already not in NATO or the EU but is clearly western aligned now, so other than pettily holding Ukraine back it doesn't achieve anything for Russia in terms of preventing Ukraine from leaving its orbit.
I can see Ukraine agreeing to it, reluctantly, but even though Russia claims to want it it doesn't seem to obtain much.
What it achieves is preventing what's happened in the Balkan States and Poland, with NATO troops right up to the Russian border. Neutrality would mean no Russian, American or other foreign troops there, ever - Ukrainer would be the Switzerland of Eastern Europe. My reading of Putin and Russian public opinion (insofar as we can judge from polls of doubtful validity) is that that's what they really want. Everything else is secondary.
Conversely, Ukraine wants to be in the EU, Western and prosperous. They don't really care about having foreign troops and missiles, except as a deterrent to precisely what's happening now. So part of the deal for them has to be security guarantees that they can rely on - a NATO statement that yes, we'll stay out, but not if Ukraine is violated again. In return the West could gradually wind its sanctions down if the Russians withdraw and the deal holds.
In other words, sooner or later the West will need to play a part in getting a lasting deal.
Russia surely wouldn't regard EU membership as being neutral. What if the EU, rather than NATO, decided to put troops there? So neutrality which does not prevent EU membership would be pointless.
All of this kicked off in 2014 over a co-operation deal with the EU. If Russia concedes on Ukraine having a close relationship with the EU, on a pathway to membership, then that's the strategic defeat they've been working to avoid for eight years.
There's a lot of fighting left until they'd be willing to concede that.
Seeing has how even well-run charities are NOT totally efficient, sounds bit harsh to criticize Ukrainians who are eager to personally contribute to their country NOW rather than just sending a check?
My argument is NOT that giving to national or international agencies is bad, rather that it it wrong to assume that all individual donor efforts are wrong or foolish or (dare I say) counter-productive.
IF you wish to defend HM's current G, is it really necessary to diss these individuals?
Comments
If not it will find it very hard to attract investment, who would what to build a factory, office building or develop a block of flats, if they thought there was a risk of another Russian invasion blowing it all up?
Details here:
https://twitter.com/kgorchinskaya/status/1500840773822169090
I am happy to correct the record.
That’s why an agreement not to join NATO or even be neutral (like Austria, like Ireland) is totally do-able, whereas an agreement not to join the EU would not be acceptable.
If one takes Russia at its word (hard, since the country is run by an evil c***), their concern is demilitarisation.
LONDON — Russian chef Alexei Zimin is donating part of his London restaurant’s revenue to support Red Cross work with Ukrainian refugees. He has been singing songs by a Russian dissident poet on Instagram, posting messages such as: “Stop the war. Withdraw troops. Bring our soldiers home.” He knows that in speaking out this way, he may never be able to return to Russia, where he has been credited with leading a gastronomic revolution and owns two more restaurants.
And yet angry messages are filling his restaurant’s voice-mail inbox. “Russians are killers,” one declared. “You’re Putin’s Russians,” another accused.
Zimin, 50, is among those who have been hit by a sudden and rapidly rising tide of anti-Russian sentiment in Europe. While governments have moved to punish Russian President Vladimir Putin and sanction oligarchs, while societies have been calling for cultural figures – from hockey stars to opera singers – to denounce the war, Russian expats who have never had sympathy for Putin and who are horrified by what’s happening in Ukraine say they are facing a wave of generalized hostility.
“Across Europe, people who have no involvement with the war are being targeted and removed from positions,” said Aleksandra Lewicki, a sociologist at the University of Sussex. “There’s a sense of a clear enemy, it’s Russians, from all walks of life, who are being targeted by racist hate crimes and derogatory comments.”
SSI - note that some of the same anti-Russian bigotry has featured here on PB in recent days. Including calls for extermination of all Russians.
To my mind, suchlike are playing Putin's game, either deliberately or ignorantly, not that THAT matters.
This is NOT a prediction, but a plausible answer to your question.
It’s quite exciting to have some real Russian Intel on here, so perhaps you could answer this one.
Is V Putin really a massive, screaming, gay?
Putin has crushed a generation's dreams
BY BEN JUDAH"
https://unherd.com/2022/03/the-russia-we-have-lost/
The second has always been the case, in the past something like unilateral disarmament is a clear example that had many supporters across the country but a no-no for people who wanted to succeed in politics.
https://twitter.com/threshedthought/status/1500824178219491334?s=21
Dr Mike Martin:
“All western strategy over Ukraine has to send the right messages to China.
This has become about much more than Crimea and the Donbas.
Everyone looking for a fudge or a climb down for Putin that includes those regions needs to understand that this is all about the international security order, for which Ukrainian sovereignty will be held up as the reason.
All fudges and off ramps need to be designed around Putin rather than around Ukrainian territory.”
It’s a good bounce back in popularity signalled by the poll.
But supportive front pages can be ethereal.
I wonder what is really thought about him under the surface now, how quickly war bounce rally round flag in crisis, and this is a genuine crisis, can fade. Appears Marquee Mark not won back yet, nor other conservatives who felt let down. The phantom leaker against Boris shut up weeks ago, not wishing to waste revelations beneath current media narrative I suspect. The Met might feel they can’t rock the boat with a revelation in a genuine crisis. so I wonder to what extent normal business is merely on hold?
Are the conservatives even having a good crisis overall, it’s not just todays problems in the political news beneath the main news, they started the sanction response off by misjudging the mood to go further and being outflanked by US and EU. Is this why the gaps still three and Labour going up two during war bounce, an indication public not happy with how their government handling what’s in their gift to control?
And then there’s other aspects of government competence we won’t be able to judge for ages, such as Alan Duncan’s today interview this morning, in a nutshell the economic danger of going too quick to fast
“There is this auction of indignation, which all of us totally understand, against anything to do with Russia.
"So they ban this, ban that and ban everything, but in the end, we’re going to end up banning our own supplies.”
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/cost-of-living/former-melton-mp-sir-alan-6764731
I am not saying don't give your money to them but it seems to me they have a vested interest in making sure charity passes through their hands rather than going direct to the people in need.
Like saying the small ships that helped save the BEF from beach at Dunkirk, should have left the job to RN.
How did you answer their questions?
@PJohnson had this wonderful schtick about how he really cared about the Ukrainian people, and they'd all be much happier if they just laid down their weapons, and the Katyn massacre definitely didn't happen.
@d_d seems to be peddling this line that the (soft, decadent) West would be much happier if we just laid down our weapons.
And you know what, people would prefer lower commodity prices. But we'd also prefer it that countries in Europe didn't get invaded for... for... not being real countries in the first place. And we've also seen this movie before: you need to stand up for democratic countries invaded by tyrants, because (selfishly) they never stop at just one country.
He’s also right. We’ve lost half the world. It’s closed down. Shuttered
We lived through a golden age of go-anywhere travel and now it is over
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-38651041
'Lord Armstrong said: "In the result, therefore, I find that in the early hours of Sunday 2 January 2011, at the flat in Greig Crescent, Armadale, both defenders (the footballers) took advantage of the pursuer when she was vulnerable through an excessive intake of alcohol and, because her cognitive functioning and decision-making processes were so impaired, was incapable of giving meaningful consent; and that they each raped her."'
At first he was almost genial, but as he realised what was probably coming down the line, he got increasingly agitated. Finally he fled, ashen faced, after soulfully clasping our hands and whispering ‘good luck’
An unnerving moment, to be sure
here's what the Disasters Emergency Committee says about dosh you give it
"Approximately 93% of what you donate is divided between our 14 member agencies. Of this amount, they can use up to 7% to cover their own management costs related to the appeal (this includes things such as overheads relating to staff working on the response and monitoring and evaluation of their programmes). The remainder will then go directly towards the response programme. Of this, 50% minimum will pay for supplying items such as medicines, water, food, hygiene items, temporary shelters, tarpaulins etc. The rest will cover costs such as transporting these materials, the costs of staff carrying out distributions or providing health care (the majority of whom are locals from the affected area), or communications costs to ensure good coordination and information sharing."
So that's 90% of the money directed to the response program, which knows what is needed and how to bulk buy it.
DONATE
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-07/morgan-stanley-sees-russia-set-for-venezuela-style-debt-default
I wonder how the price of salted cucumbers in Moscow had been impacted.
What if the tie break question was Liverpool or Manchester United and your life depended on it 🤭
Conversely, Ukraine wants to be in the EU, Western and prosperous. They don't really care about having foreign troops and missiles, except as a deterrent to precisely what's happening now. So part of the deal for them has to be security guarantees that they can rely on - a NATO statement that yes, we'll stay out, but not if Ukraine is violated again. In return the West could gradually wind its sanctions down if the Russians withdraw and the deal holds.
In other words, sooner or later the West will need to play a part in getting a lasting deal.
But I am highly sceptical of any 'deal' that gives any benefit to Russia. Isn't that just appeasement? We'd better use the time carefully if so, as it is just a matter of time until Russia act again.
As for your quotation, I well remember how I donated a largish sum (for me anyway) to the Red Cross for Katrina relief. Turned out percentage of my & other donations was FAR less than 90%. Cannot remember actual figure, but it was a national scandal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Red_Cross#Hurricane_Katrina_controversy
I will ignore your personal insult, as I really don't give a dying fiddler's final farewell fuck what you think.
Do you think it's because they are paid in roubles, and they just can't get the staff anymore?
Before you lose access to the global internet and are stuck with Rus-net, I thought you would enjoy this humorous video. It asks “Are We The Baddies?”.
https://youtu.be/ToKcmnrE5oY
And yes. You are the baddies. You are the modern Nazis in fact. Anyway good day to you sir(s).
By the way the post war financial bail out of your bankrupt country won’t come without cost. I should think the decommissioning of 90% of your nuclear arsenal would be a reasonable starting point.
@IAPonomarenko
We’re having air combat over Kyiv now.
Two Russian aircraft have been downed over the city, the military says.
https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1500918368202891271
Now, found to be x != actually is x, but = is x within the systems which matter for practical purposes (liability for defamation mainly) and is the best evidence we are likely to get that in fact, is x.
Seriously when this is over Russia must pay for sure and some disarmament would be a good idea but let’s not make the same mistake as after world war 1.
short for Penis Minimus Omnium
Still this wouldn't be a terrible holding position whilst we wait for economic collapse in Russia. We can then demand reparations to Ukraine as a condition for unfreezing the foreign reserves and a peacekeeping force on the Russian side of the border. I'd also like to see them removed from their position on the UN Security council but don't know how easy that would be?
Talking of real intel, I haven’t seen a Yokes posts for ages. I think the last was a week ago, something like don’t get carried away with how bad Russia doing, they may have planned for a longer timetable than a win in just a few days.
Have I missed a more recent one? Surely we should be feeling a bit more confident Ukraine in better position now for negotiation?
Is this the optimal moment for Ukraine striking a deal or can it get better still?
Hope Putin doesn't read spy novels.
And this is the video that claims to be of explosions last night at the airfield. https://twitter.com/MrKovalenko/status/1500686412605181953
"In other words, sooner or later the West will need to play a part in getting a lasting deal. "
How do you do a deal with a country that habitually lies about its intentions, and breaks its treaties?
Come on, Nick. You're a Diplomacy player, a good one by all accounts. You know that once you've shown you cannot be trusted you can't do any type of deal. Nobody is going to be gulled by you anymore.
Who is going to do a deal with Putin now?
I doubt they’re likely to sue anyone anytime soon, but we should be very careful when talking about such civil cases.
Trial by jury is sacrosanct in my opinion. Best we don’t undermine it.
There's a lot of fighting left until they'd be willing to concede that.
My argument is NOT that giving to national or international agencies is bad, rather that it it wrong to assume that all individual donor efforts are wrong or foolish or (dare I say) counter-productive.
IF you wish to defend HM's current G, is it really necessary to diss these individuals?