For the first time in years I bought a Sunday Times to see just what it had on the Lebedev connection. It was damning. If there were not a war on Boris would be out pronto just on the evidence of that one edition.
He will certainly have to go before the next election. Never mind the text, some of the pictures were lethal. Labour and the LibDems would only have to keep reprinting them in leaflet after leaflet to torpedo the Tory campaign below the water line. The Tories simply cannot go into battle with him as leader. This is not the USA, and he is not Trump. The voters won't back him blind, whatever success he may have in the war or esewhere.
So if he's toast, when does he actually pop out of the toaster?
His MPs clearly think 'not now - the war you know.' They can maybe get away with that a bit but it's not a great look. Then there's the locals. 'Wait for them' is another excuse for inaction. What then? 'Takes a while to change a leader, and he was a winner'. Not sure that will suffice for very long.
Regrdless of the odds, I would say some time this year seems most likely by a long way, but he could get lucky with the war if that drags on. So maybe Mike is right, and at the odds 2023 looks decent enough value for the momnet.
The other dilemma for Conservative MPs is that the longer he is left in place, the more he taints the whole party. After all, some of this was known ages ago- enough for people to ask some pretty probing questions. But they all (even Boris-sceptics like Hunt) backed him for PM.
On topic, surely Boris will go in Autumn 2023 if and only if he is confident of winning well. After all, that's why Maggie and Blair went for elections after four years and Major and Brown didn't.
Given the wider economic forecasts, that seems brave... Does "these economic problems, which started somewhere else" ever work?
John Major won in '92 despite the vicious 1990-1 recession. And that one was caused by domestic policy mistakes - in particular joining the ERM - rather than international factors like the price of energy. The Opposition needs a convincing story about how they will improve the economy, which Starmer doesn't have - just more tax, spend and regulation of exactly the kind that will throttle growth.
It MAY be enough if the Conservatives mess thinkgs up badly enough, but at the moment, I'm not sure.
Starmer may well find that boring old competence and simply not being the other guy is sufficient.
Starmer is certainly boring, but I'm not convinced he's at all competent. I think he made the wrong call at just about every stage during the pandemic, for example, when he actually bothered to offer any opposition to the government at all, which was rarely. Also his Brexit policy at the 2019 election was a dismal failure. And he ran on a Corbynite manifesto in 2019 and again on a Corbynite programme in 2020 before now posing laughably in front of the Union Jack at every opportunity.
It MAY be enough if Boris messes up badly enough, but if the Conservatives recover significantly, I don't see him winning and he may not even come close.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
If you think that this is another Afghanistan you are indeed deluding yourself. In Afghanistan there was virtually no organised or equipped regular forces against the Russians. There were Mujaheddin in the hills launching raids and using a trickle of western technology, usually anti aircraft missles. In the Ukraine they are fighting a well organised army with huge quantities of superior western kit which is currently being replaced at a prodigious rate.
So, you have not only somewhat lesser logistical challenges but a very rapid attrition rate. At best the Russians are sustaining casualties, including kit, wounded and surrendered, of around 1% of their force a day. They either win soon or they lose. There is still a window of opportunity for them but it is closing.
One outcome, which seems likely, is that they will 'win' by relying on extreme firepower and the worst type of weapons imaginable. They will bomb Ukraine to bits raising russian flags on the rubble. But it will be a phyrric victory, and they will never be able to control the country.
Russian advances seem to have stopped over the last couple of days. That could be logisitical but I expect to see more stories of the Ukrainains retaking territory over the next week. The Russians will need to consolidate to reduce their attrition rate.
For the first time in years I bought a Sunday Times to see just what it had on the Lebedev connection. It was damning. If there were not a war on Boris would be out pronto just on the evidence of that one edition.
He will certainly have to go before the next election. Never mind the text, some of the pictures were lethal. Labour and the LibDems would only have to keep reprinting them in leaflet after leaflet to torpedo the Tory campaign below the water line. The Tories simply cannot go into battle with him as leader. This is not the USA, and he is not Trump. The voters won't back him blind, whatever success he may have in the war or esewhere.
So if he's toast, when does he actually pop out of the toaster?
His MPs clearly think 'not now - the war you know.' They can maybe get away with that a bit but it's not a great look. Then there's the locals. 'Wait for them' is another excuse for inaction. What then? 'Takes a while to change a leader, and he was a winner'. Not sure that will suffice for very long.
Regrdless of the odds, I would say some time this year seems most likely by a long way, but he could get lucky with the war if that drags on. So maybe Mike is right, and at the odds 2023 looks decent enough value for the momnet.
The other dilemma for Conservative MPs is that the longer he is left in place, the more he taints the whole party. After all, some of this was known ages ago- enough for people to ask some pretty probing questions. But they all (even Boris-sceptics like Hunt) backed him for PM.
On topic, surely Boris will go in Autumn 2023 if and only if he is confident of winning well. After all, that's why Maggie and Blair went for elections after four years and Major and Brown didn't.
Given the wider economic forecasts, that seems brave... Does "these economic problems, which started somewhere else" ever work?
John Major won in '92 despite the vicious 1990-1 recession. And that one was caused by domestic policy mistakes - in particular joining the ERM - rather than international factors like the price of energy. The Opposition needs a convincing story about how they will improve the economy, which Starmer doesn't have - just more tax, spend and regulation of exactly the kind that will throttle growth.
It MAY be enough if the Conservatives mess thinkgs up badly enough, but at the moment, I'm not sure.
Starmer may well find that boring old competence and simply not being the other guy is sufficient.
Starmer is certainly boring, but I'm not convinced he's at all competent. I think he made the wrong call at just about every stage during the pandemic, for example, when he actually bothered to offer any opposition to the government at all, which was rarely. Also his Brexit policy at the 2019 election was a dismal failure. And he ran on a Corbynite manifesto in 2019 and again on a Corbynite programme in 2020 before now posing laughably in front of the Union Jack at every opportunity.
It MAY be enough if Boris messes up badly enough, but if the Conservatives recover significantly, I don't see him winning and he may not even come close.
How about just 'boring and not the other guy' then?
The Hang Seng down 5.5% today - carnage on the markets to come I think with the China warning
Any idea why Tokyo and Singapore were fine when the Hang Seng slumped? The China link?
The markets are very odd at the moment: London was fine on Friday when the US sank. Unusual.
EH? London was up marginally on Friday, as was the Dow at the time the London market closed. It sank a little during the American afternoon, but only closed down 0.69%. So the difference, such as it is, is down to the time zones. And the US is trading historically at higher levels to begin with.
The mystery is why markets around the world are still comparatively optimistic, when the sky is full of large and slow moving dark clouds
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
I don't know a single person on here who is right all the time and you most certainly aren't. I probably treat your posts with about 60% seriousness, your father's at about 90%. You are, for example, very skewed to a US way of thinking which doesn't always, or readily, transfer this side of the pond. You've just come out with a constitutional howler about Boris Johnson which I've been more gentle with you over than you with I. You just can't resist playing the person 'eh?
On covid I've been mostly right. No idea what you're talking about BA pilots: don't know any and don't recall ever having mentioned them in my life. I don't fly with BA (I go Qatar) and I don't have any contacts with BA.
I think the only big mistake I've made since joining, and it's a huge one, was assuming that Putin wasn't mad enough to invade. Based that on him having insufficient troops in place to guarantee victory and because we always over-estimate Russian military equipment. So I was right about the reason but misjudged the man. But, then, how do you legislate for someone who has gone full tonto?
The Hang Seng down 5.5% today - carnage on the markets to come I think with the China warning
Any idea why Tokyo and Singapore were fine when the Hang Seng slumped? The China link?
The markets are very odd at the moment: London was fine on Friday when the US sank. Unusual.
EH? London was up marginally on Friday, as was the Dow at the time the London market closed. It sank a little during the American afternoon, but only closed down 0.69%. So the difference, such as it is, is down to the time zones. And the US is trading historically at higher levels to begin with.
The mystery is why markets around the world are still comparatively optimistic, when the sky is full of large and slow moving dark clouds
I think the Lebedev thing is awful but I'm even more concerned by the way Boris Johnson shares with Putin the attempt to alter the reality of truth. It's not just lying, it's attempting entirely to re-write a narrative, a zeitgeist, into something that is utterly at variance with the actual truth. Putin does it all the time but so does Johnson. Cummings was another shit who was up to it.
Some of you may dislike the comparison of Putin with Johnson but this is deeply disturbing. I genuinely fear for our democracy because a lot of people get taken in by it.
Both are post-truth politicians. But in Putin's case, he has perhaps run in to the limits of what is possible. You can't fake an invasion of another country with tens of thousands of conscripts dying, hyperinflation, banks closing down, Shops closing, etc. There comes a point where you no longer control the agenda and a form of reality intervenes.
Putin should have stuck with the old tactics of plausible deniability and fake institutions that fooled people and useful idiots could get behind. It could have run on and on for decades, generations even.
Putin could probably have bled Ukraine dry if he'd funded opposition groups, bribed politicians, and continued to arm the separatists. Maybe a few Russian troops could have grabbed 20 miles here or there...
Instead he went for invasion. And succeeded in uniting the decadent West.
One trouble with a system based on lies (in this case, Great and Greater Russia) is that you start to believe your own propoganda. Reality always intrudes in the end, and war is an especially unforgiving reality.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
If you think that this is another Afghanistan you are indeed deluding yourself. In Afghanistan there was virtually no organised or equipped regular forces against the Russians. There were Mujaheddin in the hills launching raids and using a trickle of western technology, usually anti aircraft missles. In the Ukraine they are fighting a well organised army with huge quantities of superior western kit which is currently being replaced at a prodigious rate.
So, you have not only somewhat lesser logistical challenges but a very rapid attrition rate. At best the Russians are sustaining casualties, including kit, wounded and surrendered, of around 1% of their force a day. They either win soon or they lose. There is still a window of opportunity for them but it is closing.
The battle is between the rate of collapse of the Russian economy (military and civil) and the rate at which the Ukrainians get ground down.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
I don't know a single person on here who is right all the time and you most certainly aren't. I probably treat your posts with about 60% seriousness, your father's at about 90%. You are, for example, very skewed to a US way of thinking which doesn't always, or readily, transfer this side of the pond. You've just come out with a constitutional howler about Boris Johnson which I've been more gentle with you over than you with I. You just can't resist playing the person 'eh?
On covid I've been mostly right. No idea what you're talking about BA pilots: don't know any and don't recall ever having mentioned them in my life. I don't fly with BA (I go Qatar) and I don't have any contacts with BA.
I think the only big mistake I've made since joining, and it's a huge one, was assuming that Putin wasn't mad enough to invade. Based that on him having insufficient troops in place to guarantee victory and because we always over-estimate Russian military equipment. So I was right about the reason but misjudged the man. But, then, how do you legislate for someone who has gone full tonto?
Also - what constitutional howler about Boris Johnson?
I don't think I've mentioned him yet, except to say that he will be departing. A feature - not a bug - about democracies.
For the first time in years I bought a Sunday Times to see just what it had on the Lebedev connection. It was damning. If there were not a war on Boris would be out pronto just on the evidence of that one edition.
He will certainly have to go before the next election. Never mind the text, some of the pictures were lethal. Labour and the LibDems would only have to keep reprinting them in leaflet after leaflet to torpedo the Tory campaign below the water line. The Tories simply cannot go into battle with him as leader. This is not the USA, and he is not Trump. The voters won't back him blind, whatever success he may have in the war or esewhere.
So if he's toast, when does he actually pop out of the toaster?
His MPs clearly think 'not now - the war you know.' They can maybe get away with that a bit but it's not a great look. Then there's the locals. 'Wait for them' is another excuse for inaction. What then? 'Takes a while to change a leader, and he was a winner'. Not sure that will suffice for very long.
Regrdless of the odds, I would say some time this year seems most likely by a long way, but he could get lucky with the war if that drags on. So maybe Mike is right, and at the odds 2023 looks decent enough value for the momnet.
The people that matter in this, Tory MPs, members and even voters don't seem to care.
Virtually none of the Tory posters on here who weren't already critics of the PM when he was first elected will engage with issues of standards, whether about lying, finances, cronyism or security risks.
The responses are a mix of "all politicians are thieving nasty liars regardless", "what about Corbyn", "other things are more important", or "if he helps bring a blue win then anything goes".
He is staying on until he loses an election or it is blatantly clear he will lose the next one.
Couldn’t agree more. The silence is deafening. It’s fine that Russian money and bot farms helped to deliver Brexit, it’s no problem that Russian money has financed the Tory Party and it’s client media for decades. The end justifies the means.
The aims of the right chime with those of Putin, in as much as they both get hard for a strong, nationalist agenda, a return of Empire, of power, of prestige perceived to have been lost. Not collaboration with a weak, Woke, green EU. Fellow travellers on the anti-climate change bandwagon, for whom the profit available from digging up and burning fossil fuels is more important than the long-term health of the planet.
The right can’t face up to this yet. Perhaps with time they will do.
I enabled Corbyn and the hard left. Having grown disillusioned with Blairism and the endless triangulation I wanted some conviction politics. Voted for - and believed in - the wrong Milliband. Then having grown utterly disillusioned by Andy Burnham's campaign was persuaded by a good friend to look at Jeremy Corbyn who I knew literally nothing about.
Less than a year into his tenure I realised what a fool I had been and how dangerous he was. Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa. I then switched sides and joined the insurrection against him, received warmly and with good grace by my colleagues who hadn't gone mad as I had.
My point is that even having enabled Bad Things - like the Big Dog - these MPs can still redeem themselves. Forgiveness is a simple thing, you just need to be genuine in your repentance. Are any of them capable?
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
He is staying on until he loses an election or it is blatantly clear he will lose the next one.
That's generally how political careers work.
If Ukraine manage a victory of sorts over Russia, then it won't surprise me at all if Boris says "I'm off in time for my successor to be crowned at the party conference". He will bask in the glow of being worshipped in Ukraine and having generally been seen to have done a good job in that war and on Covid. Downing Street parties will be a forgotten footnote - although his bad calls on being chummy with dodgy Russians less so.
But he can go and make his millions on the talking circuit sooner rather than later, having departed on his own terms. I think he'd take that from where he was a month ago.
The Hang Seng down 5.5% today - carnage on the markets to come I think with the China warning
Any idea why Tokyo and Singapore were fine when the Hang Seng slumped? The China link?
The markets are very odd at the moment: London was fine on Friday when the US sank. Unusual.
EH? London was up marginally on Friday, as was the Dow
Nasdaq was down -2.18% and the S&P down 1.3% on a day London was level, with no real reaction to the US which is unusual.
Western European markets have frequently been taking a hammering whilst London has fared slightly better for obvious geographic reasons.
I'm just curious, and was asking State Away or anyone knowledgeable, why Bombay and Tokyo for example closed UP 1.13% and 0.58% on a day when the Hang Seng closed down 5.5%? I guess it's the China comments but I'd have expected the rest of the Far East to take a beating.
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
It ebbs and flows.
I'd say the quality is high at the moment, and fairly decorous (young Malc notwithstanding). It also has a broader mix of political views than usual, although Scots Labour supporters are still as rare as hen's teeth.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
Another difficult weekend as the Estonians contemplate still more refugees, over 1800 last night alone (of which over 700 children). Moldova is appealing for help, because that relatively poor country simply can not cope with the crisis they now have to deal with. Every front line country is now struggling to find places for the millions who have fled. An emergency coordination is being established, and rather than promise random numbers, the UK government needs to engage to help the situation in a practical way. The Home Office has rarely looked so stupidly bureaucratic as now. The pressure that many British people are putting on their government is a good sign, but the truth is that Britain will need to take several hundred thousand to match the other large countries in Europe. The numbers promised so far are lower than those Estonia, a country with about one fiftieth of the UK population, has already taken.
I spoke to friends in Kharkiv, the brutality of the invaders is utterly shocking and amounts to wholesale murder of the civilian population. Meanwhile, despite a lot of talk, the Ukrainian army is not getting the flow of weapons it needs, and as you have seen on the news, the casualties amongst the defenders has risen quite sharply. Under the circumstances, the performance of the Ukrainians is simply heroic.
As far as the wider strategic implications of this weekend are concerned, the fact that Russia has asked for military assistance from China now seems to be an established fact, however the Chinese use of the word "pragmatic" must be a pretty bad sign for Putin´s hopes of engaging China in his own military mess. More likely is China offering its good offices to establish a ceasefire. The timing is important, since it is critical to get the spring harvest, without which China, like the rest fo the world will see high food price inflation.
Inside Russia there is now growing concern, even if the reality of the situation is still not widely understood. The regime continues to rely on Stalinist tactics, but one Russian expert here suggested that if the Russians do go for a ceasefire soon, his bet was that Putin would be gone very quickly. The increasing intensity of the Russian attacks perhaps reflects the growing crisis for the regime,
There is something of a news blackout from Belarus, we hear rumours that Lukashenka is in considerable trouble.
So in sum, it is touch and go. A Finn said to me that the Winter War of 1939-40 lasted three months, one week and six days and he thought that the "Spring War" might be quicker. If it leads to the defeat of the Putinist forces then the sigh of relief here will be audible in Stornoway.
As ever, many thanks for your posts. I think 'touch and go' seems right. I would like to be solidly optimistic about the outcome, but it seem quite precariously poised to me, FWIW.
For the first time in years I bought a Sunday Times to see just what it had on the Lebedev connection. It was damning. If there were not a war on Boris would be out pronto just on the evidence of that one edition.
He will certainly have to go before the next election. Never mind the text, some of the pictures were lethal. Labour and the LibDems would only have to keep reprinting them in leaflet after leaflet to torpedo the Tory campaign below the water line. The Tories simply cannot go into battle with him as leader. This is not the USA, and he is not Trump. The voters won't back him blind, whatever success he may have in the war or esewhere.
So if he's toast, when does he actually pop out of the toaster?
His MPs clearly think 'not now - the war you know.' They can maybe get away with that a bit but it's not a great look. Then there's the locals. 'Wait for them' is another excuse for inaction. What then? 'Takes a while to change a leader, and he was a winner'. Not sure that will suffice for very long.
Regrdless of the odds, I would say some time this year seems most likely by a long way, but he could get lucky with the war if that drags on. So maybe Mike is right, and at the odds 2023 looks decent enough value for the momnet.
The other dilemma for Conservative MPs is that the longer he is left in place, the more he taints the whole party. After all, some of this was known ages ago- enough for people to ask some pretty probing questions. But they all (even Boris-sceptics like Hunt) backed him for PM.
On topic, surely Boris will go in Autumn 2023 if and only if he is confident of winning well. After all, that's why Maggie and Blair went for elections after four years and Major and Brown didn't.
Given the wider economic forecasts, that seems brave... Does "these economic problems, which started somewhere else" ever work?
John Major won in '92 despite the vicious 1990-1 recession. And that one was caused by domestic policy mistakes - in particular joining the ERM - rather than international factors like the price of energy. The Opposition needs a convincing story about how they will improve the economy, which Starmer doesn't have - just more tax, spend and regulation of exactly the kind that will throttle growth.
It MAY be enough if the Conservatives mess thinkgs up badly enough, but at the moment, I'm not sure.
Starmer may well find that boring old competence and simply not being the other guy is sufficient.
Starmer is certainly boring, but I'm not convinced he's at all competent. I think he made the wrong call at just about every stage during the pandemic, for example, when he actually bothered to offer any opposition to the government at all, which was rarely. Also his Brexit policy at the 2019 election was a dismal failure. And he ran on a Corbynite manifesto in 2019 and again on a Corbynite programme in 2020 before now posing laughably in front of the Union Jack at every opportunity.
It MAY be enough if Boris messes up badly enough, but if the Conservatives recover significantly, I don't see him winning and he may not even come close.
For all your analysis of Johnson's genius and Starmer's ineptitude you have forgotten one thing. The economy.
I think the Lebedev thing is awful but I'm even more concerned by the way Boris Johnson shares with Putin the attempt to alter the reality of truth. It's not just lying, it's attempting entirely to re-write a narrative, a zeitgeist, into something that is utterly at variance with the actual truth. Putin does it all the time but so does Johnson. Cummings was another shit who was up to it.
Some of you may dislike the comparison of Putin with Johnson but this is deeply disturbing. I genuinely fear for our democracy because a lot of people get taken in by it.
I think, post war, we will need to face up to the weaknesses of our own political system. The shameless lies from various politicians has absolutely created a fog of misinformation. The process of calling out Trump, Johnson, Farage, Le Pen, Salmond and many others needs to be carried through, and those who have served Putin, in whatever capacity, need to be removed from the political process entirely and where appropriate to face criminal trial.
While I appreciate your comment, I'm not banning people just for being Putin puppets.
What about banning people who post articles that PB deems Russian propaganda?
Here's another one. Again, gives a perspective that many won't like on here, not fitting the PB Russian military disaster narrative as it doesn't.
What replaces Putin when Russia retreats from Ukraine? Not any of his coterie because they are either all implicated in his policies or seen to be too weak to stand up to him. It will have to be someone with clean hands who can convince Russians and the world of their competence and integrity. Someone like the governor of the central bank Elvira Nabiullina perhaps. Though the FT's portrait sees her primarily as a technocrat with pragmatic loyalty to Putin for the good of the country.
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
It ebbs and flows.
I'd say the quality is high at the moment, and fairly decorous (young Malc notwithstanding). It also has a broader mix of political views than usual, although Scots Labour supporters are still as rare as hen's teeth.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
I don't know a single person on here who is right all the time and you most certainly aren't. I probably treat your posts with about 60% seriousness, your father's at about 90%. You are, for example, very skewed to a US way of thinking which doesn't always, or readily, transfer this side of the pond. You've just come out with a constitutional howler about Boris Johnson which I've been more gentle with you over than you with I. You just can't resist playing the person 'eh?
On covid I've been mostly right. No idea what you're talking about BA pilots: don't know any and don't recall ever having mentioned them in my life. I don't fly with BA (I go Qatar) and I don't have any contacts with BA.
I think the only big mistake I've made since joining, and it's a huge one, was assuming that Putin wasn't mad enough to invade. Based that on him having insufficient troops in place to guarantee victory and because we always over-estimate Russian military equipment. So I was right about the reason but misjudged the man. But, then, how do you legislate for someone who has gone full tonto?
I like having you on board, but why don't you admit where you're sitting?
Robert I have someone close to the seat of power. I've only once shared something but I don't want to dump them in trouble. If I did an HYUFD, for example, it would not be cool for the person concerned.
I hope you can live with that and I'm glad you like having me on board. It's mutual and it's a great place.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
Very well briefed, but still some holes. Not knowing "London Bridge"? Tut tut.....
The faux reasonableness is very, very well done though.
The Hang Seng down 5.5% today - carnage on the markets to come I think with the China warning
Any idea why Tokyo and Singapore were fine when the Hang Seng slumped? The China link?
The markets are very odd at the moment: London was fine on Friday when the US sank. Unusual.
EH? London was up marginally on Friday, as was the Dow
Nasdaq was down -2.18% and the S&P down 1.3% on a day London was level, with no real reaction to the US which is unusual.
Western European markets have frequently been taking a hammering whilst London has fared slightly better for obvious geographic reasons.
I'm just curious, and was asking State Away or anyone knowledgeable, why Bombay and Tokyo for example closed UP 1.13% and 0.58% on a day when the Hang Seng closed down 5.5%? I guess it's the China comments but I'd have expected the rest of the Far East to take a beating.
Anyone?
As I said, most of the American falls came after London closed. You need to account for time zones.
I don't know on Hong Kong, but their covid situation appears bad independent from the war.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
I loathe Putin to the depths of my being.
Just because I think the west's response has been limp, and that I think regrettably that Putin's forces will eventually win this, don't for one second make me out to be an apologist for what Putin has done. It's evil beyond evil, from the chthonian depths.
For the first time in years I bought a Sunday Times to see just what it had on the Lebedev connection. It was damning. If there were not a war on Boris would be out pronto just on the evidence of that one edition.
He will certainly have to go before the next election. Never mind the text, some of the pictures were lethal. Labour and the LibDems would only have to keep reprinting them in leaflet after leaflet to torpedo the Tory campaign below the water line. The Tories simply cannot go into battle with him as leader. This is not the USA, and he is not Trump. The voters won't back him blind, whatever success he may have in the war or esewhere.
So if he's toast, when does he actually pop out of the toaster?
His MPs clearly think 'not now - the war you know.' They can maybe get away with that a bit but it's not a great look. Then there's the locals. 'Wait for them' is another excuse for inaction. What then? 'Takes a while to change a leader, and he was a winner'. Not sure that will suffice for very long.
Regrdless of the odds, I would say some time this year seems most likely by a long way, but he could get lucky with the war if that drags on. So maybe Mike is right, and at the odds 2023 looks decent enough value for the momnet.
The other dilemma for Conservative MPs is that the longer he is left in place, the more he taints the whole party. After all, some of this was known ages ago- enough for people to ask some pretty probing questions. But they all (even Boris-sceptics like Hunt) backed him for PM.
On topic, surely Boris will go in Autumn 2023 if and only if he is confident of winning well. After all, that's why Maggie and Blair went for elections after four years and Major and Brown didn't.
Given the wider economic forecasts, that seems brave... Does "these economic problems, which started somewhere else" ever work?
John Major won in '92 despite the vicious 1990-1 recession. And that one was caused by domestic policy mistakes - in particular joining the ERM - rather than international factors like the price of energy. The Opposition needs a convincing story about how they will improve the economy, which Starmer doesn't have - just more tax, spend and regulation of exactly the kind that will throttle growth.
It MAY be enough if the Conservatives mess thinkgs up badly enough, but at the moment, I'm not sure.
Starmer may well find that boring old competence and simply not being the other guy is sufficient.
Starmer is certainly boring, but I'm not convinced he's at all competent. I think he made the wrong call at just about every stage during the pandemic, for example, when he actually bothered to offer any opposition to the government at all, which was rarely. Also his Brexit policy at the 2019 election was a dismal failure. And he ran on a Corbynite manifesto in 2019 and again on a Corbynite programme in 2020 before now posing laughably in front of the Union Jack at every opportunity.
It MAY be enough if Boris messes up badly enough, but if the Conservatives recover significantly, I don't see him winning and he may not even come close.
For all your analysis of Johnson's genius and Starmer's ineptitude you have forgotten one thing. The economy.
Which as I have been flagging since the start of this war is going to get acutely worse than it already was going to be. Saying "but its Putin's fault" when this war is behind us won't help the government.
We also know that they will continue to screw up, continue to pointlessly incompetently screw over people and then lie about it. Hard political times are ahead.
For the first time in years I bought a Sunday Times to see just what it had on the Lebedev connection. It was damning. If there were not a war on Boris would be out pronto just on the evidence of that one edition.
He will certainly have to go before the next election. Never mind the text, some of the pictures were lethal. Labour and the LibDems would only have to keep reprinting them in leaflet after leaflet to torpedo the Tory campaign below the water line. The Tories simply cannot go into battle with him as leader. This is not the USA, and he is not Trump. The voters won't back him blind, whatever success he may have in the war or esewhere.
So if he's toast, when does he actually pop out of the toaster?
His MPs clearly think 'not now - the war you know.' They can maybe get away with that a bit but it's not a great look. Then there's the locals. 'Wait for them' is another excuse for inaction. What then? 'Takes a while to change a leader, and he was a winner'. Not sure that will suffice for very long.
Regrdless of the odds, I would say some time this year seems most likely by a long way, but he could get lucky with the war if that drags on. So maybe Mike is right, and at the odds 2023 looks decent enough value for the momnet.
The other dilemma for Conservative MPs is that the longer he is left in place, the more he taints the whole party. After all, some of this was known ages ago- enough for people to ask some pretty probing questions. But they all (even Boris-sceptics like Hunt) backed him for PM.
On topic, surely Boris will go in Autumn 2023 if and only if he is confident of winning well. After all, that's why Maggie and Blair went for elections after four years and Major and Brown didn't.
Given the wider economic forecasts, that seems brave... Does "these economic problems, which started somewhere else" ever work?
John Major won in '92 despite the vicious 1990-1 recession. And that one was caused by domestic policy mistakes - in particular joining the ERM - rather than international factors like the price of energy. The Opposition needs a convincing story about how they will improve the economy, which Starmer doesn't have - just more tax, spend and regulation of exactly the kind that will throttle growth.
It MAY be enough if the Conservatives mess thinkgs up badly enough, but at the moment, I'm not sure.
Starmer may well find that boring old competence and simply not being the other guy is sufficient.
Starmer is certainly boring, but I'm not convinced he's at all competent. I think he made the wrong call at just about every stage during the pandemic, for example, when he actually bothered to offer any opposition to the government at all, which was rarely. Also his Brexit policy at the 2019 election was a dismal failure. And he ran on a Corbynite manifesto in 2019 and again on a Corbynite programme in 2020 before now posing laughably in front of the Union Jack at every opportunity.
It MAY be enough if Boris messes up badly enough, but if the Conservatives recover significantly, I don't see him winning and he may not even come close.
For all your analysis of Johnson's genius and Starmer's ineptitude you have forgotten one thing. The economy.
Please show my analysis of Johnson's genius? Neither of them are exactly Margaret Thatcher. And I did actually mention Starmer on the economy in another post, saying I think his programme will make things much worse.
(I think the Economist's verdict on Boris was very shrewd - he has flashes of genius, e.g. breaking the Brexit logjam or the vaccination programme but also too-frequent disasters. And if we move towards more settled times, he'd be the wrong leader. But I'm not convinced by any of the alternatives on the Conservative benches yet, and I don't think that Starmer is competent).
We need to get away from the idea that just because somebody is boring, they're also competent. Gordon Brown should have blown that one to pieces.
For the first time in years I bought a Sunday Times to see just what it had on the Lebedev connection. It was damning. If there were not a war on Boris would be out pronto just on the evidence of that one edition.
He will certainly have to go before the next election. Never mind the text, some of the pictures were lethal. Labour and the LibDems would only have to keep reprinting them in leaflet after leaflet to torpedo the Tory campaign below the water line. The Tories simply cannot go into battle with him as leader. This is not the USA, and he is not Trump. The voters won't back him blind, whatever success he may have in the war or esewhere.
So if he's toast, when does he actually pop out of the toaster?
His MPs clearly think 'not now - the war you know.' They can maybe get away with that a bit but it's not a great look. Then there's the locals. 'Wait for them' is another excuse for inaction. What then? 'Takes a while to change a leader, and he was a winner'. Not sure that will suffice for very long.
Regrdless of the odds, I would say some time this year seems most likely by a long way, but he could get lucky with the war if that drags on. So maybe Mike is right, and at the odds 2023 looks decent enough value for the momnet.
The people that matter in this, Tory MPs, members and even voters don't seem to care.
Virtually none of the Tory posters on here who weren't already critics of the PM when he was first elected will engage with issues of standards, whether about lying, finances, cronyism or security risks.
The responses are a mix of "all politicians are thieving nasty liars regardless", "what about Corbyn", "other things are more important", or "if he helps bring a blue win then anything goes".
He is staying on until he loses an election or it is blatantly clear he will lose the next one.
Couldn’t agree more. The silence is deafening. It’s fine that Russian money and bot farms helped to deliver Brexit, it’s no problem that Russian money has financed the Tory Party and it’s client media for decades. The end justifies the means.
The aims of the right chime with those of Putin, in as much as they both get hard for a strong, nationalist agenda, a return of Empire, of power, of prestige perceived to have been lost. Not collaboration with a weak, Woke, green EU. Fellow travellers on the anti-climate change bandwagon, for whom the profit available from digging up and burning fossil fuels is more important than the long-term health of the planet.
The right can’t face up to this yet. Perhaps with time they will do.
I enabled Corbyn and the hard left. Having grown disillusioned with Blairism and the endless triangulation I wanted some conviction politics. Voted for - and believed in - the wrong Milliband. Then having grown utterly disillusioned by Andy Burnham's campaign was persuaded by a good friend to look at Jeremy Corbyn who I knew literally nothing about.
Less than a year into his tenure I realised what a fool I had been and how dangerous he was. Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa. I then switched sides and joined the insurrection against him, received warmly and with good grace by my colleagues who hadn't gone mad as I had.
My point is that even having enabled Bad Things - like the Big Dog - these MPs can still redeem themselves. Forgiveness is a simple thing, you just need to be genuine in your repentance. Are any of them capable?
That's a great post, RP.
If one can judge from the conservative party supporters who post here on PB, I should say that the love of Boris is not entirely blind.
Looks like the Chinese reponse to the planks about trading with the Russians militarily is "We don't know anything about that, now how about those bio labs"...
OT "I don't like war movies" claimed my fiancee at the weekend. Sunday's movies ? Saving Private Ryan & Black Hawk Down
Javier Blas @JavierBlas · 35m China placed the 17.5 million residents of the southern city of Shenzhen into a lockdown -- this is one of the world's most important manufacturing exports hubs, particularly for electronics (and the city is the 4th world's largest container port).
For the first time in years I bought a Sunday Times to see just what it had on the Lebedev connection. It was damning. If there were not a war on Boris would be out pronto just on the evidence of that one edition.
He will certainly have to go before the next election. Never mind the text, some of the pictures were lethal. Labour and the LibDems would only have to keep reprinting them in leaflet after leaflet to torpedo the Tory campaign below the water line. The Tories simply cannot go into battle with him as leader. This is not the USA, and he is not Trump. The voters won't back him blind, whatever success he may have in the war or esewhere.
So if he's toast, when does he actually pop out of the toaster?
His MPs clearly think 'not now - the war you know.' They can maybe get away with that a bit but it's not a great look. Then there's the locals. 'Wait for them' is another excuse for inaction. What then? 'Takes a while to change a leader, and he was a winner'. Not sure that will suffice for very long.
Regrdless of the odds, I would say some time this year seems most likely by a long way, but he could get lucky with the war if that drags on. So maybe Mike is right, and at the odds 2023 looks decent enough value for the momnet.
The other dilemma for Conservative MPs is that the longer he is left in place, the more he taints the whole party. After all, some of this was known ages ago- enough for people to ask some pretty probing questions. But they all (even Boris-sceptics like Hunt) backed him for PM.
On topic, surely Boris will go in Autumn 2023 if and only if he is confident of winning well. After all, that's why Maggie and Blair went for elections after four years and Major and Brown didn't.
Given the wider economic forecasts, that seems brave... Does "these economic problems, which started somewhere else" ever work?
John Major won in '92 despite the vicious 1990-1 recession. And that one was caused by domestic policy mistakes - in particular joining the ERM - rather than international factors like the price of energy. The Opposition needs a convincing story about how they will improve the economy, which Starmer doesn't have - just more tax, spend and regulation of exactly the kind that will throttle growth.
It MAY be enough if the Conservatives mess thinkgs up badly enough, but at the moment, I'm not sure.
Starmer may well find that boring old competence and simply not being the other guy is sufficient.
Starmer is certainly boring, but I'm not convinced he's at all competent. I think he made the wrong call at just about every stage during the pandemic, for example, when he actually bothered to offer any opposition to the government at all, which was rarely. Also his Brexit policy at the 2019 election was a dismal failure. And he ran on a Corbynite manifesto in 2019 and again on a Corbynite programme in 2020 before now posing laughably in front of the Union Jack at every opportunity.
It MAY be enough if Boris messes up badly enough, but if the Conservatives recover significantly, I don't see him winning and he may not even come close.
For all your analysis of Johnson's genius and Starmer's ineptitude you have forgotten one thing. The economy.
I still don't see political "blame" attaching to the economy. Mostly because Labour has offered no alternative. It supported the Government's measures on Covid, which are a large part of where we are. It supported the Government's measures on Ukraine, which are in large part dictating where we are headed. It has ruled out any materially different tack on Brexit.
The voters will be right to say nothing would be materially different with Labour. The Government unpopularity is down to the reaction to Boris's antics. Change Boris, and Labour are left gazing at their shoes....
For the first time in years I bought a Sunday Times to see just what it had on the Lebedev connection. It was damning. If there were not a war on Boris would be out pronto just on the evidence of that one edition.
He will certainly have to go before the next election. Never mind the text, some of the pictures were lethal. Labour and the LibDems would only have to keep reprinting them in leaflet after leaflet to torpedo the Tory campaign below the water line. The Tories simply cannot go into battle with him as leader. This is not the USA, and he is not Trump. The voters won't back him blind, whatever success he may have in the war or esewhere.
So if he's toast, when does he actually pop out of the toaster?
His MPs clearly think 'not now - the war you know.' They can maybe get away with that a bit but it's not a great look. Then there's the locals. 'Wait for them' is another excuse for inaction. What then? 'Takes a while to change a leader, and he was a winner'. Not sure that will suffice for very long.
Regrdless of the odds, I would say some time this year seems most likely by a long way, but he could get lucky with the war if that drags on. So maybe Mike is right, and at the odds 2023 looks decent enough value for the momnet.
The other dilemma for Conservative MPs is that the longer he is left in place, the more he taints the whole party. After all, some of this was known ages ago- enough for people to ask some pretty probing questions. But they all (even Boris-sceptics like Hunt) backed him for PM.
On topic, surely Boris will go in Autumn 2023 if and only if he is confident of winning well. After all, that's why Maggie and Blair went for elections after four years and Major and Brown didn't.
Given the wider economic forecasts, that seems brave... Does "these economic problems, which started somewhere else" ever work?
John Major won in '92 despite the vicious 1990-1 recession. And that one was caused by domestic policy mistakes - in particular joining the ERM - rather than international factors like the price of energy. The Opposition needs a convincing story about how they will improve the economy, which Starmer doesn't have - just more tax, spend and regulation of exactly the kind that will throttle growth.
It MAY be enough if the Conservatives mess thinkgs up badly enough, but at the moment, I'm not sure.
Starmer may well find that boring old competence and simply not being the other guy is sufficient.
Starmer is certainly boring, but I'm not convinced he's at all competent. I think he made the wrong call at just about every stage during the pandemic, for example, when he actually bothered to offer any opposition to the government at all, which was rarely. Also his Brexit policy at the 2019 election was a dismal failure. And he ran on a Corbynite manifesto in 2019 and again on a Corbynite programme in 2020 before now posing laughably in front of the Union Jack at every opportunity.
It MAY be enough if Boris messes up badly enough, but if the Conservatives recover significantly, I don't see him winning and he may not even come close.
How about just 'boring and not the other guy' then?
People may be tempted to stick with the devil they know, as was probably the case in 1992.
Looks like the Chinese reponse to the planks about trading with the Russians militarily is "We don't know anything about that, now how about those bio labs"...
OT "I don't like war movies" claimed my fiancee at the weekend. Sunday's movies ? Saving Private Ryan & Black Hawk Down
I think the Lebedev thing is awful but I'm even more concerned by the way Boris Johnson shares with Putin the attempt to alter the reality of truth. It's not just lying, it's attempting entirely to re-write a narrative, a zeitgeist, into something that is utterly at variance with the actual truth. Putin does it all the time but so does Johnson. Cummings was another shit who was up to it.
Some of you may dislike the comparison of Putin with Johnson but this is deeply disturbing. I genuinely fear for our democracy because a lot of people get taken in by it.
Both are post-truth politicians. But in Putin's case, he has perhaps run in to the limits of what is possible. You can't fake an invasion of another country with tens of thousands of conscripts dying, hyperinflation, banks closing down, Shops closing, etc. There comes a point where you no longer control the agenda and a form of reality intervenes.
Putin should have stuck with the old tactics of plausible deniability and fake institutions that fooled people and useful idiots could get behind. It could have run on and on for decades, generations even.
Putin could probably have bled Ukraine dry if he'd funded opposition groups, bribed politicians, and continued to arm the separatists. Maybe a few Russian troops could have grabbed 20 miles here or there...
Instead he went for invasion. And succeeded in uniting the decadent West.
I've been thinking about it. And I am quite convinced that he was going for a coup-de-main modelled on - Afghanistan.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
The faux reasonableness is very, very well done though.
I think, and I do mean this, you should take a look at yourself if you are 'really' going down that route because it's a very, very, dark place to go.
If you start to think that anyone with whom you disagree displays the signs of being something other than sincere, a phantasm, a spectre, who is merely 'faux' reasonable then you are disappearing into a rabbit hole void the end result of which is a dystopian nightmare of narcissistic individualism.
I don't agree with everything you post but I don't stoop to question your sincerity.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
Very well briefed, but still some holes. Not knowing "London Bridge"? Tut tut.....
The faux reasonableness is very, very well done though.
Also well done for the occasional flashes of backstory.
'The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.'
No serious commentator is suggesting a NFZ. The reason is obvious, and has been stated on this forum clearly and frequently.
NFZ is simply fluffy words to mean the West bombing Russia, which is a major escalation that gives Putin cover for his own escalation.
Far, far better to keep shoveling all those Stinger ground-to-air missiles over into Ukraine. Get enough of them in theatre, and you end up with a no-fly zone by default.
The Hang Seng down 5.5% today - carnage on the markets to come I think with the China warning
Any idea why Tokyo and Singapore were fine when the Hang Seng slumped? The China link?
The markets are very odd at the moment: London was fine on Friday when the US sank. Unusual.
EH? London was up marginally on Friday, as was the Dow
Nasdaq was down -2.18% and the S&P down 1.3% on a day London was level, with no real reaction to the US which is unusual.
Western European markets have frequently been taking a hammering whilst London has fared slightly better for obvious geographic reasons.
I'm just curious, and was asking State Away or anyone knowledgeable, why Bombay and Tokyo for example closed UP 1.13% and 0.58% on a day when the Hang Seng closed down 5.5%? I guess it's the China comments but I'd have expected the rest of the Far East to take a beating.
Anyone?
Covid data from Hong Kong looks horrible. Friends of mine are leaving the city rather than be locked down
For the first time in years I bought a Sunday Times to see just what it had on the Lebedev connection. It was damning. If there were not a war on Boris would be out pronto just on the evidence of that one edition.
He will certainly have to go before the next election. Never mind the text, some of the pictures were lethal. Labour and the LibDems would only have to keep reprinting them in leaflet after leaflet to torpedo the Tory campaign below the water line. The Tories simply cannot go into battle with him as leader. This is not the USA, and he is not Trump. The voters won't back him blind, whatever success he may have in the war or esewhere.
So if he's toast, when does he actually pop out of the toaster?
His MPs clearly think 'not now - the war you know.' They can maybe get away with that a bit but it's not a great look. Then there's the locals. 'Wait for them' is another excuse for inaction. What then? 'Takes a while to change a leader, and he was a winner'. Not sure that will suffice for very long.
Regrdless of the odds, I would say some time this year seems most likely by a long way, but he could get lucky with the war if that drags on. So maybe Mike is right, and at the odds 2023 looks decent enough value for the momnet.
The other dilemma for Conservative MPs is that the longer he is left in place, the more he taints the whole party. After all, some of this was known ages ago- enough for people to ask some pretty probing questions. But they all (even Boris-sceptics like Hunt) backed him for PM.
On topic, surely Boris will go in Autumn 2023 if and only if he is confident of winning well. After all, that's why Maggie and Blair went for elections after four years and Major and Brown didn't.
Given the wider economic forecasts, that seems brave... Does "these economic problems, which started somewhere else" ever work?
John Major won in '92 despite the vicious 1990-1 recession. And that one was caused by domestic policy mistakes - in particular joining the ERM - rather than international factors like the price of energy. The Opposition needs a convincing story about how they will improve the economy, which Starmer doesn't have - just more tax, spend and regulation of exactly the kind that will throttle growth.
It MAY be enough if the Conservatives mess thinkgs up badly enough, but at the moment, I'm not sure.
Starmer may well find that boring old competence and simply not being the other guy is sufficient.
Starmer is certainly boring, but I'm not convinced he's at all competent. I think he made the wrong call at just about every stage during the pandemic, for example, when he actually bothered to offer any opposition to the government at all, which was rarely. Also his Brexit policy at the 2019 election was a dismal failure. And he ran on a Corbynite manifesto in 2019 and again on a Corbynite programme in 2020 before now posing laughably in front of the Union Jack at every opportunity.
It MAY be enough if Boris messes up badly enough, but if the Conservatives recover significantly, I don't see him winning and he may not even come close.
For all your analysis of Johnson's genius and Starmer's ineptitude you have forgotten one thing. The economy.
Please show my analysis of Johnson's genius? Neither of them are exactly Margaret Thatcher. And I did actually mention Starmer on the economy in another post, saying I think his programme will make things much worse.
(I think the Economist's verdict on Boris was very shrewd - he has flashes of genius, e.g. breaking the Brexit logjam or the vaccination programme but also too-frequent disasters. And if we move towards more settled times, he'd be the wrong leader. But I'm not convinced by any of the alternatives on the Conservative benches yet, and I don't think that Starmer is competent).
We need to get away from the idea that just because somebody is boring, they're also competent. Gordon Brown should have blown that one to pieces.
The vaccination programme was Kate Bingham but the PM is entitled to take some of the credit. He gets enough shit for things that weren't necessarily his fault, so fairy nuff.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
Very well briefed, but still some holes. Not knowing "London Bridge"? Tut tut.....
The faux reasonableness is very, very well done though.
I think the Lebedev thing is awful but I'm even more concerned by the way Boris Johnson shares with Putin the attempt to alter the reality of truth. It's not just lying, it's attempting entirely to re-write a narrative, a zeitgeist, into something that is utterly at variance with the actual truth. Putin does it all the time but so does Johnson. Cummings was another shit who was up to it.
Some of you may dislike the comparison of Putin with Johnson but this is deeply disturbing. I genuinely fear for our democracy because a lot of people get taken in by it.
I think, post war, we will need to face up to the weaknesses of our own political system. The shameless lies from various politicians has absolutely created a fog of misinformation. The process of calling out Trump, Johnson, Farage, Le Pen, Salmond and many others needs to be carried through, and those who have served Putin, in whatever capacity, need to be removed from the political process entirely and where appropriate to face criminal trial.
I don't think that's much to do with the political system. Western institutions are quite adequate, if we make use of them. It's how people engage - or don't - that counts.
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
The Hang Seng down 5.5% today - carnage on the markets to come I think with the China warning
Any idea why Tokyo and Singapore were fine when the Hang Seng slumped? The China link?
The markets are very odd at the moment: London was fine on Friday when the US sank. Unusual.
EH? London was up marginally on Friday, as was the Dow
Nasdaq was down -2.18% and the S&P down 1.3% on a day London was level, with no real reaction to the US which is unusual.
Western European markets have frequently been taking a hammering whilst London has fared slightly better for obvious geographic reasons.
I'm just curious, and was asking State Away or anyone knowledgeable, why Bombay and Tokyo for example closed UP 1.13% and 0.58% on a day when the Hang Seng closed down 5.5%? I guess it's the China comments but I'd have expected the rest of the Far East to take a beating.
Anyone?
Covid data from Hong Kong looks horrible. Friends of mine are leaving the city rather than be locked down
For the first time in years I bought a Sunday Times to see just what it had on the Lebedev connection. It was damning. If there were not a war on Boris would be out pronto just on the evidence of that one edition.
He will certainly have to go before the next election. Never mind the text, some of the pictures were lethal. Labour and the LibDems would only have to keep reprinting them in leaflet after leaflet to torpedo the Tory campaign below the water line. The Tories simply cannot go into battle with him as leader. This is not the USA, and he is not Trump. The voters won't back him blind, whatever success he may have in the war or esewhere.
So if he's toast, when does he actually pop out of the toaster?
His MPs clearly think 'not now - the war you know.' They can maybe get away with that a bit but it's not a great look. Then there's the locals. 'Wait for them' is another excuse for inaction. What then? 'Takes a while to change a leader, and he was a winner'. Not sure that will suffice for very long.
Regrdless of the odds, I would say some time this year seems most likely by a long way, but he could get lucky with the war if that drags on. So maybe Mike is right, and at the odds 2023 looks decent enough value for the momnet.
The other dilemma for Conservative MPs is that the longer he is left in place, the more he taints the whole party. After all, some of this was known ages ago- enough for people to ask some pretty probing questions. But they all (even Boris-sceptics like Hunt) backed him for PM.
On topic, surely Boris will go in Autumn 2023 if and only if he is confident of winning well. After all, that's why Maggie and Blair went for elections after four years and Major and Brown didn't.
Given the wider economic forecasts, that seems brave... Does "these economic problems, which started somewhere else" ever work?
John Major won in '92 despite the vicious 1990-1 recession. And that one was caused by domestic policy mistakes - in particular joining the ERM - rather than international factors like the price of energy. The Opposition needs a convincing story about how they will improve the economy, which Starmer doesn't have - just more tax, spend and regulation of exactly the kind that will throttle growth.
It MAY be enough if the Conservatives mess thinkgs up badly enough, but at the moment, I'm not sure.
Starmer may well find that boring old competence and simply not being the other guy is sufficient.
Starmer is certainly boring, but I'm not convinced he's at all competent. I think he made the wrong call at just about every stage during the pandemic, for example, when he actually bothered to offer any opposition to the government at all, which was rarely. Also his Brexit policy at the 2019 election was a dismal failure. And he ran on a Corbynite manifesto in 2019 and again on a Corbynite programme in 2020 before now posing laughably in front of the Union Jack at every opportunity.
It MAY be enough if Boris messes up badly enough, but if the Conservatives recover significantly, I don't see him winning and he may not even come close.
For all your analysis of Johnson's genius and Starmer's ineptitude you have forgotten one thing. The economy.
Please show my analysis of Johnson's genius? Neither of them are exactly Margaret Thatcher. And I did actually mention Starmer on the economy in another post, saying I think his programme will make things much worse.
(I think the Economist's verdict on Boris was very shrewd - he has flashes of genius, e.g. breaking the Brexit logjam or the vaccination programme but also too-frequent disasters. And if we move towards more settled times, he'd be the wrong leader. But I'm not convinced by any of the alternatives on the Conservative benches yet, and I don't think that Starmer is competent).
We need to get away from the idea that just because somebody is boring, they're also competent. Gordon Brown should have blown that one to pieces.
I think Johnson has good instincts, but is lazy and arrogant.
He was spot on with vaccines, broadly right about Ukraine, and got the UK out of the Brexit logjam.
But he has no money, and that has led him - like others before - to make poor choices of friends. He doesn't think the rules apply to him. And he's not very process oriented.
I suspect he will lead the Conservatives to defeat (albeit a narrow one) in 2024. But he's probably the best person for the PM role right now.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
The faux reasonableness is very, very well done though.
I think, and I do mean this, you should take a look at yourself if you are 'really' going down that route because it's a very, very, dark place to go.
If you start to think that anyone with whom you disagree displays the signs of being something other than sincere, a phantasm, a spectre, who is merely 'faux' reasonable then you are disappearing into a rabbit hole void the end result of which is a dystopian nightmare of narcissistic individualism.
I don't agree with everything you post but I don't stoop to question your sincerity.
It's a strange phenomenon on PB, noted also by @Dura_Ace and @YBarddCwsc yesterday. Normally very thoughtful, enquiring minds have fallen into line over a preferred stance on Russia/Ukraine. Any deviation from that stance is met with disproportionate hostility.
Perhaps it stems from a sense of frustration at our powerlessness. Change your profile picture to the Ukrainian flag and shout down those who don't agree with the chosen line on Ukraine (Russia doing dreadfully, imminent collapse of their war effort, dissent maybe even revolution at home, etc).
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
The Hang Seng down 5.5% today - carnage on the markets to come I think with the China warning
Any idea why Tokyo and Singapore were fine when the Hang Seng slumped? The China link?
The markets are very odd at the moment: London was fine on Friday when the US sank. Unusual.
EH? London was up marginally on Friday, as was the Dow
Nasdaq was down -2.18% and the S&P down 1.3% on a day London was level, with no real reaction to the US which is unusual.
Western European markets have frequently been taking a hammering whilst London has fared slightly better for obvious geographic reasons.
I'm just curious, and was asking State Away or anyone knowledgeable, why Bombay and Tokyo for example closed UP 1.13% and 0.58% on a day when the Hang Seng closed down 5.5%? I guess it's the China comments but I'd have expected the rest of the Far East to take a beating.
Anyone?
Covid data from Hong Kong looks horrible. Friends of mine are leaving the city rather than be locked down
Eeek.
Don't tell Robert.
Hong Kong has very poor vaccination rates in the elderly, has little natural immunity, and has been largely dependent on low efficacy Chinese vaccines.
Do you want me to drag out your lies errors on Israel, or she we leave it there?
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
'The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.'
No serious commentator is suggesting a NFZ. The reason is obvious, and has been stated on this forum clearly and frequently.
NFZ is simply fluffy words to mean the West bombing Russia, which is a major escalation that gives Putin cover for his own escalation.
Far, far better to keep shoveling all those Stinger ground-to-air missiles over into Ukraine. Get enough of them in theatre, and you end up with a no-fly zone by default.
Looking at what is happening and not happening in Ukraine, my theory on the air war, is that both sides have enough SAM systems to make medium and high level operations very dangerous. This is why the Russians appear to be flying very low. In part this is due to the Russian lack of real defence suppression capability (SEAD).
We should (and I hope are) be looking at resupplying Ukraine with higher end systems than just Stinger. These would need be the various Russia systems such as (ironically, given the history) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system
I think the Lebedev thing is awful but I'm even more concerned by the way Boris Johnson shares with Putin the attempt to alter the reality of truth. It's not just lying, it's attempting entirely to re-write a narrative, a zeitgeist, into something that is utterly at variance with the actual truth. Putin does it all the time but so does Johnson. Cummings was another shit who was up to it.
Some of you may dislike the comparison of Putin with Johnson but this is deeply disturbing. I genuinely fear for our democracy because a lot of people get taken in by it.
I think, post war, we will need to face up to the weaknesses of our own political system. The shameless lies from various politicians has absolutely created a fog of misinformation. The process of calling out Trump, Johnson, Farage, Le Pen, Salmond and many others needs to be carried through, and those who have served Putin, in whatever capacity, need to be removed from the political process entirely and where appropriate to face criminal trial.
I don't think that's much to do with the political system. Western institutions are quite adequate, if we make use of them. It's how people engage - or don't - that counts.
No, I don't agree Nigel, and I think you just about nail the problem yourself. People don't engage.
Sorry to go all LibDem on this, but the voting system is fundamentally flawed. If we could just address that it would be a big step forward. I'm not holding my breath though.
As for the rogues gallery - Trump, Johnson, Farage, Le Pen, Salmond etc - there's a decent chance of them getting their dues, I should say, once the full extent of their Russian links are exposed.
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
I loathe Putin to the depths of my being.
Just because I think the west's response has been limp, and that I think regrettably that Putin's forces will eventually win this, don't for one second make me out to be an apologist for what Putin has done. It's evil beyond evil, from the chthonian depths.
I mostly loathe the world of men.
Words chosen deliberately.
And yet every twist you have advocated Putin’s agenda.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
The faux reasonableness is very, very well done though.
I think, and I do mean this, you should take a look at yourself if you are 'really' going down that route because it's a very, very, dark place to go.
If you start to think that anyone with whom you disagree displays the signs of being something other than sincere, a phantasm, a spectre, who is merely 'faux' reasonable then you are disappearing into a rabbit hole void the end result of which is a dystopian nightmare of narcissistic individualism.
I don't agree with everything you post but I don't stoop to question your sincerity.
It's a strange phenomenon on PB, noted also by @Dura_Ace and @YBarddCwsc yesterday. Normally very thoughtful, enquiring minds have fallen into line over a preferred stance on Russia/Ukraine. Any deviation from that stance is met with disproportionate hostility.
Perhaps it stems from a sense of frustration at our powerlessness. Change your profile picture to the Ukrainian flag and shout down those who don't agree with the chosen line on Ukraine (Russia doing dreadfully, imminent collapse of their war effort, dissent maybe even revolution at home, etc).
It really is quite strange.
It's OK to have a dissenting opinion.
But it's also a little suspicious when you have a dissenting opinion, have a record of spreading falsehoods (about BA pilots and vaccines, for example), and have an IP address that's listed in the blacklists.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
The faux reasonableness is very, very well done though.
I think, and I do mean this, you should take a look at yourself if you are 'really' going down that route because it's a very, very, dark place to go.
If you start to think that anyone with whom you disagree displays the signs of being something other than sincere, a phantasm, a spectre, who is merely 'faux' reasonable then you are disappearing into a rabbit hole void the end result of which is a dystopian nightmare of narcissistic individualism.
I don't agree with everything you post but I don't stoop to question your sincerity.
It's a strange phenomenon on PB, noted also by @Dura_Ace and @YBarddCwsc yesterday. Normally very thoughtful, enquiring minds have fallen into line over a preferred stance on Russia/Ukraine. Any deviation from that stance is met with disproportionate hostility.
Perhaps it stems from a sense of frustration at our powerlessness. Change your profile picture to the Ukrainian flag and shout down those who don't agree with the chosen line on Ukraine (Russia doing dreadfully, imminent collapse of their war effort, dissent maybe even revolution at home, etc).
It really is quite strange.
I'd just like to remind you of what you said to me a week or so ago... Perhaps you fall into the same trap?
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
The faux reasonableness is very, very well done though.
I think, and I do mean this, you should take a look at yourself if you are 'really' going down that route because it's a very, very, dark place to go.
If you start to think that anyone with whom you disagree displays the signs of being something other than sincere, a phantasm, a spectre, who is merely 'faux' reasonable then you are disappearing into a rabbit hole void the end result of which is a dystopian nightmare of narcissistic individualism.
I don't agree with everything you post but I don't stoop to question your sincerity.
It's a strange phenomenon on PB, noted also by @Dura_Ace and @YBarddCwsc yesterday. Normally very thoughtful, enquiring minds have fallen into line over a preferred stance on Russia/Ukraine. Any deviation from that stance is met with disproportionate hostility.
Perhaps it stems from a sense of frustration at our powerlessness. Change your profile picture to the Ukrainian flag and shout down those who don't agree with the chosen line on Ukraine (Russia doing dreadfully, imminent collapse of their war effort, dissent maybe even revolution at home, etc).
It really is quite strange.
Not really. There was a topic, that cut across party lines, that caused all kind of acrimony. People who had been stalwart supporters of a party for decades tearing up membership cards..... I can't recall exactly what it was. I don't think it was Pineapple-On-Pizza??
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
Basically, it's compromised machines that are used by email (and forum) spammers.
In the sense that they ought to know they are compromised or in the sense they might just be an idiot with crap security who is confused why their “computer is so slow”?
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
The faux reasonableness is very, very well done though.
I think, and I do mean this, you should take a look at yourself if you are 'really' going down that route because it's a very, very, dark place to go.
If you start to think that anyone with whom you disagree displays the signs of being something other than sincere, a phantasm, a spectre, who is merely 'faux' reasonable then you are disappearing into a rabbit hole void the end result of which is a dystopian nightmare of narcissistic individualism.
I don't agree with everything you post but I don't stoop to question your sincerity.
It's a strange phenomenon on PB, noted also by @Dura_Ace and @YBarddCwsc yesterday. Normally very thoughtful, enquiring minds have fallen into line over a preferred stance on Russia/Ukraine. Any deviation from that stance is met with disproportionate hostility.
Perhaps it stems from a sense of frustration at our powerlessness. Change your profile picture to the Ukrainian flag and shout down those who don't agree with the chosen line on Ukraine (Russia doing dreadfully, imminent collapse of their war effort, dissent maybe even revolution at home, etc).
It really is quite strange.
You make a very good point and I agree with you, even as one who supports 'the chosen line on Ukraine'.
I do recognise that there is a large chunk of wish fulfilment in my thinking and I think it is entirely right you should be able to express a more cautious (more pessimistic?) view without being shouted down as a Russian stooge.
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
Basically, it's compromised machines that are used by email (and forum) spammers.
In the sense that they ought to know they are compromised or in the sense they might just be an idiot with crap security who is confused why their “computer is so slow”?
Oh, it's entirely possible there is an innocent explanation.
People's machines get hacked all the time.
On the other hand, it is odd how many posters appear with certain... hobby horses... and which also have IPs that are flagged.
Dmytro Kuleba, Ukraine Minister of Foreign Affairs:
"To those abroad scared of being ‘dragged into WWIII’. Ukraine fights back successfully. We need you to help us fight. Provide us with all necessary weapons. Apply more sanctions on Russia and isolate it fully. Help Ukraine force Putin into failure and you will avert a larger war."
I think the Lebedev thing is awful but I'm even more concerned by the way Boris Johnson shares with Putin the attempt to alter the reality of truth. It's not just lying, it's attempting entirely to re-write a narrative, a zeitgeist, into something that is utterly at variance with the actual truth. Putin does it all the time but so does Johnson. Cummings was another shit who was up to it.
Some of you may dislike the comparison of Putin with Johnson but this is deeply disturbing. I genuinely fear for our democracy because a lot of people get taken in by it.
Both are post-truth politicians. But in Putin's case, he has perhaps run in to the limits of what is possible. You can't fake an invasion of another country with tens of thousands of conscripts dying, hyperinflation, banks closing down, Shops closing, etc. There comes a point where you no longer control the agenda and a form of reality intervenes.
Putin should have stuck with the old tactics of plausible deniability and fake institutions that fooled people and useful idiots could get behind. It could have run on and on for decades, generations even.
Putin could probably have bled Ukraine dry if he'd funded opposition groups, bribed politicians, and continued to arm the separatists. Maybe a few Russian troops could have grabbed 20 miles here or there...
Instead he went for invasion. And succeeded in uniting the decadent West.
I've been thinking about it. And I am quite convinced that he was going for a coup-de-main modelled on - Afghanistan.
I think the Lebedev thing is awful but I'm even more concerned by the way Boris Johnson shares with Putin the attempt to alter the reality of truth. It's not just lying, it's attempting entirely to re-write a narrative, a zeitgeist, into something that is utterly at variance with the actual truth. Putin does it all the time but so does Johnson. Cummings was another shit who was up to it.
Some of you may dislike the comparison of Putin with Johnson but this is deeply disturbing. I genuinely fear for our democracy because a lot of people get taken in by it.
I think, post war, we will need to face up to the weaknesses of our own political system. The shameless lies from various politicians has absolutely created a fog of misinformation. The process of calling out Trump, Johnson, Farage, Le Pen, Salmond and many others needs to be carried through, and those who have served Putin, in whatever capacity, need to be removed from the political process entirely and where appropriate to face criminal trial.
While I appreciate your comment, I'm not banning people just for being Putin puppets.
What about banning people who post articles that PB deems Russian propaganda?
Here's another one. Again, gives a perspective that many won't like on here, not fitting the PB Russian military disaster narrative as it doesn't.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
The faux reasonableness is very, very well done though.
I think, and I do mean this, you should take a look at yourself if you are 'really' going down that route because it's a very, very, dark place to go.
If you start to think that anyone with whom you disagree displays the signs of being something other than sincere, a phantasm, a spectre, who is merely 'faux' reasonable then you are disappearing into a rabbit hole void the end result of which is a dystopian nightmare of narcissistic individualism.
I don't agree with everything you post but I don't stoop to question your sincerity.
OK, I'll say what others won't: fuck off, you Putin apologist. I'm not going to be lectured on "dark places" from someone who would have NATO bomb Russia's air defences inside Russia. That comes from a very dark place indeed.
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
JackW was but it turned out he was operating from a cellar in LibDem HQ so Mike let the old scrote off.
The Hang Seng down 5.5% today - carnage on the markets to come I think with the China warning
Any idea why Tokyo and Singapore were fine when the Hang Seng slumped? The China link?
The markets are very odd at the moment: London was fine on Friday when the US sank. Unusual.
EH? London was up marginally on Friday, as was the Dow
Nasdaq was down -2.18% and the S&P down 1.3% on a day London was level, with no real reaction to the US which is unusual.
Western European markets have frequently been taking a hammering whilst London has fared slightly better for obvious geographic reasons.
I'm just curious, and was asking State Away or anyone knowledgeable, why Bombay and Tokyo for example closed UP 1.13% and 0.58% on a day when the Hang Seng closed down 5.5%? I guess it's the China comments but I'd have expected the rest of the Far East to take a beating.
Anyone?
Covid data from Hong Kong looks horrible. Friends of mine are leaving the city rather than be locked down
Eeek.
Don't tell Robert.
Very different to the false data on Israel you repeatedly posted despite being called out
Russia flattening the Antonov works today looks more like economic vandalism ahead of a forced-by-reality ceasefire, than it does any great military targeting.
I think the Lebedev thing is awful but I'm even more concerned by the way Boris Johnson shares with Putin the attempt to alter the reality of truth. It's not just lying, it's attempting entirely to re-write a narrative, a zeitgeist, into something that is utterly at variance with the actual truth. Putin does it all the time but so does Johnson. Cummings was another shit who was up to it.
Some of you may dislike the comparison of Putin with Johnson but this is deeply disturbing. I genuinely fear for our democracy because a lot of people get taken in by it.
Both are post-truth politicians. But in Putin's case, he has perhaps run in to the limits of what is possible. You can't fake an invasion of another country with tens of thousands of conscripts dying, hyperinflation, banks closing down, Shops closing, etc. There comes a point where you no longer control the agenda and a form of reality intervenes.
Putin should have stuck with the old tactics of plausible deniability and fake institutions that fooled people and useful idiots could get behind. It could have run on and on for decades, generations even.
Putin could probably have bled Ukraine dry if he'd funded opposition groups, bribed politicians, and continued to arm the separatists. Maybe a few Russian troops could have grabbed 20 miles here or there...
Instead he went for invasion. And succeeded in uniting the decadent West.
I've been thinking about it. And I am quite convinced that he was going for a coup-de-main modelled on - Afghanistan.
Secure the self-proclaimed republics (including the water sources for the Crimea and the land bridge via Mariupol)
Grab the capital and defenestrate the president
Negotiate peace
All done in 2 weeks
I think he was looking for 2 days - by the time the West got the first summit conference agreed, a fait accompli.
Russia would be running Ukraine from the capital, installing a temporary government and recognising a range of "republics" covering large chunks of the Eastern part of Ukraine.
Tonight Russian state TV’s flagship news show tells viewers Russian troops are in Ukraine to stop Ukraine joining Nato, getting a nuclear bomb, attacking Crimea & then southern Russia, ie Ukraine was a threat to Russia. Alternative reality. More of what host Kiselev said 👇
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
JackW was but it turned out he was operating from a cellar in LibDem HQ so Mike let the old scrote off.
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
Robert seems to check them quite often. I remember being 'checked' when I was claiming to be posting from Sioux Falls. Which I was.
The point is that someone has been challenged, and hasn't responded in any of the normal ways that a regular poster would (which might include some righteous indignation at being checked and assertions of being simply at home/at work as usual), but instead responded by dodging the issue with some bluster and then swiftly disappearing. Hardly reassuring.
Robert has no reason to risk his credibility by making up false information about the IP address, so either there's an innocent explanation or mistake, or there isn't.
What gets me with Heathener is that her posts are so repetitive and tiresome and then she wonders why people in the surrounding conversation sometimes seem a little irritated.
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
Russia flattening the Antonov works today looks more like economic vandalism ahead of a forced-by-reality ceasefire, than it does any great military targeting.
One of the problems the west has in air campaigns is literally running out of targets. You can see it in Kosovo and Libya in particular. The western solution is to step back and try to find some more military targets, and run more patrols looking for targets of opportunity. The Russian solution might be to strike any vaguely relevant target. Also, Russia not having a well deceloped target list may be part of the answer to why we haven’t seen so much of its airforce. Just a theory.
'The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.'
No serious commentator is suggesting a NFZ. The reason is obvious, and has been stated on this forum clearly and frequently.
NFZ is simply fluffy words to mean the West bombing Russia, which is a major escalation that gives Putin cover for his own escalation.
Far, far better to keep shoveling all those Stinger ground-to-air missiles over into Ukraine. Get enough of them in theatre, and you end up with a no-fly zone by default.
Looking at what is happening and not happening in Ukraine, my theory on the air war, is that both sides have enough SAM systems to make medium and high level operations very dangerous. This is why the Russians appear to be flying very low. In part this is due to the Russian lack of real defence suppression capability (SEAD).
We should (and I hope are) be looking at resupplying Ukraine with higher end systems than just Stinger. These would need be the various Russia systems such as (ironically, given the history) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system
The Article That Must Not Be Named also posited that the reason the Russians are flying low might be because there is precious little communication/coordination with their own anti-aircraft weapons and they don't want to get shot down by their own side.
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
Robert seems to check them quite often. I remember being 'checked' when I was claiming to be posting from Sioux Falls. Which I was.
The point is that someone has been challenged, and hasn't responded in any of the normal ways that a regular poster would (which might include some righteous indignation at being checked and assertions of being simply at home/at work as usual), but instead responded by dodging the issue with some bluster and then swiftly disappearing. Hardly reassuring.
Robert has no reason to risk his credibility by making up false information about the IP address, so either there's an innocent explanation or mistake, or there isn't.
What gets me with Heathener is that her posts are so repetitive and tiresome and then she wonders why people in the surrounding conversation sometimes seem a little irritated.
I actually have a Python script that runs once a week (and which I occasionally manually run). Most of the time it comes back with no hits, but since the Ukraine invasion, it has chirped on a couple of occasions.
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
Robert seems to check them quite often. I remember being 'checked' when I was claiming to be posting from Sioux Falls. Which I was.
The point is that someone has been challenged, and hasn't responded in any of the normal ways that a regular poster would (which might include some righteous indignation at being checked and assertions of being simply at home/at work as usual), but instead responded by dodging the issue with some bluster and then swiftly disappearing. Hardly reassuring.
What gets me with Heathener is that her posts are so repetitive and tiresome and then she wonders why people in the surrounding conversation sometimes seem a little irritated.
Speaking as a bloke, @Heathener does make a good point about the 'maleness' of PB at times.
Indeed, it's not so much 'maleness', more 'puerile-teenage-boy-ness'. As an example, the inane 'willy-warmer' conversation the other night made me cringe tbh.
It would be good to have more women posting on here but we don't make it very encouraging at times.
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
The faux reasonableness is very, very well done though.
I think, and I do mean this, you should take a look at yourself if you are 'really' going down that route because it's a very, very, dark place to go.
If you start to think that anyone with whom you disagree displays the signs of being something other than sincere, a phantasm, a spectre, who is merely 'faux' reasonable then you are disappearing into a rabbit hole void the end result of which is a dystopian nightmare of narcissistic individualism.
I don't agree with everything you post but I don't stoop to question your sincerity.
It's a strange phenomenon on PB, noted also by @Dura_Ace and @YBarddCwsc yesterday. Normally very thoughtful, enquiring minds have fallen into line over a preferred stance on Russia/Ukraine. Any deviation from that stance is met with disproportionate hostility.
Perhaps it stems from a sense of frustration at our powerlessness. Change your profile picture to the Ukrainian flag and shout down those who don't agree with the chosen line on Ukraine (Russia doing dreadfully, imminent collapse of their war effort, dissent maybe even revolution at home, etc).
It really is quite strange.
It's OK to have a dissenting opinion.
But it's also a little suspicious when you have a dissenting opinion, have a record of spreading falsehoods (about BA pilots and vaccines, for example), and have an IP address that's listed in the blacklists.
Absolutely and it's your site so them's the rules. Perhaps it is a mark of the sophistication of spammers that @Heathener's posts seem to me to be genuine and I could point to other posters who are equally contentious for many on PB, not to say equally provocative.
'The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.'
No serious commentator is suggesting a NFZ. The reason is obvious, and has been stated on this forum clearly and frequently.
NFZ is simply fluffy words to mean the West bombing Russia, which is a major escalation that gives Putin cover for his own escalation.
Far, far better to keep shoveling all those Stinger ground-to-air missiles over into Ukraine. Get enough of them in theatre, and you end up with a no-fly zone by default.
I am not an expert on war but in regard to the 30 or so cruise missiles that hit near the Polish border are there defence systems that can intercept them and are there any deployed in Ukraine ?
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
Basically, it's compromised machines that are used by email (and forum) spammers.
In the sense that they ought to know they are compromised or in the sense they might just be an idiot with crap security who is confused why their “computer is so slow”?
Oh, it's entirely possible there is an innocent explanation.
People's machines get hacked all the time.
On the other hand, it is odd how many posters appear with certain... hobby horses... and which also have IPs that are flagged.
Meeks's article is excellent. Even if he's not on here he is at least putting out his thoughts and aperçus in the market place of ideas. Better than many a commentator in the mainstream media.
Russia flattening the Antonov works today looks more like economic vandalism ahead of a forced-by-reality ceasefire, than it does any great military targeting.
One of the problems the west has in air campaigns is literally running out of targets. You can see it in Kosovo and Libya in particular. The western solution is to step back and try to find some more military targets, and run more patrols looking for targets of opportunity. The Russian solution might be to strike any vaguely relevant target. Also, Russia not having a well deceloped target list may be part of the answer to why we haven’t seen so much of its airforce. Just a theory.
One of the curious phenomenon of dictatorships is the way their armed forces become a series of competing fiefdoms. This is great for The Boss - since a fragmented military is less of threat. But getting them all to dance to the same tune is then problematic.
I’ve had a few problems with betting sites since enabling my iPhones “private relay” - I think it’s basically a VPN with a scrambled IP address. Anyone else had similar problems?
'The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.'
No serious commentator is suggesting a NFZ. The reason is obvious, and has been stated on this forum clearly and frequently.
NFZ is simply fluffy words to mean the West bombing Russia, which is a major escalation that gives Putin cover for his own escalation.
Far, far better to keep shoveling all those Stinger ground-to-air missiles over into Ukraine. Get enough of them in theatre, and you end up with a no-fly zone by default.
I am not an expert on war but in regard to the 30 or so cruise missiles that hit near the Polish border are there defence systems that can intercept them and are there any deployed in Ukraine ?
Yes, patriot is deployed in Poland.
And - probably not anything comparable, but they might have a bit of ex-Soviet capability.
Russia flattening the Antonov works today looks more like economic vandalism ahead of a forced-by-reality ceasefire, than it does any great military targeting.
A plane factory could definitely be a useful asset in a longer war, but it does look like the Russians have decided that Ukraine won’t be allowed to have nice things. It’s symbolic more than strategic, same as the An225 they blew up a couple of weeks ago.
Tonight Russian state TV’s flagship news show tells viewers Russian troops are in Ukraine to stop Ukraine joining Nato, getting a nuclear bomb, attacking Crimea & then southern Russia, ie Ukraine was a threat to Russia. Alternative reality. More of what host Kiselev said 👇
The Hang Seng down 5.5% today - carnage on the markets to come I think with the China warning
Any idea why Tokyo and Singapore were fine when the Hang Seng slumped? The China link?
The markets are very odd at the moment: London was fine on Friday when the US sank. Unusual.
EH? London was up marginally on Friday, as was the Dow
Nasdaq was down -2.18% and the S&P down 1.3% on a day London was level, with no real reaction to the US which is unusual.
Western European markets have frequently been taking a hammering whilst London has fared slightly better for obvious geographic reasons.
I'm just curious, and was asking State Away or anyone knowledgeable, why Bombay and Tokyo for example closed UP 1.13% and 0.58% on a day when the Hang Seng closed down 5.5%? I guess it's the China comments but I'd have expected the rest of the Far East to take a beating.
Anyone?
As I said, most of the American falls came after London closed. You need to account for time zones.
I don't know on Hong Kong, but their covid situation appears bad independent from the war.
Probably the news that Foxconn has suspended production as a result of the latest lockdown has something to do with it ?
'The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.'
No serious commentator is suggesting a NFZ. The reason is obvious, and has been stated on this forum clearly and frequently.
NFZ is simply fluffy words to mean the West bombing Russia, which is a major escalation that gives Putin cover for his own escalation.
Far, far better to keep shoveling all those Stinger ground-to-air missiles over into Ukraine. Get enough of them in theatre, and you end up with a no-fly zone by default.
I am not an expert on war but in regard to the 30 or so cruise missiles that hit near the Polish border are there defence systems that can intercept them and are there any deployed in Ukraine ?
Depends on the missiles. Older Soviet era system tend to be less good against low flying, terrain hugging planes and missiles.
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
Basically, it's compromised machines that are used by email (and forum) spammers.
In the sense that they ought to know they are compromised or in the sense they might just be an idiot with crap security who is confused why their “computer is so slow”?
Oh, it's entirely possible there is an innocent explanation.
People's machines get hacked all the time.
On the other hand, it is odd how many posters appear with certain... hobby horses... and which also have IPs that are flagged.
I think you are forgetting that Heathener worked in intelligence for three years, on Russian military manoeuvres no less, and so is using her spy-craft to disguise who she is in case the FSB track her IP address and find out where she lives….
Clearly she is posting sceptical posts with a Russian flavour so that she can flush out people who agree and catch those wily Russian 5th column chaps who post on PB.
Never forget Heathener worked in intelligence for three years…..
And just to remind you in case you’ve already forgotten, Heathener worked in intelligence for three years.
Tonight Russian state TV’s flagship news show tells viewers Russian troops are in Ukraine to stop Ukraine joining Nato, getting a nuclear bomb, attacking Crimea & then southern Russia, ie Ukraine was a threat to Russia. Alternative reality. More of what host Kiselev said 👇
And Russians are buying it. I keep hearing from Russian and Ukrainian colleagues about their frustrating calls with elderly relatives in Russia, who are just parroting the Kremlin lines wholesale. It's as bad as the capture of a large chunk of the US population by Trumpism and QAnon.
It means any short term hope for Putin to fall from grace is just wishful thinking. We are at the start of a long, tedious, painful, occasionally dangerous period of containment that may last decades. It may evolve in time into a full on US-China cold war as Russia becomes increasingly like the Austro-Hungarian or Ottoman empires from 1914 onwards - a convenient ally for the real rising power.
Zero chance of Boris calling a general election this year or even next year unless the Tories regain a big lead in the polls. Otherwise, even if he won it would be with a significantly reduced majority.
Note too after 10 years of their party in power no PM has called a general election before the full 5 year term of their government is up. See 1964, 1992, 1997 and 2010 (not all of them were defeated, Major won a shock re election in 1992)
I'm afraid I really do think a lot of the back-slapping about how well we are doing is delusional borne of a need not to feel as powerless about what Putin is doing as we are.
The fact is, we stood by and let him invade and pulverise an entire nation. Slowly and inexorably that is what he is doing. Biden and NATO refused to pitch in because they were too scared of Putin's nuclear threats. Perhaps justifiably, but we've let him get away with it.
We all want this to be another Afghanistan. I fear we are deluding ourselves.
When you say "we", I don't think you're including yourself.
So perhaps you should be a little more precise in your language and say "you".
It would be a little more honest, no?
'We' meaning the west, not pb.com per se.
I think we in the west have been trying to convince ourselves that we're doing as much as we possibly can (we aren't), that we're united (we aren't) and that there's nothing further we can do without risking nuclear war (not true).
The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.
You started here with some views on Covid cases and hospitalisations in Israel which turned out not to be - how to put this - entirely accurate. Then moved on to a story about BA pilots, which turned out to be... ah yes... not entirely accurate.
And now you're onto "oh yes, I'm on your side, one of *you*, and I know it's hard to accept, but it would be better for all of us if the Ukrainians just accepted the inevitable and laid down their arms... after all, what chance do they stand?"
It is a little tricky to take you seriously, and for that I apologise.
At least she’s a better class of Russian provocateur. PB should feel flattered
The faux reasonableness is very, very well done though.
I think, and I do mean this, you should take a look at yourself if you are 'really' going down that route because it's a very, very, dark place to go.
If you start to think that anyone with whom you disagree displays the signs of being something other than sincere, a phantasm, a spectre, who is merely 'faux' reasonable then you are disappearing into a rabbit hole void the end result of which is a dystopian nightmare of narcissistic individualism.
I don't agree with everything you post but I don't stoop to question your sincerity.
It's a strange phenomenon on PB, noted also by @Dura_Ace and @YBarddCwsc yesterday. Normally very thoughtful, enquiring minds have fallen into line over a preferred stance on Russia/Ukraine. Any deviation from that stance is met with disproportionate hostility.
Perhaps it stems from a sense of frustration at our powerlessness. Change your profile picture to the Ukrainian flag and shout down those who don't agree with the chosen line on Ukraine (Russia doing dreadfully, imminent collapse of their war effort, dissent maybe even revolution at home, etc).
It really is quite strange.
It's OK to have a dissenting opinion.
But it's also a little suspicious when you have a dissenting opinion, have a record of spreading falsehoods (about BA pilots and vaccines, for example), and have an IP address that's listed in the blacklists.
Absolutely and it's your site so them's the rules. Perhaps it is a mark of the sophistication of spammers that @Heathener's posts seem to me to be genuine and I could point to other posters who are equally contentious for many on PB, not to say equally provocative.
P Johnson and d-d were laughably obvious, but Heathener less so.
I thought she was stupid, but harmless. Guess she's gone now.
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
Robert seems to check them quite often. I remember being 'checked' when I was claiming to be posting from Sioux Falls. Which I was.
The point is that someone has been challenged, and hasn't responded in any of the normal ways that a regular poster would (which might include some righteous indignation at being checked and assertions of being simply at home/at work as usual), but instead responded by dodging the issue with some bluster and then swiftly disappearing. Hardly reassuring.
Robert has no reason to risk his credibility by making up false information about the IP address, so either there's an innocent explanation or mistake, or there isn't.
What gets me with Heathener is that her posts are so repetitive and tiresome and then she wonders why people in the surrounding conversation sometimes seem a little irritated.
I actually have a Python script that runs once a week (and which I occasionally manually run). Most of the time it comes back with no hits, but since the Ukraine invasion, it has chirped on a couple of occasions.
You'd think that during the pandemic these trolls should be working from home?
'The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.'
No serious commentator is suggesting a NFZ. The reason is obvious, and has been stated on this forum clearly and frequently.
NFZ is simply fluffy words to mean the West bombing Russia, which is a major escalation that gives Putin cover for his own escalation.
Far, far better to keep shoveling all those Stinger ground-to-air missiles over into Ukraine. Get enough of them in theatre, and you end up with a no-fly zone by default.
I am not an expert on war but in regard to the 30 or so cruise missiles that hit near the Polish border are there defence systems that can intercept them and are there any deployed in Ukraine ?
It was reported last week that a missile defence system has been set up close to the Polish border, using the US Patriot system. Presumably it’s going to be used to stop stray missiles heading for Poland, rather than to take out Russian missiles in Ukraine.
It’s interesting how, with the exception of the attack on this base at the weekend, Russia has been quite sparing with the long-range missiles. My suspicion is that they have only a few hundred of them.
“ Clausewitz describes the "culminating point" as when an attacking force hits strong resistance, runs out of energy, and can no longer continue. Russia is running out of manpower, asking Syria to send troops. Sanctions are working. Russia may culminate in 10-14 days if we press.”
So what happens then ?
Who knows?
But who knows what happens if we withdraw all help from Ukraine, and Russia rolls over them and gets a nice, compliant pro-Russian government in Kiev?
In my mind it's quite simple: it is right versus wrong, good versus evil. The evil is easy to identify: Putin and his cronies. They are the ones who have invaded another country; they are the ones who are killing innocent civilians. They are the ones threatening smaller democracies with invasion. They are the ones who are threatening the world with chemical weapons, or nuclear oblivion.
Those on the side of evil talk about how it is our fault, how we caused this mess, rather than concentrate their ire on the evil.
We have to be on the side of good. And that means supporting Ukraine.
Which we are doing.
The time to think about the causes of this is after the mess is over - and I think many of their arguments are bogus anyway, purposeful distractions away from evil.
The final clause is the sort of thing we should avoid writing. I don't know people who are 'purposefully' distracting away from evil, at least not on here. I don't frequent other political or social media sites.
The reason why the causes are pertinent is that they are also so relevant to both the present and the future.
We were powerless to stop Putin because we are powerless to stop Putin and we will be powerless to stop Putin. We are so frit of him, of the nuclear threat, that we're not prepared to stand up and defend Ukraine with the only language Putin will pay attention to: military force.
Biden is a wet blanket. His ghastly withdrawal from Afghanistan, aided and abetted by Johnson, greenlit Putin's invasion of Ukraine and has shown Putin that NATO is not going to stand up and defend them.
And, yes, Putin and his invasion are utterly evil.
I utterly disagree. In other places, the 'we caused tis by x, y and z' are being used as distractions away from the Russian's folly. Whenever anyone criticises Russia, the voices cry that it is 'our' fault.
"Russians are doing these things." "Remember that we guaranteed we would not expand NATO eastwards, and Ukraine is filled with Nazis. Besides, we 'poked' them into it."
It is classic maskirovka, performed by either knowing or unknowing fools.
The Russian government is not the victims in this. They are the aggressor, the bully. The victims are the Ukrainian people and, to a lesser extent, the Russian people.
If we see what is happening as akin to rape, then these people are saying that Ukraine should not have been wearing such a short skirt.
Twitter is full of such comments.
Twitter is part of the poison that has got us to the place of Russia invading Ukraine. .
I read your posts on here with interest (Chris, again, take note). I've seen Greta Thurnberg blamed on here for starting the Ukraine war but now Twitter is responsible for it? It's an interesting thesis but I'm not on twitter so I wouldn't know.
I think if we believe in democracy it's really important that we continue to debate in as friendly a way as possible, even when profoundly disagreeing with someone's perspective or suggestion. I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. That's a shame because this is a decent site and the only one I frequent. When someone is rude to me I tend to disappear as I have better things to do than be insulted by someone from the comfort of their chair whom I've never met.
So keep playing the ball, folks. Not the man or woman.
". I've noticed an increasing amount of anger and abuse on here. "
You weren't here in 2016. Or 2017. Or 2014. Or 2019. Or 2020. In fact, it's pretty much always been like this...
I'd argue PB is a rather decorous place compared to the Internet in general, especially as politics is being discussed. It's also more informative than most places.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
It's not exactly a welcoming place for women tbh.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Odd that you were challenged specifically on your IP address, and have dodged providing any sort of response?
By Robert?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
Yes, the more obvious trolls, in recent weeks. Its quite common.
'The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.'
No serious commentator is suggesting a NFZ. The reason is obvious, and has been stated on this forum clearly and frequently.
NFZ is simply fluffy words to mean the West bombing Russia, which is a major escalation that gives Putin cover for his own escalation.
Far, far better to keep shoveling all those Stinger ground-to-air missiles over into Ukraine. Get enough of them in theatre, and you end up with a no-fly zone by default.
I am not an expert on war but in regard to the 30 or so cruise missiles that hit near the Polish border are there defence systems that can intercept them and are there any deployed in Ukraine ?
It was reported last week that a missile defence system has been set up close to the Polish border, using the US Patriot system. Presumably it’s going to be used to stop stray missiles heading for Poland, rather than to take out Russian missiles in Ukraine.
It’s interesting how, with the exception of the attack on this base at the weekend, Russia has been quite sparing with the long-range missiles. My suspicion is that they have only a few hundred of them.
It’s what it would look like if we or the French were acting unilaterally I think (the lack of cruise missiles I mean - we wouldn’t now resort to gravity bombs). We’ve all got so used to watching US led Ops with unlimited munitions that we’ve missed that these things are costly and stocks need managing.
'The reality is that we are ignoring Zelensky's pleas for a No Fly Zone and we're letting an entire country get pulverised.'
No serious commentator is suggesting a NFZ. The reason is obvious, and has been stated on this forum clearly and frequently.
NFZ is simply fluffy words to mean the West bombing Russia, which is a major escalation that gives Putin cover for his own escalation.
Far, far better to keep shoveling all those Stinger ground-to-air missiles over into Ukraine. Get enough of them in theatre, and you end up with a no-fly zone by default.
I am not an expert on war but in regard to the 30 or so cruise missiles that hit near the Polish border are there defence systems that can intercept them and are there any deployed in Ukraine ?
It was reported last week that a missile defence system has been set up close to the Polish border, using the US Patriot system. Presumably it’s going to be used to stop stray missiles heading for Poland, rather than to take out Russian missiles in Ukraine.
It’s interesting how, with the exception of the attack on this base at the weekend, Russia has been quite sparing with the long-range missiles. My suspicion is that they have only a few hundred of them.
A video the other say said that Russia had launched only 100 missiles in the first ?day? of the war - when they are most effective at hitting concentrated defenders. In comparison, the US launched 350 in the first day of the Iraq War twenty years ago.
(Apols if I've misremembered / misunderstood those figures.)
If that's right, you do have to ask why: and lack of missiles might well be a factor.
Comments
It MAY be enough if Boris messes up badly enough, but if the Conservatives recover significantly, I don't see him winning and he may not even come close.
The mystery is why markets around the world are still comparatively optimistic, when the sky is full of large and slow moving dark clouds
I like having you on board, but why don't you admit where you're sitting?
I don't think I've mentioned him yet, except to say that he will be departing. A feature - not a bug - about democracies.
Less than a year into his tenure I realised what a fool I had been and how dangerous he was. Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa. I then switched sides and joined the insurrection against him, received warmly and with good grace by my colleagues who hadn't gone mad as I had.
My point is that even having enabled Bad Things - like the Big Dog - these MPs can still redeem themselves. Forgiveness is a simple thing, you just need to be genuine in your repentance. Are any of them capable?
Western European markets have frequently been taking a hammering whilst London has fared slightly better for obvious geographic reasons.
I'm just curious, and was asking State Away or anyone knowledgeable, why Bombay and Tokyo for example closed UP 1.13% and 0.58% on a day when the Hang Seng closed down 5.5%? I guess it's the China comments but I'd have expected the rest of the Far East to take a beating.
Anyone?
I'd say the quality is high at the moment, and fairly decorous (young Malc notwithstanding). It also has a broader mix of political views than usual, although Scots Labour supporters are still as rare as hen's teeth.
There are more women than ever before, but still by no means enough.
I think 'touch and go' seems right. I would like to be solidly optimistic about the outcome, but it seem quite precariously poised to me, FWIW.
Ukraine have counted over 2000 civilian deaths in Mariupol. Given the appalling conditions, there are possibly many more uncounted.
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1503280012136439808
Here's another one. Again, gives a perspective that many won't like on here, not fitting the PB Russian military disaster narrative as it doesn't.
https://intellinews.com/phase-4-of-ukraine-war-starts-as-rockets-rain-down-on-mariupol-but-peace-talks-are-ongoing-237909/?source=russia
She added a lot to the quality of debate.
I hope you can live with that and I'm glad you like having me on board. It's mutual and it's a great place.
The faux reasonableness is very, very well done though.
I don't know on Hong Kong, but their covid situation appears bad independent from the war.
Just because I think the west's response has been limp, and that I think regrettably that Putin's forces will eventually win this, don't for one second make me out to be an apologist for what Putin has done. It's evil beyond evil, from the chthonian depths.
I mostly loathe the world of men.
Words chosen deliberately.
We also know that they will continue to screw up, continue to pointlessly incompetently screw over people and then lie about it. Hard political times are ahead.
(I think the Economist's verdict on Boris was very shrewd - he has flashes of genius, e.g. breaking the Brexit logjam or the vaccination programme but also too-frequent disasters. And if we move towards more settled times, he'd be the wrong leader. But I'm not convinced by any of the alternatives on the Conservative benches yet, and I don't think that Starmer is competent).
We need to get away from the idea that just because somebody is boring, they're also competent. Gordon Brown should have blown that one to pieces.
If one can judge from the conservative party supporters who post here on PB, I should say that the love of Boris is not entirely blind.
OT "I don't like war movies" claimed my fiancee at the weekend. Sunday's movies ?
Saving Private Ryan & Black Hawk Down
@JavierBlas
·
35m
China placed the 17.5 million residents of the southern city of Shenzhen into a lockdown -- this is one of the world's most important manufacturing exports hubs, particularly for electronics (and the city is the 4th world's largest container port).
The voters will be right to say nothing would be materially different with Labour. The Government unpopularity is down to the reaction to Boris's antics. Change Boris, and Labour are left gazing at their shoes....
https://alastair-meeks.medium.com/now-and-next-seven-things-to-think-about-following-the-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-7f8497774dbb
The question I would ask of him as he is so positive about the EU's enhanced significance in this crisis is this:
What is the EUs policy about what happens if there is a Russian attack of any sort on an EU neutral country - Finland/Sweden in particular?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Storm-333
If you start to think that anyone with whom you disagree displays the signs of being something other than sincere, a phantasm, a spectre, who is merely 'faux' reasonable then you are disappearing into a rabbit hole void the end result of which is a dystopian nightmare of narcissistic individualism.
I don't agree with everything you post but I don't stoop to question your sincerity.
Far, far better to keep shoveling all those Stinger ground-to-air missiles over into Ukraine. Get enough of them in theatre, and you end up with a no-fly zone by default.
Colour of the PB.com boathouse, eh?
Western institutions are quite adequate, if we make use of them. It's how people engage - or don't - that counts.
There's far too much male aggression and downright rudeness, a failure to debate issues and always a tendency to attack the person.
This place is like being on a rugby field of 30 men. And not in a pleasant fantasy way
I shall be off for a bit. The personal rudeness is tiresome and I have a life outside that feels a lot more wholesome.
Don't tell Robert.
He was spot on with vaccines, broadly right about Ukraine, and got the UK out of the Brexit logjam.
But he has no money, and that has led him - like others before - to make poor choices of friends. He doesn't think the rules apply to him. And he's not very process oriented.
I suspect he will lead the Conservatives to defeat (albeit a narrow one) in 2024. But he's probably the best person for the PM role right now.
Perhaps it stems from a sense of frustration at our powerlessness. Change your profile picture to the Ukrainian flag and shout down those who don't agree with the chosen line on Ukraine (Russia doing dreadfully, imminent collapse of their war effort, dissent maybe even revolution at home, etc).
It really is quite strange.
Do you want me to drag out your lies errors on Israel, or she we leave it there?
Has anyone else ever been "challenged specifically on [their] IP address"?
We should (and I hope are) be looking at resupplying Ukraine with higher end systems than just Stinger. These would need be the various Russia systems such as (ironically, given the history) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system
Sorry to go all LibDem on this, but the voting system is fundamentally flawed. If we could just address that it would be a big step forward. I'm not holding my breath though.
As for the rogues gallery - Trump, Johnson, Farage, Le Pen, Salmond etc - there's a decent chance of them getting their dues, I should say, once the full extent of their Russian links are exposed.
I remain hopeful.
I've pulled a number of posters (less than 5, more than 2) for having IP addresses that fail the blacklist check (https://www.whatismyip.com/blacklist-check/).
Basically, it's compromised machines that are used by email (and forum) spammers.
But it's also a little suspicious when you have a dissenting opinion, have a record of spreading falsehoods (about BA pilots and vaccines, for example), and have an IP address that's listed in the blacklists.
I do recognise that there is a large chunk of wish fulfilment in my thinking and I think it is entirely right you should be able to express a more cautious (more pessimistic?) view without being shouted down as a Russian stooge.
People's machines get hacked all the time.
On the other hand, it is odd how many posters appear with certain... hobby horses... and which also have IPs that are flagged.
Let's put this into context for a moment. In the last 30 days, there have been a little under 200 individual posters on PB. Of these, three have IP addresses that are flagged in https://www.whatismyip.com/blacklist-check/: @PJohnson, @d_d and @Heathener
Coincindence?
"To those abroad scared of being ‘dragged into WWIII’. Ukraine fights back successfully. We need you to help us fight. Provide us with all necessary weapons. Apply more sanctions on Russia and isolate it fully. Help Ukraine force Putin into failure and you will avert a larger war."
https://twitter.com/DmytroKuleba/status/1503278351145918467?s=20&t=Nv_glxtsLe3uFlw7Y6QbiQ
Interestingly, no mention of a NFZ.
Secure the self-proclaimed republics (including the water sources for the Crimea and the land bridge via Mariupol)
Grab the capital and defenestrate the president
Negotiate peace
All done in 2 weeks
However, many of us add: at what cost are those advances being made? And can Russia sustain that cost?
Russia would be running Ukraine from the capital, installing a temporary government and recognising a range of "republics" covering large chunks of the Eastern part of Ukraine.
https://twitter.com/BBCSteveR/status/1503048996205600769
The point is that someone has been challenged, and hasn't responded in any of the normal ways that a regular poster would (which might include some righteous indignation at being checked and assertions of being simply at home/at work as usual), but instead responded by dodging the issue with some bluster and then swiftly disappearing. Hardly reassuring.
Robert has no reason to risk his credibility by making up false information about the IP address, so either there's an innocent explanation or mistake, or there isn't.
What gets me with Heathener is that her posts are so repetitive and tiresome and then she wonders why people in the surrounding conversation sometimes seem a little irritated.
@d_d
Both were before they disappeared
A denial of reality waged by trolls, state media, influencers.
With @AdeaneAnt - first eps on Monday, trailer here.
https://twitter.com/mariannaspring/status/1502298981552037898
Coincindence? "
Oops.
Indeed, it's not so much 'maleness', more 'puerile-teenage-boy-ness'. As an example, the inane 'willy-warmer' conversation the other night made me cringe tbh.
It would be good to have more women posting on here but we don't make it very encouraging at times.
I wonder if this is an issue in Russia.
And - probably not anything comparable, but they might have a bit of ex-Soviet capability.
The rest are just the Russian equivalent of Daily Mail readers.
Clearly she is posting sceptical posts with a Russian flavour so that she can flush out people who agree and catch those wily Russian 5th column chaps who post on PB.
Never forget Heathener worked in intelligence for three years…..
And just to remind you in case you’ve already forgotten, Heathener worked in intelligence for three years.
It means any short term hope for Putin to fall from grace is just wishful thinking. We are at the start of a long, tedious, painful, occasionally dangerous period of containment that may last decades. It may evolve in time into a full on US-China cold war as Russia becomes increasingly like the Austro-Hungarian or Ottoman empires from 1914 onwards - a convenient ally for the real rising power.
Note too after 10 years of their party in power no PM has called a general election before the full 5 year term of their government is up. See 1964, 1992, 1997 and 2010 (not all of them were defeated, Major won a shock re election in 1992)
I thought she was stupid, but harmless. Guess she's gone now.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/10/politics/us-patriot-missile-defense-system-explainer/index.html
It’s interesting how, with the exception of the attack on this base at the weekend, Russia has been quite sparing with the long-range missiles. My suspicion is that they have only a few hundred of them.
(Apols if I've misremembered / misunderstood those figures.)
If that's right, you do have to ask why: and lack of missiles might well be a factor.