Leicester City not looking good. If we sell Fofana to Chelsea, and don't replace well we could be in a relegation scrap. Without him (as per the first 3/4 of last season) our defence is crap. Schmeichel gone too, and no signings.
I find this talk of Leicester being in trouble rather odd. You finished 8th last season! I reckon part of it is that because you had games in hand last season, you were in the bottom half for much of the season, so everyone thinks Leicester didn't do very well.
I reckon the three that came up are going straight back down.
Forest are good and well managed, though may have overdone the signings and destabilised.
There is clearly tension between Rogers and our management, and the lack of transfer budget has made some players restive, notably Fofana. We won't sell him cheaply (he signed a new contact in the spring), but Chelsea have turned his head. He is our only world class player at present.
I have a few quid on Rogers being the first manager to be gone.
I don't hold it against Khun Top. Duty Free has not been a good business to be in for these last few years. Signings have to be funded by sales this year.
After their loans were returned Forest had about 5 players left who might be expected to make it in the Prem, but still unproven, and another 3 or 4 who might possibly make it in the Prem but probably not at the right level. The rest were bottom half of Championship standard and/or too inexperienced.
Stability was not an option, nor was only making half a dozen signings.
I have seen it before with promoted teams (including Leicester City) of refreshing a team so completely that it loses all cohesion, and are in the relegation zone before the new players integrate. It is nearly as bad as Norwich City's approach of hardly signing anyone.
I think Forest will be top of the promoted teams, and it is very rare for all promoted teams to go straight back down.
Yes the best approach (at least for staying up for 1 season as opposed to several) is to largely stick with the team that was promoted adding in a sprinkling of quality. Brentford did this well last year.
However it was never an option for Forest who relied heavily on 5 loan signings then had a keeper who wanted to leave and their captain and top scorer being 34, out of contract and plagued with injuries. Half their team was leaving regardless, so they could either replace them or finish bottom.
They were my first ever direct debit, set up in 1997.
They've reported that Ukraine frequently bases troops and firing positions in schools and hospitals (sometimes though not always after civilians have been evacuated). That puts in context the verified reports of Russians bombing schools and hospitals, so if one takes the view that anything that introduces a nuance is bad for Ukraine, then Amnesty are being naughty. The reality is that any urban conflict is going to be nasty and nobody emerges with completely clean hands, and it's useful to be reminded of that, without thereby justifying the war.
Or one could take the view that Russia should not bomb schools and hospitals, regardless of what weaponry is near them, because they shouldn't be there in the first place.
What are the Ukrainians meant to do? Not defend them? Just let the Russians seize these places which may have civilians in and launch massacres?
"if one takes the view that anything that introduces a nuance is bad for Ukraine" is the strawiest of straw men, and why I ill advisedly introduced the Azov regt in the first place.
I do find peoples reaction to the Amnesty report rather depressing.
I mean, I expected Twitterers to be, well, twats about it, but surely the cooler heads of PB can see that Ukrainians ain’t whiter than white?
Apparently not.
War makes people stupid.
Truly dim. Did you wake up and think Hey, I'll cement my position as a free thinking contrarian this a.m?
Ukraine's Azov Regiment is balls out neo Nazi and probably at least as nasty as the Wagner guys, if you want some balance. But Amnesty's new rule of warfare, that an attacking army automatically takes a city because putting troops in to defend it is a war crime, is so startlingly novel that I would hope even you would notice.
"Balls out Neo-Nazi"? Heavily overegged, I think.
Sometime we will find the dividing line between what is true, and what is Russian Government talking points, or online campaigns by their propagandists / useful idiots.
It's possible to think that Russia's invasion is an imperialist monstrosity without pretending that Ukraine has a record of splendid liberal democracy untouched by corruption and extreme nationalism. Yes, the toleration of the Azov movement with its open neo-Nazi elements is a longstanding scandal in Ukraine - essentially nationalism was so strong in the country (for historical reasons that are easy to understand) that it was seen as difficult to crack down on the most extreme exponents of it - and of course Putin exploits it now. The same applied to the toleration of hero-worship for Bandera, despite his intermittent collaboration with Hitler.
The right reaction to that is surely to say - yes, that was pretty horrible, but it doesn't justify the invasion, and we are right to help Ukraine defend itself (though not, in my opinion, to extend the war to reconquering Crimea). And the same applies to other blots on Ukraine's record. If we start from the position that Ukraine is perfect and any criticism is Russian trolling, then we just set ourselves up for disillusionment - which will actually damage support for Ukraine more than clear-eyed understanding.
Amnesty is traditionally irritating for all of us who take sides in conflicts. But that's what they're for - we should support them even when they expose something embarassing about a cause we're supporting. If they started covering up bad practice because it's politically inconvenient, it would be a blow to all of us.
I had some fun the other day with someone who bought up Bandera - trying to get the same person to say anything negative about Bose was strangely difficult :-)
I'm not going to pretend to be au fait with financial matters, but the notion higher interest rates are bad for savers is so obviously wrong it makes me wonder who is writing the stories.
"Sudden downpour bad for people on fire."
If interest rates are rising a bit but inflation is running rampant then savers are screwed.
Rising rates are generally a sign that inflation is higher than target, so there is some tension between rising rates (immediate impact boost for savers) and the confirmation of expected future inflation (bad for savers).
The change in rates itself is clearly good for savers, but not sure that it is preferable that it is happening.
The 5% interest on my new motor is effectively a discount. Similarly Mrs Foxys interest free kitchen refreshment.
All slightly dependent on pay keeping vaguely in pace with inflation though. That 4.3% is now a 9% real terms pay cut, so very likely to be in industrial action by the autumn. Likely to be a work to rule, with no extra duties rather than full strike, but with all the vacancies we are carrying that should be pretty effective. Rotas will collapse.
Smarkets have a market on the Florida governor race, with DeSantis on 1.09 & Crist on 12.5.
This could be one to watch. Last time (in 2018) De Santis barely managed to win with 49.6% against 49.2% for a relatively weak Dem candidate (Andrew Gillum).
Charlie Crist is a significantly stronger candidate, being a former Republican and a former Governor, although the environment for Dems right now is a lot more unfavourable than 2018.
Still, there is a possibility that a backlash driven by the SC abortion ruling might be enough to cause problems for DeSantis, specially with a moderate Dem opponent & in a relatively purple state.
The last DeSantis vs Crist poll was in Feb & had DeSantis a whopping 21 points ahead, but earlier polls had the margin a lot closer (between 6 to 8 points).
@HYUFD has been of the opinion that this is a close fight for some time. I have been sceptical, but... I do wonder. Florida is extremely pro-Choice; Florida's Republican legislature has passed an *extremely* restrictive anti-abortion law; and DeSantis has chosen to suspend a prosecutor who has said he won't prosecute those accused of abortion offences.
We have seen from Kansas that abortion can be a great motivator. Twenty percent of voters came out just to vote in the referendum.
I'd take 12.5 on Crist. Heck; I might take 8s or higher.
Crist beats DeSantis 45% to 44% in the latest poll
" Global oil prices dropped on Thursday to their lowest levels since before Russia's February invasion of Ukraine, as traders fretted over the possibility of an economic recession later this year that could torpedo energy demand."
A realistic prospect of prices going rapidly into reverse as the global economy disappears up the swanny. Punters are already hugely suspicious as to why the collapse in wholesale prices hasn't seen pump prices follow. Just watch the same writ large if crude prices really spiral downwards and the oil companies accidentally continue to make record profits whilst not dropping pump prices.
Not that there should be a windfall tax on Tory donors you understand, that would be bad.
There is a little bit of a price war in Dundee at the moment but diesel is currently about 15p a litre less than it was at the peak.
I filled up with unleaded yesterday at the bargain price of 170p. It was 185 at the same place a few weeks back.
Living in the sticks and burning oil and wood for fuel is not looking such a bad strategy for this winter after all
Yes, I have a new multihull stove in my living room and a big pile of Ash to burn, in case of power outages or gas cuts.
I would have thought logs would be more useful than ash
I've still got two more pallets to chop up and then need to order some hardwood logs. But then I'm set for the winter.
Get it in writing that the hardwood is seasoned. Or get a moisture meter off ebay.
Thank you, having had a wood burner for 7 years I wouldn't have known the wood needed to be seasoned.
I have a whole tree's worth of unseasoned wood to burn over the next few winters. I can't season it as I don't have a kiln - and frankly it sounds like a waste of fuel! Unseasoned wood burns. Get the fire going on smaller bits, then have your logs chopped into smaller chunks and they burn, moisture or not.
Surely chopping it and stacking it properly - so that it dries - under cover will go a long way, surely? We have a hot dry summer after all.
It will go all the way. stack it where the sun and wind can get at it, under cover if possible, and you are there.
Indeed, that's how you season wood. Downside is you have to store it for a bit and you have to stock up a year or two ahead.
This is also relevant to the will she / won't she thing. We know Truss wants an emergency budget;
Playbook @politico scoop that Truss Budget could take place on Wed 21 Sept. Means splitting statement from most of 4 day debate and votes which will fall other side of recess. Permissible but unusual. Gives OBR longer BUT means Budget is “live” as parli issue for 4 weeks
It's time to unite. 21 current and former colleagues who have sat around the Cabinet table have come together to back Liz. She will unite our Party, beat Keir Starmer, and is trusted to deliver for Britain 👇 https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1555468229392437249/photo/1
✅ Jake Berry ✅ Suella Braverman ✅ James Cleverly ✅ Simon Clarke ✅ Therese Coffey ✅ Michelle Donelan ✅ Nadine Dorries ✅ David Frost ✅ Sajid Javid ✅ David Jones ✅ Kwasi Kwarteng ✅ Brandon Lewis ✅ Penny Mordaunt ✅ David Mundell ✅ John Redwood ✅ Jacob Rees-Mogg ✅ Iain Duncan Smith ✅ Anne-Marie Trevelyan ✅ Ben Wallace ✅ John Whittingdale ✅ Nadhim Zahawi
The deluded, the desperate, the dismal and the demented...
Ex squeezes, perverts, job applicants and tax avoiders. Meanwhile Rishi has got Hague, Major and Clarke behind him.
He may have fewer cards, but he has a shed load more Top Trumps Tories points.
This man claims that he will have to pay an additional £250 per month on his loans. He has £25k of loans and credit card debt. He is almost certainly paying something like 30% APR on his credit card debt already. His loans will almost certainly be at a fixed rate. Neither are actually likely to be affected by a change in the base rate of 0.5%.
Furthermore, his debt is currently depreciating at around 10% a year. His salary will be increasing by something like 6% on average. In real terms he will be paying less interest on a smaller debt in 12 months time which he will no doubt regard as an excellent opportunity to top up.
In short, the story is complete nonsense. The reality is that for more than a decade now we have got used to base rates being lower than inflation. That has a hugely distorting effect on the economy. It encourages debt, discourages saving, boosts short term demand and is potentially inflationary for that reason. For a long time inflation didn't come and even now it has come with a lot of help from an energy price shock. Now its here, however, we have a real problem because the tools we have used in the past to control it are simply not available without genuinely massive increases in interest rates.
For most of my adult life, until 2008, interest rates showed a real return of 1-2% above inflation giving savers a modest return on their money. That would mean base rates now of around 11% and going higher. This hysteria about a 0.5% increase in a base rate that has become vastly more negative in the last 6 months is really a part of the problem. This mess is a consequence, in part, of the policy responses to 2008 and the Bank's utter failure to unwind those responses in the last 14 years. The same short termism we see in our politics now pervades our economic policy. But a 0.5% increase in base rates in a month when inflation jumped over 1% is really not any kind of a solution at all.
The UK became a "don't out it off, put in on", "because I'm worth it" society with an economy where rising house prices and consumption rising faster than production became the norm.
Governments encouraged this as it made people happy and so more likely to re-elect governments.
Faisal Islam was asked on R5 yesterday between 6 and 7pm how an increase in interest rates would reduce inflation. He really couldn't answer the question, he was all over the place.
Now, in fairness, he may be concerned about whether an increase in rates has any impact on an external shock but he seemed completely unable to explain the mechanics of macro-economic management. He may have been struggling to put it into words the average listener might follow. Or, just maybe, he has not actually experienced inflation as a major problem and monetary policy being used to address it in his professional life. Any which way, I listened to the economics editor of the BBC with increasing disbelief.
The chap on Channel 4 was better, he said it was obvious the BoE thinks that some of the inflation is endogamous, and of course there can be a knock-on effect from the exogamous shocks.
Of course if the economy goes into decline and inflation peaks and starts to decline rapidly, you can always reduce rates again.
Or one could take the view that Russia should not bomb schools and hospitals, regardless of what weaponry is near them, because they shouldn't be there in the first place.
What are the Ukrainians meant to do? Not defend them? Just let the Russians seize these places which may have civilians in and launch massacres?
As others have said, it's unreasonable to criticise Ukraine for putting armed forces in cities - absolutely everyone does that in a war - there is no alternative. It's reasonable to say they shouldn't base them *in* (not near) hospitals, especially if there are still patients inside, because it's inevitable that if they do then it will attract counterfire. And if they do it anyway, they can't reasonably invite the media to display the bombed hospital as evidence of an atrocious attack on defenseless civilians, and then complain if the media and NGOs ask critical questions, which is what's now happening.
Exactly the same applies to reports that Russia is using a nuclear power plant as a base for troops, because they calculate that the Ukrainians wont dare to bomb it. It's recklessly irresponsible - which is what army commmanders often are in wars.
In a later post, Barnes noted that he had in fact been wrong to accuse Carrier of being a frequentist, as Carrier believes in prior probabilities, which frequentists don't.
With the government being in need of more than a bit of '"we're all in tis together" mentality from the voters I wonder how much they're now regretting the "its one rule for you and another rule for us" attitude in Downing Street these last two years.
Speaking of the Downing Street parties and decorations, apart from Boris has anybody been sacked because of it ?
Or are various spads and lackeys involved still on track to get safe Conservative seats in the next 5+ years ?
Or one could take the view that Russia should not bomb schools and hospitals, regardless of what weaponry is near them, because they shouldn't be there in the first place.
What are the Ukrainians meant to do? Not defend them? Just let the Russians seize these places which may have civilians in and launch massacres?
As others have said, it's unreasonable to criticise Ukraine for putting armed forces in cities - absolutely everyone does that in a war - there is no alternative. It's reasonable to say they shouldn't base them *in* (not near) hospitals, especially if there are still patients inside, because it's inevitable that if they do then it will attract counterfire. And if they do it anyway, they can't reasonably invite the media to display the bombed hospital as evidence of an atrocious attack on defenseless civilians, and then complain if the media and NGOs ask critical questions, which is what's now happening.
Exactly the same applies to reports that Russia is using a nuclear power plant as a base for troops, because they calculate that the Ukrainians wont dare to bomb it. It's recklessly irresponsible - which is what army commmanders often are in wars.
Again, you are overlooking the obvious. The issue is that Russia is attacking. Nobody is forcing them to do that. The problem would be solved if they stopped. If they don't want to counter fire on schools'n'hospitals, it is open to them to stop doing so. In the case of Chernobyl, again, there would be no risk to it if Russia hadn't invaded.
I have to say some of the stuff said about this comes alarmingly close to victim blaming.
It's time to unite. 21 current and former colleagues who have sat around the Cabinet table have come together to back Liz. She will unite our Party, beat Keir Starmer, and is trusted to deliver for Britain 👇 https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1555468229392437249/photo/1
✅ Jake Berry ✅ Suella Braverman ✅ James Cleverly ✅ Simon Clarke ✅ Therese Coffey ✅ Michelle Donelan ✅ Nadine Dorries ✅ David Frost ✅ Sajid Javid ✅ David Jones ✅ Kwasi Kwarteng ✅ Brandon Lewis ✅ Penny Mordaunt ✅ David Mundell ✅ John Redwood ✅ Jacob Rees-Mogg ✅ Iain Duncan Smith ✅ Anne-Marie Trevelyan ✅ Ben Wallace ✅ John Whittingdale ✅ Nadhim Zahawi
The deluded, the desperate, the dismal and the demented...
Ex squeezes, perverts, job applicants and tax avoiders. Meanwhile Rishi has got Hague, Major and Clarke behind him.
He may have fewer cards, but he has a shed load more Top Trumps Tories points.
Top Tories sure.
But endorsements by Major and Clarke probably don't help Rishi with the current membership.
Smarkets have a market on the Florida governor race, with DeSantis on 1.09 & Crist on 12.5.
This could be one to watch. Last time (in 2018) De Santis barely managed to win with 49.6% against 49.2% for a relatively weak Dem candidate (Andrew Gillum).
Charlie Crist is a significantly stronger candidate, being a former Republican and a former Governor, although the environment for Dems right now is a lot more unfavourable than 2018.
Still, there is a possibility that a backlash driven by the SC abortion ruling might be enough to cause problems for DeSantis, specially with a moderate Dem opponent & in a relatively purple state.
The last DeSantis vs Crist poll was in Feb & had DeSantis a whopping 21 points ahead, but earlier polls had the margin a lot closer (between 6 to 8 points).
@HYUFD has been of the opinion that this is a close fight for some time. I have been sceptical, but... I do wonder. Florida is extremely pro-Choice; Florida's Republican legislature has passed an *extremely* restrictive anti-abortion law; and DeSantis has chosen to suspend a prosecutor who has said he won't prosecute those accused of abortion offences.
We have seen from Kansas that abortion can be a great motivator. Twenty percent of voters came out just to vote in the referendum.
I'd take 12.5 on Crist. Heck; I might take 8s or higher.
Crist beats DeSantis 45% to 44% in the latest poll
I do find peoples reaction to the Amnesty report rather depressing.
I mean, I expected Twitterers to be, well, twats about it, but surely the cooler heads of PB can see that Ukrainians ain’t whiter than white?
Apparently not.
War makes people stupid.
Truly dim. Did you wake up and think Hey, I'll cement my position as a free thinking contrarian this a.m?
Ukraine's Azov Regiment is balls out neo Nazi and probably at least as nasty as the Wagner guys, if you want some balance. But Amnesty's new rule of warfare, that an attacking army automatically takes a city because putting troops in to defend it is a war crime, is so startlingly novel that I would hope even you would notice.
"Balls out Neo-Nazi"? Heavily overegged, I think.
Sometime we will find the dividing line between what is true, and what is Russian Government talking points, or online campaigns by their propagandists / useful idiots.
It's possible to think that Russia's invasion is an imperialist monstrosity without pretending that Ukraine has a record of splendid liberal democracy untouched by corruption and extreme nationalism. Yes, the toleration of the Azov movement with its open neo-Nazi elements is a longstanding scandal in Ukraine - essentially nationalism was so strong in the country (for historical reasons that are easy to understand) that it was seen as difficult to crack down on the most extreme exponents of it - and of course Putin exploits it now. The same applied to the toleration of hero-worship for Bandera, despite his intermittent collaboration with Hitler.
The right reaction to that is surely to say - yes, that was pretty horrible, but it doesn't justify the invasion, and we are right to help Ukraine defend itself (though not, in my opinion, to extend the war to reconquering Crimea). And the same applies to other blots on Ukraine's record. If we start from the position that Ukraine is perfect and any criticism is Russian trolling, then we just set ourselves up for disillusionment - which will actually damage support for Ukraine more than clear-eyed understanding.
Amnesty is traditionally irritating for all of us who take sides in conflicts. But that's what they're for - we should support them even when they expose something embarassing about a cause we're supporting. If they started covering up bad practice because it's politically inconvenient, it would be a blow to all of us.
The issue here is they have, in effect, criticised the Ukrainians for defending their cities by putting weapons in them.
Which is not really a defensible remark under the circumstances. The issue is that Russia is trying to conquer its cities, and the way to stop civilians being at risk is to compel Russia to desist.
If they were trying to 'reconquer' (which I might add isn't really an appropriate word, as it implies they'conquered' it to start with which is not the case) Crimea, or seize Rostov, and putting their weapons in civilian areas it would be somewhat different.
Amnesty sort-of have a point.
If Ukraine are placing (say) SAM systems a hundred miles behind the front lines, in a hospital car park, so the Russians will have a hard time hitting it with counter-battery fire or missiles, then that's wrong IMO (though of course we places anti-aircraft guns on everything that didn't move in WWII, and on some things that did move (1))
But IMO Amnesty went too far in their claims. Ukraine cannot make civilians leave their homes (and if they tried, they might get accused of crimes), and the idea that Ukraine fighters should not fight in towns just because civilians are there is unconscionable - unless the Russians agree not to as well. But the towns and cities are the things both sides want to control.
This is made worse by some claims that I have seen (not from Amnesty), for instance that even having injured troops being treated in civilian hospitals makes them valid military targets. By that sort of thinking, everything in Ukraine is a target, and the Ukrainians cannot defend from anywhere except open fields.
It also ignores the *vast* number of hospitals, schools and universities that Russia has hit throughout Ukraine. It is clear that this is a strategy to denude Ukraine's civilian infrastructure, rather than to hit 'military' targets. If there was any doubt, it's the same strategy they have used in Syria and Grozny.
So Amnesty may have had a small point, and expanded it far too much. As I have pointed out, their total output appears to criticise Russia much more than Ukraine. But that one article was wrong.
I can let you know if my pack has arrived this weekend. However I don't think pictures of ballot papers are a good idea, certainly not completed ones anyway
Can we count you as a Boris write-in?
No I will vote for Sunak, however I expect him to lose. Though that is normal for me, in Tory membership ballots so far I voted for Ken Clarke in 2001, David Davis in 2005 and Boris Johnson in 2019. So the only winning candidate I voted for was Boris
I can let you know if my pack has arrived this weekend. However I don't think pictures of ballot papers are a good idea, certainly not completed ones anyway
I think the issue with Amnesty - and I've supported them for years - is not that they're documenting incidents but they are looking only at a very narrow definition of responsibility. This isn't like the Israeli/Palestinian conflict where both sides have faults of policy, attitude and military strategy going back years. One side has illegally, aggressively and for no reason whatsoever launched a war of extermination against the other. The other side may not be saints, but they are absolutely entitled to point out that nothing they do would be necessary but for the much greater crime the other had committed. And they are trying to remove civilians from battlefield areas, and protecting them as they leave, which means putting weapons next to them.
All other considerations at this moment are secondary to this point. There is a reason why no members of the French Resistance stood in the dock at Nuremberg.
Or one could take the view that Russia should not bomb schools and hospitals, regardless of what weaponry is near them, because they shouldn't be there in the first place.
What are the Ukrainians meant to do? Not defend them? Just let the Russians seize these places which may have civilians in and launch massacres?
As others have said, it's unreasonable to criticise Ukraine for putting armed forces in cities - absolutely everyone does that in a war - there is no alternative. It's reasonable to say they shouldn't base them *in* (not near) hospitals, especially if there are still patients inside, because it's inevitable that if they do then it will attract counterfire. And if they do it anyway, they can't reasonably invite the media to display the bombed hospital as evidence of an atrocious attack on defenseless civilians, and then complain if the media and NGOs ask critical questions, which is what's now happening.
Exactly the same applies to reports that Russia is using a nuclear power plant as a base for troops, because they calculate that the Ukrainians wont dare to bomb it. It's recklessly irresponsible - which is what army commmanders often are in wars.
But Nick, have you seen the vast numbers of hospitals, medical practices, schools, universities and other civilian infrastructure that Russia is hitting not just in the immediate battle areas, but all over Ukraine? I very much doubt that all of these were in use by the Ukrainian military in any meaningful manner.
In which case, there is a blanket policy in Russia to denude Ukraine's civilian infrastructure.
You could try arguing against that, except it's also what Russia did in Syria and Chechnya. Target the hospitals. Target the schools.
I do find peoples reaction to the Amnesty report rather depressing.
I mean, I expected Twitterers to be, well, twats about it, but surely the cooler heads of PB can see that Ukrainians ain’t whiter than white?
Apparently not.
War makes people stupid.
Truly dim. Did you wake up and think Hey, I'll cement my position as a free thinking contrarian this a.m?
Ukraine's Azov Regiment is balls out neo Nazi and probably at least as nasty as the Wagner guys, if you want some balance. But Amnesty's new rule of warfare, that an attacking army automatically takes a city because putting troops in to defend it is a war crime, is so startlingly novel that I would hope even you would notice.
"Balls out Neo-Nazi"? Heavily overegged, I think.
Sometime we will find the dividing line between what is true, and what is Russian Government talking points, or online campaigns by their propagandists / useful idiots.
It's possible to think that Russia's invasion is an imperialist monstrosity without pretending that Ukraine has a record of splendid liberal democracy untouched by corruption and extreme nationalism. Yes, the toleration of the Azov movement with its open neo-Nazi elements is a longstanding scandal in Ukraine - essentially nationalism was so strong in the country (for historical reasons that are easy to understand) that it was seen as difficult to crack down on the most extreme exponents of it - and of course Putin exploits it now. The same applied to the toleration of hero-worship for Bandera, despite his intermittent collaboration with Hitler.
The right reaction to that is surely to say - yes, that was pretty horrible, but it doesn't justify the invasion, and we are right to help Ukraine defend itself (though not, in my opinion, to extend the war to reconquering Crimea). And the same applies to other blots on Ukraine's record. If we start from the position that Ukraine is perfect and any criticism is Russian trolling, then we just set ourselves up for disillusionment - which will actually damage support for Ukraine more than clear-eyed understanding.
Amnesty is traditionally irritating for all of us who take sides in conflicts. But that's what they're for - we should support them even when they expose something embarassing about a cause we're supporting. If they started covering up bad practice because it's politically inconvenient, it would be a blow to all of us.
The issue here is they have, in effect, criticised the Ukrainians for defending their cities by putting weapons in them.
Which is not really a defensible remark under the circumstances. The issue is that Russia is trying to conquer its cities, and the way to stop civilians being at risk is to compel Russia to desist.
If they were trying to 'reconquer' (which I might add isn't really an appropriate word, as it implies they'conquered' it to start with which is not the case) Crimea, or seize Rostov, and putting their weapons in civilian areas it would be somewhat different.
Amnesty sort-of have a point.
If Ukraine are placing (say) SAM systems a hundred miles behind the front lines, in a hospital car park, so the Russians will have a hard time hitting it with counter-battery fire or missiles, then that's wrong IMO (though of course we places anti-aircraft guns on everything that didn't move in WWII, and on some things that did move (1))
But IMO Amnesty went too far in their claims. Ukraine cannot make civilians leave their homes (and if they tried, they might get accused of crimes), and the idea that Ukraine fighters should not fight in towns just because civilians are there is unconscionable - unless the Russians agree not to as well. But the towns and cities are the things both sides want to control.
This is made worse by some claims that I have seen (not from Amnesty), for instance that even having injured troops being treated in civilian hospitals makes them valid military targets. By that sort of thinking, everything in Ukraine is a target, and the Ukrainians cannot defend from anywhere except open fields.
It also ignores the *vast* number of hospitals, schools and universities that Russia has hit throughout Ukraine. It is clear that this is a strategy to denude Ukraine's civilian infrastructure, rather than to hit 'military' targets. If there was any doubt, it's the same strategy they have used in Syria and Grozny.
So Amnesty may have had a small point, and expanded it far too much. As I have pointed out, their total output appears to criticise Russia much more than Ukraine. But that one article was wrong.
"even having injured troops being treated in civilian hospitals makes them valid military targets" - deliberately targeting a *military* hospital is a straight up war crime.
Or one could take the view that Russia should not bomb schools and hospitals, regardless of what weaponry is near them, because they shouldn't be there in the first place.
What are the Ukrainians meant to do? Not defend them? Just let the Russians seize these places which may have civilians in and launch massacres?
As others have said, it's unreasonable to criticise Ukraine for putting armed forces in cities - absolutely everyone does that in a war - there is no alternative. It's reasonable to say they shouldn't base them *in* (not near) hospitals, especially if there are still patients inside, because it's inevitable that if they do then it will attract counterfire. And if they do it anyway, they can't reasonably invite the media to display the bombed hospital as evidence of an atrocious attack on defenseless civilians, and then complain if the media and NGOs ask critical questions, which is what's now happening.
Exactly the same applies to reports that Russia is using a nuclear power plant as a base for troops, because they calculate that the Ukrainians wont dare to bomb it. It's recklessly irresponsible - which is what army commmanders often are in wars.
But Nick, have you seen the vast numbers of hospitals, medical practices, schools, universities and other civilian infrastructure that Russia is hitting not just in the immediate battle areas, but all over Ukraine? I very much doubt that all of these were in use by the Ukrainian military in any meaningful manner.
In which case, there is a blanket policy in Russia to denude Ukraine's civilian infrastructure.
You could try arguing against that, except it's also what Russia did in Syria and Chechnya. Target the hospitals. Target the schools.
I agree - the Russian tactic seems to be to bomb everything to smithereens and occupy the ruins. I'm not defending that!
"Salting" the audience with people with views the program makers interesting is standard practise.
It was given as one of the reasons that the BBC refused to show the Cameron Direct things - that they wouldn't be allowed to add people to the audience to ask "interesting" questions.
Don't bring emotion into it. The BBC loves nothing more than an emotion-driven news report. Most journalists are the same. "Anyone here been raped and speaks English?"
Will be hard to keep emotion out of the economy disastrofuck this winter. People are going to die. The press will lap up these emotional horror stories of granny freezing to death, especially the newspapers who have directly championed the politics that made it happen.
There will also be some groups of people, those opposed to the government or perhaps big fans of EU membership, who will come across as happy to be revelling at the misery of others, in order to make their own political point.
Well that would be ridiculous of both Socialists and Remainers so to do. It's our misery too! That's a bit like biting off one's own nose to spite someone else's face.
To be fair that happens on both sides of the argument, remembering Leon's comment a week or so ago.
One interesting place to look at is the dam above Kherson. If that fails, then large areas of the city and its surroundings may be flooded. In addition, the attached hydroelectric plant is a juicy target. So far, both sides have apparently avoided hitting it, despite the fact a road crosses it (AIUI the road has been hit on both sides of the dam, but not the dam or power station itself).
On the other hand, AIUI the dam holds back the water that flows into the Crimean Canal - one of the 'excuses' for the war. If the dam fails, the canal gets no water.
It'll be interesting to see if the dam suffers an 'accident' as the Russians retreat. What do the Russians value more?
I think the issue with Amnesty - and I've supported them for years - is not that they're documenting incidents but they are looking only at a very narrow definition of responsibility. This isn't like the Israeli/Palestinian conflict where both sides have faults of policy, attitude and military strategy going back years. One side has illegally, aggressively and for no reason whatsoever launched a war of extermination against the other. The other side may not be saints, but they are absolutely entitled to point out that nothing they do would be necessary but for the much greater crime the other had committed. And they are trying to remove civilians from battlefield areas, and protecting them as they leave, which means putting weapons next to them.
All other considerations at this moment are secondary to this point. There is a reason why no members of the French Resistance stood in the dock at Nuremberg.
Amnesty are utter fools. They're arguing - in effect - that Ukrainians should just give up their towns and cities without a fight to the invaders.
I do find peoples reaction to the Amnesty report rather depressing.
I mean, I expected Twitterers to be, well, twats about it, but surely the cooler heads of PB can see that Ukrainians ain’t whiter than white?
Apparently not.
War makes people stupid.
Truly dim. Did you wake up and think Hey, I'll cement my position as a free thinking contrarian this a.m?
Ukraine's Azov Regiment is balls out neo Nazi and probably at least as nasty as the Wagner guys, if you want some balance. But Amnesty's new rule of warfare, that an attacking army automatically takes a city because putting troops in to defend it is a war crime, is so startlingly novel that I would hope even you would notice.
"Balls out Neo-Nazi"? Heavily overegged, I think.
Sometime we will find the dividing line between what is true, and what is Russian Government talking points, or online campaigns by their propagandists / useful idiots.
The Azov Regiment undoubtedly had (Neo)Nazi origins, and retains some of its insignia from its formation. In general views in Ukraine, as in much of Eastern Europe make it easy to highlight things which are unacceptable from a UK perspective. But simply taking an apparent view that Russian propaganda on these things started in 2021 is extremely naive. Much of what we have read about places like Ukraine has been sowed through Russian propaganda for years. At least since 2012-2014 if not further.
You literally have to question and treat with scepticism EVERY Russian talking point on these things. It's scary how deeply ingrained much of it is.
If you look at my link, Israel, Canada and the US didn't want much to do with them until they did. Now they may all have been falling for russian propaganda ever since 2015 but it is fair to think they probably did a bit of their own research. Not like they don't have national intel organisations.
I am not attacking them and I am sure they are far too busy this year to pursue a neo nazi agenda, just making the point that the amnesty report is bad on its merits, not on some blanket all ukrainians are angels theory.
Good morning everyone; a fine bright one here! On topic, history is history. That somewhat gnomic remark means that Ukrainian Russian relations haven't been straightforward for many many years. It's rather like the 'love/ hate' relationship that exists, in some minds anyway, between England, and I mean England, not the whole UK, and France. One could, I think, argue that Ukrainian as a nationality didn't really exist until the 19th century. In any event its current capital is one of the most important cities in Russian history and, if I'm not much mistaken, was is the cradle of Russian Christianity. Russian/Ukrainian\Nazi hostilities in WWII were quite complex; I think it's been argued that have the Nazis not been so hysterically anti-Slav there might have been a Ukrainian army on the Nazi side!
It's really nothing like the relationship between England and France.
I do find peoples reaction to the Amnesty report rather depressing.
I mean, I expected Twitterers to be, well, twats about it, but surely the cooler heads of PB can see that Ukrainians ain’t whiter than white?
Apparently not.
War makes people stupid.
Truly dim. Did you wake up and think Hey, I'll cement my position as a free thinking contrarian this a.m?
Ukraine's Azov Regiment is balls out neo Nazi and probably at least as nasty as the Wagner guys, if you want some balance. But Amnesty's new rule of warfare, that an attacking army automatically takes a city because putting troops in to defend it is a war crime, is so startlingly novel that I would hope even you would notice.
"Balls out Neo-Nazi"? Heavily overegged, I think.
Sometime we will find the dividing line between what is true, and what is Russian Government talking points, or online campaigns by their propagandists / useful idiots.
It's possible to think that Russia's invasion is an imperialist monstrosity without pretending that Ukraine has a record of splendid liberal democracy untouched by corruption and extreme nationalism. Yes, the toleration of the Azov movement with its open neo-Nazi elements is a longstanding scandal in Ukraine - essentially nationalism was so strong in the country (for historical reasons that are easy to understand) that it was seen as difficult to crack down on the most extreme exponents of it - and of course Putin exploits it now. The same applied to the toleration of hero-worship for Bandera, despite his intermittent collaboration with Hitler.
The right reaction to that is surely to say - yes, that was pretty horrible, but it doesn't justify the invasion, and we are right to help Ukraine defend itself (though not, in my opinion, to extend the war to reconquering Crimea). And the same applies to other blots on Ukraine's record. If we start from the position that Ukraine is perfect and any criticism is Russian trolling, then we just set ourselves up for disillusionment - which will actually damage support for Ukraine more than clear-eyed understanding.
Amnesty is traditionally irritating for all of us who take sides in conflicts. But that's what they're for - we should support them even when they expose something embarassing about a cause we're supporting. If they started covering up bad practice because it's politically inconvenient, it would be a blow to all of us.
The issue here is they have, in effect, criticised the Ukrainians for defending their cities by putting weapons in them.
Which is not really a defensible remark under the circumstances. The issue is that Russia is trying to conquer its cities, and the way to stop civilians being at risk is to compel Russia to desist.
If they were trying to 'reconquer' (which I might add isn't really an appropriate word, as it implies they'conquered' it to start with which is not the case) Crimea, or seize Rostov, and putting their weapons in civilian areas it would be somewhat different.
Amnesty sort-of have a point.
If Ukraine are placing (say) SAM systems a hundred miles behind the front lines, in a hospital car park, so the Russians will have a hard time hitting it with counter-battery fire or missiles, then that's wrong IMO (though of course we places anti-aircraft guns on everything that didn't move in WWII, and on some things that did move (1))
But IMO Amnesty went too far in their claims. Ukraine cannot make civilians leave their homes (and if they tried, they might get accused of crimes), and the idea that Ukraine fighters should not fight in towns just because civilians are there is unconscionable - unless the Russians agree not to as well. But the towns and cities are the things both sides want to control.
This is made worse by some claims that I have seen (not from Amnesty), for instance that even having injured troops being treated in civilian hospitals makes them valid military targets. By that sort of thinking, everything in Ukraine is a target, and the Ukrainians cannot defend from anywhere except open fields.
It also ignores the *vast* number of hospitals, schools and universities that Russia has hit throughout Ukraine. It is clear that this is a strategy to denude Ukraine's civilian infrastructure, rather than to hit 'military' targets. If there was any doubt, it's the same strategy they have used in Syria and Grozny.
So Amnesty may have had a small point, and expanded it far too much. As I have pointed out, their total output appears to criticise Russia much more than Ukraine. But that one article was wrong.
"even having injured troops being treated in civilian hospitals makes them valid military targets" - deliberately targeting a *military* hospital is a straight up war crime.
I agree; I'm just pointing out what I've seen in the cesspit that Twitter can be.
Or one could take the view that Russia should not bomb schools and hospitals, regardless of what weaponry is near them, because they shouldn't be there in the first place.
What are the Ukrainians meant to do? Not defend them? Just let the Russians seize these places which may have civilians in and launch massacres?
As others have said, it's unreasonable to criticise Ukraine for putting armed forces in cities - absolutely everyone does that in a war - there is no alternative. It's reasonable to say they shouldn't base them *in* (not near) hospitals, especially if there are still patients inside, because it's inevitable that if they do then it will attract counterfire. And if they do it anyway, they can't reasonably invite the media to display the bombed hospital as evidence of an atrocious attack on defenseless civilians, and then complain if the media and NGOs ask critical questions, which is what's now happening.
Exactly the same applies to reports that Russia is using a nuclear power plant as a base for troops, because they calculate that the Ukrainians wont dare to bomb it. It's recklessly irresponsible - which is what army commmanders often are in wars.
But Nick, have you seen the vast numbers of hospitals, medical practices, schools, universities and other civilian infrastructure that Russia is hitting not just in the immediate battle areas, but all over Ukraine? I very much doubt that all of these were in use by the Ukrainian military in any meaningful manner.
In which case, there is a blanket policy in Russia to denude Ukraine's civilian infrastructure.
You could try arguing against that, except it's also what Russia did in Syria and Chechnya. Target the hospitals. Target the schools.
While there is evidence that Russia is intentionally placing their soldiers in a Nuclear Power Station I've not seen any evidence that the Ukraine is placing their soldiers in shopping centres, schools and hospitals miles from the front line.
Yet those are the places that Russia is hitting and those are the places Russia intentionally targeted in Both Syria and Chechnya - so it's not just implausible that the places being hit by Russia are valid military targets - there is confirmed history (across multiple wars) that Russia intentionally targets Civilian targets while claiming those targets are valid military ones
I do find peoples reaction to the Amnesty report rather depressing.
I mean, I expected Twitterers to be, well, twats about it, but surely the cooler heads of PB can see that Ukrainians ain’t whiter than white?
Apparently not.
War makes people stupid.
Truly dim. Did you wake up and think Hey, I'll cement my position as a free thinking contrarian this a.m?
Ukraine's Azov Regiment is balls out neo Nazi and probably at least as nasty as the Wagner guys, if you want some balance. But Amnesty's new rule of warfare, that an attacking army automatically takes a city because putting troops in to defend it is a war crime, is so startlingly novel that I would hope even you would notice.
"Balls out Neo-Nazi"? Heavily overegged, I think.
Sometime we will find the dividing line between what is true, and what is Russian Government talking points, or online campaigns by their propagandists / useful idiots.
It's possible to think that Russia's invasion is an imperialist monstrosity without pretending that Ukraine has a record of splendid liberal democracy untouched by corruption and extreme nationalism. Yes, the toleration of the Azov movement with its open neo-Nazi elements is a longstanding scandal in Ukraine - essentially nationalism was so strong in the country (for historical reasons that are easy to understand) that it was seen as difficult to crack down on the most extreme exponents of it - and of course Putin exploits it now. The same applied to the toleration of hero-worship for Bandera, despite his intermittent collaboration with Hitler.
The right reaction to that is surely to say - yes, that was pretty horrible, but it doesn't justify the invasion, and we are right to help Ukraine defend itself (though not, in my opinion, to extend the war to reconquering Crimea). And the same applies to other blots on Ukraine's record. If we start from the position that Ukraine is perfect and any criticism is Russian trolling, then we just set ourselves up for disillusionment - which will actually damage support for Ukraine more than clear-eyed understanding.
Amnesty is traditionally irritating for all of us who take sides in conflicts. But that's what they're for - we should support them even when they expose something embarassing about a cause we're supporting. If they started covering up bad practice because it's politically inconvenient, it would be a blow to all of us.
But what the Secretary General was complaining of was that Ukraine was defending in cities, not Ukranian war crimes or political prisoners.
Might as well criticise the Warsaw rising for that, or the Soviet defence of Leningrad.
I do find peoples reaction to the Amnesty report rather depressing.
I mean, I expected Twitterers to be, well, twats about it, but surely the cooler heads of PB can see that Ukrainians ain’t whiter than white?
Apparently not.
War makes people stupid.
Truly dim. Did you wake up and think Hey, I'll cement my position as a free thinking contrarian this a.m?
Ukraine's Azov Regiment is balls out neo Nazi and probably at least as nasty as the Wagner guys, if you want some balance. But Amnesty's new rule of warfare, that an attacking army automatically takes a city because putting troops in to defend it is a war crime, is so startlingly novel that I would hope even you would notice.
"Balls out Neo-Nazi"? Heavily overegged, I think.
Sometime we will find the dividing line between what is true, and what is Russian Government talking points, or online campaigns by their propagandists / useful idiots.
The Azov Regiment undoubtedly had (Neo)Nazi origins, and retains some of its insignia from its formation. In general views in Ukraine, as in much of Eastern Europe make it easy to highlight things which are unacceptable from a UK perspective. But simply taking an apparent view that Russian propaganda on these things started in 2021 is extremely naive. Much of what we have read about places like Ukraine has been sowed through Russian propaganda for years. At least since 2012-2014 if not further.
You literally have to question and treat with scepticism EVERY Russian talking point on these things. It's scary how deeply ingrained much of it is.
If you look at my link, Israel, Canada and the US didn't want much to do with them until they did. Now they may all have been falling for russian propaganda ever since 2015 but it is fair to think they probably did a bit of their own research. Not like they don't have national intel organisations.
I am not attacking them and I am sure they are far too busy this year to pursue a neo nazi agenda, just making the point that the amnesty report is bad on its merits, not on some blanket all ukrainians are angels theory.
Good morning everyone; a fine bright one here! On topic, history is history. That somewhat gnomic remark means that Ukrainian Russian relations haven't been straightforward for many many years. It's rather like the 'love/ hate' relationship that exists, in some minds anyway, between England, and I mean England, not the whole UK, and France. One could, I think, argue that Ukrainian as a nationality didn't really exist until the 19th century. In any event its current capital is one of the most important cities in Russian history and, if I'm not much mistaken, was is the cradle of Russian Christianity. Russian/Ukrainian\Nazi hostilities in WWII were quite complex; I think it's been argued that have the Nazis not been so hysterically anti-Slav there might have been a Ukrainian army on the Nazi side!
There was, although it would have been larger but for the Nazis' many atrocities in Ukraine.
England and Ireland would be a better parallel than England and France. They were equals and rivals, but for 350 years the Ukrainians have always been at best supplicants and at worst subordinates to Russia.
Obviously I concede the parallel to a professional historian! The history doesn't of course excuse the atrocities that the Russians are committing!
"Ukrainian as a nationality" - I think that it did exist, as a *culture* long before the 19th cent. It was the 19th cent where the ideas of universal rights came up against the discrimination that minority cultures suffered in multi-ethnic states/empires. Which is where the ideas of linking nations to cultures came from - if you are oppressed as a group, it seems logical to have a nation for that group. For those in that group.
Indeed; the modern concept of nation state didn't then exist, but Ukrainians and Muscovites were very different peoples for many centuries. And the former spent more of that time as part of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth.
I do find peoples reaction to the Amnesty report rather depressing.
I mean, I expected Twitterers to be, well, twats about it, but surely the cooler heads of PB can see that Ukrainians ain’t whiter than white?
Apparently not.
War makes people stupid.
Truly dim. Did you wake up and think Hey, I'll cement my position as a free thinking contrarian this a.m?
Ukraine's Azov Regiment is balls out neo Nazi and probably at least as nasty as the Wagner guys, if you want some balance. But Amnesty's new rule of warfare, that an attacking army automatically takes a city because putting troops in to defend it is a war crime, is so startlingly novel that I would hope even you would notice.
"Balls out Neo-Nazi"? Heavily overegged, I think.
Sometime we will find the dividing line between what is true, and what is Russian Government talking points, or online campaigns by their propagandists / useful idiots.
It's possible to think that Russia's invasion is an imperialist monstrosity without pretending that Ukraine has a record of splendid liberal democracy untouched by corruption and extreme nationalism. Yes, the toleration of the Azov movement with its open neo-Nazi elements is a longstanding scandal in Ukraine - essentially nationalism was so strong in the country (for historical reasons that are easy to understand) that it was seen as difficult to crack down on the most extreme exponents of it - and of course Putin exploits it now. The same applied to the toleration of hero-worship for Bandera, despite his intermittent collaboration with Hitler.
The right reaction to that is surely to say - yes, that was pretty horrible, but it doesn't justify the invasion, and we are right to help Ukraine defend itself (though not, in my opinion, to extend the war to reconquering Crimea). And the same applies to other blots on Ukraine's record. If we start from the position that Ukraine is perfect and any criticism is Russian trolling, then we just set ourselves up for disillusionment - which will actually damage support for Ukraine more than clear-eyed understanding.
Amnesty is traditionally irritating for all of us who take sides in conflicts. But that's what they're for - we should support them even when they expose something embarassing about a cause we're supporting. If they started covering up bad practice because it's politically inconvenient, it would be a blow to all of us.
But what the Secretary General was complaining of was that Ukraine was defending in cities, not Ukranian war crimes or political prisoners.
Might as well criticise the Warsaw rising for that, or the Soviet defence of Leningrad.
I do find peoples reaction to the Amnesty report rather depressing.
I mean, I expected Twitterers to be, well, twats about it, but surely the cooler heads of PB can see that Ukrainians ain’t whiter than white?
Apparently not.
War makes people stupid.
Truly dim. Did you wake up and think Hey, I'll cement my position as a free thinking contrarian this a.m?
Ukraine's Azov Regiment is balls out neo Nazi and probably at least as nasty as the Wagner guys, if you want some balance. But Amnesty's new rule of warfare, that an attacking army automatically takes a city because putting troops in to defend it is a war crime, is so startlingly novel that I would hope even you would notice.
"Balls out Neo-Nazi"? Heavily overegged, I think.
Sometime we will find the dividing line between what is true, and what is Russian Government talking points, or online campaigns by their propagandists / useful idiots.
It's possible to think that Russia's invasion is an imperialist monstrosity without pretending that Ukraine has a record of splendid liberal democracy untouched by corruption and extreme nationalism. Yes, the toleration of the Azov movement with its open neo-Nazi elements is a longstanding scandal in Ukraine - essentially nationalism was so strong in the country (for historical reasons that are easy to understand) that it was seen as difficult to crack down on the most extreme exponents of it - and of course Putin exploits it now. The same applied to the toleration of hero-worship for Bandera, despite his intermittent collaboration with Hitler.
The right reaction to that is surely to say - yes, that was pretty horrible, but it doesn't justify the invasion, and we are right to help Ukraine defend itself (though not, in my opinion, to extend the war to reconquering Crimea). And the same applies to other blots on Ukraine's record. If we start from the position that Ukraine is perfect and any criticism is Russian trolling, then we just set ourselves up for disillusionment - which will actually damage support for Ukraine more than clear-eyed understanding.
Amnesty is traditionally irritating for all of us who take sides in conflicts. But that's what they're for - we should support them even when they expose something embarassing about a cause we're supporting. If they started covering up bad practice because it's politically inconvenient, it would be a blow to all of us.
But what the Secretary General was complaining of was that Ukraine was defending in cities, not Ukranian war crimes or political prisoners.
Might as well criticise the Warsaw rising for that, or the Soviet defence of Leningrad.
If this London weather forecast verifies we are looking at an unprecedented drought. Not a hint of rain for another ten days, and everything is already parched
Smarkets have a market on the Florida governor race, with DeSantis on 1.09 & Crist on 12.5.
This could be one to watch. Last time (in 2018) De Santis barely managed to win with 49.6% against 49.2% for a relatively weak Dem candidate (Andrew Gillum).
Charlie Crist is a significantly stronger candidate, being a former Republican and a former Governor, although the environment for Dems right now is a lot more unfavourable than 2018.
Still, there is a possibility that a backlash driven by the SC abortion ruling might be enough to cause problems for DeSantis, specially with a moderate Dem opponent & in a relatively purple state.
The last DeSantis vs Crist poll was in Feb & had DeSantis a whopping 21 points ahead, but earlier polls had the margin a lot closer (between 6 to 8 points).
@HYUFD has been of the opinion that this is a close fight for some time. I have been sceptical, but... I do wonder. Florida is extremely pro-Choice; Florida's Republican legislature has passed an *extremely* restrictive anti-abortion law; and DeSantis has chosen to suspend a prosecutor who has said he won't prosecute those accused of abortion offences.
We have seen from Kansas that abortion can be a great motivator. Twenty percent of voters came out just to vote in the referendum.
I'd take 12.5 on Crist. Heck; I might take 8s or higher.
Crist beats DeSantis 45% to 44% in the latest poll
Or one could take the view that Russia should not bomb schools and hospitals, regardless of what weaponry is near them, because they shouldn't be there in the first place.
What are the Ukrainians meant to do? Not defend them? Just let the Russians seize these places which may have civilians in and launch massacres?
As others have said, it's unreasonable to criticise Ukraine for putting armed forces in cities - absolutely everyone does that in a war - there is no alternative. It's reasonable to say they shouldn't base them *in* (not near) hospitals, especially if there are still patients inside, because it's inevitable that if they do then it will attract counterfire. And if they do it anyway, they can't reasonably invite the media to display the bombed hospital as evidence of an atrocious attack on defenseless civilians, and then complain if the media and NGOs ask critical questions, which is what's now happening.
Exactly the same applies to reports that Russia is using a nuclear power plant as a base for troops, because they calculate that the Ukrainians wont dare to bomb it. It's recklessly irresponsible - which is what army commmanders often are in wars.
Again, you are overlooking the obvious. The issue is that Russia is attacking. Nobody is forcing them to do that. The problem would be solved if they stopped. If they don't want to counter fire on schools'n'hospitals, it is open to them to stop doing so. In the case of Chernobyl, again, there would be no risk to it if Russia hadn't invaded.
I have to say some of the stuff said about this comes alarmingly close to victim blaming.
In the Middle East, we condemned the baddies for using human shields.
I do find peoples reaction to the Amnesty report rather depressing.
I mean, I expected Twitterers to be, well, twats about it, but surely the cooler heads of PB can see that Ukrainians ain’t whiter than white?
Apparently not.
War makes people stupid.
Truly dim. Did you wake up and think Hey, I'll cement my position as a free thinking contrarian this a.m?
Ukraine's Azov Regiment is balls out neo Nazi and probably at least as nasty as the Wagner guys, if you want some balance. But Amnesty's new rule of warfare, that an attacking army automatically takes a city because putting troops in to defend it is a war crime, is so startlingly novel that I would hope even you would notice.
"Balls out Neo-Nazi"? Heavily overegged, I think.
Sometime we will find the dividing line between what is true, and what is Russian Government talking points, or online campaigns by their propagandists / useful idiots.
It's possible to think that Russia's invasion is an imperialist monstrosity without pretending that Ukraine has a record of splendid liberal democracy untouched by corruption and extreme nationalism. Yes, the toleration of the Azov movement with its open neo-Nazi elements is a longstanding scandal in Ukraine - essentially nationalism was so strong in the country (for historical reasons that are easy to understand) that it was seen as difficult to crack down on the most extreme exponents of it - and of course Putin exploits it now. The same applied to the toleration of hero-worship for Bandera, despite his intermittent collaboration with Hitler.
The right reaction to that is surely to say - yes, that was pretty horrible, but it doesn't justify the invasion, and we are right to help Ukraine defend itself (though not, in my opinion, to extend the war to reconquering Crimea). And the same applies to other blots on Ukraine's record. If we start from the position that Ukraine is perfect and any criticism is Russian trolling, then we just set ourselves up for disillusionment - which will actually damage support for Ukraine more than clear-eyed understanding.
Amnesty is traditionally irritating for all of us who take sides in conflicts. But that's what they're for - we should support them even when they expose something embarassing about a cause we're supporting. If they started covering up bad practice because it's politically inconvenient, it would be a blow to all of us.
But what the Secretary General was complaining of was that Ukraine was defending in cities, not Ukranian war crimes or political prisoners.
Might as well criticise the Warsaw rising for that, or the Soviet defence of Leningrad.
Even if the Tories go back into the lead would she risk an early election ? Personally I can’t see a 2022 election . It’s possible that things will start improving into 2024 and the Tories can then say “ don’t throw away all the hard work “ , “we’re through the worst and we don’t want to go back to square one with Labour “.
That I assume will be their mantra around an election . Of course this is dependent on the economy improving .
Of course the change narrative after 14 years of Tory government could also be strong .
I do find peoples reaction to the Amnesty report rather depressing.
I mean, I expected Twitterers to be, well, twats about it, but surely the cooler heads of PB can see that Ukrainians ain’t whiter than white?
Apparently not.
War makes people stupid.
Truly dim. Did you wake up and think Hey, I'll cement my position as a free thinking contrarian this a.m?
Ukraine's Azov Regiment is balls out neo Nazi and probably at least as nasty as the Wagner guys, if you want some balance. But Amnesty's new rule of warfare, that an attacking army automatically takes a city because putting troops in to defend it is a war crime, is so startlingly novel that I would hope even you would notice.
"Balls out Neo-Nazi"? Heavily overegged, I think.
Sometime we will find the dividing line between what is true, and what is Russian Government talking points, or online campaigns by their propagandists / useful idiots.
The Azov Regiment undoubtedly had (Neo)Nazi origins, and retains some of its insignia from its formation. In general views in Ukraine, as in much of Eastern Europe make it easy to highlight things which are unacceptable from a UK perspective. But simply taking an apparent view that Russian propaganda on these things started in 2021 is extremely naive. Much of what we have read about places like Ukraine has been sowed through Russian propaganda for years. At least since 2012-2014 if not further.
You literally have to question and treat with scepticism EVERY Russian talking point on these things. It's scary how deeply ingrained much of it is.
If you look at my link, Israel, Canada and the US didn't want much to do with them until they did. Now they may all have been falling for russian propaganda ever since 2015 but it is fair to think they probably did a bit of their own research. Not like they don't have national intel organisations.
I am not attacking them and I am sure they are far too busy this year to pursue a neo nazi agenda, just making the point that the amnesty report is bad on its merits, not on some blanket all ukrainians are angels theory.
Good morning everyone; a fine bright one here! On topic, history is history. That somewhat gnomic remark means that Ukrainian Russian relations haven't been straightforward for many many years. It's rather like the 'love/ hate' relationship that exists, in some minds anyway, between England, and I mean England, not the whole UK, and France. One could, I think, argue that Ukrainian as a nationality didn't really exist until the 19th century. In any event its current capital is one of the most important cities in Russian history and, if I'm not much mistaken, was is the cradle of Russian Christianity. Russian/Ukrainian\Nazi hostilities in WWII were quite complex; I think it's been argued that have the Nazis not been so hysterically anti-Slav there might have been a Ukrainian army on the Nazi side!
There was, although it would have been larger but for the Nazis' many atrocities in Ukraine.
England and Ireland would be a better parallel than England and France. They were equals and rivals, but for 350 years the Ukrainians have always been at best supplicants and at worst subordinates to Russia.
Obviously I concede the parallel to a professional historian! The history doesn't of course excuse the atrocities that the Russians are committing!
"Ukrainian as a nationality" - I think that it did exist, as a *culture* long before the 19th cent. It was the 19th cent where the ideas of universal rights came up against the discrimination that minority cultures suffered in multi-ethnic states/empires. Which is where the ideas of linking nations to cultures came from - if you are oppressed as a group, it seems logical to have a nation for that group. For those in that group.
Indeed; the modern concept of nation state didn't then exist, but Ukrainians and Muscovites were very different peoples for many centuries. And the former spent more of that time as part of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Didn't it? To me a nation state exists when you can confidently predict based on where you live who is going to tax you and who is going to cut your head off if you start murdering folk. There have been places like that for millennia. What is the modern element over and above that?
It's time to unite. 21 current and former colleagues who have sat around the Cabinet table have come together to back Liz. She will unite our Party, beat Keir Starmer, and is trusted to deliver for Britain 👇 https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1555468229392437249/photo/1
✅ Jake Berry ✅ Suella Braverman ✅ James Cleverly ✅ Simon Clarke ✅ Therese Coffey ✅ Michelle Donelan ✅ Nadine Dorries ✅ David Frost ✅ Sajid Javid ✅ David Jones ✅ Kwasi Kwarteng ✅ Brandon Lewis ✅ Penny Mordaunt ✅ David Mundell ✅ John Redwood ✅ Jacob Rees-Mogg ✅ Iain Duncan Smith ✅ Anne-Marie Trevelyan ✅ Ben Wallace ✅ John Whittingdale ✅ Nadhim Zahawi
The deluded, the desperate, the dismal and the demented...
Ex squeezes, perverts, job applicants and tax avoiders. Meanwhile Rishi has got Hague, Major and Clarke behind him.
It’s interesting that the party and defeating Labour comes before the country. You would have thought they were not in government.
By my reckoning Liz Truss may just nip ahead of Henry Campbell-Bannerman in the longevity of PMs terms if she waits until last possible date for GE in Jan 2025.
Even if the Tories go back into the lead would she risk an early election ? Personally I can’t see a 2022 election . It’s possible that things will start improving into 2024 and the Tories can then say “ don’t throw away all the hard work “ , “we’re through the worst and we don’t want to go back to square one with Labour “.
That I assume will be their mantra around an election . Of course this is dependent on the economy improving .
Of course the change narrative after 14 years of Tory government could also be strong .
Even if Truss gets a lead she is unlikely to get as big a bounce as May did and May lost her majority in her snap election after just a year in power.
Major was the last leader who went into a general election with a majority having taken over as PM midterm and who held that majority and he waited a full 5 years
The New Statesman @NewStatesman EXCLUSIVE: In a leaked video, Rishi Sunak boasted to Conservative Party members that he was prepared to take public money out of “deprived urban areas” to help wealthy towns.
If this London weather forecast verifies we are looking at an unprecedented drought. Not a hint of rain for another ten days, and everything is already parched
See also the Met Office Long Range Forecast:
UK long range weather forecast Tuesday 9 Aug - Thursday 18 Aug Most places are likely to see a fair amount of settled weather throughout this period. Cloudy at first in the far north and northwest, with some outbreaks of light rain possible. Mostly dry elsewhere with long sunny spells, especially across the south. Generally warm, and locally very warm or even hot in central and southern parts. Winds light to moderate for most, but fresh to strong in the far northwest, and becoming breezy near south and southeastern coasts. Further into the period there is still the chance of some periods of organised rain in the north, but generally the dry weather is likely to persist across the country. Temperatures remaining above average widely, with further spells of very warm weather possible. Updated: 15:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Friday 19 Aug - Friday 2 Sep Occasional bouts of more unsettled weather are likely for this period. These will bring outbreaks of rain and also increase the likelihood of thunderstorms, especially in the south and west. Temperatures near normal to warm, but very warm and humid at times in the south. Updated: 16:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Add 'drought' to the list of issues voters will be blaming PM Truss for in September. ;-)
The New Statesman @NewStatesman EXCLUSIVE: In a leaked video, Rishi Sunak boasted to Conservative Party members that he was prepared to take public money out of “deprived urban areas” to help wealthy towns.
It's time to unite. 21 current and former colleagues who have sat around the Cabinet table have come together to back Liz. She will unite our Party, beat Keir Starmer, and is trusted to deliver for Britain 👇 https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1555468229392437249/photo/1
✅ Jake Berry ✅ Suella Braverman ✅ James Cleverly ✅ Simon Clarke ✅ Therese Coffey ✅ Michelle Donelan ✅ Nadine Dorries ✅ David Frost ✅ Sajid Javid ✅ David Jones ✅ Kwasi Kwarteng ✅ Brandon Lewis ✅ Penny Mordaunt ✅ David Mundell ✅ John Redwood ✅ Jacob Rees-Mogg ✅ Iain Duncan Smith ✅ Anne-Marie Trevelyan ✅ Ben Wallace ✅ John Whittingdale ✅ Nadhim Zahawi
The deluded, the desperate, the dismal and the demented...
Ex squeezes, perverts, job applicants and tax avoiders. Meanwhile Rishi has got Hague, Major and Clarke behind him.
Is that supposed to be a reason to go for or against Rishi?
A bit like listing JRM and Dorries for Liz, hardly an endorsement of Liz.
Even if the Tories go back into the lead would she risk an early election ? Personally I can’t see a 2022 election . It’s possible that things will start improving into 2024 and the Tories can then say “ don’t throw away all the hard work “ , “we’re through the worst and we don’t want to back to square one with Labour “.
That I assume will be their mantra around an election . Of course this is dependent on the economy improving .
Of course the change narrative after 14 years of Tory government could also be strong .
Against that, CCHQ might take the view that it is best to go to the country before Labour can replace Keir Starmer.
On 2022, there is quite a narrow window to call an election after reaching 10 Downing Street on 5th or 6th September. The 12th December 2019 general election was about as late as practicable, so the new Prime Minister would have less than two months to call an election before the end of October. Is that enough time to convince yourself that any poll lead is resilient?
Boris was rumoured to be contemplating a 2023 election so it is likely CCHQ has a blueprint on the shelf.
Even if the Tories go back into the lead would she risk an early election ? Personally I can’t see a 2022 election . It’s possible that things will start improving into 2024 and the Tories can then say “ don’t throw away all the hard work “ , “we’re through the worst and we don’t want to go back to square one with Labour “.
That I assume will be their mantra around an election . Of course this is dependent on the economy improving .
Of course the change narrative after 14 years of Tory government could also be strong .
Any 2022 election will mean Truss risks being the shortest serving PM, which she may not care about but she might resile from if the lead is small. She wont risk it with less than double digits i think. She might risk March 23 if she had retained a five point plus lead throughout winter
To call an election the Tories would want several weeks - at least - of very solid poll leads. They’re not going to do it after one YouGov showing them +4
By the time Truss is crowned, if it is she, this glorious summer will already be slipping into memory, and we will all be feeling - literally and figuratively - the chill winds of autumn
The Tories will not be getting big consistent poll leads this autumn. There won’t be an election
It's time to unite. 21 current and former colleagues who have sat around the Cabinet table have come together to back Liz. She will unite our Party, beat Keir Starmer, and is trusted to deliver for Britain 👇 https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1555468229392437249/photo/1
✅ Jake Berry ✅ Suella Braverman ✅ James Cleverly ✅ Simon Clarke ✅ Therese Coffey ✅ Michelle Donelan ✅ Nadine Dorries ✅ David Frost ✅ Sajid Javid ✅ David Jones ✅ Kwasi Kwarteng ✅ Brandon Lewis ✅ Penny Mordaunt ✅ David Mundell ✅ John Redwood ✅ Jacob Rees-Mogg ✅ Iain Duncan Smith ✅ Anne-Marie Trevelyan ✅ Ben Wallace ✅ John Whittingdale ✅ Nadhim Zahawi
The deluded, the desperate, the dismal and the demented...
Even if the Tories go back into the lead would she risk an early election ? Personally I can’t see a 2022 election . It’s possible that things will start improving into 2024 and the Tories can then say “ don’t throw away all the hard work “ , “we’re through the worst and we don’t want to go back to square one with Labour “.
That I assume will be their mantra around an election . Of course this is dependent on the economy improving .
Of course the change narrative after 14 years of Tory government could also be strong .
Even if Truss gets a lead she is unlikely to get as big a bounce as May did and May lost her majority in her snap election after just a year in power.
Major was the last leader who went into a general election with a majority having taken over as PM midterm and who held that majority and he waited a full 5 years
Four years and ten months, to be exact. Which was eighteen months after becoming PM.
If this London weather forecast verifies we are looking at an unprecedented drought. Not a hint of rain for another ten days, and everything is already parched
Not unprecedented - 1976 says 'hold my beer'.
its also very much a south and south east drought. To the north and west there is no drought.
I just came across this click-bait piece about the differences between North and South Korea. Some things look very similar; other things look rather different...
(Yes, I know choice of photo can make a big differences, but I'd say this didn't go out of its way to make North Korea look terrible; perhaps quite the opposite.)
The New Statesman @NewStatesman EXCLUSIVE: In a leaked video, Rishi Sunak boasted to Conservative Party members that he was prepared to take public money out of “deprived urban areas” to help wealthy towns.
That impressively bad even for him. Defunding deprivation relief.
If this London weather forecast verifies we are looking at an unprecedented drought. Not a hint of rain for another ten days, and everything is already parched
See also the Met Office Long Range Forecast:
UK long range weather forecast Tuesday 9 Aug - Thursday 18 Aug Most places are likely to see a fair amount of settled weather throughout this period. Cloudy at first in the far north and northwest, with some outbreaks of light rain possible. Mostly dry elsewhere with long sunny spells, especially across the south. Generally warm, and locally very warm or even hot in central and southern parts. Winds light to moderate for most, but fresh to strong in the far northwest, and becoming breezy near south and southeastern coasts. Further into the period there is still the chance of some periods of organised rain in the north, but generally the dry weather is likely to persist across the country. Temperatures remaining above average widely, with further spells of very warm weather possible. Updated: 15:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Friday 19 Aug - Friday 2 Sep Occasional bouts of more unsettled weather are likely for this period. These will bring outbreaks of rain and also increase the likelihood of thunderstorms, especially in the south and west. Temperatures near normal to warm, but very warm and humid at times in the south. Updated: 16:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Add 'drought' to the list of issues voters will be blaming PM Truss for in September. ;-)
You’re on fairly safe ground when you’re predicting “occasional bouts of more unsettled weather” somewhere in the UK - in three weeks time
Is there any way such a forecast could be proven wrong?
Also there might be outbreaks of rain and possibly storms, perhaps in the south and west. And at times there will be clouds, and, at other times, fewer clouds. Air will prevail
If this London weather forecast verifies we are looking at an unprecedented drought. Not a hint of rain for another ten days, and everything is already parched
According to these observations from Hampstead the last 365 days has been the driest 365 day period in Hampstead since records began*.
To call an election the Tories would want several weeks - at least - of very solid poll leads. They’re not going to do it after one YouGov showing them +4
By the time Truss is crowned, if it is she, this glorious summer will already be slipping into memory, and we will all be feeling - literally and figuratively - the chill winds of autumn
The Tories will not be getting big consistent poll leads this autumn. There won’t be an election
Yup. The only reasons to go in autumn 2022 are to avoid a really calamatous defeat in 2024 and to leave Labour to change the poonami nappy of recession. Both of those factors might be rational. But neither of them really works politically.
By my reckoning Liz Truss may just nip ahead of Henry Campbell-Bannerman in the longevity of PMs terms if she waits until last possible date for GE in Jan 2025.
Johnson has just overtaken May today.
3 years and 12 days of farcical mismanagement, compared to TM's 3 years 11 days of, er, farcical mismanagement.
I do find peoples reaction to the Amnesty report rather depressing.
I mean, I expected Twitterers to be, well, twats about it, but surely the cooler heads of PB can see that Ukrainians ain’t whiter than white?
Apparently not.
War makes people stupid.
Truly dim. Did you wake up and think Hey, I'll cement my position as a free thinking contrarian this a.m?
Ukraine's Azov Regiment is balls out neo Nazi and probably at least as nasty as the Wagner guys, if you want some balance. But Amnesty's new rule of warfare, that an attacking army automatically takes a city because putting troops in to defend it is a war crime, is so startlingly novel that I would hope even you would notice.
"Balls out Neo-Nazi"? Heavily overegged, I think.
Sometime we will find the dividing line between what is true, and what is Russian Government talking points, or online campaigns by their propagandists / useful idiots.
It's possible to think that Russia's invasion is an imperialist monstrosity without pretending that Ukraine has a record of splendid liberal democracy untouched by corruption and extreme nationalism. Yes, the toleration of the Azov movement with its open neo-Nazi elements is a longstanding scandal in Ukraine - essentially nationalism was so strong in the country (for historical reasons that are easy to understand) that it was seen as difficult to crack down on the most extreme exponents of it - and of course Putin exploits it now. The same applied to the toleration of hero-worship for Bandera, despite his intermittent collaboration with Hitler.
The right reaction to that is surely to say - yes, that was pretty horrible...
That would only be the "right reaction" if you were to ignore the Euromaidan and the last decade of history.
Or one could take the view that Russia should not bomb schools and hospitals, regardless of what weaponry is near them, because they shouldn't be there in the first place.
What are the Ukrainians meant to do? Not defend them? Just let the Russians seize these places which may have civilians in and launch massacres?
As others have said, it's unreasonable to criticise Ukraine for putting armed forces in cities - absolutely everyone does that in a war - there is no alternative. It's reasonable to say they shouldn't base them *in* (not near) hospitals, especially if there are still patients inside, because it's inevitable that if they do then it will attract counterfire. And if they do it anyway, they can't reasonably invite the media to display the bombed hospital as evidence of an atrocious attack on defenseless civilians, and then complain if the media and NGOs ask critical questions, which is what's now happening.
Exactly the same applies to reports that Russia is using a nuclear power plant as a base for troops, because they calculate that the Ukrainians wont dare to bomb it. It's recklessly irresponsible - which is what army commmanders often are in wars.
Again, you are overlooking the obvious. The issue is that Russia is attacking. Nobody is forcing them to do that. The problem would be solved if they stopped. If they don't want to counter fire on schools'n'hospitals, it is open to them to stop doing so. In the case of Chernobyl, again, there would be no risk to it if Russia hadn't invaded.
I have to say some of the stuff said about this comes alarmingly close to victim blaming.
In the Middle East, we condemned the baddies for using human shields.
Ukraine are doing everything they can to evacuate civilians from the front lines. You can't accurately describe how they're fighting the war as using human shields.
If this London weather forecast verifies we are looking at an unprecedented drought. Not a hint of rain for another ten days, and everything is already parched
Not unprecedented - 1976 says 'hold my beer'.
its also very much a south and south east drought. To the north and west there is no drought.
The Welsh reservoirs got rather low a couple of weeks back, but the recent rain has topped them up nicely. Elan Valley is still around 80% but that's because one of the dams is having work done to it so they can't fill the reservoir.
The Derwent Valley figures are still less than stellar.
By my reckoning Liz Truss may just nip ahead of Henry Campbell-Bannerman in the longevity of PMs terms if she waits until last possible date for GE in Jan 2025.
Johnson has just overtaken May today.
3 years and 12 days of farcical mismanagement, compared to TM's 3 years 11 days of, er, farcical mismanagement.
There is a pleasing symmetry in that they were both brought down by Boris Johnson.
The New Statesman @NewStatesman EXCLUSIVE: In a leaked video, Rishi Sunak boasted to Conservative Party members that he was prepared to take public money out of “deprived urban areas” to help wealthy towns.
Oh how I remember the howls about "Liz Truss' dementia tax moment" being breathlessly spouted here under a week ago. The conservatives are lucky Sunak is heading to defeat.
Even if the Tories go back into the lead would she risk an early election ? Personally I can’t see a 2022 election . It’s possible that things will start improving into 2024 and the Tories can then say “ don’t throw away all the hard work “ , “we’re through the worst and we don’t want to go back to square one with Labour “.
That I assume will be their mantra around an election . Of course this is dependent on the economy improving .
Of course the change narrative after 14 years of Tory government could also be strong .
The importance of fighting the election on a change ticket is the best argument for Truss engineering an early election. Despite being in Cabinet for many years, the public are probably less familiar with her than with Starmer, and so she might just be able to pull it off, absurd though that would be objectively.
If this London weather forecast verifies we are looking at an unprecedented drought. Not a hint of rain for another ten days, and everything is already parched
See also the Met Office Long Range Forecast:
UK long range weather forecast Tuesday 9 Aug - Thursday 18 Aug Most places are likely to see a fair amount of settled weather throughout this period. Cloudy at first in the far north and northwest, with some outbreaks of light rain possible. Mostly dry elsewhere with long sunny spells, especially across the south. Generally warm, and locally very warm or even hot in central and southern parts. Winds light to moderate for most, but fresh to strong in the far northwest, and becoming breezy near south and southeastern coasts. Further into the period there is still the chance of some periods of organised rain in the north, but generally the dry weather is likely to persist across the country. Temperatures remaining above average widely, with further spells of very warm weather possible. Updated: 15:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Friday 19 Aug - Friday 2 Sep Occasional bouts of more unsettled weather are likely for this period. These will bring outbreaks of rain and also increase the likelihood of thunderstorms, especially in the south and west. Temperatures near normal to warm, but very warm and humid at times in the south. Updated: 16:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Add 'drought' to the list of issues voters will be blaming PM Truss for in September. ;-)
You’re on fairly safe ground when you’re predicting “occasional bouts of more unsettled weather” somewhere in the UK - in three weeks time
Is there any way such a forecast could be proven wrong?
Also there might be outbreaks of rain and possibly storms, perhaps in the south and west. And at times there will be clouds, and, at other times, fewer clouds. Air will prevail
That's fair; the 3-4 week section of the Met Office LRF tends to be rather cagey. I didn't read that section as 'drought over' though - we'd need several weeks of rain for that. (I was actually posting this to support your concern about drought.)
Still, at least we won't be moaning about a 'wash-out summer' this year, eh?
The New Statesman @NewStatesman EXCLUSIVE: In a leaked video, Rishi Sunak boasted to Conservative Party members that he was prepared to take public money out of “deprived urban areas” to help wealthy towns.
Oh how I remember the howls about "Liz Truss' dementia tax moment" being breathlessly spouted here under a week ago. The conservatives are lucky Sunak is heading to defeat.
Rishi Sunak boasted to Conservative Party members that he was prepared to take public money out of “deprived urban areas” to help wealthy towns.
As would Liz Truss on her current "plans". The only difference between them is that Sunak's universe isn't quite as parallel.
Edit. And to be fair, Sunak did actually provide vulnerable people with £400 - £800 to help with their fuel bills. Not nearly enough, but Truss is proposing to do nothing at all for them.
I do find peoples reaction to the Amnesty report rather depressing.
I mean, I expected Twitterers to be, well, twats about it, but surely the cooler heads of PB can see that Ukrainians ain’t whiter than white?
Apparently not.
War makes people stupid.
Truly dim. Did you wake up and think Hey, I'll cement my position as a free thinking contrarian this a.m?
Ukraine's Azov Regiment is balls out neo Nazi and probably at least as nasty as the Wagner guys, if you want some balance. But Amnesty's new rule of warfare, that an attacking army automatically takes a city because putting troops in to defend it is a war crime, is so startlingly novel that I would hope even you would notice.
"Balls out Neo-Nazi"? Heavily overegged, I think.
Sometime we will find the dividing line between what is true, and what is Russian Government talking points, or online campaigns by their propagandists / useful idiots.
The Azov Regiment undoubtedly had (Neo)Nazi origins, and retains some of its insignia from its formation. In general views in Ukraine, as in much of Eastern Europe make it easy to highlight things which are unacceptable from a UK perspective. But simply taking an apparent view that Russian propaganda on these things started in 2021 is extremely naive. Much of what we have read about places like Ukraine has been sowed through Russian propaganda for years. At least since 2012-2014 if not further.
You literally have to question and treat with scepticism EVERY Russian talking point on these things. It's scary how deeply ingrained much of it is.
If you look at my link, Israel, Canada and the US didn't want much to do with them until they did. Now they may all have been falling for russian propaganda ever since 2015 but it is fair to think they probably did a bit of their own research. Not like they don't have national intel organisations.
I am not attacking them and I am sure they are far too busy this year to pursue a neo nazi agenda, just making the point that the amnesty report is bad on its merits, not on some blanket all ukrainians are angels theory.
Good morning everyone; a fine bright one here! On topic, history is history. That somewhat gnomic remark means that Ukrainian Russian relations haven't been straightforward for many many years. It's rather like the 'love/ hate' relationship that exists, in some minds anyway, between England, and I mean England, not the whole UK, and France. One could, I think, argue that Ukrainian as a nationality didn't really exist until the 19th century. In any event its current capital is one of the most important cities in Russian history and, if I'm not much mistaken, was is the cradle of Russian Christianity. Russian/Ukrainian\Nazi hostilities in WWII were quite complex; I think it's been argued that have the Nazis not been so hysterically anti-Slav there might have been a Ukrainian army on the Nazi side!
It's really nothing like the relationship between England and France.
Ydoethyr pointed out, and I accepted, that it was more like the relationship between England and Ireland. You can never find direct comparisons of course, only similarities.
The New Statesman @NewStatesman EXCLUSIVE: In a leaked video, Rishi Sunak boasted to Conservative Party members that he was prepared to take public money out of “deprived urban areas” to help wealthy towns.
Oh how I remember the howls about "Liz Truss' dementia tax moment" being breathlessly spouted here under a week ago. The conservatives are lucky Sunak is heading to defeat.
Not sure how damning that is. No town is so wealthy that it is self sustaining on private money. If it deserves some money, then it is conceptually possible it is getting less than it deserves relative to somewhere else.
If this London weather forecast verifies we are looking at an unprecedented drought. Not a hint of rain for another ten days, and everything is already parched
Not unprecedented - 1976 says 'hold my beer'.
its also very much a south and south east drought. To the north and west there is no drought.
The Welsh reservoirs got rather low a couple of weeks back, but the recent rain has topped them up nicely. Elan Valley is still around 80% but that's because one of the dams is having work done to it so they can't fill the reservoir.
The Derwent Valley figures are still less than stellar.
If this London weather forecast verifies we are looking at an unprecedented drought. Not a hint of rain for another ten days, and everything is already parched
See also the Met Office Long Range Forecast:
UK long range weather forecast Tuesday 9 Aug - Thursday 18 Aug Most places are likely to see a fair amount of settled weather throughout this period. Cloudy at first in the far north and northwest, with some outbreaks of light rain possible. Mostly dry elsewhere with long sunny spells, especially across the south. Generally warm, and locally very warm or even hot in central and southern parts. Winds light to moderate for most, but fresh to strong in the far northwest, and becoming breezy near south and southeastern coasts. Further into the period there is still the chance of some periods of organised rain in the north, but generally the dry weather is likely to persist across the country. Temperatures remaining above average widely, with further spells of very warm weather possible. Updated: 15:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Friday 19 Aug - Friday 2 Sep Occasional bouts of more unsettled weather are likely for this period. These will bring outbreaks of rain and also increase the likelihood of thunderstorms, especially in the south and west. Temperatures near normal to warm, but very warm and humid at times in the south. Updated: 16:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Add 'drought' to the list of issues voters will be blaming PM Truss for in September. ;-)
The Met Office three-month outlook ends with:
"...there are no strong signals for a significant amelioration of current dry conditions."
Course, precipitation is harder to forecast than temperature. Normally Sep-Nov is the wettest season in England & Wales.
I've no skin in the game, but I thought Sunak's sneering reference to "lefty lawyers" in last night's Sky debate was pretty obnoxious.
Surely there must be some Tories out there who don't like the race to the bottom and would rather the candidates weren't indulging in dog whistles to please the Daily Mail brigade? It's a pretty unedifying spectacle. If I had a vote, it would be "none of the above". Though I guess that's why I don't have a vote.
The New Statesman @NewStatesman EXCLUSIVE: In a leaked video, Rishi Sunak boasted to Conservative Party members that he was prepared to take public money out of “deprived urban areas” to help wealthy towns.
The New Statesman @NewStatesman EXCLUSIVE: In a leaked video, Rishi Sunak boasted to Conservative Party members that he was prepared to take public money out of “deprived urban areas” to help wealthy towns.
Some of us have been making the point for a while, that the problem isn’t just that he’s rich - but that he’s so rich as to have no understanding of a household budget, has no empathy at all, and can’t see past numbers on a spreadsheet having been totally caputerd by the Treasury mandarins.
Hey, VAT from petrol is up 50% this year, on slightly reduced volumes, so we are raising money for the Treasury and making progress towards Net Zero - doubleplusgood. Meanwhile, millions of people are trying to work out how to manage their petrol bill.
The New Statesman @NewStatesman EXCLUSIVE: In a leaked video, Rishi Sunak boasted to Conservative Party members that he was prepared to take public money out of “deprived urban areas” to help wealthy towns.
Oh how I remember the howls about "Liz Truss' dementia tax moment" being breathlessly spouted here under a week ago. The conservatives are lucky Sunak is heading to defeat.
Not sure how damning that is. No town is so wealthy that it is self sustaining on private money. If it deserves some money, then it is conceptually possible it is getting less than it deserves relative to somewhere else.
Not a smoking gun.
Yebbut it’s the gormlessness of not realising what goes down well with tiny audience X is steaming slurry to much larger group Y. Managing that constant balancing act is arguably the top requirement for a pol in the modern age.
Looks like both Truss and Sunak are a bit rubbish.
Agree. But there are degrees of rubbish and Truss is further along the scale than Sunak. All reasonable and informed people should hope for Sunak as PM, given we are stuck with this miserable set.
If this London weather forecast verifies we are looking at an unprecedented drought. Not a hint of rain for another ten days, and everything is already parched
See also the Met Office Long Range Forecast:
UK long range weather forecast Tuesday 9 Aug - Thursday 18 Aug Most places are likely to see a fair amount of settled weather throughout this period. Cloudy at first in the far north and northwest, with some outbreaks of light rain possible. Mostly dry elsewhere with long sunny spells, especially across the south. Generally warm, and locally very warm or even hot in central and southern parts. Winds light to moderate for most, but fresh to strong in the far northwest, and becoming breezy near south and southeastern coasts. Further into the period there is still the chance of some periods of organised rain in the north, but generally the dry weather is likely to persist across the country. Temperatures remaining above average widely, with further spells of very warm weather possible. Updated: 15:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Friday 19 Aug - Friday 2 Sep Occasional bouts of more unsettled weather are likely for this period. These will bring outbreaks of rain and also increase the likelihood of thunderstorms, especially in the south and west. Temperatures near normal to warm, but very warm and humid at times in the south. Updated: 16:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Add 'drought' to the list of issues voters will be blaming PM Truss for in September. ;-)
You’re on fairly safe ground when you’re predicting “occasional bouts of more unsettled weather” somewhere in the UK - in three weeks time
Is there any way such a forecast could be proven wrong?
Also there might be outbreaks of rain and possibly storms, perhaps in the south and west. And at times there will be clouds, and, at other times, fewer clouds. Air will prevail
That's fair; the 3-4 week section of the Met Office LRF tends to be rather cagey. I didn't read that section as 'drought over' though - we'd need several weeks of rain for that. (I was actually posting this to support your concern about drought.)
Still, at least we won't be moaning about a 'wash-out summer' this year, eh?
I wasn’t arguing merely noting the ludicrously vague language of the longer range forecast, which is so enigmatic it can’t ever be “wrong”
We are certainly in a drought now. I guess that’s bad. However, given the horribleness of everything else in the world, I reckon I’ll cope if it means more weeks of lovely warm sunshine. I intend to spend this afternoon in Regent’s Park
If this London weather forecast verifies we are looking at an unprecedented drought. Not a hint of rain for another ten days, and everything is already parched
See also the Met Office Long Range Forecast:
UK long range weather forecast Tuesday 9 Aug - Thursday 18 Aug Most places are likely to see a fair amount of settled weather throughout this period. Cloudy at first in the far north and northwest, with some outbreaks of light rain possible. Mostly dry elsewhere with long sunny spells, especially across the south. Generally warm, and locally very warm or even hot in central and southern parts. Winds light to moderate for most, but fresh to strong in the far northwest, and becoming breezy near south and southeastern coasts. Further into the period there is still the chance of some periods of organised rain in the north, but generally the dry weather is likely to persist across the country. Temperatures remaining above average widely, with further spells of very warm weather possible. Updated: 15:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Friday 19 Aug - Friday 2 Sep Occasional bouts of more unsettled weather are likely for this period. These will bring outbreaks of rain and also increase the likelihood of thunderstorms, especially in the south and west. Temperatures near normal to warm, but very warm and humid at times in the south. Updated: 16:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Add 'drought' to the list of issues voters will be blaming PM Truss for in September. ;-)
You’re on fairly safe ground when you’re predicting “occasional bouts of more unsettled weather” somewhere in the UK - in three weeks time
Is there any way such a forecast could be proven wrong?
Also there might be outbreaks of rain and possibly storms, perhaps in the south and west. And at times there will be clouds, and, at other times, fewer clouds. Air will prevail
Yes. If there was a decisive shift to a more westerly regime, then you could have extended periods of frontal rain, and similarly, if the high pressure was stronger you would not have unsettled weather.
It might sound indistinct, but it represents a particular sort of weather pattern. The text forecast itself will be based on an analysis of most likely weather patterns from an ensemble forecast, and the skill of these forecasts at different lead times is actively monitored.
The Met Office sometimes go into this in some detail in their 10-day trend videos on YouTube. You might find them interesting.
It's time to unite. 21 current and former colleagues who have sat around the Cabinet table have come together to back Liz. She will unite our Party, beat Keir Starmer, and is trusted to deliver for Britain 👇 https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1555468229392437249/photo/1
✅ Jake Berry ✅ Suella Braverman ✅ James Cleverly ✅ Simon Clarke ✅ Therese Coffey ✅ Michelle Donelan ✅ Nadine Dorries ✅ David Frost ✅ Sajid Javid ✅ David Jones ✅ Kwasi Kwarteng ✅ Brandon Lewis ✅ Penny Mordaunt ✅ David Mundell ✅ John Redwood ✅ Jacob Rees-Mogg ✅ Iain Duncan Smith ✅ Anne-Marie Trevelyan ✅ Ben Wallace ✅ John Whittingdale ✅ Nadhim Zahawi
The deluded, the desperate, the dismal and the demented...
How many are holding knives?
Given that video of Rishi below - the Tory party has little choice but to choice from 2 people both of whom will have serious problems retaining their Redwall / northern seats.
Looks like both Truss and Sunak are a bit rubbish.
Agree. But there are degrees of rubbish and Truss is further along the scale than Sunak. All reasonable and informed people should hope for Sunak as PM, given we are stuck with this miserable set.
Some of us have been driven beyond caring, and waiting for 2024, when we will probably get another set of muppets anyway.
The New Statesman @NewStatesman EXCLUSIVE: In a leaked video, Rishi Sunak boasted to Conservative Party members that he was prepared to take public money out of “deprived urban areas” to help wealthy towns.
Oh how I remember the howls about "Liz Truss' dementia tax moment" being breathlessly spouted here under a week ago. The conservatives are lucky Sunak is heading to defeat.
Not sure how damning that is. No town is so wealthy that it is self sustaining on private money. If it deserves some money, then it is conceptually possible it is getting less than it deserves relative to somewhere else.
Not a smoking gun.
Yebbut it’s the gormlessness of not realising what goes down well with tiny audience X is steaming slurry to much larger group Y. Managing that constant balancing act is arguably the top requirement for a pol in the modern age.
Sunak could easily have made exactly the same point in a way that wasn't politically damaging by saying something like, "Labour don't care about areas like yours which is why we had to make the system fairer."
The New Statesman @NewStatesman EXCLUSIVE: In a leaked video, Rishi Sunak boasted to Conservative Party members that he was prepared to take public money out of “deprived urban areas” to help wealthy towns.
Oh how I remember the howls about "Liz Truss' dementia tax moment" being breathlessly spouted here under a week ago. The conservatives are lucky Sunak is heading to defeat.
Not sure how damning that is. No town is so wealthy that it is self sustaining on private money. If it deserves some money, then it is conceptually possible it is getting less than it deserves relative to somewhere else.
Not a smoking gun.
Disagree, this is like Clinton's deplorables, Romney's 47% or May's dementia tax. It won't matter as he's going to lose to Truss not Starmer mind.
Comments
However it was never an option for Forest who relied heavily on 5 loan signings then had a keeper who wanted to leave and their captain and top scorer being 34, out of contract and plagued with injuries. Half their team was leaving regardless, so they could either replace them or finish bottom.
All slightly dependent on pay keeping vaguely in pace with inflation though. That 4.3% is now a 9% real terms pay cut, so very likely to be in industrial action by the autumn. Likely to be a work to rule, with no extra duties rather than full strike, but with all the vacancies we are carrying that should be pretty effective. Rotas will collapse.
Playbook @politico scoop that Truss Budget could take place on Wed 21 Sept. Means splitting statement from most of 4 day debate and votes which will fall other side of recess. Permissible but unusual. Gives OBR longer BUT means Budget is “live” as parli issue for 4 weeks
https://twitter.com/nmdacosta/status/1555462809156288514?t=sJo8A8nlswxIlEHV_Z-ubQ&s=19
That pushes an early election back to late November, I think. Which is brave without the Parliamentary constipation of 2019.
@TomChivers
Apparently there was a series of Bayesian statistics conferences in Spain starting in the late 1970s, and they had a tradition of cabaret songs about how great Bayes' theorem is
https://twitter.com/TomChivers/status/1555471411669598208
Governments encouraged this as it made people happy and so more likely to re-elect governments.
Of course if the economy goes into decline and inflation peaks and starts to decline rapidly, you can always reduce rates again.
Exactly the same applies to reports that Russia is using a nuclear power plant as a base for troops, because they calculate that the Ukrainians wont dare to bomb it. It's recklessly irresponsible - which is what army commmanders often are in wars.
https://letterstonature.wordpress.com/2013/12/13/probably-not-a-fine-tuned-critique-of-richard-carrier-part-1/
In a later post, Barnes noted that he had in fact been wrong to accuse Carrier of being a frequentist, as Carrier believes in prior probabilities, which frequentists don't.
Really quite funny. Via Guido.
I'm not sure who it is with too much time on their hands.
https://order-order.com/2022/08/05/anti-liz-audience-member-is-anna-soubrys-former-chief-of-staff/
Speaking of the Downing Street parties and decorations, apart from Boris has anybody been sacked because of it ?
Or are various spads and lackeys involved still on track to get safe Conservative seats in the next 5+ years ?
I have to say some of the stuff said about this comes alarmingly close to victim blaming.
But endorsements by Major and Clarke probably don't help Rishi with the current membership.
That's how far through the looking-glass we are.
If Ukraine are placing (say) SAM systems a hundred miles behind the front lines, in a hospital car park, so the Russians will have a hard time hitting it with counter-battery fire or missiles, then that's wrong IMO (though of course we places anti-aircraft guns on everything that didn't move in WWII, and on some things that did move (1))
But IMO Amnesty went too far in their claims. Ukraine cannot make civilians leave their homes (and if they tried, they might get accused of crimes), and the idea that Ukraine fighters should not fight in towns just because civilians are there is unconscionable - unless the Russians agree not to as well. But the towns and cities are the things both sides want to control.
This is made worse by some claims that I have seen (not from Amnesty), for instance that even having injured troops being treated in civilian hospitals makes them valid military targets. By that sort of thinking, everything in Ukraine is a target, and the Ukrainians cannot defend from anywhere except open fields.
It also ignores the *vast* number of hospitals, schools and universities that Russia has hit throughout Ukraine. It is clear that this is a strategy to denude Ukraine's civilian infrastructure, rather than to hit 'military' targets. If there was any doubt, it's the same strategy they have used in Syria and Grozny.
So Amnesty may have had a small point, and expanded it far too much. As I have pointed out, their total output appears to criticise Russia much more than Ukraine. But that one article was wrong.
(1): https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Romney,_Hythe_and_Dymchurch_armoured_train_cropped.jpg
All other considerations at this moment are secondary to this point. There is a reason why no members of the French Resistance stood in the dock at Nuremberg.
In which case, there is a blanket policy in Russia to denude Ukraine's civilian infrastructure.
You could try arguing against that, except it's also what Russia did in Syria and Chechnya. Target the hospitals. Target the schools.
Sweet Jesus - DOUBLE WITCHING incoming end of 2024...
The next UK General election and US presidential election are likely to both be at the same time.
I'm also due to remortgage in Jan 2025
It was given as one of the reasons that the BBC refused to show the Cameron Direct things - that they wouldn't be allowed to add people to the audience to ask "interesting" questions.
On the other hand, AIUI the dam holds back the water that flows into the Crimean Canal - one of the 'excuses' for the war. If the dam fails, the canal gets no water.
It'll be interesting to see if the dam suffers an 'accident' as the Russians retreat. What do the Russians value more?
Yet those are the places that Russia is hitting and those are the places Russia intentionally targeted in Both Syria and Chechnya - so it's not just implausible that the places being hit by Russia are valid military targets - there is confirmed history (across multiple wars) that Russia intentionally targets Civilian targets while claiming those targets are valid military ones
All voters
Truss 40%
Sunak 29%
Conservative voters
Truss 56%
Sunak 36%
https://twitter.com/techneUK/status/1555447955804536833?s=20&t=1DOfp1MZs-DSZoK-aaVm9w
And the former spent more of that time as part of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Hmmm. So Guernica was legitimate target?
Last possible date for UK general election 2025-01-24 (or 23rd if a Thursday)
It's actually grotesque to shift the blame from aggressor to defender in the way that Amnesty are doing.
Even if the Tories go back into the lead would she risk an early election ? Personally I can’t see a 2022 election . It’s possible that things will start improving into 2024 and the Tories can then say “ don’t throw away all the hard work “ , “we’re through the worst and we don’t want to go back to square one with Labour “.
That I assume will be their mantra around an election . Of course this is dependent on the economy improving .
Of course the change narrative after 14 years of Tory government could also be strong .
Major was the last leader who went into a general election with a majority having taken over as PM midterm and who held that majority and he waited a full 5 years
The New Statesman
@NewStatesman
EXCLUSIVE: In a leaked video, Rishi Sunak boasted to Conservative Party members that he was prepared to take public money out of “deprived urban areas” to help wealthy towns.
UK long range weather forecast
Tuesday 9 Aug - Thursday 18 Aug
Most places are likely to see a fair amount of settled weather throughout this period. Cloudy at first in the far north and northwest, with some outbreaks of light rain possible. Mostly dry elsewhere with long sunny spells, especially across the south. Generally warm, and locally very warm or even hot in central and southern parts. Winds light to moderate for most, but fresh to strong in the far northwest, and becoming breezy near south and southeastern coasts. Further into the period there is still the chance of some periods of organised rain in the north, but generally the dry weather is likely to persist across the country. Temperatures remaining above average widely, with further spells of very warm weather possible.
Updated: 15:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Friday 19 Aug - Friday 2 Sep
Occasional bouts of more unsettled weather are likely for this period. These will bring outbreaks of rain and also increase the likelihood of thunderstorms, especially in the south and west. Temperatures near normal to warm, but very warm and humid at times in the south.
Updated: 16:00 (UTC+1) on Thu 4 Aug 2022
Add 'drought' to the list of issues voters will be blaming PM Truss for in September. ;-)
A bit like listing JRM and Dorries for Liz, hardly an endorsement of Liz.
On 2022, there is quite a narrow window to call an election after reaching 10 Downing Street on 5th or 6th September. The 12th December 2019 general election was about as late as practicable, so the new Prime Minister would have less than two months to call an election before the end of October. Is that enough time to convince yourself that any poll lead is resilient?
Boris was rumoured to be contemplating a 2023 election so it is likely CCHQ has a blueprint on the shelf.
By the time Truss is crowned, if it is she, this glorious summer will already be slipping into memory, and we will all be feeling - literally and figuratively - the chill winds of autumn
The Tories will not be getting big consistent poll leads this autumn. There won’t be an election
its also very much a south and south east drought. To the north and west there is no drought.
I just came across this click-bait piece about the differences between North and South Korea. Some things look very similar; other things look rather different...
https://cleverclassic.com/trending/korea-differences-fb/
(Yes, I know choice of photo can make a big differences, but I'd say this didn't go out of its way to make North Korea look terrible; perhaps quite the opposite.)
Is there any way such a forecast could be proven wrong?
Also there might be outbreaks of rain and possibly storms, perhaps in the south and west. And at times there will be clouds, and, at other times, fewer clouds. Air will prevail
http://nw3weather.co.uk/wx12.php
* Records began in 2009.
I'm not immediately finding stats from the Met Office on how unprecedented the dryness might be over a longer time period.
3 years and 12 days of farcical mismanagement, compared to TM's 3 years 11 days of, er, farcical mismanagement.
Betfair next prime minister
1.12 Liz Truss 89%
8.8 Rishi Sunak 11%
Next Conservative leader
1.12 Liz Truss 89%
9.2 Rishi Sunak 11%
The Derwent Valley figures are still less than stellar.
https://www.stwater.co.uk/about-us/reservoir-levels/raw-water-storage-levels-16-may-2022/
Still, at least we won't be moaning about a 'wash-out summer' this year, eh?
https://twitter.com/iandunt/status/1555482094582829062?s=21&t=DbWJjG2uQa2Vdd-XdfpLNA
As would Liz Truss on her current "plans". The only difference between them is that Sunak's universe isn't quite as parallel.
Edit. And to be fair, Sunak did actually provide vulnerable people with £400 - £800 to help with their fuel bills. Not nearly enough, but Truss is proposing to do nothing at all for them.
About half an hour ago.
https://twitter.com/cyclefree2/status/1555478008584179712?s=21&t=TB-zQoFF9I15EMlcdmZVlA
And now -
Not a smoking gun.
"...there are no strong signals for a significant amelioration of current dry conditions."
Course, precipitation is harder to forecast than temperature. Normally Sep-Nov is the wettest season in England & Wales.
Surely there must be some Tories out there who don't like the race to the bottom and would rather the candidates weren't indulging in dog whistles to please the Daily Mail brigade? It's a pretty unedifying spectacle. If I had a vote, it would be "none of the above". Though I guess that's why I don't have a vote.
Hey, VAT from petrol is up 50% this year, on slightly reduced volumes, so we are raising money for the Treasury and making progress towards Net Zero - doubleplusgood. Meanwhile, millions of people are trying to work out how to manage their petrol bill.
We are certainly in a drought now. I guess that’s bad. However, given the horribleness of everything else in the world, I reckon I’ll cope if it means more weeks of lovely warm sunshine. I intend to spend this afternoon in Regent’s Park
It might sound indistinct, but it represents a particular sort of weather pattern. The text forecast itself will be based on an analysis of most likely weather patterns from an ensemble forecast, and the skill of these forecasts at different lead times is actively monitored.
The Met Office sometimes go into this in some detail in their 10-day trend videos on YouTube. You might find them interesting.