Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
I’d agree with that. It does serve to preserve the illusion for those who are, that the entire nation is in mourning. But I think that’s possibly a mistake, as you say.
I am neither a republican, nor completely insensible to HMQ’s passing, but thank heavens for Netflix.
They are going to do serious, really serious damage to themselves. OK so a full state funeral is in order. But beyond that? We're about to see all of the trappings and wealth and otherness of the monarchy. People are heading into this winter in a real crisis over how to keep their children fed and warm.
Setting a new unpayable £2,500 price cap (which you plebs can all pay for over the next 10 years) does not fix the crisis - it only stops it getting worse. The previous price cap was already unpayable for too many, with schools already seeing kids coming in cold and hungry. That won't change, especially with this government and heir parrots sneering away that "we have fixed this crisis" when they have instead cemented it into place.
Compare and contrast hat real, lived disaster in people's lives with the lavish pomp and pageantry to come, and the planning for an even more lavish crowning of the new King. This is bad - for them.
We are though, going to be promised a celebration in mid summer 2023; King Charles the third's coronation. Not quite a rerun of the platinum Jubilee of course, but street parties and similar jollification will be encouraged!
"The threats picked up after misinformation spread online that suggested the hospital performed gender-affirming genital surgeries on young children.
Boston Children’s says it provides overall care to children who identify as transgender or nonbinary, but surgeries are performed only on consenting adults.
“Age 18 is used to reflect the standard age of majority for medical decision-making. Boston Children’s does not perform genital surgeries as part of gender-affirming care on a patient under the age of 18,” the statement says. "
My perspective on the 'american culture war' is as follows:
This begun in universities in the late 2010's, where college professors were being unseated on vague, spurious accusations relating to 'racism'; the universities lost their ability to control it, and it exploded massively in 2020, breaking out of university and 'infecting' the whole of society, which became consumed by an irrational revolutionary fervour, a sort of 'toxic mix' of revolutionary france and the salem witch trials.
The right initially started to fight it by appeals to discourse and reason, but it failed. So in 2021/2022 they resorted to fighting it by any means possible, weaponising appeals to religion (abortion) and the fear of child abuse, and despatching their own 'cancel culture' towards ideas they dislike (ie critical race theory), with some success.
It is true that both sides are now basically as bad as each other, but to find a resolution to the issue, you have to stop automatically and reflexively taking the side of the left, which is what a majority of posters on here do. It gets very tiring to observe, otherwise smart and intelligent people coming across as fellow travellers supporting the revolution.
To add... bombings of public buildings are not a new low in this war, they were seen a lot in 2020 for instance.
Respectfully, that seems like a very partial interpretation of the American culture wars. What was McCarthyism if not a culture war? I’m sure the left have their share of the blame but it’s hypocritical in the extreme to say that it originated with them. Throughout most of the 20th century the majority of censorship was done in the name of conservatism.
You can't avoid having a discussion about something because it is too hard to find a starting point. That is just dodging the issue. I would say the current wave of problems did start in the 2010's, mainly because the 'left' could not come to terms with Donald Trump.
The democrats are not dealing with the left at all, they seem to have bought in to it all completely.
To my mind, looking at the situation as it was in 2020; I can easily see and understand why Americans vote for Trump and the Republicans, I would probably do the same if I was American.
I’m not dodging the issue but to say “This begun in universities in the late 2010's” is absolutely absurd, as if cultural censorship didn’t exist before them. You’re looking at your own political inclination and working back to the date that’s easiest to justify it.
I didn't make the claim that 'cultural censorship begain in the 2010's'. I was trying to identify the causes of these hospital bomb threats.
But if anything this is a symptom of the problem I am describing, the idea that because McCarthyism targetted the left 70 years ago, it is ok for the left to now take revenge in a similar fashion and on a more damaging scale. People don't want to question too much the antics of the left because they ultimately think they are 'on the right side of history', which is actually just a comforting delusion.
Plus , the comparison doesn't really work, because McCarthyism was about trying to root out actual 'enemies of the state' in the cold war; whereas the sackings of professors in the 2010's onwards was about suppressing beliefs and opinions people don't like, be this about race, gender whatever. It was just an assault on the freedom of expression.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Obviously everyone's experiences will differ, but what I'm seeing corresponds more closely with Nick's assessment than yours.
We were at the theatre last night, along with the usual crowd of oldies and a gratifyingly larger smattering of youngsters than usual. I was expecting perhaps a minute of silence, but no, there was no indication whatsoever that anything was out of the ordinary, and I didn't hear the death of the Queen mentioned once during the interval. This was a small local theatre in a safe Tory constituency, btw, true blue territory.
I was on an academic update day. It wasn't mentioned by any of the speakers, nor did I hear anything said about the death at coffee breaks, just the usual chat about the topics discussed and the planning of the Christmas Party.
It isn't callousness, just the irrelevance to daily life. An hour or two in the evening to update on events would be plenty. The antiquated rituals of theme park Britain are of only minor interest.
If you had met the Queen you would have given deference ,whatever you left wing republican views might be. It is equivalent to champagne socialism.
No, it's not. Champagne socialism (whatever you think it is) is something one pursues. Being polite to HMtQ is no different from being polite to any VIP visitor to one's work.
I was listening to one of the war experts a few days ago on telly, and he reckoned the Ukranian counter-attack would be chronic rather than acute. However, the thing to watch for was if Putin became desperate and moved the reserve army from Russia towards Kherson to prevent its fall.
He had doubts about their quality, but that could be the deisive move. Of course, he was cut off short by the interviewer who thought she should be the centre of attention.
Do you mean the reserve Corps to the Kharkiv front? The Kherson front seems to be holding for Russia still.
I am impressed with the skill of the UKR forces, offensive operations being so much more difficult than defensive. They should be able to consolidate before the mud season bogs down everything.
The Kherson pocket can only be taken quickly with a high Ukrainian casualty rate. We’re seeing instead something resembling siege warfare there. Perhaps 20k Russian soldiers largely cut off from supply lines, now being attritted at a very high rate. One assumes the territory West of the Dnipro will be static and then will suddenly move all at once.
From a strategic perspective, the Ukrainians have fought rope-a-dope warfare. Russia has exhausted itself without getting very far in its own strategic objectives, while Ukraine kept stinging like a bee. “1000 bee stings a day” is how someone reported their single minded focus on destroying fuel vehicles, ammo dumps and infrastructure bottle necks.
Also the superb use of sabotage and partisan warfare in the occupied zones
It’s like the Fall of France plus the Tet Offensive
She has only been in office for a few days. To draw any conclusion is foolhardy. Let's see where we are in a year's time.
She is likely to grow into the role - that is true. But we don't need to wait for her with regards to policy. Its all there on display, and its awful.
Though to be fair, Truss has shown admirable pragmatism, with her ditching of regional pay and simply ginormous energy handout. Both the necessary things to do, but not what she or her dry libertarian fans would have wanted.
I think she is still in trouble; she's chosen not to play with a full deck, and even if Ukraine goes well, the next couple of years look bad- just less bad.
What energy handout? Are we not all to pay for it? They haven't yet announced the details, but the commentary being given by her team was that they're protecting energy company profits and they're protecting public finances by having us pay the money back over the next decade.
And again, the "fix" is at a level that is simply unpayable for so many people. And ow they will haughtily insist there is no energy crisis, the have dealt with it, everyone should be appreciative of how benevolent they are. As people say "but I can't pay this"
Tobias Schneider @tobiaschneider I'm trying not to lap up every rumor circulating around Telegram, but the main challenge in establishing a clear picture of the situation in Kharkiv appears to be that Russian lines are collapsing faster than Ukraine can even advance and clear liberated areas. Astonishing.
It will be interesting to see how far the collapse continues.
There was some stuff I saw earlier about the Ukrainians capturing some seriously obsolete (1950s) artillery. This was beyond rolling out the old 122mm stuff.
The morale of some parts of the Russian armed forces is completely broken. There's masses of Russian equipment being captured, but it mostly seems to be older stuff, like T-72B obr 1989.
Presumably the parts of the Russian Army with newer kit, such as those trying to advance on the Bakhmut-Siversk line, will stop the collapse, but not sure what line they can cover.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
I’d agree with that. It does serve to preserve the illusion for those who are, that the entire nation is in mourning. But I think that’s possibly a mistake, as you say.
I am neither a republican, nor completely insensible to HMQ’s passing, but thank heavens for Netflix.
They are going to do serious, really serious damage to themselves. OK so a full state funeral is in order. But beyond that? We're about to see all of the trappings and wealth and otherness of the monarchy. People are heading into this winter in a real crisis over how to keep their children fed and warm.
Setting a new unpayable £2,500 price cap (which you plebs can all pay for over the next 10 years) does not fix the crisis - it only stops it getting worse. The previous price cap was already unpayable for too many, with schools already seeing kids coming in cold and hungry. That won't change, especially with this government and heir parrots sneering away that "we have fixed this crisis" when they have instead cemented it into place.
Compare and contrast hat real, lived disaster in people's lives with the lavish pomp and pageantry to come, and the planning for an even more lavish crowning of the new King. This is bad - for them.
Nah. If it has any impact at all it will be to entrench positions. Those that lived the queen / the monarchy will love it even more after the pomp and ceremony. Those that thought them hangers on will think as you say.
What’s interesting is those in the middle. I’ve been pretty ambivalent about the monarchy for a while, even though ERII was herself a champion. “What’s it all for?” was something that I struggled to have a good answer to. But I think seeing how this week is playing out, I start to understand. It allows extreme change under the cover of remarkable continuity and stability.
Quite. The country is being hollowed out by the Tories under the fig leaf of monarchy. That's the danger for the monarchy: they get dragged down by the wider chaos.
I was listening to one of the war experts a few days ago on telly, and he reckoned the Ukranian counter-attack would be chronic rather than acute. However, the thing to watch for was if Putin became desperate and moved the reserve army from Russia towards Kherson to prevent its fall.
He had doubts about their quality, but that could be the deisive move. Of course, he was cut off short by the interviewer who thought she should be the centre of attention.
Do you mean the reserve Corps to the Kharkiv front? The Kherson front seems to be holding for Russia still.
I am impressed with the skill of the UKR forces, offensive operations being so much more difficult than defensive. They should be able to consolidate before the mud season bogs down everything.
The Kherson pocket can only be taken quickly with a high Ukrainian casualty rate. We’re seeing instead something resembling siege warfare there. Perhaps 20k Russian soldiers largely cut off from supply lines, now being attritted at a very high rate. One assumes the territory West of the Dnipro will be static and then will suddenly move all at once.
From a strategic perspective, the Ukrainians have fought rope-a-dope warfare. Russia has exhausted itself without getting very far in its own strategic objectives, while Ukraine kept stinging like a bee. “1000 bee stings a day” is how someone reported their single minded focus on destroying fuel vehicles, ammo dumps and infrastructure bottle necks.
Yes, more great news out of Ukraine to wake up to this morning.
The story of Kharkiv Oblast is astonishing over the past few days. It appears that the enemy spread themselves very thin, in an attempt to shore up the line at Kherson, and the defenders have retaken a huge amount of territory with very little resistance. The strategic town of Kupyansk now looks to have fallen completely, and with it the supply lines to the South and the town of Izyum. There’s many rivers in this area, and few crossing points, and the enemy risks being surrounded if they don’t withdraw.
Meanwhile, the reinforcements sent to Kherson are also cut off and some progress is being made there, the enemy will eventually be starved out, and will withdraw or be captured once they have no more ammunition.
As far as Ukraine is concerned, this is the most significant week of the war since the withdraw of the enemy from the roads to Kiev.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Where's Harry, out of interest?
The queen’s death seems to have unsettled you. Why don’t you switch off and turn to the coverage of Ukraine’s counteroffensive to cheer you up instead?
I really got to some of the monarchists here when I said their emotions were going haywire because a rich old lady died in a castle, didn't I? And you come out with the same old line that I must be a pro-Kremlin traitor for saying so.
Your certainties as symbolically crystallised in feudal imagery could be about to fall apart...which you may already know.
I asked "Where's Harry?" The Torygraph say "With the death of his grandmother, Harry has never looked so alone". Scared, much?
I don’t know if you’re another Leon sock pocket or are legit. If the former than you’re not trying very hard with this one!
If the latter, then no I’m not scared. I feel remarkably jolly this morning actually. Rarely in the last two decades have I had more confidence in the future of western democracy than I do this morning. Also the grass is green again and the sky a deep blue. Have a lovely day won’t you.
The man was talking about Kherson because of it's importance, and the original talk was that it was the target. Of course, it could have been a bluff put out Zelensky.
We were in Krakow last month, and we got talking to a young Ukranian. To be honest, I think he moved to Krakow to avoid being drafted, but he was very patriotic. He asked what the UK public thought of the war. When I told him we were all behind Boris for once, he was very pleased.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Where's Harry, out of interest?
The queen’s death seems to have unsettled you. Why don’t you switch off and turn to the coverage of Ukraine’s counteroffensive to cheer you up instead?
I really got to some of the monarchists here when I said their emotions were going haywire because a rich old lady died in a castle, didn't I? And you come out with the same old line that I must be a pro-Kremlin traitor for saying so.
Your certainties as symbolically crystallised in feudal imagery could be about to fall apart...which you may already know.
I asked "Where's Harry?" The Torygraph say "With the death of his grandmother, Harry has never looked so alone". Scared, much?
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
I’d agree with that. It does serve to preserve the illusion for those who are, that the entire nation is in mourning. But I think that’s possibly a mistake, as you say.
I am neither a republican, nor completely insensible to HMQ’s passing, but thank heavens for Netflix.
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
Someone on PB was claiming that that would cement the RF forever in the nation's affections etc. etc.
I said it made Charles safe from Republicans, contrary to their hope that the mere fact of his accession would end the Monarchy.
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
Someone on PB was claiming that that would cement the RF forever in the nation's affections etc. etc.
For me, it is a very strong indicator that the new King's relationship with the British people is going to be very different to the one the Queen had. It will be much, much less deferential, much less serious. I am not sure that translates into deep affection, though.
The sort of person who piles into the crowds at Crathie, Buck House, etc. is hardly typical of the nation. Which leaves the questions posed even more uncertain, of course, despite the fervent assurances of the monarchists and Tories on PB.
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
Someone on PB was claiming that that would cement the RF forever in the nation's affections etc. etc.
I said it made Charles safe from Republicans, contrary to their hope that the mere fact of his accession would end the Monarchy.
Some random fan who turned up at Buck House? That's not an average sample of the UK population.
Edit: I really do not understand your logic there.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Obviously everyone's experiences will differ, but what I'm seeing corresponds more closely with Nick's assessment than yours.
We were at the theatre last night, along with the usual crowd of oldies and a gratifyingly larger smattering of youngsters than usual. I was expecting perhaps a minute of silence, but no, there was no indication whatsoever that anything was out of the ordinary, and I didn't hear the death of the Queen mentioned once during the interval. This was a small local theatre in a safe Tory constituency, btw, true blue territory.
I was on an academic update day. It wasn't mentioned by any of the speakers, nor did I hear anything said about the death at coffee breaks, just the usual chat about the topics discussed and the planning of the Christmas Party.
It isn't callousness, just the irrelevance to daily life. An hour or two in the evening to update on events would be plenty. The antiquated rituals of theme park Britain are of only minor interest.
I think it is sad the media just goes so over the top with a lot of time filling and stupid interviews. As a consequence I switch off and then miss the key stuff while avoiding the dross. As a consequence I missed Charles's speech (didn't even know it had happened until this morning and still haven't heard it) and HofC speeches.
The media just goes silly and drives me away.
Listening to R5 this morning I started to wonder if the presenters enjoy wha5 they are doing, and if they believe it. Rachel Burden for some unfathomable reason is at Balmoral, wittering about the Queen being ‘just another local’ and all kinds of blather. Is this what they dreamed off when starting their careers? I think football have got it wrong this weekend, most other sports have got it right. Lots of stuff on the day she died is fine. Some special programmes this week, and covering events works. But for many (most?) people are getting on with living.
I was listening to one of the war experts a few days ago on telly, and he reckoned the Ukranian counter-attack would be chronic rather than acute. However, the thing to watch for was if Putin became desperate and moved the reserve army from Russia towards Kherson to prevent its fall.
He had doubts about their quality, but that could be the deisive move. Of course, he was cut off short by the interviewer who thought she should be the centre of attention.
Do you mean the reserve Corps to the Kharkiv front? The Kherson front seems to be holding for Russia still.
I am impressed with the skill of the UKR forces, offensive operations being so much more difficult than defensive. They should be able to consolidate before the mud season bogs down everything.
The Kherson pocket can only be taken quickly with a high Ukrainian casualty rate. We’re seeing instead something resembling siege warfare there. Perhaps 20k Russian soldiers largely cut off from supply lines, now being attritted at a very high rate. One assumes the territory West of the Dnipro will be static and then will suddenly move all at once.
From a strategic perspective, the Ukrainians have fought rope-a-dope warfare. Russia has exhausted itself without getting very far in its own strategic objectives, while Ukraine kept stinging like a bee. “1000 bee stings a day” is how someone reported their single minded focus on destroying fuel vehicles, ammo dumps and infrastructure bottle necks.
Also the superb use of sabotage and partisan warfare in the occupied zones
It’s like the Fall of France plus the Tet Offensive
Yes I was thinking about the Tet Offensive the other day too. The losses Russia are suffering seems to be even heavier
Could I point out something to the ludicrous Dynamo on the last thread who wanted a referendum on the monarchy on the basis of one poll with a landslide 61% still in favour of the monarchy.
Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in. It would be absurd to give it up
Before you reached for and flung adjectives such as "ludicrous" and "absurd", you should have checked what I actually wrote. I posted a YouGov poll from 2021 which referenced similar polls in 2020 and 2019 and I said let's have another poll now. I drew particular attention to the large reported swing to republicanism in the 18-24 age group. Why you thought I meant a referendum I have no idea.
The media are screaming practically wall to wall that the monarchy represents the whole country and that an elderly woman with a palace and a couple of castles had a place in almost everyone's heart. Well how about a media organisation commissions a poll to find out whether that's true or not and publishes the results. Retain the monarchy or abolish it - see how the population feel about that question when a pollster rings them up and asks them. ASKS them. Not TELLS them what they think, which is what politicians of all parties and the entire media are doing right now. No cueing. No pictures of an elderly woman, or guys wearing medals, or good-looking young women either. No Range Rovers. No glamour. Just ask them and find out. What's the problem with that?
If Russian forces are getting routed in the way that is being reported, surely this is going to have huge ramifications in Moscow's corridors of power. My fear is that this brings nukes into the equation in some way. If they are seen as the only way to prevent defeat, won't they be used?
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
Someone on PB was claiming that that would cement the RF forever in the nation's affections etc. etc.
I’m sure we can all be relieved that now Charles has full access to the wellspring of royal wealth he will no longer need to sully himself with bags of Middle Eastern cash.
The first Acclamation of King Charles III is to take place at St James’s Palace at 10am, followed by similar events in other places over the next few days.
To those who think there’s no real news, and that there’s too much focus on the story, there’s now going to be Royal events several times a day until after the funeral. Hope you all renewed your Netflix subscriptions, and see you a week on Tuesday. The UK has not done full national mourning for a long time, this is simply what it’s like.
I was listening to one of the war experts a few days ago on telly, and he reckoned the Ukranian counter-attack would be chronic rather than acute. However, the thing to watch for was if Putin became desperate and moved the reserve army from Russia towards Kherson to prevent its fall.
He had doubts about their quality, but that could be the deisive move. Of course, he was cut off short by the interviewer who thought she should be the centre of attention.
Do you mean the reserve Corps to the Kharkiv front? The Kherson front seems to be holding for Russia still.
I am impressed with the skill of the UKR forces, offensive operations being so much more difficult than defensive. They should be able to consolidate before the mud season bogs down everything.
The Kherson pocket can only be taken quickly with a high Ukrainian casualty rate. We’re seeing instead something resembling siege warfare there. Perhaps 20k Russian soldiers largely cut off from supply lines, now being attritted at a very high rate. One assumes the territory West of the Dnipro will be static and then will suddenly move all at once.
From a strategic perspective, the Ukrainians have fought rope-a-dope warfare. Russia has exhausted itself without getting very far in its own strategic objectives, while Ukraine kept stinging like a bee. “1000 bee stings a day” is how someone reported their single minded focus on destroying fuel vehicles, ammo dumps and infrastructure bottle necks.
What were (are?) the Russian strategic objectives in your view? In addition to pushing Kiev out of the Donbas, to capture and annex a thick piece of territory stretching from the Donbas to Moldavia and including Odessa?
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
I’d agree with that. It does serve to preserve the illusion for those who are, that the entire nation is in mourning. But I think that’s possibly a mistake, as you say.
I am neither a republican, nor completely insensible to HMQ’s passing, but thank heavens for Netflix.
Yep, there are alternatives. Thankfully.
The people that moan about “radio 3” being “wall to wall mourning” seem mainly to be bizarre old people that still follow the Radio Times and tune in to one station for “the evening” and ask “what’s on tonight?”
Does anyone under 60 do that? No. There’s an entire internet out there. People under 35 don’t watch BBC television AT ALL
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Where's Harry, out of interest?
The queen’s death seems to have unsettled you. Why don’t you switch off and turn to the coverage of Ukraine’s counteroffensive to cheer you up instead?
I really got to some of the monarchists here when I said their emotions were going haywire because a rich old lady died in a castle, didn't I? And you come out with the same old line that I must be a pro-Kremlin traitor for saying so.
Your certainties as symbolically crystallised in feudal imagery could be about to fall apart...which you may already know.
I asked "Where's Harry?" The Torygraph say "With the death of his grandmother, Harry has never looked so alone". Scared, much?
Scared about what? What on earth has Harry got to do with anything?
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
Someone on PB was claiming that that would cement the RF forever in the nation's affections etc. etc.
I’m sure we can all be relieved that now Charles has full access to the wellspring of royal wealth he will no longer need to sully himself with bags of Middle Eastern cash.
He has had access since he became Duke of Cornwall in 1952. and full access when he reached the age of21.....do keep up.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
I’d agree with that. It does serve to preserve the illusion for those who are, that the entire nation is in mourning. But I think that’s possibly a mistake, as you say.
I am neither a republican, nor completely insensible to HMQ’s passing, but thank heavens for Netflix.
Yep, there are alternatives. Thankfully.
The people that moan about “radio 3” being “wall to wall mourning” seem mainly to be bizarre old people that still follow the Radio Times and tune in to one station for “the evening” and ask “what’s on tonight?”
Does anyone under 60 do that? No. There’s an entire internet out there. People under 35 don’t watch BBC television AT ALL
It’s just a bunch of pensioners whingeing
It's a good point, though, with wider implications. How far can the RF control and preserve their mystique in an era no longer dominated by the BBC and ITV? And what happens when the BBC is sold off and becomes just another random channel?
If Russian forces are getting routed in the way that is being reported, surely this is going to have huge ramifications in Moscow's corridors of power. My fear is that this brings nukes into the equation in some way. If they are seen as the only way to prevent defeat, won't they be used?
But to what end? What does it gain Russia apart from: even more hatred, the deeply negative attention of China, and a cloud of radiation drifting back to the Volga?
There is a danger a Mad Dog Putin will try to do it to save his own face, but one hopes that the rest of Russia has more sense…
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I watched the address from our new King live. The main things I took from it were that, 1. He understood why his mother was successful in the role. 2. No mention of his siblings or their families - the anticipated slimming down of the Royal Family to the direct line of descent is happening.
Did you conclude anything else of significance from it?
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Where's Harry, out of interest?
The queen’s death seems to have unsettled you. Why don’t you switch off and turn to the coverage of Ukraine’s counteroffensive to cheer you up instead?
I really got to some of the monarchists here when I said their emotions were going haywire because a rich old lady died in a castle, didn't I? And you come out with the same old line that I must be a pro-Kremlin traitor for saying so.
Your certainties as symbolically crystallised in feudal imagery could be about to fall apart...which you may already know.
I asked "Where's Harry?" The Torygraph say "With the death of his grandmother, Harry has never looked so alone". Scared, much?
Tell us more about the Kharkiv Oblast
The silly thing is that “if” Dynamo is a Russian Troll then it’s completely pointless.
If he came on here and said, “look guys, I’m Russian and I’m putting across a different point of view and hoping I can change minds” then most posters would say “that’s cool, always good to have a different perspective whether we agree or not”.
Pretending not to be, trying a “hail fellow well met” style that then turns into a blatant attempt to crowbar in Russian propaganda or trying to stir up dissent is just annoying and pointless as it isn’t going to change any minds or opinions and is just mocked or ignored.
If Dynamo isn’t a Troll then he just has some “special” views on the world and maybe needs a bit of therapy or a good night on the sauce with some friends.
I was listening to one of the war experts a few days ago on telly, and he reckoned the Ukranian counter-attack would be chronic rather than acute. However, the thing to watch for was if Putin became desperate and moved the reserve army from Russia towards Kherson to prevent its fall.
He had doubts about their quality, but that could be the deisive move. Of course, he was cut off short by the interviewer who thought she should be the centre of attention.
Do you mean the reserve Corps to the Kharkiv front? The Kherson front seems to be holding for Russia still.
I am impressed with the skill of the UKR forces, offensive operations being so much more difficult than defensive. They should be able to consolidate before the mud season bogs down everything.
The Kherson pocket can only be taken quickly with a high Ukrainian casualty rate. We’re seeing instead something resembling siege warfare there. Perhaps 20k Russian soldiers largely cut off from supply lines, now being attritted at a very high rate. One assumes the territory West of the Dnipro will be static and then will suddenly move all at once.
From a strategic perspective, the Ukrainians have fought rope-a-dope warfare. Russia has exhausted itself without getting very far in its own strategic objectives, while Ukraine kept stinging like a bee. “1000 bee stings a day” is how someone reported their single minded focus on destroying fuel vehicles, ammo dumps and infrastructure bottle necks.
What were (are?) the Russian strategic objectives in your view? In addition to pushing Kiev out of the Donbas, to capture and annex a thick piece of territory stretching from the Donbas to Moldavia and including Odessa?
Not to lose a substantial amount of their men and materiel, in capturing and holding very little territory while being squeezed hard domestically by international sanctions, as most of the rest of the world arms the Ukranian defenders?
She has only been in office for a few days. To draw any conclusion is foolhardy. Let's see where we are in a year's time.
She is likely to grow into the role - that is true. But we don't need to wait for her with regards to policy. Its all there on display, and its awful.
Though to be fair, Truss has shown admirable pragmatism, with her ditching of regional pay and simply ginormous energy handout. Both the necessary things to do, but not what she or her dry libertarian fans would have wanted.
I think she is still in trouble; she's chosen not to play with a full deck, and even if Ukraine goes well, the next couple of years look bad- just less bad.
What energy handout? Are we not all to pay for it? They haven't yet announced the details, but the commentary being given by her team was that they're protecting energy company profits and they're protecting public finances by having us pay the money back over the next decade.
And again, the "fix" is at a level that is simply unpayable for so many people. And ow they will haughtily insist there is no energy crisis, the have dealt with it, everyone should be appreciative of how benevolent they are. As people say "but I can't pay this"
All true. However the Truss plan is way less psychotic than Versions 1 (cut taxes) and 2 (put it on the future bills of our children). But you are right that this version is also unlikely to be enough. (The brunch place at the end of my road looks like it isn't going to try to re-open after the summer holidays, and I can't say I blame them.) And that's the problem Truss has. Even if she does a good job, it won't be enough to beat circumstances and Time For A Change/The Other Bloke Isn't Scary/We're Too Cold To Care About Woke.
If Russian forces are getting routed in the way that is being reported, surely this is going to have huge ramifications in Moscow's corridors of power. My fear is that this brings nukes into the equation in some way. If they are seen as the only way to prevent defeat, won't they be used?
This is - and always was - the big risk in a conventional war with Russia. And we haven't even fought a direct war, just via supplying a proxy. Russia will end this humiliated and emasculated. "I HAVE NUKES" may well be the only "sane" option Putin has left. Unless his arse cancer finishes him quickly.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
I’d agree with that. It does serve to preserve the illusion for those who are, that the entire nation is in mourning. But I think that’s possibly a mistake, as you say.
I am neither a republican, nor completely insensible to HMQ’s passing, but thank heavens for Netflix.
Yep, there are alternatives. Thankfully.
Does anyone under 60 do that?
Not that you would know, old man You are the wrong side of 60, and you know it.
Having a dig at ageing Radio 3 listeners is rather rich coming from someone whose witterings on here are a constant rage against the dying light. An author whose genre of ego-centric misoygny no longer has a market. Except (he thinks) on a minor political forum full of equally ageing brilliantined old stick insects.
I don’t think there’s any danger of The Crown becoming unpopular. And I mean that in both senses of The Crown
It’s THE international soap opera that everyone follows. Around the world. From Diana to the death of the Queen, we can all gossip about it
And they have a brilliant new season ready with Harry and Meghan feuding across the Atlantic as the doddery old Prince tries to live up to Mum while hiding away the wicked Uncle
The royal family does not need BBC and ITV to sell itself. It literally has Netflix, and 3 billion transfixed viewers
I was listening to one of the war experts a few days ago on telly, and he reckoned the Ukranian counter-attack would be chronic rather than acute. However, the thing to watch for was if Putin became desperate and moved the reserve army from Russia towards Kherson to prevent its fall.
He had doubts about their quality, but that could be the deisive move. Of course, he was cut off short by the interviewer who thought she should be the centre of attention.
Do you mean the reserve Corps to the Kharkiv front? The Kherson front seems to be holding for Russia still.
I am impressed with the skill of the UKR forces, offensive operations being so much more difficult than defensive. They should be able to consolidate before the mud season bogs down everything.
The Kherson pocket can only be taken quickly with a high Ukrainian casualty rate. We’re seeing instead something resembling siege warfare there. Perhaps 20k Russian soldiers largely cut off from supply lines, now being attritted at a very high rate. One assumes the territory West of the Dnipro will be static and then will suddenly move all at once.
From a strategic perspective, the Ukrainians have fought rope-a-dope warfare. Russia has exhausted itself without getting very far in its own strategic objectives, while Ukraine kept stinging like a bee. “1000 bee stings a day” is how someone reported their single minded focus on destroying fuel vehicles, ammo dumps and infrastructure bottle necks.
Also the superb use of sabotage and partisan warfare in the occupied zones
It’s like the Fall of France plus the Tet Offensive
Yes I was thinking about the Tet Offensive the other day too. The losses Russia are suffering seems to be even heavier
It nothing like the Tet Offensive, as a brief glance at Wikipedia shows. … The leadership in Hanoi was despondent at the outcome of their offensive.[164][165] Their first and most ambitious goal, producing a general uprising, had ended in a dismal failure. In total, about 85,000–100,000 PAVN/VC troops had participated in the initial onslaught and in the follow-up phases. Overall, during the "Border Battles" of 1967 and the nine-month winter-spring campaign, 45,267 PAVN/VC troops had been killed in action.[166][167] Hanoi had underestimated the strategic mobility of the allied forces, which allowed them to redeploy at will to threatened areas; their battle plan was too complex and difficult to coordinate, which was amply demonstrated by the 30 January attacks; their violation of the principle of mass, attacking everywhere instead of concentrating their forces on a few specific targets, allowed their forces to be defeated piecemeal; the launching of massed attacks headlong into the teeth of vastly superior firepower; and last, but not least, the incorrect assumptions upon which the entire campaign was based…
One thing that a lot of people in the West might not appreciate is just how smart and tech savvy the Ukrainians are. In my line of work, we see a lot of very major semiconductor, software and internet companies outsource a huge amount of engineering, reverse engineering and development work to businesses in Kiev and other cities. Give these people high-grade kit and top-level training and they are going to make hay. It seems to me (caveat: an observer who knows next to nothing about the subject) that in the face of superior weaponry and strategic ability, sheer numbers of troops on the ground is not necessarily a huge help. If that is the case, getting more kit to Ukraine asap is absolutely vital.
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
Someone on PB was claiming that that would cement the RF forever in the nation's affections etc. etc.
I said it made Charles safe from Republicans, contrary to their hope that the mere fact of his accession would end the Monarchy.
Some random fan who turned up at Buck House? That's not an average sample of the UK population.
Edit: I really do not understand your logic there.
It's the image. It shows him connecting with an "ordinary person", which is contrary to his prior image of being a bit stiff, awkward and stilted in public.
It's the sort of thing that happened with Diana that the rest of the Royal Family were terrified of in the 1980s. Well, they were a bit slow to move with the times, but they have now, and it will keep the public on side. Clearly they learnt the lessons of the public reaction to Diana's death.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Where's Harry, out of interest?
The queen’s death seems to have unsettled you. Why don’t you switch off and turn to the coverage of Ukraine’s counteroffensive to cheer you up instead?
I really got to some of the monarchists here when I said their emotions were going haywire because a rich old lady died in a castle, didn't I? And you come out with the same old line that I must be a pro-Kremlin traitor for saying so.
Your certainties as symbolically crystallised in feudal imagery could be about to fall apart...which you may already know.
I asked "Where's Harry?" The Torygraph say "With the death of his grandmother, Harry has never looked so alone". Scared, much?
Tell us more about the Kharkiv Oblast
The silly thing is that “if” Dynamo is a Russian Troll
Isn't it de rigueur to accuse any new poster of being a Russian troll or, in my case, a Russian doll?
I was listening to one of the war experts a few days ago on telly, and he reckoned the Ukranian counter-attack would be chronic rather than acute. However, the thing to watch for was if Putin became desperate and moved the reserve army from Russia towards Kherson to prevent its fall.
He had doubts about their quality, but that could be the deisive move. Of course, he was cut off short by the interviewer who thought she should be the centre of attention.
Do you mean the reserve Corps to the Kharkiv front? The Kherson front seems to be holding for Russia still.
I am impressed with the skill of the UKR forces, offensive operations being so much more difficult than defensive. They should be able to consolidate before the mud season bogs down everything.
The Kherson pocket can only be taken quickly with a high Ukrainian casualty rate. We’re seeing instead something resembling siege warfare there. Perhaps 20k Russian soldiers largely cut off from supply lines, now being attritted at a very high rate. One assumes the territory West of the Dnipro will be static and then will suddenly move all at once.
From a strategic perspective, the Ukrainians have fought rope-a-dope warfare. Russia has exhausted itself without getting very far in its own strategic objectives, while Ukraine kept stinging like a bee. “1000 bee stings a day” is how someone reported their single minded focus on destroying fuel vehicles, ammo dumps and infrastructure bottle necks.
What were (are?) the Russian strategic objectives in your view? In addition to pushing Kiev out of the Donbas, to capture and annex a thick piece of territory stretching from the Donbas to Moldavia and including Odessa?
They’ve been very clear - the annihilation of Ukraine as an independent nation. Fuck knows what they are now.
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
Someone on PB was claiming that that would cement the RF forever in the nation's affections etc. etc.
That would at least require tongues I think. We're not that easily bought off.
Tory local election results continue to be awful, they must fear any by elections in safe Con seats. I have said this before it does not matter who the leader is, what they do or do not do, it is really of little or no consequence. The Conservatives have reached their sell by date, it is the swing of the pendulum and it cannot be stopped, short of an armed take over of the state. Fortunately this is the UK and not Trump land.
Re Ukraine, Russia now bringing in re-inforcements and seem to be holding in Kherson. Next week could go either way. Must say very emotional seeing the reaction of locals to the advancing troops. Appears this morning that Kupiansk has fallen, presumably the Russians evacuated?
The first Acclamation of King Charles III is to take place at St James’s Palace at 10am, followed by similar events in other places over the next few days.
To those who think there’s no real news, and that there’s too much focus on the story, there’s now going to be Royal events several times a day until after the funeral. Hope you all renewed your Netflix subscriptions, and see you a week on Tuesday. The UK has not done full national mourning for a long time, this is simply what it’s like.
Perhaps. Alternatively, it’s the last time we’ll see what’s essentially a Victorian holdover. If the monarchy is to adapt and survive, this will not happen again.
@Nigelb its like the Tet Offensive in its use of partisan warfare/sabotage behind American lines, all synchronised superbly with an outright attack on the front
Tet came as a total shock to the USA, at a time when the Americans complacently thought the war was quietening down with no major moves
In many ways thereafter the Tet was a failure for Hanoi and the Yanks pushed the VC back quite easily
But Tet broke the American will to fight. It showed Americans at home the war was unwinnable and the North would never give up, and would endure any cost. From that moment Saigon 73 was inevitable
Could I point out something to the ludicrous Dynamo on the last thread who wanted a referendum on the monarchy on the basis of one poll with a landslide 61% still in favour of the monarchy.
Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in. It would be absurd to give it up
Before you reached for and flung adjectives such as "ludicrous" and "absurd", you should have checked what I actually wrote. I posted a YouGov poll from 2021 which referenced similar polls in 2020 and 2019 and I said let's have another poll now. I drew particular attention to the large reported swing to republicanism in the 18-24 age group. Why you thought I meant a referendum I have no idea.
The media are screaming practically wall to wall that the monarchy represents the whole country and that an elderly woman with a palace and a couple of castles had a place in almost everyone's heart. Well how about a media organisation commissions a poll to find out whether that's true or not and publishes the results. Retain the monarchy or abolish it - see how the population feel about that question when a pollster rings them up and asks them. ASKS them. Not TELLS them what they think, which is what politicians of all parties and the entire media are doing right now. No cueing. No pictures of an elderly woman, or guys wearing medals, or good-looking young women either. No Range Rovers. No glamour. Just ask them and find out. What's the problem with that?
Are you OK, hun?
Cancelling the cricket match at Izyum upset him badly… we should be kind.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Where's Harry, out of interest?
The queen’s death seems to have unsettled you. Why don’t you switch off and turn to the coverage of Ukraine’s counteroffensive to cheer you up instead?
I really got to some of the monarchists here when I said their emotions were going haywire because a rich old lady died in a castle, didn't I? And you come out with the same old line that I must be a pro-Kremlin traitor for saying so.
Your certainties as symbolically crystallised in feudal imagery could be about to fall apart...which you may already know.
I asked "Where's Harry?" The Torygraph say "With the death of his grandmother, Harry has never looked so alone". Scared, much?
Tell us more about the Kharkiv Oblast
The silly thing is that “if” Dynamo is a Russian Troll
Isn't it de rigueur to accuse any new poster of being a Russian troll or, in my case, a Russian doll?
Oh Heathener, you are only a Russian doll in the way that you are a beautiful thing with many undiscovered layers lying within.
The immediate shuffling of titles seems to me to be in poor taste. Confirmation that with the passing (sorry @IshmaelZ) of HMQ the whole alphabet soup is an unaffordable anachronism.
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
Someone on PB was claiming that that would cement the RF forever in the nation's affections etc. etc.
I said it made Charles safe from Republicans, contrary to their hope that the mere fact of his accession would end the Monarchy.
Some random fan who turned up at Buck House? That's not an average sample of the UK population.
Edit: I really do not understand your logic there.
It's the image. It shows him connecting with an "ordinary person", which is contrary to his prior image of being a bit stiff, awkward and stilted in public.
It's the sort of thing that happened with Diana that the rest of the Royal Family were terrified of in the 1980s. Well, they were a bit slow to move with the times, but they have now, and it will keep the public on side. Clearly they learnt the lessons of the public reaction to Diana's death.
Thank you; interesting, and to be taken seriously. But, as indeed my case shows, it's not obvious to many.
Another reason why I remain unconvinced is the behaviour of various male members of the RF, which, to put it mildly, breached the mystique years ago. This is not Diana's funeral [edit] in the 1980s. Though it will be interesting, objectively, to see if a similar collective sentiment develops as it did in some areas then.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Where's Harry, out of interest?
The queen’s death seems to have unsettled you. Why don’t you switch off and turn to the coverage of Ukraine’s counteroffensive to cheer you up instead?
I really got to some of the monarchists here when I said their emotions were going haywire because a rich old lady died in a castle, didn't I? And you come out with the same old line that I must be a pro-Kremlin traitor for saying so.
Your certainties as symbolically crystallised in feudal imagery could be about to fall apart...which you may already know.
I asked "Where's Harry?" The Torygraph say "With the death of his grandmother, Harry has never looked so alone". Scared, much?
Tell us more about the Kharkiv Oblast
The silly thing is that “if” Dynamo is a Russian Troll
Isn't it de rigueur to accuse any new poster of being a Russian troll or, in my case, a Russian doll?
Oh Heathener, you are only a Russian doll in the way that you are a beautiful thing with many undiscovered layers lying within.
Like a particularly charming onion.
Sadly, the new layers prove to be exactly the same as the old ones.
Tobias Schneider @tobiaschneider I'm trying not to lap up every rumor circulating around Telegram, but the main challenge in establishing a clear picture of the situation in Kharkiv appears to be that Russian lines are collapsing faster than Ukraine can even advance and clear liberated areas. Astonishing.
NYT Sept 9 - Ukraine’s military made significant advances in recent days near the northeastern city of Izium, a key Russian stronghold, according to military analysts and geolocated photos and videos. The breakthrough — possibly some 50 kilometers in just a few days — threatened to encircle Russian forces, which appeared to be caught by surprise.
The progress of the Ukrainian counteroffensive in the east, paired with slower, more limited gains in the south, represents some of the most significant changes to the frontlines of the war in months.
The exact positions of Ukrainian forces around Izium could not be independently confirmed. The Russian military released a video with what it said were reinforcements headed to the Kharkiv area, but it has not made detailed statements about the status of the fighting.
But military analysts, satellite detections and photos and videos of Ukrainian forces indicate that they moved rapidly east toward Kupiansk in recent days, possibly getting close to the outskirts of the city. Capturing Kupiansk could threaten Russian supply lines to Izium. And the Ukrainian military claimed to capture the city of Balakliya, prompting Russian military bloggers to complain that Russia was poorly prepared.
The situation is fluid, and further Ukrainian gains may be more heavily contested as Russia stabilizes its response.
Ukraine’s counteroffensive in the east came in parallel to a push in the south that it had prepared for months, around the regional capital, Kherson. Russia was forced to redeploy troops to shore up its defenses in this area, which may have left its remaining forces in the east more thinly spread.
Ukrainian advances in the south have been slower. Ukrainian troops are fighting to push Russian troops back from the western side of the Dnipro river, which Russia has controlled since the first week of the invasion. After 12 days of intense fighting and shelling, Ukrainian forces have reclaimed a number of small settlements along the frontline.
Despite the successes, Ukrainian officials have warned that it will be a slow grind to reclaim more territory. Russian forces have shifted to defensive positions and have heavily mined the surrounding area.
The advances follow weeks of Ukrainian strikes on Russian equipment behind the frontlines, including ammunition depots and command posts.
Watching the exerpts from Russian media on Daily Kos last night I got 2 references to the fact that the troops who have made these incredible break throughs were those trained in the UK. From the Russians. They have been using combined tactics to hit, move and bypass and the Russians are not coping with it. Maybe fighting is something else that should be on the overnight list (without wanting to take anything away from the incredibly brave Ukranians).
The first Acclamation of King Charles III is to take place at St James’s Palace at 10am, followed by similar events in other places over the next few days.
To those who think there’s no real news, and that there’s too much focus on the story, there’s now going to be Royal events several times a day until after the funeral. Hope you all renewed your Netflix subscriptions, and see you a week on Tuesday. The UK has not done full national mourning for a long time, this is simply what it’s like.
Perhaps. Alternatively, it’s the last time we’ll see what’s essentially a Victorian holdover. If the monarchy is to adapt and survive, this will not happen again.
Yes it will.
As I said yesterday there will always be a need to have an accession process for the new monarch, the previous monarch's body will always lie in state and there will always be a state funeral for that monarch.
Even if we had a President, when a US President dies they normally lie in state in the Capitol before a full State Funeral. The inauguration of a new President is always a big event too.
That is just the natural order of things for the change of a nation's head of state, especially a head of state of a top 10 ten nation
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Where's Harry, out of interest?
The queen’s death seems to have unsettled you. Why don’t you switch off and turn to the coverage of Ukraine’s counteroffensive to cheer you up instead?
I really got to some of the monarchists here when I said their emotions were going haywire because a rich old lady died in a castle, didn't I? And you come out with the same old line that I must be a pro-Kremlin traitor for saying so.
Your certainties as symbolically crystallised in feudal imagery could be about to fall apart...which you may already know.
I asked "Where's Harry?" The Torygraph say "With the death of his grandmother, Harry has never looked so alone". Scared, much?
Tell us more about the Kharkiv Oblast
The silly thing is that “if” Dynamo is a Russian Troll
Isn't it de rigueur to accuse any new poster of being a Russian troll or, in my case, a Russian doll?
No, just when they come on and start up deliberately about covid lockdowns, BA pilots dying after the vaccine, and how Russia are really the good guys.
"The threats picked up after misinformation spread online that suggested the hospital performed gender-affirming genital surgeries on young children.
Boston Children’s says it provides overall care to children who identify as transgender or nonbinary, but surgeries are performed only on consenting adults.
“Age 18 is used to reflect the standard age of majority for medical decision-making. Boston Children’s does not perform genital surgeries as part of gender-affirming care on a patient under the age of 18,” the statement says. "
My perspective on the 'american culture war' is as follows:
This begun in universities in the late 2010's, where college professors were being unseated on vague, spurious accusations relating to 'racism'; the universities lost their ability to control it, and it exploded massively in 2020, breaking out of university and 'infecting' the whole of society, which became consumed by an irrational revolutionary fervour, a sort of 'toxic mix' of revolutionary france and the salem witch trials.
The right initially started to fight it by appeals to discourse and reason, but it failed. So in 2021/2022 they resorted to fighting it by any means possible, weaponising appeals to religion (abortion) and the fear of child abuse, and despatching their own 'cancel culture' towards ideas they dislike (ie critical race theory), with some success.
It is true that both sides are now basically as bad as each other, but to find a resolution to the issue, you have to stop automatically and reflexively taking the side of the left, which is what a majority of posters on here do. It gets very tiring to observe, otherwise smart and intelligent people coming across as fellow travellers supporting the revolution.
To add... bombings of public buildings are not a new low in this war, they were seen a lot in 2020 for instance.
Respectfully, that seems like a very partial interpretation of the American culture wars. What was McCarthyism if not a culture war? I’m sure the left have their share of the blame but it’s hypocritical in the extreme to say that it originated with them. Throughout most of the 20th century the majority of censorship was done in the name of conservatism.
You can't avoid having a discussion about something because it is too hard to find a starting point. That is just dodging the issue. I would say the current wave of problems did start in the 2010's, mainly because the 'left' could not come to terms with Donald Trump.
The democrats are not dealing with the left at all, they seem to have bought in to it all completely.
To my mind, looking at the situation as it was in 2020; I can easily see and understand why Americans vote for Trump and the Republicans, I would probably do the same if I was American.
I’m not dodging the issue but to say “This begun in universities in the late 2010's” is absolutely absurd, as if cultural censorship didn’t exist before them. You’re looking at your own political inclination and working back to the date that’s easiest to justify it.
I didn't make the claim that 'cultural censorship begain in the 2010's'. I was trying to identify the causes of these hospital bomb threats.
But if anything this is a symptom of the problem I am describing, the idea that because McCarthyism targetted the left 70 years ago, it is ok for the left to now take revenge in a similar fashion and on a more damaging scale. People don't want to question too much the antics of the left because they ultimately think they are 'on the right side of history', which is actually just a comforting delusion.
Plus , the comparison doesn't really work, because McCarthyism was about trying to root out actual 'enemies of the state' in the cold war; whereas the sackings of professors in the 2010's onwards was about suppressing beliefs and opinions people don't like, be this about race, gender whatever. It was just an assault on the freedom of expression.
I would think the roots of these bomb threats lie more in a history of bomb threats, arson attacks, shootings etc. targeting abortion providers than began in the late ‘70s in the US. You then see this sort of domestic terrorism spreading to general anti-government militia movements, with of course the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995 that killed 168.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Obviously everyone's experiences will differ, but what I'm seeing corresponds more closely with Nick's assessment than yours.
We were at the theatre last night, along with the usual crowd of oldies and a gratifyingly larger smattering of youngsters than usual. I was expecting perhaps a minute of silence, but no, there was no indication whatsoever that anything was out of the ordinary, and I didn't hear the death of the Queen mentioned once during the interval. This was a small local theatre in a safe Tory constituency, btw, true blue territory.
Charles’s “kind” comments about Harry and Meghan need to be seen in the context of Harry’s book deal. The firm are terrified about it’s contents.
Thanks to events, they’ve got H&M pinned down. This is their one and only opportunity.
I’d love to be a fly on the wall!
Harry and Meghan are currently just above Andrew in the Royal popularity list, if they are rude in their book they may even plumb to Andrew levels of hatred here. It is up to them what they choose to do
The first Acclamation of King Charles III is to take place at St James’s Palace at 10am, followed by similar events in other places over the next few days.
To those who think there’s no real news, and that there’s too much focus on the story, there’s now going to be Royal events several times a day until after the funeral. Hope you all renewed your Netflix subscriptions, and see you a week on Tuesday. The UK has not done full national mourning for a long time, this is simply what it’s like.
Perhaps. Alternatively, it’s the last time we’ll see what’s essentially a Victorian holdover. If the monarchy is to adapt and survive, this will not happen again.
Yes it will.
As I said yesterday there will always be a need to have an accession process for the new monarch, the previous monarch's body will always lie in state and there will always be a state funeral for that monarch.
Even if we had a President, when a US President dies they normally lie in state in the Capitol before a full State Funeral. The inauguration of a new President is always a big event too.
That is just the natural order of things for the change of a nation's head of state, especially a head of state of a top 10 ten nation
Yes what do they expect. Just chuck the dead queen in a ditch and drive Charles to the palace in a van?
He’s the king. We are a monarchy. This is what happens. Nations have pomp and circumstance
Look at great republics like France and the USA. They too have elaborate rituals relating to power, history and prestige. The French still parade missiles down the champs elysee, FFS
The first Acclamation of King Charles III is to take place at St James’s Palace at 10am, followed by similar events in other places over the next few days.
To those who think there’s no real news, and that there’s too much focus on the story, there’s now going to be Royal events several times a day until after the funeral. Hope you all renewed your Netflix subscriptions, and see you a week on Tuesday. The UK has not done full national mourning for a long time, this is simply what it’s like.
Perhaps. Alternatively, it’s the last time we’ll see what’s essentially a Victorian holdover. If the monarchy is to adapt and survive, this will not happen again.
Yes it will.
As I said yesterday there will always be a need to have an accession process for the new monarch, the previous monarch's body will always lie in state and there will always be a state funeral for that monarch.
Even if we had a President, when a US President dies they normally lie in state in the Capitol before a full State Funeral. The inauguration of a new President is always a big event too.
That is just the natural order of things for the change of a nation's head of state, especially a head of state of a top 10 ten nation
"Natural order." The accession process naturally takes 5 minutes to swear them in. Just look at the Uachtarán next door.
All else os fluff on the public purse at a time of huge stringency.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
Nope.
Not interested in the monarchy. Not interested in Charles.
And your hyperbolic nonsense only makes me more certain that I, along with millions of others, am right not to bother.
And it must really hurt to learn that virtually no-one is in you.
The only way you feel you can get attention is by petulance and unpleasantness.
That speaks for itself but don't expect any of us to listen.
@Nigelb its like the Tet Offensive in its use of partisan warfare/sabotage behind American lines, all synchronised superbly with an outright attack on the front
Tet came as a total shock to the USA, at a time when the Americans complacently thought the war was quietening down with no major moves
In many ways thereafter the Tet was a failure for Hanoi and the Yanks pushed the VC back quite easily
But Tet broke the American will to fight. It showed Americans at home the war was unwinnable and the North would never give up, and would endure any cost. From that moment Saigon 73 was inevitable
Saigon 73 wasn’t inevitable.
The South fought hard until they ran out of weapons, in 73. Re supply was blocked by the US Congress. So they were facing a massive conventional invasion by armoured columns, and ran out of tanks and antitank weapons.
@Nigelb its like the Tet Offensive in its use of partisan warfare/sabotage behind American lines, all synchronised superbly with an outright attack on the front
Tet came as a total shock to the USA, at a time when the Americans complacently thought the war was quietening down with no major moves
In many ways thereafter the Tet was a failure for Hanoi and the Yanks pushed the VC back quite easily
But Tet broke the American will to fight. It showed Americans at home the war was unwinnable and the North would never give up, and would endure any cost. From that moment Saigon 73 was inevitable
The comparison (I hope) seriously undersells the success of the Ukrainian counteroffensive. And I certainly don’t want to see another five years of this.
It is immensely different, as this seems to be brilliantly organise and executed, taking advantage of superior kit to rout a numerically superior, fairly modern army. The partisan attacks seem to be a comparatively minor part of it.
But agreed that it’s had a huge effect on Russian morale.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I for one am watching history in the making as an history enthusiast. Is monarchy relevant to most people's daily lives? No.
Oh, but it is. It very much is.
Because it's at the core of our constitution and the stability of our country.
You might not think about that when you're out shopping, and take it for granted, but it sinews together our governance and seminal national moments.
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
Someone on PB was claiming that that would cement the RF forever in the nation's affections etc. etc.
For me, it is a very strong indicator that the new King's relationship with the British people is going to be very different to the one the Queen had. It will be much, much less deferential, much less serious. I am not sure that translates into deep affection, though.
The sort of person who piles into the crowds at Crathie, Buck House, etc. is hardly typical of the nation. Which leaves the questions posed even more uncertain, of course, despite the fervent assurances of the monarchists and Tories on PB.
Ironically, that claim — that the crowds were unrepresentative of the general public — is what the Royal Establishment made about those mourning the death of Diana.
The first Acclamation of King Charles III is to take place at St James’s Palace at 10am, followed by similar events in other places over the next few days.
To those who think there’s no real news, and that there’s too much focus on the story, there’s now going to be Royal events several times a day until after the funeral. Hope you all renewed your Netflix subscriptions, and see you a week on Tuesday. The UK has not done full national mourning for a long time, this is simply what it’s like.
Perhaps. Alternatively, it’s the last time we’ll see what’s essentially a Victorian holdover. If the monarchy is to adapt and survive, this will not happen again.
Yes it will.
As I said yesterday there will always be a need to have an accession process for the new monarch, the previous monarch's body will always lie in state and there will always be a state funeral for that monarch.
Even if we had a President, when a US President dies they normally lie in state in the Capitol before a full State Funeral. The inauguration of a new President is always a big event too.
That is just the natural order of things for the change of a nation's head of state, especially a head of state of a top 10 ten nation
"Natural order." The accession process naturally takes 5 minutes to swear them in. Just look at the Uachtarán next door.
All else os fluff on the public purse at a time of huge stringency.
With all due respect to Ireland, the United Kingdom is not a little republic like Ireland, and the head of state of the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, and so on, is not “the Taoiseach”
The first Acclamation of King Charles III is to take place at St James’s Palace at 10am, followed by similar events in other places over the next few days.
To those who think there’s no real news, and that there’s too much focus on the story, there’s now going to be Royal events several times a day until after the funeral. Hope you all renewed your Netflix subscriptions, and see you a week on Tuesday. The UK has not done full national mourning for a long time, this is simply what it’s like.
Perhaps. Alternatively, it’s the last time we’ll see what’s essentially a Victorian holdover. If the monarchy is to adapt and survive, this will not happen again.
Yes it will.
As I said yesterday there will always be a need to have an accession process for the new monarch, the previous monarch's body will always lie in state and there will always be a state funeral for that monarch.
Even if we had a President, when a US President dies they normally lie in state in the Capitol before a full State Funeral. The inauguration of a new President is always a big event too.
That is just the natural order of things for the change of a nation's head of state, especially a head of state of a top 10 ten nation
"Natural order." The accession process naturally takes 5 minutes to swear them in. Just look at the Uachtarán next door.
All else os fluff on the public purse at a time of huge stringency.
With all due respect to Ireland, the United Kingdom is not a little republic like Ireland, and the head of state of the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, and so on, is not “the Taoiseach”
You do, er, realise that the Taoiseach is not the Head of State. The Uachtarán is.
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
Someone on PB was claiming that that would cement the RF forever in the nation's affections etc. etc.
For me, it is a very strong indicator that the new King's relationship with the British people is going to be very different to the one the Queen had. It will be much, much less deferential, much less serious. I am not sure that translates into deep affection, though.
The sort of person who piles into the crowds at Crathie, Buck House, etc. is hardly typical of the nation. Which leaves the questions posed even more uncertain, of course, despite the fervent assurances of the monarchists and Tories on PB.
Ironically, that claim — that the crowds were unrepresentative of the general public — is what the Royal Establishment made about those mourning the death of Diana.
@Nigelb its like the Tet Offensive in its use of partisan warfare/sabotage behind American lines, all synchronised superbly with an outright attack on the front
Tet came as a total shock to the USA, at a time when the Americans complacently thought the war was quietening down with no major moves
In many ways thereafter the Tet was a failure for Hanoi and the Yanks pushed the VC back quite easily
But Tet broke the American will to fight. It showed Americans at home the war was unwinnable and the North would never give up, and would endure any cost. From that moment Saigon 73 was inevitable
Saigon 73 wasn’t inevitable.
The South fought hard until they ran out of weapons, in 73. Re supply was blocked by the US Congress. So they were facing a massive conventional invasion by armoured columns, and ran out of tanks and antitank weapons.
Makes you think, doesn’t it?
I’ve read a ton of books about the Vietnam war (probably more than is healthy) and been several times to the country
IMHO the war was invisibly but decisively lost for the south from Tet on. It broke the will of Washington
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I for one am watching history in the making as an history enthusiast. Is monarchy relevant to most people's daily lives? No.
Oh, but it is. It very much is.
Because it's at the core of our constitution and the stability of our country.
You might not think about that when you're out shopping, and take it for granted, but it sinews together our governance and seminal national moments.
Hmm. With respect, that "constitution" can be changed at any moment, thanks to the supremacy of Parliament over the Crown after the revolutions of the 17th century.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I for one am watching history in the making as an history enthusiast. Is monarchy relevant to most people's daily lives? No.
Oh, but it is. It very much is.
Because it's at the core of our constitution and the stability of our country.
You might not think about that when you're out shopping, and take it for granted, but it sinews together our governance and seminal national moments.
It really doesn't. All the monarchical input into constitutional politics could be swept away at a stroke by a Tony Benn Government.
The first Acclamation of King Charles III is to take place at St James’s Palace at 10am, followed by similar events in other places over the next few days.
To those who think there’s no real news, and that there’s too much focus on the story, there’s now going to be Royal events several times a day until after the funeral. Hope you all renewed your Netflix subscriptions, and see you a week on Tuesday. The UK has not done full national mourning for a long time, this is simply what it’s like.
Perhaps. Alternatively, it’s the last time we’ll see what’s essentially a Victorian holdover. If the monarchy is to adapt and survive, this will not happen again.
Yes it will.
As I said yesterday there will always be a need to have an accession process for the new monarch, the previous monarch's body will always lie in state and there will always be a state funeral for that monarch.
Even if we had a President, when a US President dies they normally lie in state in the Capitol before a full State Funeral. The inauguration of a new President is always a big event too.
That is just the natural order of things for the change of a nation's head of state, especially a head of state of a top 10 ten nation
"Natural order." The accession process naturally takes 5 minutes to swear them in. Just look at the Uachtarán next door.
All else os fluff on the public purse at a time of huge stringency.
Since when has Ireland been a top 10 nation? However even President De Valera for example lied in State and had a full State Funeral in Dublin. Plus each President there too has to be sworn in
The first Acclamation of King Charles III is to take place at St James’s Palace at 10am, followed by similar events in other places over the next few days.
To those who think there’s no real news, and that there’s too much focus on the story, there’s now going to be Royal events several times a day until after the funeral. Hope you all renewed your Netflix subscriptions, and see you a week on Tuesday. The UK has not done full national mourning for a long time, this is simply what it’s like.
Perhaps. Alternatively, it’s the last time we’ll see what’s essentially a Victorian holdover. If the monarchy is to adapt and survive, this will not happen again.
Yes it will.
As I said yesterday there will always be a need to have an accession process for the new monarch, the previous monarch's body will always lie in state and there will always be a state funeral for that monarch.
Even if we had a President, when a US President dies they normally lie in state in the Capitol before a full State Funeral. The inauguration of a new President is always a big event too.
That is just the natural order of things for the change of a nation's head of state, especially a head of state of a top 10 ten nation
"Natural order." The accession process naturally takes 5 minutes to swear them in. Just look at the Uachtarán next door.
All else os fluff on the public purse at a time of huge stringency.
With all due respect to Ireland, the United Kingdom is not a little republic like Ireland, and the head of state of the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, and so on, is not “the Taoiseach”
You do, er, realise that the Taoiseach is not the Head of State. The Uachtarán is.
Yes I do realise that. I was pointing out the preposterous nature of your comment with facetiousness
The Irish President isn’t even the teashuck. He she it (who the fuck is it?) is orders of magnitude less important than QE2
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I for one am watching history in the making as an history enthusiast. Is monarchy relevant to most people's daily lives? No.
Oh, but it is. It very much is.
Because it's at the core of our constitution and the stability of our country.
You might not think about that when you're out shopping, and take it for granted, but it sinews together our governance and seminal national moments.
It really doesn't. All the monarchical input into constitutional politics could be swept away at a stroke by a Tony Benn Government.
Yes well fortunately the prospect of a republican Corbyn Bennite government was trounced at the 2019 general election and now even Starmer backs a reformed monarchy
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I for one am watching history in the making as an history enthusiast. Is monarchy relevant to most people's daily lives? No.
Oh, but it is. It very much is.
Because it's at the core of our constitution and the stability of our country.
You might not think about that when you're out shopping, and take it for granted, but it sinews together our governance and seminal national moments.
Hmm. With respect, that "constitution" can be changed at any moment, thanks to the supremacy of Parliament over the Crown after the revolutions of the 17th century.
Only legally if the Crown and Monarch signs changes into law, our constitution is Crown in Parliament not Parliament alone
No one knows for sure, but as I wondered on the day he invaded ... what is his exit strategy? He didn't seem to have one unless he succeeded totally. He can hardly retreat his army and make out it was a victory. He's definitely getting very ratty now.
Labrov had great faith in the Russian population falling for the concept of a patriotic war because they wanted to be convinced. Hmm ... I suspect he's not so sure now. Putin may go for the Millwall defence. "Everyone hates us, we don't care."
@Nigelb its like the Tet Offensive in its use of partisan warfare/sabotage behind American lines, all synchronised superbly with an outright attack on the front
Tet came as a total shock to the USA, at a time when the Americans complacently thought the war was quietening down with no major moves
In many ways thereafter the Tet was a failure for Hanoi and the Yanks pushed the VC back quite easily
But Tet broke the American will to fight. It showed Americans at home the war was unwinnable and the North would never give up, and would endure any cost. From that moment Saigon 73 was inevitable
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I for one am watching history in the making as an history enthusiast. Is monarchy relevant to most people's daily lives? No.
Oh, but it is. It very much is.
Because it's at the core of our constitution and the stability of our country.
You might not think about that when you're out shopping, and take it for granted, but it sinews together our governance and seminal national moments.
Hmm. With respect, that "constitution" can be changed at any moment, thanks to the supremacy of Parliament over the Crown after the revolutions of the 17th century.
Only legally if the Crown and Monarch signs changes into law, our constitution is Crown in Parliament not Parliament alone
The first Acclamation of King Charles III is to take place at St James’s Palace at 10am, followed by similar events in other places over the next few days.
To those who think there’s no real news, and that there’s too much focus on the story, there’s now going to be Royal events several times a day until after the funeral. Hope you all renewed your Netflix subscriptions, and see you a week on Tuesday. The UK has not done full national mourning for a long time, this is simply what it’s like.
Perhaps. Alternatively, it’s the last time we’ll see what’s essentially a Victorian holdover. If the monarchy is to adapt and survive, this will not happen again.
Yes it will.
As I said yesterday there will always be a need to have an accession process for the new monarch, the previous monarch's body will always lie in state and there will always be a state funeral for that monarch.
Even if we had a President, when a US President dies they normally lie in state in the Capitol before a full State Funeral. The inauguration of a new President is always a big event too.
That is just the natural order of things for the change of a nation's head of state, especially a head of state of a top 10 ten nation
"Natural order." The accession process naturally takes 5 minutes to swear them in. Just look at the Uachtarán next door.
All else os fluff on the public purse at a time of huge stringency.
With all due respect to Ireland, the United Kingdom is not a little republic like Ireland, and the head of state of the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, and so on, is not “the Taoiseach”
You do, er, realise that the Taoiseach is not the Head of State. The Uachtarán is.
Yes I do realise that. I was pointing out the preposterous nature of your comment with facetiousness
The Irish President isn’t even the teashuck. He she it (who the fuck is it?) is orders of magnitude less important than QE2
If you like heads of state to be super-important, why don't you like Putin?
The first Acclamation of King Charles III is to take place at St James’s Palace at 10am, followed by similar events in other places over the next few days.
To those who think there’s no real news, and that there’s too much focus on the story, there’s now going to be Royal events several times a day until after the funeral. Hope you all renewed your Netflix subscriptions, and see you a week on Tuesday. The UK has not done full national mourning for a long time, this is simply what it’s like.
Perhaps. Alternatively, it’s the last time we’ll see what’s essentially a Victorian holdover. If the monarchy is to adapt and survive, this will not happen again.
Yes it will.
As I said yesterday there will always be a need to have an accession process for the new monarch, the previous monarch's body will always lie in state and there will always be a state funeral for that monarch.
Even if we had a President, when a US President dies they normally lie in state in the Capitol before a full State Funeral. The inauguration of a new President is always a big event too.
That is just the natural order of things for the change of a nation's head of state, especially a head of state of a top 10 ten nation
"Natural order." The accession process naturally takes 5 minutes to swear them in. Just look at the Uachtarán next door.
All else os fluff on the public purse at a time of huge stringency.
With all due respect to Ireland, the United Kingdom is not a little republic like Ireland, and the head of state of the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, and so on, is not “the Taoiseach”
You do, er, realise that the Taoiseach is not the Head of State. The Uachtarán is.
Yes I do realise that. I was pointing out the preposterous nature of your comment with facetiousness
The Irish President isn’t even the teashuck. He she it (who the fuck is it?) is orders of magnitude less important than QE2
If you like heads of state to be super-important, why don't you like Putin?
Obvs, heads of state should be super-important, but not pizdy.
If Russian forces are getting routed in the way that is being reported, surely this is going to have huge ramifications in Moscow's corridors of power. My fear is that this brings nukes into the equation in some way. If they are seen as the only way to prevent defeat, won't they be used?
Technically, Russia has committed to only use nuclear weapons in the event that the survival of the Russian state itself is at stake.
Of course, I do wonder if Putin has done a Louis XIV and thinks that HE is Russia. If the Ukrainian offensive is successful in destroying large amounts of Russian forces and forcing them back to their start lines, Putin may think he might be couped (and he might). Given (in his head) the end of him is the same as the end of the Russian state, he might just use nukes with this justification.
The response of the west in this situation will be very telling, but I don't think any country would be able to let him/Russia get away with it.
The gap between what’s being reported on Twitter about the Ukrainian offensive and the cautious and barely noticeable coverage on TV news is at its most marked today.
The news channels, all the papers, still on London Bridge. My Twitter feed is saturation Kharkiv oblast and translations of panicked Russian Telegram channels.
Comments
I was trying to identify the causes of these hospital bomb threats.
But if anything this is a symptom of the problem I am describing, the idea that because McCarthyism targetted the left 70 years ago, it is ok for the left to now take revenge in a similar fashion and on a more damaging scale. People don't want to question too much the antics of the left because they ultimately think they are 'on the right side of history', which is actually just a comforting delusion.
Plus , the comparison doesn't really work, because McCarthyism was about trying to root out actual 'enemies of the state' in the cold war; whereas the sackings of professors in the 2010's onwards was about suppressing beliefs and opinions people don't like, be this about race, gender whatever. It was just an assault on the freedom of expression.
It’s like the Fall of France plus the Tet Offensive
And again, the "fix" is at a level that is simply unpayable for so many people. And ow they will haughtily insist there is no energy crisis, the have dealt with it, everyone should be appreciative of how benevolent they are. As people say "but I can't pay this"
Presumably the parts of the Russian Army with newer kit, such as those trying to advance on the Bakhmut-Siversk line, will stop the collapse, but not sure what line they can cover.
The story of Kharkiv Oblast is astonishing over the past few days. It appears that the enemy spread themselves very thin, in an attempt to shore up the line at Kherson, and the defenders have retaken a huge amount of territory with very little resistance. The strategic town of Kupyansk now looks to have fallen completely, and with it the supply lines to the South and the town of Izyum. There’s many rivers in this area, and few crossing points, and the enemy risks being surrounded if they don’t withdraw.
Meanwhile, the reinforcements sent to Kherson are also cut off and some progress is being made there, the enemy will eventually be starved out, and will withdraw or be captured once they have no more ammunition.
As far as Ukraine is concerned, this is the most significant week of the war since the withdraw of the enemy from the roads to Kiev.
If the latter, then no I’m not scared. I feel remarkably jolly this morning actually. Rarely in the last two decades have I had more confidence in the future of western democracy than I do this morning. Also the grass is green again and the sky a deep blue. Have a lovely day won’t you.
The man was talking about Kherson because of it's importance, and the original talk was that it was the target. Of course, it could have been a bluff put out Zelensky.
We were in Krakow last month, and we got talking to a young Ukranian. To be honest, I think he moved to Krakow to avoid being drafted, but he was very patriotic. He asked what the UK public thought of the war. When I told him we were all behind Boris for once, he was very pleased.
Edit: I really do not understand your logic there.
I think football have got it wrong this weekend, most other sports have got it right. Lots of stuff on the day she died is fine. Some special programmes this week, and covering events works. But for many (most?) people are getting on with living.
A Russian appointed governor of occupied areas. Tells his new citizens:
“There is no reason to panic. But please run for your lives to the Russian frontier. Spassibo”
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1568374505357320193?s=46&t=GiOdGloFCgqJMxzpRhNWZw
To those who think there’s no real news, and that there’s too much focus on the story, there’s now going to be Royal events several times a day until after the funeral. Hope you all renewed your Netflix subscriptions, and see you a week on Tuesday. The UK has not done full national mourning for a long time, this is simply what it’s like.
Does anyone under 60 do that? No. There’s an
entire internet out there. People under 35 don’t watch BBC television AT ALL
It’s just a bunch of pensioners whingeing
There is a danger a Mad Dog Putin will try to do it to save his own face, but one hopes that the rest of Russia has more sense…
1. He understood why his mother was successful in the role.
2. No mention of his siblings or their families - the anticipated slimming down of the Royal Family to the direct line of descent is happening.
Did you conclude anything else of significance from it?
If he came on here and said, “look guys, I’m Russian and I’m putting across a different point of view and hoping I can change minds” then most posters would say “that’s cool, always good to have a different perspective whether we agree or not”.
Pretending not to be, trying a “hail fellow well met” style that then turns into a blatant attempt to crowbar in Russian propaganda or trying to stir up dissent is just annoying and pointless as it isn’t going to change any minds or opinions and is just mocked or ignored.
If Dynamo isn’t a Troll then he just has some “special” views on the world and maybe needs a bit of therapy or a good night on the sauce with some friends.
But you are right that this version is also unlikely to be enough. (The brunch place at the end of my road looks like it isn't going to try to re-open after the summer holidays, and I can't say I blame them.) And that's the problem Truss has. Even if she does a good job, it won't be enough to beat circumstances and Time For A Change/The Other Bloke Isn't Scary/We're Too Cold To Care About Woke.
Having a dig at ageing Radio 3 listeners is rather rich coming from someone whose witterings on here are a constant rage against the dying light. An author whose genre of ego-centric misoygny no longer has a market. Except (he thinks) on a minor political forum full of equally ageing brilliantined old stick insects.
Have a nice day
I don’t think there’s any danger of The Crown becoming unpopular. And I mean that in both senses of The Crown
It’s THE international soap opera that everyone follows. Around the world. From Diana to the death of the Queen, we can all gossip about it
And they have a brilliant new season ready with Harry and Meghan feuding across the Atlantic as the doddery old Prince tries to live up to Mum while hiding away the wicked Uncle
The royal family does not need BBC and ITV to sell itself. It literally has Netflix, and 3 billion transfixed viewers
… The leadership in Hanoi was despondent at the outcome of their offensive.[164][165] Their first and most ambitious goal, producing a general uprising, had ended in a dismal failure. In total, about 85,000–100,000 PAVN/VC troops had participated in the initial onslaught and in the follow-up phases. Overall, during the "Border Battles" of 1967 and the nine-month winter-spring campaign, 45,267 PAVN/VC troops had been killed in action.[166][167]
Hanoi had underestimated the strategic mobility of the allied forces, which allowed them to redeploy at will to threatened areas; their battle plan was too complex and difficult to coordinate, which was amply demonstrated by the 30 January attacks; their violation of the principle of mass, attacking everywhere instead of concentrating their forces on a few specific targets, allowed their forces to be defeated piecemeal; the launching of massed attacks headlong into the teeth of vastly superior firepower; and last, but not least, the incorrect assumptions upon which the entire campaign was based…
It's the sort of thing that happened with Diana that the rest of the Royal Family were terrified of in the 1980s. Well, they were a bit slow to move with the times, but they have now, and it will keep the public on side. Clearly they learnt the lessons of the public reaction to Diana's death.
Fuck knows what they are now.
I have said this before it does not matter who the leader is, what they do or do not do, it is really of little or no consequence. The Conservatives have reached their sell by date, it is the swing of the pendulum and it cannot be stopped, short of an armed take over of the state. Fortunately this is the UK and not Trump land.
Re Ukraine, Russia now bringing in re-inforcements and seem to be holding in Kherson. Next week could go either way. Must say very emotional seeing the reaction of locals to the advancing troops. Appears this morning that Kupiansk has fallen, presumably the Russians evacuated?
Alternatively, it’s the last time we’ll see what’s essentially a Victorian holdover.
If the monarchy is to adapt and survive, this will not happen again.
Tet came as a total shock to the USA, at a time when the Americans complacently thought the war was quietening down with no major moves
In many ways thereafter the Tet was a failure for Hanoi and the Yanks pushed the VC back quite easily
But Tet broke the American will to fight. It showed Americans at home the war was unwinnable and the North would never give up, and would endure any cost. From that moment Saigon 73 was inevitable
Like a particularly charming onion.
Another reason why I remain unconvinced is the behaviour of various male members of the RF, which, to put it mildly, breached the mystique years ago. This is not Diana's funeral [edit] in the 1980s. Though it will be interesting, objectively, to see if a similar collective sentiment develops as it did in some areas then.
Thanks to events, they’ve got H&M pinned down. This is their one and only opportunity.
I’d love to be a fly on the wall!
“Reports are coming in that Kupyansk has fallen, and also, just now, early reports that Izyum has been abandoned with Russian troops fleeing.”
4 minutes ago
https://twitter.com/threshedthought/status/1568509749079187463?s=46&t=GiOdGloFCgqJMxzpRhNWZw
As I said yesterday there will always be a need to have an accession process for the new monarch, the previous monarch's body will always lie in state and there will always be a state funeral for that monarch.
Even if we had a President, when a US President dies they normally lie in state in the Capitol before a full State Funeral. The inauguration of a new President is always a big event too.
That is just the natural order of things for the change of a nation's head of state, especially a head of state of a top 10 ten nation
https://solt.co.uk/about-london-theatre/press-office/updated-statement-from-society-of-london-theatre-and-uk-theatre/
He’s the king. We are a monarchy. This is what happens. Nations have pomp and circumstance
Look at great republics like France and the USA. They too have elaborate rituals relating to power, history and prestige. The French still parade missiles down the champs elysee, FFS
All else os fluff on the public purse at a time of huge stringency.
The only way you feel you can get attention is by petulance and unpleasantness.
That speaks for itself but don't expect any of us to listen.
The South fought hard until they ran out of weapons, in 73. Re supply was blocked by the US Congress. So they were facing a massive conventional invasion by armoured columns, and ran out of tanks and antitank weapons.
Makes you think, doesn’t it?
It is immensely different, as this seems to be brilliantly organise and executed, taking advantage of superior kit to rout a numerically superior, fairly modern army.
The partisan attacks seem to be a comparatively minor part of it.
But agreed that it’s had a huge effect on Russian morale.
Because it's at the core of our constitution and the stability of our country.
You might not think about that when you're out shopping, and take it for granted, but it sinews together our governance and seminal national moments.
IMHO the war was invisibly but decisively lost for the south from Tet on. It broke the will of Washington
The Irish President isn’t even the teashuck. He she it (who the fuck is it?) is orders of magnitude less important than QE2
general election and now even Starmer backs a reformed monarchy
No one knows for sure, but as I wondered on the day he invaded ... what is his exit strategy? He didn't seem to have one unless he succeeded totally. He can hardly retreat his army and make out it was a victory. He's definitely getting very ratty now.
Labrov had great faith in the Russian population falling for the concept of a patriotic war because they wanted to be convinced. Hmm ... I suspect he's not so sure now. Putin may go for the Millwall defence. "Everyone hates us, we don't care."
Won a Pulitzer.
Let’s hope the operations become more Bagration than Tet.
Of course, I do wonder if Putin has done a Louis XIV and thinks that HE is Russia.
If the Ukrainian offensive is successful in destroying large amounts of Russian forces and forcing them back to their start lines, Putin may think he might be couped (and he might). Given (in his head) the end of him is the same as the end of the Russian state, he might just use nukes with this justification.
The response of the west in this situation will be very telling, but I don't think any country would be able to let him/Russia get away with it.
The news channels, all the papers, still on London Bridge. My Twitter feed is saturation Kharkiv oblast and translations of panicked Russian Telegram channels.