Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

The most loopy idea yet from Team Truss? – politicalbetting.com

123457

Comments

  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,779

    Omnium said:

    Ratters said:

    Omnium said:

    Ratters said:

    Here's another thing - the Bank of England has so far only spent £3bn out of the reported £65bn.

    And they are buying the wrong assets - conventional gilts rather than index-linked gilts which is the core of the pensions market.

    The BoE's intervention has just slowed down the run on UK government debt, UK corporate bonds and UK property funds, but it hasn't stopped it.

    Index linked gilts surely can't be seen as the core of the pensions market, as you put it. Fund managers really don't like them.
    They are probably the single biggest holding for most DB pension schemes as they are a good match for inflation-linked pension payments.
    They've generally traded on a negative real yield though. Why would fund managers choose such a thing? I've generally assumed that the holders were pretty much all banks with their arms twisted.

    I admit my 'Fund managers don't like them' was the case many years ago rather than based on any recent experience.
    A pension fund manager chooses such a thing because in a future scenario where inflation in high, the real-terms loss is less than that of other 'safe' assets.

    But I see that index-linked gilts are now trading at prices which will give positive real returns. Looks like a great opportunity for pension funds.
    Precisely the time they should have been a good investment they've proved horrible.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,377
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work
    Of course they work. Russia would have been colonised about 60 years ago otherwise.

    The terrifying thing is that so much effort is being made by western propagandists on certain websites to spread the idea that they don't work, or that they might work if launched but the commanders would never manage to launch them successfully, or if they did launch some it would only be a few that managed to get through to targets, so few as to make WW3 an utterly good idea if Russia doesn't act as the USA wants it to.

    One inconvenient thing for those who are spreading such evil war propaganda is that the whole of US nuclear weapons policy, as well as the existence of NATO etc., has been predicated on the idea that Soviet and now Russian strategic nukes actually do work. So if only all the western strategists between say 1950 and 2020 could have seen ahead a few decades and got their wisdom from Twitter...

    The reason that Russia has not been “colonised” is largely to do with the fact that aside from Adolf Hitler, no one wanted to.

    If Putin hadn’t been stupid enough to start this war, Nordstream 2 would have been up and running, and my how the money would have rolled in….

    Far from attacking Russia people were making all kind of allowances for the foul behaviour of its leadership.

    It took Putin waving his Big Weapons to unite everyone in Europe against him. If he carries on he might get Ireland and Switzerland into the alliance against him.
    He could have just sat back and raked in huge amounts of cash, acting like a bully toward his neighbours from time to time and make believing that the whole world was out to get Russia.

    Instead he seems to have wanted a legacy as a conqueror, the guy so powerful he changed the world, and was not content to simply live out his days as a super rich autocrat.
    And if Saddam Hussein hadn’t gone on a bender in Kuwait he would probably still be with us.

    These guys always seem to end up high on their own supply.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187
    Nigelb said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    Roger said:

    The contrast between the articulate and competent Sturgeon and beleaguered and hopeless looking Truss must be worrying for Scottish Unionists. The contrast is off the scale

    What? The cut-the-bottom-off-the-doors administration? The ferry-non-acquiring administration?

    The biggest positive of the current polls is that Kier won't be reliant on the SNP for the next government.
    Or on the votes of folk who can't/won't spell his name correctly.
    Ha! Can't, in this case. Sorry Keir.
    SIR Keir. We'll get there eventually.
    Bit odd for an equalitarianism to insist on titles ?
    Well he will be the master soon - by the looks of it - so best to behave and pay due respect.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Omnium said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Omnium said:

    How does Ovaltine still exist?

    Because Horlicks makes it look good.

    A Frenchwoman told me that it is quite wrong to think the French think mint sauce is the best English culinary joke, what is even funnier is the concept of "night starvation" (which, per the Horlicks label, is the inevitable consequence of going to bed without your horlicks).
    I'm happy for you that it wasn't a French man suggesting that mint sauce was not the finest thing to go with lamb ever invented. You'd surely have been involved in an unnecessary duel.
    Entirely agree. It's their loss.

    What's odd is they call gooseberries groseilles à maquereau - quite rightly, but I would have thought the combination was in the same sort of parish as lamb with mint sauce.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,151

    rcs1000 said:

    .

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    Bomber Harris, is that you?

    One of the things we learned from WW2, is that you could have utterly destroyed cities, with no water or power, and yet life continued.

    Shit life, for sure, but let's not pretend that Russia is managing even 1% of the devastation that the US and the UK wreaked on Germany in the last years of the warm, and which barely dented either industrial production or the will to resist.
    Intense bombing didn't defeat the Viet Cong either, tho they were prepared to live in muddy pits and eat tarantulas to win the war. And there was no risk of dying from intense cold if they had no power

    But terror bombing did defeat the Japanese - a much more advanced society, which is interesting in itself

    Anyway you are of course right. The question is does he have the missiles/drones to keep this up? Almost certainly not, at the moment. But he will be begging China and Iran for more

    China might help out, if it sees this as a way of ensuring Putin's survival, and avoiding him going nuclear
    It was not terror bombing on its own.
    Hope they served the Tarantula properly, Tempura I suggest - though it would be a scream if you simply ordered soup of the day, and didn’t realise it was Tarantula Surprise.
    I have eaten tarantula. I might try and find a photo of my ordeal

    I ate them in Skuon, Cambodia, where they deep fry them, cover them with Knorr Readymix, and treat them as a delicacy. The Skuoners acquired this habit during the Khmer Rouge years, when all they had to eat was tarantulas

    They are profoundly disgusting. The thorax still gives me shudders
  • Options
    mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,140
    Sandpit said:

    Cicero said:

    Looks like quite a few Russian troops have entered Belarus in order to form joint units with the BY army and possibly try to invade UA from the north. A huge risk for Lukashenka if true. Could start a Belarusian civil war. and the UA army has kept about a third in reserve to face just this possibility.

    Ah, the ressurection of the Chernobyl Road tank crap shoot, T-62s and T-72s vs NLAWs and Javelins.

    Didn’t they see how well that went, when they last tried it back in February? :confused:
    Probably not - they don't have the benefit of troops who went through it the first time. They are either redployed, dead, wounded, or POWs.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work
    Of course they work. Russia would have been colonised about 60 years ago otherwise.

    The terrifying thing is that so much effort is being made by western propagandists on certain websites to spread the idea that they don't work, or that they might work if launched but the commanders would never manage to launch them successfully, or if they did launch some it would only be a few that managed to get through to targets, so few as to make WW3 an utterly good idea if Russia doesn't act as the USA wants it to.

    One inconvenient thing for those who are spreading such evil war propaganda is that the whole of US nuclear weapons policy, as well as the existence of NATO etc., has been predicated on the idea that Soviet and now Russian strategic nukes actually do work. So if only all the western strategists between say 1950 and 2020 could have seen ahead a few decades and got their wisdom from Twitter...

    The reason that Russia has not been “colonised” is largely to do with the fact that aside from Adolf Hitler, no one wanted to.

    If Putin hadn’t been stupid enough to start this war, Nordstream 2 would have been up and running, and my how the money would have rolled in….

    Far from attacking Russia people were making all kind of allowances for the foul behaviour of its leadership.

    It took Putin waving his Big Weapons to unite everyone in Europe against him. If he carries on he might get Ireland and Switzerland into the alliance against him.
    He could have just sat back and raked in huge amounts of cash, acting like a bully toward his neighbours from time to time and make believing that the whole world was out to get Russia.

    Instead he seems to have wanted a legacy as a conqueror, the guy so powerful he changed the world, and was not content to simply live out his days as a super rich autocrat.
    And if Saddam Hussein hadn’t gone on a bender in Kuwait he would probably still be with us.

    These guys always seem to end up high on their own supply.
    Some of them. I've not crunched the stats, but I've the unfortunate impression most die peacefully, fat and rich.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,854
    Evening all :)

    Time to move away from the hyperbole of distant conflicts and thoughts of "Wartime Coalitions" (anything to keep Labour out of Government, it would seem?) and back to the day to day of elections and polls.

    Denmark votes in just three weeks and the latest Voxmeter poll as follows (changes from 2019 election):

    Social Democrats: 27.1% (+1.2)
    Venstre: 13.8% (-9.6)
    Conservative: 9.8% (+3.2)
    Denmark Democrats: 9.0% (new)
    Socialist Folkeparti: 8.7% (+1.0)
    Red-Green Alliance: 6.7% (-0.2)
    Liberal Alliance: 5.3% (+3.0)
    Radikale Venstre: 5.0% (-3.6)
    New Right: 4.9% (+2.5)
    Moderates: 4.1% (new)
    People's Party: 2.3% (-6.4)
    Alternative: 2.0% (-1.0)

    All the above would get into the new Folketing on those numbers. The current Government (and supporting parties) have 47.5% (-1.6) but looking at a prospective centre-right bloc, you have Venstre, the Conservatives, Denmark Democrats, Liberal Alliance, New Right and the People's Party and combined they score 45.1% and that contains a lot of ifs, buts and maybes in terms of who will or won't together.

    The Moderates sit on 4.1% and remain in the box seat currently.

    To be accurate, the Folketing has 179 members - 175 of whom are elected in Denmark itself with two each from the Faeroes and Greenland respectively. Last time, Social Democrat parties won two of the four, one went to the centre right and one to the far left.

    It's a decent poll for the Government and the centre-left parties but there's still 3 weeks to go.

    To wrap up Lower Saxony where overhanging and levelling (which sounds positively mediaeval but is more psephological) has expanded the Landtag to 146 seats (from 135) - the SPD ended up on 57 seats, the CDU 47, Greens 24 and Alternativ 18.

    It's quite clear the CDU are out and we'll see a new majority SPD-Green Government which will be a relief for Chancellor Scholz, a headache for opposition leader Merz, something to smile about for the Greens and a pain in somewhat different areas for FDP leader Christian Lindner who has seen his party out of four regional parliaments.
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    .

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    Bomber Harris, is that you?

    One of the things we learned from WW2, is that you could have utterly destroyed cities, with no water or power, and yet life continued.

    Shit life, for sure, but let's not pretend that Russia is managing even 1% of the devastation that the US and the UK wreaked on Germany in the last years of the warm, and which barely dented either industrial production or the will to resist.
    Intense bombing didn't defeat the Viet Cong either, tho they were prepared to live in muddy pits and eat tarantulas to win the war. And there was no risk of dying from intense cold if they had no power

    But terror bombing did defeat the Japanese - a much more advanced society, which is interesting in itself

    Anyway you are of course right. The question is does he have the missiles/drones to keep this up? Almost certainly not, at the moment. But he will be begging China and Iran for more

    China might help out, if it sees this as a way of ensuring Putin's survival, and avoiding him going nuclear
    It was not terror bombing on its own.
    Hope they served the Tarantula properly, Tempura I suggest - though it would be a scream if you simply ordered soup of the day, and didn’t realise it was Tarantula Surprise.
    I have eaten tarantula. I might try and find a photo of my ordeal

    I ate them in Skuon, Cambodia, where they deep fry them, cover them with Knorr Readymix, and treat them as a delicacy. The Skuoners acquired this habit during the Khmer Rouge years, when all they had to eat was tarantulas

    They are profoundly disgusting. The thorax still gives me shudders
    I wasn’t too far out then with Tempura 😆

    🤮
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,987
    .
    JWallace said:

    maxh said:

    I’m beginning to think that there is a strong moral* case for all out NATO assault on Russian forces in Ukraine, despite having been dead against this until recently.

    Sure, it has risks. Ww3 chief amongst them. But I think we are caught in a fairly binary choice at the moment with likely poor outcomes on both sides…either:

    1. We allow Putin to very clearly commit war crimes on UKR civilians, and send a global message that the global rules-based order is toothless and irrelevant, or

    2. We say enough is enough, mobilise to defend UKR as a proxy for the right of nations everywhere to expect the rules-based order to apply to them, and risk the consequences.

    I’m not suggesting 2 lightly, but I think the moral consequences of 1 are far worse, long term, than many of us have really had a chance to think through. I am beginning to think we need to defend, visibly and with force, our view of how the world should work.

    *I suspect, but don’t know, that politically this would be very difficult, especially for Biden in run up to midterms. But that doesn’t affect the moral case.

    maxh said:

    I’m beginning to think that there is a strong moral* case for all out NATO assault on Russian forces in Ukraine, despite having been dead against this until recently.

    Sure, it has risks. Ww3 chief amongst them. But I think we are caught in a fairly binary choice at the moment with likely poor outcomes on both sides…either:

    1. We allow Putin to very clearly commit war crimes on UKR civilians, and send a global message that the global rules-based order is toothless and irrelevant, or

    2. We say enough is enough, mobilise to defend UKR as a proxy for the right of nations everywhere to expect the rules-based order to apply to them, and risk the consequences.

    I’m not suggesting 2 lightly, but I think the moral consequences of 1 are far worse, long term, than many of us have really had a chance to think through. I am beginning to think we need to defend, visibly and with force, our view of how the world should work.

    *I suspect, but don’t know, that politically this would be very difficult, especially for Biden in run up to midterms. But that doesn’t affect the moral case.

    Interesting that the russians bailed out Donald Trump when he was about to file bankruptcy in 2004. How much does Trump owe to the Russians and how does this impact his statements
    No libeling people on here please.
  • Options
    Truss is awful, she needs to be removed, she's a threat to the nation.
  • Options
    maxh said:

    I’m beginning to think that there is a strong moral* case for all out NATO assault on Russian forces in Ukraine, despite having been dead against this until recently.

    Sure, it has risks. Ww3 chief amongst them. But I think we are caught in a fairly binary choice at the moment with likely poor outcomes on both sides…either:

    1. We allow Putin to very clearly commit war crimes on UKR civilians, and send a global message that the global rules-based order is toothless and irrelevant, or

    2. We say enough is enough, mobilise to defend UKR as a proxy for the right of nations everywhere to expect the rules-based order to apply to them, and risk the consequences.

    I’m not suggesting 2 lightly, but I think the moral consequences of 1 are far worse, long term, than many of us have really had a chance to think through. I am beginning to think we need to defend, visibly and with force, our view of how the world should work.

    *I suspect, but don’t know, that politically this would be very difficult, especially for Biden in run up to midterms. But that doesn’t affect the moral case.

    Yes. A shooting war between Nato and Russia is a top idea. Especially when we're fighting for someone who isn't a NATO member who has a chunk of people who are ethnic Russians.

    Happily we have President Biden. Under President Trump we'd already have tried to cut a deal to hand Ukraine to his friend Putin, and then all died when Trump provoked a nuclear war when Putin demanded the Baltics too or he gets the piss pictures out.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,987
    edited October 2022

    Omnium said:

    Ratters said:

    Omnium said:

    Ratters said:

    Here's another thing - the Bank of England has so far only spent £3bn out of the reported £65bn.

    And they are buying the wrong assets - conventional gilts rather than index-linked gilts which is the core of the pensions market.

    The BoE's intervention has just slowed down the run on UK government debt, UK corporate bonds and UK property funds, but it hasn't stopped it.

    Index linked gilts surely can't be seen as the core of the pensions market, as you put it. Fund managers really don't like them.
    They are probably the single biggest holding for most DB pension schemes as they are a good match for inflation-linked pension payments.
    They've generally traded on a negative real yield though. Why would fund managers choose such a thing? I've generally assumed that the holders were pretty much all banks with their arms twisted.

    I admit my 'Fund managers don't like them' was the case many years ago rather than based on any recent experience.
    A pension fund manager chooses such a thing because in a future scenario where inflation in high, the real-terms loss is less than that of other 'safe' assets.

    But I see that index-linked gilts are now trading at prices which will give positive real returns. Looks like a great opportunity for pension funds.
    The total return of index linked Gilts has been eyewateringly bad: https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/indices/fixed-income/sp-uk-inflation-linked-gilt-index/#overview

    Frankly, you might as well have invested in crypto.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,151
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Time to move away from the hyperbole of distant conflicts and thoughts of "Wartime Coalitions" (anything to keep Labour out of Government, it would seem?) and back to the day to day of elections and polls.

    Denmark votes in just three weeks and the latest Voxmeter poll as follows (changes from 2019 election):

    Social Democrats: 27.1% (+1.2)
    Venstre: 13.8% (-9.6)
    Conservative: 9.8% (+3.2)
    Denmark Democrats: 9.0% (new)
    Socialist Folkeparti: 8.7% (+1.0)
    Red-Green Alliance: 6.7% (-0.2)
    Liberal Alliance: 5.3% (+3.0)
    Radikale Venstre: 5.0% (-3.6)
    New Right: 4.9% (+2.5)
    Moderates: 4.1% (new)
    People's Party: 2.3% (-6.4)
    Alternative: 2.0% (-1.0)

    All the above would get into the new Folketing on those numbers. The current Government (and supporting parties) have 47.5% (-1.6) but looking at a prospective centre-right bloc, you have Venstre, the Conservatives, Denmark Democrats, Liberal Alliance, New Right and the People's Party and combined they score 45.1% and that contains a lot of ifs, buts and maybes in terms of who will or won't together.

    The Moderates sit on 4.1% and remain in the box seat currently.

    To be accurate, the Folketing has 179 members - 175 of whom are elected in Denmark itself with two each from the Faeroes and Greenland respectively. Last time, Social Democrat parties won two of the four, one went to the centre right and one to the far left.

    It's a decent poll for the Government and the centre-left parties but there's still 3 weeks to go.

    To wrap up Lower Saxony where overhanging and levelling (which sounds positively mediaeval but is more psephological) has expanded the Landtag to 146 seats (from 135) - the SPD ended up on 57 seats, the CDU 47, Greens 24 and Alternativ 18.

    It's quite clear the CDU are out and we'll see a new majority SPD-Green Government which will be a relief for Chancellor Scholz, a headache for opposition leader Merz, something to smile about for the Greens and a pain in somewhat different areas for FDP leader Christian Lindner who has seen his party out of four regional parliaments.

    So you are not calling this Folkething a borgon conclusion yet then?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
    Ukraine coped just fine with regular power cuts before the war, I’m sure they’ll cope just as well during it.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Oh no, not a power cut for a few hours

    Having no power or water for a day or two, was perfectly normal in Ukraine before the war. It won’t be a problem during the war either. People cope, because people do that, especially when there’s a wider context of a madman trying to take over their way of life.

    How are the residents of the leafy parts of London 2022, going to react if there’s no power for a few hours this winter?
    In Johannesburg - and many other South African cities - you have several hours of "load shedding" every single day. No power, no lights, the traffic lights are gone.

    And you know what, people survive.
    Ditto under Heath in the 70s.
    Remember my mum cooking on a camping stove by candlelight.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,995
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work
    Of course they work. Russia would have been colonised about 60 years ago otherwise.

    The terrifying thing is that so much effort is being made by western propagandists on certain websites to spread the idea that they don't work, or that they might work if launched but the commanders would never manage to launch them successfully, or if they did launch some it would only be a few that managed to get through to targets, so few as to make WW3 an utterly good idea if Russia doesn't act as the USA wants it to.

    One inconvenient thing for those who are spreading such evil war propaganda is that the whole of US nuclear weapons policy, as well as the existence of NATO etc., has been predicated on the idea that Soviet and now Russian strategic nukes actually do work. So if only all the western strategists between say 1950 and 2020 could have seen ahead a few decades and got their wisdom from Twitter...

    The reason that Russia has not been “colonised” is largely to do with the fact that aside from Adolf Hitler, no one wanted to.

    If Putin hadn’t been stupid enough to start this war, Nordstream 2 would have been up and running, and my how the money would have rolled in….

    Far from attacking Russia people were making all kind of allowances for the foul behaviour of its leadership.

    It took Putin waving his Big Weapons to unite everyone in Europe against him. If he carries on he might get Ireland and Switzerland into the alliance against him.
    He could have just sat back and raked in huge amounts of cash, acting like a bully toward his neighbours from time to time and make believing that the whole world was out to get Russia.

    Instead he seems to have wanted a legacy as a conqueror, the guy so powerful he changed the world, and was not content to simply live out his days as a super rich autocrat.
    In any situation like this, you need to ask what the sides want.

    In the case of Ukraine, it seems to be at least going back to the borders of February 2022, if not 2014. There are other things - they would probably quite like reparations or NATO membership - but the borders are the main thing.

    Russia's desires are much more complex. Putin's asserted reasons for the invasion smell like horsecr@p to me: "denazification" and demilitarisation. So if those are not real, then what does he want? Sadly for all of us, his rhetoric appears to be that he wants a Greater Russia that is essentially the same as the old USSR: all the old Eastern European states either directly under Russian control, or with Belarussian-style Russofriendly leaders. At the very least, he wants Ukraine and the Baltic states under Russian actual or de facto control.

    He wraps this up in some weird fallacious historical and quasi-religious mumbo-jumbo.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,987
    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Spectacular detail in the Spectator profile of the new Russian general, now in charge of the war

    "in 2004, he upbraided one of his subordinates so severely that the scolded subordinate shot himself"

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/putin-s-attack-dog-brings-a-terrible-new-type-of-warfare-to-ukraine

    Sounds like a diamond geezer

    Busy year for him

    In March 2004, Surovikin was accused by Lieutenant Colonel Viktor Chibizov of beating him up for voting for the wrong candidate. In April, division deputy commander for armaments Colonel Andrei Shtakal shot himself in the presence of Surovikin and the district deputy commander after being criticized by Surovikin.[5] In both cases, a military prosecutor found no evidence of guilt.[8]

    Mind you I'd want to interview the district deputy commander before forming a view on the incident.
    Who hasn't had a subordinate commit suicide?
  • Options
    Have got BBC Scotland on whilst I do YouTube editing. "Highlands - Scotland's Wild Heart" narrated by Ewan McGregor. Its a much better PPB for the SNP than tonight's shite effort.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,151
    edited October 2022
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This ynly works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
    Ukraine coped just fine with regular power cuts before the war, I’m sure they’ll cope just as well during it.
    I'm talking about hugely prolonged power cuts, maybe weeks or months. Not a few hours a day a few times a week. I hope we never find out if my speculations - that this would be insufferably painful - are right or wrong

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work
    Of course they work. Russia would have been colonised about 60 years ago otherwise.

    The terrifying thing is that so much effort is being made by western propagandists on certain websites to spread the idea that they don't work, or that they might work if launched but the commanders would never manage to launch them successfully, or if they did launch some it would only be a few that managed to get through to targets, so few as to make WW3 an utterly good idea if Russia doesn't act as the USA wants it to.

    One inconvenient thing for those who are spreading such evil war propaganda is that the whole of US nuclear weapons policy, as well as the existence of NATO etc., has been predicated on the idea that Soviet and now Russian strategic nukes actually do work. So if only all the western strategists between say 1950 and 2020 could have seen ahead a few decades and got their wisdom from Twitter...

    The reason that Russia has not been “colonised” is largely to do with the fact that aside from Adolf Hitler, no one wanted to.

    If Putin hadn’t been stupid enough to start this war, Nordstream 2 would have been up and running, and my how the money would have rolled in….

    Far from attacking Russia people were making all kind of allowances for the foul behaviour of its leadership.

    It took Putin waving his Big Weapons to unite everyone in Europe against him. If he carries on he might get Ireland and Switzerland into the alliance against him.
    He could have just sat back and raked in huge amounts of cash, acting like a bully toward his neighbours from time to time and make believing that the whole world was out to get Russia.

    Instead he seems to have wanted a legacy as a conqueror, the guy so powerful he changed the world, and was not content to simply live out his days as a super rich autocrat.
    In any situation like this, you need to ask what the sides want.

    In the case of Ukraine, it seems to be at least going back to the borders of February 2022, if not 2014. There are other things - they would probably quite like reparations or NATO membership - but the borders are the main thing.

    Russia's desires are much more complex. Putin's asserted reasons for the invasion smell like horsecr@p to me: "denazification" and demilitarisation. So if those are not real, then what does he want? Sadly for all of us, his rhetoric appears to be that he wants a Greater Russia that is essentially the same as the old USSR: all the old Eastern European states either directly under Russian control, or with Belarussian-style Russofriendly leaders. At the very least, he wants Ukraine and the Baltic states under Russian actual or de facto control.

    He wraps this up in some weird fallacious historical and quasi-religious mumbo-jumbo.
    If only he'd found his calling as a pseudo-historical twitter ranting nutbag before he became a dictator.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,151
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Oh no, not a power cut for a few hours

    Having no power or water for a day or two, was perfectly normal in Ukraine before the war. It won’t be a problem during the war either. People cope, because people do that, especially when there’s a wider context of a madman trying to take over their way of life.

    How are the residents of the leafy parts of London 2022, going to react if there’s no power for a few hours this winter?
    In Johannesburg - and many other South African cities - you have several hours of "load shedding" every single day. No power, no lights, the traffic lights are gone.

    And you know what, people survive.
    Ditto under Heath in the 70s.
    Remember my mum cooking on a camping stove by candlelight.
    Call me Cap'n Peter Pessimistic, but I've got a weird feeling the coming winter in Ukraine might just be a tad more of an ordeal than "the 3 day week" in Great Britain in the 1970s, when we occasionally had to use candles as we ate our Findus lasagne
  • Options
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
    They died primarily of starvation and close range shelling, and it lasted nearly three years. The comparison just isn't valid.

    You can take an issue seriously without resorting to the overwrought, excitable, and frankly genuinely weird fantasies to which you are constantly attracted.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,987
    edited October 2022

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work
    Of course they work. Russia would have been colonised about 60 years ago otherwise.

    The terrifying thing is that so much effort is being made by western propagandists on certain websites to spread the idea that they don't work, or that they might work if launched but the commanders would never manage to launch them successfully, or if they did launch some it would only be a few that managed to get through to targets, so few as to make WW3 an utterly good idea if Russia doesn't act as the USA wants it to.

    One inconvenient thing for those who are spreading such evil war propaganda is that the whole of US nuclear weapons policy, as well as the existence of NATO etc., has been predicated on the idea that Soviet and now Russian strategic nukes actually do work. So if only all the western strategists between say 1950 and 2020 could have seen ahead a few decades and got their wisdom from Twitter...

    The reason that Russia has not been “colonised” is largely to do with the fact that aside from Adolf Hitler, no one wanted to.

    If Putin hadn’t been stupid enough to start this war, Nordstream 2 would have been up and running, and my how the money would have rolled in….

    Far from attacking Russia people were making all kind of allowances for the foul behaviour of its leadership.

    It took Putin waving his Big Weapons to unite everyone in Europe against him. If he carries on he might get Ireland and Switzerland into the alliance against him.
    He could have just sat back and raked in huge amounts of cash, acting like a bully toward his neighbours from time to time and make believing that the whole world was out to get Russia.

    Instead he seems to have wanted a legacy as a conqueror, the guy so powerful he changed the world, and was not content to simply live out his days as a super rich autocrat.
    And if Saddam Hussein hadn’t gone on a bender in Kuwait he would probably still be with us.

    These guys always seem to end up high on their own supply.
    Had they not been utterly certain of their own abilities, they would never have ended up dictator in the first place.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896
    So, it seems that nine out of ten F1 teams managed to spend the right amount of money last year - guess which one didn’t?

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/63204082
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    So, it seems that nine out of ten F1 teams managed to spend the right amount of money last year - guess which one didn’t?

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/63204082

    Tainted title.
  • Options
    Personally we should strip Christian Horner of British citizenship.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,151

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
    They died primarily of starvation and close range shelling, and it lasted nearly three years. The comparison just isn't valid.

    You can take an issue seriously without resorting to the overwrought, excitable, and frankly genuinely weird fantasies to which you are constantly attracted.
    Yes yes. Tish tish

    I cannot find a parallel in history with what Putin MIGHT do that is better than the Siege of Leningrad. Similar climate, similar numbers, similar experience. Can you? And we can only predict what might happen by learning from history. Plenty of military people have already compared this war to WW1 and WW2 in its brutality

    If the Mods think it is distasteful to speculate in this way, then they can tell me - and I will stop. Otherwise I will continue to comment, and you are free to read, or not
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896

    Sandpit said:

    So, it seems that nine out of ten F1 teams managed to spend the right amount of money last year - guess which one didn’t?

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/63204082

    Tainted title.
    Even more tainted than it was already!
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,995

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work
    Of course they work. Russia would have been colonised about 60 years ago otherwise.

    The terrifying thing is that so much effort is being made by western propagandists on certain websites to spread the idea that they don't work, or that they might work if launched but the commanders would never manage to launch them successfully, or if they did launch some it would only be a few that managed to get through to targets, so few as to make WW3 an utterly good idea if Russia doesn't act as the USA wants it to.

    One inconvenient thing for those who are spreading such evil war propaganda is that the whole of US nuclear weapons policy, as well as the existence of NATO etc., has been predicated on the idea that Soviet and now Russian strategic nukes actually do work. So if only all the western strategists between say 1950 and 2020 could have seen ahead a few decades and got their wisdom from Twitter...

    The reason that Russia has not been “colonised” is largely to do with the fact that aside from Adolf Hitler, no one wanted to.

    If Putin hadn’t been stupid enough to start this war, Nordstream 2 would have been up and running, and my how the money would have rolled in….

    Far from attacking Russia people were making all kind of allowances for the foul behaviour of its leadership.

    It took Putin waving his Big Weapons to unite everyone in Europe against him. If he carries on he might get Ireland and Switzerland into the alliance against him.
    He could have just sat back and raked in huge amounts of cash, acting like a bully toward his neighbours from time to time and make believing that the whole world was out to get Russia.

    Instead he seems to have wanted a legacy as a conqueror, the guy so powerful he changed the world, and was not content to simply live out his days as a super rich autocrat.
    And if Saddam Hussein hadn’t gone on a bender in Kuwait he would probably still be with us.

    These guys always seem to end up high on their own supply.
    Mrs J has a saying (which I think comes from Turkish): "He's high on his own farts."
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,151
    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work
    Of course they work. Russia would have been colonised about 60 years ago otherwise.

    The terrifying thing is that so much effort is being made by western propagandists on certain websites to spread the idea that they don't work, or that they might work if launched but the commanders would never manage to launch them successfully, or if they did launch some it would only be a few that managed to get through to targets, so few as to make WW3 an utterly good idea if Russia doesn't act as the USA wants it to.

    One inconvenient thing for those who are spreading such evil war propaganda is that the whole of US nuclear weapons policy, as well as the existence of NATO etc., has been predicated on the idea that Soviet and now Russian strategic nukes actually do work. So if only all the western strategists between say 1950 and 2020 could have seen ahead a few decades and got their wisdom from Twitter...

    The reason that Russia has not been “colonised” is largely to do with the fact that aside from Adolf Hitler, no one wanted to.

    If Putin hadn’t been stupid enough to start this war, Nordstream 2 would have been up and running, and my how the money would have rolled in….

    Far from attacking Russia people were making all kind of allowances for the foul behaviour of its leadership.

    It took Putin waving his Big Weapons to unite everyone in Europe against him. If he carries on he might get Ireland and Switzerland into the alliance against him.
    He could have just sat back and raked in huge amounts of cash, acting like a bully toward his neighbours from time to time and make believing that the whole world was out to get Russia.

    Instead he seems to have wanted a legacy as a conqueror, the guy so powerful he changed the world, and was not content to simply live out his days as a super rich autocrat.
    And if Saddam Hussein hadn’t gone on a bender in Kuwait he would probably still be with us.

    These guys always seem to end up high on their own supply.
    Had they not been utterly certain of their own abilities, they would never have ended up dictator in the first place.
    Dictator Overreach is a definite thing, tho. @kle4 is right

    I wonder if they just get bored. How many palaces and yachts can you enjoy? War is more fun (for them)
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    So, it seems that nine out of ten F1 teams managed to spend the right amount of money last year - guess which one didn’t?

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/63204082

    Williams - didn't spend enough.
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,945
    rcs1000 said:

    Omnium said:

    Ratters said:

    Omnium said:

    Ratters said:

    Here's another thing - the Bank of England has so far only spent £3bn out of the reported £65bn.

    And they are buying the wrong assets - conventional gilts rather than index-linked gilts which is the core of the pensions market.

    The BoE's intervention has just slowed down the run on UK government debt, UK corporate bonds and UK property funds, but it hasn't stopped it.

    Index linked gilts surely can't be seen as the core of the pensions market, as you put it. Fund managers really don't like them.
    They are probably the single biggest holding for most DB pension schemes as they are a good match for inflation-linked pension payments.
    They've generally traded on a negative real yield though. Why would fund managers choose such a thing? I've generally assumed that the holders were pretty much all banks with their arms twisted.

    I admit my 'Fund managers don't like them' was the case many years ago rather than based on any recent experience.
    A pension fund manager chooses such a thing because in a future scenario where inflation in high, the real-terms loss is less than that of other 'safe' assets.

    But I see that index-linked gilts are now trading at prices which will give positive real returns. Looks like a great opportunity for pension funds.
    The total return of index linked Gilts has been eyewateringly bad: https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/indices/fixed-income/sp-uk-inflation-linked-gilt-index/#overview

    Frankly, you might as well have invested in crypto.
    With the exception of a couple of weeks, crypto never really traded above the 59k mark (peaked at 64k in November), and averaged about 40k during most of 2021's bull run. So if you bought last year, you're essentially looking at a 50-60% drawdown, depending on when you bought. SPX down 24% YTD, NDQ down 33%. Meme stocks like GME down 62% from their 2021 peak, while Netflix is down a whopping 67% from its November 2021 peak and Facebook (Meta) down 64% from its 2021 peak - both worse drawdowns than bitcoin.

    TL;DR, an ETF tracking the SPX would have lost you about half of what investing in bitcoin would have lost you slightly less than half of investing in bitcoin, NDQ slightly less than a third. Bitcoin was a better bet to hold in 2021-2022 than either Netflix or Facebook.
  • Options

    Personally we should strip Christian Horner of British citizenship.

    He married Geri Helliwell. Isn't that punishment enough?

    Anyway park the Horners. The genius that is Adrian Newey deserves respect for yet another dominant car design.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,779
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
    They died primarily of starvation and close range shelling, and it lasted nearly three years. The comparison just isn't valid.

    You can take an issue seriously without resorting to the overwrought, excitable, and frankly genuinely weird fantasies to which you are constantly attracted.
    Yes yes. Tish tish

    I cannot find a parallel in history with what Putin MIGHT do that is better than the Siege of Leningrad. Similar climate, similar numbers, similar experience. Can you? And we can only predict what might happen by learning from history. Plenty of military people have already compared this war to WW1 and WW2 in its brutality

    If the Mods think it is distasteful to speculate in this way, then they can tell me - and I will stop. Otherwise I will continue to comment, and you are free to read, or not
    Putin isn't going to do anything other than by-the-numbers. He has no upside if he strays.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,151
    IshmaelZ said:
    That's fascinating. Not entirely sure I buy it, but fascinating


    Conclusion:

    "For the moment, though, only two things are certain in this hall of mirrors: someone did blow up the bridge using a truck bomb and that someone was willing to kill the driver to do it."
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,987
    edited October 2022
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
    No, it's not remotely comparable.

    Leningrad was completely cut off, except for occasional supplies across the ice.

    Kiev is not going to be cut off and it's not going to be surrounded by German troops. There will not be any trouble in getting food to Kiev.

    There will be power cuts. But completely cutting off all power is harder than you think. It's also perfectly possible for the West to supply containerised power stations (there's a Scottish company whose name I forget who rents those out).

    But this isn't like the Blitz. This is a few dozen missiles chucked with low accuracy at a city.
  • Options
    RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,977

    Sandpit said:

    So, it seems that nine out of ten F1 teams managed to spend the right amount of money last year - guess which one didn’t?

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/63204082

    Williams - didn't spend enough.
    I bet all the FIA will do with Red Bull is fine them.

    I’d love to see driver’s championship points taken off Verstappen last year, making Hamilton the champion (but that won’t happen)
  • Options
    Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,540
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Oh no, not a power cut for a few hours

    Having no power or water for a day or two, was perfectly normal in Ukraine before the war. It won’t be a problem during the war either. People cope, because people do that, especially when there’s a wider context of a madman trying to take over their way of life.

    How are the residents of the leafy parts of London 2022, going to react if there’s no power for a few hours this winter?
    In Johannesburg - and many other South African cities - you have several hours of "load shedding" every single day. No power, no lights, the traffic lights are gone.

    And you know what, people survive.
    Ditto under Heath in the 70s.
    Remember my mum cooking on a camping stove by candlelight.
    Did she taste good?
  • Options
    moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,244
    Leon said:

    moonshine said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)

    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    There are estimates online of Russia’s prewar production capacity of cruise missiles of 120 per year. Pretty paltry. Sure the Iranians are giving some kamikaze drones but what is their production capacity? How easy are they to destroy? Total fired in the last 24 hours was 75, over half shot down. And with more air defence systems on the way.

    You are falling into an abyss of hyperbole.
    I'm really not. I am, I hope, being realistic. I want Putin to lose and this war to end in peace, but we are not at that happy place yet



    I've said multiple times today that Putin surely doesn't have enough missiles/drones as things stand. So this tactic fails AS THINGS STAND

    But wars evolve quickly and chaotically. If Putin can persuade China to help out an old pal... (see my point below)

    When I was looking at the early Coronavirus threads, the other day, I checked your responses. For a long while you were in stubborn and ludicrous denial. You are lucky you wised up just in time to make money
    I have a particular perspective on the workings of the Chinese communist party too. And so far they’ve performed roughly as I would have expected. Studious neutrality. Not antagonising either Russia or the US.

    What did surprise me was the public rebuke by Xi when he visited Kazakhstan to guarantee its external security. I would argue that was one the most notable foreign policy interventions of the modern communist party. Because Kazakhstan’s external security is only really threatened by Russia. And everyone knows it.

    In this context, there is simply no rationale at all for China to provide Putin with supplies of precision missiles.

    I am fairly well as close to certain as it’s ever sensible to be that Russia will lose this war if fought on conventional terms. Indeed the die is already cast.

    I have much less certainty what happens thereafter in Russia but it’s very hard indeed to see how Putin himself would benefit from the use of nukes. By the time we hypothetically get to the point where he’s that desperate, he will have lost effective control anyway.

    My base case is he retains power after losing the war and sulks. Followed by some combination of one of the hardliners taking over and there being internal threats to their power from the regions. That’s not going to be fun. A civil war in Russia. Ugh.

    But it’s still really hard to get to a scenario of an exchange of strategic nukes. And plenty of people far more qualified than an MIT physicist agree.

  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,334



    They died primarily of starvation and close range shelling, and it lasted nearly three years. The comparison just isn't valid.

    You can take an issue seriously without resorting to the overwrought, excitable, and frankly genuinely weird fantasies to which you are constantly attracted.

    Yes. A great-aunt of mine was among the million who died of starvation in Leningrad. It's not excusing the invasion of Ukraine to say that widespread disuption to power supplies is a different order of magnitude.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,151
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
    No, it's not remotely comparable.

    Leningrad was completely cut off, except for occasional supplies across the ice.

    Kiev is not going to be cut off and it's not going to be surrounded by German troops. There will not be any trouble in getting food to Kiev.

    There will be power cuts. But completely cutting off all power is harder than you think. It's also perfectly possible for the West to supply containerised power stations (there's a Scottish company whose name I forget who rents those out).

    But this isn't like the Blitz. This is a few dozen missiles chucked with low accuracy at a city.
    I'm not sure that's the case. No this isn't the Blitz, but then societies are much more dependant on networks than they were in 1940

    No one has tried to take down the entire infrastructure of a fairly advanced nation (complete with internet, etc) in the modern era. There may be systemic failures we have not anticipated. Human civilisation has become fantastically complex but also delicate

    My comparison with Leningrad was not the Germans and the starvation, more the experience of a big city with a similar climate going months without power. On reading, it seems Leningrad did have some power, but it was severely rationed: not allowed in homes, only in factories etc
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work
    Of course they work. Russia would have been colonised about 60 years ago otherwise.

    The terrifying thing is that so much effort is being made by western propagandists on certain websites to spread the idea that they don't work, or that they might work if launched but the commanders would never manage to launch them successfully, or if they did launch some it would only be a few that managed to get through to targets, so few as to make WW3 an utterly good idea if Russia doesn't act as the USA wants it to.

    One inconvenient thing for those who are spreading such evil war propaganda is that the whole of US nuclear weapons policy, as well as the existence of NATO etc., has been predicated on the idea that Soviet and now Russian strategic nukes actually do work. So if only all the western strategists between say 1950 and 2020 could have seen ahead a few decades and got their wisdom from Twitter...

    The reason that Russia has not been “colonised” is largely to do with the fact that aside from Adolf Hitler, no one wanted to.

    If Putin hadn’t been stupid enough to start this war, Nordstream 2 would have been up and running, and my how the money would have rolled in….

    Far from attacking Russia people were making all kind of allowances for the foul behaviour of its leadership.

    It took Putin waving his Big Weapons to unite everyone in Europe against him. If he carries on he might get Ireland and Switzerland into the alliance against him.
    He could have just sat back and raked in huge amounts of cash, acting like a bully toward his neighbours from time to time and make believing that the whole world was out to get Russia.

    Instead he seems to have wanted a legacy as a conqueror, the guy so powerful he changed the world, and was not content to simply live out his days as a super rich autocrat.
    And if Saddam Hussein hadn’t gone on a bender in Kuwait he would probably still be with us.

    These guys always seem to end up high on their own supply.
    Had they not been utterly certain of their own abilities, they would never have ended up dictator in the first place.
    Dictator Overreach is a definite thing, tho. kle4 is right

    I wonder if they just get bored. How many palaces and yachts can you enjoy? War is more fun (for them)
    Power over wealth. Forcing others to submit to them definitely feels like a goal - they'd not need such visible demonstration of their power otherwise.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,046
    What about the launching of missiles from Moldovan airspace? If Moldova asked Nato to take care of its airspace, should we accept?
  • Options
    TresTres Posts: 2,226
    Omnium said:

    Ratters said:

    Here's another thing - the Bank of England has so far only spent £3bn out of the reported £65bn.

    And they are buying the wrong assets - conventional gilts rather than index-linked gilts which is the core of the pensions market.

    The BoE's intervention has just slowed down the run on UK government debt, UK corporate bonds and UK property funds, but it hasn't stopped it.

    Index linked gilts surely can't be seen as the core of the pensions market, as you put it. Fund managers really don't like them.
    They are a good match for benefits that increase with inflation - which are what defined pension schemes usually offer.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,151
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work
    Of course they work. Russia would have been colonised about 60 years ago otherwise.

    The terrifying thing is that so much effort is being made by western propagandists on certain websites to spread the idea that they don't work, or that they might work if launched but the commanders would never manage to launch them successfully, or if they did launch some it would only be a few that managed to get through to targets, so few as to make WW3 an utterly good idea if Russia doesn't act as the USA wants it to.

    One inconvenient thing for those who are spreading such evil war propaganda is that the whole of US nuclear weapons policy, as well as the existence of NATO etc., has been predicated on the idea that Soviet and now Russian strategic nukes actually do work. So if only all the western strategists between say 1950 and 2020 could have seen ahead a few decades and got their wisdom from Twitter...

    The reason that Russia has not been “colonised” is largely to do with the fact that aside from Adolf Hitler, no one wanted to.

    If Putin hadn’t been stupid enough to start this war, Nordstream 2 would have been up and running, and my how the money would have rolled in….

    Far from attacking Russia people were making all kind of allowances for the foul behaviour of its leadership.

    It took Putin waving his Big Weapons to unite everyone in Europe against him. If he carries on he might get Ireland and Switzerland into the alliance against him.
    He could have just sat back and raked in huge amounts of cash, acting like a bully toward his neighbours from time to time and make believing that the whole world was out to get Russia.

    Instead he seems to have wanted a legacy as a conqueror, the guy so powerful he changed the world, and was not content to simply live out his days as a super rich autocrat.
    And if Saddam Hussein hadn’t gone on a bender in Kuwait he would probably still be with us.

    These guys always seem to end up high on their own supply.
    Had they not been utterly certain of their own abilities, they would never have ended up dictator in the first place.
    Dictator Overreach is a definite thing, tho. kle4 is right

    I wonder if they just get bored. How many palaces and yachts can you enjoy? War is more fun (for them)
    Power over wealth. Forcing others to submit to them definitely feels like a goal - they'd not need such visible demonstration of their power otherwise.
    Power is totes more fun than mere wealth. As Kissinger observed
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,526
    edited October 2022

    If there ever were an "antigrowth coalition" proposal, you're looking at it.

    Completely backwards from the government's professed agenda.

    100% agreed.

    Utter nonsense pandering to the anti growth coalition of NIMBYs. Inexcusable.
    Its the raging hypocrisy which is most funny.

    They propose a bonfire of red tape for planning applications for housing and fracking
    They propose a burden of red tape to dictate planning decisions on private land

    What do they want? If they are so against red tape why are they proposing red tape? They are in favour of easier planning whilst proposing a dictatorial planning regime?
    This is bullshit. If it weren't for a framework of Government incentives, do you really think it would be more profitable for farmers in rainy Britain to put solar panels all over their land than, you know, grow stuff?
    Well let's think about this. Agriculture is heavily subsidised. Solar panels are not.

    Hmm, which has an incentive? 🤔
    i shouldn't mock but if building solar farms isn't profitable they aren't going to be a problem.

    BTW
    they are not a problem .

    https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-is-solar-power-a-threat-to-uk-farmland/
    IIRC that piece only references studies from climates substantially different from the UK eg places in the USA, and with hundreds of hours more insolation than here.

    If the studies had been done for the UK climate, I think they would be referencing them.

    If you look in the comments, you can see me making various points there some weeks ago.

    Those who wish to gobble up farmland here for solar are like the people who don't want to build on brown field sites because it is a little bit less profitable for them to be more socially responsible.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586
    .

    Sandpit said:

    So, it seems that nine out of ten F1 teams managed to spend the right amount of money last year - guess which one didn’t?

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/63204082

    Tainted title.
    Stolen title.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,334
    rcs1000 said:



    In Johannesburg - and many other South African cities - you have several hours of "load shedding" every single day. No power, no lights, the traffic lights are gone.

    And you know what, people survive.

    Agreed. But a friend in South Africa says the power cuts have destroyed his desktop and forced him to buy another and reload everything. I've never heard of such a thing - are there any particular precautions we should take before an anticipated cut? Simply shut down the system?
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415

    rcs1000 said:



    In Johannesburg - and many other South African cities - you have several hours of "load shedding" every single day. No power, no lights, the traffic lights are gone.

    And you know what, people survive.

    Agreed. But a friend in South Africa says the power cuts have destroyed his desktop and forced him to buy another and reload everything. I've never heard of such a thing - are there any particular precautions we should take before an anticipated cut? Simply shut down the system?
    Bit of a bummer for anyone relying on breathing apparatus 😕
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,995

    Sandpit said:

    So, it seems that nine out of ten F1 teams managed to spend the right amount of money last year - guess which one didn’t?

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/63204082

    Williams - didn't spend enough.
    I bet all the FIA will do with Red Bull is fine them.

    I’d love to see driver’s championship points taken off Verstappen last year, making Hamilton the champion (but that won’t happen)
    There has to be a penalty that hurts Red Bull - otherwise the spending cap (which IMO is a good idea) is pointless.

    I'd love them to hand last year's championship to Hamilton (and this overspend is akin to cheating), but that'd be too political. IMO the thing to do is reduce 2023's cap by double the amount they overspent. So if they overspent by three million, next year they get six million less to spend.
  • Options
    solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,623

    Sandpit said:

    So, it seems that nine out of ten F1 teams managed to spend the right amount of money last year - guess which one didn’t?

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/63204082

    Williams - didn't spend enough.
    I bet all the FIA will do with Red Bull is fine them.

    I’d love to see driver’s championship points taken off Verstappen last year, making Hamilton the champion (but that won’t happen)
    If the outcome for breaking the cost cap is a fine (i.e. give us some more money to make up for the fact you spent too much money) the FIA are even stupider than I thought.

    What's funny though is even after being told they've broken it Horner still saying "but we didn't". Got to double down on the innocent act now after having a go at Toto I guess.

    In a way it would fundamentally change the DNA of the sport, but if they made F1 a spec series I'm not sure I'd be that unhappy.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    MattW said:

    If there ever were an "antigrowth coalition" proposal, you're looking at it.

    Completely backwards from the government's professed agenda.

    100% agreed.

    Utter nonsense pandering to the anti growth coalition of NIMBYs. Inexcusable.
    Its the raging hypocrisy which is most funny.

    They propose a bonfire of red tape for planning applications for housing and fracking
    They propose a burden of red tape to dictate planning decisions on private land

    What do they want? If they are so against red tape why are they proposing red tape? They are in favour of easier planning whilst proposing a dictatorial planning regime?
    This is bullshit. If it weren't for a framework of Government incentives, do you really think it would be more profitable for farmers in rainy Britain to put solar panels all over their land than, you know, grow stuff?
    Well let's think about this. Agriculture is heavily subsidised. Solar panels are not.

    Hmm, which has an incentive? 🤔
    i shouldn't mock but if building solar farms isn't profitable they aren't going to be a problem.

    BTW
    they are not a problem .

    https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-is-solar-power-a-threat-to-uk-farmland/
    That piece only references studies from climates substantially different from the UK eg places in the USA, and with hundreds of hours more insolation than here.

    If the studies had been done for the UK climate, I think they would be referencing them.

    If you look in the comments, you can see me making those points there some weeks ago.

    Those who wish to gobble up farmland here for solar are like the people who don't want to build on brown field sites because it is a little bit less profitable for them to be more socially responsible.
    And as I have pointed out to this guy already, look at the photo of sheep happily grazing under solar panels. Sheep cannot live on dirt and pebbles; they were put there for the photo op and then, one hopes, taken straight back to some actual grass.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
    They died primarily of starvation and close range shelling, and it lasted nearly three years. The comparison just isn't valid.

    You can take an issue seriously without resorting to the overwrought, excitable, and frankly genuinely weird fantasies to which you are constantly attracted.
    Yes yes. Tish tish

    I cannot find a parallel in history with what Putin MIGHT do that is better than the Siege of Leningrad. Similar climate, similar numbers, similar experience. Can you? And we can only predict what might happen by learning from history. Plenty of military people have already compared this war to WW1 and WW2 in its brutality

    If the Mods think it is distasteful to speculate in this way, then they can tell me - and I will stop. Otherwise I will continue to comment, and you are free to read, or not
    Some of the towns and cities in the east have been without power for some time.

    This isn’t’t the siege of Leningrad, though. You’d realise the comparison is stupid hyperbole if you paused to think about it.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,987

    rcs1000 said:



    In Johannesburg - and many other South African cities - you have several hours of "load shedding" every single day. No power, no lights, the traffic lights are gone.

    And you know what, people survive.

    Agreed. But a friend in South Africa says the power cuts have destroyed his desktop and forced him to buy another and reload everything. I've never heard of such a thing - are there any particular precautions we should take before an anticipated cut? Simply shut down the system?
    Have a laptop computer, not a desktop!
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896

    rcs1000 said:



    In Johannesburg - and many other South African cities - you have several hours of "load shedding" every single day. No power, no lights, the traffic lights are gone.

    And you know what, people survive.

    Agreed. But a friend in South Africa says the power cuts have destroyed his desktop and forced him to buy another and reload everything. I've never heard of such a thing - are there any particular precautions we should take before an anticipated cut? Simply shut down the system?
    For a home computer, use a UPS. For an office setup in Africa, we used a massive UPS with a generator backup, powering a separate “Clean Power” ring main for all the computers as well as the server room.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,526
    TimS said:

    Not sure if anyone already posted this from Lammy, but he is right. None of this Grant Shapps caretaker nonsense.

    https://twitter.com/DavidLammy/status/1579123871948869632?s=20&t=B4FjY_lpIJJHqPB2-ugk3A

    I wonder if David Lammy was demanding that Gordon Brown hold a General Election in 2009?
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,185
    IshmaelZ said:

    MattW said:

    If there ever were an "antigrowth coalition" proposal, you're looking at it.

    Completely backwards from the government's professed agenda.

    100% agreed.

    Utter nonsense pandering to the anti growth coalition of NIMBYs. Inexcusable.
    Its the raging hypocrisy which is most funny.

    They propose a bonfire of red tape for planning applications for housing and fracking
    They propose a burden of red tape to dictate planning decisions on private land

    What do they want? If they are so against red tape why are they proposing red tape? They are in favour of easier planning whilst proposing a dictatorial planning regime?
    This is bullshit. If it weren't for a framework of Government incentives, do you really think it would be more profitable for farmers in rainy Britain to put solar panels all over their land than, you know, grow stuff?
    Well let's think about this. Agriculture is heavily subsidised. Solar panels are not.

    Hmm, which has an incentive? 🤔
    i shouldn't mock but if building solar farms isn't profitable they aren't going to be a problem.

    BTW
    they are not a problem .

    https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-is-solar-power-a-threat-to-uk-farmland/
    That piece only references studies from climates substantially different from the UK eg places in the USA, and with hundreds of hours more insolation than here.

    If the studies had been done for the UK climate, I think they would be referencing them.

    If you look in the comments, you can see me making those points there some weeks ago.

    Those who wish to gobble up farmland here for solar are like the people who don't want to build on brown field sites because it is a little bit less profitable for them to be more socially responsible.
    And as I have pointed out to this guy already, look at the photo of sheep happily grazing under solar panels. Sheep cannot live on dirt and pebbles; they were put there for the photo op and then, one hopes, taken straight back to some actual grass.
    How much light does grass need a day? Does it grow in the shade? It’s entirely possible that some grazing can be done among solar panels.
  • Options
    AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,004
    Not sure if this has been posted yet (video on link).

    Crimea Railway Bridge damage: the fire burned with 1000+ degrees Celsius and melted the rails. That rail isn't gonna be in use for a week or two... and I doubt the bridge can hold the weight of a train transporting tanks.
    https://twitter.com/noclador/status/1579545243183374337
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,232
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:



    In Johannesburg - and many other South African cities - you have several hours of "load shedding" every single day. No power, no lights, the traffic lights are gone.

    And you know what, people survive.

    Agreed. But a friend in South Africa says the power cuts have destroyed his desktop and forced him to buy another and reload everything. I've never heard of such a thing - are there any particular precautions we should take before an anticipated cut? Simply shut down the system?
    Have a laptop computer, not a desktop!
    Put a surge protector in the socket?
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,138
    edited October 2022
    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
    No, it's not remotely comparable.

    Leningrad was completely cut off, except for occasional supplies across the ice.

    Kiev is not going to be cut off and it's not going to be surrounded by German troops. There will not be any trouble in getting food to Kiev.

    There will be power cuts. But completely cutting off all power is harder than you think. It's also perfectly possible for the West to supply containerised power stations (there's a Scottish company whose name I forget who rents those out).

    But this isn't like the Blitz. This is a few dozen missiles chucked with low accuracy at a city.
    I'm not sure that's the case. No this isn't the Blitz, but then societies are much more
    dependant on networks than they were in 1940

    No one has tried to take down the entire infrastructure of a fairly advanced nation (complete with internet, etc) in the modern era. There may be systemic failures we have not anticipated. Human civilisation has become fantastically complex but also delicate

    My comparison with Leningrad was not the Germans and the starvation, more the experience of a big city with a similar climate going months without power. On reading, it seems Leningrad did have some power, but it was severely rationed: not allowed in homes, only in factories etc
    The siege of Sarajevo began in April 1992 and lasted 1,425 days, more than four years, until it ended in 1996. Serb forces cut off all remaining utilities, including electricity, in May 1995. They were not completely restored until the siege was lifted the following year. The Bosnians did not capitulate. It’s not as cold there as Kiev but it’s hardly balmy. And while it was just about pre-internet it was still a modern city.



  • Options
    AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,004

    Sandpit said:

    So, it seems that nine out of ten F1 teams managed to spend the right amount of money last year - guess which one didn’t?

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/63204082

    Williams - didn't spend enough.
    I bet all the FIA will do with Red Bull is fine them.

    I’d love to see driver’s championship points taken off Verstappen last year, making Hamilton the champion (but that won’t happen)
    There has to be a penalty that hurts Red Bull - otherwise the spending cap (which IMO is a good idea) is pointless.

    I'd love them to hand last year's championship to Hamilton (and this overspend is akin to cheating), but that'd be too political. IMO the thing to do is reduce 2023's cap by double the amount they overspent. So if they overspent by three million, next year they get six million less to spend.
    I don't see how a team can break the rules like that and not get a points penalty. From the little I understand this money has a major impact on car performance. There needs to be seen to be consequences.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187
    edited October 2022

    Sandpit said:

    So, it seems that nine out of ten F1 teams managed to spend the right amount of money last year - guess which one didn’t?

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/63204082

    Williams - didn't spend enough.
    I bet all the FIA will do with Red Bull is fine them.

    I’d love to see driver’s championship points taken off Verstappen last year, making Hamilton the champion (but that won’t happen)
    Verstappen's 2 titles are like Maradona's goals in the 86 quarter final. The 1st a cheat, the 2nd a masterclass.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744
    edited October 2022
    MattW said:

    TimS said:

    Not sure if anyone already posted this from Lammy, but he is right. None of this Grant Shapps caretaker nonsense.

    https://twitter.com/DavidLammy/status/1579123871948869632?s=20&t=B4FjY_lpIJJHqPB2-ugk3A

    I wonder if David Lammy was demanding that Gordon Brown hold a General Election in 2009?
    Probably not. Personally whilst I think government pass the parcel is unedifying, unlike Lammy I think that is what our democracy is about - we elect a parliament to serve a term, and sometimes things change dramatically within that term. They shouldn't keep cutting terms short because they are struggling to get legislation through, or leaders have changed. We elected 650 individuals, albeit with vaguely stated intentions as blocs, work it the f*ck out without asking us again every 2-3 years.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,151
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
    They died primarily of starvation and close range shelling, and it lasted nearly three years. The comparison just isn't valid.

    You can take an issue seriously without resorting to the overwrought, excitable, and frankly genuinely weird fantasies to which you are constantly attracted.
    Yes yes. Tish tish

    I cannot find a parallel in history with what Putin MIGHT do that is better than the Siege of Leningrad. Similar climate, similar numbers, similar experience. Can you? And we can only predict what might happen by learning from history. Plenty of military people have already compared this war to WW1 and WW2 in its brutality

    If the Mods think it is distasteful to speculate in this way, then they can tell me - and I will stop. Otherwise I will continue to comment, and you are free to read, or not
    Some of the towns and cities in the east have been without power for some time.

    This isn’t’t the siege of Leningrad, though. You’d realise the comparison is stupid hyperbole if you paused to think about it.
    No, people are misinterpreting my Leningrad comparison. I was trying to find an example of a chilly Eurasian city that went without power for a long time (the military situation is clearly different). I should not have added that "1 million died" bit at the end. Can't resist a dramatic flourish. My apologies

    Anyway I have found a better comparison. Aleppo

    This is V V Putin's Wartime Playbook. Cut the power and the water. It was done to Aleppo


    "The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) says the civilian population in the city of Aleppo is undergoing enormous suffering because of deliberate cuts to water and electricity supplies. Around two million people live in the city but many, on both sides of the front lines, are having severe difficulty in accessing water."

    https://www.icrc.org/en/document/syria-water-used-weapon-war


  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,526
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:



    In Johannesburg - and many other South African cities - you have several hours of "load shedding" every single day. No power, no lights, the traffic lights are gone.

    And you know what, people survive.

    Agreed. But a friend in South Africa says the power cuts have destroyed his desktop and forced him to buy another and reload everything. I've never heard of such a thing - are there any particular precautions we should take before an anticipated cut? Simply shut down the system?
    For a home computer, use a UPS. For an office setup in Africa, we used a massive UPS with a generator backup, powering a separate “Clean Power” ring main for all the computers as well as the server room.
    I've heard of such a thing.

    Jerry Pournelle published a column in BYTE Magazine entitled "The Great Power Spike".

    In ..er .. 1989.

    https://www.jerrypournelle.com/computing/august89.html

    Genuinely much less of a problem in the UK, and much of Europe.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    IshmaelZ said:

    MattW said:

    If there ever were an "antigrowth coalition" proposal, you're looking at it.

    Completely backwards from the government's professed agenda.

    100% agreed.

    Utter nonsense pandering to the anti growth coalition of NIMBYs. Inexcusable.
    Its the raging hypocrisy which is most funny.

    They propose a bonfire of red tape for planning applications for housing and fracking
    They propose a burden of red tape to dictate planning decisions on private land

    What do they want? If they are so against red tape why are they proposing red tape? They are in favour of easier planning whilst proposing a dictatorial planning regime?
    This is bullshit. If it weren't for a framework of Government incentives, do you really think it would be more profitable for farmers in rainy Britain to put solar panels all over their land than, you know, grow stuff?
    Well let's think about this. Agriculture is heavily subsidised. Solar panels are not.

    Hmm, which has an incentive? 🤔
    i shouldn't mock but if building solar farms isn't profitable they aren't going to be a problem.

    BTW
    they are not a problem .

    https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-is-solar-power-a-threat-to-uk-farmland/
    That piece only references studies from climates substantially different from the UK eg places in the USA, and with hundreds of hours more insolation than here.

    If the studies had been done for the UK climate, I think they would be referencing them.

    If you look in the comments, you can see me making those points there some weeks ago.

    Those who wish to gobble up farmland here for solar are like the people who don't want to build on brown field sites because it is a little bit less profitable for them to be more socially responsible.
    And as I have pointed out to this guy already, look at the photo of sheep happily grazing under solar panels. Sheep cannot live on dirt and pebbles; they were put there for the photo op and then, one hopes, taken straight back to some actual grass.
    How much light does grass need a day? Does it grow in the shade? It’s entirely possible that some grazing can be done among solar panels.
    Not judging by that photo.

    In the UK as much as it can get. There's countries where it actually benefits from some shade, the UK not among them. Sure, you can design a system where the grass gets enough light to get by (compare the fact that grass grows all the way up to the trunk of a mature tree) but you have to design it. Put your panels on stilts. This is not being done here.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,617

    rcs1000 said:



    In Johannesburg - and many other South African cities - you have several hours of "load shedding" every single day. No power, no lights, the traffic lights are gone.

    And you know what, people survive.

    Agreed. But a friend in South Africa says the power cuts have destroyed his desktop and forced him to buy another and reload everything. I've never heard of such a thing - are there any particular precautions we should take before an anticipated cut? Simply shut down the system?
    My friends in Malawi (which has fairly regular blackouts) run everything like electronics via a surge protector. They aren't so good for high wattage equipment but protect more delicate electronics fairly well.

    There are plenty out there online.
  • Options
    maxhmaxh Posts: 825
    kyf_100 said:

    maxh said:

    I’m beginning to think that there is a strong moral* case for all out NATO assault on Russian forces in Ukraine, despite having been dead against this until recently.

    Sure, it has risks. Ww3 chief amongst them. But I think we are caught in a fairly binary choice at the moment with likely poor outcomes on both sides...

    "I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed, Mr President. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh, depending on the breaks..."

    Quite probably the finest film ever made, but not that relevant. I’m not arguing for a pre-emptive nuclear strike.
  • Options
    FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 3,886
    AlistairM said:

    Not sure if this has been posted yet (video on link).

    Crimea Railway Bridge damage: the fire burned with 1000+ degrees Celsius and melted the rails. That rail isn't gonna be in use for a week or two... and I doubt the bridge can hold the weight of a train transporting tanks.
    https://twitter.com/noclador/status/1579545243183374337

    Ouch!

    This still shows quite a lot:
    https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media/FeuvOSeXEAMWGey.jpg

    The steel rail has deformed plastically under the weight of the train when hot. You have to assume the same could have happened to the entire structure.

    Also - what happened to the ballast?

    I really really wouldn't fancy taking a train with anything heavy on it over that.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586

    Sandpit said:

    So, it seems that nine out of ten F1 teams managed to spend the right amount of money last year - guess which one didn’t?

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/63204082

    Williams - didn't spend enough.
    I bet all the FIA will do with Red Bull is fine them.

    I’d love to see driver’s championship points taken off Verstappen last year, making Hamilton the champion (but that won’t happen)
    There has to be a penalty that hurts Red Bull - otherwise the spending cap (which IMO is a good idea) is pointless.

    I'd love them to hand last year's championship to Hamilton (and this overspend is akin to cheating), but that'd be too political. IMO the thing to do is reduce 2023's cap by double the amount they overspent. So if they overspent by three million, next year they get six million less to spend.
    The penalty is also dependent on whether they challenge the ruling.
    If they are stupid enough to do so, then loss of points - and therefore the championship - is certainly an option.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586
    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:



    In Johannesburg - and many other South African cities - you have several hours of "load shedding" every single day. No power, no lights, the traffic lights are gone.

    And you know what, people survive.

    Agreed. But a friend in South Africa says the power cuts have destroyed his desktop and forced him to buy another and reload everything. I've never heard of such a thing - are there any particular precautions we should take before an anticipated cut? Simply shut down the system?
    My friends in Malawi (which has fairly regular blackouts) run everything like electronics via a surge protector. They aren't so good for high wattage equipment but protect more delicate electronics fairly well.

    There are plenty out there online.
    You can get surge protection for higher power systems too. It’s just more expensive, sometimes a lot more.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,275
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    It was a truck

    "The blast and fire sent part of the 12-mile Kerch Strait Bridge tumbling into the sea and killed at least three people, according to the Russian authorities. A senior Ukrainian official corroborated Russian reports that Ukraine was behind the attack. The official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of a government ban on discussing the blast, added that Ukraine’s intelligence services had orchestrated the explosion, using a bomb loaded onto a TRUCK being driven across the bridge."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/08/world/europe/ukraine-crimea-bridge-explosion.html

    Leon said:

    It was a truck

    "The blast and fire sent part of the 12-mile Kerch Strait Bridge tumbling into the sea and killed at least three people, according to the Russian authorities. A senior Ukrainian official corroborated Russian reports that Ukraine was behind the attack. The official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of a government ban on discussing the blast, added that Ukraine’s intelligence services had orchestrated the explosion, using a bomb loaded onto a TRUCK being driven across the bridge."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/08/world/europe/ukraine-crimea-bridge-explosion.html

    Or the Ukrainians want you to believe it was a truck.
    Then they should just have put it out on Twitter….
  • Options

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work
    Of course they work. Russia would have been colonised about 60 years ago otherwise.

    The terrifying thing is that so much effort is being made by western propagandists on certain websites to spread the idea that they don't work, or that they might work if launched but the commanders would never manage to launch them successfully, or if they did launch some it would only be a few that managed to get through to targets, so few as to make WW3 an utterly good idea if Russia doesn't act as the USA wants it to.

    One inconvenient thing for those who are spreading such evil war propaganda is that the whole of US nuclear weapons policy, as well as the existence of NATO etc., has been predicated on the idea that Soviet and now Russian strategic nukes actually do work. So if only all the western strategists between say 1950 and 2020 could have seen ahead a few decades and got their wisdom from Twitter...

    The reason that Russia has not been “colonised” is largely to do with the fact that aside from Adolf Hitler, no one wanted to.

    If Putin hadn’t been stupid enough to start this war, Nordstream 2 would have been up and running, and my how the money would have rolled in….

    Far from attacking Russia people were making all kind of allowances for the foul behaviour of its leadership.

    It took Putin waving his Big Weapons to unite everyone in Europe against him. If he carries on he might get Ireland and Switzerland into the alliance against him.
    Ireland actually voted with "the West" in favour of the UN resolution condemning the annexation of eastern Ukraine last week.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,603
    MattW said:

    TimS said:

    Not sure if anyone already posted this from Lammy, but he is right. None of this Grant Shapps caretaker nonsense.

    https://twitter.com/DavidLammy/status/1579123871948869632?s=20&t=B4FjY_lpIJJHqPB2-ugk3A

    I wonder if David Lammy was demanding that Gordon Brown hold a General Election in 2009?
    To be fair we’re 2 PMs further on than the Brown situation.

    Very few people complained about May replacing Cameron after the referendum. Those that did had their hypocrisy pointed out to them. But now, a third mid-term replacement in 6 years? The party are taking the piss.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586
    edited October 2022
    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
    They died primarily of starvation and close range shelling, and it lasted nearly three years. The comparison just isn't valid.

    You can take an issue seriously without resorting to the overwrought, excitable, and frankly genuinely weird fantasies to which you are constantly attracted.
    Yes yes. Tish tish

    I cannot find a parallel in history with what Putin MIGHT do that is better than the Siege of Leningrad. Similar climate, similar numbers, similar experience. Can you? And we can only predict what might happen by learning from history. Plenty of military people have already compared this war to WW1 and WW2 in its brutality

    If the Mods think it is distasteful to speculate in this way, then they can tell me - and I will stop. Otherwise I will continue to comment, and you are free to read, or not
    Some of the towns and cities in the east have been without power for some time.

    This isn’t’t the siege of Leningrad, though. You’d realise the comparison is stupid hyperbole if you paused to think about it.
    No, people are misinterpreting my Leningrad comparison. I was trying to find an example of a chilly Eurasian city that went without power for a long time (the military situation is clearly different). I should not have added that "1 million died" bit at the end. Can't resist a dramatic flourish. My apologies

    Anyway I have found a better comparison. Aleppo

    This is V V Putin's Wartime Playbook. Cut the power and the water. It was done to Aleppo

    "The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) says the civilian population in the city of Aleppo is undergoing enormous suffering because of deliberate cuts to water and electricity supplies. Around two million people live in the city but many, on both sides of the front lines, are having severe difficulty in accessing water."

    https://www.icrc.org/en/document/syria-water-used-weapon-war


    And it’s not Aleppo. Which compared with Ukrainian was virtually undefeated.

    Sometimes you just have to accept that things are what they are, rather than one of your mental analogues.
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    So, it seems that nine out of ten F1 teams managed to spend the right amount of money last year - guess which one didn’t?

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/63204082

    Williams - didn't spend enough.
    I bet all the FIA will do with Red Bull is fine them.

    I’d love to see driver’s championship points taken off Verstappen last year, making Hamilton the champion (but that won’t happen)
    Whenever the team fuck up they penalise the team not their drivers. Taking some / all of the Red Bull points away would be rather expensive for them...
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,232

    AlistairM said:

    Not sure if this has been posted yet (video on link).

    Crimea Railway Bridge damage: the fire burned with 1000+ degrees Celsius and melted the rails. That rail isn't gonna be in use for a week or two... and I doubt the bridge can hold the weight of a train transporting tanks.
    https://twitter.com/noclador/status/1579545243183374337

    Ouch!

    This still shows quite a lot:
    https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media/FeuvOSeXEAMWGey.jpg

    The steel rail has deformed plastically under the weight of the train when hot. You have to assume the same could have happened to the entire structure.

    Also - what happened to the ballast?

    I really really wouldn't fancy taking a train with anything heavy on it over that.
    What is the deck of that bridge actually made of?

    If it's concrete, I would think twice before taking a pushbike over it.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,151
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
    They died primarily of starvation and close range shelling, and it lasted nearly three years. The comparison just isn't valid.

    You can take an issue seriously without resorting to the overwrought, excitable, and frankly genuinely weird fantasies to which you are constantly attracted.
    Yes yes. Tish tish

    I cannot find a parallel in history with what Putin MIGHT do that is better than the Siege of Leningrad. Similar climate, similar numbers, similar experience. Can you? And we can only predict what might happen by learning from history. Plenty of military people have already compared this war to WW1 and WW2 in its brutality

    If the Mods think it is distasteful to speculate in this way, then they can tell me - and I will stop. Otherwise I will continue to comment, and you are free to read, or not
    Some of the towns and cities in the east have been without power for some time.

    This isn’t’t the siege of Leningrad, though. You’d realise the comparison is stupid hyperbole if you paused to think about it.
    No, people are misinterpreting my Leningrad comparison. I was trying to find an example of a chilly Eurasian city that went without power for a long time (the military situation is clearly different). I should not have added that "1 million died" bit at the end. Can't resist a dramatic flourish. My apologies

    Anyway I have found a better comparison. Aleppo

    This is V V Putin's Wartime Playbook. Cut the power and the water. It was done to Aleppo

    "The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) says the civilian population in the city of Aleppo is undergoing enormous suffering because of deliberate cuts to water and electricity supplies. Around two million people live in the city but many, on both sides of the front lines, are having severe difficulty in accessing water."

    https://www.icrc.org/en/document/syria-water-used-weapon-war


    And it’s not Aleppo. Which compared with Ukrainian was virtually undefeated.

    Sometimes you just have to accept that things are what they are, rather than one of your mental analogues.
    But there's always the chance that one of my mental analogies will inspire lurking journalists to write Spectator articles, so I feel I am providing a service, nonetheless
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,232
    dixiedean said:

    Anecdote from today.
    12 yo storms in: I hate Miss X. She's a horrible person.
    TA: Miss X isn't that bad. You enjoyed her lessons last week.
    12 yo (thinking) : I suppose she isn't as bad as that stupid, ugly witch that everyone hates.
    TA (ready to chastise for slagging off a teacher so) : And who's that then?
    12 yo: The leader of the country.
    TA (relieved): Ah. You mean Liz Truss. No. I suppose not.
    12 yo: Yes. Nowhere near as bad as her.

    LOL!

    Sounds like you've at least got a real rapport with this one!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,744
    dixiedean said:

    Anecdote from today.
    12 yo storms in: I hate Miss X. She's a horrible person.
    TA: Miss X isn't that bad. You enjoyed her lessons last week.
    12 yo (thinking and calming down) : I suppose she isn't as bad as that stupid, ugly witch that everyone hates.
    TA (ready to chastise for slagging off a teacher so) : And who's that then?
    12 yo: The leader of the country.
    TA (relieved): Ah. You mean Liz Truss. No. I suppose not.
    12 yo: Yes. Nowhere near as bad as her.

    Indoctrination!
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,965
    ydoethur said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anecdote from today.
    12 yo storms in: I hate Miss X. She's a horrible person.
    TA: Miss X isn't that bad. You enjoyed her lessons last week.
    12 yo (thinking) : I suppose she isn't as bad as that stupid, ugly witch that everyone hates.
    TA (ready to chastise for slagging off a teacher so) : And who's that then?
    12 yo: The leader of the country.
    TA (relieved): Ah. You mean Liz Truss. No. I suppose not.
    12 yo: Yes. Nowhere near as bad as her.

    LOL!

    Sounds like you've at least got a real rapport with this one!
    I first sussed it was absolutely finished for Gordon Brown when my basic skills class of the long-term unemployed launched into an unprovoked and unanimous discussion of how awful he was.
    It's gone way beyond folk who normally take an interest. It's accepted wisdom now. It can be turned around a little, as Brown did. But not so much.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586
    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    At least the rest of the world is calm, as Britain sails over the edge of the falls


    "Deadly airstrikes are just 'first episode' of response to Crimea attack, says Medvedev

    "Russia's retaliatory mass strikes across Ukraine were only the "first episode" of Moscow's planned response to the attack on the bridge to Crimea, said former President Dmitry Medvedev, claiming it had become necessary for Russia to 'dismantle' Ukraine."

    "Vladimir Putin and the Belarusian president have agreed to form a joint group of troops on the Ukrainian border, amid fears of a new ground invasion of Kyiv"

    https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1579503021129465856?s=20&t=_W1JHL_VjZFnMgPeFvttPw

    You know it’s all going to pot when you have to rely on Lukaschenko.
    I'm now thinking Putin's missiles might work

    He's not doing it as a gesture, he is going after critical Ukrainian infrastructure. It is reported tonight that Kharkiv has no water supply, and not much power

    How long can cities endure that? Not long. Ukraine will surrender

    Therefore the crucial test is Does he have more drones and missiles to bring this off? Possibly

    Add in a new assault from the north, with Belarus, attempting to take Kyiv and I can see Putin actually winning this, over the winter. I do not say this happily
    Hang on, haven’t you been saying that Putin was cornered and was going to annihilate us all with nuclear fire on his way down??
    Putin has potentially changed the game. I thought only WMD could do that, but this might work

    A brutal assault on Ukrainian infrastructure, leaving entire cities without water, food, power, heating, through a Ukrainian winter? It is terrifying and evil but it could work IF Putin has enough missiles/drones to finish the job

    My Peace Plan looks an awful lot more enticing right now
    I don't really see how - if the contention is he has taken out critical infrastructure, he's already played that card. He cannot take it back. So he cannot say 'Let's ceasefire or I take out your critical infrastructure'.
    Extrapolate

    If he can permanently deprive entire cities of water, power, heat, even food, then what choice do they have but surrender? In a Ukrainian winter? Think of it a medieval siege, but with missiles

    Of course we don't know if he can do this. He will need tons of ordnance. And the Ukes might be brilliant at repair. And his army is still shit

    But yes I can see how an unbridled assault on advanced nation infrastructure could win a war. It would be evil and imhumane, but this is Putin
    A bit of perspective is needed.

    A couple of hours ago, the Ukrainians were reporting 11 dead and 89 injured from today's attacks. No doubt the numbers will grow a bit. Maybe 25, possibly even a few more than that, but surely the total is clearly going to be far short of 100.

    Yet the scenario you are painting is more like what happened to Japan in 1945. Then, on 9-10 March, somewhere in the region of 100,000 died in Tokyo in a firestorm caused by conventional bombing.

    There's absolutely no comparison.
    Because Putin went after infrastructure, not people. It wasn't Dresden or Coventry

    Is that too hard to understand?

    He was also quite successful. As of this moment, several parts of Kyiv and several Ukrainian cities have no power


    Free Army of Civilians in Ukraine*️⃣
    @FreeCiviliansUA
    ·
    33m
    🔴Regions with severe power disruptions in #Ukraine at 20-00 local time:
    Lviv
    Ternopil
    Rivne
    Khmelnyitsky
    Zhytomyr
    Kyiv/Kyiv Obl.
    Cherkasy
    Chernihiv
    Sumy
    Poltava
    Kharkiv
    Dnipropetrovsk (sp. Kryvyi Rih)
    http://donorbox.org/freearmyukraine


    https://twitter.com/FreeCiviliansUA/status/1579519578467889153?s=20&t=Tp-RkbEHU7Bgwi4N4GMT5w


    This only works for Putin if he can keep it up. Imagine Kyiv enduring a Ukrainian winter with no power. Is it even possible?
    Yes.
    That's quite a glib answer. A Ukrainian winter with no power. What about babies and small children. And old people? I am not sure that is endurable. Think of the hospitals too

    The nearest equivalent would be the Siege of Leningrad, perhaps

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

    1 million people died
    They died primarily of starvation and close range shelling, and it lasted nearly three years. The comparison just isn't valid.

    You can take an issue seriously without resorting to the overwrought, excitable, and frankly genuinely weird fantasies to which you are constantly attracted.
    Yes yes. Tish tish

    I cannot find a parallel in history with what Putin MIGHT do that is better than the Siege of Leningrad. Similar climate, similar numbers, similar experience. Can you? And we can only predict what might happen by learning from history. Plenty of military people have already compared this war to WW1 and WW2 in its brutality

    If the Mods think it is distasteful to speculate in this way, then they can tell me - and I will stop. Otherwise I will continue to comment, and you are free to read, or not
    Some of the towns and cities in the east have been without power for some time.

    This isn’t’t the siege of Leningrad, though. You’d realise the comparison is stupid hyperbole if you paused to think about it.
    No, people are misinterpreting my Leningrad comparison. I was trying to find an example of a chilly Eurasian city that went without power for a long time (the military situation is clearly different). I should not have added that "1 million died" bit at the end. Can't resist a dramatic flourish. My apologies

    Anyway I have found a better comparison. Aleppo

    This is V V Putin's Wartime Playbook. Cut the power and the water. It was done to Aleppo

    "The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) says the civilian population in the city of Aleppo is undergoing enormous suffering because of deliberate cuts to water and electricity supplies. Around two million people live in the city but many, on both sides of the front lines, are having severe difficulty in accessing water."

    https://www.icrc.org/en/document/syria-water-used-weapon-war


    And it’s not Aleppo. Which compared with Ukrainian was virtually undefeated.

    Sometimes you just have to accept that things are what they are, rather than one of your mental analogues.
    But there's always the chance that one of my mental analogies will inspire lurking journalists to write Spectator articles, so I feel I am providing a service, nonetheless
    That an opinion which others might differ on, too.
  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 5,901
    The problem with all this talk of nuclear war is that normal political chat isn't particularly interesting. I'm completely unfussed by what gilts are doing, distracted by trying to work out how best to store water in my flat.

    Can we detox tomorrow with the Indy Supreme Court case, perhaps some moths & planning laws on Wednesday, and UBI on Thursday? Happy to revisit DEATH BY FIRE next week.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,617
    dixiedean said:

    Anecdote from today.
    12 yo storms in: I hate Miss X. She's a horrible person.
    TA: Miss X isn't that bad. You enjoyed her lessons last week.
    12 yo (thinking and calming down) : I suppose she isn't as bad as that stupid, ugly witch that everyone hates.
    TA (ready to chastise for slagging off a teacher so) : And who's that then?
    12 yo: The leader of the country.
    TA (relieved): Ah. You mean Liz Truss. No. I suppose not.
    12 yo: Yes. Nowhere near as bad as her.

    I have had a few patients launch similar unprovoked rants about the PM. It isn't just a media bubble thing, they all knew she was shite back in the summer. Now everyone knows.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,526
    edited October 2022

    Leon said:

    The problem is, you kind of do notice.
    Because living in England, you subconsciously soak up “what goes with what”.

    Poundbury is an interesting experiment, a success on some measures and a failure on others.

    But it is a living experiment, so hopefully it’s failures can be addressed over time.

    More successful than Skelmersdale or that Scottish one which essentially need to be completely demolished.

    But, it works

    If I took 20 large, random yet comparable new developments (including Poundbury) and asked you which one would you live in, almost certainly it would be Poundbury


    Look at all these. Poundbury is nicer than all of them

    https://gleesonhomes.co.uk/developments/

    https://www.redrow.co.uk/

    https://www.barratthomes.co.uk/

    Soulless boring redbrick mediocrity. At best. Actively horrible at worst
    The reason all of these, including Poundbury, have an uncanny, soulless feeling is that they are too planned. We need to let development happen more organically with a local vernacular.
    I might have some sympathy for the local vernacular comment.

    But I also note that Leon is reacting to a brochure websites, which avdertise what the public buy.

    The brochures for Georgian Barratt, Victorian Barratt, or London Tubeland Barratt in the 1920s-30s were exactly the same. Except that the quality is now closer to what is desired, rather than the standards imposed by whoever is buidling them to pay the Bufton-Tufton pension.

    One of the estates on those links is down the road from me, and shows very little actual context - such as the country parks it is built next to or the local facilities close by that were required for it to be built there.
  • Options
    valleyboyvalleyboy Posts: 605
    dixiedean said:

    Anecdote from today.
    12 yo storms in: I hate Miss X. She's a horrible person.
    TA: Miss X isn't that bad. You enjoyed her lessons last week.
    12 yo (thinking and calming down) : I suppose she isn't as bad as that stupid, ugly witch that everyone hates.
    TA (ready to chastise for slagging off a teacher so) : And who's that then?
    12 yo: The leader of the country.
    TA (relieved): Ah. You mean Liz Truss. No. I suppose not.
    12 yo: Yes. Nowhere near as bad as her.

    Lol. I like it!
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,617
    Eabhal said:

    The problem with all this talk of nuclear war is that normal political chat isn't particularly interesting. I'm completely unfussed by what gilts are doing, distracted by trying to work out how best to store water in my flat.

    Can we detox tomorrow with the Indy Supreme Court case, perhaps some moths & planning laws on Wednesday, and UBI on Thursday? Happy to revisit DEATH BY FIRE next week.

    Nuclear war isn't worth worrying about. If it happens we die, if it doesn't happen, everything carries on. Either way, nothing to get upset about. We cannot change it.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586
    From a good thread on gas markets and arbitrage.

    https://twitter.com/DoombergT/status/1578671558238748672
    Over the past year, an unprecedented arbitrage has opened up in the market for natural gas. Price disparities across regions have exploded to once-unthinkable levels and look set to persist for at least the next few years.

    Genuine LOL…
    “ At various points in the past few months, natural gas in Europe was selling for more than 20 TIMES the price in Canada!!!
    Amazingly, Canadian Prime Minister Justice Trudeau recently claimed there has "never been a strong business case" for LNG exports from Canada to Europe. (It might surprise our followers to learn that you can be a leader of a G7 country with no business acumen whatsoever.)“
  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 5,901
    edited October 2022
    Foxy said:

    Eabhal said:

    The problem with all this talk of nuclear war is that normal political chat isn't particularly interesting. I'm completely unfussed by what gilts are doing, distracted by trying to work out how best to store water in my flat.

    Can we detox tomorrow with the Indy Supreme Court case, perhaps some moths & planning laws on Wednesday, and UBI on Thursday? Happy to revisit DEATH BY FIRE next week.

    Nuclear war isn't worth worrying about. If it happens we die, if it doesn't happen, everything carries on. Either way, nothing to get upset about. We cannot change it.
    I don't think Edinburgh will get nuked but we are downwind of Faslane. That gives me a few weeks, at least?
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,526

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Time to move away from the hyperbole of distant conflicts and thoughts of "Wartime Coalitions" (anything to keep Labour out of Government, it would seem?) and back to the day to day of elections and polls.

    Denmark votes in just three weeks and the latest Voxmeter poll as follows (changes from 2019 election):

    Social Democrats: 27.1% (+1.2)
    Venstre: 13.8% (-9.6)
    Conservative: 9.8% (+3.2)
    Denmark Democrats: 9.0% (new)
    Socialist Folkeparti: 8.7% (+1.0)
    Red-Green Alliance: 6.7% (-0.2)
    Liberal Alliance: 5.3% (+3.0)
    Radikale Venstre: 5.0% (-3.6)
    New Right: 4.9% (+2.5)
    Moderates: 4.1% (new)
    People's Party: 2.3% (-6.4)
    Alternative: 2.0% (-1.0)

    All the above would get into the new Folketing on those numbers. The current Government (and supporting parties) have 47.5% (-1.6) but looking at a prospective centre-right bloc, you have Venstre, the Conservatives, Denmark Democrats, Liberal Alliance, New Right and the People's Party and combined they score 45.1% and that contains a lot of ifs, buts and maybes in terms of who will or won't together.

    The Moderates sit on 4.1% and remain in the box seat currently.

    To be accurate, the Folketing has 179 members - 175 of whom are elected in Denmark itself with two each from the Faeroes and Greenland respectively. Last time, Social Democrat parties won two of the four, one went to the centre right and one to the far left.

    It's a decent poll for the Government and the centre-left parties but there's still 3 weeks to go.

    To wrap up Lower Saxony where overhanging and levelling (which sounds positively mediaeval but is more psephological) has expanded the Landtag to 146 seats (from 135) - the SPD ended up on 57 seats, the CDU 47, Greens 24 and Alternativ 18.

    It's quite clear the CDU are out and we'll see a new majority SPD-Green Government which will be a relief for Chancellor Scholz, a headache for opposition leader Merz, something to smile about for the Greens and a pain in somewhat different areas for FDP leader Christian Lindner who has seen his party out of four regional parliaments.

    So you are not calling this Folkething a borgon conclusion yet then?
    What's Venstre?

    Are they the party of the Defenestrated?

    Do we have a Government in Sweden, yet?
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,526
    ydoethur said:

    AlistairM said:

    Not sure if this has been posted yet (video on link).

    Crimea Railway Bridge damage: the fire burned with 1000+ degrees Celsius and melted the rails. That rail isn't gonna be in use for a week or two... and I doubt the bridge can hold the weight of a train transporting tanks.
    https://twitter.com/noclador/status/1579545243183374337

    Ouch!

    This still shows quite a lot:
    https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media/FeuvOSeXEAMWGey.jpg

    The steel rail has deformed plastically under the weight of the train when hot. You have to assume the same could have happened to the entire structure.

    Also - what happened to the ballast?

    I really really wouldn't fancy taking a train with anything heavy on it over that.
    What is the deck of that bridge actually made of?

    If it's concrete, I would think twice before taking a pushbike over it.
    It looked like a bog prefab road deck - so perhaps prestressed beams below with a type of reinforced deck on top.

    In principle like our elevated motorways.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,526
    TimS said:

    MattW said:

    TimS said:

    Not sure if anyone already posted this from Lammy, but he is right. None of this Grant Shapps caretaker nonsense.

    https://twitter.com/DavidLammy/status/1579123871948869632?s=20&t=B4FjY_lpIJJHqPB2-ugk3A

    I wonder if David Lammy was demanding that Gordon Brown hold a General Election in 2009?
    To be fair we’re 2 PMs further on than the Brown situation.

    Very few people complained about May replacing Cameron after the referendum. Those that did had their hypocrisy pointed out to them. But now, a third mid-term replacement in 6 years? The party are taking the piss.
    Hmmm. It's the same system, so comparable.

    And both TM (ish) and BJ (thoroughly) got a mandate at the next election.
  • Options
    FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 3,886
    ydoethur said:

    AlistairM said:

    Not sure if this has been posted yet (video on link).

    Crimea Railway Bridge damage: the fire burned with 1000+ degrees Celsius and melted the rails. That rail isn't gonna be in use for a week or two... and I doubt the bridge can hold the weight of a train transporting tanks.
    https://twitter.com/noclador/status/1579545243183374337

    Ouch!

    This still shows quite a lot:
    https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media/FeuvOSeXEAMWGey.jpg

    The steel rail has deformed plastically under the weight of the train when hot. You have to assume the same could have happened to the entire structure.

    Also - what happened to the ballast?

    I really really wouldn't fancy taking a train with anything heavy on it over that.
    What is the deck of that bridge actually made of?

    If it's concrete, I would think twice before taking a pushbike over it.
    I think the deck is steel, but the columns are obviously concrete, and at least one of them has been subject to fire:
    https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media/Fei8lixXgAE6ZmW.jpg

    This shows a section under construction:
    https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media/FejDg3uXkAEa_L7.jpg

    And another one end on:
    https://www.alamy.com/kerch-bridge-under-construction-in-a-rainy-cloudy-summer-day-image226365101.html?imageid=A57D20CF-91D8-42CE-8188-2CACE8D559AF&p=305404&pn=1&searchId=c1ee8c3a6b23a38792be6e75569190d2&searchtype=0

    It does look over-engineered perhaps, but you are right that nobody sane would be overly keen to cross it now.

    Crimea is an active tectonic area so a little earthquake to help it on its way down would be welcome.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,720
    edited October 2022
    https://twitter.com/aaf_lukas/status/1567914075274858498?cxt=HHwWhMC-8erirMIrAAAA

    O/T but a little gem - an Italian tankette* (1930s vintage) in Afghan. Especially for @Malmesbury .

    *Their version of Carden-Loyd tankettes.
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anecdote from today.
    12 yo storms in: I hate Miss X. She's a horrible person.
    TA: Miss X isn't that bad. You enjoyed her lessons last week.
    12 yo (thinking and calming down) : I suppose she isn't as bad as that stupid, ugly witch that everyone hates.
    TA (ready to chastise for slagging off a teacher so) : And who's that then?
    12 yo: The leader of the country.
    TA (relieved): Ah. You mean Liz Truss. No. I suppose not.
    12 yo: Yes. Nowhere near as bad as her.

    I have had a few patients launch similar unprovoked rants about the PM. It isn't just a media bubble thing, they all knew she was shite back in the summer. Now everyone knows.
    The thing is that makes it more likely the Tories will get rid of her, probably early 2023, and claim it was a horrible mistake. Then who is elected next?
This discussion has been closed.