Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countries almost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
Yeah in Georgia the US threatened to rain tomahawks upon their army if they proceeded any further, so they didn't.
You haven't answered my question anyway - at what point does nuclear war become ok?
well i dont think it ever becomes ok - IF you scorn at that answer i suggest taking a walk this afternoon and looking at the humanity of life - old ,young, etc and asking if you really think its ever ok
What on earth are you talking about? If nuclear war is never ok - then what is stopping any country with nuclear weapons doing anything they want? If Russia invaded Germany, would we do nothing? What about Ireland?
So the PB consensus on nuclear war has gone from No it's not going to happen, to Fuck it, if it's going to happen let's have it NOW and ASAP rather than in a few years time, yay bombs!
I'm not sure everyone would agree with this
You are giving them a choice between certain death in the next six weeks, or probable death in three to five years
99% of people would choose the latter, thanks very much. I quite like being alive and seeing my friends. And if I get to do that for another three years that would be cool
You’re going to give yourself an ulcer at this rate . There’s zip all we can do about it so my advice is just go into a bubble of denial and just enjoy yourself .
That at least does have some merit, as an approach
Trouble is I can't. I keep looking at the door. And there's a fucking great big wolf there. Howling
I’m not normally a chilled out bubble type of person but this nuclear situation bizarrely I’m just not giving too much thought to as Putin seems to like self -preservation and he’s not a religious fundamentalist in which case I would be more worried about it.
Question I'm asking is: why has he not responded to the Kerch bombing with a nuke?
A: Either because he's bluffing or he's not being allowed too.
It really would be crossing a red line and I think he’d lose the support of some countries who were backing him so far if he used a tactical nuclear weapon.
I don’t think Putin wants to be a martyr and must realize he has no idea what the repercussions would be from NATO. Clearly you can’t allow a country to use a nuclear weapon without severe repercussions otherwise that country and any other could now be given a green light to embark on the same course of action.
So the PB consensus on nuclear war has gone from No it's not going to happen, to Fuck it, if it's going to happen let's have it NOW and ASAP rather than in a few years time, yay bombs!
I'm not sure everyone would agree with this
You are giving them a choice between certain death in the next six weeks, or probable death in three to five years
99% of people would choose the latter, thanks very much. I quite like being alive and seeing my friends. And if I get to do that for another three years that would be cool
This is laughable. There is an easy way to end the Ukrainian conflict - Russia stops their invasion and goes home. Anything else is giving into bullies. There is not any shades of grey here, it's black and white.
except it definitely does have alot of shades of grey (perhaps even more than 50) - Now is not the time to get binary and all simplistic about goodies and baddies and the baddies must fail
Cowards and appeasers will always make excuses.
i thought you were better than that frankly - but if you are calling me a coward then I suggest you go and fight this war personally rather than urging others to do it
Mate, they have lost their minds. Genuinely
I think a lot of it is just primitive fear. This is such a horrible prospect it invokes deep fear and loathing, and irrational aggression, and also large dollops of denial. Not going to happen! Don't think about it! Kill Putin!
What's the difference between this and Germany invading Poland? Genuine question. A lot of British lives would have been saved if we had let Germany take over mainland Europe.
germany did not have any nukes in 1939
So that's the only difference? Total war is fine, but nukes are not?
well err yes
If you die under a sea of cruise missiles or you die under a mushroom cloud, the outcome is the same.
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Say the West does it your way. Putin is allowed to keep what he has taken and Rump Ukraine is rendered officially neutral, do you think that's the end. He will try again, at least in Ukraine, and likely elsewhere. Where's your line when he's invaded Eastern Germany, they've pushed Putin back to the Donbass and he starts waving his nuclear willy again?
Say we have a 1 in 6 chance of nuclear war now, and we give in. In 2 years we end up in a similar situation with a 1 in 6 chance of nuclear war. Say we give in again, and 2 years from then we have another 1 in 6 chance etc etc. How long until one of those 1 in 6s goes off?
Alternatively, say we have a 1 in 6 chance of nuclear war and the west stands firm, we avoid rolling a 6 and Putin is diminished or dead. Our chances of nuclear war become 1 in 10000. We can quibble numbers but those are our options. Up front yours is safer, but in the long run it increases, rather than decreases the probability of nuclear war.
That is not what I am advocating, and it is boring to continuously reiterate this
I am seeking a sweet diplomatic spot where Putin is forever chastened and diminished, but he survives with some tiny trophy
It would be difficult. But nuclear war will be worse
Think King Charles would be wise not to approve this move. The MPs concerned are at liberty to withdraw their acceptance of peerages on this round and trust Truss to renominate them for peerages at a later date.
That triggers a thought.
Who officially nominated them? Yes, they are chosen by the outgoing PM but does he actually *officially* nominate them? I’d always assumed the King awards peerages based on the recommendation of the *current* PM
Possibly Truss could countermand the peerages, but that's not the ask. Truss wants the King to award the peerages but hold off the investiture because she lacks the authority to get the MPs to withdraw. She wants Charles to get her out of her party discipline hole.
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countries almost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
Yeah in Georgia the US threatened to rain tomahawks upon their army if they proceeded any further, so they didn't.
You haven't answered my question anyway - at what point does nuclear war become ok?
well i dont think it ever becomes ok - IF you scorn at that answer i suggest taking a walk this afternoon and looking at the humanity of life - old ,young, etc and asking if you really think its ever ok
What on earth are you talking about? If nuclear war is never ok - then what is stopping any country with nuclear weapons doing anything they want? If Russia invaded Germany, would we do nothing? What about Ireland?
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
Yes, the success of prohibition over the last 50 years is unarguably fail, fail fail, to plagerise a technique. Not just cannabis all drugs. Legalise. Tax. Distribution controls. Quality checks. Crime reduction. Free up Police time. Register of users for hard drugs. Addiction clinics and programs. Massive dissincentives for black market drugs.legalise and regulate prostitution while you are at it.
Do you regard Singapore's policy as a failure?
There are 2 ways we go with drugs 1. Decriminalise and regulate 2. The singapore model of death penalty for drug traffickers
A third model, often ignored, is to treat it the same as liberal opinion treats prostitution: stop blaming and shaming the supplier and start placing the big penalties on users.
We have got used to the assumption that suppliers/importers get 25 years and users, without whom suppliers could not exist, get nothing or a slap on the wrist. It needs questioning.
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countrialmost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
Yeah in Georgia the US threatened to rain tomahawks upon their army if they proceeded any further, so they didn't.
You haven't answered my question anyway - at what point does nuclear war become ok?
well i dont think it ever becomes ok - IF you scorn at that answer i suggest taking a walk this afternoon and looking at the humanity of life - old ,young, etc and asking if you really think its ever ok
What on earth are you talking about? If nuclear war is never ok - then what is stopping any country with nuclear weapons doing anything they want? If Russia invaded Germany, would we do nothing? What about Ireland?
again I just see your answer as unhinged .Sorry you scare me - A border dispute by Russian and Ukraine is not worth a nuclear war -
So the PB consensus on nuclear war has gone from No it's not going to happen, to Fuck it, if it's going to happen let's have it NOW and ASAP rather than in a few years time, yay bombs!
I'm not sure everyone would agree with this
You are giving them a choice between certain death in the next six weeks, or probable death in three to five years
99% of people would choose the latter, thanks very much. I quite like being alive and seeing my friends. And if I get to do that for another three years that would be cool
You’re going to give yourself an ulcer at this rate . There’s zip all we can do about it so my advice is just go into a bubble of denial and just enjoy yourself .
That at least does have some merit, as an approach
Trouble is I can't. I keep looking at the door. And there's a fucking great big wolf there. Howling
I’m not normally a chilled out bubble type of person but this nuclear situation bizarrely I’m just not giving too much thought to as Putin seems to like self -preservation and he’s not a religious fundamentalist in which case I would be more worried about it.
Question I'm asking is: why has he not responded to the Kerch bombing with a nuke?
A: Either because he's bluffing or he's not being allowed too.
It's because he still has too much to lose, and he will always have too much to lose to use nuclear weapons in a futile attempt to prevent the failure of a war of conquest.
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
Yes, the success of prohibition over the last 50 years is unarguably fail, fail fail, to plagerise a technique. Not just cannabis all drugs. Legalise. Tax. Distribution controls. Quality checks. Crime reduction. Free up Police time. Register of users for hard drugs. Addiction clinics and programs. Massive dissincentives for black market drugs.legalise and regulate prostitution while you are at it.
Do you regard Singapore's policy as a failure?
There are 2 ways we go with drugs 1. Decriminalise and regulate 2. The singapore model of death penalty for drug traffickers
A third model, often ignored, is to treat it the same as liberal opinion treats prostitution: stop blaming and shaming the supplier and start placing the big penalties on users.
We have got used to the assumption that suppliers/importers get 25 years and users, without whom suppliers could not exist, get nothing or a slap on the wrist. It needs questioning.
That third model was tried in America as the War on Drugs and was a complete failure that ended with the largest incarcerated population in the world, increased profits for dealers and a generation of kids raised without fathers.
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countrialmost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
Yeah in Georgia the US threatened to rain tomahawks upon their army if they proceeded any further, so they didn't.
You haven't answered my question anyway - at what point does nuclear war become ok?
well i dont think it ever becomes ok - IF you scorn at that answer i suggest taking a walk this afternoon and looking at the humanity of life - old ,young, etc and asking if you really think its ever ok
What on earth are you talking about? If nuclear war is never ok - then what is stopping any country with nuclear weapons doing anything they want? If Russia invaded Germany, would we do nothing? What about Ireland?
again I just see your answer as unhinged .Sorry you scare me - A border dispute by Russian and Ukraine is not worth a nuclear war -
If this is your definition of a mere 'border dispute' you're right we don't want to see a full scale war with added genocide.
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countries almost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
"Everybody forgot about (Ukraine 2014, Georgia)"
No, we did not forget. Or Litvinenko. Or Salisbury. Or Syria.
And your argument is sort of the point: Putin's Russia has imperial fascism at its heart: he will keep on interfering, and invading, neighbouring countries until he has resuscitated something akin to the USSR. If *you* forgot about them, that's your issue: the sanctions put on Russia after 2014 shows the international community did not forget, either.
In fact, those sanctions should have been much greater, and we should have applied more pressure on Putin back then. But your sort of attitude prevailed, and we descended further into the mire.
So my question to you is this: if Russia gains Ukraine, when would you intervene? When he gets Estonia? Lithuania? Poland? Or will you back down when he willy-waves his nukes about? And when other countries also start nuclear blackmail?
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countries almost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
Yeah in Georgia the US threatened to rain tomahawks upon their army if they proceeded any further, so they didn't.
You haven't answered my question anyway - at what point does nuclear war become ok?
well i dont think it ever becomes ok - IF you scorn at that answer i suggest taking a walk this afternoon and looking at the humanity of life - old ,young, etc and asking if you really think its ever ok
What on earth are you talking about? If nuclear war is never ok - then what is stopping any country with nuclear weapons doing anything they want? If Russia invaded Germany, would we do nothing? What about Ireland?
Fuck Ireland. They wouldn’t die for us
If you consider their tax policy and their neutrality policy, Ireland is perhaps the most selfish country in the Western world.
So the PB consensus on nuclear war has gone from No it's not going to happen, to Fuck it, if it's going to happen let's have it NOW and ASAP rather than in a few years time, yay bombs!
I'm not sure everyone would agree with this
You are giving them a choice between certain death in the next six weeks, or probable death in three to five years
99% of people would choose the latter, thanks very much. I quite like being alive and seeing my friends. And if I get to do that for another three years that would be cool
You’re going to give yourself an ulcer at this rate . There’s zip all we can do about it so my advice is just go into a bubble of denial and just enjoy yourself .
That at least does have some merit, as an approach
Trouble is I can't. I keep looking at the door. And there's a fucking great big wolf there. Howling
I’m not normally a chilled out bubble type of person but this nuclear situation bizarrely I’m just not giving too much thought to as Putin seems to like self -preservation and he’s not a religious fundamentalist in which case I would be more worried about it.
Question I'm asking is: why has he not responded to the Kerch bombing with a nuke?
A: Either because he's bluffing or he's not being allowed too.
Nuclear radiation fallout may end up in Russia if the climate is in a bad mood.
C: Letting off nuclear weapons makes no sense for the Russian Government because it leaves them in a worse situation than they were before. It won't get them very far in the ground war but is likely to lead to a serious rupture with the Chinese, upon whom they are now critically dependent.
Regardless of whether the Ukrainians manage to win outright or there's a partition of territory along a ceasefire line a la India/Pakistan, the best way forward for Putin remains blaming Russian failures on the combined effects of American and NATO support for Ukraine, and the failures of various inadequate underlings. A propaganda campaign on state TV and a purge leave him and his country intact, to brood and plot revenge. A global thermonuclear holocaust doesn't. He can't indulge his Peter the Great fantasies if both he and his people are dead.
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Say the West does it your way. Putin is allowed to keep what he has taken and Rump Ukraine is rendered officially neutral, do you think that's the end. He will try again, at least in Ukraine, and likely elsewhere. Where's your line when he's invaded Eastern Germany, they've pushed Putin back to the Donbass and he starts waving his nuclear willy again?
Say we have a 1 in 6 chance of nuclear war now, and we give in. In 2 years we end up in a similar situation with a 1 in 6 chance of nuclear war. Say we give in again, and 2 years from then we have another 1 in 6 chance etc etc. How long until one of those 1 in 6s goes off?
Alternatively, say we have a 1 in 6 chance of nuclear war and the west stands firm, we avoid rolling a 6 and Putin is diminished or dead. Our chances of nuclear war become 1 in 10000. We can quibble numbers but those are our options. Up front yours is safer, but in the long run it increases, rather than decreases the probability of nuclear war.
That is not what I am advocating, and it is boring to continuously reiterate this
I am seeking a sweet diplomatic spot where Putin is forever chastened and diminished, but he survives with some tiny trophy
It would be difficult. But nuclear war will be worse
We let him survive as President of Russia. That's his offramp.
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countries almost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
"Everybody forgot about (Ukraine 2014, Georgia)"
No, we did not forget. Or Litvinenko. Or Salisbury. Or Syria.
And your argument is sort of the point: Putin's Russia has imperial fascism at its heart: he will keep on interfering, and invading, neighbouring countries until he has resuscitated something akin to the USSR. If *you* forgot about them, that's your issue: the sanctions put on Russia after 2014 shows the international community did not forget, either.
In fact, those sanctions should have been much greater, and we should have applied more pressure on Putin back then. But your sort of attitude prevailed, and we descended further into the mire.
So my question to you is this: if Russia gains Ukraine, when would you intervene? When he gets Estonia? Lithuania? Poland? Or will you back down when he willy-waves his nukes about? And when other countries also start nuclear blackmail?
Your position is immoral and unworkable.
yours is immoral (and deranged ) if you think nuclear war is worth it because of this. Dividing the world up and countries up into goodies and baddies and playing "war" is something I grew out of about 12
Think King Charles would be wise not to approve this move. The MPs concerned are at liberty to withdraw their acceptance of peerages on this round and trust Truss to renominate them for peerages at a later date.
That triggers a thought.
Who officially nominated them? Yes, they are chosen by the outgoing PM but does he actually *officially* nominate them? I’d always assumed the King awards peerages based on the recommendation of the *current* PM
Possibly Truss could countermand the peerages, but that's not the ask. Truss wants the King to award the peerages but hold off the investiture because she lacks the authority to get the MPs to withdraw. She wants Charles to get her out of her party discipline hole.
There is no investiture with a peerage. The announcement is simply made and the person takes their seat at their and the House’s convenience. The Crown plays no role.
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Say the West does it your way. Putin is allowed to keep what he has taken and Rump Ukraine is rendered officially neutral, do you think that's the end. He will try again, at least in Ukraine, and likely elsewhere. Where's your line when he's invaded Eastern Germany, they've pushed Putin back to the Donbass and he starts waving his nuclear willy again?
Say we have a 1 in 6 chance of nuclear war now, and we give in. In 2 years we end up in a similar situation with a 1 in 6 chance of nuclear war. Say we give in again, and 2 years from then we have another 1 in 6 chance etc etc. How long until one of those 1 in 6s goes off?
Alternatively, say we have a 1 in 6 chance of nuclear war and the west stands firm, we avoid rolling a 6 and Putin is diminished or dead. Our chances of nuclear war become 1 in 10000. We can quibble numbers but those are our options. Up front yours is safer, but in the long run it increases, rather than decreases the probability of nuclear war.
That is not what I am advocating, and it is boring to continuously reiterate this
I am seeking a sweet diplomatic spot where Putin is forever chastened and diminished, but he survives with some tiny trophy
It would be difficult. But nuclear war will be worse
We let him survive as President of Russia. That's his offramp.
Which is pretty much Biden's policy. Support Ukraine just enough so it pushes Russia back, but hold back plenty of escalation options if needed.
Are we really still doing this? Elon is deep down the rabbit hole on this. And so it seems are others.
No. I think there is a real risk of a nuclear escalation. I’d have it at;
5% major escalation 8-10% limited escalation, ultimately contained.
That’s fucking scary, whichever way you slice it.
Source: I’ve made decent money predicting political outcomes. And did an international relations undergrad degree, which covered a fair amount of political strategy/MAD shit.
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countries almost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
"Everybody forgot about (Ukraine 2014, Georgia)"
No, we did not forget. Or Litvinenko. Or Salisbury. Or Syria.
And your argument is sort of the point: Putin's Russia has imperial fascism at its heart: he will keep on interfering, and invading, neighbouring countries until he has resuscitated something akin to the USSR. If *you* forgot about them, that's your issue: the sanctions put on Russia after 2014 shows the international community did not forget, either.
In fact, those sanctions should have been much greater, and we should have applied more pressure on Putin back then. But your sort of attitude prevailed, and we descended further into the mire.
So my question to you is this: if Russia gains Ukraine, when would you intervene? When he gets Estonia? Lithuania? Poland? Or will you back down when he willy-waves his nukes about? And when other countries also start nuclear blackmail?
Your position is immoral and unworkable.
yours is immoral (and deranged ) if you think nuclear war is worth it because of this
With respect, I think you are missing the point. The person who thinks avoiding defeat in Ukraine might be worth nuclear war is Vladimir Putin. Nobody in the west is suggesting launching one.
So if you say that he should be given Ukraine in response to nuclear war you are saying, in effect, that nuclear war is worth doing. Because it gets you what you want.
As it happens, dodgy pseudo-Bayesian equations aside, it isn't likely. If he let the Kerch Bridge go down without a nuclear response it's hard to see what will actually trigger one (unless it really was an accident or an internal act of terrorism, but the bombing of Zaporizhia suggests he doesn't think it was).
He needs to keep making the threats as much as anything because he's got nothing else that might work now. This war is lost, and he knows it. Even if he can keep Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk the humiliation of Russia was completed with the fall of Lyman.
Think King Charles would be wise not to approve this move. The MPs concerned are at liberty to withdraw their acceptance of peerages on this round and trust Truss to renominate them for peerages at a later date.
That triggers a thought.
Who officially nominated them? Yes, they are chosen by the outgoing PM but does he actually *officially* nominate them? I’d always assumed the King awards peerages based on the recommendation of the *current* PM
Possibly Truss could countermand the peerages, but that's not the ask. Truss wants the King to award the peerages but hold off the investiture because she lacks the authority to get the MPs to withdraw. She wants Charles to get her out of her party discipline hole.
There is no investiture with a peerage. The announcement is simply made and the person takes their seat at their and the House’s convenience. The Crown plays no role.
But presumably there needs to be some sort of sanction for the delay, otherwise Truss wouldn't need to ask the King for permission. Maybe these MPs could filibuster? Take two years to decide they will be called Lady Dorries of the Bonkbuster. At what point in this process are they expected to step down from their Commons membership, which is the key here?
My Morocco/Ireland/Portugal nuclear plan is predicated on nuclear winter not being a big deal in the end.
It’s a fascinating topic and one I had to study back in the day in the climatology module of my undergrad degree. Things haven’t actually moved on much since then.
The nuclear winter effect is from soot injected into the stratosphere by firestorms after the initial blasts. Either cities consumed by fire, like Hiroshima, or wildfires in forests. Not from dust created by the blast.
It is therefore very dependent on 2 things: 1 the time of year the war happens (much better in autumn or winter when there’s wetter ground and less to burn), and 2 the fabric of cities. Concrete and asphalt cities are better than wooden ones. The latest modelling studies are essentially saying the same things, and making the same controversial assumptions, as those I remember studying in the 1990s.
The Wikipedia page on nuclear winter is excellent. I recommend reading the whole thing. It could determine whether you get on that plane or just throw yourself at the centre of the first blast https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter
George Osborne tells @afneil there's a potential for a Tory wipe out that just wasn't on the cards a few months ago “The political experiment has blown up the chemistry lab and everyone’s sort of standing there in the wreckage.” https://twitter.com/Channel4/status/1579116975715852288
Think King Charles would be wise not to approve this move. The MPs concerned are at liberty to withdraw their acceptance of peerages on this round and trust Truss to renominate them for peerages at a later date.
That triggers a thought.
Who officially nominated them? Yes, they are chosen by the outgoing PM but does he actually *officially* nominate them? I’d always assumed the King awards peerages based on the recommendation of the *current* PM
Possibly Truss could countermand the peerages, but that's not the ask. Truss wants the King to award the peerages but hold off the investiture because she lacks the authority to get the MPs to withdraw. She wants Charles to get her out of her party discipline hole.
There is no investiture with a peerage. The announcement is simply made and the person takes their seat at their and the House’s convenience. The Crown plays no role.
And automatically vacates their seat in the Commons. As Benn did, even though he never took up his seat in the lords.
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Say the West does it your way. Putin is allowed to keep what he has taken and Rump Ukraine is rendered officially neutral, do you think that's the end. He will try again, at least in Ukraine, and likely elsewhere. Where's your line when he's invaded Eastern Germany, they've pushed Putin back to the Donbass and he starts waving his nuclear willy again?
Say we have a 1 in 6 chance of nuclear war now, and we give in. In 2 years we end up in a similar situation with a 1 in 6 chance of nuclear war. Say we give in again, and 2 years from then we have another 1 in 6 chance etc etc. How long until one of those 1 in 6s goes off?
Alternatively, say we have a 1 in 6 chance of nuclear war and the west stands firm, we avoid rolling a 6 and Putin is diminished or dead. Our chances of nuclear war become 1 in 10000. We can quibble numbers but those are our options. Up front yours is safer, but in the long run it increases, rather than decreases the probability of nuclear war.
That is not what I am advocating, and it is boring to continuously reiterate this
I am seeking a sweet diplomatic spot where Putin is forever chastened and diminished, but he survives with some tiny trophy
It would be difficult. But nuclear war will be worse
But say it is not only difficult, but that the diplomatic g-spot doesn't exist. I know you'll be bored of the comparison, but did such a spot exist between 1933-1939 that would have left Hitler in charge but so chastened that he would never again have contemplated war? I'm not sure that one did. If you are wrong, and such a solution is impossible, then my point stands and nuclear war is more likely rather than less and we'll just keep rolling the dice every couple of years.
My Morocco/Ireland/Portugal nuclear plan is predicated on nuclear winter not being a big deal in the end.
It’s a fascinating topic and one I had to study back in the day in the climatology module of my undergrad degree. Things haven’t actually moved on much since then.
The nuclear winter effect is from soot injected into the stratosphere by firestorms after the initial blasts. Either cities consumed by fire, like Hiroshima, or wildfires in forests. Not from dust created by the blast.
It is therefore very dependent on 2 things: 1 the time of year the war happens (much better in autumn or winter when there’s wetter ground and less to burn), and 2 the fabric of cities. Concrete and asphalt cities are better than wooden ones. The latest modelling studies are essentially saying the same things, and making the same controversial assumptions, as those I remember studying in the 1990s.
The Wikipedia page on nuclear winter is excellent. I recommend reading the whole thing. It could determine whether you get on that plane or just throw yourself at the centre of the first blast https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter
My post nuclear attack plan involves a bottle of Japanese Whisky and a large collection of sleeping pills.
Hi, sorry to bother you but this is one of my occasional postings. Some of you may recall the first in my Ukraine War series (see [1]). The sequel - yes, "Ukraine War II" - depicted the Russian invasion as if it was in the UK instead of Ukraine, depicting events in recognisable British locations transposed from their UKR equivalents. I can't speak for the quality of the writing but (except for one flourish referring to an incident in "Red Storm Rising") it was my best efforts at getting the areas and events right
It was written up and sent to OGH and his sons in August and was accepted. Unfortunately the election of Truss and the death of the Monarch put it on the backburner and the recent Ukraine advances make it out of date.
To prevent it being lost, I am making it available to you via this posting. If you want a copy of the Word document, and its accompanying concordance explaining the references, let me know and I'll PM you a copy.
I will post this reminder once a day until Monday 10th, and I will host a Q&A on Tuesday 11th in the unlikely event anybody wants to discuss it.
I have opened up a discussion place with the article attached: saves emailing it to all and helps me retain anonymity. I have added @StillWaters to it: I assume you got the notification?
Hi, sorry to bother you but this is one of my occasional postings. Some of you may recall the first in my Ukraine War series (see [1]). The sequel - yes, "Ukraine War II" - depicted the Russian invasion as if it was in the UK instead of Ukraine, depicting events in recognisable British locations transposed from their UKR equivalents. I can't speak for the quality of the writing but (except for one flourish referring to an incident in "Red Storm Rising") it was my best efforts at getting the areas and events right
It was written up and sent to OGH and his sons in August and was accepted. Unfortunately the election of Truss and the death of the Monarch put it on the backburner and the recent Ukraine advances make it out of date.
To prevent it being lost, I am making it available to you via this posting. If you want a copy of the Word document, and its accompanying concordance explaining the references, let me know and I'll PM you a copy.
I will post this reminder once a day until Monday 10th, and I will host a Q&A on Tuesday 11th in the unlikely event anybody wants to discuss it.
I have opened up a discussion place with the article attached: saves emailing it to all and helps me retain anonymity. I have added @StillWaters to it: I assume you got the notification?
Are we really still doing this? Elon is deep down the rabbit hole on this. And so it seems are others.
Mate, you believe in ALIENS
I do yes
So you believe we are being visited by aliens, but the idea we might tip into nuclear war is “totally batshit down-the-rabbit-hole crazy”
The prospects for nuclear war have increased in 2022 most definitely. Because of the heightened tension, the risk is higher of one side misreading data and thinking the other side has already launched.
I do not judge that the risk of a a deliberate first strike by any nation on any other has much changed, with the arguments rehashed many times over these months.
As for aliens, I have still not seen a better explanation for some of the public data and governmental behaviour. If it’s not aliens, then there’s a reasonable chance instead that the US have ultratech that would make any nuclear war a pretty one sided affair. But I don’t really see the relevance of that to judging whether the Federation of Russia is another to launch nuclear weapons on anger.
Think King Charles would be wise not to approve this move. The MPs concerned are at liberty to withdraw their acceptance of peerages on this round and trust Truss to renominate them for peerages at a later date.
That triggers a thought.
Who officially nominated them? Yes, they are chosen by the outgoing PM but does he actually *officially* nominate them? I’d always assumed the King awards peerages based on the recommendation of the *current* PM
Possibly Truss could countermand the peerages, but that's not the ask. Truss wants the King to award the peerages but hold off the investiture because she lacks the authority to get the MPs to withdraw. She wants Charles to get her out of her party discipline hole.
There is no investiture with a peerage. The announcement is simply made and the person takes their seat at their and the House’s convenience. The Crown plays no role.
But presumably there needs to be some sort of sanction for the delay, otherwise Truss wouldn't need to ask the King for permission. Maybe these MPs could filibuster? Take two years to decide they will be called Lady Dorries of the Bonkbuster. At what point in this process are they expected to step down from their Commons membership, which is the key here?
I think membership of the HoL automatically expires if you don't show up for a year. Is that the issue here?
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countrialmost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
Yeah in Georgia the US threatened to rain tomahawks upon their army if they proceeded any further, so they didn't.
You haven't answered my question anyway - at what point does nuclear war become ok?
well i dont think it ever becomes ok - IF you scorn at that answer i suggest taking a walk this afternoon and looking at the humanity of life - old ,young, etc and asking if you really think its ever ok
What on earth are you talking about? If nuclear war is never ok - then what is stopping any country with nuclear weapons doing anything they want? If Russia invaded Germany, would we do nothing? What about Ireland?
again I just see your answer as unhinged .Sorry you scare me - A border dispute by Russian and Ukraine is not worth a nuclear war -
I think you're missing the quite reasonable point @Gallowgate is making - at what point is the line drawn?
If Putin points the nukes at Britain and says "you have 12 hours to surrender unconditionally or the nuclear bombs rain down", do we say "even though we could retaliate, nuclear war is never ok, so we surrender?"
Hi, sorry to bother you but this is one of my occasional postings. Some of you may recall the first in my Ukraine War series (see [1]). The sequel - yes, "Ukraine War II" - depicted the Russian invasion as if it was in the UK instead of Ukraine, depicting events in recognisable British locations transposed from their UKR equivalents. I can't speak for the quality of the writing but (except for one flourish referring to an incident in "Red Storm Rising") it was my best efforts at getting the areas and events right
It was written up and sent to OGH and his sons in August and was accepted. Unfortunately the election of Truss and the death of the Monarch put it on the backburner and the recent Ukraine advances make it out of date.
To prevent it being lost, I am making it available to you via this posting. If you want a copy of the Word document, and its accompanying concordance explaining the references, let me know and I'll PM you a copy.
I will post this reminder once a day until Monday 10th, and I will host a Q&A on Tuesday 11th in the unlikely event anybody wants to discuss it.
I have opened up a discussion place with the article attached: saves emailing it to all and helps me retain anonymity. I have added @StillWaters to it: I assume you got the notification?
I would be interested in this also.
@LostPassword has been added: I assume you got the notification.
Remember, TRUMP WAS RIGHT ABOUT LAB LEAK. And he was right about Germany and Nordstream
"Trump on Ukraine: "We must demand the immediate negotiation of a peaceful end to the war in Ukraine or we will end up in World War Three. And there will be nothing left of our planet -- all because stupid people didn't have a clue... They don't understand the power of nuclear.""
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countries almost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
Yeah in Georgia the US threatened to rain tomahawks upon their army if they proceeded any further, so they didn't.
You haven't answered my question anyway - at what point does nuclear war become ok?
well i dont think it ever becomes ok - IF you scorn at that answer i suggest taking a walk this afternoon and looking at the humanity of life - old ,young, etc and asking if you really think its ever ok
What on earth are you talking about? If nuclear war is never ok - then what is stopping any country with nuclear weapons doing anything they want? If Russia invaded Germany, would we do nothing? What about Ireland?
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countrialmost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
Yeah in Georgia the US threatened to rain tomahawks upon their army if they proceeded any further, so they didn't.
You haven't answered my question anyway - at what point does nuclear war become ok?
well i dont think it ever becomes ok - IF you scorn at that answer i suggest taking a walk this afternoon and looking at the humanity of life - old ,young, etc and asking if you really think its ever ok
What on earth are you talking about? If nuclear war is never ok - then what is stopping any country with nuclear weapons doing anything they want? If Russia invaded Germany, would we do nothing? What about Ireland?
again I just see your answer as unhinged .Sorry you scare me - A border dispute by Russian and Ukraine is not worth a nuclear war -
"Home Secretary Suella Braverman considers upgrading cannabis to class A amid concerns over evidence linking it to psychosis, cancer and birth defects"
Are we really still doing this? Elon is deep down the rabbit hole on this. And so it seems are others.
Mate, you believe in ALIENS
I do yes
So you believe we are being visited by aliens, but the idea we might tip into nuclear war is “totally batshit down-the-rabbit-hole crazy”
The prospects for nuclear war have increased in 2022 most definitely. Because of the heightened tension, the risk is higher of one side misreading data and thinking the other side has already launched.
I do not judge that the risk of a a deliberate first strike by any nation on any other has much changed, with the arguments rehashed many times over these months.
As for aliens, I have still not seen a better explanation for some of the public data and governmental behaviour. If it’s not aliens, then there’s a reasonable chance instead that the US have ultratech that would make any nuclear war a pretty one sided affair. But I don’t really see the relevance of that to judging whether the Federation of Russia is another to launch nuclear weapons on anger.
I'm trying to assess why one theory - we are now at serious risk of nuclear war - is "rabbit hole" crazy stuff, in your eyes, and yet ALIENS is a totally reasonable theorem, indeed true
I don't see how you can believe those two things simultaneously without your brain exploding from cognitive dissonance
And you know I am someone who endorses your open-mindedness on the UFO stuff. There is still a mystery to be resolved, even if I am unsure what it is. And they might even be linked!
The fact is, serious people are now making serious predictions of the likelihood of a nuke going off. I've seen it put at 7%, 8%, 10%, now we hear "15% chance of total nuclear war" from the MIT prof. Musk hasn't given his maths, but it seems he is alarmed
George Osborne tells @afneil there's a potential for a Tory wipe out that just wasn't on the cards a few months ago “The political experiment has blown up the chemistry lab and everyone’s sort of standing there in the wreckage.” https://twitter.com/Channel4/status/1579116975715852288
A 1 in 6 chance that human civilisation is about to be extinguished
"Many people have asked me what I think the odds are of an imminent major US-Russia nuclear war. My current estimate is about the same as losing in Russian roulette: one in six. The goal of this post is to explain how I arrived at this estimate. Please forgive its cold and analytic nature despite the emotionally charged topic; I'm trying not to be biased by hopes, fears or wishful thinking. "
its hard to be precise with these things but the odds feel to me about right , at this lebvel of probability we really need to step back and do what we can at our end even if it means Putin gets away with it
And now you will get the Combined Sofa Militia of PB, led by General @TSE and Corporal @BartholomewRoberts calling you a "fucking appeaser"
Please, I'd be a Marshal, not some mere general.
Plus, you are a fucking appeaser.
Your panty wetting routine is amusing, go watch Threads again.
It's not amusing in the least, it's deeply bloody tedious.
Repeating "we're all going to die because some bellend on Twitter says so" on an endless loop does not constitute comedy.
I get that you don't want to think about the howling wolf at the door, nonetheless there is, I am afraid, a wolf howling at the door
No there isn’t, it is just that same damn spotty kid running about shouting again, just like last time.
"Home Secretary Suella Braverman considers upgrading cannabis to class A amid concerns over evidence linking it to psychosis, cancer and birth defects"
"Home Secretary Suella Braverman considers upgrading cannabis to class A amid concerns over evidence linking it to psychosis, cancer and birth defects"
Hi, sorry to bother you but this is one of my occasional postings. Some of you may recall the first in my Ukraine War series (see [1]). The sequel - yes, "Ukraine War II" - depicted the Russian invasion as if it was in the UK instead of Ukraine, depicting events in recognisable British locations transposed from their UKR equivalents. I can't speak for the quality of the writing but (except for one flourish referring to an incident in "Red Storm Rising") it was my best efforts at getting the areas and events right
It was written up and sent to OGH and his sons in August and was accepted. Unfortunately the election of Truss and the death of the Monarch put it on the backburner and the recent Ukraine advances make it out of date.
To prevent it being lost, I am making it available to you via this posting. If you want a copy of the Word document, and its accompanying concordance explaining the references, let me know and I'll PM you a copy.
I will post this reminder once a day until Monday 10th, and I will host a Q&A on Tuesday 11th in the unlikely event anybody wants to discuss it.
I have opened up a discussion place with the article attached: saves emailing it to all and helps me retain anonymity. I have added @StillWaters to it: I assume you got the notification?
"Home Secretary Suella Braverman considers upgrading cannabis to class A amid concerns over evidence linking it to psychosis, cancer and birth defects"
"Home Secretary Suella Braverman considers upgrading cannabis to class A amid concerns over evidence linking it to psychosis, cancer and birth defects"
Remember, TRUMP WAS RIGHT ABOUT LAB LEAK. And he was right about Germany and Nordstream
"Trump on Ukraine: "We must demand the immediate negotiation of a peaceful end to the war in Ukraine or we will end up in World War Three. And there will be nothing left of our planet -- all because stupid people didn't have a clue... They don't understand the power of nuclear.""
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countries almost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
"Everybody forgot about (Ukraine 2014, Georgia)"
No, we did not forget. Or Litvinenko. Or Salisbury. Or Syria.
And your argument is sort of the point: Putin's Russia has imperial fascism at its heart: he will keep on interfering, and invading, neighbouring countries until he has resuscitated something akin to the USSR. If *you* forgot about them, that's your issue: the sanctions put on Russia after 2014 shows the international community did not forget, either.
In fact, those sanctions should have been much greater, and we should have applied more pressure on Putin back then. But your sort of attitude prevailed, and we descended further into the mire.
So my question to you is this: if Russia gains Ukraine, when would you intervene? When he gets Estonia? Lithuania? Poland? Or will you back down when he willy-waves his nukes about? And when other countries also start nuclear blackmail?
Your position is immoral and unworkable.
yours is immoral (and deranged ) if you think nuclear war is worth it because of this. Dividing the world up and countries up into goodies and baddies and playing "war" is something I grew out of about 12
Of course nuclear war is hideous. But you fail to say how your approach makes the chances of nuclear war in the future less likely. In my eyes (and those of many others), capitulation today makes the chances of nuclear war in the future much higher - and with a greater range of potential blackmailers.
Are you seriously saying that Russia is not acting as a 'baddy' ? How do you view Hitler's Germany in 1938?
A 1 in 6 chance that human civilisation is about to be extinguished
"Many people have asked me what I think the odds are of an imminent major US-Russia nuclear war. My current estimate is about the same as losing in Russian roulette: one in six. The goal of this post is to explain how I arrived at this estimate. Please forgive its cold and analytic nature despite the emotionally charged topic; I'm trying not to be biased by hopes, fears or wishful thinking. "
its hard to be precise with these things but the odds feel to me about right , at this lebvel of probability we really need to step back and do what we can at our end even if it means Putin gets away with it
And now you will get the Combined Sofa Militia of PB, led by General @TSE and Corporal @Bartholomew,LeRoberts calling you a "fucking appeaser"
Please, I'd be a Marshal, not some mere general.
Plus, you are a fucking appeaser.
Your panty wetting routine is amusing, go watch Threads again.
It's not amusing in the least, it's deeply bloody tedious.
Repeating "we're all going to die because some bellend on Twitter says so" on an endless loop does not constitute comedy.
Given how wrong Leon has been on so many things it is reassuring to know he is convinced we're all going to die in a nuclear holocaust kind of guarantees we won't.
Actually for all his OTT (but entertaining ) drama ,Leon is very insightful about things that matter
You mean his comments about Covid in March 2020 when he fled his home demanding lockdown and quoting some projections that we'd all die from Covid-19 by October 2020?
I believe Leon (or an incarnation of Leon) did advise to sell any shares before the FTSE crashed becasue of covid
No, that was me. He posted shortly after the crash started that he had done so. Whether this was true, or merely more of his small-dick-syndrome boasting, can be left as an exercise for the reader.
Absurd article by TSE. Every PM announces a list of peers after they resign and it is up to the Monarch to appoint them not the next PM. Far from damaging the monarchy all Truss annoying Boris would do is shift him and his supporters to the Sunsk camp which via Shapps and Gove is already plotting to remove the PM. If Dorries has her peerage rejected, despite being a Truss supporter from the outset, that would shift her too to the rebels camp.
On the matter of proroguation of Parliament, personally I don't think King Charles would have agreed to it unlike his mother. While he knows he is a constitutional monarch he also knows he can use his role to uphold the constitution and as the Supreme Court confirmed he would have been right on that
But if he upholds the constitution by disobeying his PM he has screwed up because he has overthrown the constitution by disobeying his PM.
No he hasn't you ignoramus. Our constitution is based on Crown in Parliament not PM in Parliament.
The PM is merely the King's chief minister, nothing more
Insults, insults. But you are going on primitive and ancient theory. It's actual political *reality* I am thinking of.
Actual political reality is our constitution is still based on Crown in Parliament. The King appoints the PM and their government, the King can dismiss them to if they no longer retain the confidence of Parliament or try and ignore Parliament
But you've basically just admitted that QE2 was wrong to obey her PM when he prorogated parliament. So why do we have this expensive monarchy business if it goes wrong at critical times anyway?
It doesn't go wrong, it avoids an equally expensive and divisive party political head of state without the tourist revenue. It is also up to each monarch how they interpret the constitution and their powers in terms of enforcing it over the actions of the PM in terms of the PM's relationship with Parliament
"equally expensive"!?
"equally [...] divisive"
Either prorogation was right or wrong - you are trying to have it both ways to try and defend the Crown you value more than every so-called subject in this so-called united kingdom.
FWIW I think it probably is worth negotiating with Putin. The totally destroyed Hitler scenarios are rare. But for Ukraine's sake and ours, any concessions to Putin should be at a high price, Maybe Russia keeps Crimea if it behaves and removes itself entirely from the rest of Ukraine and has no future say on what that country does. Giving up large chunks of Ukraine for no Russian commitment, and with the nuclear threat intact, would be a bad deal indeed.
Remember, TRUMP WAS RIGHT ABOUT LAB LEAK. And he was right about Germany and Nordstream
"Trump on Ukraine: "We must demand the immediate negotiation of a peaceful end to the war in Ukraine or we will end up in World War Three. And there will be nothing left of our planet -- all because stupid people didn't have a clue... They don't understand the power of nuclear.""
I think Leon is right to suggest that we listen to Trump, in that Trump is a direct conduit for Putin's threats/talking points.
We will get no clearer version of Putin's message because Trump is incapable of creative embellishment.
What we then choose to do with the knowledge of that threat is up to us on, say, the appeasement/belligerence axis.
Trump was right about Germany and Nordstream. Trump was right about Lab Leak
We are in danger of going to nuclear war because people on Twitter dislike Donald Trump so always take the opposite position to him: on anything
Trump is also the only living ex president not to benefit from the daily briefing note, so don’t assume he has any special classified info insight on this. Which he did on lab leak. And which anyone with a brain also concluded about Nordstream even without access to classified briefings and the best foreign policy advice.
There are, as most of you know, Americans who take the threat of nuclear war seriously. (Though fewer, as far I can tell, than there were decades ago*.)
They show it by preparing for nuclear war, by moving out of large cities (or even to other nations), by stockpiling supplies of food, and, sometimes by building fallout shelters. Or even doing something as simple as buying some potassium iodide pills.
If someone hasn't moved out of a large city, and done some of the other things to prepare for nuclear war, I wonder whether they are really worried about nuclear war.
(*There are fewer in part because of the great reduction in the number of nuclear warheads, achieved by negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union, and its successor, Russia. See, for example, the graph showing those reductions in this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon#Governance,_control,_and_law Sadly, our last two presidents, Trump and Biden, have not been able to continue that reduction, though one must admit that Putin and Xi don't seem to have much desire for further reductions, either.)
FWIW I think it probably is worth negotiating with Putin. The totally destroyed Hitler scenarios are rare. But for Ukraine's sake and ours, any concessions to Putin should be at a high price, Maybe Russia keeps Crimea if it behaves and removes itself entirely from the rest of Ukraine and has no future say on what that country does. Giving up large chunks of Ukraine for no other commitment, with the nuclear threat intact, would be a bad deal indeed.
I agree. However the problem is the same as with Hitler in 1938: you cannot trust him. What can he say or do to convince Ukraine, and the rest of the world, that he will keep his word and not find an excuse to attack Ukraine or a.n.other country in five years?
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
Yes, the success of prohibition over the last 50 years is unarguably fail, fail fail, to plagerise a technique. Not just cannabis all drugs. Legalise. Tax. Distribution controls. Quality checks. Crime reduction. Free up Police time. Register of users for hard drugs. Addiction clinics and programs. Massive dissincentives for black market drugs.legalise and regulate prostitution while you are at it.
Do you regard Singapore's policy as a failure?
There are 2 ways we go with drugs 1. Decriminalise and regulate 2. The singapore model of death penalty for drug traffickers
A third model, often ignored, is to treat it the same as liberal opinion treats prostitution: stop blaming and shaming the supplier and start placing the big penalties on users.
We have got used to the assumption that suppliers/importers get 25 years and users, without whom suppliers could not exist, get nothing or a slap on the wrist. It needs questioning.
That third model was tried in America as the War on Drugs and was a complete failure that ended with the largest incarcerated population in the world, increased profits for dealers and a generation of kids raised without fathers.
Fair enough. But in the matter of drugs (I am a reluctant decriminaliser) there are only bad and worse solutions. There is currently no prospect of a good solution. So criticism of itself demonstrates not much.
Hi, sorry to bother you but this is one of my occasional postings. Some of you may recall the first in my Ukraine War series (see [1]). The sequel - yes, "Ukraine War II" - depicted the Russian invasion as if it was in the UK instead of Ukraine, depicting events in recognisable British locations transposed from their UKR equivalents. I can't speak for the quality of the writing but (except for one flourish referring to an incident in "Red Storm Rising") it was my best efforts at getting the areas and events right
It was written up and sent to OGH and his sons in August and was accepted. Unfortunately the election of Truss and the death of the Monarch put it on the backburner and the recent Ukraine advances make it out of date.
To prevent it being lost, I am making it available to you via this posting. If you want a copy of the Word document, and its accompanying concordance explaining the references, let me know and I'll PM you a copy.
I will post this reminder once a day until Monday 10th, and I will host a Q&A on Tuesday 11th in the unlikely event anybody wants to discuss it.
I have opened up a discussion place with the article attached: saves emailing it to all and helps me retain anonymity. I have added @StillWaters to it: I assume you got the notification?
A 1 in 6 chance that human civilisation is about to be extinguished
"Many people have asked me what I think the odds are of an imminent major US-Russia nuclear war. My current estimate is about the same as losing in Russian roulette: one in six. The goal of this post is to explain how I arrived at this estimate. Please forgive its cold and analytic nature despite the emotionally charged topic; I'm trying not to be biased by hopes, fears or wishful thinking. "
its hard to be precise with these things but the odds feel to me about right , at this lebvel of probability we really need to step back and do what we can at our end even if it means Putin gets away with it
And now you will get the Combined Sofa Militia of PB, led by General @TSE and Corporal @Bartholomew,LeRoberts calling you a "fucking appeaser"
Please, I'd be a Marshal, not some mere general.
Plus, you are a fucking appeaser.
Your panty wetting routine is amusing, go watch Threads again.
It's not amusing in the least, it's deeply bloody tedious.
Repeating "we're all going to die because some bellend on Twitter says so" on an endless loop does not constitute comedy.
Given how wrong Leon has been on so many things it is reassuring to know he is convinced we're all going to die in a nuclear holocaust kind of guarantees we won't.
Actually for all his OTT (but entertaining ) drama ,Leon is very insightful about things that matter
You mean his comments about Covid in March 2020 when he fled his home demanding lockdown and quoting some projections that we'd all die from Covid-19 by October 2020?
I believe Leon (or an incarnation of Leon) did advise to sell any shares before the FTSE crashed becasue of covid
No, that was me. He posted shortly after the crash started that he had done so. Whether this was true, or merely more of his small-dicksyndrome boasting, can be left as an exercise for the reader.
That was quite a time wasn’t it. I didn’t just pivot out of equities, I bought a modest amount of out the money DJ puts and woke up several days later to see I was 6 figures richer in USD terms. Which saw me through being unemployed throughout the pandemic. Eternally grateful to the pb gang for that.
Remember, TRUMP WAS RIGHT ABOUT LAB LEAK. And he was right about Germany and Nordstream
"Trump on Ukraine: "We must demand the immediate negotiation of a peaceful end to the war in Ukraine or we will end up in World War Three. And there will be nothing left of our planet -- all because stupid people didn't have a clue... They don't understand the power of nuclear.""
I think Leon is right to suggest that we listen to Trump, in that Trump is a direct conduit for Putin's threats/talking points.
We will get no clearer version of Putin's message because Trump is incapable of creative embellishment.
What we then choose to do with the knowledge of that threat is up to us on, say, the appeasement/belligerence axis.
Trump was right about Germany and Nordstream. Trump was right about Lab Leak
We are in danger of going to nuclear war because people on Twitter dislike Donald Trump so always take the opposite position to him: on anything
Trump is also the only living ex president not to benefit from the daily briefing note, so don’t assume he has any special classified info insight on this. Which he did on lab leak. And which anyone with a brain also concluded about Nordstream even without access to classified briefings and the best foreign policy advice.
I never said anything about classified info
You don't need classified info to see the danger. You just need an open mind, and an ability to look at a terrible reality without completely flinching and looking away
Trump has a rat-like cunning and the hide of a rhino. With those beady little eyes of his, he can see what Musk can see
Remember, TRUMP WAS RIGHT ABOUT LAB LEAK. And he was right about Germany and Nordstream
"Trump on Ukraine: "We must demand the immediate negotiation of a peaceful end to the war in Ukraine or we will end up in World War Three. And there will be nothing left of our planet -- all because stupid people didn't have a clue... They don't understand the power of nuclear.""
FWIW I think it probably is worth negotiating with Putin. The totally destroyed Hitler scenarios are rare. But for Ukraine's sake and ours, any concessions to Putin should be at a high price, Maybe Russia keeps Crimea if it behaves and removes itself entirely from the rest of Ukraine and has no future say on what that country does. Giving up large chunks of Ukraine for no Russian commitment, and with the nuclear threat intact, would be a bad deal indeed.
There’s going to be a difficult moment in the next couple of months where “the West” (ie the US and big Western European powers) decides it’s time for negotiation and a settlement, and Ukraine wants to keep going. I think that moment will be when UAF are on the borders of Crimea.
Poland and the Baltics will be behind Ukraine going all the way. The UK will follow whatever the US decides. We could end up with a future Ukraine that’s resentful of the West “selling out”.
FWIW I think it probably is worth negotiating with Putin. The totally destroyed Hitler scenarios are rare. But for Ukraine's sake and ours, any concessions to Putin should be at a high price, Maybe Russia keeps Crimea if it behaves and removes itself entirely from the rest of Ukraine and has no future say on what that country does. Giving up large chunks of Ukraine for no other commitment, with the nuclear threat intact, would be a bad deal indeed.
I agree. However the problem is the same as with Hitler in 1938: you cannot trust him. What can he say or do to convince Ukraine, and the rest of the world, that he will keep his word and not find an excuse to attack Ukraine or a.n.other country in five years?
Lack of trust is normal. Which is why Putin has to be offered something he wants compared with no deal, for the negotiation to work, even if the terms are tough.
Remember, TRUMP WAS RIGHT ABOUT LAB LEAK. And he was right about Germany and Nordstream
"Trump on Ukraine: "We must demand the immediate negotiation of a peaceful end to the war in Ukraine or we will end up in World War Three. And there will be nothing left of our planet -- all because stupid people didn't have a clue... They don't understand the power of nuclear.""
I think Leon is right to suggest that we listen to Trump, in that Trump is a direct conduit for Putin's threats/talking points.
We will get no clearer version of Putin's message because Trump is incapable of creative embellishment.
What we then choose to do with the knowledge of that threat is up to us on, say, the appeasement/belligerence axis.
Trump was right about Germany and Nordstream. Trump was right about Lab Leak
We are in danger of going to nuclear war because people on Twitter dislike Donald Trump so always take the opposite position to him: on anything
Trump is also the only living ex president not to benefit from the daily briefing note, so don’t assume he has any special classified info insight on this. Which he did on lab leak. And which anyone with a brain also concluded about Nordstream even without access to classified briefings and the best foreign policy advice.
I never said anything about classified info
You don't need classified info to see the danger. You just need an open mind, and an ability to look at a terrible reality without completely flinching and looking away Trump has a rat-like cunning and the hide of a rhino. With those beady little eyes of his, he can see what Musk can see
A 1 in 6 chance that human civilisation is about to be extinguished
"Many people have asked me what I think the odds are of an imminent major US-Russia nuclear war. My current estimate is about the same as losing in Russian roulette: one in six. The goal of this post is to explain how I arrived at this estimate. Please forgive its cold and analytic nature despite the emotionally charged topic; I'm trying not to be biased by hopes, fears or wishful thinking. "
its hard to be precise with these things but the odds feel to me about right , at this lebvel of probability we really need to step back and do what we can at our end even if it means Putin gets away with it
And now you will get the Combined Sofa Militia of PB, led by General @TSE and Corporal @Bartholomew,LeRoberts calling you a "fucking appeaser"
Please, I'd be a Marshal, not some mere general.
Plus, you are a fucking appeaser.
Your panty wetting routine is amusing, go watch Threads again.
It's not amusing in the least, it's deeply bloody tedious.
Repeating "we're all going to die because some bellend on Twitter says so" on an endless loop does not constitute comedy.
Given how wrong Leon has been on so many things it is reassuring to know he is convinced we're all going to die in a nuclear holocaust kind of guarantees we won't.
Actually for all his OTT (but entertaining ) drama ,Leon is very insightful about things that matter
You mean his comments about Covid in March 2020 when he fled his home demanding lockdown and quoting some projections that we'd all die from Covid-19 by October 2020?
I believe Leon (or an incarnation of Leon) did advise to sell any shares before the FTSE crashed becasue of covid
No, that was me. He posted shortly after the crash started that he had done so. Whether this was true, or merely more of his small-dick-syndrome boasting, can be left as an exercise for the reader.
Flat out 100% lie, mate. He and I advised and in my case perpetrated a complete portfolio dump weeks before you got the memo and came up with some rather mimsy tips about investing several dozens of pounds in put options, whatever the fuck they are. CBA to trawl the historical record, but it's all there.
A 1 in 6 chance that human civilisation is about to be extinguished
"Many people have asked me what I think the odds are of an imminent major US-Russia nuclear war. My current estimate is about the same as losing in Russian roulette: one in six. The goal of this post is to explain how I arrived at this estimate. Please forgive its cold and analytic nature despite the emotionally charged topic; I'm trying not to be biased by hopes, fears or wishful thinking. "
its hard to be precise with these things but the odds feel to me about right , at this lebvel of probability we really need to step back and do what we can at our end even if it means Putin gets away with it
And now you will get the Combined Sofa Militia of PB, led by General @TSE and Corporal @Bartholomew,LeRoberts calling you a "fucking appeaser"
Please, I'd be a Marshal, not some mere general.
Plus, you are a fucking appeaser.
Your panty wetting routine is amusing, go watch Threads again.
It's not amusing in the least, it's deeply bloody tedious.
Repeating "we're all going to die because some bellend on Twitter says so" on an endless loop does not constitute comedy.
Given how wrong Leon has been on so many things it is reassuring to know he is convinced we're all going to die in a nuclear holocaust kind of guarantees we won't.
Actually for all his OTT (but entertaining ) drama ,Leon is very insightful about things that matter
You mean his comments about Covid in March 2020 when he fled his home demanding lockdown and quoting some projections that we'd all die from Covid-19 by October 2020?
I believe Leon (or an incarnation of Leon) did advise to sell any shares before the FTSE crashed becasue of covid
No, that was me. He posted shortly after the crash started that he had done so. Whether this was true, or merely more of his small-dick-syndrome boasting, can be left as an exercise for the reader.
Flat out 100% lie, mate. He and I advised and in my case perpetrated a complete portfolio dump weeks before you got the memo and came up with some rather mimsy tips about investing several dozens of pounds in put options, whatever the fuck they are. CBA to trawl the historical record, but it's all there.
Well done for protecting your portfolio but you should have listened to the put options advice. And if you don’t understand them, then read around it so you’re ready for next time.
FWIW I think it probably is worth negotiating with Putin. The totally destroyed Hitler scenarios are rare. But for Ukraine's sake and ours, any concessions to Putin should be at a high price, Maybe Russia keeps Crimea if it behaves and removes itself entirely from the rest of Ukraine and has no future say on what that country does. Giving up large chunks of Ukraine for no Russian commitment, and with the nuclear threat intact, would be a bad deal indeed.
There’s going to be a difficult moment in the next couple of months where “the West” (ie the US and big Western European powers) decides it’s time for negotiation and a settlement, and Ukraine wants to keep going. I think that moment will be when UAF are on the borders of Crimea.
Poland and the Baltics will be behind Ukraine going all the way. The UK will follow whatever the US decides. We could end up with a future Ukraine that’s resentful of the West “selling out”.
It's possible, maybe likely. We can rationalise a deal as being in Ukraine's interest, but ultimately a country's interest is whatever it decides it to be.
Remember, TRUMP WAS RIGHT ABOUT LAB LEAK. And he was right about Germany and Nordstream
"Trump on Ukraine: "We must demand the immediate negotiation of a peaceful end to the war in Ukraine or we will end up in World War Three. And there will be nothing left of our planet -- all because stupid people didn't have a clue... They don't understand the power of nuclear.""
I think Leon is right to suggest that we listen to Trump, in that Trump is a direct conduit for Putin's threats/talking points.
We will get no clearer version of Putin's message because Trump is incapable of creative embellishment.
What we then choose to do with the knowledge of that threat is up to us on, say, the appeasement/belligerence axis.
Trump was right about Germany and Nordstream. Trump was right about Lab Leak
We are in danger of going to nuclear war because people on Twitter dislike Donald Trump so always take the opposite position to him: on anything
Trump is also the only living ex president not to benefit from the daily briefing note, so don’t assume he has any special classified info insight on this. Which he did on lab leak. And which anyone with a brain also concluded about Nordstream even without access to classified briefings and the best foreign policy advice.
I never said anything about classified info
You don't need classified info to see the danger. You just need an open mind, and an ability to look at a terrible reality without completely flinching and looking away Trump has a rat-like cunning and the hide of a rhino. With those beady little eyes of his, he can see what Musk can see
Remember, TRUMP WAS RIGHT ABOUT LAB LEAK. And he was right about Germany and Nordstream
"Trump on Ukraine: "We must demand the immediate negotiation of a peaceful end to the war in Ukraine or we will end up in World War Three. And there will be nothing left of our planet -- all because stupid people didn't have a clue... They don't understand the power of nuclear.""
I think Leon is right to suggest that we listen to Trump, in that Trump is a direct conduit for Putin's threats/talking points.
We will get no clearer version of Putin's message because Trump is incapable of creative embellishment.
What we then choose to do with the knowledge of that threat is up to us on, say, the appeasement/belligerence axis.
Trump was right about Germany and Nordstream. Trump was right about Lab Leak
We are in danger of going to nuclear war because people on Twitter dislike Donald Trump so always take the opposite position to him: on anything
Trump is also the only living ex president not to benefit from the daily briefing note, so don’t assume he has any special classified info insight on this. Which he did on lab leak. And which anyone with a brain also concluded about Nordstream even without access to classified briefings and the best foreign policy advice.
I never said anything about classified info
You don't need classified info to see the danger. You just need an open mind, and an ability to look at a terrible reality without completely flinching and looking away
Trump has a rat-like cunning and the hide of a rhino. With those beady little eyes of his, he can see what Musk can see
He doesn’t have the “hide of a rhino” - he has a fragile ego with a terrible fear of being branded a loser. That’s why he won’t go near the nomination or the presidency unless he’s confident of winning and why the smart money is probably on his not running again.
FWIW I think it probably is worth negotiating with Putin. The totally destroyed Hitler scenarios are rare. But for Ukraine's sake and ours, any concessions to Putin should be at a high price, Maybe Russia keeps Crimea if it behaves and removes itself entirely from the rest of Ukraine and has no future say on what that country does. Giving up large chunks of Ukraine for no Russian commitment, and with the nuclear threat intact, would be a bad deal indeed.
There’s going to be a difficult moment in the next couple of months where “the West” (ie the US and big Western European powers) decides it’s time for negotiation and a settlement, and Ukraine wants to keep going. I think that moment will be when UAF are on the borders of Crimea.
Poland and the Baltics will be behind Ukraine going all the way. The UK will follow whatever the US decides. We could end up with a future Ukraine that’s resentful of the West “selling out”.
Yes that’s possible. It’s also possible that before then there’s regime change in Russia
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countries almost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
Yeah in Georgia the US threatened to rain tomahawks upon their army if they proceeded any further, so they didn't.
You haven't answered my question anyway - at what point does nuclear war become ok?
well i dont think it ever becomes ok - IF you scorn at that answer i suggest taking a walk this afternoon and looking at the humanity of life - old ,young, etc and asking if you really think its ever ok
What on earth are you talking about? If nuclear war is never ok - then what is stopping any country with nuclear weapons doing anything they want? If Russia invaded Germany, would we do nothing? What about Ireland?
Fuck Ireland. They wouldn’t die for us
If you consider their tax policy and their neutrality policy, Ireland is perhaps the most selfish country in the Western world.
Hi, sorry to bother you but this is one of my occasional postings. Some of you may recall the first in my Ukraine War series (see [1]). The sequel - yes, "Ukraine War II" - depicted the Russian invasion as if it was in the UK instead of Ukraine, depicting events in recognisable British locations transposed from their UKR equivalents. I can't speak for the quality of the writing but (except for one flourish referring to an incident in "Red Storm Rising") it was my best efforts at getting the areas and events right
It was written up and sent to OGH and his sons in August and was accepted. Unfortunately the election of Truss and the death of the Monarch put it on the backburner and the recent Ukraine advances make it out of date.
To prevent it being lost, I am making it available to you via this posting. If you want a copy of the Word document, and its accompanying concordance explaining the references, let me know and I'll PM you a copy.
I will post this reminder once a day until Monday 10th, and I will host a Q&A on Tuesday 11th in the unlikely event anybody wants to discuss it.
I have opened up a discussion place with the article attached: saves emailing it to all and helps me retain anonymity. I have added @StillWaters to it: I assume you got the notification?
FWIW I think it probably is worth negotiating with Putin. The totally destroyed Hitler scenarios are rare. But for Ukraine's sake and ours, any concessions to Putin should be at a high price, Maybe Russia keeps Crimea if it behaves and removes itself entirely from the rest of Ukraine and has no future say on what that country does. Giving up large chunks of Ukraine for no Russian commitment, and with the nuclear threat intact, would be a bad deal indeed.
There’s going to be a difficult moment in the next couple of months where “the West” (ie the US and big Western European powers) decides it’s time for negotiation and a settlement, and Ukraine wants to keep going. I think that moment will be when UAF are on the borders of Crimea.
Poland and the Baltics will be behind Ukraine going all the way. The UK will follow whatever the US decides. We could end up with a future Ukraine that’s resentful of the West “selling out”.
I doubt it. Either Ukraine wins or there'll be a stalemate (Crimea will be very hard to capture given the narrow land bridges that link it to the rest of Ukraine, and Ukraine's lack of naval power.) There's no particular reason to suppose that the Americans will try to force Zelensky to give Putin any presents.
FWIW I think it probably is worth negotiating with Putin. The totally destroyed Hitler scenarios are rare. But for Ukraine's sake and ours, any concessions to Putin should be at a high price, Maybe Russia keeps Crimea if it behaves and removes itself entirely from the rest of Ukraine and has no future say on what that country does. Giving up large chunks of Ukraine for no Russian commitment, and with the nuclear threat intact, would be a bad deal indeed.
There’s going to be a difficult moment in the next couple of months where “the West” (ie the US and big Western European powers) decides it’s time for negotiation and a settlement, and Ukraine wants to keep going. I think that moment will be when UAF are on the borders of Crimea.
Poland and the Baltics will be behind Ukraine going all the way. The UK will follow whatever the US decides. We could end up with a future Ukraine that’s resentful of the West “selling out”.
Yes that’s possible. It’s also possible that before then there’s regime change in Russia
In all seriousness that is our best option by a million miles. We need to have this lunatic look too far out of a window like so many of his victims and then hope and pray his replacement is more rational. The longer Putin stays in power the greater the risks.
A 1 in 6 chance that human civilisation is about to be extinguished
"Many people have asked me what I think the odds are of an imminent major US-Russia nuclear war. My current estimate is about the same as losing in Russian roulette: one in six. The goal of this post is to explain how I arrived at this estimate. Please forgive its cold and analytic nature despite the emotionally charged topic; I'm trying not to be biased by hopes, fears or wishful thinking. "
its hard to be precise with these things but the odds feel to me about right , at this lebvel of probability we really need to step back and do what we can at our end even if it means Putin gets away with it
And now you will get the Combined Sofa Militia of PB, led by General @TSE and Corporal @Bartholomew,LeRoberts calling you a "fucking appeaser"
Please, I'd be a Marshal, not some mere general.
Plus, you are a fucking appeaser.
Your panty wetting routine is amusing, go watch Threads again.
It's not amusing in the least, it's deeply bloody tedious.
Repeating "we're all going to die because some bellend on Twitter says so" on an endless loop does not constitute comedy.
Given how wrong Leon has been on so many things it is reassuring to know he is convinced we're all going to die in a nuclear holocaust kind of guarantees we won't.
Actually for all his OTT (but entertaining ) drama ,Leon is very insightful about things that matter
You mean his comments about Covid in March 2020 when he fled his home demanding lockdown and quoting some projections that we'd all die from Covid-19 by October 2020?
I believe Leon (or an incarnation of Leon) did advise to sell any shares before the FTSE crashed becasue of covid
No, that was me. He posted shortly after the crash started that he had done so. Whether this was true, or merely more of his small-dick-syndrome boasting, can be left as an exercise for the reader.
Flat out 100% lie, mate. He and I advised and in my case perpetrated a complete portfolio dump weeks before you got the memo and came up with some rather mimsy tips about investing several dozens of pounds in put options, whatever the fuck they are. CBA to trawl the historical record, but it's all there.
It is indeed all there, and your memory is faulty. Not least because I have never owned a put option. Leon (or whoever he was back then) did his usual act of flailing every which way, and after the event was well underway claimed to have acted some time earlier. That isn’t prescience nor actionable advice, although it is true that prices continued to fall thereafter and I regularly updated PB’ers with the positions I was taking, in real time, not days later.
Remember, TRUMP WAS RIGHT ABOUT LAB LEAK. And he was right about Germany and Nordstream
"Trump on Ukraine: "We must demand the immediate negotiation of a peaceful end to the war in Ukraine or we will end up in World War Three. And there will be nothing left of our planet -- all because stupid people didn't have a clue... They don't understand the power of nuclear.""
Remember, TRUMP WAS RIGHT ABOUT LAB LEAK. And he was right about Germany and Nordstream
"Trump on Ukraine: "We must demand the immediate negotiation of a peaceful end to the war in Ukraine or we will end up in World War Three. And there will be nothing left of our planet -- all because stupid people didn't have a clue... They don't understand the power of nuclear.""
I think Leon is right to suggest that we listen to Trump, in that Trump is a direct conduit for Putin's threats/talking points.
We will get no clearer version of Putin's message because Trump is incapable of creative embellishment.
What we then choose to do with the knowledge of that threat is up to us on, say, the appeasement/belligerence axis.
Trump was right about Germany and Nordstream. Trump was right about Lab Leak
We are in danger of going to nuclear war because people on Twitter dislike Donald Trump so always take the opposite position to him: on anything
Trump is also the only living ex president not to benefit from the daily briefing note, so don’t assume he has any special classified info insight on this. Which he did on lab leak. And which anyone with a brain also concluded about Nordstream even without access to classified briefings and the best foreign policy advice.
I never said anything about classified info
You don't need classified info to see the danger. You just need an open mind, and an ability to look at a terrible reality without completely flinching and looking away
Trump has a rat-like cunning and the hide of a rhino. With those beady little eyes of his, he can see what Musk can see
He doesn’t have the “hide of a rhino” - he has a fragile ego with a terrible fear of being branded a loser. That’s why he won’t go near the nomination or the presidency unless he’s confident of winning and why the smart money is probably on his not running again.
The only way he could have been confident of winning in 2016 was from huge self-belief, and he showed that he could bounce back from campaigning setbacks that would have buried most political candidates. He may have a fragile ego, but that doesn't mean you can count on him shying away from running.
FWIW I think it probably is worth negotiating with Putin. The totally destroyed Hitler scenarios are rare. But for Ukraine's sake and ours, any concessions to Putin should be at a high price, Maybe Russia keeps Crimea if it behaves and removes itself entirely from the rest of Ukraine and has no future say on what that country does. Giving up large chunks of Ukraine for no Russian commitment, and with the nuclear threat intact, would be a bad deal indeed.
There’s going to be a difficult moment in the next couple of months where “the West” (ie the US and big Western European powers) decides it’s time for negotiation and a settlement, and Ukraine wants to keep going. I think that moment will be when UAF are on the borders of Crimea.
Poland and the Baltics will be behind Ukraine going all the way. The UK will follow whatever the US decides. We could end up with a future Ukraine that’s resentful of the West “selling out”.
There are already some people advocating for a peace settlement at the current lines, and I have no doubt there will be more as Ukraine make greater gains, but I'm pretty confident that the US, UK and many other Western European countries will support Ukraine in an attempt to retake Crimea. The messaging from the US, and numerous other countries has been pretty clear - Crimea is Ukraine. While a distinction has been drawn between Russian territory and Russian-occupied Ukraine (in terms of using HIMARS on targets in Russia), no such distinction has been drawn between occupied Crimea and occupied Kherson/Zaporizhzhia/Donetsk/Luhansk.
If there were to be a stalemate for several months then that might be a turning point, but that is why the Ukrainian gains over the last six weeks have been so important.
A 1 in 6 chance that human civilisation is about to be extinguished
"Many people have asked me what I think the odds are of an imminent major US-Russia nuclear war. My current estimate is about the same as losing in Russian roulette: one in six. The goal of this post is to explain how I arrived at this estimate. Please forgive its cold and analytic nature despite the emotionally charged topic; I'm trying not to be biased by hopes, fears or wishful thinking. "
its hard to be precise with these things but the odds feel to me about right , at this lebvel of probability we really need to step back and do what we can at our end even if it means Putin gets away with it
And now you will get the Combined Sofa Militia of PB, led by General @TSE and Corporal @Bartholomew,LeRoberts calling you a "fucking appeaser"
Please, I'd be a Marshal, not some mere general.
Plus, you are a fucking appeaser.
Your panty wetting routine is amusing, go watch Threads again.
It's not amusing in the least, it's deeply bloody tedious.
Repeating "we're all going to die because some bellend on Twitter says so" on an endless loop does not constitute comedy.
Given how wrong Leon has been on so many things it is reassuring to know he is convinced we're all going to die in a nuclear holocaust kind of guarantees we won't.
Actually for all his OTT (but entertaining ) drama ,Leon is very insightful about things that matter
You mean his comments about Covid in March 2020 when he fled his home demanding lockdown and quoting some projections that we'd all die from Covid-19 by October 2020?
I believe Leon (or an incarnation of Leon) did advise to sell any shares before the FTSE crashed becasue of covid
No, that was me. He posted shortly after the crash started that he had done so. Whether this was true, or merely more of his small-dick-syndrome boasting, can be left as an exercise for the reader.
Flat out 100% lie, mate. He and I advised and in my case perpetrated a complete portfolio dump weeks before you got the memo and came up with some rather mimsy tips about investing several dozens of pounds in put options, whatever the fuck they are. CBA to trawl the historical record, but it's all there.
It is indeed all there, and your memory is faulty. Not least because I have never owned a put option. Leon (or whoever he was back then) did his usual act of flailing every which way, and after the event was well underway claimed to have acted some time earlier. That isn’t prescience nor actionable advice, although it is true that prices continued to fall thereafter and I regularly updated PB’ers with the positions I was taking, in real time, not days later.
"Home Secretary Suella Braverman considers upgrading cannabis to class A amid concerns over evidence linking it to psychosis, cancer and birth defects"
FWIW I think it probably is worth negotiating with Putin. The totally destroyed Hitler scenarios are rare. But for Ukraine's sake and ours, any concessions to Putin should be at a high price, Maybe Russia keeps Crimea if it behaves and removes itself entirely from the rest of Ukraine and has no future say on what that country does. Giving up large chunks of Ukraine for no other commitment, with the nuclear threat intact, would be a bad deal indeed.
I agree. However the problem is the same as with Hitler in 1938: you cannot trust him. What can he say or do to convince Ukraine, and the rest of the world, that he will keep his word and not find an excuse to attack Ukraine or a.n.other country in five years?
Lack of trust is normal. Which is why Putin has to be offered something he wants compared with no deal, for the negotiation to work, even if the terms are tough.
Putin wants a New Russia that includes Ukraine, Poland, the Baltic States and more, either directly or through Bellarussian-style stooges. That's the problem.
Chamberlain offered Hitler Sudetenland in exchange for no other territorial demands. That did not end well.
I'd argue dealing with Putin is as difficult as dealing with Hitler was. It *may* be possible to do a deal, but he will not give up on what he wants.
Apart from the folly of appeasement one would have hoped that that another lesson from WWII that we learnt was to crush utterly the criminal gangs that run countries.
Putin and his thugs are on the thick end of a drubbing and humiliation in Ukraine. When Putin is in his box or deposed we should admit Ukraine to NATO and all pressure maintained on Russia for reparations to Ukraine. The democracies of this world must be prevail and be seen to win.
FWIW I think it probably is worth negotiating with Putin. The totally destroyed Hitler scenarios are rare. But for Ukraine's sake and ours, any concessions to Putin should be at a high price, Maybe Russia keeps Crimea if it behaves and removes itself entirely from the rest of Ukraine and has no future say on what that country does. Giving up large chunks of Ukraine for no Russian commitment, and with the nuclear threat intact, would be a bad deal indeed.
There’s going to be a difficult moment in the next couple of months where “the West” (ie the US and big Western European powers) decides it’s time for negotiation and a settlement, and Ukraine wants to keep going. I think that moment will be when UAF are on the borders of Crimea.
Poland and the Baltics will be behind Ukraine going all the way. The UK will follow whatever the US decides. We could end up with a future Ukraine that’s resentful of the West “selling out”.
I doubt it. Either Ukraine wins or there'll be a stalemate (Crimea will be very hard to capture given the narrow land bridges that link it to the rest of Ukraine, and Ukraine's lack of naval power.) There's no particular reason to suppose that the Americans will try to force Zelensky to give Putin any presents.
Not by any stretch a military strategist, but my uninformed take is that Crimea is an easier capture for Ukraine than, say Mariupol. While narrow, Ukraine does at least have a landbridge to the peninsula, unlike Russia, which is why Crimea has always been part of a larger territory that is now included within Ukraine.
My premise would be for Ukraine to attack Crimea but trade it for concessions made by Russia. Probably won't happen like that, however.
A 1 in 6 chance that human civilisation is about to be extinguished
"Many people have asked me what I think the odds are of an imminent major US-Russia nuclear war. My current estimate is about the same as losing in Russian roulette: one in six. The goal of this post is to explain how I arrived at this estimate. Please forgive its cold and analytic nature despite the emotionally charged topic; I'm trying not to be biased by hopes, fears or wishful thinking. "
its hard to be precise with these things but the odds feel to me about right , at this lebvel of probability we really need to step back and do what we can at our end even if it means Putin gets away with it
And now you will get the Combined Sofa Militia of PB, led by General @TSE and Corporal @Bartholomew,LeRoberts calling you a "fucking appeaser"
Please, I'd be a Marshal, not some mere general.
Plus, you are a fucking appeaser.
Your panty wetting routine is amusing, go watch Threads again.
It's not amusing in the least, it's deeply bloody tedious.
Repeating "we're all going to die because some bellend on Twitter says so" on an endless loop does not constitute comedy.
Given how wrong Leon has been on so many things it is reassuring to know he is convinced we're all going to die in a nuclear holocaust kind of guarantees we won't.
Actually for all his OTT (but entertaining ) drama ,Leon is very insightful about things that matter
You mean his comments about Covid in March 2020 when he fled his home demanding lockdown and quoting some projections that we'd all die from Covid-19 by October 2020?
I believe Leon (or an incarnation of Leon) did advise to sell any shares before the FTSE crashed becasue of covid
No, that was me. He posted shortly after the crash started that he had done so. Whether this was true, or merely more of his small-dick-syndrome boasting, can be left as an exercise for the reader.
Flat out 100% lie, mate. He and I advised and in my case perpetrated a complete portfolio dump weeks before you got the memo and came up with some rather mimsy tips about investing several dozens of pounds in put options, whatever the fuck they are. CBA to trawl the historical record, but it's all there.
It is indeed all there, and your memory is faulty. Not least because I have never owned a put option. Leon (or whoever he was back then) did his usual act of flailing every which way, and after the event was well underway claimed to have acted some time earlier. That isn’t prescience nor actionable advice, although it is true that prices continued to fall thereafter and I regularly updated PB’ers with the positions I was taking, in real time, not days later.
Absolutely not true. Sorry, but there it is.
You’ve clearly fallen for Leon’s ability after the event for making out that he’d predicted something that he hadn’t, usually achieved by a mix of posting about every unlikely future possibility that enters his head amplified by a generous helping of exaggeration and some deliberate amnesia over the timescales.
Suella Braverman is a moron. We should be looking to legalise, regulate and tax recreational drugs and ensure consumers are buying from legitimate untainted sources. Reclassification to class A will be a disaster for millions of ordinary people.
Bring back Priti Patel please.
I dont see how reclassification to class A will be a disaster for people. Not being able to smoke cannabis quite as easily is inconvenient not a disaster
Cocaine is literally everywhere in major cities and out of touch old tories are getting their knickers in a twist over weed, which is more than everywhere.
Massively out of touch.
Who is massively out of touch? Major cities rarely vote Tory.
Outside of them,there is plenty of political consternation about County Lines.
Yeah and if you legalise and regulate you remove that problem immediately.
I don't have a dog in this fight; I don't take drugs.
Unlike one poster on here this afternoon who has clearly taken a great many of them all at once...
So I am a crazy person on drugs: because I express concern that a highly esteemed professor from MIT estimates that there is a 1 in 6 chance of human society being wiped out in the coming weeks? And, moreover, that one of the smartest guys on the planet (and the richest) agrees with this estimate?
How did PB arrive at this insane perspective, where being justifiably worried about nuclear disaster is some kind of cowardly hallucination?
Your logic suggests that we should let other nuclear powers do whatever they want in case they nuke us. Where does it end? Where is the red line?
well that red line has to be a lot further away from being drawn than about essentially a slavic border dispute
Laughable. A slavic border dispute? Give over. It's one sovereign country invading another. Would it make a difference if it was Poland?
Is nuclear war over Poland ok, but not over Ukraine?
I ask again - where is the red line? At what point does nuclear war become ok?
I seriously hope you dont think nuclear war is ok over this - but countires have been invading other countries almost annually - We even supported and did it ourselves (Iraq, Afghanistan) - Russia did it in 2014 with Ukraine (nobody really gave a toss then and actually forgot about it until recently ) They also did with Georgia - again everyone forgot about that. For some reason we have got into a bizarre situation where we are risking ours and our faimilies lives and the whole culture and civilisation and history of the Uk for this latest incarnation of slavic border disputes
Yeah in Georgia the US threatened to rain tomahawks upon their army if they proceeded any further, so they didn't.
You haven't answered my question anyway - at what point does nuclear war become ok?
well i dont think it ever becomes ok - IF you scorn at that answer i suggest taking a walk this afternoon and looking at the humanity of life - old ,young, etc and asking if you really think its ever ok
What on earth are you talking about? If nuclear war is never ok - then what is stopping any country with nuclear weapons doing anything they want? If Russia invaded Germany, would we do nothing? What about Ireland?
Fuck Ireland. They wouldn’t die for us
If you consider their tax policy and their neutrality policy, Ireland is perhaps the most selfish country in the Western world.
Plus effectively relying on the UK for especially serious air and sea security matters.
Why are we all panicking about nuclear war? No serious suggestion of this coming from Russia.
Oh I see, Donald Trump has mentioned it. He wouldn't be worried about Joe Biden getting a boost from a possible foreign policy success would he? He wouldn't want to distract from his own difficulties with the law?
Leon says he was right about Nordstream and the as yet unproven covid lab leak theory.
Remember, TRUMP WAS RIGHT ABOUT LAB LEAK. And he was right about Germany and Nordstream
"Trump on Ukraine: "We must demand the immediate negotiation of a peaceful end to the war in Ukraine or we will end up in World War Three. And there will be nothing left of our planet -- all because stupid people didn't have a clue... They don't understand the power of nuclear.""
Comments
I don’t think Putin wants to be a martyr and must realize he has no idea what the repercussions would be from NATO. Clearly you can’t allow a country to use a nuclear weapon without severe repercussions otherwise that country and any other could now be given a green light to embark on the same course of action.
We have got used to the assumption that suppliers/importers get 25 years and users, without whom suppliers could not exist, get nothing or a slap on the wrist. It needs questioning.
No, we did not forget. Or Litvinenko. Or Salisbury. Or Syria.
And your argument is sort of the point: Putin's Russia has imperial fascism at its heart: he will keep on interfering, and invading, neighbouring countries until he has resuscitated something akin to the USSR. If *you* forgot about them, that's your issue: the sanctions put on Russia after 2014 shows the international community did not forget, either.
In fact, those sanctions should have been much greater, and we should have applied more pressure on Putin back then. But your sort of attitude prevailed, and we descended further into the mire.
So my question to you is this: if Russia gains Ukraine, when would you intervene? When he gets Estonia? Lithuania? Poland? Or will you back down when he willy-waves his nukes about? And when other countries also start nuclear blackmail?
Your position is immoral and unworkable.
Regardless of whether the Ukrainians manage to win outright or there's a partition of territory along a ceasefire line a la India/Pakistan, the best way forward for Putin remains blaming Russian failures on the combined effects of American and NATO support for Ukraine, and the failures of various inadequate underlings. A propaganda campaign on state TV and a purge leave him and his country intact, to brood and plot revenge. A global thermonuclear holocaust doesn't. He can't indulge his Peter the Great fantasies if both he and his people are dead.
5% major escalation
8-10% limited escalation, ultimately contained.
That’s fucking scary, whichever way you slice it.
Source: I’ve made decent money predicting political outcomes. And did an international relations undergrad degree, which covered a fair amount of political strategy/MAD shit.
So if you say that he should be given Ukraine in response to nuclear war you are saying, in effect, that nuclear war is worth doing. Because it gets you what you want.
As it happens, dodgy pseudo-Bayesian equations aside, it isn't likely. If he let the Kerch Bridge go down without a nuclear response it's hard to see what will actually trigger one (unless it really was an accident or an internal act of terrorism, but the bombing of Zaporizhia suggests he doesn't think it was).
He needs to keep making the threats as much as anything because he's got nothing else that might work now. This war is lost, and he knows it. Even if he can keep Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk the humiliation of Russia was completed with the fall of Lyman.
#AndrewNeilShow | @AFNeil https://twitter.com/Channel4/status/1579100293182136320/video/1
It’s a fascinating topic and one I had to study back in the day in the climatology module of my undergrad degree. Things haven’t actually moved on much since then.
The nuclear winter effect is from soot injected into the stratosphere by firestorms after the initial blasts. Either cities consumed by fire, like Hiroshima, or wildfires in forests. Not from dust created by the blast.
It is therefore very dependent on 2 things: 1 the time of year the war happens (much better in autumn or winter when there’s wetter ground and less to burn), and 2 the fabric of cities. Concrete and asphalt cities are better than wooden ones. The latest modelling studies are essentially saying the same things, and making the same controversial assumptions, as those I remember studying in the 1990s.
The Wikipedia page on nuclear winter is excellent. I recommend reading the whole
thing. It could determine whether you get on that plane or just throw yourself at the centre of the first blast
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter
“The political experiment has blown up the chemistry lab and everyone’s sort of standing there in the wreckage.” https://twitter.com/Channel4/status/1579116975715852288
Back then, the risk was lower, but public fear was greater.
Now, the risk is greater, yet public perception of the risk (of nuclear annihilation) is far less.
There’s a PHD thesis, for some future academic, should we survive this.
I do not judge that the risk of a a deliberate first strike by any nation on any other has much changed, with the arguments rehashed many times over these months.
As for aliens, I have still not seen a better explanation for some of the public data and governmental behaviour. If it’s not aliens, then there’s a reasonable chance instead that the US have ultratech that would make any nuclear war a pretty one sided affair. But I don’t really see the relevance of that to judging whether the Federation of Russia is another to launch nuclear weapons on anger.
If Putin points the nukes at Britain and says "you have 12 hours to surrender unconditionally or the nuclear bombs rain down", do we say "even though we could retaliate, nuclear war is never ok, so we surrender?"
We will get no clearer version of Putin's message because Trump is incapable of creative embellishment.
What we then choose to do with the knowledge of that threat is up to us on, say, the appeasement/belligerence axis.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11296157/Home-Secretary-Suella-Braverman-considers-upgrading-cannabis-class-A.html
I don't see how you can believe those two things simultaneously without your brain exploding from cognitive dissonance
And you know I am someone who endorses your open-mindedness on the UFO stuff. There is still a mystery to be resolved, even if I am unsure what it is. And they might even be linked!
The fact is, serious people are now making serious predictions of the likelihood of a nuke going off. I've seen it put at 7%, 8%, 10%, now we hear "15% chance of total nuclear war" from the MIT prof. Musk hasn't given his maths, but it seems he is alarmed
There is real cause for grave alarm
We are in danger of going to nuclear war because people on Twitter dislike Donald Trump so always take the opposite position to him: on anything
Su-24 crashed in Rostov region of Russia, pilot ejected and safe
https://twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/1579116950449315840
Are you seriously saying that Russia is not acting as a 'baddy' ? How do you view Hitler's Germany in 1938?
"equally [...] divisive"
Either prorogation was right or wrong - you are trying to have it both ways to try and defend the Crown you value more than every so-called subject in this so-called united kingdom.
They show it by preparing for nuclear war, by moving out of large cities (or even to other nations), by stockpiling supplies of food, and, sometimes by building fallout shelters. Or even doing something as simple as buying some potassium iodide pills.
If someone hasn't moved out of a large city, and done some of the other things to prepare for nuclear war, I wonder whether they are really worried about nuclear war.
(*There are fewer in part because of the great reduction in the number of nuclear warheads, achieved by negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union, and its successor, Russia. See, for example, the graph showing those reductions in this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon#Governance,_control,_and_law
Sadly, our last two presidents, Trump and Biden, have not been able to continue that reduction, though one must admit that Putin and Xi don't seem to have much desire for further reductions, either.)
You don't need classified info to see the danger. You just need an open mind, and an ability to look at a terrible reality without completely flinching and looking away
Trump has a rat-like cunning and the hide of a rhino. With those beady little eyes of his, he can see what Musk can see
Really? Methinks that is demonstrably NOT the case! Like most congenital liars, 45 is VERY creative.
Poland and the Baltics will be behind Ukraine going all the way. The UK will follow whatever the US decides. We could end up with a future Ukraine that’s resentful of the West “selling out”.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3255349/#Comment_3255349
Probably having roast beef. Does anyone know of a red that goes well with nuclear fallout?
This is going to be a bit of a nuisance, isn’t it?
I have been far more hysterical than that
Also: I miss @contrarian
What happened to him/her? Banned? A valuable unorthodox voice
I think you just need to take the risk that you might find restocking problematic in the post nuclear wasteland.
If there were to be a stalemate for several months then that might be a turning point, but that is why the Ukrainian gains over the last six weeks have been so important.
Chamberlain offered Hitler Sudetenland in exchange for no other territorial demands. That did not end well.
I'd argue dealing with Putin is as difficult as dealing with Hitler was. It *may* be possible to do a deal, but he will not give up on what he wants.
Putin and his thugs are on the thick end of a drubbing and humiliation in Ukraine. When Putin is in his box or deposed we should admit Ukraine to NATO and all pressure maintained on Russia for reparations to Ukraine. The democracies of this world must be prevail and be seen to win.
China take note.
At least the England cricket team should survive ( T20 version).
My premise would be for Ukraine to attack Crimea but trade it for concessions made by Russia. Probably won't happen like that, however.
Oh I see, Donald Trump has mentioned it. He wouldn't be worried about Joe Biden getting a boost from a possible foreign policy success would he? He wouldn't want to distract from his own difficulties with the law?
Leon says he was right about Nordstream and the as yet unproven covid lab leak theory.
He's also been wrong about many things.