It is curious that those who were once telling us that Russian victory was so inevitable that Ukraine should surrender immediately are now telling us that Ukraine must bend over backwards to accommodate the Russians in victory. The shilling is painfully obvious.
The whole of Ukraine should and will be liberated by the AFU. They have been the borders of Ukraine since independence and were guaranteed by Russia, the UK and the US. The lies about the residents of the Donbass being Russian really, because they can speak two languages or have a Russian cousin, will be shown up for what they are. As a modern, democratic country Ukraine will allow people of all ethnicities to be part of the country, as long as they did not collaborate with the fascist invaders. Those that did collaborate will be held to account for their treason.
Retaliation against collaborators would be a sure way of alienating the United States.
Not at all. Ukraine, as it moves away from Russian arbitrary government, seeks to be a country of laws. There are laws against treason and they will be enforced.
Ukraine is dependent on the goodwill of the United States. It would be a courageous move to alienate their most powerful ally whose supply of money, arms and intelligence has been crucial to the successful defence of Ukraine.
There is no alienation that will happen. Just as many of the rioters on January 6th have been put in prison, Ukraine will do the same for treason in her territory, in accordance with the law.
But how do you know? Are you Ukrainian? In the UK prosecutions for treason need approval from the DPP because there's very often public policy grounds for not bringing them.
Are you Ukrainian? Are you a lawyer?
Any personal information I choose to disclose will be done on my own time. In the meantime, I am confident the success of my predictions will speak for themselves. Though I note the repeated failed predictions of those with orcish sympathies does not prevent them from continuing to post unashamed.
OK, so you are a robotic arsehole and an obvious troll. Fucking off would be one option.
That’s really out of order. Tsk
Pb welcomes all voices. Until they break fundamental rules. That is key to the site’s success
I know but piling in with this shit, first post? If he really is Ukrainian at least I won't feel quite so bad if it all goes pear shaped in Donetsk.
While I am here, this King stuff is starting to feel like Ruritanian shit. Good lols for 3 days, now can we have our queen back pls.
You’re being ill mannered, for which you earlier and rightly criticised King Chuck
New poster @WillG has come on here with firm opinions. Let him express them and argue with him. He might be enlightening
It is curious that those who were once telling us that Russian victory was so inevitable that Ukraine should surrender immediately are now telling us that Ukraine must bend over backwards to accommodate the Russians in victory. The shilling is painfully obvious.
The whole of Ukraine should and will be liberated by the AFU. They have been the borders of Ukraine since independence and were guaranteed by Russia, the UK and the US. The lies about the residents of the Donbass being Russian really, because they can speak two languages or have a Russian cousin, will be shown up for what they are. As a modern, democratic country Ukraine will allow people of all ethnicities to be part of the country, as long as they did not collaborate with the fascist invaders. Those that did collaborate will be held to account for their treason.
Retaliation against collaborators would be a sure way of alienating the United States.
Not at all. Ukraine, as it moves away from Russian arbitrary government, seeks to be a country of laws. There are laws against treason and they will be enforced.
Ukraine is dependent on the goodwill of the United States. It would be a courageous move to alienate their most powerful ally whose supply of money, arms and intelligence has been crucial to the successful defence of Ukraine.
There is no alienation that will happen. Just as many of the rioters on January 6th have been put in prison, Ukraine will do the same for treason in her territory, in accordance with the law.
But how do you know? Are you Ukrainian? In the UK prosecutions for treason need approval from the DPP because there's very often public policy grounds for not bringing them.
Are you Ukrainian? Are you a lawyer?
Any personal information I choose to disclose will be done on my own time. In the meantime, I am confident the success of my predictions will speak for themselves. Though I note the repeated failed predictions of those with orcish sympathies does not prevent them from continuing to post unashamed.
Says somebody clearly ashamed enough of their own posting oeuvre to have created a shiny new pseudonym.
The Mail on Sunday says it? My God, have you seen some of the things the Mail on Sunday has said?
The Telegraph now reporting Truss was informed before she went to present her energy proposals the Queen was failing and her death was imminent
I assume this was much the same time as the members of the Royal family and it really is not a party political issue, you would expect the PM to be notified first
Yup. And Rentoul's retweeting of the MoS should add weight to it.
THEREFORE the note to Liz from NZ did NOT say HM is utterly and incredibly fucking poorly because that was not news at this stage. What comes next? 4 letters, first letter D
I was right, as so often.
So Keir Starmer really did wish the Queen a recovery after he was told she had died, his deputy retweeting it and Downing Street randomly lied about the time the PM was informed of her death. Plausible.
Yes, because he had been told to suppress the truth; what is much more telling is Truss's tweet did NOT contain any equivalent wish.
The Queen is dead.
You were just informed of the Queen's death, at 7 pm on 10 September. See?
In an homage to yesterday.... your evidence Starmer is part of a conspiracy to suppress the truth?
Is it that difficult to believe? I'm pretty sure half the news channels were doing that for hours as soon as they'd got their black ties on.
Yes, it is. He simply would not make reference to wishing her a recovery. How the fuck would that look when the truth emerges?! Why on Earth would the Palace put news readers in the position of lying to the public for a few hours? Put a black tie on but lie about HMQ's status lads, its for the lolz. Occams razor - they first knew when they say they knew.
Occam's razor, the last refuge of the moron. The rule says entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, it is a rule of thumb only in metaphysics only, and it does not mean the stupidest explanation is usually correct. And your thesis is utterly self-stutifying because black tie = person dead, so newsreaders wearing them were saying two different things anyway.
'The stupidest explanation' - that everyone was told the news when they say they were told the news? As opposed to your brilliantly deductive explanation that the Leader of the Opposition was wishing a dead Queen a recovery because he'd been told to keep it schtum and newsreaders were, at different times, changing into black ties because she was dead but the information she was dead was not being released, so they sort of hinted it without engaging any other protocols on banners, screen layouts etc. I'm done with this If it transpires any news caster or LOTO had been informed of Her Majesty's death (not that she was at deaths door but that she had expired) before the 'official' time given of 4.30 i will offer you an unreserved apology and pay £10 to yout choice of charity.
you are not making sense even on your own terms. Why, in your view, did the news bods put on black ties?
I assume because they were fully aware the news was imminent. They didn't all change at the same time. 'She wont survive the day'. I've said what i think, if i am wrong you will have an apology and a charitable donation.
At about 2pm, on the day, a bunch of workmen and a chap in a suit were fiddling with the flag on the top of the Bank of England. They didn’t replace the flag (though the suited chap had a shiny new one). This was visible from my office, close by. They were obviously looking at the issue of putting the flag to half mast.
I presume that, just as the civil service was telling people to get their copies of London Bridge out, the newscasters were being precautionary.
The position of the Crimea can't just be waved away in a sentence. It's far more complex than that and if you read your history of the mid 90s, the Ukraine weren't always fair and even in their dealings with the Peninsula.
I have the impression that you have been reading this from the same kind of sources who talk about eight years of Ukrainian bombardment of the peaceful citizens of Donbas.
I'm certainly not an apologist for Putin nor do I any way support or condone his actions in Crimea in 2014 and against the rest of the Ukraine since.
The facts (uncomfortable though they may be) are that the behaviour of past Ukrainian Governments toward the Crimea weren't always as generous as we might like to think.
The 1991 referendum did indeed show a 54-46 majority for independence but as we've seen elsewhere narrow wins do not always mark the end of a problem and 30 years on (more than a "generation" you might argue) it may be time to revisit the question of Crimean sovereignty.
If everyone is determined it has to be part of the Ukraine (a view which I think is going to lead to more trouble down the road but in the current atmosphere seems to be prevalent) then at the very least Kyiv needs to recognise it is different from the rest of the Ukraine and allow it a considerable degree of autonomy to govern its own affairs.
I am simply concerned about how past Ukrainian Governments have responded to Crimean attempts to assert a degree of autonomy - that, by the way, also implies there's plenty of fault on the Crimean side which did plenty to provoke a response from Kyiv.
Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?
Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do
Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed
Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding
But the new King is under intense pressure
I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
I’m very uncomfortable with the idea that Ukraine has no natural right to the Donbas or the Crimea because of “ethnic Russians”.
Most modern countries are multi-ethnic patchworks to a lesser or greater extent, but that doesn’t make them illegitimate or give neighbouring states especial rights over them.
Especially when those patchworks were created by imperialism and ethnic cleansing just decades ago.
There are two separate issues - what do a majority of people in Crimea want, and should they be allowed to have whatever it is? We don't know the answer to the first, and only an internationally-supervised referendum will give us a satisfactory answer. But the answer to the second should be yes, just as Scotland has a right to go its own way if it wants to. Insisting that they should be governed by a government they dislike (if they do), merely because Russia thought it administrative convenient to attach it to Ukraine in the 1950s, would be just as wrong as Russia trying to conquer Kyiv, where the popyulation quite obviously don't want them.
Support for Ukraine against czarist Russian aggression was right. Support for imposing Ukrainian nationalism on areas where it may not be wanted - no.
My guess is that Zelensky knows that, and would win a referendum in Crimea if it was held, if only because people have had enough of war. But they shoyuld get a say.
The key though is who should vote. Having been cleared of Ukranians and Tartars and settled with Russian incomers is that a fair plebiscite? A bit like polling parts of the West Bank about being incorporated into Israel, for example...
The position of the Crimea can't just be waved away in a sentence. It's far more complex than that and if you read your history of the mid 90s, the Ukraine weren't always fair and even in their dealings with the Peninsula.
I have the impression that you have been reading this from the same kind of sources who talk about eight years of Ukrainian bombardment of the peaceful citizens of Donbas.
I'm certainly not an apologist for Putin nor do I any way support or condone his actions in Crimea in 2014 and against the rest of the Ukraine since.
The facts (uncomfortable though they may be) are that the behaviour of past Ukrainian Governments toward the Crimea weren't always as generous as we might like to think.
The 1991 referendum did indeed show a 54-46 majority for independence but as we've seen elsewhere narrow wins do not always mark the end of a problem and 30 years on (more than a "generation" you might argue) it may be time to revisit the question of Crimean sovereignty.
If everyone is determined it has to be part of the Ukraine (a view which I think is going to lead to more trouble down the road but in the current atmosphere seems to be prevalent) then at the very least Kyiv needs to recognise it is different from the rest of the Ukraine and allow it a considerable degree of autonomy to govern its own affairs.
I am simply concerned about how past Ukrainian Governments have responded to Crimean attempts to assert a degree of autonomy - that, by the way, also implies there's plenty of fault on the Crimean side which did plenty to provoke a response from Kyiv.
There’s a new Ukrainian government now. Let’s judge them by their record, rather than harking back.
Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?
Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do
Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed
Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding
But the new King is under intense pressure
I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
You also need a soupçon of charisma
Back in the 1980s there was a pub near my work, where I could walk in and give a gentle nod and the landlady would instantly pour me a pint. Does that count?
Popped to my newsagents earlier for bread and milk.
They had an absolute stack of papers. Way, way more than they usually have. This was 7pm. Looks like masses of unsold.
Did the papers print a ton more than normal as they thought it was a big selling event?
Perhaps, these days, people do their vicarious grieving via online news?
I bought my mother a copy of the Times. It will take her weeks to get thro it all but she was very grateful.
Is she reading it or using it for a more "suitable" purpose?
Oh .. she will read it. She is a Monarchist. I am also going to set up Jim Naughties excellent programme on R 4 about the life of the Queen.Well worth listening to.
The position of the Crimea can't just be waved away in a sentence. It's far more complex than that and if you read your history of the mid 90s, the Ukraine weren't always fair and even in their dealings with the Peninsula.
I have the impression that you have been reading this from the same kind of sources who talk about eight years of Ukrainian bombardment of the peaceful citizens of Donbas.
I'm certainly not an apologist for Putin nor do I any way support or condone his actions in Crimea in 2014 and against the rest of the Ukraine since.
The facts (uncomfortable though they may be) are that the behaviour of past Ukrainian Governments toward the Crimea weren't always as generous as we might like to think.
The 1991 referendum did indeed show a 54-46 majority for independence but as we've seen elsewhere narrow wins do not always mark the end of a problem and 30 years on (more than a "generation" you might argue) it may be time to revisit the question of Crimean sovereignty.
If everyone is determined it has to be part of the Ukraine (a view which I think is going to lead to more trouble down the road but in the current atmosphere seems to be prevalent) then at the very least Kyiv needs to recognise it is different from the rest of the Ukraine and allow it a considerable degree of autonomy to govern its own affairs.
I am simply concerned about how past Ukrainian Governments have responded to Crimean attempts to assert a degree of autonomy - that, by the way, also implies there's plenty of fault on the Crimean side which did plenty to provoke a response from Kyiv.
There’s a new Ukrainian government now. Let’s judge them by their record, rather than harking back.
That's an important point: many (most) of the pre-2014 governments that Stodge is stating did not treat Crimeans well were rather pro-Russian. Hence the Maidan evolution.
It is curious that those who were once telling us that Russian victory was so inevitable that Ukraine should surrender immediately are now telling us that Ukraine must bend over backwards to accommodate the Russians in victory. The shilling is painfully obvious.
The whole of Ukraine should and will be liberated by the AFU. They have been the borders of Ukraine since independence and were guaranteed by Russia, the UK and the US. The lies about the residents of the Donbass being Russian really, because they can speak two languages or have a Russian cousin, will be shown up for what they are. As a modern, democratic country Ukraine will allow people of all ethnicities to be part of the country, as long as they did not collaborate with the fascist invaders. Those that did collaborate will be held to account for their treason.
Retaliation against collaborators would be a sure way of alienating the United States.
Not at all. Ukraine, as it moves away from Russian arbitrary government, seeks to be a country of laws. There are laws against treason and they will be enforced.
Ukraine is dependent on the goodwill of the United States. It would be a courageous move to alienate their most powerful ally whose supply of money, arms and intelligence has been crucial to the successful defence of Ukraine.
There is no alienation that will happen. Just as many of the rioters on January 6th have been put in prison, Ukraine will do the same for treason in her territory, in accordance with the law.
But how do you know? Are you Ukrainian? In the UK prosecutions for treason need approval from the DPP because there's very often public policy grounds for not bringing them.
Are you Ukrainian? Are you a lawyer?
Any personal information I choose to disclose will be done on my own time. In the meantime, I am confident the success of my predictions will speak for themselves. Though I note the repeated failed predictions of those with orcish sympathies does not prevent them from continuing to post unashamed.
Ishmael is not someone with “orcish sympathies”. He’s just quite correctly coming at it from the position of being a lawyer where the simple and probably “morally correct” position isn’t always the appropriate legal or overriding political position.
In no way is he a friend of Bad Vlad and co.
Apologies if you were not targeting him.
So far, Ukraine has arrested and in some cases, prosecuted people for collaborating with the Russians. People in government posts, mainly, i believe.
It seems improbable that this won’t continue. It also seems improbable that anyone will object to the prosecution of government officials who turned against their government.
Yeah, it's just the staggering pointlessness of this poster's debut.
Hmmm. Lots of stuff at here. I largely agree with @IshmaelZ .
The UK, USA and Russia did *not* "guarantee" the borders of the Ukraine; they "recognised" them. And Russia under Putin decided to go back on their commitment when they wanted to do so. @WillG recommend that you go and read the text of the Budapest Memorandum; it is on the UN website.
There are already judicial processes underway domestically under Ukraine Law (one Russian soldier has already been tried and imprisoned for admitting committing murder. And also at the Hague ICJ. And there are something between 10k and 20k investigations started in Ukraine already.
It seems well organised and I see no problem with that proceeding. I think various countries including us have sent experienced lawyers to advise on processes.
It was done even in WW2. British POWs were sometimes subject to German Civil Justice when they committed the correct sort of crimes. I think I recall someone from Colditz being taken for a trial, and escaping from the less secure civil prison accommodation - or similar.
Why would the US be alienated by 'collaborators' being put on trial for their crimes under Ukr or International Law? I can see them making careful checks if the accused were US citizens, but OTOH the USA is legendary for its long term pursuit of people abroad.
I just had a long chat with my Russian friend. Among many other things we chatted about, she told me she wants me to call her my Siberian friend
She has a British passport (from marrying a gay English guy), but would understand why I don't call her my British friend. But she's so British now
She's been crying about the Queen dying. A lot
She tells me her Siberian family (elderly parents, sister the same age and teenage niece) are all really upset about it too. They have all been to London and seen Buckingham Palace and the changing of the guard, but that's still a hell of a long way for the sadness to reach
Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.
For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
James Dean, maybe. Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.
Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
No, I meant Katherine Hepburn, who was a far bigger star than Audrey Hepburn for a far longer period. Likewise Streep and Connery. Perhaps they just didn't appear in films you like?
Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?
Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do
Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed
Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding
But the new King is under intense pressure
I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
You also need a soupçon of charisma
Back in the 1980s there was a pub near my work, where I could walk in and give a gentle nod and the landlady would instantly pour me a pint. Does that count?
Putin "obsessed" with avoiding an end like Gadhafi's? I doubt it. Other assertions have been that Putin is battling severe cancer, suffers from Parkinson's, has a secret daughter, is a paedophile, etc. As for Gadhafi, Reagan called him a transvestite. If anything, Putin may fear getting arrested by army brass, as Beria was - or just bumped off as Stalin may well have been.
PS Today the "Moscow Sun" big wheel opened in Moscow. It's almost but not quite on the same line of longitude as the Lubianka. If anyone knows the exact time it was declared open, I'd be very interested. Was it 12:59pm Moscow time (10:59am BST) by any chance, straight bang on today's full moon?
So sentence 1-2 LOL at the idea he fears being assassinated like a despot, but sentence 5 he may well fear being assassinated like a despot.
This is all taking its toll on you.
@IshmaelZ. No. I'm guessing here that you think my "PS" is a bit nuts. It certainly isn't. To appreciate that, you have to realise there's a lot of that kind of thing about (I could give examples in many countries) and that despots in particular - and would-be despots - are very seriously into that kind of (let's call it) architectural magic.
I'm guessing you miss that point because...you think there's a big contradiction between sentences 1-2 and 5 and there isn't. Gadhafi was in a civil war, his convoy was attacked by US and French (NATO) forces, and when he was captured by the other side he was horribly brutalised and murdered. I am asserting that Putin doesn't fear that. He doesn't even fear an end like Ceausescu's - big crowds bringing stuff to a halt in the capital city, a "revolution", although that is slightly more likely than a Gadhafi scenario.
I have no doubt that Putin fears the chop...but in a scenario that would be something similar to what happened to Beria, what almost happened to Gorbachev, what Stalin was afraid of too. A coup by leading figures in army or FSB or both. (The party doesn't exist any more.) The regime would continue but there would be a big change in direction in one or more major policy areas (i.e. in this case, the war) and Putin would be wasted fast. Russia is unfortunately not about to stop being a mafia state. (Nor is Ukraine.)
The position of the Crimea can't just be waved away in a sentence. It's far more complex than that and if you read your history of the mid 90s, the Ukraine weren't always fair and even in their dealings with the Peninsula.
I have the impression that you have been reading this from the same kind of sources who talk about eight years of Ukrainian bombardment of the peaceful citizens of Donbas.
I'm certainly not an apologist for Putin nor do I any way support or condone his actions in Crimea in 2014 and against the rest of the Ukraine since.
The facts (uncomfortable though they may be) are that the behaviour of past Ukrainian Governments toward the Crimea weren't always as generous as we might like to think.
The 1991 referendum did indeed show a 54-46 majority for independence but as we've seen elsewhere narrow wins do not always mark the end of a problem and 30 years on (more than a "generation" you might argue) it may be time to revisit the question of Crimean sovereignty.
If everyone is determined it has to be part of the Ukraine (a view which I think is going to lead to more trouble down the road but in the current atmosphere seems to be prevalent) then at the very least Kyiv needs to recognise it is different from the rest of the Ukraine and allow it a considerable degree of autonomy to govern its own affairs.
I am simply concerned about how past Ukrainian Governments have responded to Crimean attempts to assert a degree of autonomy - that, by the way, also implies there's plenty of fault on the Crimean side which did plenty to provoke a response from Kyiv.
There’s a new Ukrainian government now. Let’s judge them by their record, rather than harking back.
That's an important point: many (most) of the pre-2014 governments that Stodge is stating did not treat Crimeans well were rather pro-Russian. Hence the Maidan evolution.
Ukraine was a corrupt hell-hole for nearly thirty years, practically a failed state.
Zelensky (and the war) is forging a new one, avowedly liberal and democratic. Hopefully he succeeds.
It is curious that those who were once telling us that Russian victory was so inevitable that Ukraine should surrender immediately are now telling us that Ukraine must bend over backwards to accommodate the Russians in victory. The shilling is painfully obvious.
The whole of Ukraine should and will be liberated by the AFU. They have been the borders of Ukraine since independence and were guaranteed by Russia, the UK and the US. The lies about the residents of the Donbass being Russian really, because they can speak two languages or have a Russian cousin, will be shown up for what they are. As a modern, democratic country Ukraine will allow people of all ethnicities to be part of the country, as long as they did not collaborate with the fascist invaders. Those that did collaborate will be held to account for their treason.
Retaliation against collaborators would be a sure way of alienating the United States.
Not at all. Ukraine, as it moves away from Russian arbitrary government, seeks to be a country of laws. There are laws against treason and they will be enforced.
Ukraine is dependent on the goodwill of the United States. It would be a courageous move to alienate their most powerful ally whose supply of money, arms and intelligence has been crucial to the successful defence of Ukraine.
There is no alienation that will happen. Just as many of the rioters on January 6th have been put in prison, Ukraine will do the same for treason in her territory, in accordance with the law.
But how do you know? Are you Ukrainian? In the UK prosecutions for treason need approval from the DPP because there's very often public policy grounds for not bringing them.
Are you Ukrainian? Are you a lawyer?
Any personal information I choose to disclose will be done on my own time. In the meantime, I am confident the success of my predictions will speak for themselves. Though I note the repeated failed predictions of those with orcish sympathies does not prevent them from continuing to post unashamed.
Ishmael is not someone with “orcish sympathies”. He’s just quite correctly coming at it from the position of being a lawyer where the simple and probably “morally correct” position isn’t always the appropriate legal or overriding political position.
In no way is he a friend of Bad Vlad and co.
Apologies if you were not targeting him.
So far, Ukraine has arrested and in some cases, prosecuted people for collaborating with the Russians. People in government posts, mainly, i believe.
It seems improbable that this won’t continue. It also seems improbable that anyone will object to the prosecution of government officials who turned against their government.
Yeah, it's just the staggering pointlessness of this poster's debut.
Hmmm. Lots of stuff at here,
The UK, USA and Russia did *not* "guarantee" the borders of the Ukraine; they "recognised" them. And Russia under Putin decided to go back on their commitment when they wanted to do so. @WillG recommend that you go and read the text of the Budapest Memorandum; it is on the UN website.
There are already judicial processes underway domestically under Ukraine Law (one Russian soldier has already been tried and imprisoned for admitting committing murder. And also at the Hague ICJ. And there are something between 10k and 20k investigations started in Ukraine already.
It was normal even in WW2 for British POWs to be subject to German Civil Justice when they committed the correct sort of crimes. I think I recall someone from Colditz being taken for a trial, and escaping from the less secure civil prison accommodation - or similar.
Why would the US be alienated by 'collaborators' being put on trial for their crimes under Ukr or International Law? I can see them making careful checks if the accused were US citizens, but OTOH the USA is legendary for its long term pursuit of people abroad.
The US also has form for overlooking crimes if that person is useful to them. German Nuclear scientists as an example.
Very sensible but they aren’t averse to making deals and ignoring crimes for the greater good as they see it.
I just had a long chat with my Russian friend. Among many other things we chatted about, she told me she wants me to call her my Siberian friend
She has a British passport (from marrying a gay English guy), but would understand why I don't call her my British friend. But she's so British now
She's been crying about the Queen dying. A lot
She tells me her Siberian family (elderly parents, sister the same age
and teenage niece) are all really upset about it too. They have all been to London and seen Buckingham Palace and the changing of the guard, but that's still a hell of a long way for the sadness to reach
First person to ring the uk and commiserate the Queens death was Putin
Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?
Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do
Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed
Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding
But the new King is under intense pressure
I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
You also need a soupçon of charisma
Back in the 1980s there was a pub near my work, where I could walk in and give a gentle nod and the landlady would instantly pour me a pint. Does that count?
Yes, exactly. Being able to do that with relative strangers is the crucial up-step
Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?
Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do
Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed
Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding
But the new King is under intense pressure
I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
You also need a soupçon of charisma
Back in the 1980s there was a pub near my work, where I could walk in and give a gentle nod and the landlady would instantly pour me a pint. Does that count?
The barmaid at my local used to pour mine as i approached if the pub was quiet, i could be clearly seen on final approach. And she had a cracking arse. Happy days.
There’s a new Ukrainian government now. Let’s judge them by their record, rather than harking back.
That's an important point: many (most) of the pre-2014 governments that Stodge is stating did not treat Crimeans well were rather pro-Russian. Hence the Maidan evolution.
That's a point I'm happy to concede and in no way am I assuming Zekenskyy will act as some of his predecessors in Kyiv. The bad stuff happened in the Kuchma period so well before the Orange Revolution let alone Maidan.
However, the Crimean population may need convincing of Zelenskyy's benevolent intentions in the event the Russians leave or are forced out.
I’m very uncomfortable with the idea that Ukraine has no natural right to the Donbas or the Crimea because of “ethnic Russians”.
Most modern countries are multi-ethnic patchworks to a lesser or greater extent, but that doesn’t make them illegitimate or give neighbouring states especial rights over them.
Especially when those patchworks were created by imperialism and ethnic cleansing just decades ago.
There are two separate issues - what do a majority of people in Crimea want, and should they be allowed to have whatever it is? We don't know the answer to the first, and only an internationally-supervised referendum will give us a satisfactory answer. But the answer to the second should be yes, just as Scotland has a right to go its own way if it wants to. Insisting that they should be governed by a government they dislike (if they do), merely because Russia thought it administrative convenient to attach it to Ukraine in the 1950s, would be just as wrong as Russia trying to conquer Kyiv, where the popyulation quite obviously don't want them.
Support for Ukraine against czarist Russian aggression was right. Support for imposing Ukrainian nationalism on areas where it may not be wanted - no.
My guess is that Zelensky knows that, and would win a referendum in Crimea if it was held, if only because people have had enough of war. But they shoyuld get a say.
And to credibly do that Ukraine would need to take back the area first, as the legally recognised government. It would be impossible to have a fair view whilst Russia controls the area as what is internationally seen as an occupying force. If they pull out with international agreement that Ukraine must hold a referendum, that might be something, but not before.
So the talk about imposing Ukrainian nationalism I think is misplaced, and very much cart before the horse in any case.
It's like when people are so worried about a potential overreaction that they don't react in the first place, in that some seem really focused on what hypothetically might happen with the people in Crimea when the first step, end of the war (which involves return of Crimea - even if it is ceasefire without it, it would still be war until that happens), still needs to happen first.
Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?
Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do
Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed
Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding
But the new King is under intense pressure
I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
You also need a soupçon of charisma
Back in the 1980s there was a pub near my work, where I could walk in and give a gentle nod and the landlady would instantly pour me a pint. Does that count?
The barmaid at my local used to pour mine as i approached if the pub was quiet, i could be clearly seen on final approach. And she had a cracking arse. Happy days.
Quite. The last day, the beer was free, and that was it. Got converted to a yuppie wine bar with plastic stachoos. No more collapsed sofas to luxuriate in.
Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?
Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do
Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed
Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding
But the new King is under intense pressure
Hmmm. I don't see anything here.
There's no audio on the vid clip, and all KCIII does is wave his hand for the desk to be cleared a little so he can put his papers down.
7 seconds of trolling from a republican troll account.
I hope we don't have much more of this - just tedious.
I'll have to ask my palace staff contacts how he actually comes across .
I just had a long chat with my Russian friend. Among many other things we chatted about, she told me she wants me to call her my Siberian friend
She has a British passport (from marrying a gay English guy), but would understand why I don't call her my British friend. But she's so British now
She's been crying about the Queen dying. A lot
She tells me her Siberian family (elderly parents, sister the same age
and teenage niece) are all really upset about it too. They have all been to London and seen Buckingham Palace and the changing of the guard, but that's still a hell of a long way for the sadness to reach
First person to ring the uk and commiserate the Queens death was Putin
Yeah we also discussed how weird that was
I suppose it's testament to just how important QEII was that even Vladmir Fucking Putin thought that she deserved some respect
Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?
Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do
Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed
Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding
But the new King is under intense pressure
I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
You also need a soupçon of charisma
Back in the 1980s there was a pub near my work, where I could walk in and give a gentle nod and the landlady would instantly pour me a pint. Does that count?
Elvis (postumously) Lenin, Mandela. No FDR,, De Gaulle Thatch, Reagan or Di.
Edit: Maybe Leon instead of Lenin. (And not Trotsky).
Castro, Pele, Bowie.
Gandhi of course! MJ. A little more tenuously, Bogie, Armstrong (L) and Hitchcock - obviously these are more USA/Europe list, but honestly I don't know about whom the billion-plus Chinese people idolise and I think the global list would exclude a few of the above.
I just had a long chat with my Russian friend. Among many other things we chatted about, she told me she wants me to call her my Siberian friend
She has a British passport (from marrying a gay English guy), but would understand why I don't call her my British friend. But she's so British now
She's been crying about the Queen dying. A lot
She tells me her Siberian family (elderly parents, sister the same age and teenage niece) are all really upset about it too. They have all been to London and seen Buckingham Palace and the changing of the guard, but that's still a hell of a long way for the sadness to reach
I think a global sadness is there, she has closed probably the final door on all that we have loved and cherished that passed away or faded. A last link with all those secret longings and yearnings for better yesterdays we miss. We look forward too, but there is always that comfort we seek in how it used to be. When Mum was here, when the phone was on the hall wall, when we won the world cup, when Freddos were 10p, before we were older and afraid, when everything wasnt so.... now (however now has offended)
Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?
Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do
Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed
Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding
But the new King is under intense pressure
I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
You also need a soupçon of charisma
Back in the 1980s there was a pub near my work, where I could walk in and give a gentle nod and the landlady would instantly pour me a pint. Does that count?
Yes, exactly. Being able to do that with relative strangers is the crucial up-step
Hmmm. There's no audio on the vid clip, and all KCIII does is wave his hand for the desk to be cleared a little so he can put his papers down.
7 seconds of trolling from a republican troll account.
I’m a royalist but the TV images are not good. He looks irritable, querulous and bossy in a bad way. A small man in big shoes
Starting to recognise every little potential tinpot statelet as a potential sovereign entity is a very dangerous path down which to be embarking. If you're going to start meddling in the territorial integrity of Ukraine, which was previously guaranteed as absolute by the US, UK and Russia, then why not also the tinpot republics in the Donbas? And if you're proposing that we demand Ukraine allow itself to be carved into little pieces, then why not extend the same logic to Russia itself? Russia is a vast collection of regions and republics, many of which are very distant indeed from Moscow, feel exploited by Moscow, are majority non-Russian ethnically, or some combination of the three.
Almost the entire international community recognises Crimea as part of Ukraine. Therefore Crimea should return to Ukraine. End of.
Sorry, I'm not arguing that.
I'm arguing three points, first, you are suggesting the Ukrainian minority (15%) gets to rule over the Russian majority (65%) in Crimea and while that might be viable for a while, history suggests such an approach doesn't end well.
Second, the Ukraine's own behaviour toward even limited autonomy for the Crimeans in the 1990s was poor and on that basis I can understand the Crimean people being concerned about the prospect of returning to Ukrainian rule
Third, why not just ask the Crimean people what they want? Since when did self-determination fall out of favour?
Your third is such a distraction though - they cannot be asked now because the Russians occupied and absorbed it. I can believe most were happy about it, but it is clearly not an environment where a free plebsicite can take place, since anything under Russian control is not free and fair. No one other than Russia would trust such an exercise whilst Russian forces and administrators still control the place.
So, sure, it'd be nice to know what the people of Crimea now think, but that cannot happen in current circumstances so what's the point in saying it?
It's like those stop the war bods saying 'Has anyone tried, you know, not fighting, because fighting is bad?' How lovely an idea, but unworkable.
Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?
Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do
Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed
Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding
But the new King is under intense pressure
I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
I just had a long chat with my Russian friend. Among many other things we chatted about, she told me she wants me to call her my Siberian friend
She has a British passport (from marrying a gay English guy), but would understand why I don't call her my British friend. But she's so British now
She's been crying about the Queen dying. A lot
She tells me her Siberian family (elderly parents, sister the same age and teenage niece) are all really upset about it too. They have all been to London and seen Buckingham Palace and the changing of the guard, but that's still a hell of a long way for the sadness to reach
I think a global sadness is there, she has closed probably the final door on all that we have loved and cherished that passed away or faded. A last link with all those secret longings and yearnings for better yesterdays we miss. We look forward too, but there is always that comfort we seek in how it used to be. When Mum was here, when the phone was on the hall wall, when we won the world cup, when Freddos were 10p, before we were older and afraid, when everything wasnt so.... now (however now has offended)
SHITE
Now is SHITE
Tho actually I am in a charming Alentejo hotel where the Swiss architect owner has just told me “you can stay as long as you like and all the food and booze is free” so my PARTICULAR now is tolerable
I just had a long chat with my Russian friend. Among many other things we chatted about, she told me she wants me to call her my Siberian friend
She has a British passport (from marrying a gay English guy), but would understand why I don't call her my British friend. But she's so British now
She's been crying about the Queen dying. A lot
She tells me her Siberian family (elderly parents, sister the same age
and teenage niece) are all really upset about it too. They have all been to London and seen Buckingham Palace and the changing of the guard, but that's still a hell of a long way for the sadness to reach
First person to ring the uk and commiserate the Queens death was Putin
Yeah we also discussed how weird that was
I suppose it's testament to just how important QEII was that even Vladmir Fucking Putin thought that she deserved some respect
The position of the Crimea can't just be waved away in a sentence. It's far more complex than that and if you read your history of the mid 90s, the Ukraine weren't always fair and even in their dealings with the Peninsula.
I have the impression that you have been reading this from the same kind of sources who talk about eight years of Ukrainian bombardment of the peaceful citizens of Donbas.
I'm certainly not an apologist for Putin nor do I any way support or condone his actions in Crimea in 2014 and against the rest of the Ukraine since.
No, but you keep advancing a fantasy wherein we can somehow find out for sure what the people of Crimea want, despite the fact that it being under the control of the Russian Federation, a repressive autocracy, means there's no way to do that.
So the question you want answered, about whether they would prefer to be independent (which doesn't seem viable given all the talk about its resources when Russia took it), with Russia or with Ukraine, cannot actually occur until they are under a free government, and Ukraine is closer to that.
Ukraine might not care to do that, but the order of events still requires territorial integrity before it can be asked.
That's why it is a quesiton for another day not now.
Yes dreadful, and Mills behind him can see how dreadful it is. When people show you who they are believe them.
Camilla looks properly embarrassed at his behaviour doesn't she?
Trying to be kind he IS under a lot of grief and stress at the moment... But then you remember all the rumours about about his behviour towards staff over the years as well as Diana's assessement of him all those years ago (not up to the "top job") and it makes you wonder what we're in for with the reign of King Charles III...
In a similar situation the Queen would have just given "one of her looks" and that's all it would take. And everyone would laugh and say "she's not happy!"
Yes, it’s an enormous social skill to be able to express a need, want, irritation, whatever, with just a tilt of the head, thereby offering no offence. She had it. He doesn’t. Few do
Chas should have looked to his right, smiled ironically, gestured airily at the misplaced pen, this followed by an amiable shrug as the flunkey moved in to sort it out. No one offended; all fixed
Boris has this ability, to disarm, even while making people do your bidding
But the new King is under intense pressure
I've tried a few times to express what I want with just a tilt of the head. It's never worked. Probably because it requires having slaves and my cupboard is bare on that score.
No, you can do it in pubs, restaurants, shops. Try it. The tilt of the head
Yes I can do a tilt of the head. That's not a problem.
You also need a soupçon of charisma
Back in the 1980s there was a pub near my work, where I could walk in and give a gentle nod and the landlady would instantly pour me a pint. Does that count?
The barmaid at my local used to pour mine as i approached if the pub was quiet, i could be clearly seen on final approach. And she had a cracking arse. Happy days.
Quite. The last day, the beer was free, and that was it. Got converted to a yuppie wine bar with plastic stachoos. No more collapsed sofas to luxuriate in.
Urgh, yeah. The tyranny of fads. Give me back my yesterdays and ill give you all the tomorrows you want, they are of declining use to me
Starting to recognise every little potential tinpot statelet as a potential sovereign entity is a very dangerous path down which to be embarking. If you're going to start meddling in the territorial integrity of Ukraine, which was previously guaranteed as absolute by the US, UK and Russia, then why not also the tinpot republics in the Donbas? And if you're proposing that we demand Ukraine allow itself to be carved into little pieces, then why not extend the same logic to Russia itself? Russia is a vast collection of regions and republics, many of which are very distant indeed from Moscow, feel exploited by Moscow, are majority non-Russian ethnically, or some combination of the three.
Almost the entire international community recognises Crimea as part of Ukraine. Therefore Crimea should return to Ukraine. End of.
Sorry, I'm not arguing that.
I'm arguing three points, first, you are suggesting the Ukrainian minority (15%) gets to rule over the Russian majority (65%) in Crimea and while that might be viable for a while, history suggests such an approach doesn't end well.
Second, the Ukraine's own behaviour toward even limited autonomy for the Crimeans in the 1990s was poor and on that basis I can understand the Crimean people being concerned about the prospect of returning to Ukrainian rule
Third, why not just ask the Crimean people what they want? Since when did self-determination fall out of favour?
Your third is such a distraction though - they cannot be asked now because the Russians occupied and absorbed it. I can believe most were happy about it, but it is clearly not an environment where a free plebsicite can take place, since anything under Russian control is not free and fair. No one other than Russia would trust such an exercise whilst Russian forces and administrators still control the place.
So, sure, it'd be nice to know what the people of Crimea now think, but that cannot happen in current circumstances so what's the point in saying it?
It's like those stop the war bods saying 'Has anyone tried, you know, not fighting, because fighting is bad?' How lovely an idea, but unworkable.
"No one other than Russia"
Sadly, there are plenty of gullible fools and useful idiots in the West that are ready to lap up Russian propaganda. I am sure the left leaders on here saying that the majority created by recent ethnic cleansing should get its way would apply exactly the same standard to a future Israeli settler majority in the West Bank.
Clark Gable and Katherine Hepburn would surely have to be on the list too.
For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
James Dean, maybe. Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.
Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
No, I meant Katherine Hepburn, who was a far bigger star than Audrey Hepburn for a far longer period. Likewise Streep and Connery. Perhaps they just didn't appear in films you like?
The actor James Stewart had a very interesting life. I did not realise he was actually a one-star general and had flown combat missions and was still flying in B52s in the 1960s. I was very surprised when I found out.
The Mail on Sunday says it? My God, have you seen some of the things the Mail on Sunday has said?
The Telegraph now reporting Truss was informed before she went to present her energy proposals the Queen was failing and her death was imminent
I assume this was much the same time as the members of the Royal family and it really is not a party political issue, you would expect the PM to be notified first
Yup. And Rentoul's retweeting of the MoS should add weight to it.
THEREFORE the note to Liz from NZ did NOT say HM is utterly and incredibly fucking poorly because that was not news at this stage. What comes next? 4 letters, first letter D
I was right, as so often.
So Keir Starmer really did wish the Queen a recovery after he was told she had died, his deputy retweeting it and Downing Street randomly lied about the time the PM was informed of her death. Plausible.
Yes, because he had been told to suppress the truth; what is much more telling is Truss's tweet did NOT contain any equivalent wish.
The Queen is dead.
You were just informed of the Queen's death, at 7 pm on 10 September. See?
In an homage to yesterday.... your evidence Starmer is part of a conspiracy to suppress the truth?
Is it that difficult to believe? I'm pretty sure half the news channels were doing that for hours as soon as they'd got their black ties on.
Yes, it is. He simply would not make reference to wishing her a recovery. How the fuck would that look when the truth emerges?! Why on Earth would the Palace put news readers in the position of lying to the public for a few hours? Put a black tie on but lie about HMQ's status lads, its for the lolz. Occams razor - they first knew when they say they knew.
Occam's razor, the last refuge of the moron. The rule says entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, it is a rule of thumb only in metaphysics only, and it does not mean the stupidest explanation is usually correct. And your thesis is utterly self-stutifying because black tie = person dead, so newsreaders wearing them were saying two different things anyway.
'The stupidest explanation' - that everyone was told the news when they say they were told the news? As opposed to your brilliantly deductive explanation that the Leader of the Opposition was wishing a dead Queen a recovery because he'd been told to keep it schtum and newsreaders were, at different times, changing into black ties because she was dead but the information she was dead was not being released, so they sort of hinted it without engaging any other protocols on banners, screen layouts etc. I'm done with this If it transpires any news caster or LOTO had been informed of Her Majesty's death (not that she was at deaths door but that she had expired) before the 'official' time given of 4.30 i will offer you an unreserved apology and pay £10 to yout choice of charity.
you are not making sense even on your own terms. Why, in your view, did the news bods put on black ties?
I assume because they were fully aware the news was imminent. They didn't all change at the same time. 'She wont survive the day'. I've said what i think, if i am wrong you will have an apology and a charitable donation.
At about 2pm, on the day, a bunch of workmen and a chap in a suit were fiddling with the flag on the top of the Bank of England. They didn’t replace the flag (though the suited chap had a shiny new one). This was visible from my office, close by. They were obviously looking at the issue of putting the flag to half mast.
I presume that, just as the civil service was telling people to get their copies of London Bridge out, the newscasters were being precautionary.
I posted here at the time that the Telegraph was testing (badly) moving to a prepared front page. Clearly many were preparing for the worst.
Elvis (postumously) Lenin, Mandela. No FDR,, De Gaulle Thatch, Reagan or Di.
Edit: Maybe Leon instead of Lenin. (And not Trotsky).
Castro, Pele, Bowie.
Gandhi of course! MJ. A little more tenuously, Bogie, Armstrong (L) and Hitchcock - obviously these are more USA/Europe list, but honestly I don't know about whom the billion-plus Chinese people idolise and I think the global list would exclude a few of the above.
Mao and Deng would be the key ones in China.
Not twentieth century, but the visage of Karl Marx only really became distinctive due to the pseudo-Marxist states set up after 1918. So he could be counted.
I just had a long chat with my Russian friend. Among many other things we chatted about, she told me she wants me to call her my Siberian friend
She has a British passport (from marrying a gay English guy), but would understand why I don't call her my British friend. But she's so British now
She's been crying about the Queen dying. A lot
She tells me her Siberian family (elderly parents, sister the same age and teenage niece) are all really upset about it too. They have all been to London and seen Buckingham Palace and the changing of the guard, but that's still a hell of a long way for the sadness to reach
That's fascinating,
but it might be that in Russia the TV and newspapers are covering her death in a big way at the moment, a side effect might be that there is no room or time to report anything else that might be happening? maybe?
Comments
New poster @WillG has come on here with firm opinions. Let him express them and argue with him. He might be enlightening
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJBBLSm8B54
The facts (uncomfortable though they may be) are that the behaviour of past Ukrainian Governments toward the Crimea weren't always as generous as we might like to think.
The 1991 referendum did indeed show a 54-46 majority for independence but as we've seen elsewhere narrow wins do not always mark the end of a problem and 30 years on (more than a "generation" you might argue) it may be time to revisit the question of Crimean sovereignty.
If everyone is determined it has to be part of the Ukraine (a view which I think is going to lead to more trouble down the road but in the current atmosphere seems to be prevalent) then at the very least Kyiv needs to recognise it is different from the rest of the Ukraine and allow it a considerable degree of autonomy to govern its own affairs.
I am simply concerned about how past Ukrainian Governments have responded to Crimean attempts to assert a degree of autonomy - that, by the way, also implies there's plenty of fault on the Crimean side which did plenty to provoke a response from Kyiv.
For later stars, James Dean, Sean Connery, Meryl Streep.
Let’s judge them by their record, rather than harking back.
Not sure the others could be identified in a line-up as easily as you’d think.
Edit: I presume you mean Audrey Hepburn, if d agree with that.
Edit: Maybe Leon instead of Lenin. (And not Trotsky).
I suspect Ukraine will displace her (rightfully so) tomorrow.
The UK, USA and Russia did *not* "guarantee" the borders of the Ukraine; they "recognised" them. And Russia under Putin decided to go back on their commitment when they wanted to do so. @WillG recommend that you go and read the text of the Budapest Memorandum; it is on the UN website.
There are already judicial processes underway domestically under Ukraine Law (one Russian soldier has already been tried and imprisoned for admitting committing murder. And also at the Hague ICJ. And there are something between 10k and 20k investigations started in Ukraine already.
It seems well organised and I see no problem with that proceeding. I think various countries including us have sent experienced lawyers to advise on processes.
It was done even in WW2. British POWs were sometimes subject to German Civil Justice when they committed the correct sort of crimes. I think I recall someone from Colditz being taken for a trial, and escaping from the less secure civil prison accommodation - or similar.
Why would the US be alienated by 'collaborators' being put on trial for their crimes under Ukr or International Law? I can see them making careful checks if the accused were US citizens, but OTOH the USA is legendary for its long term pursuit of people abroad.
Treat with caution. It may be disinfo and / or someone mistaking the fireworks noise. But...
Elvis.
Perhaps there is no wi-fi down the salt mines.
They aint that clever
She has a British passport (from marrying a gay English guy), but would understand why I don't call her my British friend. But she's so British now
She's been crying about the Queen dying. A lot
She tells me her Siberian family (elderly parents, sister the same age and teenage niece) are all really upset about it too. They have all been to London and seen Buckingham Palace and the changing of the guard, but that's still a hell of a long way for the sadness to reach
It probably was Her Maj
Now? Surely an icon of the internet generation
Lionel Messi? Ronaldo? A member of BTS
I’m going with a footballer; in terms of someone that most people worldwide can correctly name
Or Trump, tragically
Was it the Diggers?
I'm guessing you miss that point because...you think there's a big contradiction between sentences 1-2 and 5 and there isn't. Gadhafi was in a civil war, his convoy was attacked by US and French (NATO) forces, and when he was captured by the other side he was horribly brutalised and murdered. I am asserting that Putin doesn't fear that. He doesn't even fear an end like Ceausescu's - big crowds bringing stuff to a halt in the capital city, a "revolution", although that is slightly more likely than a Gadhafi scenario.
I have no doubt that Putin fears the chop...but in a scenario that would be something similar to what happened to Beria, what almost happened to Gorbachev, what Stalin was afraid of too. A coup by leading figures in army or FSB or both. (The party doesn't exist any more.) The regime would continue but there would be a big change in direction in one or more major policy areas (i.e. in this case, the war) and Putin would be wasted fast. Russia is unfortunately not about to stop being a mafia state. (Nor is Ukraine.)
Zelensky (and the war) is forging a new one, avowedly liberal and democratic. Hopefully he succeeds.
Very sensible but they aren’t averse to making deals and ignoring crimes for the greater good as they see it.
King Charles III to accompany Boris Johnson on his tour of grief throughout these fabulous islands.
However, the Crimean population may need convincing of Zelenskyy's benevolent intentions in the event the Russians leave or are forced out.
So the talk about imposing Ukrainian nationalism I think is misplaced, and very much cart before the horse in any case.
It's like when people are so worried about a potential overreaction that they don't react in the first place, in that some seem really focused on what hypothetically might happen with the people in Crimea when the first step, end of the war (which involves return of Crimea - even if it is ceasefire without it, it would still be war until that happens), still needs to happen first.
There's no audio on the vid clip, and all KCIII does is wave his hand for the desk to be cleared a little so he can put his papers down.
7 seconds of trolling from a republican troll account.
I hope we don't have much more of this - just tedious.
I'll have to ask my palace staff contacts how he actually comes across
You can put a level forefinger over your upper lip and there you are: Hitler
Indeed he might well be the most recognisable human in history. Which is deeply sad
I suppose it's testament to just how important QEII was that even Vladmir Fucking Putin thought that she deserved some respect
Nope. In a galaxy long ago and far away.
Brigitte Bardot maybe. (Marianne busts were modelled on her.)
We look forward too, but there is always that comfort we seek in how it used to be. When Mum was here, when the phone was on the hall wall, when we won the world cup, when Freddos were 10p, before we were older and afraid, when everything wasnt so.... now (however now has offended)
But I agree it is just 7 seconds
So, sure, it'd be nice to know what the people of Crimea now think, but that cannot happen in current circumstances so what's the point in saying it?
It's like those stop the war bods saying 'Has anyone tried, you know, not fighting, because fighting is bad?' How lovely an idea, but unworkable.
As a songwriter ignore anything that doesn't start and end in "rebel".
Now is SHITE
Tho actually I am in a charming Alentejo hotel where the Swiss architect owner has just told me “you can stay as long as you like and all the food and booze is free” so my PARTICULAR now is tolerable
Good call. Hitler or Jesus?
Probably Jesus. Let us hope so
However you have to reckon with the chance Jesus did not exist. Then it is Hitler
2. Er, no, B-list at best.
So the question you want answered, about whether they would prefer to be independent (which doesn't seem viable given all the talk about its resources when Russia took it), with Russia or with Ukraine, cannot actually occur until they are under a free government, and Ukraine is closer to that.
Ukraine might not care to do that, but the order of events still requires territorial integrity before it can be asked.
That's why it is a quesiton for another day not now.
It was an honour and a privilege to speak with His Majesty King Charles III today.
I expressed my sincere condolences for his loss and pledged my support on his accession to the throne.
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1568686435246686209
Sadly, there are plenty of gullible fools and useful idiots in the West that are ready to lap up Russian propaganda. I am sure the left leaders on here saying that the majority created by recent ethnic cleansing should get its way would apply exactly the same standard to a future Israeli settler majority in the West Bank.
Not twentieth century, but the visage of Karl Marx only really became distinctive due to the pseudo-Marxist states set up after 1918. So he could be counted.
So he is the most recognisable unrecognisable person in history.
but it might be that in Russia the TV and newspapers are covering her death in a big way at the moment, a side effect might be that there is no room or time to report anything else that might be happening? maybe?
Life on Mars is a magnificent pop song. A rolling complex haunting melody with wonderful quirky lyrics
“It’s a godawful small affair…”
And Heroes is swaggeringly iconic. Simple yet Wow