Charles III has seen a surge of support since his mother’s death, with most Britons praising his leadership and believing he will be a good king.
The first polling on public reactions to the death of Elizabeth II finds almost nine in ten people praising her reign as good for the country, with 87 per cent saying she will probably go down as one of Britain’s greatest monarchs.
YouGov finds that initial reactions to the King’s leadership since his mother’s death are overwhelmingly positive, while people also seem confident in his wife’s role as Queen Consort.
The polling finds 73 per cent saying the King has responded well and only 5 per cent suggesting he has handled the past few days badly. A total of 94 per cent say his first address to the nation as King on Friday was a good speech, with only 3 per cent critical.
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
That is more than 2.5 million though!
There will be massive crowds on Monday for the funeral itself. It seems that I might be free to watch it, as looks like lots of clinical activity being cancelled. We had a straw poll done amongst staff. The admin staff and nurses are strongly for day off, not so much out of Monarchism but more due to practicalities such as child care and public transport.
I've booked a romantic long weekend away this weekend/Monday.
Whoever is organising this funeral are making a real pigs trotter of it. They've just cancelled three more premier league games at the week end for no obvious reason. Not being able to cope with a funeral and a football match on different days- in one case in a different part of the couintry- doesn't doesn't bode well for our new status as a theme park.
What's more If any of the postponed teams look like they're heading for the quadruple there literally aren't going to be enough days available to play all the matches
I hate to tell you this, but the people 'organising this funeral' are not the same people cancelling premier league games.
Is this the first time you've ever expressed an interest in football on here?
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
That is more than 2.5 million though!
There will be massive crowds on Monday for the funeral itself. It seems that I might be free to watch it, as looks like lots of clinical activity being cancelled. We had a straw poll done amongst staff. The admin staff and nurses are strongly for day off, not so much out of Monarchism but more due to practicalities such as child care and public transport.
I misread that and was puzzled. I wondered why the cancellation of criminal activity would affect you.
On a different subject, Azerbaijan now looks to be ramming home its military advantage over Armenia. That could easily get very nasty indeed as if they do retake Nagorno Karabakh I imagine most people currently there won't want to stay there even if they're given a choice.
I imagine attacks on South Ossetia and possibly Transnistria will not be far behind if Russia continues to wobble like this.
If Russia loses, all the people on Left and Right in the West that demanded a "compromise" that "accepts Russia's legitimate interests" will shift to accusing the West of having sucked Putin into a deliberate trap to crush Moscow
None of these people will rethink their positions
Prediction: this will also be the position of the Putin regime, or whatever more extreme despotism succeeds it, and that of most of the Russian population along with it. They think they're entitled to conquer and subjugate their neighbours at will, and when the plan goes wrong it's the fault of everyone but themselves. They're irredeemable.
Even if the Putin regime falls and is replaced by a more hard line government, that government is unlikely to last very long.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
That is more than 2.5 million though!
There will be massive crowds on Monday for the funeral itself. It seems that I might be free to watch it, as looks like lots of clinical activity being cancelled. We had a straw poll done amongst staff. The admin staff and nurses are strongly for day off, not so much out of Monarchism but more due to practicalities such as child care and public transport.
I've booked a romantic long weekend away this weekend/Monday.
Personally, my sense of grieve is proportionate to the sense of loss I feel. I'm not sure why one should grieve less for someone very old, for whom death is expected but who's been a constant presence in your life - I will miss her reassuring presence, her smile, the Christmas speeches and national messages, her sense of duty, her shrewdness, diplomacy and good humour. And the stability and continuity she gave.
The fact I know that's now gone for good means I feel the sense of loss more keenly, and so I grieve. In my head I'd expected her to life about the same lifespan as the Queen Mother, maybe to 100 to 101, and certainly to make it to 2024 and become the longest reigning monarch, because although I knew she was frail and had mobility problems I had no idea it was any more serious than that nor that death was imminent. So it came as a shock.
Contrast to Diana. The reaction to her death was near hysterical. That was a tragedy, and indeed very sad, particularly for her two boys, but the country seemed to go berserk. I'm afraid I didn't grieve because I didn't feel the same sense of connection to her, and I'm a pretty staunch monarchist, and I still don't really understand what happened that week.
Whoever is organising this funeral are making a real pigs trotter of it. They've just cancelled three more premier league games at the week end for no obvious reason. Not being able to cope with a funeral and a football match on different days- in one case in a different part of the couintry- doesn't doesn't bode well for our new status as a theme park.
What's more If any of the postponed teams look like they're heading for the quadruple there literally aren't going to be enough days available to play all the matches
I hate to tell you this, but the people 'organising this funeral' are not the same people cancelling premier league games.
Is this the first time you've ever expressed an interest in football on here?
Leicester away at Spurs on Saturday looks like it is still on. Fans planning to sing "sacked in the mourning, you're being sacked in the mourning..."
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
'Just' 4%? I'd like to do it, but I can't really get down there to do it. The fact that 4% are *planning* to do it is quite fricking huge.
I'll just pay my respects in other ways.
It is around the same percentage as people who tell pollsters they have been decapitated.
A slightly larger proportion of those in this poll will actually be going through with it, I think ?
4% would be 2.5 million people. I’m not really sure what bitter Republican TSE is implying. That no-ones going to turn up?
He's looking for a figleaf.
For elderly people, those with full-time jobs or young families, or those who live a very long way away, it's simply not practical to head to London and spend 20 hours queuing overnight.
If queues were only 1-2 hours with refreshments provided, I expect numbers would be much higher. But of course that's not possible.
Whose side is everyone on in the Armenia-Azerbaijan forthcoming war ?
Armenia is generally considered an ally of Russia, and Azerbaijan an ally of Turkey. I´d tend to favour Georgia under the current circumstances. Armenia will have little choice but to sue for peace.
The Armenian - Azeri news looks a grim portent. As Moscow’s authority slips away, what is to become of the Russian Federarion, not just in the rest of the world where it’s poked its claws, but within its own borders? How many potentially independent states of Russia have nuclear missile silos?
Whose side is everyone on in the Armenia-Azerbaijan forthcoming war ?
Armenia is generally considered an ally of Russia, and Azerbaijan an ally of Turkey. I´d tend to favour Georgia under the current circumstances. Armenia will have little choice but to sue for peace.
Er - in a fight between two countries, you favour a third one?
Whoever is organising this funeral are making a real pigs trotter of it. They've just cancelled three more premier league games at the week end for no obvious reason. Not being able to cope with a funeral and a football match on different days- in one case in a different part of the couintry- doesn't doesn't bode well for our new status as a theme park.
What's more If any of the postponed teams look like they're heading for the quadruple there literally aren't going to be enough days available to play all the matches
Personally, my sense of grieve is proportionate to the sense of loss I feel. I'm not sure why one should grieve less for someone very old, for whom death is expected but who's been a constant presence in your life - I will miss her reassuring presence, her smile, the Christmas speeches and national messages, her sense of duty, her shrewdness, diplomacy and good humour. And the stability and continuity she gave.
The fact I know that's now gone for good means I feel the sense of loss more keenly, and so I grieve. In my head I'd expected her to life about the same lifespan as the Queen Mother, maybe to 100 to 101, and certainly to make it to 2024 and become the longest reigning monarch, because although I knew she was frail and had mobility problems I had no idea it was any more serious than that nor that death was imminent. So it came as a shock.
Contrast to Diana. The reaction to her death was near hysterical. That was a tragedy, and indeed very sad, particularly for her two boys, but the country seemed to go berserk. I'm afraid I didn't grieve because I didn't feel the same sense of connection to her, and I'm a pretty staunch monarchist, and I still don't really understand what happened that week.
Depends on the individual, I guess.
I see it as a loss for all the reasons you give, and perhaps feel a bit sad at the passing of an era, but I don't really 'feel' it.
I think that the Diana thing was more of an outpouring of mass emotion in response to a death. Its a bit like George Floyd or Sarah Everard (although there are obvious differences). Some events just randomly trigger this type of response, it is one of these poorly explained features of human affairs.
A carriage of the Royal train, modified especially to carry Queen Elizabeth II’s coffin, lies unused after plans for the nation to turn out to show its respects were scrapped over fears for public safety and disruption.
It's a shame that the railway isn't getting used in all this.
Charles III has seen a surge of support since his mother’s death, with most Britons praising his leadership and believing he will be a good king.
The first polling on public reactions to the death of Elizabeth II finds almost nine in ten people praising her reign as good for the country, with 87 per cent saying she will probably go down as one of Britain’s greatest monarchs.
YouGov finds that initial reactions to the King’s leadership since his mother’s death are overwhelmingly positive, while people also seem confident in his wife’s role as Queen Consort.
The polling finds 73 per cent saying the King has responded well and only 5 per cent suggesting he has handled the past few days badly. A total of 94 per cent say his first address to the nation as King on Friday was a good speech, with only 3 per cent critical.
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
That is more than 2.5 million though!
There will be massive crowds on Monday for the funeral itself. It seems that I might be free to watch it, as looks like lots of clinical activity being cancelled. We had a straw poll done amongst staff. The admin staff and nurses are strongly for day off, not so much out of Monarchism but more due to practicalities such as child care and public transport.
I've booked a romantic long weekend away this weekend/Monday.
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
'Just' 4%? I'd like to do it, but I can't really get down there to do it. The fact that 4% are *planning* to do it is quite fricking huge.
I'll just pay my respects in other ways.
It is around the same percentage as people who tell pollsters they have been decapitated.
So you're insinuating that nobody wants to see QEII lie in state?
Go easy on him.
Republicans are having their arse handed to them on a plate with the polling this morning.
So hope that the Democrats might hold the House?
😉
Abortion has been an issue which has helped but also GAS prices in the US have helped the democrats too. From a high around 5 GREENBACKS a gallon they have tumbled.
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
'Just' 4%? I'd like to do it, but I can't really get down there to do it. The fact that 4% are *planning* to do it is quite fricking huge.
I'll just pay my respects in other ways.
It is around the same percentage as people who tell pollsters they have been decapitated.
So you're insinuating that nobody wants to see QEII lie in state?
Go easy on him.
Republicans are having their arse handed to them on a plate with the polling this morning.
I am a fairly agnostic Monarchist, but I don't think polling during this period of mourning will be representative. Wait until the dust settles, but a quarter of the country favouring a Republic is quite significant.
Historically not that unusual, I believe there was quite a lot of republican feeling in Regency, Victorian and Edwardian Britain.
Now, it’s 5am, so at this time of day, their ranking algo is probably getting the lowest number of hits and “most read” is a less reliable guide to which story most British people are most interested in, but still…
I recon a significant chunk of Britain is getting a bit pissed off at the blanket coverage. Fair enough, going mega for the first 48hrs, but then the BBC should have toned it down until the funeral, imo.
Indeed. I think the coverage should be somewhat more reduced to the crucial essentials now, until Monday. The crucial moments of the lying in state yes, the 423rd anecdote by an equerry and Gyles Brandreth's 628th joke, no.
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
'Just' 4%? I'd like to do it, but I can't really get down there to do it. The fact that 4% are *planning* to do it is quite fricking huge.
I'll just pay my respects in other ways.
It is around the same percentage as people who tell pollsters they have been decapitated.
A slightly larger proportion of those in this poll will actually be going through with it, I think ?
4% would be 2.5 million people. I’m not really sure what bitter Republican TSE is implying. That no-ones going to turn up?
He's looking for a figleaf.
For elderly people, those with full-time jobs or young families, or those who live a very long way away, it's simply not practical to head to London and spend 20 hours queuing overnight.
If queues were only 1-2 hours with refreshments provided, I expect numbers would be much higher. But of course that's not possible.
I was surprised that they weren't doing some sort of timed ticket operation so that people didn't have to queue for a day. I hope the weather is kind.
Not sure a May poll is relevant in view of the recent Queen's death and the coverage so far
I assume more upto date polling will come along, but I am sceptical that, notwithstanding the wall to wall coverage and the inappropriate arresting of protesters, that the popularity of becoming a republic has grown
We have just lost a monarch who was highly respected by many who are not in the 62% of supporters. We have wall to wall pro-monarchy coverage right now and dissent is considered treasonable by fanatics like CasinoRoyale.
Let's see where the figures stand 12 months into Charlie's reign. We will get a truer picture then, both here and in the other countries where it is an issue. My guess is that Republican support will keep increasing now the Queen has gone but it will hang on by slimming further and further. By the time William becomes king the monarchy will be a very pale shadow of what it was, it will be the only way it can survive.
Charles III has seen a surge of support since his mother’s death, with most Britons praising his leadership and believing he will be a good king.
The first polling on public reactions to the death of Elizabeth II finds almost nine in ten people praising her reign as good for the country, with 87 per cent saying she will probably go down as one of Britain’s greatest monarchs.
YouGov finds that initial reactions to the King’s leadership since his mother’s death are overwhelmingly positive, while people also seem confident in his wife’s role as Queen Consort.
The polling finds 73 per cent saying the King has responded well and only 5 per cent suggesting he has handled the past few days badly. A total of 94 per cent say his first address to the nation as King on Friday was a good speech, with only 3 per cent critical.
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
'Just' 4%? I'd like to do it, but I can't really get down there to do it. The fact that 4% are *planning* to do it is quite fricking huge.
I'll just pay my respects in other ways.
It is around the same percentage as people who tell pollsters they have been decapitated.
A slightly larger proportion of those in this poll will actually be going through with it, I think ?
4% would be 2.5 million people. I’m not really sure what bitter Republican TSE is implying. That no-ones going to turn up?
He's looking for a figleaf.
For elderly people, those with full-time jobs or young families, or those who live a very long way away, it's simply not practical to head to London and spend 20 hours queuing overnight.
If queues were only 1-2 hours with refreshments provided, I expect numbers would be much higher. But of course that's not possible.
I was surprised that they weren't doing some sort of timed ticket operation so that people didn't have to queue for a day. I hope the weather is kind.
A ballot system would seem sensible, though I don't know how easy that would be to organise at short notice.
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
That is more than 2.5 million though!
There will be massive crowds on Monday for the funeral itself. It seems that I might be free to watch it, as looks like lots of clinical activity being cancelled. We had a straw poll done amongst staff. The admin staff and nurses are strongly for day off, not so much out of Monarchism but more due to practicalities such as child care and public transport.
I've booked a romantic long weekend away this weekend/Monday.
Personally, my sense of grieve is proportionate to the sense of loss I feel. I'm not sure why one should grieve less for someone very old, for whom death is expected but who's been a constant presence in your life - I will miss her reassuring presence, her smile, the Christmas speeches and national messages, her sense of duty, her shrewdness, diplomacy and good humour. And the stability and continuity she gave.
The fact I know that's now gone for good means I feel the sense of loss more keenly, and so I grieve. In my head I'd expected her to life about the same lifespan as the Queen Mother, maybe to 100 to 101, and certainly to make it to 2024 and become the longest reigning monarch, because although I knew she was frail and had mobility problems I had no idea it was any more serious than that nor that death was imminent. So it came as a shock.
Contrast to Diana. The reaction to her death was near hysterical. That was a tragedy, and indeed very sad, particularly for her two boys, but the country seemed to go berserk. I'm afraid I didn't grieve because I didn't feel the same sense of connection to her, and I'm a pretty staunch monarchist, and I still don't really understand what happened that week.
Depends on the individual, I guess.
The Diana thing still excites sociologists, 25 years on. ISTM there are a couple of really distinct features about it: Diana brought together several top bill items; royalty, scandal, heartbreak, emoting touchy feely charisma, beauty, Cinderella and celebrity.
She also spoke (and I noticed this a lot) for the transition generation of women around her age (they are now 55-65) who lived through the last age of patriarchy. She was their celebrity representative, and they turned out in their millions. Their daughters have inherited a different world.
If Russia loses, all the people on Left and Right in the West that demanded a "compromise" that "accepts Russia's legitimate interests" will shift to accusing the West of having sucked Putin into a deliberate trap to crush Moscow
None of these people will rethink their positions
Prediction: this will also be the position of the Putin regime, or whatever more extreme despotism succeeds it, and that of most of the Russian population along with it. They think they're entitled to conquer and subjugate their neighbours at will, and when the plan goes wrong it's the fault of everyone but themselves. They're irredeemable.
Even if the Putin regime falls and is replaced by a more hard line government, that government is unlikely to last very long.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
For many people in countries that border Russia, the top pressing interest is in 'removing the threat', and this can be achieved through the 'defeat of Russia', even though that means 'embracing the chaos' that follows.
But the end game of what you are describing is the disintegration of Russia in to multiple statelets, run by a collection of warlords and dubious 'businessmen'; who inherit collections of nuclear weapons and other significant military infrastructure; who have no interest in constitutional democracy, and who 'work with' powers like China and Iran, and with a population who 'blame the west' for the second disintegration of the former Russian State and the chaos and poverty that ensues.
I've got no real embarrassment about looking at the situation and concluding that there may just be some merit in 'clinging to nurse'. We need to remember what happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi in Libya.
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
'Just' 4%? I'd like to do it, but I can't really get down there to do it. The fact that 4% are *planning* to do it is quite fricking huge.
I'll just pay my respects in other ways.
It is around the same percentage as people who tell pollsters they have been decapitated.
A slightly larger proportion of those in this poll will actually be going through with it, I think ?
4% would be 2.5 million people. I’m not really sure what bitter Republican TSE is implying. That no-ones going to turn up?
He's looking for a figleaf.
For elderly people, those with full-time jobs or young families, or those who live a very long way away, it's simply not practical to head to London and spend 20 hours queuing overnight.
If queues were only 1-2 hours with refreshments provided, I expect numbers would be much higher. But of course that's not possible.
I was surprised that they weren't doing some sort of timed ticket operation so that people didn't have to queue for a day. I hope the weather is kind.
A ballot system would seem sensible, though I don't know how easy that would be to organise at short notice.
It's hardly short notice. They knew this would happen eventually and there have been signs for over a year that it would be fairly soon (even leaving aside her age).
If Russia loses, all the people on Left and Right in the West that demanded a "compromise" that "accepts Russia's legitimate interests" will shift to accusing the West of having sucked Putin into a deliberate trap to crush Moscow
None of these people will rethink their positions
Prediction: this will also be the position of the Putin regime, or whatever more extreme despotism succeeds it, and that of most of the Russian population along with it. They think they're entitled to conquer and subjugate their neighbours at will, and when the plan goes wrong it's the fault of everyone but themselves. They're irredeemable.
Even if the Putin regime falls and is replaced by a more hard line government, that government is unlikely to last very long.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
For many people in countries that border Russia, the top pressing interest is in 'removing the threat', and this can be achieved through the 'defeat of Russia', even though that means 'embracing the chaos' that follows.
But the end game of what you are describing is the disintegration of Russia in to multiple statelets, run by a collection of warlords and dubious 'businessmen'; who inherit collections of nuclear weapons and other significant military infrastructure; who have no interest in constitutional democracy, and who 'work with' powers like China and Iran, and with a population who 'blame the west' for the second disintegration of the former Russian State and the chaos and poverty that ensues.
I've got no real embarrassment about looking at the situation and concluding that there may just be some merit in 'clinging to nurse'. We need to remember what happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi in Libya.
So what is your actual policy proposal ? That we force Ukraine to accept Russian territorial seizures, and just live with the enormous damage they have wreaked ?
All those complaining that those backing Ukraine 'have no endgame' don't seem to have any problem with their own equally uncertain, and far less justified position.
Charles III has seen a surge of support since his mother’s death, with most Britons praising his leadership and believing he will be a good king.
The first polling on public reactions to the death of Elizabeth II finds almost nine in ten people praising her reign as good for the country, with 87 per cent saying she will probably go down as one of Britain’s greatest monarchs.
YouGov finds that initial reactions to the King’s leadership since his mother’s death are overwhelmingly positive, while people also seem confident in his wife’s role as Queen Consort.
The polling finds 73 per cent saying the King has responded well and only 5 per cent suggesting he has handled the past few days badly. A total of 94 per cent say his first address to the nation as King on Friday was a good speech, with only 3 per cent critical.
That response to the speech must exclude those who didn't see it? I've not seen any of it and I find it hard to believe that makes up only the remaining 3%
(I saw quite a few other bits relating to the Queen's death, not sure what day the speech was, bit there was a day I was traveling a lot)
Edit: And I'm politically engaged, but have no particular interest in seeking out the speech to watch it
Now, it’s 5am, so at this time of day, their ranking algo is probably getting the lowest number of hits and “most read” is a less reliable guide to which story most British people are most interested in, but still…
I recon a significant chunk of Britain is getting a bit pissed off at the blanket coverage. Fair enough, going mega for the first 48hrs, but then the BBC should have toned it down until the funeral, imo.
Indeed. I think the coverage should be somewhat more reduced to the crucial essentials now, until Monday. The crucial moments of the lying in state yes, the 423rd anecdote by an equerry and Gyles Brandreth's 628th joke, no.
I am glad that I stopped watching TV some time ago.
If Russia loses, all the people on Left and Right in the West that demanded a "compromise" that "accepts Russia's legitimate interests" will shift to accusing the West of having sucked Putin into a deliberate trap to crush Moscow
None of these people will rethink their positions
Prediction: this will also be the position of the Putin regime, or whatever more extreme despotism succeeds it, and that of most of the Russian population along with it. They think they're entitled to conquer and subjugate their neighbours at will, and when the plan goes wrong it's the fault of everyone but themselves. They're irredeemable.
Even if the Putin regime falls and is replaced by a more hard line government, that government is unlikely to last very long.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
For many people in countries that border Russia, the top pressing interest is in 'removing the threat', and this can be achieved through the 'defeat of Russia', even though that means 'embracing the chaos' that follows.
But the end game of what you are describing is the disintegration of Russia in to multiple statelets, run by a collection of warlords and dubious 'businessmen'; who inherit collections of nuclear weapons and other significant military infrastructure; who have no interest in constitutional democracy, and who 'work with' powers like China and Iran, and with a population who 'blame the west' for the second disintegration of the former Russian State and the chaos and poverty that ensues.
I've got no real embarrassment about looking at the situation and concluding that there may just be some merit in 'clinging to nurse'. We need to remember what happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi in Libya.
Exactly so, at least in terms of Russia staying together. I was going to post yesterday exactly the same - that the nonsense about "embracing the chaos" from figures like Applebaum indeed reminds me exactly of the neocon nonsense from figures like Rumsfeld before the Iraq war. Some ideologues never learn.
Good to see Squid Game win a couple of Emmys. Feel for Bob Odenkirk though as that is it for Better Call Saul (not finished so please no spoilers).
I don't want to come over all Charles ex of PB-ish about it but the only people I know who are planning to go to the lying in state are peers. But then they do have special access and can avoid (most of) the queues.
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
'Just' 4%? I'd like to do it, but I can't really get down there to do it. The fact that 4% are *planning* to do it is quite fricking huge.
I'll just pay my respects in other ways.
It is around the same percentage as people who tell pollsters they have been decapitated.
A slightly larger proportion of those in this poll will actually be going through with it, I think ?
4% would be 2.5 million people. I’m not really sure what bitter Republican TSE is implying. That no-ones going to turn up?
He's looking for a figleaf.
For elderly people, those with full-time jobs or young families, or those who live a very long way away, it's simply not practical to head to London and spend 20 hours queuing overnight.
If queues were only 1-2 hours with refreshments provided, I expect numbers would be much higher. But of course that's not possible.
I was surprised that they weren't doing some sort of timed ticket operation so that people didn't have to queue for a day. I hope the weather is kind.
A ballot system would seem sensible, though I don't know how easy that would be to organise at short notice.
It's hardly short notice. They knew this would happen eventually and there have been signs for over a year that it would be fairly soon (even leaving aside her age).
Not sure ballots are the favoured system. Perhaps each U.K. household could send their first born (male before 2010)?
If Russia loses, all the people on Left and Right in the West that demanded a "compromise" that "accepts Russia's legitimate interests" will shift to accusing the West of having sucked Putin into a deliberate trap to crush Moscow
None of these people will rethink their positions
Prediction: this will also be the position of the Putin regime, or whatever more extreme despotism succeeds it, and that of most of the Russian population along with it. They think they're entitled to conquer and subjugate their neighbours at will, and when the plan goes wrong it's the fault of everyone but themselves. They're irredeemable.
Even if the Putin regime falls and is replaced by a more hard line government, that government is unlikely to last very long.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
For many people in countries that border Russia, the top pressing interest is in 'removing the threat', and this can be achieved through the 'defeat of Russia', even though that means 'embracing the chaos' that follows.
But the end game of what you are describing is the disintegration of Russia in to multiple statelets, run by a collection of warlords and dubious 'businessmen'; who inherit collections of nuclear weapons and other significant military infrastructure; who have no interest in constitutional democracy, and who 'work with' powers like China and Iran, and with a population who 'blame the west' for the second disintegration of the former Russian State and the chaos and poverty that ensues.
I've got no real embarrassment about looking at the situation and concluding that there may just be some merit in 'clinging to nurse'. We need to remember what happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi in Libya.
Exactly so, at least in terms of Russia staying together. I was going to post yesterday exactly the same - that the nonsense about "embracing the chaos" from figures like Applebaum indeed reminds me exactly of the neocon nonsense before the Iraq war. Some ideologues never learn.
Whether or not Russia stays together really isn't in the gift of the west. The future is inherently unknowable and chaotic.
This is what she actually wrote, btw. ...To prepare for Putin’s exit does not mean that Americans, Europeans, or any outsiders intervene directly in the politics of Moscow. We have no tools that can affect the course of events in the Kremlin, and any effort to meddle would certainly backfire. But that doesn’t mean we should help him stay in power either. As Western heads of state, foreign ministers, and generals think about how to end this war, they should not try to preserve Putin’s view of himself or of the world, his backward-looking definition of Russian greatness. They should not be planning to negotiate on his terms at all, because they might be dealing with someone else altogether....
Good to see Squid Game win a couple of Emmys. Feel for Bob Odenkirk though as that is it for Better Call Saul (not finished so please no spoilers).
I don't want to come over all Charles ex of PB-ish about it but the only people I know who are planning to go to the lying in state are peers. But then they do have special access and can avoid (most of) the queues.
I may rewatch the last season of Better Call Saul. Binge watching a series is a very different experience to seeing it an episode each week, and it was good enough to want to see again.
Of interest was these blasts filmed yesterday in Taganrog, Russia. It is where the Russians base their AWACS....
Taganrog (Rostov Oblast) is where the Beriev plant that makes the A-50 is located. The operational aircraft are based at Ivanovo North (Ivanovo Oblast). That's a long way away, even by Russian standards.
If Russia loses, all the people on Left and Right in the West that demanded a "compromise" that "accepts Russia's legitimate interests" will shift to accusing the West of having sucked Putin into a deliberate trap to crush Moscow
None of these people will rethink their positions
Prediction: this will also be the position of the Putin regime, or whatever more extreme despotism succeeds it, and that of most of the Russian population along with it. They think they're entitled to conquer and subjugate their neighbours at will, and when the plan goes wrong it's the fault of everyone but themselves. They're irredeemable.
Even if the Putin regime falls and is replaced by a more hard line government, that government is unlikely to last very long.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
For many people in countries that border Russia, the top pressing interest is in 'removing the threat', and this can be achieved through the 'defeat of Russia', even though that means 'embracing the chaos' that follows.
But the end game of what you are describing is the disintegration of Russia in to multiple statelets, run by a collection of warlords and dubious 'businessmen'; who inherit collections of nuclear weapons and other significant military infrastructure; who have no interest in constitutional democracy, and who 'work with' powers like China and Iran, and with a population who 'blame the west' for the second disintegration of the former Russian State and the chaos and poverty that ensues.
I've got no real embarrassment about looking at the situation and concluding that there may just be some merit in 'clinging to nurse'. We need to remember what happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi in Libya.
Exactly so, at least in terms of Russia staying together. I was going to post yesterday exactly the same - that the nonsense about "embracing the chaos" from figures like Applebaum indeed reminds me exactly of the neocon nonsense before the Iraq war. Some ideologues never learn.
Whether or not Russia stays together really isn't in the gift of the west. The future is inherently unknowable and chaotic.
That's true, but it also shouldn't be a war or strategic aim of the West to break it up. A somewhat separate but also relevant issue, is that that agenda also relates to some of the bitterest efforts of some of our friends like Dynamo, via that nice Mr Dugin, not only to break up the EU but the UK and US as well.
If Russia loses, all the people on Left and Right in the West that demanded a "compromise" that "accepts Russia's legitimate interests" will shift to accusing the West of having sucked Putin into a deliberate trap to crush Moscow
None of these people will rethink their positions
Prediction: this will also be the position of the Putin regime, or whatever more extreme despotism succeeds it, and that of most of the Russian population along with it. They think they're entitled to conquer and subjugate their neighbours at will, and when the plan goes wrong it's the fault of everyone but themselves. They're irredeemable.
Even if the Putin regime falls and is replaced by a more hard line government, that government is unlikely to last very long.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
For many people in countries that border Russia, the top pressing interest is in 'removing the threat', and this can be achieved through the 'defeat of Russia', even though that means 'embracing the chaos' that follows.
But the end game of what you are describing is the disintegration of Russia in to multiple statelets, run by a collection of warlords and dubious 'businessmen'; who inherit collections of nuclear weapons and other significant military infrastructure; who have no interest in constitutional democracy, and who 'work with' powers like China and Iran, and with a population who 'blame the west' for the second disintegration of the former Russian State and the chaos and poverty that ensues.
I've got no real embarrassment about looking at the situation and concluding that there may just be some merit in 'clinging to nurse'. We need to remember what happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi in Libya.
Exactly so, at least in terms of Russia staying together. I was going to post yesterday exactly the same - that the nonsense about "embracing the chaos" from figures like Applebaum indeed reminds me exactly of the neocon nonsense before the Iraq war. Some ideologues never learn.
Whether or not Russia stays together really isn't in the gift of the west. The future is inherently unknowable and chaotic.
That's true, but it also shouldn't be a war aim of the West. A somewhat separate but also relevant issue, is that that agenda also relates to some of the bitterest efforts of friends like Dynamo, via Monsieur Dugin, not only to break up the EU but the UK and US as well.
Who in power has said that it is ?
And Anne Applebaum certainly hasn't said so, either. Her point was just that it's entirely possible that Ukraine will comprehensively defeat the invasion, and we should be planning for the aftermath.
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
'Just' 4%? I'd like to do it, but I can't really get down there to do it. The fact that 4% are *planning* to do it is quite fricking huge.
I'll just pay my respects in other ways.
It is around the same percentage as people who tell pollsters they have been decapitated.
A slightly larger proportion of those in this poll will actually be going through with it, I think ?
4% would be 2.5 million people. I’m not really sure what bitter Republican TSE is implying. That no-ones going to turn up?
He's looking for a figleaf.
For elderly people, those with full-time jobs or young families, or those who live a very long way away, it's simply not practical to head to London and spend 20 hours queuing overnight.
If queues were only 1-2 hours with refreshments provided, I expect numbers would be much higher. But of course that's not possible.
I was surprised that they weren't doing some sort of timed ticket operation so that people didn't have to queue for a day. I hope the weather is kind.
We can't run a decent peacetime passport application process. The idea of organising a ticket system equally open to 65 million people in a week is fanciful.
(Perhaps the passport system would run better if organised by old men with swans and badgers on their heads and dressed up as the king of diamonds).
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
That is over two million people!
I tried a back of an envelope calculation of how many people could file past in the time available and it came out at about 1.7m. That was at 5 per second for 96 hours.
Charles III has seen a surge of support since his mother’s death, with most Britons praising his leadership and believing he will be a good king.
The first polling on public reactions to the death of Elizabeth II finds almost nine in ten people praising her reign as good for the country, with 87 per cent saying she will probably go down as one of Britain’s greatest monarchs.
YouGov finds that initial reactions to the King’s leadership since his mother’s death are overwhelmingly positive, while people also seem confident in his wife’s role as Queen Consort.
The polling finds 73 per cent saying the King has responded well and only 5 per cent suggesting he has handled the past few days badly. A total of 94 per cent say his first address to the nation as King on Friday was a good speech, with only 3 per cent critical.
That response to the speech must exclude those who didn't see it? I've not seen any of it and I find it hard to believe that makes up only the remaining 3%
(I saw quite a few other bits relating to the Queen's death, not sure what day the speech was, bit there was a day I was traveling a lot)
Just think what could have happened if Truss had got the tone right. All the acres of TV time they need to fill and could have filled replaying her perfect anecdote. The BOUNCE would have been hers.....
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
'Just' 4%? I'd like to do it, but I can't really get down there to do it. The fact that 4% are *planning* to do it is quite fricking huge.
I'll just pay my respects in other ways.
It is around the same percentage as people who tell pollsters they have been decapitated.
A slightly larger proportion of those in this poll will actually be going through with it, I think ?
4% would be 2.5 million people. I’m not really sure what bitter Republican TSE is implying. That no-ones going to turn up?
He's looking for a figleaf.
For elderly people, those with full-time jobs or young families, or those who live a very long way away, it's simply not practical to head to London and spend 20 hours queuing overnight.
If queues were only 1-2 hours with refreshments provided, I expect numbers would be much higher. But of course that's not possible.
I was surprised that they weren't doing some sort of timed ticket operation so that people didn't have to queue for a day. I hope the weather is kind.
We can't run a decent peacetime passport application process. The idea of organising a ticket system equally open to 65 million people in a week is fanciful.
(Perhaps the passport system would run better if organised by old men with swans and badgers on their heads and dressed up as the king of diamonds).
"We can't run a decent peacetime passport application process."
We realised our son's passport was out of date a few months ago (during the summer). We weren't planning to go abroad, but we put in our application. It came back in a couple of weeks. Seemed decent enough to me, but perhaps we were lucky.
I also wonder if electronic versus paper applications make a difference to the time? (Can you still do paper applications?)
If Russia loses, all the people on Left and Right in the West that demanded a "compromise" that "accepts Russia's legitimate interests" will shift to accusing the West of having sucked Putin into a deliberate trap to crush Moscow
None of these people will rethink their positions
Prediction: this will also be the position of the Putin regime, or whatever more extreme despotism succeeds it, and that of most of the Russian population along with it. They think they're entitled to conquer and subjugate their neighbours at will, and when the plan goes wrong it's the fault of everyone but themselves. They're irredeemable.
Even if the Putin regime falls and is replaced by a more hard line government, that government is unlikely to last very long.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
For many people in countries that border Russia, the top pressing interest is in 'removing the threat', and this can be achieved through the 'defeat of Russia', even though that means 'embracing the chaos' that follows.
But the end game of what you are describing is the disintegration of Russia in to multiple statelets, run by a collection of warlords and dubious 'businessmen'; who inherit collections of nuclear weapons and other significant military infrastructure; who have no interest in constitutional democracy, and who 'work with' powers like China and Iran, and with a population who 'blame the west' for the second disintegration of the former Russian State and the chaos and poverty that ensues.
I've got no real embarrassment about looking at the situation and concluding that there may just be some merit in 'clinging to nurse'. We need to remember what happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi in Libya.
So what is your actual policy proposal ? That we force Ukraine to accept Russian territorial seizures, and just live with the enormous damage they have wreaked ?
All those complaining that those backing Ukraine 'have no endgame' don't seem to have any problem with their own equally uncertain, and far less justified position.
From all I have seen and read, I would go with the long term position of the west towards Russia as the 'least worst/only viable option' - IE Putin gets an 'off ramp' and there is some kind of 'deal' that secures the independence and sovereignty of Ukraine within the EU orbit, as well as the independence of Russia in relation to China, and some restoration of trade with Russia.
This puts me in a total minority and will evoke many Hitler comparisons but it is a product of doing my best to think objectively about the situation, despite initially being in the 'beat back Russia' camp at the start of the campaign.
If you want to just 'embrace chaos' then you should reflect on what happened in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or indeed in the Soviet union in the early 1990s which ultimately led to the arrival of Putin on the scene. You are taking a massive risk. If it works it will be because you were lucky.
Whoever is organising this funeral are making a real pigs trotter of it. They've just cancelled three more premier league games at the week end for no obvious reason. Not being able to cope with a funeral and a football match on different days- in one case in a different part of the couintry- doesn't doesn't bode well for our new status as a theme park.
What's more If any of the postponed teams look like they're heading for the quadruple there literally aren't going to be enough days available to play all the matches
Good morning
The matches have been cancelled due to policing requirements which is so obvious it really does ask the question why you could not see it or understand it
Good to see Squid Game win a couple of Emmys. Feel for Bob Odenkirk though as that is it for Better Call Saul (not finished so please no spoilers).
I don't want to come over all Charles ex of PB-ish about it but the only people I know who are planning to go to the lying in state are peers. But then they do have special access and can avoid (most of) the queues.
I may rewatch the last season of Better Call Saul. Binge watching a series is a very different experience to seeing it an episode each week, and it was good enough to want to see again.
I'm currently at series five of my re-watch of Better Call Saul. Then I'll watch Breaking Bad for the fourth time. Almost flawless TV - I say 'almost' because there is a change of actor in BTS which jars:
If Russia loses, all the people on Left and Right in the West that demanded a "compromise" that "accepts Russia's legitimate interests" will shift to accusing the West of having sucked Putin into a deliberate trap to crush Moscow
None of these people will rethink their positions
Prediction: this will also be the position of the Putin regime, or whatever more extreme despotism succeeds it, and that of most of the Russian population along with it. They think they're entitled to conquer and subjugate their neighbours at will, and when the plan goes wrong it's the fault of everyone but themselves. They're irredeemable.
Even if the Putin regime falls and is replaced by a more hard line government, that government is unlikely to last very long.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
For many people in countries that border Russia, the top pressing interest is in 'removing the threat', and this can be achieved through the 'defeat of Russia', even though that means 'embracing the chaos' that follows.
But the end game of what you are describing is the disintegration of Russia in to multiple statelets, run by a collection of warlords and dubious 'businessmen'; who inherit collections of nuclear weapons and other significant military infrastructure; who have no interest in constitutional democracy, and who 'work with' powers like China and Iran, and with a population who 'blame the west' for the second disintegration of the former Russian State and the chaos and poverty that ensues.
I've got no real embarrassment about looking at the situation and concluding that there may just be some merit in 'clinging to nurse'. We need to remember what happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi in Libya.
Exactly so, at least in terms of Russia staying together. I was going to post yesterday exactly the same - that the nonsense about "embracing the chaos" from figures like Applebaum indeed reminds me exactly of the neocon nonsense before the Iraq war. Some ideologues never learn.
Whether or not Russia stays together really isn't in the gift of the west. The future is inherently unknowable and chaotic.
This is what she actually wrote, btw. ...To prepare for Putin’s exit does not mean that Americans, Europeans, or any outsiders intervene directly in the politics of Moscow. We have no tools that can affect the course of events in the Kremlin, and any effort to meddle would certainly backfire. But that doesn’t mean we should help him stay in power either. As Western heads of state, foreign ministers, and generals think about how to end this war, they should not try to preserve Putin’s view of himself or of the world, his backward-looking definition of Russian greatness. They should not be planning to negotiate on his terms at all, because they might be dealing with someone else altogether....
Assuming the Putin regimes collapse is real rather than wishful thinking, we should learn from the collapse of the USSR. Being open minded and reaching out the olive branch to any new government (obviously withdrawal from Ukraine is a precondition) is likely to be in our long term interest. We don't want Russia to just shift back to being another failed state.
Russians invest a lot of nationalism in their military successes, seeing them roundly defeated will be a psychological blow as profound as it was in Weimar Germany.
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
'Just' 4%? I'd like to do it, but I can't really get down there to do it. The fact that 4% are *planning* to do it is quite fricking huge.
I'll just pay my respects in other ways.
It is around the same percentage as people who tell pollsters they have been decapitated.
So if we take a wild guess that only half actually follow through thats still well over a million. Really not feeling the point. How many had you expected to say they would?
This is big. The British intelligence confirms that the Russian 1st Guards Tank Army was pushed out from Kharkiv and is no longer capable as a combat unit.
1st GTA was supposed to be the elite breakthrough formation of the Russian army.
If Russia loses, all the people on Left and Right in the West that demanded a "compromise" that "accepts Russia's legitimate interests" will shift to accusing the West of having sucked Putin into a deliberate trap to crush Moscow
None of these people will rethink their positions
Prediction: this will also be the position of the Putin regime, or whatever more extreme despotism succeeds it, and that of most of the Russian population along with it. They think they're entitled to conquer and subjugate their neighbours at will, and when the plan goes wrong it's the fault of everyone but themselves. They're irredeemable.
Even if the Putin regime falls and is replaced by a more hard line government, that government is unlikely to last very long.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
For many people in countries that border Russia, the top pressing interest is in 'removing the threat', and this can be achieved through the 'defeat of Russia', even though that means 'embracing the chaos' that follows.
But the end game of what you are describing is the disintegration of Russia in to multiple statelets, run by a collection of warlords and dubious 'businessmen'; who inherit collections of nuclear weapons and other significant military infrastructure; who have no interest in constitutional democracy, and who 'work with' powers like China and Iran, and with a population who 'blame the west' for the second disintegration of the former Russian State and the chaos and poverty that ensues.
I've got no real embarrassment about looking at the situation and concluding that there may just be some merit in 'clinging to nurse'. We need to remember what happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi in Libya.
Absolutely the disintegration of Russia, if it happens, is to be warmly but cautiously welcomed. As would Russia remaining a unitary state but without Putin.
Look at the fall of the Soviet Union, yes some of the former parts of it haven't done too well, yet, but most of them are better off independent than under the rule of Moscow.
If Russia loses, all the people on Left and Right in the West that demanded a "compromise" that "accepts Russia's legitimate interests" will shift to accusing the West of having sucked Putin into a deliberate trap to crush Moscow
None of these people will rethink their positions
Prediction: this will also be the position of the Putin regime, or whatever more extreme despotism succeeds it, and that of most of the Russian population along with it. They think they're entitled to conquer and subjugate their neighbours at will, and when the plan goes wrong it's the fault of everyone but themselves. They're irredeemable.
Even if the Putin regime falls and is replaced by a more hard line government, that government is unlikely to last very long.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
Well agree with all that regarding Russia, but the west don't always take that approach - Iraq and Libya spring to mind.
Whoever is organising this funeral are making a real pigs trotter of it. They've just cancelled three more premier league games at the week end for no obvious reason. Not being able to cope with a funeral and a football match on different days- in one case in a different part of the couintry- doesn't doesn't bode well for our new status as a theme park.
What's more If any of the postponed teams look like they're heading for the quadruple there literally aren't going to be enough days available to play all the matches
I hate to tell you this, but the people 'organising this funeral' are not the same people cancelling premier league games.
Is this the first time you've ever expressed an interest in football on here?
Yes, I dont know how many times it needs pointing out the guidance doesnt mandate sports closures (and thus far they didnt say it was resource based).
I worked with a colleague who was a devout Muslim. He never understood why we (he knew I was Catholic) 'allowed' our religion to be insulted. When I tried to explain he pointed out a salient fact.
There might be plenty of Islamophobes around but most keep their gob shut, being frit of the reaction. (I summarise).
I couldn't argue with that.
I'm not a monarchist, the only reason for them would be for the tourist trade, but the Republican 'activists' are merely mischief-makers. We're outnumbered by three to one, and annoying people for the sake of it is irritating, and perhaps they should grow up.
Re the header, the 'furore' is the usual twitter types trying to kick up a storm over a few saddos who thought they would spend part of their day shouting their opinions - which nobody really cares about - at the funeral of the monarch.
I don't believe they should be charged but I don't believe preachers who bang on the high street about Christ and the evils of sodomy should be prosecuted either.
The only difference in this case it's the 'progressives' cause that is being attacked and therefore it's a so called threat to free speech. If it was a preacher being dragged away, they would be cheering it on.
Re the header, the 'furore' is the usual twitter types trying to kick up a storm over a few saddos who thought they would spend part of their day shouting their opinions - which nobody really cares about - at the funeral of the monarch.
I don't believe they should be charged but I don't believe preachers who bang on the high street about Christ and the evils of sodomy should be prosecuted either.
The only difference in this case it's the 'progressives' cause that is being attacked and therefore it's a so called threat to free speech. If it was a preacher being dragged away, they would be cheering it on.
The other difference between Putin's Russia and the Soviet Union is that experience shows that there is almost zero yearning for 'western style democracy' in Russia today, outside elite liberal circles perhaps in Moscow and St Petersburg and possibly a few other urban centres. The 'failed experiments' of the 1990's are etched firmly in peoples consciousness. So this tendency will be likely to characterise the regimes that follow.
Charles III has seen a surge of support since his mother’s death, with most Britons praising his leadership and believing he will be a good king.
The first polling on public reactions to the death of Elizabeth II finds almost nine in ten people praising her reign as good for the country, with 87 per cent saying she will probably go down as one of Britain’s greatest monarchs.
YouGov finds that initial reactions to the King’s leadership since his mother’s death are overwhelmingly positive, while people also seem confident in his wife’s role as Queen Consort.
The polling finds 73 per cent saying the King has responded well and only 5 per cent suggesting he has handled the past few days badly. A total of 94 per cent say his first address to the nation as King on Friday was a good speech, with only 3 per cent critical.
That response to the speech must exclude those who didn't see it? I've not seen any of it and I find it hard to believe that makes up only the remaining 3%
(I saw quite a few other bits relating to the Queen's death, not sure what day the speech was, bit there was a day I was traveling a lot)
Just think what could have happened if Truss had got the tone right. All the acres of TV time they need to fill and could have filled replaying her perfect anecdote. The BOUNCE would have been hers.....
What a chance and she blew it.
She hasn't really had the time to build up a decent portfolio of anecdotes. There's only the one about how her Maj made her pm and then, with that quiet sense of humour for which she was so well known, died.
This is big. The British intelligence confirms that the Russian 1st Guards Tank Army was pushed out from Kharkiv and is no longer capable as a combat unit.
1st GTA was supposed to be the elite breakthrough formation of the Russian army.
He's committed the most epochal act of self harm since Claudius poisoned the wine only to see first his wife drink it and then be forced to drink it himself.
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
That is over two million people!
I tried a back of an envelope calculation of how many people could file past in the time available and it came out at about 1.7m. That was at 5 per second for 96 hours.
Re the header, the 'furore' is the usual twitter types trying to kick up a storm over a few saddos who thought they would spend part of their day shouting their opinions - which nobody really cares about - at the funeral of the monarch.
I don't believe they should be charged but I don't believe preachers who bang on the high street about Christ and the evils of sodomy should be prosecuted either.
The only difference in this case it's the 'progressives' cause that is being attacked and therefore it's a so called threat to free speech. If it was a preacher being dragged away, they would be cheering it on.
If Russia loses, all the people on Left and Right in the West that demanded a "compromise" that "accepts Russia's legitimate interests" will shift to accusing the West of having sucked Putin into a deliberate trap to crush Moscow
None of these people will rethink their positions
Prediction: this will also be the position of the Putin regime, or whatever more extreme despotism succeeds it, and that of most of the Russian population along with it. They think they're entitled to conquer and subjugate their neighbours at will, and when the plan goes wrong it's the fault of everyone but themselves. They're irredeemable.
Even if the Putin regime falls and is replaced by a more hard line government, that government is unlikely to last very long.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
For many people in countries that border Russia, the top pressing interest is in 'removing the threat', and this can be achieved through the 'defeat of Russia', even though that means 'embracing the chaos' that follows.
But the end game of what you are describing is the disintegration of Russia in to multiple statelets, run by a collection of warlords and dubious 'businessmen'; who inherit collections of nuclear weapons and other significant military infrastructure; who have no interest in constitutional democracy, and who 'work with' powers like China and Iran, and with a population who 'blame the west' for the second disintegration of the former Russian State and the chaos and poverty that ensues.
I've got no real embarrassment about looking at the situation and concluding that there may just be some merit in 'clinging to nurse'. We need to remember what happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi in Libya.
So what is your actual policy proposal ? That we force Ukraine to accept Russian territorial seizures, and just live with the enormous damage they have wreaked ?
All those complaining that those backing Ukraine 'have no endgame' don't seem to have any problem with their own equally uncertain, and far less justified position.
From all I have seen and read, I would go with the long term position of the west towards Russia as the 'least worst/only viable option' - IE Putin gets an 'off ramp' and there is some kind of 'deal' that secures the independence and sovereignty of Ukraine within the EU orbit, as well as the independence of Russia in relation to China, and some restoration of trade with Russia.
This puts me in a total minority and will evoke many Hitler comparisons but it is a product of doing my best to think objectively about the situation, despite initially being in the 'beat back Russia' camp at the start of the campaign.
If you want to just 'embrace chaos' then you should reflect on what happened in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or indeed in the Soviet union in the early 1990s which ultimately led to the arrival of Putin on the scene. You are taking a massive risk. If it works it will be because you were lucky.
You're not addressing the arguments, just a phrase.
As I've pointed out, Applebaum isn't arguing that we depose Putin, or even seek to encourage such a thing. She saying, and I agree with her, that Putin's survival or otherwise simply isn't in our gift. The consequences of a defeat of his invasion are something Russia will decide.
If you're arguing that the west should treat a defeated Russia with a degree of magnanimity, then I wouldn't disagree. But what are you actually arguing for, rather than against ?
This is big. The British intelligence confirms that the Russian 1st Guards Tank Army was pushed out from Kharkiv and is no longer capable as a combat unit.
1st GTA was supposed to be the elite breakthrough formation of the Russian army.
Re the header, the 'furore' is the usual twitter types trying to kick up a storm over a few saddos who thought they would spend part of their day shouting their opinions - which nobody really cares about - at the funeral of the monarch.
I don't believe they should be charged but I don't believe preachers who bang on the high street about Christ and the evils of sodomy should be prosecuted either.
The only difference in this case it's the 'progressives' cause that is being attacked and therefore it's a so called threat to free speech. If it was a preacher being dragged away, they would be cheering it on.
Does that evils of sodomy stuff really happen?
Well, they can be a bit of a bugger.
Oh, sure, they are why we get earthquakes (per Justinian), I meant do people get prosecuted in this country for saying so? I doubt it.
Pedo boy gets to wear uniform, Harry not. This is KC humiliating his own son in favour of his trafficky brother because that's what wounded self importance looks like.
Enough. Arsenic in his Epsom salts, and extra helpings for the Queen fucking Consort. What a monumental fucking shit.
The king won't last long. Harry isn't stupid and he has a backbone. He has matured amazingly since his Nazi uniform idiocy, the Las Vegas business, and Afghanistan. His spoilt toe-rag of a father will never mature.
What if...just imagine...Harry were to have written a few alternative versions of one of the chapters in his book...and he chooses the one that really gives his father the almighty kick in the b*llocks he deserves and he leaks a copy later this week? Bye-bye kingy. Bye-bye monarchy. Go for it, Harry.
All the build-up is in one direction. All the other side have got is to print articles saying trillions of admirers are flocking the streets, blah blah. They've got absolutely nothing else - oh, some stuff about the late queen. WTF has she got to do with anything?
Sorry to disappoint but while Diana's son and heirs are in line the monarchy is secure.
As far as KCIII is concerned he's going to be an unpopular monarch but the people will tolerate him while they wait for William and Catherine - the true heirs - to ascend.
Fat baldy and social climber. Huzzah. Give it to me unlubed your maj, hard as you like
Hmmmm - "Social climber"?
Isn't one of the Republican points that he has been helicoptered to the top of the social mountain, with the flight paid by the tax payer?
Re the header, the 'furore' is the usual twitter types trying to kick up a storm over a few saddos who thought they would spend part of their day shouting their opinions - which nobody really cares about - at the funeral of the monarch.
I don't believe they should be charged but I don't believe preachers who bang on the high street about Christ and the evils of sodomy should be prosecuted either.
The only difference in this case it's the 'progressives' cause that is being attacked and therefore it's a so called threat to free speech. If it was a preacher being dragged away, they would be cheering it on.
I think free speech is important and the protestors should certainly not be charged (unless there is something not apparent in what I've seen that would justify a charge). The man shown on camera assaulting the protestor in Edinburgh should be charged.
Peaceful protest in a public space must be permitted and protected. As an example, I support Tommy Robinson being permitted to stand on a soapbox spouting his nonsense, as long as it doesn't cross over into inciting violence. The protestor yesterday, I don't know exactly what he said, but he should be able to stand there shouting "Andrew is a nonce", for example (he can be sued for that if appropriate, that's the remedy in law). He shouldn't be permitted to shout "Andrew is a nonce, let's lynch him".
(There are trickier cases where a particular group is harassed going about their normal business, e.g. Robinson harassing Muslims outside a mosque, 'pro-life' campaigners harassing people attending an abortion clinic. Even people standing outside royal palaces shouting abuse about the late Queen that could be harassment of the grieving family inside, potentially. But on a public street, no.)
If Russia loses, all the people on Left and Right in the West that demanded a "compromise" that "accepts Russia's legitimate interests" will shift to accusing the West of having sucked Putin into a deliberate trap to crush Moscow
None of these people will rethink their positions
Prediction: this will also be the position of the Putin regime, or whatever more extreme despotism succeeds it, and that of most of the Russian population along with it. They think they're entitled to conquer and subjugate their neighbours at will, and when the plan goes wrong it's the fault of everyone but themselves. They're irredeemable.
Even if the Putin regime falls and is replaced by a more hard line government, that government is unlikely to last very long.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
For many people in countries that border Russia, the top pressing interest is in 'removing the threat', and this can be achieved through the 'defeat of Russia', even though that means 'embracing the chaos' that follows.
But the end game of what you are describing is the disintegration of Russia in to multiple statelets, run by a collection of warlords and dubious 'businessmen'; who inherit collections of nuclear weapons and other significant military infrastructure; who have no interest in constitutional democracy, and who 'work with' powers like China and Iran, and with a population who 'blame the west' for the second disintegration of the former Russian State and the chaos and poverty that ensues.
I've got no real embarrassment about looking at the situation and concluding that there may just be some merit in 'clinging to nurse'. We need to remember what happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi in Libya.
Exactly so, at least in terms of Russia staying together. I was going to post yesterday exactly the same - that the nonsense about "embracing the chaos" from figures like Applebaum indeed reminds me exactly of the neocon nonsense before the Iraq war. Some ideologues never learn.
Whether or not Russia stays together really isn't in the gift of the west. The future is inherently unknowable and chaotic.
This is what she actually wrote, btw. ...To prepare for Putin’s exit does not mean that Americans, Europeans, or any outsiders intervene directly in the politics of Moscow. We have no tools that can affect the course of events in the Kremlin, and any effort to meddle would certainly backfire. But that doesn’t mean we should help him stay in power either. As Western heads of state, foreign ministers, and generals think about how to end this war, they should not try to preserve Putin’s view of himself or of the world, his backward-looking definition of Russian greatness. They should not be planning to negotiate on his terms at all, because they might be dealing with someone else altogether....
Assuming the Putin regimes collapse is real rather than wishful thinking, we should learn from the collapse of the USSR. Being open minded and reaching out the olive branch to any new government (obviously withdrawal from Ukraine is a precondition) is likely to be in our long term interest. We don't want Russia to just shift back to being another failed state.
Russians invest a lot of nationalism in their military successes, seeing them roundly defeated will be a psychological blow as profound as it was in Weimar Germany.
Weimar Germany never fought a war. Even when they were invaded in 1923 they only put up passive resistance. Do you mean in Imperial Germany and the hangover therefrom?
This is big. The British intelligence confirms that the Russian 1st Guards Tank Army was pushed out from Kharkiv and is no longer capable as a combat unit.
1st GTA was supposed to be the elite breakthrough formation of the Russian army.
Whose side is everyone on in the Armenia-Azerbaijan forthcoming war ?
Armenia is generally considered an ally of Russia, and Azerbaijan an ally of Turkey. I´d tend to favour Georgia under the current circumstances. Armenia will have little choice but to sue for peace.
Er - in a fight between two countries, you favour a third one?
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
That is over two million people!
I tried a back of an envelope calculation of how many people could file past in the time available and it came out at about 1.7m. That was at 5 per second for 96 hours.
They could restrict it to sprinters only
A travelator would be quite effective, but would take away the needed gravitas, I guess. The shuffling past is all part of it, I think.
Re the header, the 'furore' is the usual twitter types trying to kick up a storm over a few saddos who thought they would spend part of their day shouting their opinions - which nobody really cares about - at the funeral of the monarch.
I don't believe they should be charged but I don't believe preachers who bang on the high street about Christ and the evils of sodomy should be prosecuted either.
The only difference in this case it's the 'progressives' cause that is being attacked and therefore it's a so called threat to free speech. If it was a preacher being dragged away, they would be cheering it on.
Er, you just made that last para up. I don't know anyone who cheers on the police for dragging off some religious nutter preaching on the street.
Jeffery twatting Archer on Sky News discussing the Royals.
Why not get Ghislaine Maxwell on as well.
Is he telling an anecdote about the time he and Gyles Brandreth stepped on a corgi ?
The sheer quantity of the more fluffy parts of the coverage is now beginning to generate a Magical Mystery Tour queasiness, as mentioned yesterday. Gyles Brandreth's jumper flying back through time to meet Queen Victoria and Charles II.
As Russia continues to break things, Ukraine is already starting the painstaking job of mending things in the liberated territory.
https://twitter.com/AKamyshin/status/1569425516104400901 Today I failed. I've done everything possible and slightly more, but failed. My plan was to get to recently retaken Town B. by train. But no success. It was a long long day. So listen to the story...
Pedo boy gets to wear uniform, Harry not. This is KC humiliating his own son in favour of his trafficky brother because that's what wounded self importance looks like.
Enough. Arsenic in his Epsom salts, and extra helpings for the Queen fucking Consort. What a monumental fucking shit.
The king won't last long. Harry isn't stupid and he has a backbone. He has matured amazingly since his Nazi uniform idiocy, the Las Vegas business, and Afghanistan. His spoilt toe-rag of a father will never mature.
What if...just imagine...Harry were to have written a few alternative versions of one of the chapters in his book...and he chooses the one that really gives his father the almighty kick in the b*llocks he deserves and he leaks a copy later this week? Bye-bye kingy. Bye-bye monarchy. Go for it, Harry.
All the build-up is in one direction. All the other side have got is to print articles saying trillions of admirers are flocking the streets, blah blah. They've got absolutely nothing else - oh, some stuff about the late queen. WTF has she got to do with anything?
Sorry to disappoint but while Diana's son and heirs are in line the monarchy is secure.
As far as KCIII is concerned he's going to be an unpopular monarch but the people will tolerate him while they wait for William and Catherine - the true heirs - to ascend.
Fat baldy and social climber. Huzzah. Give it to me unlubed your maj, hard as you like
Hmmmm - "Social climber"?
Isn't one of the Republican points that he has been helicoptered to the top of the social mountain, with the flight paid by the tax payer?
Jeffery twatting Archer on Sky News discussing the Royals.
Why not get Ghislaine Maxwell on as well.
Is he telling an anecdote about the time he and Gyles Brandreth stepped on a corgi ?
The sheer quantity of the more fluffy parts of the coverage is now beginning to generate a Magical Mystery Tour queasiness, as mentioned yesterday. Gyles Brandreth's jumper flying back through time to meet Queen Victoria and Charles II.
Jeffery twatting Archer on Sky News discussing the Royals.
Why not get Ghislaine Maxwell on as well.
Is he telling an anecdote about the time he and Gyles Brandreth stepped on a corgi ?
The sheer quantity of the more fluffy parts of the coverage is now beginning to generate a Magical Mystery Tour queasiness, as mentioned yesterday. Gyles Brandreth's jumper flying back through time to meet Queen Victoria and Charles II.
Jeffery twatting Archer on Sky News discussing the Royals.
Why not get Ghislaine Maxwell on as well.
Is he telling an anecdote about the time he and Gyles Brandreth stepped on a corgi ?
The sheer quantity of the more fluffy parts of the coverage is now beginning to generate a Magical Mystery Tour queasiness, as mentioned yesterday. Gyles Brandreth's jumper flying back through time to meet Queen Victoria and Charles II.
Yet you're still watching it, apparently.
In places, not since yesterday now.
I haven't watched it at all since Friday evening. This is an option for all people who find it either boring or OTT.
Re the header, the 'furore' is the usual twitter types trying to kick up a storm over a few saddos who thought they would spend part of their day shouting their opinions - which nobody really cares about - at the funeral of the monarch.
I don't believe they should be charged but I don't believe preachers who bang on the high street about Christ and the evils of sodomy should be prosecuted either.
The only difference in this case it's the 'progressives' cause that is being attacked and therefore it's a so called threat to free speech. If it was a preacher being dragged away, they would be cheering it on.
Er, you just made that last para up. I don't know anyone who cheers on the police for dragging off some religious nutter preaching on the street.
If they're overrunning while in the pulpit, of course...
Just 4% of Brits plan to see QEII lying in state at Westminster.
Just?!
Thats what, 3 million people?
It's like that one about 'only' 44% of people crying.
LOL. Yep that is a desperate attempt by TSE to create the impression of lack of interest or concern. Not sure how you even get 3 million people past the coffin in 4 days. That is over 500 people a minute.
Comments
Is this the first time you've ever expressed an interest in football on here?
On a different subject, Azerbaijan now looks to be ramming home its military advantage over Armenia. That could easily get very nasty indeed as if they do retake Nagorno Karabakh I imagine most people currently there won't want to stay there even if they're given a choice.
I imagine attacks on South Ossetia and possibly Transnistria will not be far behind if Russia continues to wobble like this.
There is a growing sense of collapse on the Russian side. Rumours of an army mutiny are growing, and the reports that Kadyrov is sending forces "to support" the regime (not clear where but even, possibly, Moscow) suggests we may, just possibly, already be in some kind of end game. It appears that Kherson may fall even as early as this week, and the collapse of Russian forces in the Donbas seems to be accelerating, with UAF units getting close to Luhansk. Putin is said to be in Sochi, but as with the Czar in Pskov, that is no guarantee that he is safer there than in the capital.
Any new regime in Russia will need to deal with significant internal headwinds, and not least the Kadyrovtsi. The renewal of the Azerbaijani assault on Armenia is also yet another sign that the authority of Putin is draining away.
Personally, those who told me that, irrespective of morality or our own fundamental interests, the West should come to terms with Putin, now look more than just "wrong". The Baltic and Poland have been warning about Putin for 20 years. They were right and now the views of the front line states should count for a lot more than the discredited position of "compromise" with the rapist regime. Putin is likely to fall eventually, and that is a good thing, because irrespective of the short term, Russia has to change and it can not change with him still in the Kremlin. "Clinging hold of nurse, for fear of getting something worse" is the perennial mistake of Western statecraft when dealing with Moscow and it fails every time.
The fact I know that's now gone for good means I feel the sense of loss more keenly, and so I grieve. In my head I'd expected her to life about the same lifespan as the Queen Mother, maybe to 100 to 101, and certainly to make it to 2024 and become the longest reigning monarch, because although I knew she was frail and had mobility problems I had no idea it was any more serious than that nor that death was imminent. So it came as a shock.
Contrast to Diana. The reaction to her death was near hysterical. That was a tragedy, and indeed very sad, particularly for her two boys, but the country seemed to go berserk. I'm afraid I didn't grieve because I didn't feel the same sense of connection to her, and I'm a pretty staunch monarchist, and I still don't really understand what happened that week.
Depends on the individual, I guess.
For elderly people, those with full-time jobs or young families, or those who live a very long way away, it's simply not practical to head to London and spend 20 hours queuing overnight.
If queues were only 1-2 hours with refreshments provided, I expect numbers would be much higher. But of course that's not possible.
Republicans are having their arse handed to them on a plate with the polling this morning.
I think that the Diana thing was more of an outpouring of mass emotion in response to a death. Its a bit like George Floyd or Sarah Everard (although there are obvious differences). Some events just randomly trigger this type of response, it is one of these poorly explained features of human affairs.
😉
A carriage of the Royal train, modified especially to carry Queen Elizabeth II’s coffin, lies unused after plans for the nation to turn out to show its respects were scrapped over fears for public safety and disruption.
It's a shame that the railway isn't getting used in all this.
Historically not that unusual, I believe there was quite a lot of republican feeling in Regency, Victorian and Edwardian Britain.
Let's see where the figures stand 12 months into Charlie's reign. We will get a truer picture then, both here and in the other countries where it is an issue. My guess is that Republican support will keep increasing now the Queen has gone but it will hang on by slimming further and further. By the time William becomes king the monarchy will be a very pale shadow of what it was, it will be the only way it can survive.
She thinks they are an emo band, she’s not a fan.
She also spoke (and I noticed this a lot) for the transition generation of women around her age (they are now 55-65) who lived through the last age of patriarchy. She was their celebrity representative, and they turned out in their millions. Their daughters have inherited a different world.
For many people in countries that border Russia, the top pressing interest is in 'removing the threat', and this can be achieved through the 'defeat of Russia', even though that means 'embracing the chaos' that follows.
But the end game of what you are describing is the disintegration of Russia in to multiple statelets, run by a collection of warlords and dubious 'businessmen'; who inherit collections of nuclear weapons and other significant military infrastructure; who have no interest in constitutional democracy, and who 'work with' powers like China and Iran, and with a population who 'blame the west' for the second disintegration of the former Russian State and the chaos and poverty that ensues.
I've got no real embarrassment about looking at the situation and concluding that there may just be some merit in 'clinging to nurse'. We need to remember what happened in Iraq with Saddam Hussein or Gaddafi in Libya.
That we force Ukraine to accept Russian territorial seizures, and just live with the enormous damage they have wreaked ?
All those complaining that those backing Ukraine 'have no endgame' don't seem to have any problem with their own equally uncertain, and far less justified position.
(I saw quite a few other bits relating to the Queen's death, not sure what day the speech was, bit there was a day I was traveling a lot)
Edit: And I'm politically engaged, but have no particular interest in seeking out the speech to watch it
I don't want to come over all Charles ex of PB-ish about it but the only people I know who are planning to go to the lying in state are peers. But then they do have special access and can avoid (most of) the queues.
The future is inherently unknowable and chaotic.
This is what she actually wrote, btw.
...To prepare for Putin’s exit does not mean that Americans, Europeans, or any outsiders intervene directly in the politics of Moscow. We have no tools that can affect the course of events in the Kremlin, and any effort to meddle would certainly backfire. But that doesn’t mean we should help him stay in power either. As Western heads of state, foreign ministers, and generals think about how to end this war, they should not try to preserve Putin’s view of himself or of the world, his backward-looking definition of Russian greatness. They should not be planning to negotiate on his terms at all, because they might be dealing with someone else altogether....
Binge watching a series is a very different experience to seeing it an episode each week, and it was good enough to want to see again.
And Anne Applebaum certainly hasn't said so, either. Her point was just that it's entirely possible that Ukraine will comprehensively defeat the invasion, and we should be planning for the aftermath.
(Perhaps the passport system would run better if organised by old men with swans and badgers on their heads and dressed up as the king of diamonds).
What a chance and she blew it.
Thats what, 3 million people?
It's like that one about 'only' 44% of people crying.
We realised our son's passport was out of date a few months ago (during the summer). We weren't planning to go abroad, but we put in our application. It came back in a couple of weeks. Seemed decent enough to me, but perhaps we were lucky.
I also wonder if electronic versus paper applications make a difference to the time? (Can you still do paper applications?)
This puts me in a total minority and will evoke many Hitler comparisons but it is a product of doing my best to think objectively about the situation, despite initially being in the 'beat back Russia' camp at the start of the campaign.
If you want to just 'embrace chaos' then you should reflect on what happened in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or indeed in the Soviet union in the early 1990s which ultimately led to the arrival of Putin on the scene. You are taking a massive risk. If it works it will be because you were lucky.
The matches have been cancelled due to policing requirements which is so obvious it really does ask the question why you could not see it or understand it
https://www.nationalworld.com/culture/television/better-call-saul-season-6-episode-10-why-role-jeff-recast-nippy-actor-don-harvey-quit-3783606
Russians invest a lot of nationalism in their military successes, seeing them roundly defeated will be a psychological blow as profound as it was in Weimar Germany.
1st GTA was supposed to be the elite breakthrough formation of the Russian army.
https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1569550041194405890
Look at the fall of the Soviet Union, yes some of the former parts of it haven't done too well, yet, but most of them are better off independent than under the rule of Moscow.
There might be plenty of Islamophobes around but most keep their gob shut, being frit of the reaction. (I summarise).
I couldn't argue with that.
I'm not a monarchist, the only reason for them would be for the tourist trade, but the Republican 'activists' are merely mischief-makers. We're outnumbered by three to one, and annoying people for the sake of it is irritating, and perhaps they should grow up.
I don't believe they should be charged but I don't believe preachers who bang on the high street about Christ and the evils of sodomy should be prosecuted either.
The only difference in this case it's the 'progressives' cause that is being attacked and therefore it's a so called threat to free speech. If it was a preacher being dragged away, they would be cheering it on.
As I've pointed out, Applebaum isn't arguing that we depose Putin, or even seek to encourage such a thing.
She saying, and I agree with her, that Putin's survival or otherwise simply isn't in our gift. The consequences of a defeat of his invasion are something Russia will decide.
If you're arguing that the west should treat a defeated Russia with a degree of magnanimity, then I wouldn't disagree.
But what are you actually arguing for, rather than against ?
Bye Vlad.
Isn't one of the Republican points that he has been helicoptered to the top of the social mountain, with the flight paid by the tax payer?
Why not get Ghislaine Maxwell on as well.
Peaceful protest in a public space must be permitted and protected. As an example, I support Tommy Robinson being permitted to stand on a soapbox spouting his nonsense, as long as it doesn't cross over into inciting violence. The protestor yesterday, I don't know exactly what he said, but he should be able to stand there shouting "Andrew is a nonce", for example (he can be sued for that if appropriate, that's the remedy in law). He shouldn't be permitted to shout "Andrew is a nonce, let's lynch him".
(There are trickier cases where a particular group is harassed going about their normal business, e.g. Robinson harassing Muslims outside a mosque, 'pro-life' campaigners harassing people attending an abortion clinic. Even people standing outside royal palaces shouting abuse about the late Queen that could be harassment of the grieving family inside, potentially. But on a public street, no.)
The sheer quantity of the more fluffy parts of the coverage is now beginning to generate a Magical Mystery Tour queasiness, as mentioned yesterday. Gyles Brandreth's jumper flying back through time to meet Queen Victoria and Charles II.
https://twitter.com/AKamyshin/status/1569425516104400901
Today I failed. I've done everything possible and slightly more, but failed. My plan was to get to recently retaken Town B. by train. But no success. It was a long long day. So listen to the story...
Drone makers eye combat models
https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2022/09/13/2003785233