To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
I’m glad you are nowhere near any kind of power then. You would have a duty to your fellow man and women not to risk all out nuclear war. We have contributed massively to helping Ukraine. We will help when the time to rebuild a free Ukraine comes, probably not that far off. Russia cannot occupy Ukraine. Once the peace agreement is done, they will leave. In your version of events we’d be fighting an all out war across Europe, with the very real chance of nuclear strikes. The horror to millions across Europe would be incalculable. The costs to rebuild would cripple Europe for decades.
And please stop saying we have done nothing militarily to help Ukraine. You are just lying when you do.
Heathener being so very close to the heart of Westminster probably has access to a nuclear bunker, so they aren't risking their own life, just everyone else's the coward
I don’t believe anything he/she/it says. I’m reminded of sad middle aged men who like to say ‘they spend a lot of time round Hereford, if you know what I mean’.
probably going to regret this, but what's in Hereford?
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Our two refugees have been told they will have a visa interview within 10 days and a decision within 12 weeks. Well done, Gove. 👓🍆💦
Bloody hell.
Can't you just nick a plane and smuggle them over?
I reckon I could get them into the UK through a midnight run on the back roads of Leitrim and Fermanagh under the doleful gaze of so many of my ancestors' ghosts. But then what? I've got two undocumented and illegal minors in my house. If they are going to have any sort of life then their status has to be regularised.
Mrs DA has gone to the Netherlands and moved into an apartment with them so at least they are safe and looked after for now. Very few people have the resources to be able to do that so the system is failing a lot of people who desperately need help.
No doubt these delays are justified by 'the strongest security advice'. IE trying to do a criminal record check for citizens of a country engulfed by war. And if there is any uncertainty - the visa application will be rejected on 'security' grounds.
Whilst - as you say - anyone wanting to do actual harm to the UK and who is already legitimately in the EU, can simply enter by way of the Northern Irish loophole. Or someone who is not in the EU legitimately, can get in on 'small boat', picked up by bus on arrival in kent and freed whilst their claim spends decades in the legal system.
If you want to do an objective analysis of the situation, you could say that the priorities are all completely wrong. Or you could just say that the system is dysfunctional beyond belief, and rather than doing good (as they believe they are doing), the home office are simply perpetrators of human misery.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
The British government - regardless of party - has a duty to stand up for the interests of the country. Sometimes that involves supping with the devil… all you can do is use a long spoon
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
I’m glad you are nowhere near any kind of power then. You would have a duty to your fellow man and women not to risk all out nuclear war. We have contributed massively to helping Ukraine. We will help when the time to rebuild a free Ukraine comes, probably not that far off. Russia cannot occupy Ukraine. Once the peace agreement is done, they will leave. In your version of events we’d be fighting an all out war across Europe, with the very real chance of nuclear strikes. The horror to millions across Europe would be incalculable. The costs to rebuild would cripple Europe for decades.
And please stop saying we have done nothing militarily to help Ukraine. You are just lying when you do.
It is an obvious troll, why waste your time replying.
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
I'm not a person who finds compromise easy. I tend to see things in absolutes. Any continuing infringement on Ukrainian independence and sovereignty by Russia would be outrageous. And yet, I am reminded of what Michael Collins said about the 1921 Treaty, that, "In my opinion it gives us freedom, not the ultimate freedom that all nations desire and develop to, but the freedom to achieve it."
It may well be that Ukraine concedes on some points to Russia to bring the current hostilities to an end, but if it retains the freedom to have a democracy, to rebuild its economy and to strengthen its armed forces - then it will have retained the freedom to achieve freedom.
It appears that Britain, and some other NATO countries, did quite well over recent years in providing light infantry training and equipment to Ukraine's armed forces. If we, and other countries who are now alive to the Russian threat, provide more wide-ranging training and equipment for Ukrainian armed forces, then perhaps Ukraine will be in a place to guarantee its freedom in the future.
Meanwhile back in UK domestic politics, the energy direct debits are starting to go up. Ours more than doubled.
I expect mine to go up by about 50% but not until next month. Octopus. Annoying, as I have been succeeding in reducing my usage but it's not going to make much of a dent in that. But by gradually reducing the thermostat, and reducing boiler output temperature and hot water temperature, I have reduced my gas usage by about a quarter. Of course it has been a fairly warm winter which has helped, and I am no longer working from home so no longer have the heating on during the day. Electricity seems harder to control but not working from home has made a difference. I now need to work on reducing petrol usage. As I'm only 4 miles from work I could walk some days except that the council has dug up the main pedestrian route while "improving" it. I could get the train but it costs more than the petrol and timetables are still not ideal.
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Our two refugees have been told they will have a visa interview within 10 days and a decision within 12 weeks. Well done, Gove. 👓🍆💦
Bloody hell.
Can't you just nick a plane and smuggle them over?
I reckon I could get them into the UK through a midnight run on the back roads of Leitrim and Fermanagh under the doleful gaze of so many of my ancestors' ghosts. But then what? I've got two undocumented and illegal minors in my house. If they are going to have any sort of life then their status has to be regularised.
Mrs DA has gone to the Netherlands and moved into an apartment with them so at least they are safe and looked after for now. Very few people have the resources to be able to do that so the system is failing a lot of people who desperately need help.
I am full of admiration for your efforts and it is incredibly frustrating how slow we are being. But the Home Office is built on the premise that they want to make asylum as hard and slow as possible and are clearly struggling to change their ways.
My daughter is organising a pick up from a Ukrainian charity of medical and sanitary supplies on Friday. She has received a fair bit of money and is going to be doing a megashop tomorrow, using the money she has been given. People are desperate to help as you and your wife have vividly demonstrated and the government remains behind the curve on this.
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Our two refugees have been told they will have a visa interview within 10 days and a decision within 12 weeks. Well done, Gove. 👓🍆💦
Bloody hell.
Can't you just nick a plane and smuggle them over?
I reckon I could get them into the UK through a midnight run on the back roads of Leitrim and Fermanagh under the doleful gaze of so many of my ancestors' ghosts. But then what? I've got two undocumented and illegal minors in my house. If they are going to have any sort of life then their status has to be regularised.
Mrs DA has gone to the Netherlands and moved into an apartment with them so at least they are safe and looked after for now. Very few people have the resources to be able to do that so the system is failing a lot of people who desperately need help.
I am full of admiration for your efforts and it is incredibly frustrating how slow we are being. But the Home Office is built on the premise that they want to make asylum as hard and slow as possible and are clearly struggling to change their ways.
My daughter is organising a pick up from a Ukrainian charity of medical and sanitary supplies on Friday. She has received a fair bit of money and is going to be doing a megashop tomorrow, using the money she has been given. People are desperate to help as you and your wife have vividly demonstrated and the government remains behind the curve on this.
Is it just the Home Office though? Surely the UK government has just made a calculation of how many extra school places and doctors appointments they would have to provide for perhaps hundreds of thousands of people and they want other countries to deal with it.
It is the whole Tory government , the Home Office does not call all the shots. Plainly and simply like they do always they will talk it out with great gusto but in the end will take a miserly amount of people and will then trumpet about what a great job they did. We will not see many Ukranians in the UK.
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
UK military assessment is that the Russian advance has stalled. I have been pointing this out for 4-5 days now. Almost no progress at all. But even sitting still is a serious logistical drain on them and the Ukrainians are attacking stationary targets. The Russians cannot get their artillary within range of Kyiv. They are having to rely upon missiles to hit it and they seem to have a limited supply.
Also reports on BBC that Russia is becoming more "realistic" in the peace talks, according to Ukraine.
It is starting to look as if this military impasse might favour Ukraine who continue to get lots of hi tec from western sources. About 3-4 days ago I forecast counterattacks by Ukraine within the week relying upon Russia's logistical problems to even the fight. I still believe that will happen imminentely.
Fair enough. Lets hope so. I just note that the Ukranian propoganda seems to have slowed down a bit. Hopefully they will prevail.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
Pretty much, yes. The reason that Qatar got shut out of the GCC a few years ago, was because they were shoveling cash into Iran to fight the war. All the Sunni are on one side, and all the Shia on the other.
The specific reason for the discussions now, is that the Houthis have started lobbing missiles into Saudi and UAE, who are wanting to get their hands on upgraded Western defence kit, specifically the US/Israeli “Iron Dome” system.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
Saudi and UAE have a long history of despotism and export of terrorist ideologies.
To give up the Oligarchs rubles to grasp as the blood soaked arabian petro-dollars may be realpolitik, but it is aligning with evil.
It also hardly needs saying that we're on the side of the terrorists against the legitimate Government in Syria. Or should that be called a 'regime' because we don't like him? And would that make the terrorists 'freedom fighters' despite them being cannibalistic islamist nut jobs? It's all so confusing.
Leaving aside your conflation of Daesh with all Syrian opposition groups, the current government of Syria took power in a military coup in 1963. Hardly the 'legitimate government,' more the de facto one.
Equally you could say much the same about the House of Saud.
I thought the Saud’s won a civil war rather than orchestrated a coup?
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
As my eldest is gender neutral I absolutely agree. "They" does not work when describing a single specific person.
Not so bright here this morning. Cloudy, with a threat of rain rain later.
The Sunni vs Shia 'dispute' seems about as pointless, in reality, as that between Catholic 'Christians' and Protestant "Christians' in Europe in the 16th & 17th Centuries. Which, in some places of course, is still going on.
You'd think a benevolent God would have banged heads together long since.
Why do you assume an interventist and benevolent God? The OT was the former and the NT the latter.
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Our two refugees have been told they will have a visa interview within 10 days and a decision within 12 weeks. Well done, Gove. 👓🍆💦
Bloody hell.
Can't you just nick a plane and smuggle them over?
I reckon I could get them into the UK through a midnight run on the back roads of Leitrim and Fermanagh under the doleful gaze of so many of my ancestors' ghosts. But then what? I've got two undocumented and illegal minors in my house. If they are going to have any sort of life then their status has to be regularised.
Mrs DA has gone to the Netherlands and moved into an apartment with them so at least they are safe and looked after for now. Very few people have the resources to be able to do that so the system is failing a lot of people who desperately need help.
No doubt these delays are justified by 'the strongest security advice'. IE trying to do a criminal record check for citizens of a country engulfed by war. And if there is any uncertainty - the visa application will be rejected on 'security' grounds.
Whilst - as you say - anyone wanting to do actual harm to the UK and who is already legitimately in the EU, can simply enter by way of the Northern Irish loophole. Or someone who is not in the EU legitimately, can get in on 'small boat', picked up by bus on arrival in kent and freed whilst their claim spends decades in the legal system.
If you want to do an objective analysis of the situation, you could say that the priorities are all completely wrong. Or you could just say that the system is dysfunctional beyond belief, and rather than doing good (as they believe they are doing), the home office are simply perpetrators of human misery.
I don't understand why somebody doesn't just charter a boat and bring a few hundred over from France. They are presumably allowed to leave France. They are refugees so don't need a visa to enter the UK. For someone with money (or who can crowdsource some) and who wants to embarrass the government, it seems an obvious thing to do. It works for Somalis, why not Ukrainians?
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Big G worships Boris particularly and Tories in general, it is quite unnerving.
You know that is not the case as my many posts will evidence
He is doing fine at present but once this crisis calms down I expect and hope his mps will find a successor
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
We should be declaring a No Fly Zone even if that does risk all out nuclear war.
The Right, well represented on here, are cowards. Yes that's you.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
As my eldest is gender neutral I absolutely agree. "They" does not work when describing a single specific person.
At the risk of appearing to trivialise what is clearly a serious matter, surely the collective brains of PB could come up with the answer?
"They" feels wrong but maybe it will stick in time... "I asked my friend, they is quite happy to adopt this pronoun"?
Alternatively, how about some other variant of he/she? Xe? Ze? Se?
Something needs to become the norm, and I expect it will in time.
Melenchon has begun to gain as much of the left unites behind him. However his policy of withdrawing France from NATO and neutrality over Ukraine means the soft left rather than the hard left will still stick to voting for Hidalgo and Jadot most likely over him. So while he is now 3rd in some polls ahead of Pecresse and Zemmour, Le Pen will likely still keep second place and the runoff spot.
Interesting too that Le Pen now runs Macron closest in the runoff if she gets that runoff spot. The only candidate to get to 40%
Until the end of the age of oil and gas arrives, we will have to buy from unpleasant people. This is because the only nice country in the business (pretty much) is Norway.
Oli is the Devil's Piss - nothing worse for a country than finding oil. No, not because people invade etc. Just what the wealth does.
Russia is just the latest example.
This is why I have always advocated getting the economy off hydrocarbons as much a possible. It is worth the price, even without Global Warming.
The Saudis may try and hide it (for example) but it's the "gnawing fear they would feign disguise" - when the money is gone the whirlwind will follow. And they will have no friends.
Russia without the oil & gas doesn't have the hard currency to be more than Mexico with missiles.
Until that time, we should diversify supply - a bit here, a bit there. So, if required, we can drop a supplier at a moments notice.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
Pretty much, yes. The reason that Qatar got shut out of the GCC a few years ago, was because they were shoveling cash into Iran to fight the war. All the Sunni are on one side, and all the Shia on the other.
The specific reason for the discussions now, is that the Houthis have started lobbing missiles into Saudi and UAE, who are wanting to get their hands on upgraded Western defence kit, specifically the US/Israeli “Iron Dome” system.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
Saudi and UAE have a long history of despotism and export of terrorist ideologies.
To give up the Oligarchs rubles to grasp as the blood soaked arabian petro-dollars may be realpolitik, but it is aligning with evil.
It also hardly needs saying that we're on the side of the terrorists against the legitimate Government in Syria. Or should that be called a 'regime' because we don't like him? And would that make the terrorists 'freedom fighters' despite them being cannibalistic islamist nut jobs? It's all so confusing.
Leaving aside your conflation of Daesh with all Syrian opposition groups, the current government of Syria took power in a military coup in 1963. Hardly the 'legitimate government,' more the de facto one.
Equally you could say much the same about the House of Saud.
I thought the Saud’s won a civil war rather than orchestrated a coup?
They have been the rulers of that part of the world since the 18th century. We're now onto the Third Saudi State, they lost power on a couple of occasions due to pissing off the Sultan. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emirate_of_Diriyah?wprov=sfla1
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Our two refugees have been told they will have a visa interview within 10 days and a decision within 12 weeks. Well done, Gove. 👓🍆💦
One would hope that is a stock timeframe and the reality is things would move faster.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
As my eldest is gender neutral I absolutely agree. "They" does not work when describing a single specific person.
At the risk of appearing to trivialise what is clearly a serious matter, surely the collective brains of PB could come up with the answer?
"They" feels wrong but maybe it will stick in time... "I asked my friend, they is quite happy to adopt this pronoun"?
Alternatively, how about some other variant of he/she? Xe? Ze? Se?
Something needs to become the norm, and I expect it will in time.
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
I'm not a person who finds compromise easy. I tend to see things in absolutes. Any continuing infringement on Ukrainian independence and sovereignty by Russia would be outrageous. And yet, I am reminded of what Michael Collins said about the 1921 Treaty, that, "In my opinion it gives us freedom, not the ultimate freedom that all nations desire and develop to, but the freedom to achieve it."
It may well be that Ukraine concedes on some points to Russia to bring the current hostilities to an end, but if it retains the freedom to have a democracy, to rebuild its economy and to strengthen its armed forces - then it will have retained the freedom to achieve freedom.
It appears that Britain, and some other NATO countries, did quite well over recent years in providing light infantry training and equipment to Ukraine's armed forces. If we, and other countries who are now alive to the Russian threat, provide more wide-ranging training and equipment for Ukrainian armed forces, then perhaps Ukraine will be in a place to guarantee its freedom in the future.
We will see what emerges. But I think that one of the Russian demands will be that Ukraine demilitarises and does not get this type of military aid from the west. Being realistic about it, Putins regime are surely going to fuck Ukraine over. And they are just going to lie, cheat and steal; because that is what they have revealed themselves to be: gangsters.
Obviously we will need to have diplomatic relations with Russia, but hopefully there will be a consumer boycott not only of Russia, but of any country doing business with them. They could all be cancelled and a consumer firewall put up. It has started already, for instance my local shed company have said that they have stopped buying Russian wood.
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
My prediction a few days after the start of the war was that Russia would fail to meet its original objectives so we would get a peace deal around end of March/start of April that would see Russia keep Crimea and something in between for Donbass/Luhansk, either autonomy or a referendum.
What I have heard so far only strengthens my expectations that this will happen. Neither side wins, or is even close to winning, both Russia and Ukraine were much better off before the start of the war, but the peace would be better than ongoing war for both.
That would mean Russia has gained something from the invasion. Not workable as a solution. They must be seen to fail
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
Why don’t you bore off across the Polish border then and do the rest of us a favour
Do you really want to be left in your echo chamber? Serious question actually. You pile on me and accuse me of being a troll: because I use a VPN to protect someone close in the heart of Westminster and, more significantly, because I don't tow your right wing line.
This is a political betting forum and it should have representative views from right and left. Get over it and grow up.
probably more to do with provocative comments like
"I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?"
So repeating the President of Ukraine's request, Zelensky's request, to install a No Fly Zone is 'provocative'?
Wow the cowardice on the right is staggering.
I believe Maggie would have stood up to Putin and would have persuaded that wet drip in the White House to install a NFZ.
But then, she had far more courage than the entire male cabinet around her.
No she wouldn't, Thatcher was a realist about what the UK could do militarily.
She was quite prepared to go to war with Argentina over the Falklands as we could easily beat them. However she never threatened the USSR militarily and she agreed to stick to the Hong Kong handover to China as she knew we could not beat them militarily either
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Our two refugees have been told they will have a visa interview within 10 days and a decision within 12 weeks. Well done, Gove. 👓🍆💦
Bloody hell.
Can't you just nick a plane and smuggle them over?
I reckon I could get them into the UK through a midnight run on the back roads of Leitrim and Fermanagh under the doleful gaze of so many of my ancestors' ghosts. But then what? I've got two undocumented and illegal minors in my house. If they are going to have any sort of life then their status has to be regularised.
Mrs DA has gone to the Netherlands and moved into an apartment with them so at least they are safe and looked after for now. Very few people have the resources to be able to do that so the system is failing a lot of people who desperately need help.
No doubt these delays are justified by 'the strongest security advice'. IE trying to do a criminal record check for citizens of a country engulfed by war. And if there is any uncertainty - the visa application will be rejected on 'security' grounds.
Whilst - as you say - anyone wanting to do actual harm to the UK and who is already legitimately in the EU, can simply enter by way of the Northern Irish loophole. Or someone who is not in the EU legitimately, can get in on 'small boat', picked up by bus on arrival in kent and freed whilst their claim spends decades in the legal system.
If you want to do an objective analysis of the situation, you could say that the priorities are all completely wrong. Or you could just say that the system is dysfunctional beyond belief, and rather than doing good (as they believe they are doing), the home office are simply perpetrators of human misery.
Or that it is deliberate and ordered from the top. Johnson thinks that whatever people say now, in 2024 they will be saying Who let all these nasty Ukrainians in?
That silly saying about not ascribing to malice what is explained by incompetence has no justification and just enables shits to get away with it
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
My prediction a few days after the start of the war was that Russia would fail to meet its original objectives so we would get a peace deal around end of March/start of April that would see Russia keep Crimea and something in between for Donbass/Luhansk, either autonomy or a referendum.
What I have heard so far only strengthens my expectations that this will happen. Neither side wins, or is even close to winning, both Russia and Ukraine were much better off before the start of the war, but the peace would be better than ongoing war for both.
That would mean Russia has gained something from the invasion. Not workable as a solution. They must be seen to fail
I am not suggesting what I wish to happen or what I think should happen, but what I think will happen.
It does give Putin enough to sell as a win back home to the state media cronies, but the rest of the world will know he has lost badly.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
They.
No, no, no, no, no. 'They' is plural. I can't abide words which were doing a perfectly good job being co-opted for some other purpose. See also 'disinterested' being used as a synonym for 'uninterested'. My first thought when I hear some attention-starved individual declare that henceforth they wish to be known as 'they' is not that the individual in question is taking some creative approach to gender identity but that the individual in question now believes that there are several of it. And of course, I mentally re-calibrate, and know what the person means, but still. Once upon a time we had a third-person gender-non-specific: he. It meant a male person or a person without specific gender. Admittedly that was also a less than ideal situation.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
They.
Yeah maybe that's the answer. Confusing though if you keep the 3rd person plural verb ending.
When the dust settles on this awful chapter the real heroes of this story will be revealed - the German company who managed to fleece the Russians for training their military and managing things so the Russians didn’t realise the trainers didn’t have a clue about military tactics.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
They.
Yeah maybe that's the answer. Confusing though if you keep the 3rd person plural verb ending.
Big G, the point is that the idea that I'm a Putin troll when I'm the only one on here who thinks we should fight the bastard is an absolute joke. A sick one.
Where are those freedom-loving right wingers when it really matters? You are nowhere. You wring your hands and congratulate yourselves that your sanctions and supplies of missiles are doing the job whilst all the while an entire country is getting pulverised.
I had respect for some of you but you have shown yourselves to be cowards. You aren't prepared to put your lives at risk to save others. It doesn't matter whether they belong to NATO or the EU or EFTA. They belong to the human race.
"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."
We are supporting them, but in a way that minimises the risk of direct conflict and Ww3
I know your boss wants direct NATO involvement to give him a propaganda coup and post hoc justification but it isn’t happening.
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Big G worships Boris particularly and Tories in general, it is quite unnerving.
Big G leans centre right but he also voted for New Labour twice so hardly counts as someone who worships the Tories
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Our two refugees have been told they will have a visa interview within 10 days and a decision within 12 weeks. Well done, Gove. 👓🍆💦
Bloody hell.
Can't you just nick a plane and smuggle them over?
I reckon I could get them into the UK through a midnight run on the back roads of Leitrim and Fermanagh under the doleful gaze of so many of my ancestors' ghosts. But then what? I've got two undocumented and illegal minors in my house. If they are going to have any sort of life then their status has to be regularised.
Mrs DA has gone to the Netherlands and moved into an apartment with them so at least they are safe and looked after for now. Very few people have the resources to be able to do that so the system is failing a lot of people who desperately need help.
No doubt these delays are justified by 'the strongest security advice'. IE trying to do a criminal record check for citizens of a country engulfed by war. And if there is any uncertainty - the visa application will be rejected on 'security' grounds.
Whilst - as you say - anyone wanting to do actual harm to the UK and who is already legitimately in the EU, can simply enter by way of the Northern Irish loophole. Or someone who is not in the EU legitimately, can get in on 'small boat', picked up by bus on arrival in kent and freed whilst their claim spends decades in the legal system.
If you want to do an objective analysis of the situation, you could say that the priorities are all completely wrong. Or you could just say that the system is dysfunctional beyond belief, and rather than doing good (as they believe they are doing), the home office are simply perpetrators of human misery.
I don't understand why somebody doesn't just charter a boat and bring a few hundred over from France. They are presumably allowed to leave France. They are refugees so don't need a visa to enter the UK. For someone with money (or who can crowdsource some) and who wants to embarrass the government, it seems an obvious thing to do. It works for Somalis, why not Ukrainians?
It isn't worth the effort/risk. You could get done for people trafficking. You could perfectly legitimately put them on a Ryanair flight to Dublin, they could then get a train up to Belfast and claim asylum there.
The latest in Tallinn is that a large shipment of ambulances, food, equipment, Javelins etc. has now reached Ukraine. Meanwhile Ukrainian refugess are to have free public transport and free access to all museums, which is the kind of charming and worthy thing that makes this country such a joy to live in. We now have well over 20,000 here.
Amongst a lot more weapons I see that more Stingers and other, more sophisticated weapons are going to Ukraine, and although the flow of kit is still not fast enough, it does seem to be faster than the Russian replenishments. Clearly the Russian line about "attacks on Belgorod" (i.e. inside Russia) suggests that they may be expecting counter artillery strikes from the Ukrainians. The losses on the Russian side are still significant, and the situation around Kyiv seems to be stable at least. Better AA weapons will make a NFZ unnecessary, so I think there is a need for very cool heads. We need to be patient in order to allow the considerable pressure on Russia to do its work.
Clearly deals are being done to help out the Chinese (considering Yuan payment for oil - probably won´t happen, but at least shows awareness of the Chinese problem) and even even the most difficult issues with Venezuela and Iran are being addressed. I truly hope that Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe is finally released. Modi of India has not made many friends in the West, but Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka all abstained in the UN vote so he can get away with it for a while yet. Clearly, significant diplomacy is going on between the US and China too. I can see little to no Chinese interest in fully backing Putin, but as good mercantilists the Chinese will be asking the West for its pound of flesh.
Spring is coming, the snow is melting, but there is much toil and pain ahead.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
They.
No, no, no, no, no. 'They' is plural. I can't abide words which were doing a perfectly good job being co-opted for some other purpose. See also 'disinterested' being used as a synonym for 'uninterested'. My first thought when I hear some attention-starved individual declare that henceforth they wish to be known as 'they' is not that the individual in question is taking some creative approach to gender identity but that the individual in question now believes that there are several of it. And of course, I mentally re-calibrate, and know what the person means, but still. Once upon a time we had a third-person gender-non-specific: he. It meant a male person or a person without specific gender. Admittedly that was also a less than ideal situation.
'They is plural' ?!? Didn't them teach you anything at school @Cookie? They are plural! ;-)
(PS The rest of your post is a bit obnoxious tbh. Back to school for some diversity lessons please.)
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
Why don’t you bore off across the Polish border then and do the rest of us a favour
Do you really want to be left in your echo chamber? Serious question actually. You pile on me and accuse me of being a troll: because I use a VPN to protect someone close in the heart of Westminster and, more significantly, because I don't tow your right wing line.
This is a political betting forum and it should have representative views from right and left. Get over it and grow up.
You are either a lying Putin troll or medically unhinged, such is your glorification of nuclear war. The reason so many of us distrust your story for your black listed VPN is because your posts are so consistently odd that we find it hard to believe you are for real.
Are the West’s measures working quickly enough to stop every Ukrainian civilian death? No. But they are working with relentless efficiency. We’ve frozen two thirds of Russia’s FX reserves and are progressively tying a noose around the business interests of its oligarch class (the yachts are for show). Meanwhile Putin has shot his own golden goose by forcing Europe to urgently diversify its hydrocarbon supplies and in the medium term to decarbonise faster.
Our military aid and training, coupled with the fierce Ukrainian resistance, have shown up Russia’s conventional military to be second grade at best. Putin will not now have the money or the technology supply chain to even attempt modernisation and rearmament either.
Meanwhile the last resort tactics of indiscriminate short range artillery shelling by Russian troops have achieved in two weeks what might otherwise have needed two generations more to fully embed. Namely that the people living in Ukraine now feel a proud and deep sense of national identity separate from Russia and with a distinctly European flavour.
So, if I assume correctly that you’re a Putinista on the run, let all that sink in. You and your old fashioned imperialist mindset are losing. If I am mistaken, my sincere apologies and go and get help. It is not normal to speak to often and so positively about provoking your own demise in nuclear holocaust.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
As my eldest is gender neutral I absolutely agree. "They" does not work when describing a single specific person.
Does your eldest have a preferred solution to the pronoun issue?
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
I’m glad you are nowhere near any kind of power then. You would have a duty to your fellow man and women not to risk all out nuclear war. We have contributed massively to helping Ukraine. We will help when the time to rebuild a free Ukraine comes, probably not that far off. Russia cannot occupy Ukraine. Once the peace agreement is done, they will leave. In your version of events we’d be fighting an all out war across Europe, with the very real chance of nuclear strikes. The horror to millions across Europe would be incalculable. The costs to rebuild would cripple Europe for decades.
And please stop saying we have done nothing militarily to help Ukraine. You are just lying when you do.
Heathener being so very close to the heart of Westminster probably has access to a nuclear bunker, so they aren't risking their own life, just everyone else's the coward
I don’t believe anything he/she/it says. I’m reminded of sad middle aged men who like to say ‘they spend a lot of time round Hereford, if you know what I mean’.
I have come to the conclusion she/he simply wants to wind up everyone and seems to get a kick from labelling posters right wing, which is laughable, and now cowards
I do not believe this knowing someone to the seat of power or claims of being in intelligence, in the absence of any evidence
From covid to war with Russia the posts have been called out by so many but they continue and on occasions with personal abuse
The latest in Tallinn is that a large shipment of ambulances, food, equipment, Javelins etc. has now reached Ukraine. Meanwhile Ukrainian refugess are to have free public transport and free access to all museums, which is the kind of charming and worthy thing that makes this country such a joy to live in. We now have well over 20,000 here.
Amongst a lot more weapons I see that more Stingers and other, more sophisticated weapons are going to Ukraine, and although the flow of kit is still not fast enough, it does seem to be faster than the Russian replenishments. Clearly the Russian line about "attacks on Belgorod" (i.e. inside Russia) suggests that they may be expecting counter artillery strikes from the Ukrainians. The losses on the Russian side are still significant, and the situation around Kyiv seems to be stable at least. Better AA weapons will make a NFZ unnecessary, so I think there is a need for very cool heads. We need to be patient in order to allow the considerable pressure on Russia to do its work.
Clearly deals are being done to help out the Chinese (considering Yuan payment for oil - probably won´t happen, but at least shows awareness of the Chinese problem) and even even the most difficult issues with Venezuela and Iran are being addressed. I truly hope that Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe is finally released. Modi of India has not made many friends in the West, but Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka all abstained in the UN vote so he can get away with it for a while yet. Clearly, significant diplomacy is going on between the US and China too. I can see little to no Chinese interest in fully backing Putin, but as good mercantilists the Chinese will be asking the West for its pound of flesh.
Spring is coming, the snow is melting, but there is much toil and pain ahead.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
As my eldest is gender neutral I absolutely agree. "They" does not work when describing a single specific person.
At the risk of appearing to trivialise what is clearly a serious matter, surely the collective brains of PB could come up with the answer?
"They" feels wrong but maybe it will stick in time... "I asked my friend, they is quite happy to adopt this pronoun"?
Alternatively, how about some other variant of he/she? Xe? Ze? Se?
Something needs to become the norm, and I expect it will in time.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
They.
No, no, no, no, no. 'They' is plural. I can't abide words which were doing a perfectly good job being co-opted for some other purpose. See also 'disinterested' being used as a synonym for 'uninterested'. My first thought when I hear some attention-starved individual declare that henceforth they wish to be known as 'they' is not that the individual in question is taking some creative approach to gender identity but that the individual in question now believes that there are several of it. And of course, I mentally re-calibrate, and know what the person means, but still. Once upon a time we had a third-person gender-non-specific: he. It meant a male person or a person without specific gender. Admittedly that was also a less than ideal situation.
But it's always been in common use where the gender is unknown or irrelevant.
"Met the new boss today." "Oh. What are they like?"
"But how did the murderer get in?" "They must have come through that open window."
The latest in Tallinn is that a large shipment of ambulances, food, equipment, Javelins etc. has now reached Ukraine. Meanwhile Ukrainian refugess are to have free public transport and free access to all museums, which is the kind of charming and worthy thing that makes this country such a joy to live in. We now have well over 20,000 here.
Amongst a lot more weapons I see that more Stingers and other, more sophisticated weapons are going to Ukraine, and although the flow of kit is still not fast enough, it does seem to be faster than the Russian replenishments. Clearly the Russian line about "attacks on Belgorod" (i.e. inside Russia) suggests that they may be expecting counter artillery strikes from the Ukrainians. The losses on the Russian side are still significant, and the situation around Kyiv seems to be stable at least. Better AA weapons will make a NFZ unnecessary, so I think there is a need for very cool heads. We need to be patient in order to allow the considerable pressure on Russia to do its work.
Clearly deals are being done to help out the Chinese (considering Yuan payment for oil - probably won´t happen, but at least shows awareness of the Chinese problem) and even even the most difficult issues with Venezuela and Iran are being addressed. I truly hope that Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe is finally released. Modi of India has not made many friends in the West, but Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka all abstained in the UN vote so he can get away with it for a while yet. Clearly, significant diplomacy is going on between the US and China too. I can see little to no Chinese interest in fully backing Putin, but as good mercantilists the Chinese will be asking the West for its pound of flesh.
Spring is coming, the snow is melting, but there is much toil and pain ahead.
While Putin distracts the West with his invasion of Ukraine, China invades Taiwan. It is not impossible and Putin and Xi had a lengthy summit just weeks before Russia invaded Ukraine
When the dust settles on this awful chapter the real heroes of this story will be revealed - the German company who managed to fleece the Russians for training their military and managing things so the Russians didn’t realise the trainers didn’t have a clue about military tactics.
Interesting article here on what is going wrong with the Russian BTG organisation of the military:
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Big G worships Boris particularly and Tories in general, it is quite unnerving.
Big G leans centre right but he also voted for New Labour twice so hardly counts as someone who worships the Tories
I know it's easy to forget, and no one likes to be reminded of the implacable, merciless march of time, but New Labour were in Government 12 years ago. The time it was hoovering up Tory votes was 17 or even 21 years ago.
I think it's perfectly consistent for someone to 'worship' the present day Tories and also to have voted for Blair in '97 and '01.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
They.
No, no, no, no, no. 'They' is plural. I can't abide words which were doing a perfectly good job being co-opted for some other purpose. See also 'disinterested' being used as a synonym for 'uninterested'. My first thought when I hear some attention-starved individual declare that henceforth they wish to be known as 'they' is not that the individual in question is taking some creative approach to gender identity but that the individual in question now believes that there are several of it. And of course, I mentally re-calibrate, and know what the person means, but still. Once upon a time we had a third-person gender-non-specific: he. It meant a male person or a person without specific gender. Admittedly that was also a less than ideal situation.
The singular they was being used for hundreds of years until the mid 18th century when some chaps decided it was wrong. There is no reason our generations can't decide it is right (or to keep it as wrong). Language evolves or dies.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
Why don’t you bore off across the Polish border then and do the rest of us a favour
Do you really want to be left in your echo chamber? Serious question actually. You pile on me and accuse me of being a troll: because I use a VPN to protect someone close in the heart of Westminster and, more significantly, because I don't tow your right wing line.
This is a political betting forum and it should have representative views from right and left. Get over it and grow up.
It’s a pure coincidence that the 2 other Russian trolls had the same IP address flag I suppose?
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
The idea of fighting Russia on the ground is not totally without merit but the question is how would you do this without ending up in a nuclear confrontation.
The conventional wisdom from war games is that it ends in obliteration through nuclear war. If @Heathener wants nuclear war, then they have lost the plot completely.
It seems like a much better solution is to try and isolate Russia completely, wage war by other means - economic, diplomatically. That is why - with no credible explanation of his actions - Putin has helped us enormously. It is probably the beginning of the end for him.
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Our two refugees have been told they will have a visa interview within 10 days and a decision within 12 weeks. Well done, Gove. 👓🍆💦
Bloody hell.
Can't you just nick a plane and smuggle them over?
I reckon I could get them into the UK through a midnight run on the back roads of Leitrim and Fermanagh under the doleful gaze of so many of my ancestors' ghosts. But then what? I've got two undocumented and illegal minors in my house. If they are going to have any sort of life then their status has to be regularised.
Mrs DA has gone to the Netherlands and moved into an apartment with them so at least they are safe and looked after for now. Very few people have the resources to be able to do that so the system is failing a lot of people who desperately need help.
TBH Ive always thought you’re a bit of an arse. But kudos to you and your wife
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
They.
No, no, no, no, no. 'They' is plural. I can't abide words which were doing a perfectly good job being co-opted for some other purpose. See also 'disinterested' being used as a synonym for 'uninterested'. My first thought when I hear some attention-starved individual declare that henceforth they wish to be known as 'they' is not that the individual in question is taking some creative approach to gender identity but that the individual in question now believes that there are several of it. And of course, I mentally re-calibrate, and know what the person means, but still. Once upon a time we had a third-person gender-non-specific: he. It meant a male person or a person without specific gender. Admittedly that was also a less than ideal situation.
'They is plural' ?!? Didn't them teach you anything at school @Cookie? They are plural! ;-)
(PS The rest of your post is a bit obnoxious tbh. Back to school for some diversity lessons please.)
I think you have your tongue in your cheek here - but I think in this sense They is plural is correct! As to the obnoxious bit, if that's how I come across then I sincerely apologise. There is a lot of heat and noise on the gender identity debate, but this post wasn't meant to be part of it - my point is entirely linguistic: about the mental discomfort of hearing a single person referred to as 'they'. An agreement that it is a pity there is a non-specific word - not just for those few individuals like RochdalePioneers 's eldest who are genuinely uncomfortable with he or she but also for those countless occasions when the English language forces us to use 'he or she'.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
Pretty much, yes. The reason that Qatar got shut out of the GCC a few years ago, was because they were shoveling cash into Iran to fight the war. All the Sunni are on one side, and all the Shia on the other.
The specific reason for the discussions now, is that the Houthis have started lobbing missiles into Saudi and UAE, who are wanting to get their hands on upgraded Western defence kit, specifically the US/Israeli “Iron Dome” system.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
Saudi and UAE have a long history of despotism and export of terrorist ideologies.
To give up the Oligarchs rubles to grasp as the blood soaked arabian petro-dollars may be realpolitik, but it is aligning with evil.
It also hardly needs saying that we're on the side of the terrorists against the legitimate Government in Syria. Or should that be called a 'regime' because we don't like him? And would that make the terrorists 'freedom fighters' despite them being cannibalistic islamist nut jobs? It's all so confusing.
How would you describe our government if it were to raze Manchester to the ground and drive a quarter of our population overseas ?
That would rather depend on whether Manchester had been taken over by an islamist insurrection aided by overseas weaponry.
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Big G worships Boris particularly and Tories in general, it is quite unnerving.
Big G leans centre right but he also voted for New Labour twice so hardly counts as someone who worships the Tories
I know it's easy to forget, and no one likes to be reminded of the implacable, merciless march of time, but New Labour were in Government 12 years ago. The time it was hoovering up Tory votes was 17 or even 21 years ago.
I think it's perfectly consistent for someone to 'worship' the present day Tories and also to have voted for Blair in '97 and '01.
So what, almost a third of voters still voted Tory even in 1997 and 2001. They are the true pure Tories, Big G is not. He just leans Tory more often than Labour. Hence he will back the Tories when they have won a general election and are in power like now but will not always stick with them in opposition
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
We made a mistake withdrawing western brands from Russia. We should have put the prices up, raising money from Russian consumers for the Ukrainian reconstruction. We might have gone so far as to label them. Let Putin ban them if he wants.
Not all have. Procter & Gamble (Ariel, Pampers, Fairy, Pantene etc.) have kept locally supplied brands but stopped imports. And put prices up by 43%. And will keep putting prices up to offset the decline in the Ruble, however long that continues. If the Russians were so confident of the lack of impact of Western sanctions, why is the stock market still shut?
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Big G worships Boris particularly and Tories in general, it is quite unnerving.
Big G leans centre right but he also voted for New Labour twice so hardly counts as someone who worships the Tories
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
As my eldest is gender neutral I absolutely agree. "They" does not work when describing a single specific person.
Does your eldest have a preferred solution to the pronoun issue?
War in Europe, massive trade disruption from sanctions, energy crisis, stagflation looming, consumer confidence poor, China and Korea under the Omicron cosh.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
As my eldest is gender neutral I absolutely agree. "They" does not work when describing a single specific person.
Does your eldest have a preferred solution to the pronoun issue?
Sadly there isn't one - and they has been in use according to Twin B (doing an english degree) since the 14th century.
When the dust settles on this awful chapter the real heroes of this story will be revealed - the German company who managed to fleece the Russians for training their military and managing things so the Russians didn’t realise the trainers didn’t have a clue about military tactics.
Interesting article here on what is going wrong with the Russian BTG organisation of the military:
Interesting - do we have any Independent verification that the Russians have been deploying individual battalions (non-conscript) from each brigade? That would certainly lead to a confused mess..
We made a mistake withdrawing western brands from Russia. We should have put the prices up, raising money from Russian consumers for the Ukrainian reconstruction. We might have gone so far as to label them. Let Putin ban them if he wants.
Not all have. Procter & Gamble (Ariel, Pampers, Fairy, Pantene etc.) have kept locally supplied brands but stopped imports. And put prices up by 43%. And will keep putting prices up to offset the decline in the Ruble, however long that continues. If the Russians were so confident of the lack of impact of Western sanctions, why is the stock market still shut?
Pfizer have said the same. They’ve cancelled medical trials planned in Russia, but will keep supplying pharmaceuticals and donate profits from Russian business unit to Ukranian charities.
It’s a much more difficult decision when your product is life-saving or essential, than when it’s a discretionary or even luxury purchase.
The only sensible reason for the stock market still being shut, is so that it doesn’t crash - which would be headline news in Russia, and a big sign that all was not quite right in the world right now despite the propoganda.
Until the end of the age of oil and gas arrives, we will have to buy from unpleasant people. This is because the only nice country in the business (pretty much) is Norway.
Oli is the Devil's Piss - nothing worse for a country than finding oil. No, not because people invade etc. Just what the wealth does.
Russia is just the latest example.
This is why I have always advocated getting the economy off hydrocarbons as much a possible. It is worth the price, even without Global Warming.
The Saudis may try and hide it (for example) but it's the "gnawing fear they would feign disguise" - when the money is gone the whirlwind will follow. And they will have no friends.
Russia without the oil & gas doesn't have the hard currency to be more than Mexico with missiles.
Until that time, we should diversify supply - a bit here, a bit there. So, if required, we can drop a supplier at a moments notice.
I liken it to the Clean Air Acts. They were a cost and imposition on society and the economy: and apparently they were not popular amongst many at the time. Yet thanks to them we save thousands of lives yearly by not having polluted air. IMO they were some of the best pieces of legislation ever.
Then there is unleaded fuel: if the connection between banning unleaded fuel and the reduction in crime is proven, then a simple albeit minorly troublesome piece of legislation has been a massive boon.
In fifty years, it's possible we'll look back and see the move to electric or hydrogen vehicles and 'green' energy in the same way: it removed much of our dependence (and the power of) nasty states, improved our air, improved our climate, improves energy security, etc, etc.
There are so many reasons to do it, which is why, although I am *slightly* AGW sceptic, I've been in favour of it for a long time.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
They.
No, no, no, no, no. 'They' is plural. I can't abide words which were doing a perfectly good job being co-opted for some other purpose. See also 'disinterested' being used as a synonym for 'uninterested'. My first thought when I hear some attention-starved individual declare that henceforth they wish to be known as 'they' is not that the individual in question is taking some creative approach to gender identity but that the individual in question now believes that there are several of it. And of course, I mentally re-calibrate, and know what the person means, but still. Once upon a time we had a third-person gender-non-specific: he. It meant a male person or a person without specific gender. Admittedly that was also a less than ideal situation.
'They is plural' ?!? Didn't them teach you anything at school @Cookie? They are plural! ;-)
(PS The rest of your post is a bit obnoxious tbh. Back to school for some diversity lessons please.)
I think you have your tongue in your cheek here - but I think in this sense They is plural is correct! As to the obnoxious bit, if that's how I come across then I sincerely apologise. There is a lot of heat and noise on the gender identity debate, but this post wasn't meant to be part of it - my point is entirely linguistic: about the mental discomfort of hearing a single person referred to as 'they'. An agreement that it is a pity there is a non-specific word - not just for those few individuals like RochdalePioneers 's eldest who are genuinely uncomfortable with he or she but also for those countless occasions when the English language forces us to use 'he or she'.
I share your pain on "they". We really should just make a new gender-neutral singular, it would be useful in all kinds of situations, including on here. Let's be honest, most of the time we use he/she a gender neutral would do jus as well - most of the time the gender of the person being referred to is quite irrelevant.
I note with interest the old singular use of 'they', from above, but it still feels clumsy now (like 'less' for 'fewer' although I believe that is also a fairly recent rule).
And yep, 'they' is singular, but they are arseholes
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
They.
No, no, no, no, no. 'They' is plural. I can't abide words which were doing a perfectly good job being co-opted for some other purpose. See also 'disinterested' being used as a synonym for 'uninterested'. My first thought when I hear some attention-starved individual declare that henceforth they wish to be known as 'they' is not that the individual in question is taking some creative approach to gender identity but that the individual in question now believes that there are several of it. And of course, I mentally re-calibrate, and know what the person means, but still. Once upon a time we had a third-person gender-non-specific: he. It meant a male person or a person without specific gender. Admittedly that was also a less than ideal situation.
'They is plural' ?!? Didn't them teach you anything at school @Cookie? They are plural! ;-)
(PS The rest of your post is a bit obnoxious tbh. Back to school for some diversity lessons please.)
I think you have your tongue in your cheek here - but I think in this sense They is plural is correct! As to the obnoxious bit, if that's how I come across then I sincerely apologise. There is a lot of heat and noise on the gender identity debate, but this post wasn't meant to be part of it - my point is entirely linguistic: about the mental discomfort of hearing a single person referred to as 'they'. An agreement that it is a pity there is a non-specific word - not just for those few individuals like RochdalePioneers 's eldest who are genuinely uncomfortable with he or she but also for those countless occasions when the English language forces us to use 'he or she'.
I share your pain on "they". We really should just make a new gender-neutral singular, it would be useful in all kinds of situations, including on here. Let's be honest, most of the time we use he/she a gender neutral would do jus as well - most of the time the gender of the person being referred to is quite irrelevant.
I note with interest the old singular use of 'they', from above, but it still feels clumsy now (like 'less' for 'fewer' although I believe that is also a fairly recent rule).
And yep, 'they' is singular, but they are arseholes
I had heard that about less and fewer - although I think it dates back at least 150 years, possibly longer - so not all that recent.
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Big G worships Boris particularly and Tories in general, it is quite unnerving.
Big G leans centre right but he also voted for New Labour twice so hardly counts as someone who worships the Tories
Centre
The moment you vote Labour again is the moment Labour might win a majority, true
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
We should be declaring a No Fly Zone even if that does risk all out nuclear war.
The Right, well represented on here, are cowards. Yes that's you.
Two basic problems: 1. You repeatedly state that the west and the UK have done nothing to aid Ukraine. This is wrong. Untrue. Demonstrably bollocks. That you keep repeating it gives you little to no credibility on the subject 2. Not wanting WWIII is "cowardice", therefore wanting to provoke it is bravery. Which means Putin is demonstrating Bravery. Not sure that's what you mean, see point 1.
There is a case to be made for NATO stepping up and doing more. If this escalates we may have to. But holding off escalating the war is not "cowardice". More bollocks - laughable, pitiful bollocks this time - in addition to your "we haven't helped Ukraine bollocks.
We've been through these arguments a dozen times, along with the point that a direct NATO intervention would reinforce Putin's domestic position, and potentially garner greater support from currently reluctant allies like China. And a NFZ would be of limited help unless it also included ground attacks within Ukraine, as the Ukraine airforce has very limited ground attack capability outside of its drones which operate fairly freely already. Such direct involvement would be a major escalation - and validate for half the world Putin's claims about NATO intentions. NATO is a defensive alliance. None of its members outside of the US has the capacity to enforce a NFZ, and the US have point blank refused.
I'm not engaging with Heathener further until they make a genuine attempt to rebut these points, rather than bollocking on about 'cowardice' etc.
They could at least check the headline for typos: "... scale of losses with 'horrify' the nation when they learn the truth"
Even the Telegraph and Guardian can’t be bothered with online sub-editors any more, what’s the chance of anyone at the Mail catching typos before they go up?
We made a mistake withdrawing western brands from Russia. We should have put the prices up, raising money from Russian consumers for the Ukrainian reconstruction. We might have gone so far as to label them. Let Putin ban them if he wants.
Not all have. Procter & Gamble (Ariel, Pampers, Fairy, Pantene etc.) have kept locally supplied brands but stopped imports. And put prices up by 43%. And will keep putting prices up to offset the decline in the Ruble, however long that continues. If the Russians were so confident of the lack of impact of Western sanctions, why is the stock market still shut?
Pfizer have said the same. They’ve cancelled medical trials planned in Russia, but will keep supplying pharmaceuticals and donate profits from Russian business unit to Ukranian charities.
It’s a much more difficult decision when your product is life-saving or essential, than when it’s a discretionary or even luxury purchase.
The only sensible reason for the stock market still being shut, is so that it doesn’t crash - which would be headline news in Russia, and a big sign that all was not quite right in the world right now despite the propoganda.
I think it being closed for three weeks is going to be noticed.
The only way it can open now is on the back of a peace deal. Then it might only halve everything in value, rather than reduce it all by 80%.
She was quite prepared to go to war with Argentina over the Falklands as we could easily beat them.
There was nothing easy about it and we very nearly didn't.
Not much more would have had to go wrong for the operation to fail.
Rubbish.
We very easily beat them once we committed to the task force.
The Argentines were poorly trained and full of conscrips even more than the Russians and Thatcher of course sunk the Belgrano without much difficulty
If you speak to anyone who was there then you would know that is rubbish.
We had a more effective army than Argentina and a bigger navy and better trained pilots.
It was not that difficult. Plus of course we had submarines with nuclear missiles and Argentina did not have nuclear weapons.
Russia however does have nuclear weapons
You really do talk nonsense . We lost the Atlantic Conveyor to exocets which was a huge blow. If we had lost an aircraft carrier in the same way there would have been no way of getting troops to the Falklands as we would not have had air cover. That would have been a fatal blow.
It makes not a jot of difference that we had better soldiers, navy and air force if you can't get any of them there.
When the dust settles on this awful chapter the real heroes of this story will be revealed - the German company who managed to fleece the Russians for training their military and managing things so the Russians didn’t realise the trainers didn’t have a clue about military tactics.
Interesting article here on what is going wrong with the Russian BTG organisation of the military:
I was thinking about the Russian military in the small hours, as you do, and they are fundamentally screwed for effectiveness by their geography.
It’s such a huge country that borders so many countries with either unfriendly at best or suspicious feelings towards them.
So they have to garrison the most vast area to cover from the arctic circle, Finland, the Baltic, Eastern Europe, the Stans, China, pacific east coast (for them).
So they need huge amounts of men. Soldiers are expensive to train well which drains the budget and expensive to equip. They also require well trained soldiers who know what they are doing to train them.
So you have a situation where you either haemorrhage cash to train enough top professional soldiers to act as main force as well as able to train up recruits so they aren’t shit, haemorrhage cash to provide the up to date kit, feed and house etc or you save cash and give them crap kit and crap training added to crap conditions.
The Russian army is therefore demoralised, under trained and under equipped from day one because you need a million men to cover the expanse but can’t afford to properly.
You can of course train and equip them well but then that strains the other budgets. Russia needs a Baltic/Atlantic fleet, a Black Sea/med fleet and a pacific fleet. Again either expensive or shit. Numbers or ability.
Then Russia has to pay for upkeep of nuclear Arsenal - we know in the UK how much a slice of the defense budget it effectively takes up.
They also want super hi tech kit such as supersonic missiles. Not cheap and drains other areas.
So because of their geography and the fact they spend a fraction in real terms of the US budget they are buggered fundamentally.
They can’t just focus on the west - would be like having an amazing front door alarm system and locks and leaving the back door off it’s hinges. They also have to make sure the automatic fire sprinklers are working in the Chechnya room and former Georgia rooms. But there’s always the Chinese neighbour looking over the fence at the gnomes in the Russian garden it wouldn’t mind having.
We shouldn’t be surprised they haven’t shown themselves to be the military behemoth we thought they were and if they were shorn of their nukes tomorrow they would be purely only considered on the world stage as a country that has lots of raw materials and not a lot else.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
I’m glad you are nowhere near any kind of power then. You would have a duty to your fellow man and women not to risk all out nuclear war. We have contributed massively to helping Ukraine. We will help when the time to rebuild a free Ukraine comes, probably not that far off. Russia cannot occupy Ukraine. Once the peace agreement is done, they will leave. In your version of events we’d be fighting an all out war across Europe, with the very real chance of nuclear strikes. The horror to millions across Europe would be incalculable. The costs to rebuild would cripple Europe for decades.
And please stop saying we have done nothing militarily to help Ukraine. You are just lying when you do.
Heathener being so very close to the heart of Westminster probably has access to a nuclear bunker, so they aren't risking their own life, just everyone else's the coward
I don’t believe anything he/she/it says. I’m reminded of sad middle aged men who like to say ‘they spend a lot of time round Hereford, if you know what I mean’.
probably going to regret this, but what's in Hereford?
Until the end of the age of oil and gas arrives, we will have to buy from unpleasant people. This is because the only nice country in the business (pretty much) is Norway.
Oli is the Devil's Piss - nothing worse for a country than finding oil. No, not because people invade etc. Just what the wealth does.
Russia is just the latest example.
This is why I have always advocated getting the economy off hydrocarbons as much a possible. It is worth the price, even without Global Warming.
The Saudis may try and hide it (for example) but it's the "gnawing fear they would feign disguise" - when the money is gone the whirlwind will follow. And they will have no friends.
Russia without the oil & gas doesn't have the hard currency to be more than Mexico with missiles.
Until that time, we should diversify supply - a bit here, a bit there. So, if required, we can drop a supplier at a moments notice.
I liken it to the Clean Air Acts. They were a cost and imposition on society and the economy: and apparently they were not popular amongst many at the time. Yet thanks to them we save thousands of lives yearly by not having polluted air. IMO they were some of the best pieces of legislation ever.
Then there is unleaded fuel: if the connection between banning unleaded fuel and the reduction in crime is proven, then a simple albeit minorly troublesome piece of legislation has been a massive boon.
In fifty years, it's possible we'll look back and see the move to electric or hydrogen vehicles and 'green' energy in the same way: it removed much of our dependence (and the power of) nasty states, improved our air, improved our climate, improves energy security, etc, etc.
There are so many reasons to do it, which is why, although I am *slightly* AGW sceptic, I've been in favour of it for a long time.
The various *incremental* pollution reduction measures in the "developed world" have been one of the great, unsung successes. Similarly with safety. Compounding a couple of percent improvement a year.....
On top of reducing pollution and injuries, year by year, they have had a trickle-down effect - countries buying second hand machinery and equipment have had their standards pulled up by default.
A friend who went to the Soviet Union, just after the fall of the wall, commented that it was the 1950s there - pollution, safety at work. And it really shows what had changed.
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Our two refugees have been told they will have a visa interview within 10 days and a decision within 12 weeks. Well done, Gove. 👓🍆💦
Bloody hell.
Can't you just nick a plane and smuggle them over?
I reckon I could get them into the UK through a midnight run on the back roads of Leitrim and Fermanagh under the doleful gaze of so many of my ancestors' ghosts. But then what? I've got two undocumented and illegal minors in my house. If they are going to have any sort of life then their status has to be regularised.
Mrs DA has gone to the Netherlands and moved into an apartment with them so at least they are safe and looked after for now. Very few people have the resources to be able to do that so the system is failing a lot of people who desperately need help.
I am full of admiration for your efforts and it is incredibly frustrating how slow we are being. But the Home Office is built on the premise that they want to make asylum as hard and slow as possible and are clearly struggling to change their ways.
My daughter is organising a pick up from a Ukrainian charity of medical and sanitary supplies on Friday. She has received a fair bit of money and is going to be doing a megashop tomorrow, using the money she has been given. People are desperate to help as you and your wife have vividly demonstrated and the government remains behind the curve on this.
Do I take it from the lack of commentry that people have reassessed their optimism about Ukraine?
Obviously I hate to be pessimistic but it looks to me like the Russians are slowly (and clumsily) pounding the country to obliteration whilst arranging for a 'peace' deal that humiliates Ukraine. No NATO. 'Neutralisation'. Loss of parts of the country that have already been invaded by Russia. It is 'finlandisation', but by force and not by consent and mutual respect.
I can't see such an arrangement working out well - not least because many people in Ukraine won't be happy about it. There is the small matter of the 2000 or so Azov fascists, who we have inadvertantly armed, who are likely to turn against the Ukranian government. So the destablisation of Ukraine will continue apace.
Zelensky and co effectively have no choice other than to agree to whatever they are being presented with. Putin can just move his troops up to the border with, Georgia, Finland or whoever is next on his list. The west can go back to its comfortable decadence and denial.
Am I wrong?
Ukraine might well be screwed. But so is Russia.
Is it?
Morally, yes. But is it really screwed or do we just tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better because we sat on our hands and failed to come to Ukraine's military aid?
Yet again utter nonsense
The UK has been arming Ukraine and training them for years and our arms are being used by a very grateful Ukraine
Indeed their President and Boris are in near daily contact with each other and the goodwill the UK has with Ukrainians is well documented
Until it comes to sheltering refugees!
Our two refugees have been told they will have a visa interview within 10 days and a decision within 12 weeks. Well done, Gove. 👓🍆💦
Bloody hell.
Can't you just nick a plane and smuggle them over?
I reckon I could get them into the UK through a midnight run on the back roads of Leitrim and Fermanagh under the doleful gaze of so many of my ancestors' ghosts. But then what? I've got two undocumented and illegal minors in my house. If they are going to have any sort of life then their status has to be regularised.
Mrs DA has gone to the Netherlands and moved into an apartment with them so at least they are safe and looked after for now. Very few people have the resources to be able to do that so the system is failing a lot of people who desperately need help.
I am full of admiration for your efforts and it is incredibly frustrating how slow we are being. But the Home Office is built on the premise that they want to make asylum as hard and slow as possible and are clearly struggling to change their ways.
My daughter is organising a pick up from a Ukrainian charity of medical and sanitary supplies on Friday. She has received a fair bit of money and is going to be doing a megashop tomorrow, using the money she has been given. People are desperate to help as you and your wife have vividly demonstrated and the government remains behind the curve on this.
Is it just the Home Office though? Surely the UK government has just made a calculation of how many extra school places and doctors appointments they would have to provide for perhaps hundreds of thousands of people and they want other countries to deal with it.
It is the whole Tory government , the Home Office does not call all the shots. Plainly and simply like they do always they will talk it out with great gusto but in the end will take a miserly amount of people and will then trumpet about what a great job they did. We will not see many Ukranians in the UK.
Gove had the gall to say in the Commons that it was a Labour Home Secretary that introduced the "hostile environment" policy.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
She was quite prepared to go to war with Argentina over the Falklands as we could easily beat them.
There was nothing easy about it and we very nearly didn't.
Not much more would have had to go wrong for the operation to fail.
Rubbish.
We very easily beat them once we committed to the task force.
The Argentines were poorly trained and full of conscrips even more than the Russians and Thatcher of course sunk the Belgrano without much difficulty
If you speak to anyone who was there then you would know that is rubbish.
We had a more effective army than Argentina and a bigger navy and better trained pilots.
It was not that difficult. Plus of course we had submarines with nuclear missiles and Argentina did not have nuclear weapons.
Russia however does have nuclear weapons
You really do talk nonsense . We lost the Atlantic Conveyor to exocets which was a huge blow. If we had lost an aircraft carrier in the same way there would have been no way of getting troops to the Falklands as we would not have had air cover. That would have been a fatal blow.
It makes not a joy of difference that we had better soldiers, navy and air force if you can't get any of them there.
So what, we still sunk more Argentine ships than they sunk of ours which is the main aim in war.
Thatcher was also not a wet lettuce like you and had the Argentines sunk our aircraft carriers she might even have nuked Buenos Aires who knows. She was not going to lose that war.
However that would have been an absolute last resort to defend the Falklands if we had lost a our aircraft carriers. As we had 4 aircraft carriers at the time even had we lost 1 we would still have had 3 to replace it and could still have continued with the Task Force with them
The latest in Tallinn is that a large shipment of ambulances, food, equipment, Javelins etc. has now reached Ukraine. Meanwhile Ukrainian refugess are to have free public transport and free access to all museums, which is the kind of charming and worthy thing that makes this country such a joy to live in. We now have well over 20,000 here.
Amongst a lot more weapons I see that more Stingers and other, more sophisticated weapons are going to Ukraine, and although the flow of kit is still not fast enough, it does seem to be faster than the Russian replenishments. Clearly the Russian line about "attacks on Belgorod" (i.e. inside Russia) suggests that they may be expecting counter artillery strikes from the Ukrainians. The losses on the Russian side are still significant, and the situation around Kyiv seems to be stable at least. Better AA weapons will make a NFZ unnecessary, so I think there is a need for very cool heads. We need to be patient in order to allow the considerable pressure on Russia to do its work.
Clearly deals are being done to help out the Chinese (considering Yuan payment for oil - probably won´t happen, but at least shows awareness of the Chinese problem) and even even the most difficult issues with Venezuela and Iran are being addressed. I truly hope that Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe is finally released. Modi of India has not made many friends in the West, but Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka all abstained in the UN vote so he can get away with it for a while yet. Clearly, significant diplomacy is going on between the US and China too. I can see little to no Chinese interest in fully backing Putin, but as good mercantilists the Chinese will be asking the West for its pound of flesh.
Spring is coming, the snow is melting, but there is much toil and pain ahead.
While Putin distracts the West with his invasion of Ukraine, China invades Taiwan. It is not impossible and Putin and Xi had a lengthy summit just weeks before Russia invaded Ukraine
You think China wants to be on the wrong end of the level of sanctions Russia has been hit with? I suspect there is a whole lot of wargaming in Beijing of this new world where the players actually DO something about state aggression.
China isn't going to kill its markets for Taiwan. It's just a festering sore, not an existential threat.
They could at least check the headline for typos: "... scale of losses with 'horrify' the nation when they learn the truth"
Even the Telegraph and Guardian can’t be bothered with online sub-editors any more, what’s the chance of anyone at the Mail catching typos before they go up?
We made a mistake withdrawing western brands from Russia. We should have put the prices up, raising money from Russian consumers for the Ukrainian reconstruction. We might have gone so far as to label them. Let Putin ban them if he wants.
Not all have. Procter & Gamble (Ariel, Pampers, Fairy, Pantene etc.) have kept locally supplied brands but stopped imports. And put prices up by 43%. And will keep putting prices up to offset the decline in the Ruble, however long that continues. If the Russians were so confident of the lack of impact of Western sanctions, why is the stock market still shut?
Pfizer have said the same. They’ve cancelled medical trials planned in Russia, but will keep supplying pharmaceuticals and donate profits from Russian business unit to Ukranian charities.
It’s a much more difficult decision when your product is life-saving or essential, than when it’s a discretionary or even luxury purchase.
The only sensible reason for the stock market still being shut, is so that it doesn’t crash - which would be headline news in Russia, and a big sign that all was not quite right in the world right now despite the propoganda.
I think it being closed for three weeks is going to be noticed.
The only way it can open now is on the back of a peace deal. Then it might only halve everything in value, rather than reduce it all by 80%.
The only people really noticing it be closed are those who work there, rather than the general public. It’s probably fair to say that everyone working in the Moscow “City” knows exactly what’s going on.
But yes, if it were just for a day or two, that might have been fine - but after three weeks, it’s going to crash completely unless it opens on the back of good news.
The Chinese are waiting, hoping for the 80% and 90% discounts.
They could at least check the headline for typos: "... scale of losses with 'horrify' the nation when they learn the truth"
Even the Telegraph and Guardian can’t be bothered with online sub-editors any more, what’s the chance of anyone at the Mail catching typos before they go up?
Not so bright here this morning. Cloudy, with a threat of rain rain later.
The Sunni vs Shia 'dispute' seems about as pointless, in reality, as that between Catholic 'Christians' and Protestant "Christians' in Europe in the 16th & 17th Centuries. Which, in some places of course, is still going on.
You'd think a benevolent God would have banged heads together long since.
Why do you assume an interventist and benevolent God? The OT was the former and the NT the latter.
I was suggesting that if there was a God....... The Moslem God is, I believe, both.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
I’m glad you are nowhere near any kind of power then. You would have a duty to your fellow man and women not to risk all out nuclear war. We have contributed massively to helping Ukraine. We will help when the time to rebuild a free Ukraine comes, probably not that far off. Russia cannot occupy Ukraine. Once the peace agreement is done, they will leave. In your version of events we’d be fighting an all out war across Europe, with the very real chance of nuclear strikes. The horror to millions across Europe would be incalculable. The costs to rebuild would cripple Europe for decades.
And please stop saying we have done nothing militarily to help Ukraine. You are just lying when you do.
Heathener being so very close to the heart of Westminster probably has access to a nuclear bunker, so they aren't risking their own life, just everyone else's the coward
I don’t believe anything he/she/it says. I’m reminded of sad middle aged men who like to say ‘they spend a lot of time round Hereford, if you know what I mean’.
probably going to regret this, but what's in Hereford?
Its 'code' for I'm SAS. The phrase is allegedly dropped by wannabe saddos's who want to make people think they are SAS. Often encountered while walking (e.g.Wales, the lakes) usually in army surplus combat fatigues etc.
Until the end of the age of oil and gas arrives, we will have to buy from unpleasant people. This is because the only nice country in the business (pretty much) is Norway.
Oli is the Devil's Piss - nothing worse for a country than finding oil. No, not because people invade etc. Just what the wealth does.
Russia is just the latest example.
This is why I have always advocated getting the economy off hydrocarbons as much a possible. It is worth the price, even without Global Warming.
The Saudis may try and hide it (for example) but it's the "gnawing fear they would feign disguise" - when the money is gone the whirlwind will follow. And they will have no friends.
Russia without the oil & gas doesn't have the hard currency to be more than Mexico with missiles.
Until that time, we should diversify supply - a bit here, a bit there. So, if required, we can drop a supplier at a moments notice.
I liken it to the Clean Air Acts. They were a cost and imposition on society and the economy: and apparently they were not popular amongst many at the time. Yet thanks to them we save thousands of lives yearly by not having polluted air. IMO they were some of the best pieces of legislation ever.
Then there is unleaded fuel: if the connection between banning unleaded fuel and the reduction in crime is proven, then a simple albeit minorly troublesome piece of legislation has been a massive boon.
In fifty years, it's possible we'll look back and see the move to electric or hydrogen vehicles and 'green' energy in the same way: it removed much of our dependence (and the power of) nasty states, improved our air, improved our climate, improves energy security, etc, etc.
There are so many reasons to do it, which is why, although I am *slightly* AGW sceptic, I've been in favour of it for a long time.
The various *incremental* pollution reduction measures in the "developed world" have been one of the great, unsung successes. Similarly with safety. Compounding a couple of percent improvement a year.....
On top of reducing pollution and injuries, year by year, they have had a trickle-down effect - countries buying second hand machinery and equipment have had their standards pulled up by default.
A friend who went to the Soviet Union, just after the fall of the wall, commented that it was the 1950s there - pollution, safety at work. And it really shows what had changed.
An anecdote: 25 or so years ago, a colleague of mine went to a TV factory in Turkey. He described standing at one end of a vast building making delicate electronics, and not being able to see the far end due to the smoke and dust. He went back five or so years later there had been a massive improvement. All due to new working practices and equipment.
I remember going around the JCB factory at Rocester when I was a kid and being amazed at how clean everything was. It was heavy engineering without the dirt.
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
I’m glad you are nowhere near any kind of power then. You would have a duty to your fellow man and women not to risk all out nuclear war. We have contributed massively to helping Ukraine. We will help when the time to rebuild a free Ukraine comes, probably not that far off. Russia cannot occupy Ukraine. Once the peace agreement is done, they will leave. In your version of events we’d be fighting an all out war across Europe, with the very real chance of nuclear strikes. The horror to millions across Europe would be incalculable. The costs to rebuild would cripple Europe for decades.
And please stop saying we have done nothing militarily to help Ukraine. You are just lying when you do.
It is an obvious troll, why waste your time replying.
I know Malc - you are right, and i do think everytime why am I bothering.
She was quite prepared to go to war with Argentina over the Falklands as we could easily beat them.
There was nothing easy about it and we very nearly didn't.
Not much more would have had to go wrong for the operation to fail.
Rubbish.
We very easily beat them once we committed to the task force.
The Argentines were poorly trained and full of conscrips even more than the Russians and Thatcher of course sunk the Belgrano without much difficulty
If you speak to anyone who was there then you would know that is rubbish.
We had a more effective army than Argentina and a bigger navy and better trained pilots.
It was not that difficult. Plus of course we had submarines with nuclear missiles and Argentina did not have nuclear weapons.
Russia however does have nuclear weapons
You really do talk nonsense . We lost the Atlantic Conveyor to exocets which was a huge blow. If we had lost an aircraft carrier in the same way there would have been no way of getting troops to the Falklands as we would not have had air cover. That would have been a fatal blow.
It makes not a joy of difference that we had better soldiers, navy and air force if you can't get any of them there.
So what, we still sunk more Argentine ships than they sunk of ours which is the main aim in war.
Thatcher was also not a wet lettuce like you and had the Argentines sunk our aircraft carrier she might even have nuked Buenos Aires who knows. She was not going to lose that war.
However that would have been an absolute last resort to defend the Falklands if we had lost a our aircraft carriers. As we had 4 aircraft carriers at the time even had we lost 1 we would still have had 3 to replace it and could still have continued with the Task Force with them
Her government was willing to share sovereignty, though.
The latest in Tallinn is that a large shipment of ambulances, food, equipment, Javelins etc. has now reached Ukraine. Meanwhile Ukrainian refugess are to have free public transport and free access to all museums, which is the kind of charming and worthy thing that makes this country such a joy to live in. We now have well over 20,000 here.
Amongst a lot more weapons I see that more Stingers and other, more sophisticated weapons are going to Ukraine, and although the flow of kit is still not fast enough, it does seem to be faster than the Russian replenishments. Clearly the Russian line about "attacks on Belgorod" (i.e. inside Russia) suggests that they may be expecting counter artillery strikes from the Ukrainians. The losses on the Russian side are still significant, and the situation around Kyiv seems to be stable at least. Better AA weapons will make a NFZ unnecessary, so I think there is a need for very cool heads. We need to be patient in order to allow the considerable pressure on Russia to do its work.
Clearly deals are being done to help out the Chinese (considering Yuan payment for oil - probably won´t happen, but at least shows awareness of the Chinese problem) and even even the most difficult issues with Venezuela and Iran are being addressed. I truly hope that Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe is finally released. Modi of India has not made many friends in the West, but Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka all abstained in the UN vote so he can get away with it for a while yet. Clearly, significant diplomacy is going on between the US and China too. I can see little to no Chinese interest in fully backing Putin, but as good mercantilists the Chinese will be asking the West for its pound of flesh.
Spring is coming, the snow is melting, but there is much toil and pain ahead.
While Putin distracts the West with his invasion of Ukraine, China invades Taiwan. It is not impossible and Putin and Xi had a lengthy summit just weeks before Russia invaded Ukraine
You think China wants to be on the wrong end of the level of sanctions Russia has been hit with? I suspect there is a whole lot of wargaming in Beijing of this new world where the players actually DO something about state aggression.
China isn't going to kill its markets for Taiwan. It's just a festering sore, not an existential threat.
China wants Taiwan and will do anything to get it.
However the economic sanctions on Russia would be repeated for China if it tried, this showing there would have been a cost to that
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
When the dust settles on this awful chapter the real heroes of this story will be revealed - the German company who managed to fleece the Russians for training their military and managing things so the Russians didn’t realise the trainers didn’t have a clue about military tactics.
Interesting article here on what is going wrong with the Russian BTG organisation of the military:
I was thinking about the Russian military in the small hours, as you do, and they are fundamentally screwed for effectiveness by their geography.
It’s such a huge country that borders so many countries with either unfriendly at best or suspicious feelings towards them.
So they have to garrison the most vast area to cover from the arctic circle, Finland, the Baltic, Eastern Europe, the Stans, China, pacific east coast (for them).
So they need huge amounts of men. Soldiers are expensive to train well which drains the budget and expensive to equip. They also require well trained soldiers who know what they are doing to train them.
So you have a situation where you either haemorrhage cash to train enough top professional soldiers to act as main force as well as able to train up recruits so they aren’t shit, haemorrhage cash to provide the up to date kit, feed and house etc or you save cash and give them crap kit and crap training added to crap conditions.
The Russian army is therefore demoralised, under trained and under equipped from day one because you need a million men to cover the expanse but can’t afford to properly.
You can of course train and equip them well but then that strains the other budgets. Russia needs a Baltic/Atlantic fleet, a Black Sea/med fleet and a pacific fleet. Again either expensive or shit. Numbers or ability.
Then Russia has to pay for upkeep of nuclear Arsenal - we know in the UK how much a slice of the defense budget it effectively takes up.
They also want super hi tech kit such as supersonic missiles. Not cheap and drains other areas.
So because of their geography and the fact they spend a fraction in real terms of the US budget they are buggered fundamentally.
They can’t just focus on the west - would be like having an amazing front door alarm system and locks and leaving the back door off it’s hinges. They also have to make sure the automatic fire sprinklers are working in the Chechnya room and former Georgia rooms. But there’s always the Chinese neighbour looking over the fence at the gnomes in the Russian garden it wouldn’t mind having.
We shouldn’t be surprised they haven’t shown themselves to be the military behemoth we thought they were and if they were shorn of their nukes tomorrow they would be purely only considered on the world stage as a country that has lots of raw materials and not a lot else.
When Bush I came in, before 9/11, there was an issue with the American military and overstretch - deployment ll over the place.
The pre 9/11 plan was to retrench to large quantities of pre-positioned equipment, mothballed, in the various theatres. Troops would flown in a required. It is fairly simple to fly x thousand people round the world. Armoured divisions less so...
This would have turned many American overseas bases in supply depots. Brining the troops home would have been politically popular - it would have massively reduced base closures, in the US. And with the troops spending their pay in the US...
One last joke - it would have reduced the American presence in Saudi Arabia to caretaking some warehouse..... And it was the American presence there that so upset Bin Ladin.....
She was quite prepared to go to war with Argentina over the Falklands as we could easily beat them.
There was nothing easy about it and we very nearly didn't.
Not much more would have had to go wrong for the operation to fail.
Rubbish.
We very easily beat them once we committed to the task force.
The Argentines were poorly trained and full of conscrips even more than the Russians and Thatcher of course sunk the Belgrano without much difficulty
If you speak to anyone who was there then you would know that is rubbish.
We had a more effective army than Argentina and a bigger navy and better trained pilots.
It was not that difficult. Plus of course we had submarines with nuclear missiles and Argentina did not have nuclear weapons.
Russia however does have nuclear weapons
You really do talk nonsense . We lost the Atlantic Conveyor to exocets which was a huge blow. If we had lost an aircraft carrier in the same way there would have been no way of getting troops to the Falklands as we would not have had air cover. That would have been a fatal blow.
It makes not a joy of difference that we had better soldiers, navy and air force if you can't get any of them there.
So what, we still sunk more Argentine ships than they sunk of ours which is the main aim in war.
Thatcher was also not a wet lettuce like you and had the Argentines sunk our aircraft carrier she might even have nuked Buenos Aires who knows. She was not going to lose that war.
However that would have been an absolute last resort to defend the Falklands if we had lost a our aircraft carriers. As we had 4 aircraft carriers at the time even had we lost 1 we would still have had 3 to replace it and could still have continued with the Task Force with them
Her government was willing to share sovereignty, though.
Never committed to and certainly not after Argentina invaded the Falklands
To summarise, he will be asking for increased oil production, and will be asked for help with increased security in the Gulf region. UK is increasingly a key broker in the region, after a cooling in their relationship with the US in the past decade under Obama and Trump.
Will help with increased security mean more of this?
For some reason, many Western leftists see the Saudis as the aggressors here, rather than the defenders of the legitimate Yemeni government.
I could go on about this all day, but the long and short of the war in Yemen, is that it’s simply the latest incarnation of the centuries-old battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims.
If I understand correctly - which I may not - it’s essentially a proxy war between Iran and Saud, with the Yemeni people caught in the middle.
That is somewhat different from the situation in Ukraine, which is a war of conquest launched by a man who has clearly lost his marbles.
Although I can imagine for those actually living there it’s a distinction without a difference.
The war in Ukraine is clearly very different, with Russia simply rolling tanks over the border because Putin felt like it.
The Right will continue to tell themselves things like this but the fact is that both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are involved in very murky dealings.
As I assume you know, Qatar's strong association with the Wahabi sect of Islam is a source of considerable irritation and fury in other parts of the Middle East, hence why Saudi boycotted Qatar and why Qatar airways were blockaded from flying over the UAE.
The geopolitics of the region is dark with many complex strands and multiple human rights abuses.
We will be doing business with more evil. Classic tories.
Diddums that the West is diversifying its hydrocarbon supplies away from your dear leader
If by 'my dear leader' you mean Putin, unlike you I believe we should stand up militarily to Putin.
You are a coward.
We’ve been through this. The wide ranging sanctions and military relief to Ukraine are working.
Are they though? Really?
I see a country getting pulverised and slowly, inexorably, Russian forces creep forward. I don't think Putin will particularly care if this takes 3 months if in the process Ukraine is reduced to rubble.
We tell ourselves that our actions are working because we need to tell ourselves it. We can't stand the idea that Putin has got away with this. But he has, hasn't he?
If we had courage we would stand up to him and do what Zelensky asked: install a No Fly Zone. Yes it might risk all out nuclear war.
So what?
I'm prepared to die for Ukraine and freedom. Aren't you?
No.
Especially not in an "all out nuclear war" who's going to have "freedom" after that? the Ukrainian cockroaches?
Exactly. Assuming humans survive (not a certainty) the world will be ruled by petty warlords and thugs for 100s if not 1000s of years.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
They.
No, no, no, no, no. 'They' is plural. I can't abide words which were doing a perfectly good job being co-opted for some other purpose. See also 'disinterested' being used as a synonym for 'uninterested'. My first thought when I hear some attention-starved individual declare that henceforth they wish to be known as 'they' is not that the individual in question is taking some creative approach to gender identity but that the individual in question now believes that there are several of it. And of course, I mentally re-calibrate, and know what the person means, but still. Once upon a time we had a third-person gender-non-specific: he. It meant a male person or a person without specific gender. Admittedly that was also a less than ideal situation.
'They is plural' ?!? Didn't them teach you anything at school @Cookie? They are plural! ;-)
(PS The rest of your post is a bit obnoxious tbh. Back to school for some diversity lessons please.)
I think you have your tongue in your cheek here - but I think in this sense They is plural is correct! As to the obnoxious bit, if that's how I come across then I sincerely apologise. There is a lot of heat and noise on the gender identity debate, but this post wasn't meant to be part of it - my point is entirely linguistic: about the mental discomfort of hearing a single person referred to as 'they'. An agreement that it is a pity there is a non-specific word - not just for those few individuals like RochdalePioneers 's eldest who are genuinely uncomfortable with he or she but also for those countless occasions when the English language forces us to use 'he or she'.
I was hoping the ;-) would provide the hint that I was indeed being tongue-in-cheek.
I reacted, possibly over-reacted, to your 'some attention-starved individual' comment. I fear that assuming those with gender issues are attention-starved may trivialise what is clearly a very important issue.
But I fully accept your comments were not intended that way - no need to apologise.
Comments
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Air_Service
Whilst - as you say - anyone wanting to do actual harm to the UK and who is already legitimately in the EU, can simply enter by way of the Northern Irish loophole. Or someone who is not in the EU legitimately, can get in on 'small boat', picked up by bus on arrival in kent and freed whilst their claim spends decades in the legal system.
If you want to do an objective analysis of the situation, you could say that the priorities are all completely wrong. Or you could just say that the system is dysfunctional beyond belief, and rather than doing good (as they believe they are doing), the home office are simply perpetrators of human misery.
It may well be that Ukraine concedes on some points to Russia to bring the current hostilities to an end, but if it retains the freedom to have a democracy, to rebuild its economy and to strengthen its armed forces - then it will have retained the freedom to achieve freedom.
It appears that Britain, and some other NATO countries, did quite well over recent years in providing light infantry training and equipment to Ukraine's armed forces. If we, and other countries who are now alive to the Russian threat, provide more wide-ranging training and equipment for Ukrainian armed forces, then perhaps Ukraine will be in a place to guarantee its freedom in the future.
@Heathener has definitely lost it. If he/she? is not a Russian troll I hope he/she is getting help.
(PS We could really do with a neutral personal singular pronoun.)
He is doing fine at present but once this crisis calms down I expect and hope his mps will find a successor
The only person I worship is my good lady
But, worse, you are dull
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10618211/Ukraine-war-Russian-loses-fourth-general-Kyiv-claims.html
"They" feels wrong but maybe it will stick in time... "I asked my friend, they is quite happy to adopt this pronoun"?
Alternatively, how about some other variant of he/she? Xe? Ze? Se?
Something needs to become the norm, and I expect it will in time.
Interesting too that Le Pen now runs Macron closest in the runoff if she gets that runoff spot. The only candidate to get to 40%
Oli is the Devil's Piss - nothing worse for a country than finding oil. No, not because people invade etc. Just what the wealth does.
Russia is just the latest example.
This is why I have always advocated getting the economy off hydrocarbons as much a possible. It is worth the price, even without Global Warming.
The Saudis may try and hide it (for example) but it's the "gnawing fear they would feign disguise" - when the money is gone the whirlwind will follow. And they will have no friends.
Russia without the oil & gas doesn't have the hard currency to be more than Mexico with missiles.
Until that time, we should diversify supply - a bit here, a bit there. So, if required, we can drop a supplier at a moments notice.
Good luck!
They takes are in singular form. Just as when you replaced thou, as per the article.
It became you are for the singular not you art.
Obviously we will need to have diplomatic relations with Russia, but hopefully there will be a consumer boycott not only of Russia, but of any country doing business with them. They could all be cancelled and a consumer firewall put up. It has started already, for instance my local shed company have said that they have stopped buying Russian wood.
She was quite prepared to go to war with Argentina over the Falklands as we could easily beat them. However she never threatened the USSR militarily and she agreed to stick to the Hong Kong handover to China as she knew we could not beat them militarily either
That silly saying about not ascribing to malice what is explained by incompetence has no justification and just enables shits to get away with it
It does give Putin enough to sell as a win back home to the state media cronies, but the rest of the world will know he has lost badly.
'They' is plural.
I can't abide words which were doing a perfectly good job being co-opted for some other purpose. See also 'disinterested' being used as a synonym for 'uninterested'.
My first thought when I hear some attention-starved individual declare that henceforth they wish to be known as 'they' is not that the individual in question is taking some creative approach to gender identity but that the individual in question now believes that there are several of it. And of course, I mentally re-calibrate, and know what the person means, but still.
Once upon a time we had a third-person gender-non-specific: he. It meant a male person or a person without specific gender. Admittedly that was also a less than ideal situation.
I know your boss wants direct NATO involvement to give him a propaganda coup and post hoc justification but it isn’t happening.
Now f*** off back to St. Petersburg
Amongst a lot more weapons I see that more Stingers and other, more sophisticated weapons are going to Ukraine, and although the flow of kit is still not fast enough, it does seem to be faster than the Russian replenishments. Clearly the Russian line about "attacks on Belgorod" (i.e. inside Russia) suggests that they may be expecting counter artillery strikes from the Ukrainians. The losses on the Russian side are still significant, and the situation around Kyiv seems to be stable at least. Better AA weapons will make a NFZ unnecessary, so I think there is a need for very cool heads. We need to be patient in order to allow the considerable pressure on Russia to do its work.
Clearly deals are being done to help out the Chinese (considering Yuan payment for oil - probably won´t happen, but at least shows awareness of the Chinese problem) and even even the most difficult issues with Venezuela and Iran are being addressed. I truly hope that Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe is finally released. Modi of India has not made many friends in the West, but Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka all abstained in the UN vote so he can get away with it for a while yet. Clearly, significant diplomacy is going on between the US and China too. I can see little to no Chinese interest in fully backing Putin, but as good mercantilists the Chinese will be asking the West for its pound of flesh.
Spring is coming, the snow is melting, but there is much toil and pain ahead.
(PS The rest of your post is a bit obnoxious tbh. Back to school for some diversity lessons please.)
Are the West’s measures working quickly enough to stop every Ukrainian civilian death? No. But they are working with relentless efficiency. We’ve frozen two thirds of Russia’s FX reserves and are progressively tying a noose around the business interests of its oligarch class (the yachts are for show). Meanwhile Putin has shot his own golden goose by forcing Europe to urgently diversify its hydrocarbon supplies and in the medium term to decarbonise faster.
Our military aid and training, coupled with the fierce Ukrainian resistance, have shown up Russia’s conventional military to be second grade at best. Putin will not now have the money or the technology supply chain to even attempt modernisation and rearmament either.
Meanwhile the last resort tactics of indiscriminate short range artillery shelling by Russian troops have achieved in two weeks what might otherwise have needed two generations more to fully embed. Namely that the people living in Ukraine now feel a proud and deep sense of national identity separate from Russia and with a distinctly European flavour.
So, if I assume correctly that you’re a Putinista on the run, let all that sink in. You and your old fashioned imperialist mindset are losing. If I am mistaken, my sincere apologies and go and get help. It is not normal to speak to often and so positively about provoking your own demise in nuclear holocaust.
I do not believe this knowing someone to the seat of power or claims of being in intelligence, in the absence of any evidence
From covid to war with Russia the posts have been called out by so many but they continue and on occasions with personal abuse
Creditability is very suspect
Not much more would have had to go wrong for the operation to fail.
"Met the new boss today."
"Oh. What are they like?"
"But how did the murderer get in?"
"They must have come through that open window."
Neither of those sound modern or jarring to me.
https://ecfr.eu/article/combined-farces-russias-early-military-failures-in-ukraine/
I think it's perfectly consistent for someone to 'worship' the present day Tories and also to have voted for Blair in '97 and '01.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they
We very easily beat them once we committed to the task force.
The Argentines were poorly trained and full of conscripts even more than the Russians and Thatcher of course sunk the Belgrano without much difficulty
The conventional wisdom from war games is that it ends in obliteration through nuclear war. If @Heathener wants nuclear war, then they have lost the plot completely.
It seems like a much better solution is to try and isolate Russia completely, wage war by other means - economic, diplomatically. That is why - with no credible explanation of his actions - Putin has helped us enormously. It is probably the beginning of the end for him.
As to the obnoxious bit, if that's how I come across then I sincerely apologise. There is a lot of heat and noise on the gender identity debate, but this post wasn't meant to be part of it - my point is entirely linguistic: about the mental discomfort of hearing a single person referred to as 'they'. An agreement that it is a pity there is a non-specific word - not just for those few individuals like RochdalePioneers 's eldest who are genuinely uncomfortable with he or she but also for those countless occasions when the English language forces us to use 'he or she'.
Which is wrong.
War in Europe, massive trade disruption from sanctions, energy crisis, stagflation looming, consumer confidence poor, China and Korea under the Omicron cosh.
Yet they are up significantly.
I remember reading Becky Chambers latest book last year https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B08H831J18/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_tkin_p1_i2 and having to pause at 2 or 3 points to remember if the use of they referred to the single person I thought it did.
It was not that difficult. Plus of course we had submarines with nuclear missiles and Argentina did not have nuclear weapons.
Russia however does have nuclear weapons
It’s a much more difficult decision when your product is life-saving or essential, than when it’s a discretionary or even luxury purchase.
The only sensible reason for the stock market still being shut, is so that it doesn’t crash - which would be headline news in Russia, and a big sign that all was not quite right in the world right now despite the propoganda.
Then there is unleaded fuel: if the connection between banning unleaded fuel and the reduction in crime is proven, then a simple albeit minorly troublesome piece of legislation has been a massive boon.
In fifty years, it's possible we'll look back and see the move to electric or hydrogen vehicles and 'green' energy in the same way: it removed much of our dependence (and the power of) nasty states, improved our air, improved our climate, improves energy security, etc, etc.
There are so many reasons to do it, which is why, although I am *slightly* AGW sceptic, I've been in favour of it for a long time.
I note with interest the old singular use of 'they', from above, but it still feels clumsy now (like 'less' for 'fewer' although I believe that is also a fairly recent rule).
And yep, 'they' is singular, but they are arseholes
And a NFZ would be of limited help unless it also included ground attacks within Ukraine, as the Ukraine airforce has very limited ground attack capability outside of its drones which operate fairly freely already. Such direct involvement would be a major escalation - and validate for half the world Putin's claims about NATO intentions.
NATO is a defensive alliance. None of its members outside of the US has the capacity to enforce a NFZ, and the US have point blank refused.
I'm not engaging with Heathener further until they make a genuine attempt to rebut these points, rather than bollocking on about 'cowardice' etc.
The only way it can open now is on the back of a peace deal. Then it might only halve everything in value, rather than reduce it all by 80%.
It makes not a jot of difference that we had better soldiers, navy and air force if you can't get any of them there.
"They" is just cringeworthy.
It’s such a huge country that borders so many countries with either unfriendly at best or suspicious feelings towards them.
So they have to garrison the most vast area to cover from the arctic circle, Finland, the Baltic, Eastern Europe, the Stans, China, pacific east coast (for them).
So they need huge amounts of men. Soldiers are expensive to train well which drains the budget and expensive to equip. They also require well trained soldiers who know what they are doing to train them.
So you have a situation where you either haemorrhage cash to train enough top professional soldiers to act as main force as well as able to train up recruits so they aren’t shit, haemorrhage cash to provide the up to date kit, feed and house etc or you save cash and give them crap kit and crap training added to crap conditions.
The Russian army is therefore demoralised, under trained and under equipped from day one because you need a million men to cover the expanse but can’t afford to properly.
You can of course train and equip them well but then that strains the other budgets. Russia needs a Baltic/Atlantic fleet, a Black Sea/med fleet and a pacific fleet. Again either expensive or shit. Numbers or ability.
Then Russia has to pay for upkeep of nuclear Arsenal - we know in the UK how much a slice of the defense budget it effectively takes up.
They also want super hi tech kit such as supersonic missiles. Not cheap and drains other areas.
So because of their geography and the fact they spend a fraction in real terms of the US budget they are buggered fundamentally.
They can’t just focus on the west - would be like having an amazing front door alarm system and locks and leaving the back door off it’s hinges. They also have to make sure the automatic fire sprinklers are working in the Chechnya room and former Georgia rooms. But there’s always the Chinese neighbour looking over the fence at the gnomes in the Russian garden it wouldn’t mind having.
We shouldn’t be surprised they haven’t shown themselves to be the military behemoth we thought they were and if they were shorn of their nukes tomorrow they would be purely only considered on the world stage as a country that has lots of raw materials and not a lot else.
On top of reducing pollution and injuries, year by year, they have had a trickle-down effect - countries buying second hand machinery and equipment have had their standards pulled up by default.
A friend who went to the Soviet Union, just after the fall of the wall, commented that it was the 1950s there - pollution, safety at work. And it really shows what had changed.
Thatcher was also not a wet lettuce like you and had the Argentines sunk our aircraft carriers she might even have nuked Buenos Aires who knows. She was not going to lose that war.
However that would have been an absolute last resort to defend the Falklands if we had lost a our aircraft carriers. As we had 4 aircraft carriers at the time even had we lost 1 we would still have had 3 to replace it and could still have continued with the Task Force with them
China isn't going to kill its markets for Taiwan. It's just a festering sore, not an existential threat.
But yes, if it were just for a day or two, that might have been fine - but after three weeks, it’s going to crash completely unless it opens on the back of good news.
The Chinese are waiting, hoping for the 80% and 90% discounts.
Er, point.
The Moslem God is, I believe, both.
I remember going around the JCB factory at Rocester when I was a kid and being amazed at how clean everything was. It was heavy engineering without the dirt.
However the economic sanctions on Russia would be repeated for China if it tried, this showing there would have been a cost to that
The pre 9/11 plan was to retrench to large quantities of pre-positioned equipment, mothballed, in the various theatres. Troops would flown in a required. It is fairly simple to fly x thousand people round the world. Armoured divisions less so...
This would have turned many American overseas bases in supply depots. Brining the troops home would have been politically popular - it would have massively reduced base closures, in the US. And with the troops spending their pay in the US...
One last joke - it would have reduced the American presence in Saudi Arabia to caretaking some warehouse..... And it was the American presence there that so upset Bin Ladin.....
I reacted, possibly over-reacted, to your 'some attention-starved individual' comment. I fear that assuming those with gender issues are attention-starved may trivialise what is clearly a very important issue.
But I fully accept your comments were not intended that way - no need to apologise.