So once you take out those who haven't heard of each person, Johnson's lack of popularity is exceeded only by Putin.
Net favorability in that poll: Zelenskyy: +60 Scholz +5 Biden -2 Macron -17 Johnson -23 Putin -90
Pleased and reassured by how flaccid the Boris Bounce is, what with him being the Heir to Churchill and Ukrainian folk hero.
I know a poll by Lord Ashcroft's organization stated that Boris was the most adored world leader in Ukraine. Has that claim been substantiated elsewhere?
Ashcroft also reports that the clown’s security guards keep having to tell him to zip up his flies.
What to do in the event of a tactical nuclear strike on Ukraine. It's a difficult question. It surely draws NATO into the war, but then what? I assume they're all busy thinking about this.
An interesting option would be an overwhelming response with conventional weapons, wiping out a large chunk of the Russian invasion forces with precision weaponry but stopping short of using nuclear. It would mean only one side had crossed the Rubicon. Whether that would be militarily and logistically possible I don't know.
I was in a pub once and heard a bloke on a nearby table proclaim how much he 'liked' Putin. (This was as the time of the Salisbury attacks.) Wow. What were the chances?
Well Putin has for a while been an idol for a chunk of the fruity right - including the leading advocate of such on here - because of his muscular defence of traditional values.
Although I note Trump has said "he's changed". So maybe they've gone off him a bit now.
From being a winner to a loser. Worst possible crime.
Just one more thing to worry about is MSM complete silence about Russian plane movements. This could just be their usual 24 hour lag behind twitter, or the government is worried enough to have D noticed them.
Well this Russian aircraft movement has tanked my efficiency at work today.
The most reassuring thing that I've seen said on it is that US/UK intelligence agencies have been very on the ball so far with all of this - see predicting the invasion when few people really believed it.
I'm not seeing anything about US reservists being recalled or their strategic forces being readied, which suggests they don't think anything requires that. If we do start seeing a general mobilisation or something then it's time to panic.
BBC forced to admit there is 'absolutely no evidence' Corbyn is or was an antisemite.
Ian Austin/Telegraph forced into a humiliating and very expensive public apology about Labour staffer Laura Murray.
Looks like the tide's finally turning.
PB leaves itself open to action by allowing Posters such as Heathener to continue to call Corbyn an Anti Semite
You mean Corbyn the anti-Semite?
That Corbyn?
The self-proclaimed anti-racist who gets himself so confused by what racism is?
That Corbyn?
The fact this site allows you to say that and you are prepared to say it is yours and its problem not mine.
I know Tim has been contacted by Jezzas lawyers for comments on Twitter your turn may come
Why do you feel the need to defend Corbyn so much? Surely you can see *why* people might think it, even if you disagree? But why are you so vehement in your defence of him? What do you get out of it?
And BTW, don't threaten me. If Jezza wants to come after a non-entity like me, then he's little more than a bully. I wonder if he'll use crowd-funded lawyers to do it...
You are opening yourself to legal action as is this site
OK you win. Let's go with benignly tolerant of antisemitism. A broad church kinda guy. And what could possibly be wrong with that?
Wrongly accusing someone of vile Antisemitism has costs as Austin and the Telegraph have found out. Falsely accusing Corbyn of this or being a terrorist sympathiser or a foreign agent have resulted in apologies and substantial damages too.
The BBC lawyers have recently clearly made a decision it can no longer allow such comment
Most importantly false accusation does a massive disservice to fighting actual Antisemitism.
I would like to see people making false accusations punished for that reason
Do you not find it surprising that the EHRC report didnt name Corbyn and almost all the criticisms were about the processes as implemented under Corbyn hater McNicoll and improved under Corbynite Formby.
The Forde report is supposed to be looking into whether certain head office staff were deliberately undermining the fight against AS for factional reasons.
At that point assuming it finds this is correct i understand the legal war chest held by Jezza will be used to go after defamers in the Party
Ah yes, the Forde report. If only Starmer would publish that we will find there was a conspiracy by the Labour Party against the Jeremy after internal polling found He was about to win a majority of 704.
I don't get it. Corbyn is out of the party, the brains trust MPs like Ricky Burgon are self-censoring themselves and the hard left has scabbed off into a swathe of splinter groups under the "Left Unity" banner.
What purpose does it serve to keep trying to defend the reputation of a man who largely didn't have a reputation worth saving?
Because 1000s of members and ex members will be joining a class action against the Party for return of their subs if it was deliberately working to lose the 2017 election as alleged.
Those named like Oldknow would have already filed for defamation if the allegations against them were untrue IMO instead they are trying to defend themselves via data breach as they know the truth is out there
Oh dear:
1. The party was not "deliberately working to lose the 2017 election" 2. May increasing the Tories vote haul by 20% - an additional 2.3m votes - is what lost Labour the election 3. Which rather torpedoes the "actually Jeremy was really popular actually" argument. He was so popular that he generated millions more votes for the Tories to keep him out.
Politics and elections aren't just about what you do. Its about what your opponents do. Which is why the bullshit can't add LibDem Barchart "info"graphics of actually how Jeremy got more votes actually than Blair actually are so laughably sad. When the Tories have a majority, then add 20% more votes on top, you lose.
As for Oldknow et al, perhaps they honestly don't care less what the Trot army says about them. Which is why they aren't suing. Its the past, the people making allegations are irrelevant to them, who cares. Not so much a vast conspiracy against the Jeremy as nobody thinks its relevant any more.
You are not waiting for the Forde report?
One of the claims Forde is investigating is precisely whether The party HQ was not "deliberately working to lose the 2017 election"
I will wait to see what Forde finds if he finds it was I will be joining the class action.
If not shrugs shoulders.
Tories added 2.3m votes Jezza added 3.5 million votes as you know
Your last line is the exact Blackadder teaching Baldrick to add problem with this whole thing. Whilst national vote tallies don't translate directly into seats they are a reasonable guide.
The Tories started 2m votes ahead and added a further 2.3m votes. So whilst +3.5m votes is impressive, its still moving from fewer votes than the Tories to fewer votes than the Tories. So what is the general allegation, that the party managed to conspire to lose the scores of seats needed to win a majority of 1? Or conspired to drive vast numbers to vote Tory?
Personally I do have a little experience in how the 2017 election works. I was a member of the 4-piece team who conceived, wrote and executed the campaign that got Paul Williams elected. Defeating an actual Tory and replacing him with a Labour MP.
What to do in the event of a tactical nuclear strike on Ukraine. It's a difficult question. It surely draws NATO into the war, but then what? I assume they're all busy thinking about this.
An interesting option would be an overwhelming response with conventional weapons, wiping out a large chunk of the Russian invasion forces with precision weaponry but stopping short of using nuclear. It would mean only one side had crossed the Rubicon. Whether that would be militarily and logistically possible I don't know.
Get messages out to all the power brokers in Russia, everyone we have contact with. Everyone other countries have contact with. Tell them we are at the brink, and untold riches will come to anyone who removes Putin from power and safes the nuclear threat.
Make it clear there can be no safety for anyone involved with further uses. Carrot and stick.
Well this Russian aircraft movement has tanked my efficiency at work today.
The most reassuring thing that I've seen said on it is that US/UK intelligence agencies have been very on the ball so far with all of this - see predicting the invasion when few people really believed it.
I'm not seeing anything about US reservists being recalled or their strategic forces being readied, which suggests they don't think anything requires that. If we do start seeing a general mobilisation or something then it's time to panic.
What to do in the event of a tactical nuclear strike on Ukraine. It's a difficult question. It surely draws NATO into the war, but then what? I assume they're all busy thinking about this.
An interesting option would be an overwhelming response with conventional weapons, wiping out a large chunk of the Russian invasion forces with precision weaponry but stopping short of using nuclear. It would mean only one side had crossed the Rubicon. Whether that would be militarily and logistically possible I don't know.
Are there Red Telephone lines between the US and Russian generals, in addition to between the Presidents?
If so, I'd foresee a massive strike to eliminate all Russian armour in Ukraine and probably also Belarus, coupled with constant communication with the Russian generals in charge of the Russian nukes explaining the limits of the war and that, if they refrain from any further nuclear strikes, Russia will survive, as will the Russian military assets in Russia. I.e. your lives in return for ending the war and occupation of Ukraine (and Belarus)
What to do in the event of a tactical nuclear strike on Ukraine. It's a difficult question. It surely draws NATO into the war, but then what? I assume they're all busy thinking about this.
An interesting option would be an overwhelming response with conventional weapons, wiping out a large chunk of the Russian invasion forces with precision weaponry but stopping short of using nuclear. It would mean only one side had crossed the Rubicon. Whether that would be militarily and logistically possible I don't know.
Get messages out to all the power brokers in Russia, everyone we have contact with. Everyone other countries have contact with. Tell them we are at the brink, and untold riches will come to anyone who removes Putin from power and safes the nuclear threat.
Make it clear there can be no safety for anyone involved with further uses. Carrot and stick.
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
There's a Pascal's wager thing going on here. It is safe to predict things won't go nuclear, because nobody's going to have time to pick you up on it if you are wrong.
Yep. Although this site is so strange and special I can imagine us arguing away about who made the best call right up to the point of the Bomb dropping - and maybe just for a couple of minutes afterwards. Wonder who would get the Last Post? There's an obvious odds-on favourite, isn't there?
Just one more thing to worry about is MSM complete silence about Russian plane movements. This could just be their usual 24 hour lag behind twitter, or the government is worried enough to have D noticed them.
Good point. Not even a whisper on any of the liveblogs (that I can see). Yet this is now ALL OVER social media
Caveat emptor with this next tweet. I'm not sure WHY this is a "bad omen", without context. It is quite likely Russian planes do this every day?
"Bad omen, 2 X Russian Air Force Ilyushin IL-76MD RFF9923/RA-78831 en route to #Kaliningrad."
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
There's a Pascal's wager thing going on here. It is safe to predict things won't go nuclear, because nobody's going to have time to pick you up on it if you are wrong.
Yep. Although this site is so strange and special I can imagine us arguing away about who made the best call right up to the point of the Bomb dropping - and maybe just for a couple of minutes afterwards. Wonder who would get the Last Post? There's an obvious odds-on favourite, isn't there?
I expect the final debate to compare hits on Devonport vs Faslane from a Scindy perspective
Just one more thing to worry about is MSM complete silence about Russian plane movements. This could just be their usual 24 hour lag behind twitter, or the government is worried enough to have D noticed them.
Good point. Not even a whisper on any of the liveblogs (that I can see). Yet this is now ALL OVER social media
Caveat emptor with this next tweet. I'm not sure WHY this is a "bad omen", without context. It is quite likely Russian planes do this every day?
"Bad omen, 2 X Russian Air Force Ilyushin IL-76MD RFF9923/RA-78831 en route to #Kaliningrad."
Just one more thing to worry about is MSM complete silence about Russian plane movements. This could just be their usual 24 hour lag behind twitter, or the government is worried enough to have D noticed them.
Good point. Not even a whisper on any of the liveblogs (that I can see). Yet this is now ALL OVER social media
Caveat emptor with this next tweet. I'm not sure WHY this is a "bad omen", without context. It is quite likely Russian planes do this every day?
"Bad omen, 2 X Russian Air Force Ilyushin IL-76MD RFF9923/RA-78831 en route to #Kaliningrad."
https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1504440778940112902 After the fascist speech comes the purges: "Human rights lawyer Daniil Berman says state investigators in Moscow have been told tacitly to wrap up all their economic crimes cases ASAP because next month they’ll be inundated with new cases against various “traitors.” Putin’s Terror is coming if it isn’t already here. He says he got this information from an insider in the security forces."
BBC forced to admit there is 'absolutely no evidence' Corbyn is or was an antisemite.
Ian Austin/Telegraph forced into a humiliating and very expensive public apology about Labour staffer Laura Murray.
Looks like the tide's finally turning.
PB leaves itself open to action by allowing Posters such as Heathener to continue to call Corbyn an Anti Semite
You mean Corbyn the anti-Semite?
That Corbyn?
The self-proclaimed anti-racist who gets himself so confused by what racism is?
That Corbyn?
The fact this site allows you to say that and you are prepared to say it is yours and its problem not mine.
I know Tim has been contacted by Jezzas lawyers for comments on Twitter your turn may come
Why do you feel the need to defend Corbyn so much? Surely you can see *why* people might think it, even if you disagree? But why are you so vehement in your defence of him? What do you get out of it?
And BTW, don't threaten me. If Jezza wants to come after a non-entity like me, then he's little more than a bully. I wonder if he'll use crowd-funded lawyers to do it...
You are opening yourself to legal action as is this site
OK you win. Let's go with benignly tolerant of antisemitism. A broad church kinda guy. And what could possibly be wrong with that?
Wrongly accusing someone of vile Antisemitism has costs as Austin and the Telegraph have found out. Falsely accusing Corbyn of this or being a terrorist sympathiser or a foreign agent have resulted in apologies and substantial damages too.
The BBC lawyers have recently clearly made a decision it can no longer allow such comment
Most importantly false accusation does a massive disservice to fighting actual Antisemitism.
I would like to see people making false accusations punished for that reason
Do you not find it surprising that the EHRC report didnt name Corbyn and almost all the criticisms were about the processes as implemented under Corbyn hater McNicoll and improved under Corbynite Formby.
The Forde report is supposed to be looking into whether certain head office staff were deliberately undermining the fight against AS for factional reasons.
At that point assuming it finds this is correct i understand the legal war chest held by Jezza will be used to go after defamers in the Party
Ah yes, the Forde report. If only Starmer would publish that we will find there was a conspiracy by the Labour Party against the Jeremy after internal polling found He was about to win a majority of 704.
I don't get it. Corbyn is out of the party, the brains trust MPs like Ricky Burgon are self-censoring themselves and the hard left has scabbed off into a swathe of splinter groups under the "Left Unity" banner.
What purpose does it serve to keep trying to defend the reputation of a man who largely didn't have a reputation worth saving?
Because 1000s of members and ex members will be joining a class action against the Party for return of their subs if it was deliberately working to lose the 2017 election as alleged.
Those named like Oldknow would have already filed for defamation if the allegations against them were untrue IMO instead they are trying to defend themselves via data breach as they know the truth is out there
Oh dear:
1. The party was not "deliberately working to lose the 2017 election" 2. May increasing the Tories vote haul by 20% - an additional 2.3m votes - is what lost Labour the election 3. Which rather torpedoes the "actually Jeremy was really popular actually" argument. He was so popular that he generated millions more votes for the Tories to keep him out.
Politics and elections aren't just about what you do. Its about what your opponents do. Which is why the bullshit can't add LibDem Barchart "info"graphics of actually how Jeremy got more votes actually than Blair actually are so laughably sad. When the Tories have a majority, then add 20% more votes on top, you lose.
As for Oldknow et al, perhaps they honestly don't care less what the Trot army says about them. Which is why they aren't suing. Its the past, the people making allegations are irrelevant to them, who cares. Not so much a vast conspiracy against the Jeremy as nobody thinks its relevant any more.
You are not waiting for the Forde report?
One of the claims Forde is investigating is precisely whether The party HQ was not "deliberately working to lose the 2017 election"
I will wait to see what Forde finds if he finds it was I will be joining the class action.
If not shrugs shoulders.
Tories added 2.3m votes Jezza added 3.5 million votes as you know
Your last line is the exact Blackadder teaching Baldrick to add problem with this whole thing. Whilst national vote tallies don't translate directly into seats they are a reasonable guide.
The Tories started 2m votes ahead and added a further 2.3m votes. So whilst +3.5m votes is impressive, its still moving from fewer votes than the Tories to fewer votes than the Tories. So what is the general allegation, that the party managed to conspire to lose the scores of seats needed to win a majority of 1? Or conspired to drive vast numbers to vote Tory?
Personally I do have a little experience in how the 2017 election works. I was a member of the 4-piece team who conceived, wrote and executed the campaign that got Paul Williams elected. Defeating an actual Tory and replacing him with a Labour MP.
Shame you weren't around for 2019 when he was resoundingly beaten even with the spoiler of a BXP party candidate.
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
Yes, I was being unusually polite (as we are all quite rattled)
You were one of the loudest advocates, along with @Heathener for the "no way he will invade Ukraine" thesis. Sadly wrong
My worry with Putin is that he keeps saying "You don't believe that I will do this? - just you watch, I will now do this" - and then he goes and does it
He's now saying it with nukes. He's warning us he will use them, so there is - to my mind - a non-trivial chance that he will indeed use them. Or at least something non-conventional: a chemical weapon, or a dirty bomb in Chernobyl, or somesuch
Escalation is almost his only way of avoiding imminent humiliation
Don't know about 'one of the loudest advocates', I only did 3 posts on it, I think, none of them long or passionate. But, yep, I was wrong wrong wrong (see? only 3 posts) and although I do genuinely assess the risk of nuclear as low, it is worrying and I am worried.
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
There's a Pascal's wager thing going on here. It is safe to predict things won't go nuclear, because nobody's going to have time to pick you up on it if you are wrong.
Yep. Although this site is so strange and special I can imagine us arguing away about who made the best call right up to the point of the Bomb dropping - and maybe just for a couple of minutes afterwards. Wonder who would get the Last Post? There's an obvious odds-on favourite, isn't there?
I expect the final debate to compare hits on Devonport vs Faslane from a Scindy perspective
"The English got twice as many Russian nukes as they should have done under the Barnet Formula. Bastards."
Just one more thing to worry about is MSM complete silence about Russian plane movements. This could just be their usual 24 hour lag behind twitter, or the government is worried enough to have D noticed them.
Good point. Not even a whisper on any of the liveblogs (that I can see). Yet this is now ALL OVER social media
Caveat emptor with this next tweet. I'm not sure WHY this is a "bad omen", without context. It is quite likely Russian planes do this every day?
"Bad omen, 2 X Russian Air Force Ilyushin IL-76MD RFF9923/RA-78831 en route to #Kaliningrad."
Kaliningrad contains massive Russian bases. They must fly in and out fairly frequently.
Yes, surely
The theory touted below that tweet is that these are unusually big planes, designed for carrying heavy shit. So maybe the Russians are preparing a nuke missile in Kaliningrad?
Again, I have no idea if this is a credible interpretation. The guy sending out these tweets seems to be an "amateur geopolitical strategist", not a pro military analyst
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
There's a Pascal's wager thing going on here. It is safe to predict things won't go nuclear, because nobody's going to have time to pick you up on it if you are wrong.
Yep. Although this site is so strange and special I can imagine us arguing away about who made the best call right up to the point of the Bomb dropping - and maybe just for a couple of minutes afterwards. Wonder who would get the Last Post? There's an obvious odds-on favourite, isn't there?
Assuming the internet is still up, it'll be grim when the surviving PBers are left speculating which of our fellow posters have been taken out by the nuclear strike. I'm fairly near Heathrow airport - rumoured to be a Soviet target back in the day - so probably won't be around.
It’s really rather pleasing that MPs will get to keep their lucrative uncapped second jobs and also receive their £2k pay rise on the same day my tax will increase to pay for the care of old people, very many of whom have more assets than me and won’t themselves be hit by the tax rise.
On top of everything else skyrocketing. Inflation’s at 8%, apparently.
Assuming we’re not all fried imminently this will knock Ukraine off the headlines here soon as people start to really feel the hit in their pockets.
It feels like the calm before this particular storm. I cannot understand for the life of me why the government isn’t doing more about all this, but rather insisting the NI rise must go ahead.
Did I hear something about the tiny Sunak doing a ‘wartime budget’ soon? Does a glorious, magnanimous, beneficent U-turn seem likely?
So the MPs’ 3% pay rise is 5% below inflation, and the average MP will have £4,000 less in their pocket as a result?
Such selflessness brings a tear to the eye. How fortunate they can put a large chunk of their costs on expenses.
Just saw this post from @cookie which had 10 likes. I concur. I have not laughed so much for ages. Go and look, but make sure you have your irony meters turned right down. It's the funniest post for ages:
"That @HYUFD post above is the greatest post of the month. It could be written by Armando Ianucci or Graham Linehan or one of those fellas. In five pithy sentences he brilliantly satirises internet arguments. I keep reading it and re-reading it and cannot stop laughing. I want to point out the best bits but there is none of it which isn'tthe best bits. It's utter genius."
"-The movements of Russian government VIP planes, of course, are rare, if I gave an answer it would only be speculative. -The two RuAF IL76 on the way to kaliningrad are not a good sign and I don't think the Russians are withdrawing troops from there."
Lower impact, but higher probability than the nuclear armageddon thing is the P&O ferry shut down.
A friend of a friend is still on his boat, discussion going on about closing down the engine or something. Apparently 15% of our freight comes in on P&O; a protracted industrial struggle is going to supercharge those inflation numbers. Perhaps.
I am *not* a fan of Putin's we've-got-to-rid-the-Ukraine-of-NAZIs claim. Especially as he has his own NAZIs he uses, and he is acting like a fascist himself.
But... if Ukraine get an independent, democratic state, then Zelenskyy may have a problem. The Azov Battalion are fascists, and whilst I can understand why Ukraine wanted everyone it can to fight after 2014, they will be a prominent and armed group after the war ends.
It'll be interesting to see how he deals with them, given most of his country do not support far-right parties at the last election.
At least until a couple of months ago, the Azov were a pretty fringe group of people, capable of the occasional attack but featuring heavily in the Russian propoganda as the source of almost all fighting in the disputed territories.
Just one more thing to worry about is MSM complete silence about Russian plane movements. This could just be their usual 24 hour lag behind twitter, or the government is worried enough to have D noticed them.
Good point. Not even a whisper on any of the liveblogs (that I can see). Yet this is now ALL OVER social media
Caveat emptor with this next tweet. I'm not sure WHY this is a "bad omen", without context. It is quite likely Russian planes do this every day?
"Bad omen, 2 X Russian Air Force Ilyushin IL-76MD RFF9923/RA-78831 en route to #Kaliningrad."
Kaliningrad contains massive Russian bases. They must fly in and out fairly frequently.
Yes, surely
The theory touted below that tweet is that these are unusually big planes, designed for carrying heavy shit. So maybe the Russians are preparing a nuke missile in Kaliningrad?
Again, I have no idea if this is a credible interpretation. The guy sending out these tweets seems to be an "amateur geopolitical strategist", not a pro military analyst
He has got 38k followers tho
IL-76 - as Wikipedia would tell you - is the standard heavy transport for the Russian military. They have over a hundred of them.
The Russians put nuclear weapons in Kaliningrad years ago.
Sounds like it'll happen eventually, just something unexpected came up.
Such as? Virgin have binned the compulsory masking, as has LHR, according to that same story.
All flights in and out of the US have to abide by US and UK rules. If the US says flights beginning or terminating there require masks, then there's not much BA can do about it.
(Not that I know that's the issue; but only a very small number of BA flights are UK-to-UK.)
@christogrozev Three independent sources report that the deputy chief of Russia's Rosgvardia (a unit of RU's interior army which has had tremendous losses in Ukraine), Gen. Roman Gavrilov has been detained by FSB. Gavrilov had also previously worked in FSO, Putin's security service.
https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1504440778940112902 After the fascist speech comes the purges: "Human rights lawyer Daniil Berman says state investigators in Moscow have been told tacitly to wrap up all their economic crimes cases ASAP because next month they’ll be inundated with new cases against various “traitors.” Putin’s Terror is coming if it isn’t already here. He says he got this information from an insider in the security forces."
Everything he's done in the last month is a case study in how to destroy the economy, world standing and internal morale of an entire nation. Never seen anything as wilfully self-destructive from a long serving political leader in my lifetime. 2 decades of secure power followed by a few weeks of complete chaos. Closest equivalents? Mugabe maybe. Gaddafi, but his meltdown was a reaction to popular insurgency.
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
There's a Pascal's wager thing going on here. It is safe to predict things won't go nuclear, because nobody's going to have time to pick you up on it if you are wrong.
Yep. Although this site is so strange and special I can imagine us arguing away about who made the best call right up to the point of the Bomb dropping - and maybe just for a couple of minutes afterwards. Wonder who would get the Last Post? There's an obvious odds-on favourite, isn't there?
I expect the final debate to compare hits on Devonport vs Faslane from a Scindy perspective
But how will it affect the dunny on the wold parish by election?
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
There's a Pascal's wager thing going on here. It is safe to predict things won't go nuclear, because nobody's going to have time to pick you up on it if you are wrong.
Yep. Although this site is so strange and special I can imagine us arguing away about who made the best call right up to the point of the Bomb dropping - and maybe just for a couple of minutes afterwards. Wonder who would get the Last Post? There's an obvious odds-on favourite, isn't there?
Assuming the internet is still up, it'll be grim when the surviving PBers are left speculating which of our fellow posters have been taken out by the nuclear strike. I'm fairly near Heathrow airport - rumoured to be a Soviet target back in the day - so probably won't be around.
The surprise after a nuclear war might well be how much of the world population is completely unscathed. Economic and market meltdown of course, but otherwise life will go on. That applies to the entire Southern Hemisphere and probably - if this were a Russia v NATO war - the whole of the tropics with nothing South of Miami, Hawaii and possibly Okinawa being hit. In other words about 3/4 of the world's surface untouched.
Another sign of the apocalypse. A Thursday without a Council by-election. Life not worth living anyways.
Sometimes a by-election crops up that almost no-one was expecting, because there isn't an official central database informing people what's happening. It's entirely up to volunteers to find out which by-elections are happening and where.
Just saw this post from @cookie which had 10 likes. I concur. I have not laughed so much for ages. Go and look, but make sure you have your irony meters turned right down. It's the funniest post for ages:
"That @HYUFD post above is the greatest post of the month. It could be written by Armando Ianucci or Graham Linehan or one of those fellas. In five pithy sentences he brilliantly satirises internet arguments. I keep reading it and re-reading it and cannot stop laughing. I want to point out the best bits but there is none of it which isn'tthe best bits. It's utter genius."
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
There's a Pascal's wager thing going on here. It is safe to predict things won't go nuclear, because nobody's going to have time to pick you up on it if you are wrong.
Yep. Although this site is so strange and special I can imagine us arguing away about who made the best call right up to the point of the Bomb dropping - and maybe just for a couple of minutes afterwards. Wonder who would get the Last Post? There's an obvious odds-on favourite, isn't there?
Assuming the internet is still up, it'll be grim when the surviving PBers are left speculating which of our fellow posters have been taken out by the nuclear strike. I'm fairly near Heathrow airport - rumoured to be a Soviet target back in the day - so probably won't be around.
The surprise after a nuclear war might well be how much of the world population is completely unscathed. Economic and market meltdown of course, but otherwise life will go on. That applies to the entire Southern Hemisphere and probably - if this were a Russia v NATO war - the whole of the tropics with nothing South of Miami, Hawaii and possibly Okinawa being hit. In other words about 3/4 of the world's surface untouched.
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
There's a Pascal's wager thing going on here. It is safe to predict things won't go nuclear, because nobody's going to have time to pick you up on it if you are wrong.
Yep. Although this site is so strange and special I can imagine us arguing away about who made the best call right up to the point of the Bomb dropping - and maybe just for a couple of minutes afterwards. Wonder who would get the Last Post? There's an obvious odds-on favourite, isn't there?
Assuming the internet is still up, it'll be grim when the surviving PBers are left speculating which of our fellow posters have been taken out by the nuclear strike. I'm fairly near Heathrow airport - rumoured to be a Soviet target back in the day - so probably won't be around.
The surprise after a nuclear war might well be how much of the world population is completely unscathed. Economic and market meltdown of course, but otherwise life will go on. That applies to the entire Southern Hemisphere and probably - if this were a Russia v NATO war - the whole of the tropics with nothing South of Miami, Hawaii and possibly Okinawa being hit. In other words about 3/4 of the world's surface untouched.
Idiots. Time to get rid of mask altogether and forever.
There appears to be an abundance of international evidence that masking is near or completely useless against omicron (e.g. Hong Kong, NZ). It's not clear why anyone would persisting with an intrusive, antisocial measure for no obvious health benefit.
Has there been a scientific study demonstrating this?
I can't see how @Anabobazina can come to that conclusion. If one has a respiratory tract infection, and one wears a mask, then (a) the pace/speed at which viral matter comes out the mouth is slowed dramatically, and (b) a significant portion is simply goìng to get trapped by the mask.
Now, it's entirely possible that - because Omicron is so infectious - that R0 only coms down to (say) 2 with compulsory masking. It's also fine to say that, given high levels of natural immunity and vaccinations, then the benefits of compulsory masking are outweighed by its costs.
But it is clearly rubbish to claim - without evidence - that it does nothing to reduce transmission rates.
And in countries with limited natural immunity (*cough* China) it it probably essential to minimise viral load recieved by the immune naïve, and slow the spread of the disease.
Here's a thought on hostages I have had for some time, but haven't been able to find a congressman or senator to share it with. (Alas, "Scoop" Jackson has long left the scene.): We (the United States, the UK, and other democratic nations) should secretly collect hostages from nations like Iran in advance, so as to be ready, when the time comes, to exchange hostages, rather than paying ransom. I repeat, secretly.
I think we should recognize that are in a low-level war with Iran, and will be, as long as the current government there is in power.
Just one more thing to worry about is MSM complete silence about Russian plane movements. This could just be their usual 24 hour lag behind twitter, or the government is worried enough to have D noticed them.
Good point. Not even a whisper on any of the liveblogs (that I can see). Yet this is now ALL OVER social media
Caveat emptor with this next tweet. I'm not sure WHY this is a "bad omen", without context. It is quite likely Russian planes do this every day?
"Bad omen, 2 X Russian Air Force Ilyushin IL-76MD RFF9923/RA-78831 en route to #Kaliningrad."
Kaliningrad contains massive Russian bases. They must fly in and out fairly frequently.
Yes, surely
The theory touted below that tweet is that these are unusually big planes, designed for carrying heavy shit. So maybe the Russians are preparing a nuke missile in Kaliningrad?
Again, I have no idea if this is a credible interpretation. The guy sending out these tweets seems to be an "amateur geopolitical strategist", not a pro military analyst
He has got 38k followers tho
Well if they are can they hold off the apocalypse til Monday morning as I have a rather nice weekend coming up
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
There's a Pascal's wager thing going on here. It is safe to predict things won't go nuclear, because nobody's going to have time to pick you up on it if you are wrong.
Yep. Although this site is so strange and special I can imagine us arguing away about who made the best call right up to the point of the Bomb dropping - and maybe just for a couple of minutes afterwards. Wonder who would get the Last Post? There's an obvious odds-on favourite, isn't there?
Assuming the internet is still up, it'll be grim when the surviving PBers are left speculating which of our fellow posters have been taken out by the nuclear strike. I'm fairly near Heathrow airport - rumoured to be a Soviet target back in the day - so probably won't be around.
The surprise after a nuclear war might well be how much of the world population is completely unscathed. Economic and market meltdown of course, but otherwise life will go on. That applies to the entire Southern Hemisphere and probably - if this were a Russia v NATO war - the whole of the tropics with nothing South of Miami, Hawaii and possibly Okinawa being hit. In other words about 3/4 of the world's surface untouched.
This is quite a cheerful debate
On Kaliningrad, it would be a good place for Putin to do a nuclear false flag attack on himself. It's part of Russia but actually a fair distance from real Russia
Then he can justify a retaliatory strike on Europe. Probably drop one on Cicero in Estonia. Or Poland.
Just returned from hospital. Plaster off, stitches out, boot on. Another 4 weeks without standing on it. Thumbs up for other leg.
Is that good news? You seem pleased but that sounds quite drastic. What did you do?
My foot is on the mend, thank you. Wearing shoes is still uncomfortable and I haven't walked more than about 100 yards at a time but as I can work from home it's actually not that major an inconvenience. Nothing to suggest it won't heal perfectly well and that it'll be entirely comfortable in a couple of weeks.
Sounds like it'll happen eventually, just something unexpected came up.
Such as? Virgin have binned the compulsory masking, as has LHR, according to that same story.
All flights in and out of the US have to abide by US and UK rules. If the US says flights beginning or terminating there require masks, then there's not much BA can do about it.
(Not that I know that's the issue; but only a very small number of BA flights are UK-to-UK.)
Sure, but so what? The demasking was only on routes that allowed demasking anyway.
Idiots. Time to get rid of mask altogether and forever.
There appears to be an abundance of international evidence that masking is near or completely useless against omicron (e.g. Hong Kong, NZ). It's not clear why anyone would persisting with an intrusive, antisocial measure for no obvious health benefit.
Has there been a scientific study demonstrating this?
I can't see how @Anabobazina can come to that conclusion. If one has a respiratory tract infection, and one wears a mask, then (a) the pace/speed at which viral matter comes out the mouth is slowed dramatically, and (b) a significant portion is simply goìng to get trapped by the mask.
Now, it's entirely possible that - because Omicron is so infectious - that R0 only coms down to (say) 2 with compulsory masking. It's also fine to say that, given high levels of natural immunity and vaccinations, then the benefits of compulsory masking are outweighed by its costs.
But it is clearly rubbish to claim - without evidence - that it does nothing to reduce transmission rates.
And in countries with limited natural immunity (*cough* China) it it probably essential to minimise viral load recieved by the immune naïve, and slow the spread of the disease.
I said "there appears to be" and "near or completely useless". I am simply reading off from the numbers abroad. I haven't come to any confirmed conclusion. I am simply asking why anyone would persist with the masks in the absence of much evidence of their effectiveness against omicron. They do, after all, have massive downsides of their own.
https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1504440778940112902 After the fascist speech comes the purges: "Human rights lawyer Daniil Berman says state investigators in Moscow have been told tacitly to wrap up all their economic crimes cases ASAP because next month they’ll be inundated with new cases against various “traitors.” Putin’s Terror is coming if it isn’t already here. He says he got this information from an insider in the security forces."
https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1504440778940112902 After the fascist speech comes the purges: "Human rights lawyer Daniil Berman says state investigators in Moscow have been told tacitly to wrap up all their economic crimes cases ASAP because next month they’ll be inundated with new cases against various “traitors.” Putin’s Terror is coming if it isn’t already here. He says he got this information from an insider in the security forces."
Well I suppose it's kind of reassuring that he's planning that there will be a next month.
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
I'd been warning about it since 2014, including, I believe, on here. It was obvious Putin was not content with just Crimea and the Donbass. He had two routes: political and military. The political route got damaged in the 2019 election. That left the military.
Georgia, Crimea, Litvinenko, Salisbury, etc, etc show that Putin does not think of international relations in the same way we do. He as much more in common with Stalin or Hitler than he would like to think.
And earlier even. Chechnya. That was widely viewed as 'his' business - and by some justified because the target population was Muslim - but it was brutal and involved 'war crimes'.
Just one more thing to worry about is MSM complete silence about Russian plane movements. This could just be their usual 24 hour lag behind twitter, or the government is worried enough to have D noticed them.
Good point. Not even a whisper on any of the liveblogs (that I can see). Yet this is now ALL OVER social media
Caveat emptor with this next tweet. I'm not sure WHY this is a "bad omen", without context. It is quite likely Russian planes do this every day?
"Bad omen, 2 X Russian Air Force Ilyushin IL-76MD RFF9923/RA-78831 en route to #Kaliningrad."
Kaliningrad contains massive Russian bases. They must fly in and out fairly frequently.
Yes, surely
The theory touted below that tweet is that these are unusually big planes, designed for carrying heavy shit. So maybe the Russians are preparing a nuke missile in Kaliningrad?
Again, I have no idea if this is a credible interpretation. The guy sending out these tweets seems to be an "amateur geopolitical strategist", not a pro military analyst
He has got 38k followers tho
Your regular reminder that the sh*t/gold ration on Twitter is immense, and the number of followers irrelevant as far as assessing credibility goes.
https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1504440778940112902 After the fascist speech comes the purges: "Human rights lawyer Daniil Berman says state investigators in Moscow have been told tacitly to wrap up all their economic crimes cases ASAP because next month they’ll be inundated with new cases against various “traitors.” Putin’s Terror is coming if it isn’t already here. He says he got this information from an insider in the security forces."
Sit in on Pride of Hull. Foreign new crew waiting to board. Captain and crew refusing to get off. Says he will not allow Police access. Could get messy.
Source is Karl Turner MP via Guardian business blog. All officers sacked too.
Sounds like it'll happen eventually, just something unexpected came up.
Such as? Virgin have binned the compulsory masking, as has LHR, according to that same story.
All flights in and out of the US have to abide by US and UK rules. If the US says flights beginning or terminating there require masks, then there's not much BA can do about it.
(Not that I know that's the issue; but only a very small number of BA flights are UK-to-UK.)
No, the BA wording said that flight back to the UK will be mask optional and flights to specific destinations will be in line with the destination's rules on masks. I don't think the US can dictate what happens on flight leaving the US once they are out of US airspace, only those arriving to the US.
The federal mask mandate is stupid anyway, hopefully they shit can it soon. They seem to be dropping like flies all across Europe.
I am *not* a fan of Putin's we've-got-to-rid-the-Ukraine-of-NAZIs claim. Especially as he has his own NAZIs he uses, and he is acting like a fascist himself.
But... if Ukraine get an independent, democratic state, then Zelenskyy may have a problem. The Azov Battalion are fascists, and whilst I can understand why Ukraine wanted everyone it can to fight after 2014, they will be a prominent and armed group after the war ends.
It'll be interesting to see how he deals with them, given most of his country do not support far-right parties at the last election.
At least until a couple of months ago, the Azov were a pretty fringe group of people, capable of the occasional attack but featuring heavily in the Russian propoganda as the source of almost all fighting in the disputed territories.
Complete fringe, and almost irrelevant, in a postwar democratic state I think.
I wonder if an analyst in the Kremlin is currently really sorry by our unusual cross-channel ferry movements today.
NB: Never using them again, the bastards.
P&O are losing money on their cross channel services. What should they do?
I dunno, act like grownups and have a proper approach to consultation and redundancies and not sack all of its staff like a Corbynite’s idea of a comicbook industrialist.
I am *not* a fan of Putin's we've-got-to-rid-the-Ukraine-of-NAZIs claim. Especially as he has his own NAZIs he uses, and he is acting like a fascist himself.
But... if Ukraine get an independent, democratic state, then Zelenskyy may have a problem. The Azov Battalion are fascists, and whilst I can understand why Ukraine wanted everyone it can to fight after 2014, they will be a prominent and armed group after the war ends.
It'll be interesting to see how he deals with them, given most of his country do not support far-right parties at the last election.
At least until a couple of months ago, the Azov were a pretty fringe group of people, capable of the occasional attack but featuring heavily in the Russian propoganda as the source of almost all fighting in the disputed territories.
Complete fringe, and almost irrelevant, in a postwar democratic state I think.
Just saw this post from @cookie which had 10 likes. I concur. I have not laughed so much for ages. Go and look, but make sure you have your irony meters turned right down. It's the funniest post for ages:
"That @HYUFD post above is the greatest post of the month. It could be written by Armando Ianucci or Graham Linehan or one of those fellas. In five pithy sentences he brilliantly satirises internet arguments. I keep reading it and re-reading it and cannot stop laughing. I want to point out the best bits but there is none of it which isn'tthe best bits. It's utter genius."
Can you link or copy
Under thread "At last a day when Ukraine is not on the front page"
Ydoethur did a good response at 7.09. There are plenty more.
I wonder if an analyst in the Kremlin is currently really sorry by our unusual cross-channel ferry movements today.
NB: Never using them again, the bastards.
P&O are losing money on their cross channel services. What should they do?
I dunno, act like grownups and have a proper approach to consultation and redundancies and not sack all of its staff like a Corbynites idea of a comicbook industrialist.
Indeed. With zero notice period too. The PM met with the UAE yesterday. Is this a quid pro quo?
Impressive that nearly 20% of UK energy is being produced by solar panels at the moment, given the time of year and the fact that there don't seem to be that many solar panels installed in this country.
The solar number on Gridwatch is an estimate, because most solar shows up as reduced demand. When I did some analysis on this a while back, I came to the conclusion that it overestimated solar production in the UK pretty significantly - by at at least 60%, and maybe a bit more.
Still - even 12-13% is pretty impressive given the time of year, etc.
I wonder if an analyst in the Kremlin is currently really sorry by our unusual cross-channel ferry movements today.
NB: Never using them again, the bastards.
P&O are losing money on their cross channel services. What should they do?
I dunno, act like grownups and have a proper approach to consultation and redundancies and not sack all of its staff like a Corbynites idea of a comicbook industrialist.
Indeed. With zero notice period too. The PM met with the UAE yesterday. Is this a quid pro quo?
Hardly but it explains the timing - wait until the PM has left.
Going back to the question of what P&O should have done.
1) try to make a profit 2) shut down completely
but at the very least - properly restructure the company and follow UK law...
I wonder if an analyst in the Kremlin is currently really sorry by our unusual cross-channel ferry movements today.
NB: Never using them again, the bastards.
P&O are losing money on their cross channel services. What should they do?
I dunno, act like grownups and have a proper approach to consultation and redundancies and not sack all of its staff like a Corbynites idea of a comicbook industrialist.
Indeed. With zero notice period too. The PM met with the UAE yesterday. Is this a quid pro quo?
It’s been ages since I had to get into the guts of employment law, but there must be some really odd contracts involved for this to even be able to be vaguely lawful.
Sounds like it'll happen eventually, just something unexpected came up.
Such as? Virgin have binned the compulsory masking, as has LHR, according to that same story.
All flights in and out of the US have to abide by US and UK rules. If the US says flights beginning or terminating there require masks, then there's not much BA can do about it.
(Not that I know that's the issue; but only a very small number of BA flights are UK-to-UK.)
No, the BA wording said that flight back to the UK will be mask optional and flights to specific destinations will be in line with the destination's rules on masks. I don't think the US can dictate what happens on flight leaving the US once they are out of US airspace, only those arriving to the US.
The federal mask mandate is stupid anyway, hopefully they shit can it soon. They seem to be dropping like flies all across Europe.
Exactly. I'm genuinely baffled by what point Rob and Robert are trying to make here.
Yesterday, BA said it was dropping masking on routes where neither the source or the destination government mandated it. Great. i.e. BA would no longer impose masking rules of its own.
What appears to have happened is that several passengers have boarded flights without masks, and now someone, somewhere, has decided that, um, after all, we will continue to impose a mask mandate of our own regardless of the law at either the source or the destination.
It is BA and BA only causing this ludicrous confusion – it has nothing to do with laws because on routes where national masking laws applied BA's demasking policy was never in force in the first place!
Just returned from hospital. Plaster off, stitches out, boot on. Another 4 weeks without standing on it. Thumbs up for other leg.
Is that good news? You seem pleased but that sounds quite drastic. What did you do?
My foot is on the mend, thank you. Wearing shoes is still uncomfortable and I haven't walked more than about 100 yards at a time but as I can work from home it's actually not that major an inconvenience. Nothing to suggest it won't heal perfectly well and that it'll be entirely comfortable in a couple of weeks.
Yep pretty good news. I broke both my legs, one badly, 3 weeks ago. Just fell over. Pathetic. Left leg is now ok to put weight on. Only one broken bone and not weight bearing. Boot came off today. Multiple breaks in other leg. Pinned 2 weeks ago. 10 days in hospital prior to that. Plaster off today and boot put on.
You can just imagine the lardy **** going 'No problem your sheikness, looks like a totally sensible biz decision to me'
The mother of a P&O worker told a Mirror sister title that P&O staff were told they had "five minutes to get their stuff and get off the ships".
P&O staff were told they were being laid off by a pre-recorded video message. The message said: "Your final day of employment is today. I do accept that there are no words that can make the situation any better today. I realise that this will have come as a shock to you, and we will provide you with all of the ongoing support possible."
He then confirmed that all serving crew members would be replaced by a third party company.
Labour MP Diana Johnson told the Commons today: "I understand from the RMT union that these agency staff, mainly from overseas, are in buses on the quayside with a security firm... wearing balaclavas and taking British crew off these ships.
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
There's a Pascal's wager thing going on here. It is safe to predict things won't go nuclear, because nobody's going to have time to pick you up on it if you are wrong.
Yep. Although this site is so strange and special I can imagine us arguing away about who made the best call right up to the point of the Bomb dropping - and maybe just for a couple of minutes afterwards. Wonder who would get the Last Post? There's an obvious odds-on favourite, isn't there?
Assuming the internet is still up, it'll be grim when the surviving PBers are left speculating which of our fellow posters have been taken out by the nuclear strike. I'm fairly near Heathrow airport - rumoured to be a Soviet target back in the day - so probably won't be around.
The surprise after a nuclear war might well be how much of the world population is completely unscathed. Economic and market meltdown of course, but otherwise life will go on. That applies to the entire Southern Hemisphere and probably - if this were a Russia v NATO war - the whole of the tropics with nothing South of Miami, Hawaii and possibly Okinawa being hit. In other words about 3/4 of the world's surface untouched.
You've heard of the concept of Nuclear Winter?
So, you're saying that it reverses global warming too?
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
There's a Pascal's wager thing going on here. It is safe to predict things won't go nuclear, because nobody's going to have time to pick you up on it if you are wrong.
Yep. Although this site is so strange and special I can imagine us arguing away about who made the best call right up to the point of the Bomb dropping - and maybe just for a couple of minutes afterwards. Wonder who would get the Last Post? There's an obvious odds-on favourite, isn't there?
Assuming the internet is still up, it'll be grim when the surviving PBers are left speculating which of our fellow posters have been taken out by the nuclear strike. I'm fairly near Heathrow airport - rumoured to be a Soviet target back in the day - so probably won't be around.
The surprise after a nuclear war might well be how much of the world population is completely unscathed. Economic and market meltdown of course, but otherwise life will go on. That applies to the entire Southern Hemisphere and probably - if this were a Russia v NATO war - the whole of the tropics with nothing South of Miami, Hawaii and possibly Okinawa being hit. In other words about 3/4 of the world's surface untouched.
You've heard of the concept of Nuclear Winter?
So, you're saying that it reverses global warming too?
You can just imagine the lardy **** going 'No problem your sheikness, looks like a totally sensible biz decision to me'
The mother of a P&O worker told a Mirror sister title that P&O staff were told they had "five minutes to get their stuff and get off the ships".
P&O staff were told they were being laid off by a pre-recorded video message. The message said: "Your final day of employment is today. I do accept that there are no words that can make the situation any better today. I realise that this will have come as a shock to you, and we will provide you with all of the ongoing support possible."
He then confirmed that all serving crew members would be replaced by a third party company.
Labour MP Diana Johnson told the Commons today: "I understand from the RMT union that these agency staff, mainly from overseas, are in buses on the quayside with a security firm... wearing balaclavas and taking British crew off these ships.
Presumably P&O requires some form of licence to operate, and that the conditions require a level of basic humanity and respect for U.K. law and norms. If so, I suggest it is withdrawn.
I wonder if an analyst in the Kremlin is currently really sorry by our unusual cross-channel ferry movements today.
NB: Never using them again, the bastards.
P&O are losing money on their cross channel services. What should they do?
I dunno, act like grownups and have a proper approach to consultation and redundancies and not sack all of its staff like a Corbynites idea of a comicbook industrialist.
Indeed. With zero notice period too. The PM met with the UAE yesterday. Is this a quid pro quo?
Hardly but it explains the timing - wait until the PM has left.
Going back to the question of what P&O should have done.
1) try to make a profit 2) shut down completely
but at the very least - properly restructure the company and follow UK law...
The firm's name is going to be mud, and I expect they'll lose customers over this. A masterstroke of the business world on a par with Putin's grasp of political strategy?
I believe Ipsos MORI or Kantar do a similar style question every so often for the UK with similar levels of completely wrong.
21% transgender is perhaps the most striking figure of ignorance. But it is a crowded field.
I find that one explicable - if you go by the amount of copy the issue gets in the papers and on social media 21% of the population being transgender would feel about right.
The one that knocks me out is 30% live in New York. I mean, ok, it is the BIG Apple, but still.
But the destinations - Siberia, the Urals, Bunkerland - remain a concern
You – and others – will drive yourself stark raving mad by following every possible twitter 'lead' of this war. I implore you – as an act of kindness, PBer to fellow PBer – to get outside and enjoy this glorious London spring day. Step away from social media. Let the sun hit your skin.
Just returned from hospital. Plaster off, stitches out, boot on. Another 4 weeks without standing on it. Thumbs up for other leg.
Is that good news? You seem pleased but that sounds quite drastic. What did you do?
My foot is on the mend, thank you. Wearing shoes is still uncomfortable and I haven't walked more than about 100 yards at a time but as I can work from home it's actually not that major an inconvenience. Nothing to suggest it won't heal perfectly well and that it'll be entirely comfortable in a couple of weeks.
Yep pretty good news. I broke both my legs, one badly, 3 weeks ago. Just fell over. Pathetic. Left leg is now ok to put weight on. Only one broken bone and not weight bearing. Boot came off today. Multiple breaks in other leg. Pinned 2 weeks ago. 10 days in hospital prior to that. Plaster off today and boot put on.
NHS were fantastic.
Some people will do anything to avoid a WW3 reservist call up.
Is it even possible to turn Russia into North Korea? Russia's borders are nearly 58,000 km long. Now, if the whole 200,000 strong army was tasked with patrolling it, that would give each soldier 250m of border to patrol. But he can't be doing it 24 hours a day, at least not at the same time as invading Ukraine. Realistically, at any one time, we're looking at no more than 1 soldier per kilometre. I suppose you'd prioritise, and assume not that many Russians will be escaping to China - even so, locking down a country that large is going to take some doing. And this isn't 1917 - Russians have seen the outside world. They know what they are missing. If it weren't so terrifying it would be fascinating to see what Putin is going to attempt here. Because it surely isn't going to work.
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
There's a Pascal's wager thing going on here. It is safe to predict things won't go nuclear, because nobody's going to have time to pick you up on it if you are wrong.
Yep. Although this site is so strange and special I can imagine us arguing away about who made the best call right up to the point of the Bomb dropping - and maybe just for a couple of minutes afterwards. Wonder who would get the Last Post? There's an obvious odds-on favourite, isn't there?
Assuming the internet is still up, it'll be grim when the surviving PBers are left speculating which of our fellow posters have been taken out by the nuclear strike. I'm fairly near Heathrow airport - rumoured to be a Soviet target back in the day - so probably won't be around.
The surprise after a nuclear war might well be how much of the world population is completely unscathed. Economic and market meltdown of course, but otherwise life will go on. That applies to the entire Southern Hemisphere and probably - if this were a Russia v NATO war - the whole of the tropics with nothing South of Miami, Hawaii and possibly Okinawa being hit. In other words about 3/4 of the world's surface untouched.
You've heard of the concept of Nuclear Winter?
So, you're saying that it reverses global warming too?
You can just imagine the lardy **** going 'No problem your sheikness, looks like a totally sensible biz decision to me'
The mother of a P&O worker told a Mirror sister title that P&O staff were told they had "five minutes to get their stuff and get off the ships".
P&O staff were told they were being laid off by a pre-recorded video message. The message said: "Your final day of employment is today. I do accept that there are no words that can make the situation any better today. I realise that this will have come as a shock to you, and we will provide you with all of the ongoing support possible."
He then confirmed that all serving crew members would be replaced by a third party company.
Labour MP Diana Johnson told the Commons today: "I understand from the RMT union that these agency staff, mainly from overseas, are in buses on the quayside with a security firm... wearing balaclavas and taking British crew off these ships.
I am not sure why she has to make the point they are from overseas. That's all a bit "coming here, taking our jobs", but if this is true it is appalling.
I wonder if an analyst in the Kremlin is currently really sorry by our unusual cross-channel ferry movements today.
NB: Never using them again, the bastards.
P&O are losing money on their cross channel services. What should they do?
I dunno, act like grownups and have a proper approach to consultation and redundancies and not sack all of its staff like a Corbynite’s idea of a comicbook industrialist.
The way they are doing it is very hamfisted, true, but the point is surely that covid restrictions f8cked P&O's business and the customers have not returned. Plus, people have less money for travel because of inflation and impending tax rises for the NHS.
I don't see what option the company has, given the trading environment they have been served up by the government. What do they expect?
Last week, I read critiques of my position on Putin’s rationality and possibility of nuclear war. Many are not realist enough about the nuclear threat or the right response. I argue in this thread that if we “blink” on Putin’s nuclear threat, we will increase the risk of WWIII. https://twitter.com/andreivkozyrev/status/1503404009142423558
That's sound but I'm not sure the US response can fairly be described as 'blinking'. They've laid a clear red line - NATO territory - and I can't see why Putin would doubt this based on US rhetoric and actions thus far.
The basic problem is that Putin isn't Thatcher. He might well be prepared to use nukes rather than lose power.
In which case there's nothing we can do. But I assess the possibility as remote. Far far more likely is he's seeking to promote exactly that belief you articulate. That he's mad enough to do it. The more we buy into this the more potent is the blackmail.
How do you assess the possibility as remote? You have no no data for that.
Unless you are Putin's personal head shrinker....
A lot of people assessed the chances of an Actual Ukrainian Invasion as “remote”
TBF inc me. I was quite shocked by it. It didn't seem to make sense (for Putin) therefore I thought it wouldn't happen. So perhaps my usual abilities are malfunctioning on this one. Perhaps him going nuclear is more than a remote possibility. Perhaps the unthinkable is actually going to happen. Oh please let it not be so. I hate being wrong on PB.
There's a Pascal's wager thing going on here. It is safe to predict things won't go nuclear, because nobody's going to have time to pick you up on it if you are wrong.
Yep. Although this site is so strange and special I can imagine us arguing away about who made the best call right up to the point of the Bomb dropping - and maybe just for a couple of minutes afterwards. Wonder who would get the Last Post? There's an obvious odds-on favourite, isn't there?
Assuming the internet is still up, it'll be grim when the surviving PBers are left speculating which of our fellow posters have been taken out by the nuclear strike. I'm fairly near Heathrow airport - rumoured to be a Soviet target back in the day - so probably won't be around.
The surprise after a nuclear war might well be how much of the world population is completely unscathed. Economic and market meltdown of course, but otherwise life will go on. That applies to the entire Southern Hemisphere and probably - if this were a Russia v NATO war - the whole of the tropics with nothing South of Miami, Hawaii and possibly Okinawa being hit. In other words about 3/4 of the world's surface untouched.
You've heard of the concept of Nuclear Winter?
So, you're saying that it reverses global warming too?
That’s why I think we have to keep Greta on the “evil masterminds” suspect list.
Schwarzenegger is quite an incredible communicator.
That was excellent.
Schwarzenegger for the Nobel peace prize?
As an aside, I listened to a podcast with Arnie a few weeks ago. He is a really excellent communicator. The conversation was about Winston Churchill, of all things.
Is it even possible to turn Russia into North Korea? Russia's borders are nearly 58,000 km long. Now, if the whole 200,000 strong army was tasked with patrolling it, that would give each soldier 250m of border to patrol. But he can't be doing it 24 hours a day, at least not at the same time as invading Ukraine. Realistically, at any one time, we're looking at no more than 1 soldier per kilometre. I suppose you'd prioritise, and assume not that many Russians will be escaping to China - even so, locking down a country that large is going to take some doing. And this isn't 1917 - Russians have seen the outside world. They know what they are missing. If it weren't so terrifying it would be fascinating to see what Putin is going to attempt here. Because it surely isn't going to work.
Small nuclear exchange first to reduce the size of the habitable country?
Just returned from hospital. Plaster off, stitches out, boot on. Another 4 weeks without standing on it. Thumbs up for other leg.
Is that good news? You seem pleased but that sounds quite drastic. What did you do?
My foot is on the mend, thank you. Wearing shoes is still uncomfortable and I haven't walked more than about 100 yards at a time but as I can work from home it's actually not that major an inconvenience. Nothing to suggest it won't heal perfectly well and that it'll be entirely comfortable in a couple of weeks.
Yep pretty good news. I broke both my legs, one badly, 3 weeks ago. Just fell over. Pathetic. Left leg is now ok to put weight on. Only one broken bone and not weight bearing. Boot came off today. Multiple breaks in other leg. Pinned 2 weeks ago. 10 days in hospital prior to that. Plaster off today and boot put on.
NHS were fantastic.
You - fell over - and broke both your legs?! That's spectacularly unlucky. Glad you're on the mend.
But the destinations - Siberia, the Urals, Bunkerland - remain a concern
You – and others – will drive yourself stark raving mad by following every possible twitter 'lead' of this war. I implore you – as an act of kindness, PBer to fellow PBer – to get outside and enjoy this glorious London spring day. Step away from social media. Let the sun hit your skin.
Comments
An interesting option would be an overwhelming response with conventional weapons, wiping out a large chunk of the Russian invasion forces with precision weaponry but stopping short of using nuclear. It would mean only one side had crossed the Rubicon. Whether that would be militarily and logistically possible I don't know.
Worst possible crime.
The most reassuring thing that I've seen said on it is that US/UK intelligence agencies have been very on the ball so far with all of this - see predicting the invasion when few people really believed it.
I'm not seeing anything about US reservists being recalled or their strategic forces being readied, which suggests they don't think anything requires that. If we do start seeing a general mobilisation or something then it's time to panic.
The Tories started 2m votes ahead and added a further 2.3m votes. So whilst +3.5m votes is impressive, its still moving from fewer votes than the Tories to fewer votes than the Tories. So what is the general allegation, that the party managed to conspire to lose the scores of seats needed to win a majority of 1? Or conspired to drive vast numbers to vote Tory?
Personally I do have a little experience in how the 2017 election works. I was a member of the 4-piece team who conceived, wrote and executed the campaign that got Paul Williams elected. Defeating an actual Tory and replacing him with a Labour MP.
Make it clear there can be no safety for anyone involved with further uses. Carrot and stick.
Perhaps. Or perhaps not.
If so, I'd foresee a massive strike to eliminate all Russian armour in Ukraine and probably also Belarus, coupled with constant communication with the Russian generals in charge of the Russian nukes explaining the limits of the war and that, if they refrain from any further nuclear strikes, Russia will survive, as will the Russian military assets in Russia. I.e. your lives in return for ending the war and occupation of Ukraine (and Belarus)
Plata O Plutonio
Caveat emptor with this next tweet. I'm not sure WHY this is a "bad omen", without context. It is quite likely Russian planes do this every day?
"Bad omen, 2 X Russian Air Force Ilyushin IL-76MD RFF9923/RA-78831 en route to #Kaliningrad."
https://twitter.com/GDarkconrad/status/1504434445297897475?s=20&t=G1OYDeqhCd_txy6oJPwe_A
Or, shrug and get on with our lives.
After the fascist speech comes the purges:
"Human rights lawyer Daniil Berman says state investigators in Moscow have been told tacitly to wrap up all their economic crimes cases ASAP because next month they’ll be inundated with new cases against various “traitors.” Putin’s Terror is coming if it isn’t already here. He says he got this information from an insider in the security forces."
Plus I can't smell anything now.
The theory touted below that tweet is that these are unusually big planes, designed for carrying heavy shit. So maybe the Russians are preparing a nuke missile in Kaliningrad?
Again, I have no idea if this is a credible interpretation. The guy sending out these tweets seems to be an "amateur geopolitical strategist", not a pro military analyst
He has got 38k followers tho
I’m on Allaho, Champ & Sire du Berlais singles & acca.
Good luck to all!
https://twitter.com/RadarOps/status/1504445649743400966
OSINTAvWxRx ✪
@RadarOps
US Strategic Response Over CONUS:
STABLE 🟢🟢🟢
No additional C2 aircraft airborne.
"That @HYUFD post above is the greatest post of the month. It could be written by Armando Ianucci or Graham Linehan or one of those fellas. In five pithy sentences he brilliantly satirises internet arguments. I keep reading it and re-reading it and cannot stop laughing. I want to point out the best bits but there is none of it which isn'tthe best bits. It's utter genius."
"-The movements of Russian government VIP planes, of course, are rare, if I gave an answer it would only be speculative.
-The two RuAF IL76 on the way to kaliningrad are not a good sign and I don't think the Russians are withdrawing troops from there."
https://twitter.com/GDarkconrad/status/1504439743353872389?s=20&t=G1OYDeqhCd_txy6oJPwe_A
A friend of a friend is still on his boat, discussion going on about closing down the engine or something. Apparently 15% of our freight comes in on P&O; a protracted industrial struggle is going to supercharge those inflation numbers. Perhaps.
The Russians put nuclear weapons in Kaliningrad years ago.
NB: Never using them again, the bastards.
Just returned from hospital. Plaster off, stitches out, boot on. Another 4 weeks without standing on it. Thumbs up for other leg.
(Not that I know that's the issue; but only a very small number of BA flights are UK-to-UK.)
Three independent sources report that the deputy chief of Russia's Rosgvardia (a unit of RU's interior army which has had tremendous losses in Ukraine), Gen. Roman Gavrilov has been detained by FSB. Gavrilov had also previously worked in FSO, Putin's security service.
https://twitter.com/christogrozev/status/1504440205352349700
Schwarzenegger is quite an incredible communicator.
Now, it's entirely possible that - because Omicron is so infectious - that R0 only coms down to (say) 2 with compulsory masking. It's also fine to say that, given high levels of natural immunity and vaccinations, then the benefits of compulsory masking are outweighed by its costs.
But it is clearly rubbish to claim - without evidence - that it does nothing to reduce transmission rates.
And in countries with limited natural immunity (*cough* China) it it probably essential to minimise viral load recieved by the immune naïve, and slow the spread of the disease.
P&O are losing money on their cross channel services. What should they do?
I think we should recognize that are in a low-level war with Iran, and will be, as long as the current government there is in power.
On Kaliningrad, it would be a good place for Putin to do a nuclear false flag attack on himself. It's part of Russia but actually a fair distance from real Russia
Then he can justify a retaliatory strike on Europe. Probably drop one on Cicero in Estonia. Or Poland.
My foot is on the mend, thank you. Wearing shoes is still uncomfortable and I haven't walked more than about 100 yards at a time but as I can work from home it's actually not that major an inconvenience. Nothing to suggest it won't heal perfectly well and that it'll be entirely comfortable in a couple of weeks.
Says he will not allow Police access.
Could get messy.
Source is Karl Turner MP via Guardian business blog.
All officers sacked too.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2022/mar/17/bank-of-england-interest-rates-inflation-oil-markets-sterling-russia-bond-payments-business-live
The federal mask mandate is stupid anyway, hopefully they shit can it soon. They seem to be dropping like flies all across Europe.
https://twitter.com/dylanmatt/status/1504148689396412419
I believe Ipsos MORI or Kantar do a similar style question every so often for the UK with similar levels of completely wrong.
Ydoethur did a good response at 7.09. There are plenty more.
With zero notice period too.
The PM met with the UAE yesterday.
Is this a quid pro quo?
Still - even 12-13% is pretty impressive given the time of year, etc.
Going back to the question of what P&O should have done.
1) try to make a profit
2) shut down completely
but at the very least - properly restructure the company and follow UK law...
But it is a crowded field.
Yesterday, BA said it was dropping masking on routes where neither the source or the destination government mandated it. Great. i.e. BA would no longer impose masking rules of its own.
What appears to have happened is that several passengers have boarded flights without masks, and now someone, somewhere, has decided that, um, after all, we will continue to impose a mask mandate of our own regardless of the law at either the source or the destination.
It is BA and BA only causing this ludicrous confusion – it has nothing to do with laws because on routes where national masking laws applied BA's demasking policy was never in force in the first place!
NHS were fantastic.
P&O staff were told they were being laid off by a pre-recorded video message. The message said: "Your final day of employment is today. I do accept that there are no words that can make the situation any better today. I realise that this will have come as a shock to you, and we will provide you with all of the ongoing support possible."
He then confirmed that all serving crew members would be replaced by a third party company.
Labour MP Diana Johnson told the Commons today: "I understand from the RMT union that these agency staff, mainly from overseas, are in buses on the quayside with a security firm... wearing balaclavas and taking British crew off these ships.
"Evergreen Intel
@vcdgf555
·
55m
Now some of those Rossiya flights are returning to Moscow or have already arrived.
This behavior happens EVERY DAY. The only thing that has changed is their direction, starting off towards the east, due to air restrictions.
In short, I wouldn't run off to your bunker over this."
https://twitter.com/vcdgf555/status/1504449221092544513?s=20&t=4Ipw2KhKBxCDTBkCdWW3pg
But the destinations - Siberia, the Urals, Bunkerland - remain a concern
None of the famously reasonable NI politicians are happy.
The one that knocks me out is 30% live in New York. I mean, ok, it is the BIG Apple, but still.
Russia's borders are nearly 58,000 km long. Now, if the whole 200,000 strong army was tasked with patrolling it, that would give each soldier 250m of border to patrol. But he can't be doing it 24 hours a day, at least not at the same time as invading Ukraine. Realistically, at any one time, we're looking at no more than 1 soldier per kilometre. I suppose you'd prioritise, and assume not that many Russians will be escaping to China - even so, locking down a country that large is going to take some doing. And this isn't 1917 - Russians have seen the outside world. They know what they are missing.
If it weren't so terrifying it would be fascinating to see what Putin is going to attempt here. Because it surely isn't going to work.
I don't see what option the company has, given the trading environment they have been served up by the government. What do they expect?
Schwarzenegger for the Nobel peace prize?
As an aside, I listened to a podcast with Arnie a few weeks ago. He is a really excellent communicator. The conversation was about Winston Churchill, of all things.
https://www.podchaser.com/podcasts/dan-snows-history-hit-3895/episodes/arnold-schwarzenegger-on-churc-105998479