I watched it last night. It’s absolutely grim. I advise against
But it is only going to strengthen Ukrainian resolve against the Russians. Why would you ever surrender if this is your likely fate?
The war can only worsen
We have well-meaning debate on PB about the best option for Ukraine, but the political reality is that they can't enter into negotiations with videos like that going round.
It would be to betray the people who have put everything on the line for their country.
Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss for Tory leadership
He writes in The Times that her tax cuts are based on 'true conservative principles' & that she can unite party
Significant as Tugendhat is popular with Tory members & a senior figure in the One Nation group
Or 'Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss in a bid to become Foreign Secretary'
It's a move of weakness - he's seen the way the wind is blowing and is trying to ingratiate himself with the new leader and Prime Minister. It's so transparent it's embarrassing.
Tugendhat has debased himself and undermined his future leadership potential by this act of political cowardice.
Just discovered that you can get UKTV for free, and they carry The World at War documentary series. That's Friday night sorted!
Badly needs updating, mind.
Oh yes, it's showing its age now but I still think it's the Gold Standard of WWII documentaries. It's the one that all others wish to be, and the first-hand accounts are both invaluable and impossible to replicate now. Someone might make something better, but no one could make it again.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I think Kent should be way higher, it really is the garden of England and by far the loveliest place you can get to from London in under an hour. I would put Cornwall higher too, but perhaps that's just because I am there right now and it is absolutely glorious! You clearly love the North West, despite the near-constant rain. For me the trouble with this part of England is that it just seems an inferior version of what is available north of the border. Perhaps this is why I prefer the beautiful bits of England down south, which are quite different from the wild, stark beauty of the Scottish Highlands and Islands (for me the most beautiful part of these Isles - and if I was forced to be more specific I would say Skye).
Yes, I do see your point. My view is that Scotland is bigger, but I prefer the North of England. More lived in, more human. You can be at the top of a mountain, but you're never more than an hour's walk from the pub.
But I think formative experiences guide preferences, and my view is entirely subjective.
Pleased to hear Cornwall is glorious! I shall be arriving next Friday.
there are no mountains in England, only hills
Really? What's the cutoff? To be honest, whatever the cut off, there is only one summit which feels like a mountain in England: Scafell Pike. I don't wish to denigrate the others: there are some might fine hills and a mighty fine hill is a fine thing to be. But Skiddaw, Helvellyn, Cross Fell, the Cheviot, Kinder Scout, Black Hill, High Willhays... have the bearing of big hills, not small mountains. I do not find them lacking for this.
It's hard to describe Stac Pollaidh as a hill. I hold the controversial view that it's not all about size.
If @UKLabour members knew before they voted that @Keir_Starmer would do the opposite of what he promised to win their votes then he would not be the Labour leader today.
Starmer committed Political fraud to win the leadership contest, therefore his mandate is not legitimate.
Time for the Unions to bankrupt his shit show of a Party
Absolute nonsense.
It was absolutely clear who the candidate of continuity Corbyn was (RLB) and who the candidate of turning the page was (Starmer).
You can say you don't agree with how he's gone about it, and that's fine. But they idea that it was some kind of fraud is utterly ludicrous.
You do talk bollocks
10 pledges was continuity Corbyn whilst uniting the Party
Done the complete opposite of course
You're living in a fantasy world. If anyone chose Starmer over RLB as they wanted continuity Corbyn, they want their head examined and always did.
Look, I don't mind that you disagree with him, and you may have a point, but the Trumpian "Stop the steal" stuff... come on.
As big a liar as Boris
Do you support Nationalisation Yes before No after
Do you stand on Picket Lines in Solidarity with Trade Unions Yes before No after
I will unite all wings of the Party before I will do the total opposite now
Total fraud of a Politician and totally not to be trusted
There is a basic problem with this argument. He lied to win the leadership election. But he didn't lie to he British people or to all the voters that Labour need to win back.
He lied to you.
And there are millions of voters out there who don't mind that he had to lie to get elected if he could then make Labour electable again. Boris lies to the people. That is bad. Starmer lied to the hard left. That is ok.
I'm not sure you can lead a party by lying to the majority of its membership. If Starmer can triangulate his way to PM fine, but the foundations are shaky.
The membership didn't want Blair's old ideas and the country seems v-unsure.
Hang on - so many hard left members have left in disgust. Like BJO. So they aren't around any more to be a problem. And AIUI the bulk of the remaining members are quite happy with the maskirovka employed to take back control from the lunatics.
Look at Corbyn's two leadership elections support from 50%+. If you consider at least half of the labour party loons I would say you're pretty close to the wire.
My reading of the party is that the membership isn't overjoyed by Starmer's tactics and can smell Blair's influence. They can see the strategy, but than so can everyone else. The party is supposed to stand for labour. And the one time the country may actually want to see workers receive a little more, the leadership is too frightened to support them.
If the Labour party won't capture the moment than what is the point of them?
I voted for Corbyn in 2015. Mea Culpa. Mea Maxima Culpa. Then woke up and realised just how desperate it was. So voted for the other guy when Jezbollah was challenged. Then left completely.
You say that the party is supposed to stand for labour. True - but it is supposed to represent labour in government to make significant and lasting changes to the country. If Labour sits in endless opposition then it has failed. You mention Blair like a negative - two landslides and a big majority suggests otherwise...
I see Blair as a negative now. Twenty years ago, yes a positive! But I don't believe that the electoral strategy of the New-Labour era will work in this moment.
I think I understand your point and I know that to get in to power you must be amenable to a swathe of the country and the older demographics. But to surrender the core of your party looks weak. And I think it looks weak to those who might vote for Labour, especially as their finances become less secure. What is the point of a party that won't fight for you like the Cons fight for the retired?
Starmer will be challenged by the Conservatives next political vehicle. Boris has eaten their sins and Truss might well win!
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I think Kent should be way higher, it really is the garden of England and by far the loveliest place you can get to from London in under an hour. I would put Cornwall higher too, but perhaps that's just because I am there right now and it is absolutely glorious! You clearly love the North West, despite the near-constant rain. For me the trouble with this part of England is that it just seems an inferior version of what is available north of the border. Perhaps this is why I prefer the beautiful bits of England down south, which are quite different from the wild, stark beauty of the Scottish Highlands and Islands (for me the most beautiful part of these Isles - and if I was forced to be more specific I would say Skye).
Yes, I do see your point. My view is that Scotland is bigger, but I prefer the North of England. More lived in, more human. You can be at the top of a mountain, but you're never more than an hour's walk from the pub.
But I think formative experiences guide preferences, and my view is entirely subjective.
Pleased to hear Cornwall is glorious! I shall be arriving next Friday.
Because this is the sort of thing I cannot help doing, I have ranked all 39 historical English counties for loveliness. Necessarily highly subjective and almost solely an aesthetic thing - it doesn't take into account how much fun you can have there. Middlesex comes bottom only because being entirely urban it is sui generis - of course lots about London is lovely.
The general pattern is the west and north are lovelier. To me, anyway. I can well appreciate that to some the ideal will be the big open skies of Norfolk or the soft rolling hills of Oxfordshire.
I think Kent should be way higher, it really is the garden of England and by far the loveliest place you can get to from London in under an hour. I would put Cornwall higher too, but perhaps that's just because I am there right now and it is absolutely glorious! You clearly love the North West, despite the near-constant rain. For me the trouble with this part of England is that it just seems an inferior version of what is available north of the border. Perhaps this is why I prefer the beautiful bits of England down south, which are quite different from the wild, stark beauty of the Scottish Highlands and Islands (for me the most beautiful part of these Isles - and if I was forced to be more specific I would say Skye).
Yes, I do see your point. My view is that Scotland is bigger, but I prefer the North of England. More lived in, more human. You can be at the top of a mountain, but you're never more than an hour's walk from the pub.
But I think formative experiences guide preferences, and my view is entirely subjective.
Pleased to hear Cornwall is glorious! I shall be arriving next Friday.
there are no mountains in England, only hills
Really? What's the cutoff? To be honest, whatever the cut off, there is only one summit which feels like a mountain in England: Scafell Pike. I don't wish to denigrate the others: there are some might fine hills and a mighty fine hill is a fine thing to be. But Skiddaw, Helvellyn, Cross Fell, the Cheviot, Kinder Scout, Black Hill, High Willhays... have the bearing of big hills, not small mountains. I do not find them lacking for this.
Anything 1,000m above sea level was what I was told in the scouts.
We've gone from discussing what is a city to what is a mountain seamlessly. What is a table? Does it carry an innate tableness qua table? How about a chair? What if you sit on a table? Or sit on the floor and place your food on a chair? I hear Neighbours was good.
"#Azov militants deserve execution, but death not by firing squad but by hanging, because they’re not real soldiers. They deserve a humiliating death. A married couple from #Mariupol tell how they were shelled by 🇺🇦forces from #Azovstal. #StopNaziUkraine"
If @UKLabour members knew before they voted that @Keir_Starmer would do the opposite of what he promised to win their votes then he would not be the Labour leader today.
Starmer committed Political fraud to win the leadership contest, therefore his mandate is not legitimate.
Time for the Unions to bankrupt his shit show of a Party
Absolute nonsense.
It was absolutely clear who the candidate of continuity Corbyn was (RLB) and who the candidate of turning the page was (Starmer).
You can say you don't agree with how he's gone about it, and that's fine. But they idea that it was some kind of fraud is utterly ludicrous.
You do talk bollocks
10 pledges was continuity Corbyn whilst uniting the Party
Done the complete opposite of course
You're living in a fantasy world. If anyone chose Starmer over RLB as they wanted continuity Corbyn, they want their head examined and always did.
Look, I don't mind that you disagree with him, and you may have a point, but the Trumpian "Stop the steal" stuff... come on.
As big a liar as Boris
Do you support Nationalisation Yes before No after
Do you stand on Picket Lines in Solidarity with Trade Unions Yes before No after
I will unite all wings of the Party before I will do the total opposite now
Total fraud of a Politician and totally not to be trusted
There is a basic problem with this argument. He lied to win the leadership election. But he didn't lie to he British people or to all the voters that Labour need to win back.
He lied to you.
And there are millions of voters out there who don't mind that he had to lie to get elected if he could then make Labour electable again. Boris lies to the people. That is bad. Starmer lied to the hard left. That is ok.
I'm not sure you can lead a party by lying to the majority of its membership. If Starmer can triangulate his way to PM fine, but the foundations are shaky.
The membership didn't want Blair's old ideas and the country seems v-unsure.
Hang on - so many hard left members have left in disgust. Like BJO. So they aren't around any more to be a problem. And AIUI the bulk of the remaining members are quite happy with the maskirovka employed to take back control from the lunatics.
Look at Corbyn's two leadership elections support from 50%+. If you consider at least half of the labour party loons I would say you're pretty close to the wire.
My reading of the party is that the membership isn't overjoyed by Starmer's tactics and can smell Blair's influence. They can see the strategy, but than so can everyone else. The party is supposed to stand for labour. And the one time the country may actually want to see workers receive a little more, the leadership is too frightened to support them.
If the Labour party won't capture the moment than what is the point of them?
I voted for Corbyn in 2015. Mea Culpa. Mea Maxima Culpa. Then woke up and realised just how desperate it was. So voted for the other guy when Jezbollah was challenged. Then left completely.
You say that the party is supposed to stand for labour. True - but it is supposed to represent labour in government to make significant and lasting changes to the country. If Labour sits in endless opposition then it has failed. You mention Blair like a negative - two landslides and a big majority suggests otherwise...
I see Blair as a negative now. Twenty years ago, yes a positive! But I don't believe that the electoral strategy of the New-Labour era will work in this moment.
I think I understand your point and I know that to get in to power you must be amenable to a swathe of the country and the older demographics. But to surrender the core of your party looks weak. And I think it looks weak to those who might vote for Labour, especially as their finances become less secure. What is the point of a party that won't fight for you like the Cons fight for the retired?
Starmer will be challenged by the Conservatives next political vehicle. Boris has eaten their sins and Truss might well win!
I don't see the hard left as the core of anything. There was big influx of people post-2015 and so many of them were lunatics who were focused on the success of Corbyn as opposed to the party.
It doesn't bother me any more - I have no skin in the game. But the country needs an opposition that is electable. He wasn't, they don't care, so frankly he is right to ignore them.
As for Blair, the past can never just be copy pasted. But a lot of the centre ground pragmatism from the Blair era would do us all a lot of good now What works, rather than what is pure.
< Look at Corbyn's two leadership elections support from 50%+. If you consider at least half of the labour party loons I would say you're pretty close to the wire.
My reading of the party is that the membership isn't overjoyed by Starmer's tactics and can smell Blair's influence. They can see the strategy, but than so can everyone else. The party is supposed to stand for labour. And the one time the country may actually want to see workers receive a little more, the leadership is too frightened to support them.
If the Labour party won't capture the moment than what is the point of them?
This shouldn't need spelling out on a Political Betting site but the "point" of the Labour Party is exactly the same as the point of the Conservative Party - to get into Government. I could add some guff about setting out policies to improve the life of and the governance of this country but I won't bother because it's not true.
Both parties exist to be in power - the truth is neither has a clue what to do once in Government but that's not the point. The point is to be in charge, to be important, to be the ones listened to, the ones feted, the ones to whom deference is given.
The trappings of power enforce the pursuit of power but it's no longer a means to an end, it has become an end certainly for the Conservatives and ditto, I suspect, for Labour.
Starmer wants to be Prime Minister, not because he has a radical and positive vision for the country (Truss clearly doesn't and neither does Sunak) but because he wants to have the trappings of office.
If Labour wins next time, it won't make much difference for the vast majority of people and convincing people of that is Starmer's challenge. People will vote Labour if they don't fear Labour - Corbyn terrified people and Johnson benefitted, Blair scared no one and Major, Hague and Howard all paid the price.
Starmer has to present a Labour which is safe, unthreatening and boring - people will vote for that in droves. It may not be what @bigjohnowls wants but that's unimportant - it's what wins elections and office for Labour that matters.
Thanks for the reply. This might be a little glib but I'm not sure boring wins in this era. Boring policy maybe, but boring candidates too?
If we are debating 'glories of England' (and I think this one is England, but perhaps also Wales), I'd point to the public footpath network of 230km of paths - nearly 2km to each square km of land.
Friends tell that such do not exist to anything like the same extent elsewhere. It is one of the ways we cope with a lot of people in a small space.
Even near somewhere as suburban as NPXMP-land, I can still find several example of old Coffin Walks - where coffins had to be taken to consecrated ground. Some with an extent coffin stone - where the party can stop for a rest.
Indeed. And one area where the smart phone is genuine positive thing is the apps that have all the footpaths an odd by ways for routing. For example -
Just discovered that you can get UKTV for free, and they carry The World at War documentary series. That's Friday night sorted!
Badly needs updating, mind.
Oh yes, it's showing its age now but I still think it's the Gold Standard of WWII documentaries. It's the one that all others wish to be, and the first-hand accounts are both invaluable and impossible to replicate now. Someone might make something better, but no one could make it again.
Olivier calls it "The Ukraine" rather than "Ukraine"!
Just discovered that you can get UKTV for free, and they carry The World at War documentary series. That's Friday night sorted!
Badly needs updating, mind.
Oh yes, it's showing its age now but I still think it's the Gold Standard of WWII documentaries. It's the one that all others wish to be, and the first-hand accounts are both invaluable and impossible to replicate now. Someone might make something better, but no one could make it again.
Olivier calls it "The Ukraine" rather than "Ukraine"!
I assumed that the comment about needing updating meant we needed a new episode about Mad Vlad's attempt to recreate the 1940s in eastern Europe down to the finest detail.
A conservative news site has this simple suggestion for the Wagner group: "Another great Mattis line came in 2018, after a Russian Wagner group element attempted to kill American soldiers stationed in northeastern Syria. Then-Secretary of Defense [Jim] Mattis explained to Senators how the Wagner element was then "annihilated."
I watched it last night. It’s absolutely grim. I advise against
But it is only going to strengthen Ukrainian resolve against the Russians. Why would you ever surrender if this is your likely fate?
The war can only worsen
And God help any Russian soldiers captured by Ukranian resistance fighters or villagers now
Yes. They will be burned to death or skinned alive, and who can blame the Ukrainians?
That poor Ukrainian soldier was somebody's son, brother, uncle, father
If it was my son or my brother I could not go to my grave without taking equal revenge on a Russian. In front of me. Personally. The video is that bad
Amazingly the guy who did the castration has allowed himself to be identified, via that video (distinctive hat, etc). His days are numbered, and the number is small. As, indeed, are the days of his close family in Chechnya, I suspect
If @UKLabour members knew before they voted that @Keir_Starmer would do the opposite of what he promised to win their votes then he would not be the Labour leader today.
Starmer committed Political fraud to win the leadership contest, therefore his mandate is not legitimate.
Time for the Unions to bankrupt his shit show of a Party
Absolute nonsense.
It was absolutely clear who the candidate of continuity Corbyn was (RLB) and who the candidate of turning the page was (Starmer).
You can say you don't agree with how he's gone about it, and that's fine. But they idea that it was some kind of fraud is utterly ludicrous.
You do talk bollocks
10 pledges was continuity Corbyn whilst uniting the Party
Done the complete opposite of course
You're living in a fantasy world. If anyone chose Starmer over RLB as they wanted continuity Corbyn, they want their head examined and always did.
Look, I don't mind that you disagree with him, and you may have a point, but the Trumpian "Stop the steal" stuff... come on.
As big a liar as Boris
Do you support Nationalisation Yes before No after
Do you stand on Picket Lines in Solidarity with Trade Unions Yes before No after
I will unite all wings of the Party before I will do the total opposite now
Total fraud of a Politician and totally not to be trusted
There is a basic problem with this argument. He lied to win the leadership election. But he didn't lie to he British people or to all the voters that Labour need to win back.
He lied to you.
And there are millions of voters out there who don't mind that he had to lie to get elected if he could then make Labour electable again. Boris lies to the people. That is bad. Starmer lied to the hard left. That is ok.
I'm not sure you can lead a party by lying to the majority of its membership. If Starmer can triangulate his way to PM fine, but the foundations are shaky.
The membership didn't want Blair's old ideas and the country seems v-unsure.
Hang on - so many hard left members have left in disgust. Like BJO. So they aren't around any more to be a problem. And AIUI the bulk of the remaining members are quite happy with the maskirovka employed to take back control from the lunatics.
Look at Corbyn's two leadership elections support from 50%+. If you consider at least half of the labour party loons I would say you're pretty close to the wire.
My reading of the party is that the membership isn't overjoyed by Starmer's tactics and can smell Blair's influence. They can see the strategy, but than so can everyone else. The party is supposed to stand for labour. And the one time the country may actually want to see workers receive a little more, the leadership is too frightened to support them.
If the Labour party won't capture the moment than what is the point of them?
I voted for Corbyn in 2015. Mea Culpa. Mea Maxima Culpa. Then woke up and realised just how desperate it was. So voted for the other guy when Jezbollah was challenged. Then left completely.
You say that the party is supposed to stand for labour. True - but it is supposed to represent labour in government to make significant and lasting changes to the country. If Labour sits in endless opposition then it has failed. You mention Blair like a negative - two landslides and a big majority suggests otherwise...
I see Blair as a negative now. Twenty years ago, yes a positive! But I don't believe that the electoral strategy of the New-Labour era will work in this moment.
I think I understand your point and I know that to get in to power you must be amenable to a swathe of the country and the older demographics. But to surrender the core of your party looks weak. And I think it looks weak to those who might vote for Labour, especially as their finances become less secure. What is the point of a party that won't fight for you like the Cons fight for the retired?
Starmer will be challenged by the Conservatives next political vehicle. Boris has eaten their sins and Truss might well win!
I don't see the hard left as the core of anything. There was big influx of people post-2015 and so many of them were lunatics who were focused on the success of Corbyn as opposed to the party.
It doesn't bother me any more - I have no skin in the game. But the country needs an opposition that is electable. He wasn't, they don't care, so frankly he is right to ignore them.
As for Blair, the past can never just be copy pasted. But a lot of the centre ground pragmatism from the Blair era would do us all a lot of good now What works, rather than what is pure.
I don't want Corbyn back, but people do need to have something to believe in. If not willing to speak up for the workers, what is the point of Labour?
It's difficult. There's no point if you can't get elected. Blair saw that. On the other hand, there is little point if it's all going to be the same but more competent. That was Blair, too. There may be a market for radical change. The 17 and 19 elections suggests there probably is. The danger is Truss defines it. And leaves Starmer as the status quo candidate. Tricky. How do you present change without being scary? Truss is doing it by worshipping ancient shibboleths.
Just discovered that you can get UKTV for free, and they carry The World at War documentary series. That's Friday night sorted!
Badly needs updating, mind.
Oh yes, it's showing its age now but I still think it's the Gold Standard of WWII documentaries. It's the one that all others wish to be, and the first-hand accounts are both invaluable and impossible to replicate now. Someone might make something better, but no one could make it again.
Olivier calls it "The Ukraine" rather than "Ukraine"!
Au contraire, I've just heard him say 'Kiev, capital of Ukraine'.
Russia has had a very productive day today, galvanising support for Ukraine among wavering European countries by demonstrating just how deranged its world view has become. Way to go, Russian propaganda geniuses!
Important news: the final episode of Neighbours is on Channel 5 tonight at 9pm.
Margot Robbie. Kylie. Harold Bishop. One of these things is not like the others.
No Mrs Mangel or Bouncer the dog? Fuhgeddaboutit.
The ghost of Madge apparently, so anything is possible.
Vivien Gray died 6 years ago so no Mrs Mangel. Bouncer died in a pegging incident in 1997 Apparently a character names their car Bouncer in the final episode though!
What happens in Helsinki stays in Helsinki.
Bouncer was such a hoe
Surprisingly emotional final episode, led by the Kennedys lots of the old cast returned with the backdrop of Toadie's wedding including Harold Bishop, Kylie and Jason, Guy Pearce and brief appearances by Margot Robbie, Holly Valance, Natalie Imbruglia, Jesse Spencer and the ghosts of Madge Bishop and Doug Willis.
The cynic in me would suggest Channel 5 may have won its timeslot for about the first time ever, not much else was on tonight at 9pm
If Nadine Dorries wants to actually do something for British culture she should force the Beeb to recommission it.
Thanks for the reply. This might be a little glib but I'm not sure boring wins in this era. Boring policy maybe, but boring candidates too?
That's not glib - it's extremely pertinent.
If you think a lot of people are worried about the future, whether it's how they are going to pay their energy bills this winter or whether the environmental crisis will so radically affect our lives as to be a near existential event, I'd argue boring and reassuring works very well. No one will buy Johnsonian optimism - that works only in the good times (or against a real threat like Corbyn).
Perhaps the more relevant question is the ideological bankruptcy of both parties. Labour, indeed the whole centre-left, has struggled to come up with an economic model since the GFC. There are tentative signs of a new form of environmentalist social democracy which utilises sustainability as the core for State activity.
As for the Conservatives and centre-right, they fall back on Laffer and tax cuts but this isn't the 1970s. The size and shape of welfare has changed - pensions are a much bigger factor and no centre-right can deliberately impoverish pensions without committing political suicide. During the pandemic, indeed, all pretence at "sound money" went out the window - Sunak taxed, spent and borrowed in a way John McDonnell could only have imagined. We have racked up billions in additional debt for which we will have to pay the interest charges.
Getting the deficit under control - yes, that's possible but with pensions, the NHS, education, defence and the Police seemingly sacrosanct, where do you reduce expenditure? You can cut back on capital/infrastructure spending but that's stupidity otherwise what are you looking at?
I start therefore from the premise neither party has a clue HOW to govern - they just simply want to be IN Government.
I watched it last night. It’s absolutely grim. I advise against
But it is only going to strengthen Ukrainian resolve against the Russians. Why would you ever surrender if this is your likely fate?
The war can only worsen
And God help any Russian soldiers captured by Ukranian resistance fighters or villagers now
Yes. They will be burned to death or skinned alive, and who can blame the Ukrainians?
That poor Ukrainian soldier was somebody's son, brother, uncle, father
If it was my son or my brother I could not go to my grave without taking equal revenge on a Russian. In front of me. Personally. The video is that bad
Amazingly the guy who did the castration has allowed himself to be identified, via that video (distinctive hat, etc). His days are numbered, and the number is small. As, indeed, are the days of his close family in Chechnya, I suspect
"#Azov militants deserve execution, but death not by firing squad but by hanging, because they’re not real soldiers. They deserve a humiliating death. A married couple from #Mariupol tell how they were shelled by 🇺🇦forces from #Azovstal. #StopNaziUkraine"
We should enter the war. Let's get it finished as quickly as possible.
If @UKLabour members knew before they voted that @Keir_Starmer would do the opposite of what he promised to win their votes then he would not be the Labour leader today.
Starmer committed Political fraud to win the leadership contest, therefore his mandate is not legitimate.
Time for the Unions to bankrupt his shit show of a Party
Absolute nonsense.
It was absolutely clear who the candidate of continuity Corbyn was (RLB) and who the candidate of turning the page was (Starmer).
You can say you don't agree with how he's gone about it, and that's fine. But they idea that it was some kind of fraud is utterly ludicrous.
You do talk bollocks
10 pledges was continuity Corbyn whilst uniting the Party
Done the complete opposite of course
You're living in a fantasy world. If anyone chose Starmer over RLB as they wanted continuity Corbyn, they want their head examined and always did.
Look, I don't mind that you disagree with him, and you may have a point, but the Trumpian "Stop the steal" stuff... come on.
As big a liar as Boris
Do you support Nationalisation Yes before No after
Do you stand on Picket Lines in Solidarity with Trade Unions Yes before No after
I will unite all wings of the Party before I will do the total opposite now
Total fraud of a Politician and totally not to be trusted
There is a basic problem with this argument. He lied to win the leadership election. But he didn't lie to he British people or to all the voters that Labour need to win back.
He lied to you.
And there are millions of voters out there who don't mind that he had to lie to get elected if he could then make Labour electable again. Boris lies to the people. That is bad. Starmer lied to the hard left. That is ok.
And there is a chance he is wasn't lying when he ran the leadership. He's actually lying now.
He gets in on a moderate manifesto, but nationalises everything, universal basic income, you name it.
Breaking a promise isn't really lying is it? He could have meant it quite sincerely at the time. You can't lie retrospectively. He's just thought about it and thought 'nah'.
If @UKLabour members knew before they voted that @Keir_Starmer would do the opposite of what he promised to win their votes then he would not be the Labour leader today.
Starmer committed Political fraud to win the leadership contest, therefore his mandate is not legitimate.
Time for the Unions to bankrupt his shit show of a Party
Absolute nonsense.
It was absolutely clear who the candidate of continuity Corbyn was (RLB) and who the candidate of turning the page was (Starmer).
You can say you don't agree with how he's gone about it, and that's fine. But they idea that it was some kind of fraud is utterly ludicrous.
You do talk bollocks
10 pledges was continuity Corbyn whilst uniting the Party
Done the complete opposite of course
You're living in a fantasy world. If anyone chose Starmer over RLB as they wanted continuity Corbyn, they want their head examined and always did.
Look, I don't mind that you disagree with him, and you may have a point, but the Trumpian "Stop the steal" stuff... come on.
As big a liar as Boris
Do you support Nationalisation Yes before No after
Do you stand on Picket Lines in Solidarity with Trade Unions Yes before No after
I will unite all wings of the Party before I will do the total opposite now
Total fraud of a Politician and totally not to be trusted
There is a basic problem with this argument. He lied to win the leadership election. But he didn't lie to he British people or to all the voters that Labour need to win back.
He lied to you.
And there are millions of voters out there who don't mind that he had to lie to get elected if he could then make Labour electable again. Boris lies to the people. That is bad. Starmer lied to the hard left. That is ok.
I'm not sure you can lead a party by lying to the majority of its membership. If Starmer can triangulate his way to PM fine, but the foundations are shaky.
The membership didn't want Blair's old ideas and the country seems v-unsure.
Hang on - so many hard left members have left in disgust. Like BJO. So they aren't around any more to be a problem. And AIUI the bulk of the remaining members are quite happy with the maskirovka employed to take back control from the lunatics.
Look at Corbyn's two leadership elections support from 50%+. If you consider at least half of the labour party loons I would say you're pretty close to the wire.
My reading of the party is that the membership isn't overjoyed by Starmer's tactics and can smell Blair's influence. They can see the strategy, but than so can everyone else. The party is supposed to stand for labour. And the one time the country may actually want to see workers receive a little more, the leadership is too frightened to support them.
If the Labour party won't capture the moment than what is the point of them?
I voted for Corbyn in 2015. Mea Culpa. Mea Maxima Culpa. Then woke up and realised just how desperate it was. So voted for the other guy when Jezbollah was challenged. Then left completely.
You say that the party is supposed to stand for labour. True - but it is supposed to represent labour in government to make significant and lasting changes to the country. If Labour sits in endless opposition then it has failed. You mention Blair like a negative - two landslides and a big majority suggests otherwise...
I see Blair as a negative now. Twenty years ago, yes a positive! But I don't believe that the electoral strategy of the New-Labour era will work in this moment.
I think I understand your point and I know that to get in to power you must be amenable to a swathe of the country and the older demographics. But to surrender the core of your party looks weak. And I think it looks weak to those who might vote for Labour, especially as their finances become less secure. What is the point of a party that won't fight for you like the Cons fight for the retired?
Starmer will be challenged by the Conservatives next political vehicle. Boris has eaten their sins and Truss might well win!
I don't see the hard left as the core of anything. There was big influx of people post-2015 and so many of them were lunatics who were focused on the success of Corbyn as opposed to the party.
It doesn't bother me any more - I have no skin in the game. But the country needs an opposition that is electable. He wasn't, they don't care, so frankly he is right to ignore them.
As for Blair, the past can never just be copy pasted. But a lot of the centre ground pragmatism from the Blair era would do us all a lot of good now What works, rather than what is pure.
I don't want Corbyn back, but people do need to have something to believe in. If not willing to speak up for the workers, what is the point of Labour?
I'm a LibDem these days, but for me Starmer is speaking up for the workers.
What do the workers want? Sam Tarry, poncing about for brownie points on picket lines wanting the Tories to hit workers hard so the movement has the big bad to oppose or A Labour government actually doing things that improve their lives?
The simple reality is that Tarry and those who are like Tarry want endless opposition.
It's difficult. There's no point if you can't get elected. Blair saw that. On the other hand, there is little point if it's all going to be the same but more competent. That was Blair, too. There may be a market for radical change. The 17 and 19 elections suggests there probably is. The danger is Truss defines it. And leaves Starmer as the status quo candidate. Tricky. How do you present change without being scary? Truss is doing it by worshipping ancient shibboleths.
I think the radicalism has to be in the second term - the first term is preparing the ground.
We will never know whether Blair's second term could or would have been more radical than the first - the events of September 11th 2001 transformed the world, politically, militarily, culturally and economically.
I watched it last night. It’s absolutely grim. I advise against
But it is only going to strengthen Ukrainian resolve against the Russians. Why would you ever surrender if this is your likely fate?
The war can only worsen
And God help any Russian soldiers captured by Ukranian resistance fighters or villagers now
Yes. They will be burned to death or skinned alive, and who can blame the Ukrainians?
That poor Ukrainian soldier was somebody's son, brother, uncle, father
If it was my son or my brother I could not go to my grave without taking equal revenge on a Russian. In front of me. Personally. The video is that bad
Amazingly the guy who did the castration has allowed himself to be identified, via that video (distinctive hat, etc). His days are numbered, and the number is small. As, indeed, are the days of his close family in Chechnya, I suspect
This kind of thing was a deliberate strategy by the Japanese in WWII. The idea was, if we're brutal to prisoners, they'll be brutal to us, and our men won't surrender because they'll expect the same in return. Almost, if not, impossible not to play the game. If I recall correctly (not far enough into World at War ATM) the allies knew of the strategy but still retaliated brutally.
If @UKLabour members knew before they voted that @Keir_Starmer would do the opposite of what he promised to win their votes then he would not be the Labour leader today.
Starmer committed Political fraud to win the leadership contest, therefore his mandate is not legitimate.
Time for the Unions to bankrupt his shit show of a Party
Absolute nonsense.
It was absolutely clear who the candidate of continuity Corbyn was (RLB) and who the candidate of turning the page was (Starmer).
You can say you don't agree with how he's gone about it, and that's fine. But they idea that it was some kind of fraud is utterly ludicrous.
You do talk bollocks
10 pledges was continuity Corbyn whilst uniting the Party
Done the complete opposite of course
You're living in a fantasy world. If anyone chose Starmer over RLB as they wanted continuity Corbyn, they want their head examined and always did.
Look, I don't mind that you disagree with him, and you may have a point, but the Trumpian "Stop the steal" stuff... come on.
As big a liar as Boris
Do you support Nationalisation Yes before No after
Do you stand on Picket Lines in Solidarity with Trade Unions Yes before No after
I will unite all wings of the Party before I will do the total opposite now
Total fraud of a Politician and totally not to be trusted
There is a basic problem with this argument. He lied to win the leadership election. But he didn't lie to he British people or to all the voters that Labour need to win back.
He lied to you.
And there are millions of voters out there who don't mind that he had to lie to get elected if he could then make Labour electable again. Boris lies to the people. That is bad. Starmer lied to the hard left. That is ok.
I'm not sure you can lead a party by lying to the majority of its membership. If Starmer can triangulate his way to PM fine, but the foundations are shaky.
The membership didn't want Blair's old ideas and the country seems v-unsure.
Hang on - so many hard left members have left in disgust. Like BJO. So they aren't around any more to be a problem. And AIUI the bulk of the remaining members are quite happy with the maskirovka employed to take back control from the lunatics.
Look at Corbyn's two leadership elections support from 50%+. If you consider at least half of the labour party loons I would say you're pretty close to the wire.
My reading of the party is that the membership isn't overjoyed by Starmer's tactics and can smell Blair's influence. They can see the strategy, but than so can everyone else. The party is supposed to stand for labour. And the one time the country may actually want to see workers receive a little more, the leadership is too frightened to support them.
If the Labour party won't capture the moment than what is the point of them?
I voted for Corbyn in 2015. Mea Culpa. Mea Maxima Culpa. Then woke up and realised just how desperate it was. So voted for the other guy when Jezbollah was challenged. Then left completely.
You say that the party is supposed to stand for labour. True - but it is supposed to represent labour in government to make significant and lasting changes to the country. If Labour sits in endless opposition then it has failed. You mention Blair like a negative - two landslides and a big majority suggests otherwise...
I see Blair as a negative now. Twenty years ago, yes a positive! But I don't believe that the electoral strategy of the New-Labour era will work in this moment.
I think I understand your point and I know that to get in to power you must be amenable to a swathe of the country and the older demographics. But to surrender the core of your party looks weak. And I think it looks weak to those who might vote for Labour, especially as their finances become less secure. What is the point of a party that won't fight for you like the Cons fight for the retired?
Starmer will be challenged by the Conservatives next political vehicle. Boris has eaten their sins and Truss might well win!
I don't see the hard left as the core of anything. There was big influx of people post-2015 and so many of them were lunatics who were focused on the success of Corbyn as opposed to the party.
It doesn't bother me any more - I have no skin in the game. But the country needs an opposition that is electable. He wasn't, they don't care, so frankly he is right to ignore them.
As for Blair, the past can never just be copy pasted. But a lot of the centre ground pragmatism from the Blair era would do us all a lot of good now What works, rather than what is pure.
I don't want Corbyn back, but people do need to have something to believe in. If not willing to speak up for the workers, what is the point of Labour?
I'm a LibDem these days, but for me Starmer is speaking up for the workers.
What do the workers want? Sam Tarry, poncing about for brownie points on picket lines wanting the Tories to hit workers hard so the movement has the big bad to oppose or A Labour government actually doing things that improve their lives?
The simple reality is that Tarry and those who are like Tarry want endless opposition.
The workers want a pay rise in keeping with inflation, so they can pay their bills.
Profits are not limited to 2%, neither are rent or mortgages or grocery bills.
It's difficult. There's no point if you can't get elected. Blair saw that. On the other hand, there is little point if it's all going to be the same but more competent. That was Blair, too. There may be a market for radical change. The 17 and 19 elections suggests there probably is. The danger is Truss defines it. And leaves Starmer as the status quo candidate. Tricky. How do you present change without being scary? Truss is doing it by worshipping ancient shibboleths.
I think the radicalism has to be in the second term - the first term is preparing the ground.
We will never know whether Blair's second term could or would have been more radical than the first - the events of September 11th 2001 transformed the world, politically, militarily, culturally and economically.
Agree with this. Win an election on being a safe pair of hands and then win the trust of the electorate to tinker with the engine.
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
I watched it last night. It’s absolutely grim. I advise against
But it is only going to strengthen Ukrainian resolve against the Russians. Why would you ever surrender if this is your likely fate?
The war can only worsen
And God help any Russian soldiers captured by Ukranian resistance fighters or villagers now
Yes. They will be burned to death or skinned alive, and who can blame the Ukrainians?
That poor Ukrainian soldier was somebody's son, brother, uncle, father
If it was my son or my brother I could not go to my grave without taking equal revenge on a Russian. In front of me. Personally. The video is that bad
Amazingly the guy who did the castration has allowed himself to be identified, via that video (distinctive hat, etc). His days are numbered, and the number is small. As, indeed, are the days of his close family in Chechnya, I suspect
This kind of thing was a deliberate strategy by the Japanese in WWII. The idea was, if we're brutal to prisoners, they'll be brutal to us, and our men won't surrender because they'll expect the same in return. Almost, if not, impossible not to play the game. If I recall correctly (not far enough into World at War ATM) the allies knew of the strategy but still retaliated brutally.
I've been reading around this and you might be right. Apparently (IIRC @TOPPING told us this yesterday) the Wagner Group (hardcore Russian special ops) are known for this disgusting cruelty - to instil terror, and make Russians fight harder (to avoid capture, as you say)
Crucially, however, the normal playbook is to make sure no one is identifiable and the vids generally leak out a year or two after the atrocity: the rumours are enough to begin with. Here something seems to have gone wrong. The vid has leaked immediately and the evildoers are readily identifiable. So it feels like a massive propaganda own goal for Russia
This is terrible Nazi shit, blatantly done on living Ukrainians, visible on any phone or tablet or laptop worldwide. It stokes furious hatred for Russia
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
That doesn't end the war. It only pauses it until Russia is ready for round 3.
I've read a couple of books about those two. They sound amazing and terrifying. Long distance walking in Britain can be a physical challenge but ultimately its pretty safe. In England at least, on the most popular trails you're rarely out of sight of others; even on my most remote walks I've seen someone every hour or so. You're rarely more than an hour's walk from safety and sustenance. Whereas those two? You're on your own. You have to carry so much more because it might be days until you can next restock. The scale is so much bigger. Most of our long distance paths can be walked in a couple of weeks off work; for the American trails you have to take half a year off. But the rewards arr so much greater too, I imagine.
I watched it last night. It’s absolutely grim. I advise against
But it is only going to strengthen Ukrainian resolve against the Russians. Why would you ever surrender if this is your likely fate?
The war can only worsen
And God help any Russian soldiers captured by Ukranian resistance fighters or villagers now
Yes. They will be burned to death or skinned alive, and who can blame the Ukrainians?
That poor Ukrainian soldier was somebody's son, brother, uncle, father
If it was my son or my brother I could not go to my grave without taking equal revenge on a Russian. In front of me. Personally. The video is that bad
Amazingly the guy who did the castration has allowed himself to be identified, via that video (distinctive hat, etc). His days are numbered, and the number is small. As, indeed, are the days of his close family in Chechnya, I suspect
This kind of thing was a deliberate strategy by the Japanese in WWII. The idea was, if we're brutal to prisoners, they'll be brutal to us, and our men won't surrender because they'll expect the same in return. Almost, if not, impossible not to play the game. If I recall correctly (not far enough into World at War ATM) the allies knew of the strategy but still retaliated brutally.
I've been reading around this and you might be right. Apparently (IIRC @TOPPING told us this yesterday) the Wagner Group (hardcore Russian special ops) are known for this disgusting cruelty - to instil terror, and make Russians fight harder (to avoid capture, as you say)
Crucially, however, the normal playbook is to make sure no one is identifiable and the vids generally leak out a year or two after the atrocity: the rumours are enough to begin with. Here something seems to have gone wrong. The vid has leaked immediately and the evildoers are readily identifiable. So it feels like a massive propaganda own goal for Russia
This is terrible Nazi shit, blatantly done on living Ukrainians, visible on any phone or tablet or laptop worldwide. It stokes furious hatred for Russia
We should stop equivocating and join the war. It's our moral duty in the face of such barbarism.
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
That doesn't end the war. It only pauses it until Russia is ready for round 3.
Perhaps. A pause will do though. I am not sure who this is all benefitting except the arms industry on both sides, who will certainly be getting a free bar at their works Christmas party.
I watched it last night. It’s absolutely grim. I advise against
But it is only going to strengthen Ukrainian resolve against the Russians. Why would you ever surrender if this is your likely fate?
The war can only worsen
And God help any Russian soldiers captured by Ukranian resistance fighters or villagers now
Yes. They will be burned to death or skinned alive, and who can blame the Ukrainians?
That poor Ukrainian soldier was somebody's son, brother, uncle, father
If it was my son or my brother I could not go to my grave without taking equal revenge on a Russian. In front of me. Personally. The video is that bad
Amazingly the guy who did the castration has allowed himself to be identified, via that video (distinctive hat, etc). His days are numbered, and the number is small. As, indeed, are the days of his close family in Chechnya, I suspect
This kind of thing was a deliberate strategy by the Japanese in WWII. The idea was, if we're brutal to prisoners, they'll be brutal to us, and our men won't surrender because they'll expect the same in return. Almost, if not, impossible not to play the game. If I recall correctly (not far enough into World at War ATM) the allies knew of the strategy but still retaliated brutally.
I've been reading around this and you might be right. Apparently (IIRC @TOPPING told us this yesterday) the Wagner Group (hardcore Russian special ops) are known for this disgusting cruelty - to instil terror, and make Russians fight harder (to avoid capture, as you say)
Crucially, however, the normal playbook is to make sure no one is identifiable and the vids generally leak out a year or two after the atrocity: the rumours are enough to begin with. Here something seems to have gone wrong. The vid has leaked immediately and the evildoers are readily identifiable. So it feels like a massive propaganda own goal for Russia
This is terrible Nazi shit, blatantly done on living Ukrainians, visible on any phone or tablet or laptop worldwide. It stokes furious hatred for Russia
We should stop equivocating and join the war. It's our moral duty in the face of such barbarism.
The nukes, though. They have and do prevent wars between Great Powers. For better and for worse.
Youngest is going to work at Winfrith in October and needs to find somewhere to live nearby. He looked at Dorchester originally but is now thinking of Weymouth.
Any ideas welcome.
Weymouth will be cheaper than Dorchester, but it does have a certain reputation
Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss for Tory leadership
He writes in The Times that her tax cuts are based on 'true conservative principles' & that she can unite party
Significant as Tugendhat is popular with Tory members & a senior figure in the One Nation group
Or 'Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss in a bid to become Foreign Secretary'
It's a move of weakness - he's seen the way the wind is blowing and is trying to ingratiate himself with the new leader and Prime Minister. It's so transparent it's embarrassing.
Tugendhat has debased himself and undermined his future leadership potential by this act of political cowardice.
Wallace ditto. Sitting above the fray was fine.
I think Wallace has specific issues with Sunak in his willingness to fund British contributions to Ukraine.
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
That doesn't end the war. It only pauses it until Russia is ready for round 3.
Yep.
The answer is surely to keep doing what we’re doing, but more so, and with more crippling sanctions, until Russia is no longer a threat to anyone.
The impact of just a few HIMARS shows what some well chosen weapons and a bit of cash can do. Just need to get Germany to embrace nuclear, everyone build a shit load of wind turbines and solar panels, ramp up those LNG terminals and insulate our houses properly, and in the meantime turn off the remaining gas taps.
Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss for Tory leadership
He writes in The Times that her tax cuts are based on 'true conservative principles' & that she can unite party
Significant as Tugendhat is popular with Tory members & a senior figure in the One Nation group
Or 'Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss in a bid to become Foreign Secretary'
It's a move of weakness - he's seen the way the wind is blowing and is trying to ingratiate himself with the new leader and Prime Minister. It's so transparent it's embarrassing.
Tugendhat has debased himself and undermined his future leadership potential by this act of political cowardice.
Wallace ditto. Sitting above the fray was fine.
I think Wallace has specific issues with Sunak in his willingness to fund British contributions to Ukraine.
If he cared that much about his specific issues, I think he'd have said something when Sunak was the frontrunner, not finally chimed in when it was already clear that Truss had won. It is hardly the charge of the Light Brigade.
I watched it last night. It’s absolutely grim. I advise against
But it is only going to strengthen Ukrainian resolve against the Russians. Why would you ever surrender if this is your likely fate?
The war can only worsen
And God help any Russian soldiers captured by Ukranian resistance fighters or villagers now
Yes. They will be burned to death or skinned alive, and who can blame the Ukrainians?
That poor Ukrainian soldier was somebody's son, brother, uncle, father
If it was my son or my brother I could not go to my grave without taking equal revenge on a Russian. In front of me. Personally. The video is that bad
Amazingly the guy who did the castration has allowed himself to be identified, via that video (distinctive hat, etc). His days are numbered, and the number is small. As, indeed, are the days of his close family in Chechnya, I suspect
This kind of thing was a deliberate strategy by the Japanese in WWII. The idea was, if we're brutal to prisoners, they'll be brutal to us, and our men won't surrender because they'll expect the same in return. Almost, if not, impossible not to play the game. If I recall correctly (not far enough into World at War ATM) the allies knew of the strategy but still retaliated brutally.
I've been reading around this and you might be right. Apparently (IIRC @TOPPING told us this yesterday) the Wagner Group (hardcore Russian special ops) are known for this disgusting cruelty - to instil terror, and make Russians fight harder (to avoid capture, as you say)
Crucially, however, the normal playbook is to make sure no one is identifiable and the vids generally leak out a year or two after the atrocity: the rumours are enough to begin with. Here something seems to have gone wrong. The vid has leaked immediately and the evildoers are readily identifiable. So it feels like a massive propaganda own goal for Russia
This is terrible Nazi shit, blatantly done on living Ukrainians, visible on any phone or tablet or laptop worldwide. It stokes furious hatred for Russia
We should stop equivocating and join the war. It's our moral duty in the face of such barbarism.
We should continue to provide the Ukrainians with weapons and supplies, that is enough unless Russia goes further and invades a NATO state
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
That doesn't end the war. It only pauses it until Russia is ready for round 3.
Yep.
The answer is surely to keep doing what we’re doing, but more so, and with more crippling sanctions, until Russia is no longer a threat to anyone.
The impact of just a few HIMARS shows what some well chosen weapons and a bit of cash can do. Just need to get Germany to embrace nuclear, everyone build a shit load of wind turbines and solar panels, ramp up those LNG terminals and insulate our houses properly, and in the meantime turn off the remaining gas taps.
Russia has to be absolutely defeated now. Truss is right. What's the point of human civilisation if we allow this evil to prosper?
Slowly degrade this Nazi rogue state until Russians are eating their own faeces
Just discovered that you can get UKTV for free, and they carry The World at War documentary series. That's Friday night sorted!
Badly needs updating, mind.
Oh yes, it's showing its age now but I still think it's the Gold Standard of WWII documentaries. It's the one that all others wish to be, and the first-hand accounts are both invaluable and impossible to replicate now. Someone might make something better, but no one could make it again.
I remember the fist time I saw it being staggered that they had managed to find so many participants, from all sides, to speak to first hand. I had grandfathers involved in the war, but it always seemed a slice of history. I don't think I'd have been much more surprised had I seen an interview with the Duke of Wellington or Admiral Nelson.
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
Not a chance. Everyone knows what that means. And everyone knows Putin is a cunt. So it isn't going to happen.
Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss for Tory leadership
He writes in The Times that her tax cuts are based on 'true conservative principles' & that she can unite party
Significant as Tugendhat is popular with Tory members & a senior figure in the One Nation group
Or 'Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss in a bid to become Foreign Secretary'
It's a move of weakness - he's seen the way the wind is blowing and is trying to ingratiate himself with the new leader and Prime Minister. It's so transparent it's embarrassing.
Tugendhat has debased himself and undermined his future leadership potential by this act of political cowardice.
Wallace ditto. Sitting above the fray was fine.
I think Wallace has specific issues with Sunak in his willingness to fund British contributions to Ukraine.
Didn't he have them before the winner was obvious?
Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss for Tory leadership
He writes in The Times that her tax cuts are based on 'true conservative principles' & that she can unite party
Significant as Tugendhat is popular with Tory members & a senior figure in the One Nation group
Or 'Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss in a bid to become Foreign Secretary'
It's a move of weakness - he's seen the way the wind is blowing and is trying to ingratiate himself with the new leader and Prime Minister. It's so transparent it's embarrassing.
Tugendhat has debased himself and undermined his future leadership potential by this act of political cowardice.
Wallace ditto. Sitting above the fray was fine.
I think Wallace has specific issues with Sunak in his willingness to fund British contributions to Ukraine.
If he cared that much about his specific issues, I think he'd have said something when Sunak was the frontrunner, not finally chimed in when it was already clear that Truss had won. It is hardly the charge of the Light Brigade.
The impression I get of Wallace is that he isn't a fan of blue on blue warfare. If he doesn't want to see Rishi win, he waits to see whi is best placed to defeat him and endorses that candidate rather than weighing in early with specific issues about Rishi. You still have to work with people afterwards and you still have to fight elections.
Cookie said: "I've read a couple of books about those two. They sound amazing and terrifying."
True enough if you do all of either the Appalachian Trail or the Pacific Crest Trail. But you don't need to, since both are bisected by many roads. So, you can do what I have done, and backpack for a few days, seeing spectacular views in every direction as you go.
And there are treats. One morning I woke up to a buzz around our orange tent -- and realized that a hummingbird thought it had found the world's biggest flower. (It gave up, shortly.) On another trip, we lookd down to see a large herd of elk in the valley below us. Impressive.
I watched it last night. It’s absolutely grim. I advise against
But it is only going to strengthen Ukrainian resolve against the Russians. Why would you ever surrender if this is your likely fate?
The war can only worsen
And God help any Russian soldiers captured by Ukranian resistance fighters or villagers now
Yes. They will be burned to death or skinned alive, and who can blame the Ukrainians?
That poor Ukrainian soldier was somebody's son, brother, uncle, father
If it was my son or my brother I could not go to my grave without taking equal revenge on a Russian. In front of me. Personally. The video is that bad
Amazingly the guy who did the castration has allowed himself to be identified, via that video (distinctive hat, etc). His days are numbered, and the number is small. As, indeed, are the days of his close family in Chechnya, I suspect
This kind of thing was a deliberate strategy by the Japanese in WWII. The idea was, if we're brutal to prisoners, they'll be brutal to us, and our men won't surrender because they'll expect the same in return. Almost, if not, impossible not to play the game. If I recall correctly (not far enough into World at War ATM) the allies knew of the strategy but still retaliated brutally.
I've been reading around this and you might be right. Apparently (IIRC @TOPPING told us this yesterday) the Wagner Group (hardcore Russian special ops) are known for this disgusting cruelty - to instil terror, and make Russians fight harder (to avoid capture, as you say)
Crucially, however, the normal playbook is to make sure no one is identifiable and the vids generally leak out a year or two after the atrocity: the rumours are enough to begin with. Here something seems to have gone wrong. The vid has leaked immediately and the evildoers are readily identifiable. So it feels like a massive propaganda own goal for Russia
This is terrible Nazi shit, blatantly done on living Ukrainians, visible on any phone or tablet or laptop worldwide. It stokes furious hatred for Russia
We should stop equivocating and join the war. It's our moral duty in the face of such barbarism.
The nukes, though. They have and do prevent wars between Great Powers. For better and for worse.
I'm not suggesting we march on Moscow. Only help defend sovereign Ukrainian territory.
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
That doesn't end the war. It only pauses it until Russia is ready for round 3.
Yep.
The answer is surely to keep doing what we’re doing, but more so, and with more crippling sanctions, until Russia is no longer a threat to anyone.
The impact of just a few HIMARS shows what some well chosen weapons and a bit of cash can do. Just need to get Germany to embrace nuclear, everyone build a shit load of wind turbines and solar panels, ramp up those LNG terminals and insulate our houses properly, and in the meantime turn off the remaining gas taps.
Russia has to be absolutely defeated now. Truss is right. What's the point of human civilisation if we allow this evil to prosper?
Slowly degrade this Nazi rogue state until Russians are eating their own faeces
Nothing happens to human civilisation when we allow evil to prosper - we've been prostrate before Saudi Arabia for decades, and they cut people up before breakfast. They have also fomented terror on UK soil, and continue to fund dangerous salafism within UK Mosques, which is a good deal more than Uncle Vlad has done. Apparently they are our sort of blood soaked autocracy though.
Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss for Tory leadership
He writes in The Times that her tax cuts are based on 'true conservative principles' & that she can unite party
Significant as Tugendhat is popular with Tory members & a senior figure in the One Nation group
Or 'Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss in a bid to become Foreign Secretary'
It's a move of weakness - he's seen the way the wind is blowing and is trying to ingratiate himself with the new leader and Prime Minister. It's so transparent it's embarrassing.
Tugendhat has debased himself and undermined his future leadership potential by this act of political cowardice.
Wallace ditto. Sitting above the fray was fine.
I think Wallace has specific issues with Sunak in his willingness to fund British contributions to Ukraine.
If he cared that much about his specific issues, I think he'd have said something when Sunak was the frontrunner, not finally chimed in when it was already clear that Truss had won. It is hardly the charge of the Light Brigade.
The impression I get of Wallace is that he isn't a fan of blue on blue warfare. If he doesn't want to see Rishi win, he waits to see whi is best placed to defeat him and endorses that candidate rather than weighing in early with specific issues about Rishi. You still have to work with people afterwards and you still have to fight elections.
Well, that's a charitable view, which I commend you for.
Just discovered that you can get UKTV for free, and they carry The World at War documentary series. That's Friday night sorted!
Badly needs updating, mind.
Oh yes, it's showing its age now but I still think it's the Gold Standard of WWII documentaries. It's the one that all others wish to be, and the first-hand accounts are both invaluable and impossible to replicate now. Someone might make something better, but no one could make it again.
I remember the fist time I saw it being staggered that they had managed to find so many participants, from all sides, to speak to first hand. I had grandfathers involved in the war, but it always seemed a slice of history. I don't think I'd have been much more surprised had I seen an interview with the Duke of Wellington or Admiral Nelson.
It was made about 30 years after the events, so no more distant when made than John Major vs Neil Kinnoch in 1992 is to us now.
Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss for Tory leadership
He writes in The Times that her tax cuts are based on 'true conservative principles' & that she can unite party
Significant as Tugendhat is popular with Tory members & a senior figure in the One Nation group
Or 'Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss in a bid to become Foreign Secretary'
It's a move of weakness - he's seen the way the wind is blowing and is trying to ingratiate himself with the new leader and Prime Minister. It's so transparent it's embarrassing.
Tugendhat has debased himself and undermined his future leadership potential by this act of political cowardice.
Wallace ditto. Sitting above the fray was fine.
I think Wallace has specific issues with Sunak in his willingness to fund British contributions to Ukraine.
If he cared that much about his specific issues, I think he'd have said something when Sunak was the frontrunner, not finally chimed in when it was already clear that Truss had won. It is hardly the charge of the Light Brigade.
Wallace saved his intervention to the final weekend before the ballots were sent out. This is the moment when it could have most impact - had it not been the case that the contest was already over.
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
Not a chance. Everyone knows what that means. And everyone knows Putin is a cunt. So it isn't going to happen.
Apart from Trump, who thinks Putin is a pretty smart guy.
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
Not a chance. Everyone knows what that means. And everyone knows Putin is a cunt. So it isn't going to happen.
Ok, no peace deals that save thousands of lives and billions of pounds worth of property with nasty people - Got it. Any other gems of statecraft?
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
That doesn't end the war. It only pauses it until Russia is ready for round 3.
Yep.
The answer is surely to keep doing what we’re doing, but more so, and with more crippling sanctions, until Russia is no longer a threat to anyone.
The impact of just a few HIMARS shows what some well chosen weapons and a bit of cash can do. Just need to get Germany to embrace nuclear, everyone build a shit load of wind turbines and solar panels, ramp up those LNG terminals and insulate our houses properly, and in the meantime turn off the remaining gas taps.
Russia has to be absolutely defeated now. Truss is right. What's the point of human civilisation if we allow this evil to prosper?
Slowly degrade this Nazi rogue state until Russians are eating their own faeces
Nothing happens to human civilisation when we allow evil to prosper - we've been prostrate before Saudi Arabia for decades, and they cut people up before breakfast. They have also fomented terror on UK soil, and continue to fund dangerous salafism within UK Mosques, which is a good deal more than Uncle Vlad has done. Apparently they are our sort of blood soaked autocracy though.
I despise Saudi Arabian Islamism. I've been banned from this site for my anger on this point. I emphasise IslamISM not Islam
But let us deal with first things first: the evil that menaces the entire world right now: from their energy blackmail to their rape-war to their castration of Ukrainians, livestreamed, with Stanley knives
Islamism is evil, and must be confronted, but it does not threaten the world economy with dire poverty and civil strife this coming winter. Putin's Russia does. It is Hitler's Germany, with a Slavic face. Putin's Russia must be crushed. I see no other way
Just discovered that you can get UKTV for free, and they carry The World at War documentary series. That's Friday night sorted!
Badly needs updating, mind.
Oh yes, it's showing its age now but I still think it's the Gold Standard of WWII documentaries. It's the one that all others wish to be, and the first-hand accounts are both invaluable and impossible to replicate now. Someone might make something better, but no one could make it again.
I remember the fist time I saw it being staggered that they had managed to find so many participants, from all sides, to speak to first hand. I had grandfathers involved in the war, but it always seemed a slice of history. I don't think I'd have been much more surprised had I seen an interview with the Duke of Wellington or Admiral Nelson.
I do remember my Dad telling me that when he started his apprenticeship most of his supervisors had been at the Somme.
Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss for Tory leadership
He writes in The Times that her tax cuts are based on 'true conservative principles' & that she can unite party
Significant as Tugendhat is popular with Tory members & a senior figure in the One Nation group
Or 'Tom Tugendhat has endorsed Liz Truss in a bid to become Foreign Secretary'
It's a move of weakness - he's seen the way the wind is blowing and is trying to ingratiate himself with the new leader and Prime Minister. It's so transparent it's embarrassing.
Tugendhat has debased himself and undermined his future leadership potential by this act of political cowardice.
Wallace ditto. Sitting above the fray was fine.
Wallace always seemed like more of a Truss supporter to me. But Tugendhat was definitely more likely to support Sunak until now IMO.
Just discovered that you can get UKTV for free, and they carry The World at War documentary series. That's Friday night sorted!
Badly needs updating, mind.
Oh yes, it's showing its age now but I still think it's the Gold Standard of WWII documentaries. It's the one that all others wish to be, and the first-hand accounts are both invaluable and impossible to replicate now. Someone might make something better, but no one could make it again.
I remember the fist time I saw it being staggered that they had managed to find so many participants, from all sides, to speak to first hand. I had grandfathers involved in the war, but it always seemed a slice of history. I don't think I'd have been much more surprised had I seen an interview with the Duke of Wellington or Admiral Nelson.
It was made about 30 years after the events, so no more distant when made than John Major vs Neil Kinnoch in 1992 is to us now.
Still, they managed to get Speer, Eden and (iirc) Dönitz. God knows how they managed that, since Dönitz and Speer ended up on trial for their lives for the events chronicled. Were that me, I would never want to talk about it ever again.
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
Not a chance. Everyone knows what that means. And everyone knows Putin is a cunt. So it isn't going to happen.
Apart from Trump, who thinks Putin is a pretty smart guy.
I wonder if we might have to go to war with Russia
Hello. What took you so long? We are already at war with Russia, just a non declared one. I predicted we would be dragged fully into this by August here on PB some months ago. Looks like I will be wrong but not by much.
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
That doesn't end the war. It only pauses it until Russia is ready for round 3.
Yep.
The answer is surely to keep doing what we’re doing, but more so, and with more crippling sanctions, until Russia is no longer a threat to anyone.
The impact of just a few HIMARS shows what some well chosen weapons and a bit of cash can do. Just need to get Germany to embrace nuclear, everyone build a shit load of wind turbines and solar panels, ramp up those LNG terminals and insulate our houses properly, and in the meantime turn off the remaining gas taps.
Russia has to be absolutely defeated now. Truss is right. What's the point of human civilisation if we allow this evil to prosper?
Slowly degrade this Nazi rogue state until Russians are eating their own faeces
Nothing happens to human civilisation when we allow evil to prosper - we've been prostrate before Saudi Arabia for decades, and they cut people up before breakfast. They have also fomented terror on UK soil, and continue to fund dangerous salafism within UK Mosques, which is a good deal more than Uncle Vlad has done. Apparently they are our sort of blood soaked autocracy though.
I despise Saudi Arabian Islamism. I've been banned from this site for my anger on this point. I emphasise IslamISM not Islam
But let us deal with first things first: the evil that menaces the entire world right now: from their energy blackmail to their rape-war to their castration of Ukrainians, livestreamed, with Stanley knives
Islamism is evil, and must be confronted, but it does not threaten the world economy with dire poverty and civil strife this coming winter. Putin's Russia does. It is Hitler's Germany, with a Slavic face. Putin's Russia must be crushed. I see no other way
Regarding rape, because accuracy is important, the sacked Ukrainian human rights ombudsman is on record as saying that she made no attempt to verify any of the rape claims (made via telephone hotline) that she publicised around the world, and that indeed it was outside of her responsibilities to do so. NGOs later visited to comfort the afflicted and found no victims. There could have been rapes, but if we can't verify them, it shouldn't go down in the books as you've described it.
As for threatening, it isn't Russia who is threatening dire poverty and civil strife, that is the result of Western sanctions. They may or may not be justified, but they are a conscious policy decision, a choice made by our elected leaders. Place the responsibility where it belongs.
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
Not a chance. Everyone knows what that means. And everyone knows Putin is a cunt. So it isn't going to happen.
Ok, no peace deals that save thousands of lives and billions of pounds worth of property with nasty people - Got it. Any other gems of statecraft?
Yes. You don't do deals with murderous dictators who will not respect the international norms. We should have learned that with Hitler. Putin is the new Hitler and the Russians - unfortunately - are as bad as the Germans were in the 1930s / 1940s.
The only language Putin understands is strength. Arm Ukraine to the hilt, send them all the western equipment they need and, if Russia threatens nuclear attacks, make it clear we will strike back. Putin is a coward, he shit his pants if he thinks the West will hit Russia hard.
Youngest is going to work at Winfrith in October and needs to find somewhere to live nearby. He looked at Dorchester originally but is now thinking of Weymouth.
Any ideas welcome.
UKAEA? I don't know the area, but I know some who do live there and who worked there. Any specific questions?
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
That doesn't end the war. It only pauses it until Russia is ready for round 3.
Yep.
The answer is surely to keep doing what we’re doing, but more so, and with more crippling sanctions, until Russia is no longer a threat to anyone.
The impact of just a few HIMARS shows what some well chosen weapons and a bit of cash can do. Just need to get Germany to embrace nuclear, everyone build a shit load of wind turbines and solar panels, ramp up those LNG terminals and insulate our houses properly, and in the meantime turn off the remaining gas taps.
Russia has to be absolutely defeated now. Truss is right. What's the point of human civilisation if we allow this evil to prosper?
Slowly degrade this Nazi rogue state until Russians are eating their own faeces
Nothing happens to human civilisation when we allow evil to prosper - we've been prostrate before Saudi Arabia for decades, and they cut people up before breakfast. They have also fomented terror on UK soil, and continue to fund dangerous salafism within UK Mosques, which is a good deal more than Uncle Vlad has done. Apparently they are our sort of blood soaked autocracy though.
I despise Saudi Arabian Islamism. I've been banned from this site for my anger on this point. I emphasise IslamISM not Islam
But let us deal with first things first: the evil that menaces the entire world right now: from their energy blackmail to their rape-war to their castration of Ukrainians, livestreamed, with Stanley knives
Islamism is evil, and must be confronted, but it does not threaten the world economy with dire poverty and civil strife this coming winter. Putin's Russia does. It is Hitler's Germany, with a Slavic face. Putin's Russia must be crushed. I see no other way
Regarding rape, because accuracy is important, the sacked Ukrainian human rights ombudsman is on record as saying that she made no attempt to verify any of the rape claims (made via telephone hotline) that she publicised around the world, and that indeed it was outside of her responsibilities to do so. NGOs later visited to comfort the afflicted and found no victims. There could have been rapes, but if we can't verify them, it shouldn't go down in the books as you've described it.
As for threatening, it isn't Russia who is threatening dire poverty and civil strife, that is the result of Western sanctions. They may or may not be justified, but they are a conscious policy decision, a choice made by our elected leaders. Place the responsibility where it belongs.
Kind of done with your bullshit Putin apologetics. Fuck off
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
Not a chance. Everyone knows what that means. And everyone knows Putin is a cunt. So it isn't going to happen.
Ok, no peace deals that save thousands of lives and billions of pounds worth of property with nasty people - Got it. Any other gems of statecraft?
Yes. You don't do deals with murderous dictators who will not respect the international norms. We should have learned that with Hitler. Putin is the new Hitler and the Russians - unfortunately - are as bad as the Germans were in the 1930s / 1940s.
The only language Putin understands is strength. Arm Ukraine to the hilt, send them all the western equipment they need and, if Russia threatens nuclear attacks, make it clear we will strike back. Putin is a coward, he shit his pants if he thinks the West will hit Russia hard.
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
Not a chance. Everyone knows what that means. And everyone knows Putin is a cunt. So it isn't going to happen.
Ok, no peace deals that save thousands of lives and billions of pounds worth of property with nasty people - Got it. Any other gems of statecraft?
Yes. You don't do deals with murderous dictators who will not respect the international norms. We should have learned that with Hitler. Putin is the new Hitler and the Russians - unfortunately - are as bad as the Germans were in the 1930s / 1940s.
The only language Putin understands is strength. Arm Ukraine to the hilt, send them all the western equipment they need and, if Russia threatens nuclear attacks, make it clear we will strike back. Putin is a coward, he shit his pants if he thinks the West will hit Russia hard.
I wonder if we might have to go to war with Russia
The easy way out for us is for Ukraine to defeat the Russians with only our money and equipment as support, but we're so scared of the Russians that we won't even provide Ukraine with all the weapons we could provide, and this necessarily makes a Ukrainian victory slower, more difficult and less certain.
Russia is violating every norm of civilised society. It is only fear that holds us back, and the Russians see that fear and it emboldens them. We are allowing this evil to flourish.
But are the Russians really that scary? Will they nuke us if we fight alongside Ukraine to defend its territory and people?
No they are not and they will not. They retreated from Kyiv and the North of Ukraine when defeated. They did not turn to nuclear weapons. They threatened a response if Finland and Sweden sought to join NATO, but have done nothing when those countries took that step.
Russia is weak. If we show greater resolve over Ukraine we can force the Russians to back down again and withdraw to their borders. Give them two weeks to retreat or we start to bomb the shit out of their air defence and other long-range assets. Give them another two weeks and we send NATO ground troops to follow up the air campaign and push the Russians back out of Ukraine.
Fight the Russians. Defeat them. Stop the fighting by winning and prevent the Russians from inflicting more cruelty and suffering on another country. Finish the job the Ukrainians have started and win the war.
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
Not a chance. Everyone knows what that means. And everyone knows Putin is a cunt. So it isn't going to happen.
Ok, no peace deals that save thousands of lives and billions of pounds worth of property with nasty people - Got it. Any other gems of statecraft?
Yes. You don't do deals with murderous dictators who will not respect the international norms. We should have learned that with Hitler. Putin is the new Hitler and the Russians - unfortunately - are as bad as the Germans were in the 1930s / 1940s.
The only language Putin understands is strength. Arm Ukraine to the hilt, send them all the western equipment they need and, if Russia threatens nuclear attacks, make it clear we will strike back. Putin is a coward, he shit his pants if he thinks the West will hit Russia hard.
So where does Stalin fit in?
Are we talking 1939 or 1941?
Take your pick. You might also consider where Chairman Mao fits in with your 'nice people only or it's war' theory.
I watched it last night. It’s absolutely grim. I advise against
But it is only going to strengthen Ukrainian resolve against the Russians. Why would you ever surrender if this is your likely fate?
The war can only worsen
And God help any Russian soldiers captured by Ukranian resistance fighters or villagers now
Yes. They will be burned to death or skinned alive, and who can blame the Ukrainians?
That poor Ukrainian soldier was somebody's son, brother, uncle, father
If it was my son or my brother I could not go to my grave without taking equal revenge on a Russian. In front of me. Personally. The video is that bad
Amazingly the guy who did the castration has allowed himself to be identified, via that video (distinctive hat, etc). His days are numbered, and the number is small. As, indeed, are the days of his close family in Chechnya, I suspect
It's not amazing. It's psychological warfare. You won't deepen your understanding of it if you stay amazed.
I have not watched the video and I will not watch it either.
But the use of the hat and the use of colour in the form of the gloves suggests that someone has learnt from the recent use of PW by Daesh in the conflict in Iraq and Syria. This wasn't a guy "allowing" himself to be filmed, as in "Oh, go on then, if you want."
I watched it last night. It’s absolutely grim. I advise against
But it is only going to strengthen Ukrainian resolve against the Russians. Why would you ever surrender if this is your likely fate?
The war can only worsen
And God help any Russian soldiers captured by Ukranian resistance fighters or villagers now
Yes. They will be burned to death or skinned alive, and who can blame the Ukrainians?
That poor Ukrainian soldier was somebody's son, brother, uncle, father
If it was my son or my brother I could not go to my grave without taking equal revenge on a Russian. In front of me. Personally. The video is that bad
Amazingly the guy who did the castration has allowed himself to be identified, via that video (distinctive hat, etc). His days are numbered, and the number is small. As, indeed, are the days of his close family in Chechnya, I suspect
This kind of thing was a deliberate strategy by the Japanese in WWII. The idea was, if we're brutal to prisoners, they'll be brutal to us, and our men won't surrender because they'll expect the same in return. Almost, if not, impossible not to play the game. If I recall correctly (not far enough into World at War ATM) the allies knew of the strategy but still retaliated brutally.
I've been reading around this and you might be right. Apparently (IIRC @TOPPING told us this yesterday) the Wagner Group (hardcore Russian special ops) are known for this disgusting cruelty - to instil terror, and make Russians fight harder (to avoid capture, as you say)
Crucially, however, the normal playbook is to make sure no one is identifiable and the vids generally leak out a year or two after the atrocity: the rumours are enough to begin with. Here something seems to have gone wrong. The vid has leaked immediately and the evildoers are readily identifiable. So it feels like a massive propaganda own goal for Russia
This is terrible Nazi shit, blatantly done on living Ukrainians, visible on any phone or tablet or laptop worldwide. It stokes furious hatred for Russia
"Leak out" - please be serious. Timing is everything in warfare.
Have a look at how the Mongols used psychological warfare. They were extremely skilled at it. If your guys are seen as subhuman weaklings that's one thing, but being seen as vicious inhuman monsters is another. Sure, the two things can braid together. Psychological warfare isn't easy.
I don't know how you conclude this is definitely bad for the Russian war effort.
The Russian embassy in London won't have put that tweet out calling for neo-Nazis to suffer "humiliating deaths" without serious consideration.
My guess is there will be a response or at least a "side" reference by Lavrov or possibly even Putin.
To get a handle on which audiences are being aimed at by what parties, consider what may actually be done by parties and populations in response, not only in response to the publicity this act has received but its timing. ("Why now?") I would say for starters that those in the Ukraine, in Russia, and in the disputed regions who are somewhat sceptical about the genuineness of what may soon be a formal announcement of an intention to hold a referendum in the Kherson region are more likely to become more sceptical than less, given the publicity that this horrible act has received. On the other side of the paper, those who hold the opposite view will become more entrenched too. Those on both sides who are coining it from the war will be pleased at the development...
As for "worldwide revulsion", so what? How many divisions has worldwide revulsion?
If you only read one book on PW, make it Paul Linebarger's.
There will be Russian soldiers who have heard material about actions carried out by neo-Nazis in the Donbas and their response will be similar to yours after you heard this material: if it was your family member you wouldn't rest until you'd had revenge, etc. - against "a Russian", "a Ukrainian", "a Chechen", or whoever. That's the dynamic and it's as ugly as f***.
I wonder if we might have to go to war with Russia
The easy way out for us is for Ukraine to defeat the Russians with only our money and equipment as support, but we're so scared of the Russians that we won't even provide Ukraine with all the weapons we could provide, and this necessarily makes a Ukrainian victory slower, more difficult and less certain.
Russia is violating every norm of civilised society. It is only fear that holds us back, and the Russians see that fear and it emboldens them. We are allowing this evil to flourish.
But are the Russians really that scary? Will they nuke us if we fight alongside Ukraine to defend its territory and people?
No they are not and they will not. They treated from Kyiv and the North of Ukraine when defeated. They did not turn to nuclear weapons. They threatened a response of Finland and Sweden sought to join NATO, but have done nothing when those countries took that step.
Russia is weak. If we show greater resolve over Ukraine we can force the Russians to back down again and withdraw to their borders. Give them two weeks to retreat or we start to bomb the shit out of their air defence and other long-range assets. Give them another two weeks and we send NATO ground troops to follow up the air campaign and push the Russians back out of Ukraine.
Fight the Russians. Defeat them. Stop the fighting by winning and prevent the Russians from inflicting more cruelty and suffering on another country. Finish the job the Ukrainians have started and win the war.
I'm beginning to think this might be the only way - perhaps - but not yet
For now I am with @HYUFD. Give the Ukrainians all the weapons they need. Meanwhile, grind Russia down with endless sanctions until they are fucking starving. Let them starve. Who cares. But no troops on the ground - yet
And if we freeze this winter? So be it. We can cope. Some will die, most will live
This is becoming an existential fight for good versus evil
I'm still going with Ukraine forced to accept territorial concessions, in the face of the US deciding it isn't loving the war as much as it thought it would. Hopefully before Europe freezes its tits off.
Not a chance. Everyone knows what that means. And everyone knows Putin is a cunt. So it isn't going to happen.
Ok, no peace deals that save thousands of lives and billions of pounds worth of property with nasty people - Got it. Any other gems of statecraft?
Yes. You don't do deals with murderous dictators who will not respect the international norms. We should have learned that with Hitler. Putin is the new Hitler and the Russians - unfortunately - are as bad as the Germans were in the 1930s / 1940s.
The only language Putin understands is strength. Arm Ukraine to the hilt, send them all the western equipment they need and, if Russia threatens nuclear attacks, make it clear we will strike back. Putin is a coward, he shit his pants if he thinks the West will hit Russia hard.
So where does Stalin fit in?
Are we talking 1939 or 1941?
Take your pick. You might also consider where Chairman Mao fits in with your 'nice people only or it's war' theory.
The UK and France were ready to defend Finland in 1939-40. We only didn't because the war ended before we could send help. Otherwise, we would have been up against the Russkis.
Tell me which country Mao invaded post-the deal with Nixon.
Putin only understands strength. We tried this compromise shit in 2014 and he came back for more. Russia needs to feel the pain and hard. It already is but more is needed.
The latest Dutch opinion poll has the governing VVP in first place on just 14%. In second place on 12.5% is the Farmer-Citizen Movement which polled 1% at the last election.
I watched it last night. It’s absolutely grim. I advise against
But it is only going to strengthen Ukrainian resolve against the Russians. Why would you ever surrender if this is your likely fate?
The war can only worsen
And God help any Russian soldiers captured by Ukranian resistance fighters or villagers now
Yes. They will be burned to death or skinned alive, and who can blame the Ukrainians?
That poor Ukrainian soldier was somebody's son, brother, uncle, father
If it was my son or my brother I could not go to my grave without taking equal revenge on a Russian. In front of me. Personally. The video is that bad
Amazingly the guy who did the castration has allowed himself to be identified, via that video (distinctive hat, etc). His days are numbered, and the number is small. As, indeed, are the days of his close family in Chechnya, I suspect
It's not amazing. It's psychological warfare. You won't deepen your understanding of it if you stay amazed.
I have not watched the video and I will not watch it either.
But the use of the hat and the use of colour in the form of the gloves suggests that someone has learnt from the recent use of PW by Daesh in the conflict in Iraq and Syria. This wasn't a guy "allowing" himself to be filmed, as in "Oh, go on then, if you want."
I watched it last night. It’s absolutely grim. I advise against
But it is only going to strengthen Ukrainian resolve against the Russians. Why would you ever surrender if this is your likely fate?
The war can only worsen
And God help any Russian soldiers captured by Ukranian resistance fighters or villagers now
Yes. They will be burned to death or skinned alive, and who can blame the Ukrainians?
That poor Ukrainian soldier was somebody's son, brother, uncle, father
If it was my son or my brother I could not go to my grave without taking equal revenge on a Russian. In front of me. Personally. The video is that bad
Amazingly the guy who did the castration has allowed himself to be identified, via that video (distinctive hat, etc). His days are numbered, and the number is small. As, indeed, are the days of his close family in Chechnya, I suspect
This kind of thing was a deliberate strategy by the Japanese in WWII. The idea was, if we're brutal to prisoners, they'll be brutal to us, and our men won't surrender because they'll expect the same in return. Almost, if not, impossible not to play the game. If I recall correctly (not far enough into World at War ATM) the allies knew of the strategy but still retaliated brutally.
I've been reading around this and you might be right. Apparently (IIRC @TOPPING told us this yesterday) the Wagner Group (hardcore Russian special ops) are known for this disgusting cruelty - to instil terror, and make Russians fight harder (to avoid capture, as you say)
Crucially, however, the normal playbook is to make sure no one is identifiable and the vids generally leak out a year or two after the atrocity: the rumours are enough to begin with. Here something seems to have gone wrong. The vid has leaked immediately and the evildoers are readily identifiable. So it feels like a massive propaganda own goal for Russia
This is terrible Nazi shit, blatantly done on living Ukrainians, visible on any phone or tablet or laptop worldwide. It stokes furious hatred for Russia
"Leak out" - please be serious. Timing is everything in warfare.
Have a look at how the Mongols used psychological warfare. They were extremely skilled at it. If your guys are seen as subhuman weaklings that's one thing, but being seen as vicious inhuman monsters is another. Sure, the two things can braid together. Psychological warfare isn't easy.
I don't know how you conclude this is definitely bad for the Russian war effort.
The Russian embassy in London won't have put that tweet out calling for neo-Nazis to suffer "humiliating deaths" without serious consideration.
My guess is there will be a response or at least a "side" reference by Lavrov or possibly even Putin.
To get a handle on which audiences are being aimed at by what parties, consider what may actually be done by parties and populations in response, not only in response to the publicity this act has received but its timing. ("Why now?") I would say for starters that those in the Ukraine, in Russia, and in the disputed regions who are somewhat sceptical about the genuineness of what may soon be a formal announcement of an intention to hold a referendum in the Kherson region are more likely to become more sceptical than less, given the publicity that this horrible act has received. On the other side of the paper, those who hold the opposite view will become more entrenched too. Those on both sides who are coining it from the war will be pleased at the development...
As for "worldwide revulsion", so what? How many divisions has worldwide revulsion?
If you only read one book on PW, make it Paul Linebarger's.
There will be Russian soldiers who have heard material about actions carried out by neo-Nazis in the Donbas and their response will be similar to yours after you heard this material: if it was your family member you wouldn't rest until you'd had revenge, etc. That's the dynamic and it's as ugly as f***.
Wilkommen, tovarisch
An interestingly detailed comment, for your first comment
Comments
It would be to betray the people who have put everything on the line for their country.
But it may take a while.
The West must hold its nerve at all costs.
https://twitter.com/NoContextBrits/status/1553061410388807682
I think I understand your point and I know that to get in to power you must be amenable to a swathe of the country and the older demographics. But to surrender the core of your party looks weak. And I think it looks weak to those who might vote for Labour, especially as their finances become less secure. What is the point of a party that won't fight for you like the Cons fight for the retired?
Starmer will be challenged by the Conservatives next political vehicle. Boris has eaten their sins and Truss might well win!
https://twitter.com/thehistoryguy/status/1552941509355380737
What is a table? Does it carry an innate tableness qua table?
How about a chair? What if you sit on a table? Or sit on the floor and place your food on a chair?
I hear Neighbours was good.
https://twitter.com/RussianEmbassy/status/1553093117712162828
"#Azov militants deserve execution, but death not by firing squad but by hanging, because they’re not real soldiers. They deserve a humiliating death. A married couple from #Mariupol tell how they were shelled by 🇺🇦forces from #Azovstal. #StopNaziUkraine"
It doesn't bother me any more - I have no skin in the game. But the country needs an opposition that is electable. He wasn't, they don't care, so frankly he is right to ignore them.
As for Blair, the past can never just be copy pasted. But a lot of the centre ground pragmatism from the Blair era would do us all a lot of good now What works, rather than what is pure.
https://apps.apple.com/gb/app/footpath-route-planner/id634845718
Which enables you to find paths and plan walks all over the country…
"Another great Mattis line came in 2018, after a Russian Wagner group element attempted to kill American soldiers stationed in northeastern Syria. Then-Secretary of Defense [Jim] Mattis explained to Senators how the Wagner element was then "annihilated."
That same principle of "annihilation" should apply to future attacks or attack-anticipatory movements by the Wagner group around the world."
(Link omitted.)
source: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/wagner-group-units-should-be-annihilated-wherever-they-attack-us-forces/ar-AA104w8s?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=2fcea995b9fa4a9d9eefc8d5e6731125
Simple, and, I hope, practical in many places.
That poor Ukrainian soldier was somebody's son, brother, uncle, father
If it was my son or my brother I could not go to my grave without taking equal revenge on a Russian. In front of me. Personally. The video is that bad
Amazingly the guy who did the castration has allowed himself to be identified, via that video (distinctive hat, etc). His days are numbered, and the number is small. As, indeed, are the days of his close family in Chechnya, I suspect
There may be a market for radical change. The 17 and 19 elections suggests there probably is.
The danger is Truss defines it. And leaves Starmer as the status quo candidate.
Tricky.
How do you present change without being scary? Truss is doing it by worshipping ancient shibboleths.
If you think a lot of people are worried about the future, whether it's how they are going to pay their energy bills this winter or whether the environmental crisis will so radically affect our lives as to be a near existential event, I'd argue boring and reassuring works very well. No one will buy Johnsonian optimism - that works only in the good times (or against a real threat like Corbyn).
Perhaps the more relevant question is the ideological bankruptcy of both parties. Labour, indeed the whole centre-left, has struggled to come up with an economic model since the GFC. There are tentative signs of a new form of environmentalist social democracy which utilises sustainability as the core for State activity.
As for the Conservatives and centre-right, they fall back on Laffer and tax cuts but this isn't the 1970s. The size and shape of welfare has changed - pensions are a much bigger factor and no centre-right can deliberately impoverish pensions without committing political suicide. During the pandemic, indeed, all pretence at "sound money" went out the window - Sunak taxed, spent and borrowed in a way John McDonnell could only have imagined. We have racked up billions in additional debt for which we will have to pay the interest charges.
Getting the deficit under control - yes, that's possible but with pensions, the NHS, education, defence and the Police seemingly sacrosanct, where do you reduce expenditure? You can cut back on capital/infrastructure spending but that's stupidity otherwise what are you looking at?
I start therefore from the premise neither party has a clue HOW to govern - they just simply want to be IN Government.
it's worldwide news. And everyone is outraged. And on every examination the vid seems to be real. The guilty party is this guy
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/07/29/ukrainian-pow-castrated-russian-troops-horrifying-footage/
Properly bad for Putin
Or even this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Crest_Trail
(I've backpacked a few pieces of it.)
LBC
@LBC
On this week's Full Disclosure, RMT General Secretary Mick Lynch explains what made him such an effective communicator.
https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1553055672950046722
===
Lynch is a total natural communicator. Lab should find a safe seat and then put him the shadow cabinet this year. Massive asset for GE 2024/5.
What do the workers want?
Sam Tarry, poncing about for brownie points on picket lines wanting the Tories to hit workers hard so the movement has the big bad to oppose
or
A Labour government actually doing things that improve their lives?
The simple reality is that Tarry and those who are like Tarry want endless opposition.
It wouldn't be the first time a visceral image was used to manipulate the public. The poor dead baby on the beach springs to mind.
Even the Russians aren't denying it. You are pathetic
We will never know whether Blair's second term could or would have been more radical than the first - the events of September 11th 2001 transformed the world, politically, militarily, culturally and economically.
Profits are not limited to 2%, neither are rent or mortgages or grocery bills.
Crucially, however, the normal playbook is to make sure no one is identifiable and the vids generally leak out a year or two after the atrocity: the rumours are enough to begin with. Here something seems to have gone wrong. The vid has leaked immediately and the evildoers are readily identifiable. So it feels like a massive propaganda own goal for Russia
This is terrible Nazi shit, blatantly done on living Ukrainians, visible on any phone or tablet or laptop worldwide. It stokes furious hatred for Russia
Long distance walking in Britain can be a physical challenge but ultimately its pretty safe. In England at least, on the most popular trails you're rarely out of sight of others; even on my most remote walks I've seen someone every hour or so. You're rarely more than an hour's walk from safety and sustenance.
Whereas those two? You're on your own. You have to carry so much more because it might be days until you can next restock. The scale is so much bigger. Most of our long distance paths can be walked in a couple of weeks off work; for the American trails you have to take half a year off. But the rewards arr so much greater too, I imagine.
The answer is surely to keep doing what we’re doing, but more so, and with more crippling sanctions, until Russia is no longer a threat to anyone.
The impact of just a few HIMARS shows what some well chosen weapons and a bit of cash can do. Just need to get Germany to embrace nuclear, everyone build a shit load of wind turbines and solar panels, ramp up those LNG terminals and insulate our houses properly, and in the meantime turn off the remaining gas taps.
Slowly degrade this Nazi rogue state until Russians are eating their own faeces
True enough if you do all of either the Appalachian Trail or the Pacific Crest Trail. But you don't need to, since both are bisected by many roads. So, you can do what I have done, and backpack for a few days, seeing spectacular views in every direction as you go.
And there are treats. One morning I woke up to a buzz around our orange tent -- and realized that a hummingbird thought it had found the world's biggest flower. (It gave up, shortly.) On another trip, we lookd down to see a large herd of elk in the valley below us. Impressive.
Let Russia back down.
But let us deal with first things first: the evil that menaces the entire world right now: from their energy blackmail to their rape-war to their castration of Ukrainians, livestreamed, with Stanley knives
Islamism is evil, and must be confronted, but it does not threaten the world economy with dire poverty and civil strife this coming winter. Putin's Russia does. It is Hitler's Germany, with a Slavic face. Putin's Russia must be crushed. I see no other way
US president's administration ridiculed by Republicans, after he promised there would 'not be another foot of wall constructed' on his watch" (£)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/07/29/joe-biden-quietly-agrees-complete-trumps-wall-immigration-hotspot/
Except this time with the Russians as the aggressors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Come_and_See
Samsara.
As for threatening, it isn't Russia who is threatening dire poverty and civil strife, that is the result of Western sanctions. They may or may not be justified, but they are a conscious policy decision, a choice made by our elected leaders. Place the responsibility where it belongs.
The only language Putin understands is strength. Arm Ukraine to the hilt, send them all the western equipment they need and, if Russia threatens nuclear attacks, make it clear we will strike back. Putin is a coward, he shit his pants if he thinks the West will hit Russia hard.
Russia is violating every norm of civilised society. It is only fear that holds us back, and the Russians see that fear and it emboldens them. We are allowing this evil to flourish.
But are the Russians really that scary? Will they nuke us if we fight alongside Ukraine to defend its territory and people?
No they are not and they will not. They retreated from Kyiv and the North of Ukraine when defeated. They did not turn to nuclear weapons. They threatened a response if Finland and Sweden sought to join NATO, but have done nothing when those countries took that step.
Russia is weak. If we show greater resolve over Ukraine we can force the Russians to back down again and withdraw to their borders. Give them two weeks to retreat or we start to bomb the shit out of their air defence and other long-range assets. Give them another two weeks and we send NATO ground troops to follow up the air campaign and push the Russians back out of Ukraine.
Fight the Russians. Defeat them. Stop the fighting by winning and prevent the Russians from inflicting more cruelty and suffering on another country. Finish the job the Ukrainians have started and win the war.
I have not watched the video and I will not watch it either.
But the use of the hat and the use of colour in the form of the gloves suggests that someone has learnt from the recent use of PW by Daesh in the conflict in Iraq and Syria. This wasn't a guy "allowing" himself to be filmed, as in "Oh, go on then, if you want." "Leak out" - please be serious. Timing is everything in warfare.
Have a look at how the Mongols used psychological warfare. They were extremely skilled at it. If your guys are seen as subhuman weaklings that's one thing, but being seen as vicious inhuman monsters is another. Sure, the two things can braid together. Psychological warfare isn't easy.
I don't know how you conclude this is definitely bad for the Russian war effort.
The Russian embassy in London won't have put that tweet out calling for neo-Nazis to suffer "humiliating deaths" without serious consideration.
My guess is there will be a response or at least a "side" reference by Lavrov or possibly even Putin.
To get a handle on which audiences are being aimed at by what parties, consider what may actually be done by parties and populations in response, not only in response to the publicity this act has received but its timing. ("Why now?") I would say for starters that those in the Ukraine, in Russia, and in the disputed regions who are somewhat sceptical about the genuineness of what may soon be a formal announcement of an intention to hold a referendum in the Kherson region are more likely to become more sceptical than less, given the publicity that this horrible act has received. On the other side of the paper, those who hold the opposite view will become more entrenched too. Those on both sides who are coining it from the war will be pleased at the development...
As for "worldwide revulsion", so what? How many divisions has worldwide revulsion?
If you only read one book on PW, make it Paul Linebarger's.
There will be Russian soldiers who have heard material about actions carried out by neo-Nazis in the Donbas and their response will be similar to yours after you heard this material: if it was your family member you wouldn't rest until you'd had revenge, etc. - against "a Russian", "a Ukrainian", "a Chechen", or whoever. That's the dynamic and it's as ugly as f***.
For now I am with @HYUFD. Give the Ukrainians all the weapons they need. Meanwhile, grind Russia down with endless sanctions until they are fucking starving. Let them starve. Who cares. But no troops on the ground - yet
And if we freeze this winter? So be it. We can cope. Some will die, most will live
This is becoming an existential fight for good versus evil
Tell me which country Mao invaded post-the deal with Nixon.
Putin only understands strength. We tried this compromise shit in 2014 and he came back for more. Russia needs to feel the pain and hard. It already is but more is needed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Dutch_general_election#Vote_share
An interestingly detailed comment, for your first comment