"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans
And, finally, there is no winning of this war for Putin. Even if he manages the above, he will rule a nation of 40m people that loathe him, and will never be reconciled to Russian takeover, and who will almost immediately begin a campaign of sabotage and insurrection. A tragic and colossal blunder by Putin. He started a war he could never win, not in the long term. Probably because he believed his own lies about Ukrainians yearning for Russian rule
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Go and read up about Belarus and its military.
It has a conscript army. Many of whom would have voted for the real winner of the Presidential election, not Lukashenko.
It has an annual military budget of c$650m.
The US military aid to Ukraine so far is equivalent to 27 years of Belarus's military spend.
Belarus couldn't take Newcastle on a Friday night.
TBF, that's a task even the US Marine Corps would take on only with trepidation and if they had no other choice.
As I said yesterday, this is Putin's plan. I'm getting a bit bored of being right, TBH
"F*ck. Kyiv's Tets-6 thermal power plant is on fire after more Russian cruise missile strikes. Russia is serious about bombing Ukraine back into Stone Age by destroying all of its energy sources ... what a bunch of war criminals."
It's much harder than you think to permanently disrupt power generation.
Coal fired power stations are not very complex things, and they date back more than a century. They can almost certainly be patched up much more cheaply than Russia can lob cruise missiles and aircraft strikes.
I'm not saying he WILL do it but it is what he is trying to do, and this happened in Aleppo. But he needs a fuck of a lot of missiles and drones, because he will have to relentlessly pound the power stations/water all the way through the winter, so they cannot be repaired
Water could be as crucial as electricity. If you successfully cut a water supply you would get surrender in days, but I have no idea how difficult that is. You would probably need people on the ground to sabotage pipes?
This is an interesting thread :
UKRAINE WAR UPDATE
I have identified four intertwining paths to victory for Russia: (1) Mobilization ✅ (2) Massed Kalibr strikes on power infrastructure ✅ (3) Weaponized Kesslerization 🚀🪨🛰️💥 (4) Large-scale Chinese aid (🐉,🐻) Let's go through them.
Anatoly Karlin 🚀🪨🛰️💥
But if Russia was too incompetent or dysfunctional to surge Kalibr production in preceding months, and Ukrainians are trouncing Russians in counter-battery due to Western munitions & space-based ISR support with attendants effect on loss ratios, then it's on a path to defeat."
For anyone else who doesn't know Kesslerization equals causing a pile up in which ALL low earth orbit satellites are destroyed including US spy satellites.
I checked. He has 30,000 followers, amongst them some pretty serious people
He seems to be a hardcore Russian patriot. He wants to win this war. Yet his analysis is often deeply critical of Russian military and Russian society, eg
"China doesn't respect Russia for its economic or technological accomplishment, but did respect it as a warrior country; that has ironically been invalidated. It's possible they've since "downgraded" it to a Myanmar, and are looking to do business if/when a junta overthrows Putin."
I have to confess those are not great figures for what3words
Their tiny turnover is down? And they spent £43m??!
This may be one that I got spectacularly wrong. It's still a fabulous dreamy idea tho, and someone will make a version of it work
It is a good idea but how do they monetise it ?
That is what interests me
It's kinda tragic if it fails. There was a BBC article the other day about the problems caused by a lack of reliable addresses in poor countries
"How do you make deliveries without having a street name?
That's the problem the Gambian government is trying to resolve. Some cities and towns still have unnamed streets making the job of couriers a challenge. 🚚📦"
There is a solution ready and waiting. For some reason it is not being used
No good, no internal information, for the other purposes of everyday life.
1 Pulteney Street, Wick, Caithness IV34 1AA is meaningful even if you leave one or two bits out. And you don't need to pay anyone money. And if bits are misspelt it has some redundancy.
"The pissup is at Pounceney Street, Wick" will still work ...
FPT: EU27 GDP as % of US: 87% in 2021 from 85% in 2001. UK GDP as % of US: 13% in 2021 from 16% in 2001. All of that decline has happened since 2015. Thanks to Brexit we are once again the sick man of Europe.
You can choose your dates to create whatever narrative you like. If I did 2008 to 2022 it would look rather different, as I would be cherry picking to get the maximum negative on EUR-USD.
That's why you don't cherry pick years and you certainly don't take 2008, when the world was at maximum pre-GFC distortion, as your point of comparison. I chose 2001 simply because it was 20 years prior to the last data point. You could choose any year around then and get a similar result. The point is, the EU economy has broadly kept pace with the US over the last couple of decades - as did the UK, until Brexit.
Except its not true. 2021 dodgy is data due to Covid, and different ways of reporting Covid data.
If you look at the approximately quarter of a century pre-Covid since the EEC became the EU (1993 - 2019) then the data is the polar opposite of what you claim:
France 1.323 (19%) Germany 2.071 tn (30%) Italy 1.065 tn (16% ) UK 1.061 tn (15%) Big 4 Combined 5.52 tn (80%)
2019 (Final pre-Covid year): USA $20.94 tn
France 2.716 tn (13% down 6%) Germany 3.861 tn (18% down 12%) Italy 2.005 tn (10% down 6%) UK 2.831 tn (14% down 1%) Big 4 Combined 11.413 tn (55% down 25%)
Covid was over in 2021, measurement issues blighted 2020 and hence 2021 vs 2020 growth but not 2021. You don't think there's anything cherry picking about picking out just 4 EU members and comparing them to the whole of the US? OK. US population growth in the 90s was high owing to immigration. And Germany had a lost decade absorbing E Germany and working off the loss in competitiveness that caused. I think it makes more sense to look at the last twenty years, the 90s is ancient history economy-wise.
Really?
[Gerry Adams voice] Covid hasn't gone away, you know!
I am booked for an operation in Ipswich Hospital in two weeks time. I have been instructed by the hospital to self isolate for those two weeks and, before I am actually admitted, to produce three negative Covid tests. Doesn't look as though they think Covid is gone away!
Covid surge crisis in Munich:
"The safety of the patients is no longer guaranteed"
As I said yesterday, this is Putin's plan. I'm getting a bit bored of being right, TBH
"F*ck. Kyiv's Tets-6 thermal power plant is on fire after more Russian cruise missile strikes. Russia is serious about bombing Ukraine back into Stone Age by destroying all of its energy sources ... what a bunch of war criminals."
It's much harder than you think to permanently disrupt power generation.
Coal fired power stations are not very complex things, and they date back more than a century. They can almost certainly be patched up much more cheaply than Russia can lob cruise missiles and aircraft strikes.
I'm not saying he WILL do it but it is what he is trying to do, and this happened in Aleppo. But he needs a fuck of a lot of missiles and drones, because he will have to relentlessly pound the power stations/water all the way through the winter, so they cannot be repaired
Water could be as crucial as electricity. If you successfully cut a water supply you would get surrender in days, but I have no idea how difficult that is. You would probably need people on the ground to sabotage pipes?
This is an interesting thread :
UKRAINE WAR UPDATE
I have identified four intertwining paths to victory for Russia: (1) Mobilization ✅ (2) Massed Kalibr strikes on power infrastructure ✅ (3) Weaponized Kesslerization 🚀🪨🛰️💥 (4) Large-scale Chinese aid (🐉,🐻) Let's go through them.
Anatoly Karlin 🚀🪨🛰️💥
But if Russia was too incompetent or dysfunctional to surge Kalibr production in preceding months, and Ukrainians are trouncing Russians in counter-battery due to Western munitions & space-based ISR support with attendants effect on loss ratios, then it's on a path to defeat."
For anyone else who doesn't know Kesslerization equals causing a pile up in which ALL low earth orbit satellites are destroyed including US spy satellites.
Which would be automatically treated as an act of war, and really p*ss off the Indians, Chinese and every other major power. Worse, it probably won't effect the high-orbit (GEO/GSO) military satellites. So the US will lose Keyhole-style satellites, but not many of their other capabilities. It will also blind the Russians themselves.
Kesslerisation itself is a much-argued topic: some claim we're already nearly there; some say it won't happen until we have orders of magnitude more satellites.
And even then, the US has other assets that are capable of observing events. And their other aircraft will just ensure those aircraft can fly unmolested...
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans
And, finally, there is no winning of this war for Putin. Even if he manages the above, he will rule a nation of 40m people that loathe him, and will never be reconciled to Russian takeover, and who will almost immediately begin a campaign of sabotage and insurrection. A tragic and colossal blunder by Putin. He started a war he could never win, not in the long term. Probably because he believed his own lies about Ukrainians yearning for Russian rule
Belarus stuff could be a feint to try and draw Ukr troops away from the forthcoming turkey shoot in southern part of Ukr.
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans
And, finally, there is no winning of this war for Putin. Even if he manages the above, he will rule a nation of 40m people that loathe him, and will never be reconciled to Russian takeover, and who will almost immediately begin a campaign of sabotage and insurrection. A tragic and colossal blunder by Putin. He started a war he could never win, not in the long term. Probably because he believed his own lies about Ukrainians yearning for Russian rule
Not so much his own lies, but his FSB spies in Ukraine were either, er, overegging their effectiveness in reports back - or were played by Ukrainians. I suspect (having seen the quality of their agents in Mayfair and Salisbury) more the latter. Whichever it was, the belief in the Kremlin that the Ukrainian Government would be quickly overthrown was strong.
And wrong.
It was likely partly down to not wanting to let the big man get the impression they had failed him - with a walk out a 6th floor window as their reward. Tell Putin what he wants to hear. Then hope he forgets it was you when he relies upon it for his Special Military Operation.
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans
And, finally, there is no winning of this war for Putin. Even if he manages the above, he will rule a nation of 40m people that loathe him, and will never be reconciled to Russian takeover, and who will almost immediately begin a campaign of sabotage and insurrection. A tragic and colossal blunder by Putin. He started a war he could never win, not in the long term. Probably because he believed his own lies about Ukrainians yearning for Russian rule
Belarus stuff could be a feint to try and draw Ukr troops away from the forthcoming turkey shoot in southern part of Ukr.
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans…
First, as you recognise, you don’t know that the troops “pouring in” to Belarus are anything more than a fraction of that number. Second, they’d be no more use, probably a great deal less, than the original relatively well trained armoured forces who tried last time around.
There’s nothing ‘natural’ about the plan at all, and Ukraine reportedly has a significant reserve maintained to deal with such a desperate effort in any event. The collapse of Belarus to revolution would be a political and strategic disaster for Putin, so there’s plenty of incentive for sending troops if Lukashenko really is in trouble. It’s a perfectly feasible alternate explanation.
Bottom line is neither of us has any idea of what’s the truth of the matter.
Oh, and you really have no idea whether or not Putin is as desperate as you intuit he is, either.
You should read the AI tweet thread I posted earlier. It’s much more interesting.
This is probably the most important news from the war today.
NOËL 🇪🇺 🇺🇦 @NOELreports Belarus is handing over tanks, air defense systems and ammo to Russia. Today, several new echelons with equipment of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus in the direction of the Russian Federation were recorded at once, - Belarusian opposition media
First, Belarus will not join the war directly, otherwise it would keep its stock of spare equipment.
Second, Russia is likely reaching the limits of the usable equipment that it can bring back into service from its stores, and so it's ability to sustain the intensity of combat we have seen since February is nearing exhaustion.
Consequently, I believe we are nearer to the end of the war than the beginning.
Ukraine claims to have taken 2,500 of 3,300 Russian tanks, so far in this war. 75% of all the Russian tanks!!
Wiki reckons that Belarus has around 950 tanks, mostly T-72s. How many of those are serviceable, and how many they might let the Russians have, is unknown. Let’s say they give 300 to the Russians.
That’s ONE MONTH of tanks at the current attrition rate, assuming they don’t do anything silly like send them on the NLAW gauntlet down Chernobyl Road heading for Kiev. Again.
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
Though if the majority of those troops are ill-fed and pi**ed-off conscripts, then they might well join the Belarussian troops in an uprising *against* Lukashenko. That really would give Putin nightmares.
Fascinating to see @Casino_Royale confess on here that he may have been supporting a fraud for some years.
Of course, the Tories were not always the ideologically bankrupt, paranoid death cult they’ve become.
‘Twas Europhobia wot wrought it.
The nutty wing has always been there I suppose, certainly since the era of John Major’s “bastards”, and the delusional choice of IDS over Clarke.
But it could be dismissed on one level as a distinctly minority sect, and besides, there *were* (or are) sensible and rational eurosceptic arguments, most notably over the Euro.
But Brexit itself seems either to have radicalised Eurosceptics, or unleashed a latent and terrifying Europhobia, and frankly there is a direct line from 2016 to today’s financial and ideological precipice.
Essentially, the Tory Party ejected the realists and are high on their own supply, to the point of death by overdose.
Patriots of all ideological flavours must wish that the Tory somehow expel the now-dominant lunatic wing, but it is not a certain thing. See Trump and the Republicans for details.
An argument that strains credulity for a whole host of reasons. Not least because the architect of the latest Conservative debacle was herself a very active and staunch Remainer throughout the referendum campaign. Trying to tie the economic policies revealed over the last few weeks to Brexit is tenuous to say the least. Moreover, we are in the position we are in as far as a resolution to Brexit goes because of yet another Remainer - Theresa May, who was utterly inept in everything she did.
The problems we face today are not because of Brexit, they are because the Tory party has long since proved itself unfit to govern - something I feel was the case even before Brexit.
They are not because of “Brexit” unto itself.
They are because of the way the Tory Party have campaigned for, prosecuted, and become radicalised through, Brexit.
A second-order effect, but a very clear one.
Nah. If it hadn't been Brexit it would have been something else. The fundamental problem is the underlying nature of the Tory party, not whatever cause they choose to attach themselves to.
This seems like a form of blindness to me. What is this fundamental dysfunction that can be separable from Euroscepticism?
The belief that they, and only they, have the absolute right to rule the country. You see it in everything they do. In economics, in social policy, in foreign policy - Heath and his ilk suffered from the delusion that if we joined the European project we would naturally end up leading it. You see it in supposed libertarians who are actually more statist and authoritarian than the socialists they accuse of 'Big Government'. You see it in their idiotic attitudes to the poor and the less fortunate where they are seen as an enemy to be dealt with rather than fellow citizens to be helped. You see it in their economic policies where they think their plans and visions can simply be imposed on the markets and the whole world will bend to their will. They consider themselves the 'natural party of Government' because they are so arrogant they can't for one moment consider that anyone else has either the ability or the right to 'rule'.
I am not a socialist. I think it is a wrongheaded doctrine. But neither do I believe that the Tory party are the answer to any questions of substance today. Nor have they been since the times of Thatcher - and even then it was a case of a very few politicians of stature bring the party to heel even if only temporarily.
I would happily see the Tory party completely destroyed. They are unfit for purpose. All the other parties (with the exception of the Blair years) at least have the benefit of some element of hubris and self doubt.
From what I can see, index linked gilt yields haven’t changed much, as a result of the old lady’s latest special monetary operation.
Has the BoE been found out?
There's only so much firefighting the BoE can do when you the PM and Chancellor are financial arsonists.
There's only so much pressure you can put on the market when the traders know that you are winding up your efforts on Friday. Traders will be expecting a sharp rise in yields then when the buyer of last resort quits and it is worth holding out for that.
I am really not sure what the Bank is playing at. It is still being clear that rather than buy bonds it wants to sell at least £70bn of them in the coming year. So they are increasing the supply (as if the new borrowing targets arising after the KamiKwase tax cuts were not challenging enough) but somehow expecting the yield to fall. Its nuts. If the bank wants to be serious and show that it is willing to protect the pound (reducing imported inflation) and give some credibility to government gilts it would have increased the base rate. But, again, they wimped out.
None of this excuses the fiscal incontenence and irresponsibility of the government of course but the Bank are making an already bad situation worse rather than seeking to offset the damage done by Kwarteng.
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans…
First, as you recognise, you don’t know that the troops “pouring in” to Belarus are anything more than a fraction of that number. Second, they’d be no more use, probably a great deal less, than the original relatively well trained armoured forces who tried last time around.
There’s nothing ‘natural’ about the plan at all, and Ukraine reportedly has a significant reserve maintained to deal with such a desperate effort in any event. The collapse of Belarus to revolution would be a political and strategic disaster for Putin, so there’s plenty of incentive for sending troops if Lukashenko really is in trouble. It’s a perfectly feasible alternate explanation.
Bottom line is neither of us has any idea of what’s the truth of the matter.
Oh, and you really have no idea whether or not Putin is as desperate as you intuit he is, either.
You should read the AI tweet thread I posted earlier. It’s much more interesting.
Putin is desperate. He mobilised. A phenomenally risky and unpopular move
This is probably the most important news from the war today.
NOËL 🇪🇺 🇺🇦 @NOELreports Belarus is handing over tanks, air defense systems and ammo to Russia. Today, several new echelons with equipment of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus in the direction of the Russian Federation were recorded at once, - Belarusian opposition media
First, Belarus will not join the war directly, otherwise it would keep its stock of spare equipment.
Second, Russia is likely reaching the limits of the usable equipment that it can bring back into service from its stores, and so it's ability to sustain the intensity of combat we have seen since February is nearing exhaustion.
Consequently, I believe we are nearer to the end of the war than the beginning.
Ukraine claims to have taken 2,500 of 3,300 Russian tanks, so far in this war. 75% of all the Russian tanks!!
Wiki reckons that Belarus has around 950 tanks, mostly T-72s. How many of those are serviceable, and how many they might let the Russians have, is unknown. Let’s say they give 300 to the Russians.
That’s ONE MONTH of tanks at the current attrition rate, assuming they don’t do anything silly like send them on the NLAW gauntlet down Chernobyl Road heading for Kiev. Again.
Oryx currently has them at 1,320 tanks lost. Which is about half of Ukraine's claims, but still a staggering number. I honestly do believe that Russia is running out of tanks, let alone trained tank crew. Especially when you consider they have a very long border that needs defence, and are already known to be withdrawing kit from other areas (Finnish border?).
Lord Frost says the number of Foreign Office ministers/officials should be expanded to rebuild ties with Europe. He later adds 'there has been an overzealous wish to avoid contacts with the EU and its institutions' which has been an 'overcorrection by some as a result of Brexit'.
Lord Frost says the number of Foreign Office ministers/officials should be expanded to rebuild ties with Europe. He later adds 'there has been an overzealous wish to avoid contacts with the EU and its institutions' which has been an 'overcorrection by some as a result of Brexit'.
From what I can see, index linked gilt yields haven’t changed much, as a result of the old lady’s latest special monetary operation.
Has the BoE been found out?
There's only so much firefighting the BoE can do when you the PM and Chancellor are financial arsonists.
The Chancellor has perhaps been irresponsible playing with matches, but the Bank are pouring gasoline everywhere to put it out.
Intervening to buy £5bn bonds here and there while saying you're going to be putting £80bn of bonds on the market to be sold, is hardly going to stabilise the market now, is it?
Other Central Banks aren't doing Quantitative Tightening. Its a bone-headed suggestion at this point of time and the Bank needs to own up to its mistake and cancel QT.
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans
And, finally, there is no winning of this war for Putin. Even if he manages the above, he will rule a nation of 40m people that loathe him, and will never be reconciled to Russian takeover, and who will almost immediately begin a campaign of sabotage and insurrection. A tragic and colossal blunder by Putin. He started a war he could never win, not in the long term. Probably because he believed his own lies about Ukrainians yearning for Russian rule
On the face of it. strange that Russia is sending troops to Belarus at the same time as taking heavy weapons that they might use out of the country. Also the purpose of the mobilisation is to shore up the very long front line across the newly gained territories in the South of Ukraine, when it is recognised they are critically short of infantry. The need for troops is in the South, not the North.
My guess - no more than that - is Belarus can accommodate these troops until they are deployed in South Ukraine, while Russia can't. Belarussian military can provide at least some training when their Russian equivalents are either fighting or dead. Belarus can also feed and provide accommodation.
From what I can see, index linked gilt yields haven’t changed much, as a result of the old lady’s latest special monetary operation.
Has the BoE been found out?
There's only so much firefighting the BoE can do when you the PM and Chancellor are financial arsonists.
The Chancellor has perhaps been irresponsible playing with matches, but the Bank are pouring gasoline everywhere to put it out.
Intervening to buy £5bn bonds here and there while saying you're going to be putting £80bn of bonds on the market to be sold, is hardly going to stabilise the market now, is it?
Other Central Banks aren't doing Quantitative Tightening. Its a bone-headed suggestion at this point of time and the Bank needs to own up to its mistake and cancel QT.
Thing is, the basic problem is terrifyingly simple. Nobody wants to buy our debt.
It’s both a fiscal and a monetary problem.
You fix it with a credible, balanced budget and an interest rate that will credibly bring down inflation.
Too many games are being played by too many actors trying to bluff the markets.
Get real. Balance the budget and immediately raise interest rates to a sensible level. 6%, perhaps.
BA Jacobsen @ba_jakobsen · 2h Replying to @KyivPost Zoom in and you can see it is still there, i don't see the point of posting something like this, your resilient - we get it. Just keep it honest though.
It did seem rather unlikely that anyone could rebuild and repaint entire roads - cratered by shells - overnight. If you look at all the pics, they are - I think - all fake
But the credulous on here wanted to believe, so they believed
I have to confess those are not great figures for what3words
Their tiny turnover is down? And they spent £43m??!
This may be one that I got spectacularly wrong. It's still a fabulous dreamy idea tho, and someone will make a version of it work
It is a good idea but how do they monetise it ?
That is what interests me
It's kinda tragic if it fails. There was a BBC article the other day about the problems caused by a lack of reliable addresses in poor countries
"How do you make deliveries without having a street name?
That's the problem the Gambian government is trying to resolve. Some cities and towns still have unnamed streets making the job of couriers a challenge. 🚚📦"
There is a solution ready and waiting. For some reason it is not being used
No good, no internal information, for the other purposes of everyday life.
1 Pulteney Street, Wick, Caithness IV34 1AA is meaningful even if you leave one or two bits out. And you don't need to pay anyone money. And if bits are misspelt it has some redundancy.
"The pissup is at Pounceney Street, Wick" will still work ...
As far as I remember just having '1, IV34 1AA' is enough from that.
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans
And, finally, there is no winning of this war for Putin. Even if he manages the above, he will rule a nation of 40m people that loathe him, and will never be reconciled to Russian takeover, and who will almost immediately begin a campaign of sabotage and insurrection. A tragic and colossal blunder by Putin. He started a war he could never win, not in the long term. Probably because he believed his own lies about Ukrainians yearning for Russian rule
On the face of it. strange that Russia is sending troops to Belarus at the same time as taking heavy weapons that they might use out of the country. Also the purpose of the mobilisation is to shore up the very long front line across the newly gained territories in the South of Ukraine, when it is recognised they are critically short of infantry. The need for troops is in the South, not the North.
My guess - no more than that - is Belarus can accommodate these troops until they are deployed in South Ukraine, while Russia can't. Belarussian military can provide at least some training when their Russian equivalents are either fighting or dead. Belarus can also feed and provide accommodation.
That seems bizarre to me. Send his troops out of the country just so they can be housed and fed?
Nope, don't believe that
He could of course be dividing his new troops. 150,000 to the south, to defend, 150,000 to Belarus, to attack
It'll be fine. Growth and red tape cutting solves everything, it's just that easy - that's why previous governments decided not to do it.
Very hard to see how Truss can find this[60bn]. Largest areas of spending:
- NHS – can't cut - Pensions – won't cut - Working age benefits – see cabinet backlash - Education – if pro-growth, wouldn't cut - Defence – set to increase by 50%
From what I can see, index linked gilt yields haven’t changed much, as a result of the old lady’s latest special monetary operation.
Has the BoE been found out?
There's only so much firefighting the BoE can do when you the PM and Chancellor are financial arsonists.
The Chancellor has perhaps been irresponsible playing with matches, but the Bank are pouring gasoline everywhere to put it out.
Intervening to buy £5bn bonds here and there while saying you're going to be putting £80bn of bonds on the market to be sold, is hardly going to stabilise the market now, is it?
Other Central Banks aren't doing Quantitative Tightening. Its a bone-headed suggestion at this point of time and the Bank needs to own up to its mistake and cancel QT.
Thing is, the basic problem is terrifyingly simple. Nobody wants to buy our debt.
It’s both a fiscal and a monetary problem.
You fix it with a credible, balanced budget and an interest rate that will credibly bring down inflation.
The Bank of England have been buying Government debt for the past 15 years, as have the ECB and Fed for their nations debt.
The ECB have decided to stop engaging in QE but to rollover existing debt as it matures.
The BoE on the other hand has decided that now is the time it feels is appropriate to start offloading eighty billion of debt. That's more than Furlough, being expected to be funded by the markets in the next year on top of whatever the Government issues.
That QT is debt being sold that has to compete with debt the Government is trying to sell and the consequences are immediate and obvious, but are getting scant attention as it all being due to the Fiscal Event rather than the Bank decision in the same 24 hour window is a much more attractive media story.
QE can't continue in a high-inflation environment but engaging in QT while there's a deficit is vandalism.
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans…
First, as you recognise, you don’t know that the troops “pouring in” to Belarus are anything more than a fraction of that number. Second, they’d be no more use, probably a great deal less, than the original relatively well trained armoured forces who tried last time around.
There’s nothing ‘natural’ about the plan at all, and Ukraine reportedly has a significant reserve maintained to deal with such a desperate effort in any event. The collapse of Belarus to revolution would be a political and strategic disaster for Putin, so there’s plenty of incentive for sending troops if Lukashenko really is in trouble. It’s a perfectly feasible alternate explanation.
Bottom line is neither of us has any idea of what’s the truth of the matter.
Oh, and you really have no idea whether or not Putin is as desperate as you intuit he is, either.
You should read the AI tweet thread I posted earlier. It’s much more interesting.
What I've heard referenced is that a third of the Ukrainian army is held in reserve. Much of its kit safe in underground tunnels.
The thought is Putin might yet try to go for Kyiv, riled up as he is by his earlier disaster.
If he did and it turned into another messy rout, then Ukraine could send many of these troops south. Which could prove critical in putting a third front in play that would break the Russian forces. So for now, it is mind games. Will he really be such a stupid general? Logic says not. Lack of anything else going his way says maybe....
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans…
First, as you recognise, you don’t know that the troops “pouring in” to Belarus are anything more than a fraction of that number. Second, they’d be no more use, probably a great deal less, than the original relatively well trained armoured forces who tried last time around.
There’s nothing ‘natural’ about the plan at all, and Ukraine reportedly has a significant reserve maintained to deal with such a desperate effort in any event. The collapse of Belarus to revolution would be a political and strategic disaster for Putin, so there’s plenty of incentive for sending troops if Lukashenko really is in trouble. It’s a perfectly feasible alternate explanation.
Bottom line is neither of us has any idea of what’s the truth of the matter.
Oh, and you really have no idea whether or not Putin is as desperate as you intuit he is, either.
You should read the AI tweet thread I posted earlier. It’s much more interesting.
Putin is desperate. He mobilised. A phenomenally risky and unpopular move
I think that you are missing the point @Leon. 300k men without tanks, planes, rockets, the Russian equivalent of NWALS and HIMARS might, at best, use up some Ukranian ammunition but they are not going to attack or achieve anything on the brutal landscape of modern warfare where it is increasingly difficult for fragile human bodies to survive. The latest HIMARs rockets, with their frankly horrific titanium bearings exploding above the target shred human beings who are not adequately protected. Without training, food, tents, armour and the skills to use appropriate weaponary which is available they can, at the very best, release some real troops from guard duties.
Wars are won with logistics and Russia's stink. They can sacrifice or murder their own unfortunates but they cannot stop a modern, well equipped army such as Ukraine has built with a lot of help from us and a massive quantity of kit from the US. The mobilisation was significant politically for the reasons you point out but militarily it was pointless.
This is probably the most important news from the war today.
NOËL 🇪🇺 🇺🇦 @NOELreports Belarus is handing over tanks, air defense systems and ammo to Russia. Today, several new echelons with equipment of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus in the direction of the Russian Federation were recorded at once, - Belarusian opposition media
First, Belarus will not join the war directly, otherwise it would keep its stock of spare equipment.
Second, Russia is likely reaching the limits of the usable equipment that it can bring back into service from its stores, and so it's ability to sustain the intensity of combat we have seen since February is nearing exhaustion.
Consequently, I believe we are nearer to the end of the war than the beginning.
Ukraine claims to have taken 2,500 of 3,300 Russian tanks, so far in this war. 75% of all the Russian tanks!!
Wiki reckons that Belarus has around 950 tanks, mostly T-72s. How many of those are serviceable, and how many they might let the Russians have, is unknown. Let’s say they give 300 to the Russians.
That’s ONE MONTH of tanks at the current attrition rate, assuming they don’t do anything silly like send them on the NLAW gauntlet down Chernobyl Road heading for Kiev. Again.
Oryx currently has them at 1,320 tanks lost. Which is about half of Ukraine's claims, but still a staggering number. I honestly do believe that Russia is running out of tanks, let alone trained tank crew. Especially when you consider they have a very long border that needs defence, and are already known to be withdrawing kit from other areas (Finnish border?).
Yes, even if for sake of argument we halve the Oryx tally, it's a stunningly high number.
I know Belarus is a weak place run by a Putin wannabe (even though he's been there longer), but I'm surprised even the non-opposition elements of it are resigned to accepting being a Putin proxy state.
Putin is desperate. He mobilised. A phenomenally risky and unpopular move
The most plausible theory I read about that was that it was a response to getting the cold shoulder from his presumed allies at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation meeting. China didn't show any willingness to support Russia in a long war of attrition and put pressure on him to bring the war to a swift end because it's causing diplomatic and economic issues for them.
Up until then, Putin had been resisting mobilisation because of the risks to domestic stability and because it would break the tacit social contract he has with the Russian people.
As I said yesterday, this is Putin's plan. I'm getting a bit bored of being right, TBH
"F*ck. Kyiv's Tets-6 thermal power plant is on fire after more Russian cruise missile strikes. Russia is serious about bombing Ukraine back into Stone Age by destroying all of its energy sources ... what a bunch of war criminals."
It's much harder than you think to permanently disrupt power generation.
Coal fired power stations are not very complex things, and they date back more than a century. They can almost certainly be patched up much more cheaply than Russia can lob cruise missiles and aircraft strikes.
I'm not saying he WILL do it but it is what he is trying to do, and this happened in Aleppo. But he needs a fuck of a lot of missiles and drones, because he will have to relentlessly pound the power stations/water all the way through the winter, so they cannot be repaired
Water could be as crucial as electricity. If you successfully cut a water supply you would get surrender in days, but I have no idea how difficult that is. You would probably need people on the ground to sabotage pipes?
This is an interesting thread :
UKRAINE WAR UPDATE
I have identified four intertwining paths to victory for Russia: (1) Mobilization ✅ (2) Massed Kalibr strikes on power infrastructure ✅ (3) Weaponized Kesslerization 🚀🪨🛰️💥 (4) Large-scale Chinese aid (🐉,🐻) Let's go through them.
Anatoly Karlin 🚀🪨🛰️💥
But if Russia was too incompetent or dysfunctional to surge Kalibr production in preceding months, and Ukrainians are trouncing Russians in counter-battery due to Western munitions & space-based ISR support with attendants effect on loss ratios, then it's on a path to defeat."
From what I can see, index linked gilt yields haven’t changed much, as a result of the old lady’s latest special monetary operation.
Has the BoE been found out?
There's only so much firefighting the BoE can do when you the PM and Chancellor are financial arsonists.
There's only so much pressure you can put on the market when the traders know that you are winding up your efforts on Friday. Traders will be expecting a sharp rise in yields then when the buyer of last resort quits and it is worth holding out for that.
I am really not sure what the Bank is playing at. It is still being clear that rather than buy bonds it wants to sell at least £70bn of them in the coming year. So they are increasing the supply (as if the new borrowing targets arising after the KamiKwase tax cuts were not challenging enough) but somehow expecting the yield to fall. Its nuts. If the bank wants to be serious and show that it is willing to protect the pound (reducing imported inflation) and give some credibility to government gilts it would have increased the base rate. But, again, they wimped out.
None of this excuses the fiscal incontenence and irresponsibility of the government of course but the Bank are making an already bad situation worse rather than seeking to offset the damage done by Kwarteng.
I believe the Bank policy is clear. In principle it's to sell bonds to keep inflation in check, which is its job. This is quantative tightening. While the Bank is still officially independent it is being undermined by a government policy pushing the other way, forcing the Bank to buy bonds against its policy so the whole market doesn't crash.
We can argue whether QT is a good policy in the current environment, but the Bank isn't the one causing the dysfunction.
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
Winning seems to be a bonus rather than an expectation from it. If they lose it signals their intent to act, attempt to act, and being kept down by the UK state.
Escalating further from there isn't necessarily simple for the SNP, but it definitely still puts pressure on the 'Just ignore it and it'll go away' strategy of the UK gov.
Lord Frost says the number of Foreign Office ministers/officials should be expanded to rebuild ties with Europe. He later adds 'there has been an overzealous wish to avoid contacts with the EU and its institutions' which has been an 'overcorrection by some as a result of Brexit'.
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
Winning seems to be a bonus rather than an expectation from it. If they lose it signals their intent to act, attempt to act, and being kept down by the UK state.
Escalating further from there isn't necessarily simple for the SNP, but it definitely still puts pressure on the 'Just ignore it and it'll go away' strategy of the UK gov.
If the SNP lose the case and cannot hold a referendum without UK government consent and Sturgeon sticks to her strategy of not declaring UDI instead, then I suspect Alba will stand candidates at the next general election in Scotland on a UDI agenda. Thus splitting the Nationalist vote
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans…
First, as you recognise, you don’t know that the troops “pouring in” to Belarus are anything more than a fraction of that number. Second, they’d be no more use, probably a great deal less, than the original relatively well trained armoured forces who tried last time around.
There’s nothing ‘natural’ about the plan at all, and Ukraine reportedly has a significant reserve maintained to deal with such a desperate effort in any event. The collapse of Belarus to revolution would be a political and strategic disaster for Putin, so there’s plenty of incentive for sending troops if Lukashenko really is in trouble. It’s a perfectly feasible alternate explanation.
Bottom line is neither of us has any idea of what’s the truth of the matter.
Oh, and you really have no idea whether or not Putin is as desperate as you intuit he is, either.
You should read the AI tweet thread I posted earlier. It’s much more interesting.
Putin is desperate. He mobilised. A phenomenally risky and unpopular move
I think that you are missing the point @Leon. 300k men without tanks, planes, rockets, the Russian equivalent of NWALS and HIMARS might, at best, use up some Ukranian ammunition but they are not going to attack or achieve anything on the brutal landscape of modern warfare where it is increasingly difficult for fragile human bodies to survive. The latest HIMARs rockets, with their frankly horrific titanium bearings exploding above the target shred human beings who are not adequately protected. Without training, food, tents, armour and the skills to use appropriate weaponary which is available they can, at the very best, release some real troops from guard duties.
Wars are won with logistics and Russia's stink. They can sacrifice or murder their own unfortunates but they cannot stop a modern, well equipped army such as Ukraine has built with a lot of help from us and a massive quantity of kit from the US. The mobilisation was significant politically for the reasons you point out but militarily it was pointless.
As I said downthread, his plans "could easily go tits up, like all his plans"
His army is indeed a pile of wank, facing better soldiers with better morale and better kit. However there is at least one way he could win: if he so weakens Ukraine from bombardment that the country semi-collapses, and his ragtag troops have an easier time, and take Kyiv
{But even then, as I also say, he will lose long term to a hostile new occupied Ukraine}
Let's focus on the here and now. Putin's short term task is difficult. My bet is that he will struggle again, and be rebuffed
But is it impossible for him to win (ie take Kyiv)? No, it's not. There are routes to victory. PB is better when we address reality, rather than bend reality to make it conform to what we want
Lord Frost says the number of Foreign Office ministers/officials should be expanded to rebuild ties with Europe. He later adds 'there has been an overzealous wish to avoid contacts with the EU and its institutions' which has been an 'overcorrection by some as a result of Brexit'.
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
Even the Lord Advocate clearly does not believe that this falls within the competence of the Scottish Parliament. The SNP's own written submissions really failed to address the wording of the legislation which the SC has to apply, relying instead on inherent rights to self determination which in some way require the SC to ignore the law as it is and recognise some amorphous, overwhelming principle. It's an offer they have declined before and they will do so this time too.
@HelenKennedy Elon Musk reportedly spoke with Vladimir Putin before he tweeted that proposal to end the war by permanently ceding annexed territory to Russia.
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
I would be very happy to make a bet on those odds if you were offering!
Of course the Scottish Government could hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy and removing armed forces if they wanted to do so, just as Strathclyde could hold a referendum on privatisation of water, despite it being a matter for Westminster.
The SG or a Council holding a non-binding vote on a matter doesn't change the law on a reserved matter, so it surely isn't reserved.
I think its quite possible, indeed maybe even probable, that the Supreme Court will rule that since this is non-binding, it doesn't affect any reserved matters legally, so therefore it is not reserved.
Any political speculation about the impact on politics or what happens next is not for the Supreme Court to discharge.
Soviet Union?! £50m in the bank! Net assets of £6m..... They'll survive, but they can't do that loss for much longer I suppose.
I wonder who the heck invested all that money. The share capital and share premium account keep going up.....
They use Caseware accounts production too.... interesting. And the audit report is as clean as a whistle. Not even an emphasis of matter on going concern, which you'd expect....
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
Winning seems to be a bonus rather than an expectation from it. If they lose it signals their intent to act, attempt to act, and being kept down by the UK state.
Escalating further from there isn't necessarily simple for the SNP, but it definitely still puts pressure on the 'Just ignore it and it'll go away' strategy of the UK gov.
If the SNP lose the case and cannot hold a referendum without UK government consent and Sturgeon sticks to her strategy of not declaring UDI instead, then I suspect Alba will stand candidates at the next general election in Scotland on a UDI agenda. Thus splitting the Nationalist vote
There’s a story that prior to Musk’s Twitter poll/“peace plan” on Twitter, he spoke directly with Putin about it.
I should think he’s getting dangerously close to criminality if he’s seeking to conduct diplomacy without approval, given his military clearances for space, isn’t he?
As I said yesterday, this is Putin's plan. I'm getting a bit bored of being right, TBH
"F*ck. Kyiv's Tets-6 thermal power plant is on fire after more Russian cruise missile strikes. Russia is serious about bombing Ukraine back into Stone Age by destroying all of its energy sources ... what a bunch of war criminals."
It's much harder than you think to permanently disrupt power generation.
Coal fired power stations are not very complex things, and they date back more than a century. They can almost certainly be patched up much more cheaply than Russia can lob cruise missiles and aircraft strikes.
I'm not saying he WILL do it but it is what he is trying to do, and this happened in Aleppo. But he needs a fuck of a lot of missiles and drones, because he will have to relentlessly pound the power stations/water all the way through the winter, so they cannot be repaired
Water could be as crucial as electricity. If you successfully cut a water supply you would get surrender in days, but I have no idea how difficult that is. You would probably need people on the ground to sabotage pipes?
This is an interesting thread :
UKRAINE WAR UPDATE
I have identified four intertwining paths to victory for Russia: (1) Mobilization ✅ (2) Massed Kalibr strikes on power infrastructure ✅ (3) Weaponized Kesslerization 🚀🪨🛰️💥 (4) Large-scale Chinese aid (🐉,🐻) Let's go through them.
Anatoly Karlin 🚀🪨🛰️💥
But if Russia was too incompetent or dysfunctional to surge Kalibr production in preceding months, and Ukrainians are trouncing Russians in counter-battery due to Western munitions & space-based ISR support with attendants effect on loss ratios, then it's on a path to defeat."
Kesslerization would be very bad for Elon Musk and SpaceX.
Just sayin'!
That guy I linked to is really interesting. I can see why other people I already follow follow him
He appears to be Russian, very hardcore, very patriotic, wants to win. But he is openly contemptuous of Putin and regularly savages him
Because he is not a voice we normally hear, he unearths fascinating nuggets of info - but from the other side, as it were. Which makes him especially valuable
There’s a story that prior to Musk’s Twitter poll/“peace plan” on Twitter, he spoke directly with Putin about it.
I should think he’s getting dangerously close to criminality if he’s seeking to conduct diplomacy without approval, given his military clearances for space, isn’t he?
Logan Act says "Yo!"
Of course, THAT's been dead letter since its enactment in 1799 . . .
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
Winning seems to be a bonus rather than an expectation from it. If they lose it signals their intent to act, attempt to act, and being kept down by the UK state.
Escalating further from there isn't necessarily simple for the SNP, but it definitely still puts pressure on the 'Just ignore it and it'll go away' strategy of the UK gov.
I think it quite possible that it would career suicide for a number of SNP folk if they win. And I cannot believe they actually want to. If they win they have to go ahead. If they go ahead on what has to be in capital letters 'only advisory - a statutory opinion poll' there is a prospect of:
a mass unionist boycott, giving Westminster space to ignore it
or
losing by, let us say 48/52
or
winning by 52/48
all of which compounds the problem.
The chance of getting a decent and genuine majority is almost nil.
@HelenKennedy Elon Musk reportedly spoke with Vladimir Putin before he tweeted that proposal to end the war by permanently ceding annexed territory to Russia.
This is probably the most important news from the war today.
NOËL 🇪🇺 🇺🇦 @NOELreports Belarus is handing over tanks, air defense systems and ammo to Russia. Today, several new echelons with equipment of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus in the direction of the Russian Federation were recorded at once, - Belarusian opposition media
First, Belarus will not join the war directly, otherwise it would keep its stock of spare equipment.
Second, Russia is likely reaching the limits of the usable equipment that it can bring back into service from its stores, and so it's ability to sustain the intensity of combat we have seen since February is nearing exhaustion.
Consequently, I believe we are nearer to the end of the war than the beginning.
Ukraine claims to have taken 2,500 of 3,300 Russian tanks, so far in this war. 75% of all the Russian tanks!!
Wiki reckons that Belarus has around 950 tanks, mostly T-72s. How many of those are serviceable, and how many they might let the Russians have, is unknown. Let’s say they give 300 to the Russians.
That’s ONE MONTH of tanks at the current attrition rate, assuming they don’t do anything silly like send them on the NLAW gauntlet down Chernobyl Road heading for Kiev. Again.
Oryx currently has them at 1,320 tanks lost. Which is about half of Ukraine's claims, but still a staggering number. I honestly do believe that Russia is running out of tanks, let alone trained tank crew. Especially when you consider they have a very long border that needs defence, and are already known to be withdrawing kit from other areas (Finnish border?).
Yes, even if for sake of argument we halve the Oryx tally, it's a stunningly high number.
I know Belarus is a weak place run by a Putin wannabe (even though he's been there longer), but I'm surprised even the non-opposition elements of it are resigned to accepting being a Putin proxy state.
I wouldn't halve Oryx's number - it's a very good baseline (the photos really help with that). I think most people assume Russia have lost 20-30% more than Oryx say, due to some losses being behind Russian lines and unphotographed.
This is probably the most important news from the war today.
NOËL 🇪🇺 🇺🇦 @NOELreports Belarus is handing over tanks, air defense systems and ammo to Russia. Today, several new echelons with equipment of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus in the direction of the Russian Federation were recorded at once, - Belarusian opposition media
First, Belarus will not join the war directly, otherwise it would keep its stock of spare equipment.
Second, Russia is likely reaching the limits of the usable equipment that it can bring back into service from its stores, and so it's ability to sustain the intensity of combat we have seen since February is nearing exhaustion.
Consequently, I believe we are nearer to the end of the war than the beginning.
Ukraine claims to have taken 2,500 of 3,300 Russian tanks, so far in this war. 75% of all the Russian tanks!!
Wiki reckons that Belarus has around 950 tanks, mostly T-72s. How many of those are serviceable, and how many they might let the Russians have, is unknown. Let’s say they give 300 to the Russians.
That’s ONE MONTH of tanks at the current attrition rate, assuming they don’t do anything silly like send them on the NLAW gauntlet down Chernobyl Road heading for Kiev. Again.
Oryx currently has them at 1,320 tanks lost. Which is about half of Ukraine's claims, but still a staggering number. I honestly do believe that Russia is running out of tanks, let alone trained tank crew. Especially when you consider they have a very long border that needs defence, and are already known to be withdrawing kit from other areas (Finnish border?).
Yes, even if for sake of argument we halve the Oryx tally, it's a stunningly high number.
I know Belarus is a weak place run by a Putin wannabe (even though he's been there longer), but I'm surprised even the non-opposition elements of it are resigned to accepting being a Putin proxy state.
I wouldn't halve Oryx's number - it's a very good baseline (the photos really help with that). I think most people assume Russia have lost 20-30% more than Oryx say, due to some losses being behind Russian lines and unphotographed.
Numbers won't necessarily tell the whole story though. Which equipment will Russia have used first - their best stuff, or the museum pieces? Not difficult to work out.
So their early losses might well represent a much bigger proportion of their military capability than the headline figure suggests.
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans…
First, as you recognise, you don’t know that the troops “pouring in” to Belarus are anything more than a fraction of that number. Second, they’d be no more use, probably a great deal less, than the original relatively well trained armoured forces who tried last time around.
There’s nothing ‘natural’ about the plan at all, and Ukraine reportedly has a significant reserve maintained to deal with such a desperate effort in any event. The collapse of Belarus to revolution would be a political and strategic disaster for Putin, so there’s plenty of incentive for sending troops if Lukashenko really is in trouble. It’s a perfectly feasible alternate explanation.
Bottom line is neither of us has any idea of what’s the truth of the matter.
Oh, and you really have no idea whether or not Putin is as desperate as you intuit he is, either.
You should read the AI tweet thread I posted earlier. It’s much more interesting.
Putin is desperate. He mobilised. A phenomenally risky and unpopular move
I think that you are missing the point @Leon. 300k men without tanks, planes, rockets, the Russian equivalent of NWALS and HIMARS might, at best, use up some Ukranian ammunition but they are not going to attack or achieve anything on the brutal landscape of modern warfare where it is increasingly difficult for fragile human bodies to survive. The latest HIMARs rockets, with their frankly horrific titanium bearings exploding above the target shred human beings who are not adequately protected. Without training, food, tents, armour and the skills to use appropriate weaponary which is available they can, at the very best, release some real troops from guard duties.
Wars are won with logistics and Russia's stink. They can sacrifice or murder their own unfortunates but they cannot stop a modern, well equipped army such as Ukraine has built with a lot of help from us and a massive quantity of kit from the US. The mobilisation was significant politically for the reasons you point out but militarily it was pointless.
As I said downthread, his plans "could easily go tits up, like all his plans"
His army is indeed a pile of wank, facing better soldiers with better morale and better kit. However there is at least one way he could win: if he so weakens Ukraine from bombardment that the country semi-collapses, and his ragtag troops have an easier time, and take Kyiv
{But even then, as I also say, he will lose long term to a hostile new occupied Ukraine}
Let's focus on the here and now. Putin's short term task is difficult. My bet is that he will struggle again, and be rebuffed
But is it impossible for him to win (ie take Kyiv)? No, it's not. There are routes to victory. PB is better when we address reality, rather than bend reality to make it conform to what we want
All of Russia's attacks in the last 3 months have focused on a single village assaulted by Wagner mercenaries. The Russian army itself is just about capable of defending positions (although it is frequently outmanouvred) but seems incapable of going on the offensive, whether that is because of a lack of equipment, ammunition, fuel, food or whatever. 300K untrained men are really not going to change that.
BA Jacobsen @ba_jakobsen · 2h Replying to @KyivPost Zoom in and you can see it is still there, i don't see the point of posting something like this, your resilient - we get it. Just keep it honest though.
It did seem rather unlikely that anyone could rebuild and repaint entire roads - cratered by shells - overnight. If you look at all the pics, they are - I think - all fake
But the credulous on here wanted to believe, so they believed
I cannot speak on whether those photos are fake or not, but I cannot see why it wouldn't be possible to fill a crater and resurface overnight - particularly if there are no services underneath (or you are not bothered about the services). All you need to do is find fill material, dump it in, compact as much as possible, then pave it. Not a massive job (tm). Although they might have problems with settlement in the winter...
The video below shows a tunnel being built under a motorway in a weekend. That involves digging away the motorway, sliding the precast tunnel into place, filling, and resurfacing. A massive job, but the road is reopened to road traffic.
This is probably the most important news from the war today.
NOËL 🇪🇺 🇺🇦 @NOELreports Belarus is handing over tanks, air defense systems and ammo to Russia. Today, several new echelons with equipment of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus in the direction of the Russian Federation were recorded at once, - Belarusian opposition media
First, Belarus will not join the war directly, otherwise it would keep its stock of spare equipment.
Second, Russia is likely reaching the limits of the usable equipment that it can bring back into service from its stores, and so it's ability to sustain the intensity of combat we have seen since February is nearing exhaustion.
Consequently, I believe we are nearer to the end of the war than the beginning.
Ukraine claims to have taken 2,500 of 3,300 Russian tanks, so far in this war. 75% of all the Russian tanks!!
Wiki reckons that Belarus has around 950 tanks, mostly T-72s. How many of those are serviceable, and how many they might let the Russians have, is unknown. Let’s say they give 300 to the Russians.
That’s ONE MONTH of tanks at the current attrition rate, assuming they don’t do anything silly like send them on the NLAW gauntlet down Chernobyl Road heading for Kiev. Again.
Oryx currently has them at 1,320 tanks lost. Which is about half of Ukraine's claims, but still a staggering number. I honestly do believe that Russia is running out of tanks, let alone trained tank crew. Especially when you consider they have a very long border that needs defence, and are already known to be withdrawing kit from other areas (Finnish border?).
Yes, even if for sake of argument we halve the Oryx tally, it's a stunningly high number.
I know Belarus is a weak place run by a Putin wannabe (even though he's been there longer), but I'm surprised even the non-opposition elements of it are resigned to accepting being a Putin proxy state.
I wouldn't halve Oryx's number - it's a very good baseline (the photos really help with that). I think most people assume Russia have lost 20-30% more than Oryx say, due to some losses being behind Russian lines and unphotographed.
It was only for sake of argument, not suggesting they cannot evidence it - point being even if someone did want to question their figure, that wouldn't make it a 'good' number for Russia.
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
I would be very happy to make a bet on those odds if you were offering!
Of course the Scottish Government could hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy and removing armed forces if they wanted to do so, just as Strathclyde could hold a referendum on privatisation of water, despite it being a matter for Westminster.
The SG or a Council holding a non-binding vote on a matter doesn't change the law on a reserved matter, so it surely isn't reserved.
I think its quite possible, indeed maybe even probable, that the Supreme Court will rule that since this is non-binding, it doesn't affect any reserved matters legally, so therefore it is not reserved.
Any political speculation about the impact on politics or what happens next is not for the Supreme Court to discharge.
Setting up a referendum on a reserved matter, including using taxpayers money to run it, is by definition encroaching on a reserved power
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
Winning seems to be a bonus rather than an expectation from it. If they lose it signals their intent to act, attempt to act, and being kept down by the UK state.
Escalating further from there isn't necessarily simple for the SNP, but it definitely still puts pressure on the 'Just ignore it and it'll go away' strategy of the UK gov.
If the SNP lose the case and cannot hold a referendum without UK government consent and Sturgeon sticks to her strategy of not declaring UDI instead, then I suspect Alba will stand candidates at the next general election in Scotland on a UDI agenda. Thus splitting the Nationalist vote
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
I would be very happy to make a bet on those odds if you were offering!
Of course the Scottish Government could hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy and removing armed forces if they wanted to do so, just as Strathclyde could hold a referendum on privatisation of water, despite it being a matter for Westminster.
The SG or a Council holding a non-binding vote on a matter doesn't change the law on a reserved matter, so it surely isn't reserved.
I think its quite possible, indeed maybe even probable, that the Supreme Court will rule that since this is non-binding, it doesn't affect any reserved matters legally, so therefore it is not reserved.
Any political speculation about the impact on politics or what happens next is not for the Supreme Court to discharge.
Setting up a referendum on a reserved matter, including using taxpayers money to run it, is by definition encroaching on a reserved power
If the referendum is legal, then so too will be the necessary concomitants.
Not keen on What3Words TBH. If you misplace a word or write a homophone, the address could be on the other side of the world. Too open to hard error.
At least a location on the other side of the world is likely to be picked up as implausible. Worse are the homophones or plurals which lead to locations which are just close enough to be plausible, but far enough apart to be dangerously useless. What3Words is full of these.
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
I would be very happy to make a bet on those odds if you were offering!
Of course the Scottish Government could hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy and removing armed forces if they wanted to do so, just as Strathclyde could hold a referendum on privatisation of water, despite it being a matter for Westminster.
The SG or a Council holding a non-binding vote on a matter doesn't change the law on a reserved matter, so it surely isn't reserved.
I think its quite possible, indeed maybe even probable, that the Supreme Court will rule that since this is non-binding, it doesn't affect any reserved matters legally, so therefore it is not reserved.
Any political speculation about the impact on politics or what happens next is not for the Supreme Court to discharge.
Setting up a referendum on a reserved matter, including using taxpayers money to run it, is by definition encroaching on a reserved power
I agree with you. However, the mere fact the Supreme Court have agreed to hear the case - which, to be honest, they probably shouldn't have done, in the way the Court of Great Sessions did - is probably a sign they think it's at the very least not quite as cut and dried as that.
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
Winning seems to be a bonus rather than an expectation from it. If they lose it signals their intent to act, attempt to act, and being kept down by the UK state.
Escalating further from there isn't necessarily simple for the SNP, but it definitely still puts pressure on the 'Just ignore it and it'll go away' strategy of the UK gov.
If the SNP lose the case and cannot hold a referendum without UK government consent and Sturgeon sticks to her strategy of not declaring UDI instead, then I suspect Alba will stand candidates at the next general election in Scotland on a UDI agenda. Thus splitting the Nationalist vote
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
Even the Lord Advocate clearly does not believe that this falls within the competence of the Scottish Parliament. The SNP's own written submissions really failed to address the wording of the legislation which the SC has to apply, relying instead on inherent rights to self determination which in some way require the SC to ignore the law as it is and recognise some amorphous, overwhelming principle. It's an offer they have declined before and they will do so this time too.
I don't think that's what their written submission does at all.
Their written submissions seems to me to suggest
That the legislation could be interpreted broadly (anything even remotely connected to the reserved matter is reserved, even if it doesn't affect the law on reserved matters) or narrowly (only legal changes on reserved matters are reserved). This referendum being advisory only doesn't change any reserved matters, so would be legal under a narrow reading. That under international law Scotland should have a right to self-determination. UK law is normally interpreted where it can be to be consistent in both national and international law. Therefore the narrow interpretation should be used.
Seems to me to be a reasonable argument. Where is the flaw on that, how is a narrow reading of the legislation inappropriate?
If this from the BBC Coverage earlier is accurate then surely SC precedent would say that an advisory-only referendum is not reserved? Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain continues to cite case law in reference to whether provisions in legislation "relate to" reserved matters.
She speaks about the European Union (Continuity) Bill which was passed by the Scottish Parliament as a result of Brexit.
She says the Supreme Court placed considerable emphasis on the need for there to be some form of practical or legal effect on the law on the reserved matter.
The lord advocate says it is implicit in the reasoning of the Supreme Court when it dealt with the reference on the European Union (Continuity) Bill that it would be reasonable to suggest that holding an advisory referendum on an issue of international affairs would not relate to a reserved matter by the Scottish Parliament.
BA Jacobsen @ba_jakobsen · 2h Replying to @KyivPost Zoom in and you can see it is still there, i don't see the point of posting something like this, your resilient - we get it. Just keep it honest though.
It did seem rather unlikely that anyone could rebuild and repaint entire roads - cratered by shells - overnight. If you look at all the pics, they are - I think - all fake
But the credulous on here wanted to believe, so they believed
I cannot speak on whether those photos are fake or not, but I cannot see why it wouldn't be possible to fill a crater and resurface overnight - particularly if there are no services underneath (or you are not bothered about the services). All you need to do is find fill material, dump it in, compact as much as possible, then pave it. Not a massive job (tm). Although they might have problems with settlement in the winter...
The video below shows a tunnel being built under a motorway in a weekend. That involves digging away the motorway, sliding the precast tunnel into place, filling, and resurfacing. A massive job, but the road is reopened to road traffic.
Several journalists have made the comment that the Ukrainians are very quick to clear war damage compared with other war zones they have been to. It seems they are culturally very tidy people, as demonstrated by the woman who threw a jar of homemade pickles from her apartment window at a passing drone and then went downstairs to sweep up the broken glass,
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans…
First, as you recognise, you don’t know that the troops “pouring in” to Belarus are anything more than a fraction of that number. Second, they’d be no more use, probably a great deal less, than the original relatively well trained armoured forces who tried last time around.
There’s nothing ‘natural’ about the plan at all, and Ukraine reportedly has a significant reserve maintained to deal with such a desperate effort in any event. The collapse of Belarus to revolution would be a political and strategic disaster for Putin, so there’s plenty of incentive for sending troops if Lukashenko really is in trouble. It’s a perfectly feasible alternate explanation.
Bottom line is neither of us has any idea of what’s the truth of the matter.
Oh, and you really have no idea whether or not Putin is as desperate as you intuit he is, either.
You should read the AI tweet thread I posted earlier. It’s much more interesting.
Putin is desperate. He mobilised. A phenomenally risky and unpopular move
I think that you are missing the point @Leon. 300k men without tanks, planes, rockets, the Russian equivalent of NWALS and HIMARS might, at best, use up some Ukranian ammunition but they are not going to attack or achieve anything on the brutal landscape of modern warfare where it is increasingly difficult for fragile human bodies to survive. The latest HIMARs rockets, with their frankly horrific titanium bearings exploding above the target shred human beings who are not adequately protected. Without training, food, tents, armour and the skills to use appropriate weaponary which is available they can, at the very best, release some real troops from guard duties.
Wars are won with logistics and Russia's stink. They can sacrifice or murder their own unfortunates but they cannot stop a modern, well equipped army such as Ukraine has built with a lot of help from us and a massive quantity of kit from the US. The mobilisation was significant politically for the reasons you point out but militarily it was pointless.
As I said downthread, his plans "could easily go tits up, like all his plans"
His army is indeed a pile of wank, facing better soldiers with better morale and better kit. However there is at least one way he could win: if he so weakens Ukraine from bombardment that the country semi-collapses, and his ragtag troops have an easier time, and take Kyiv
{But even then, as I also say, he will lose long term to a hostile new occupied Ukraine}
Let's focus on the here and now. Putin's short term task is difficult. My bet is that he will struggle again, and be rebuffed
But is it impossible for him to win (ie take Kyiv)? No, it's not. There are routes to victory. PB is better when we address reality, rather than bend reality to make it conform to what we want
All of Russia's attacks in the last 3 months have focused on a single village assaulted by Wagner mercenaries. The Russian army itself is just about capable of defending positions (although it is frequently outmanouvred) but seems incapable of going on the offensive, whether that is because of a lack of equipment, ammunition, fuel, food or whatever. 300K untrained men are really not going to change that.
Vladimir Putin thinks he's modeling himself after Comrade Stalin. When actually he's parodying Czar Nicholas II.
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
I would be very happy to make a bet on those odds if you were offering!
Of course the Scottish Government could hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy and removing armed forces if they wanted to do so, just as Strathclyde could hold a referendum on privatisation of water, despite it being a matter for Westminster.
The SG or a Council holding a non-binding vote on a matter doesn't change the law on a reserved matter, so it surely isn't reserved.
I think its quite possible, indeed maybe even probable, that the Supreme Court will rule that since this is non-binding, it doesn't affect any reserved matters legally, so therefore it is not reserved.
Any political speculation about the impact on politics or what happens next is not for the Supreme Court to discharge.
Setting up a referendum on a reserved matter, including using taxpayers money to run it, is by definition encroaching on a reserved power
Not unless the referendum changes the law on a reserved matter.
If it merely asks the question, but doesn't change the law, as the Strathclyde Water Referendum did, then how is that reserved? No law change is happening on any reserved issues.
All reserved matters will still be reserved to Westminster to discharge as they see fit. It may put political pressure on Westminster, but its not the Supreme Courts job to debate politics is it, only law, and legally I can't see any way this encroaches on a reserved subject since it doesn't change the law on anything that is reserved.
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
I would be very happy to make a bet on those odds if you were offering!
Of course the Scottish Government could hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy and removing armed forces if they wanted to do so, just as Strathclyde could hold a referendum on privatisation of water, despite it being a matter for Westminster.
The SG or a Council holding a non-binding vote on a matter doesn't change the law on a reserved matter, so it surely isn't reserved.
I think its quite possible, indeed maybe even probable, that the Supreme Court will rule that since this is non-binding, it doesn't affect any reserved matters legally, so therefore it is not reserved.
Any political speculation about the impact on politics or what happens next is not for the Supreme Court to discharge.
Setting up a referendum on a reserved matter, including using taxpayers money to run it, is by definition encroaching on a reserved power
If the referendum is legal, then so too will be the necessary concomitants.
Rather doubt that Archbishop Laud (Mark II) agrees with you.
There’s a story that prior to Musk’s Twitter poll/“peace plan” on Twitter, he spoke directly with Putin about it.
I should think he’s getting dangerously close to criminality if he’s seeking to conduct diplomacy without approval, given his military clearances for space, isn’t he?
In the end, any peace will involve someone talking to Putin. Does it matter if it is Erdogan, Elon Musk or the inevitable Ryan Giggs?
From what I can see, index linked gilt yields haven’t changed much, as a result of the old lady’s latest special monetary operation.
Has the BoE been found out?
There's only so much firefighting the BoE can do when you the PM and Chancellor are financial arsonists.
There's only so much pressure you can put on the market when the traders know that you are winding up your efforts on Friday. Traders will be expecting a sharp rise in yields then when the buyer of last resort quits and it is worth holding out for that.
I am really not sure what the Bank is playing at. It is still being clear that rather than buy bonds it wants to sell at least £70bn of them in the coming year. So they are increasing the supply (as if the new borrowing targets arising after the KamiKwase tax cuts were not challenging enough) but somehow expecting the yield to fall. Its nuts. If the bank wants to be serious and show that it is willing to protect the pound (reducing imported inflation) and give some credibility to government gilts it would have increased the base rate. But, again, they wimped out.
None of this excuses the fiscal incontenence and irresponsibility of the government of course but the Bank are making an already bad situation worse rather than seeking to offset the damage done by Kwarteng.
I believe the Bank policy is clear. In principle it's to sell bonds to keep inflation in check, which is its job. This is quantative tightening. While the Bank is still officially independent it is being undermined by a government policy pushing the other way, forcing the Bank to buy bonds against its policy so the whole market doesn't crash.
We can argue whether QT is a good policy in the current environment, but the Bank isn't the one causing the dysfunction.
The Bank's primary task is to control inflation. It has failed. In part that failure was outwith its control but it failed to address matters that were in its control. In particular, it let the UK fall behind the Fed in raising interest rates. The error in increasing rates at their last meeting by 0.5% instead of 0.75% showed that they had failed to appreciate how serious inflation had become, how likely it was to become invested and how a falling pound was likely to aggravate those problems.
This incompetence has reduced the credibility of the Bank in the market. They have certainly not been helped by the KamiKwase budget but that made the increase in rates all the more urgent. They are indeed dysfunctional, almost as bad as the Chancellor.
BA Jacobsen @ba_jakobsen · 2h Replying to @KyivPost Zoom in and you can see it is still there, i don't see the point of posting something like this, your resilient - we get it. Just keep it honest though.
It did seem rather unlikely that anyone could rebuild and repaint entire roads - cratered by shells - overnight. If you look at all the pics, they are - I think - all fake
But the credulous on here wanted to believe, so they believed
I cannot speak on whether those photos are fake or not, but I cannot see why it wouldn't be possible to fill a crater and resurface overnight - particularly if there are no services underneath (or you are not bothered about the services). All you need to do is find fill material, dump it in, compact as much as possible, then pave it. Not a massive job (tm). Although they might have problems with settlement in the winter...
The video below shows a tunnel being built under a motorway in a weekend. That involves digging away the motorway, sliding the precast tunnel into place, filling, and resurfacing. A massive job, but the road is reopened to road traffic.
Several journalists have made the comment that the Ukrainians are very quick to clear war damage compared with other war zones they have been to. It seems they are culturally very tidy people, as demonstrated by the woman who threw a jar of homemade pickles from her apartment window at a passing drone and then went downstairs to sweep up the broken glass,
Am guessing she also salvaged the pickles - why not?
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
I would be very happy to make a bet on those odds if you were offering!
Of course the Scottish Government could hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy and removing armed forces if they wanted to do so, just as Strathclyde could hold a referendum on privatisation of water, despite it being a matter for Westminster.
The SG or a Council holding a non-binding vote on a matter doesn't change the law on a reserved matter, so it surely isn't reserved.
I think its quite possible, indeed maybe even probable, that the Supreme Court will rule that since this is non-binding, it doesn't affect any reserved matters legally, so therefore it is not reserved.
Any political speculation about the impact on politics or what happens next is not for the Supreme Court to discharge.
Setting up a referendum on a reserved matter, including using taxpayers money to run it, is by definition encroaching on a reserved power
Not unless the referendum changes the law on a reserved matter.
If it merely asks the question, but doesn't change the law, as the Strathclyde Water Referendum did, then how is that reserved? No law change is happening on any reserved issues.
All reserved matters will still be reserved to Westminster to discharge as they see fit. It may put political pressure on Westminster, but its not the Supreme Courts job to debate politics is it, only law, and legally I can't see any way this encroaches on a reserved subject since it doesn't change the law on anything that is reserved.
If the law is interpreted in the way you're arguing then that I can't help but feel that would be a colossal strategic defeat for the SNP. It would mean, in effect, the UK government could ignore any referendum at any time because they are not binding.
Which, I would point out, the Supreme Court has already determined in their Brexit ruling, with the important difference that they suggested a workaround.
I am not watching the Supreme Court hearings, but my personal view is that even an advisory referendum on constitutional matters falls outside the Scottish government’s remit.
As would, for example, advertising in support of independence.
I think on balance I agree, although you end up at a thorny situation. In 19th century USA, I believe that the southern states had the right to secede from the union. Does Scotland have the right to do the same from the UK? I assume there was no article 50 in the act of Union?
You only have to read the words of the statute. 'Reserved' means reserved to the UK parliament and therefore not delegated.
"General reservations The Constitution 1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
I would be very happy to make a bet on those odds if you were offering!
Of course the Scottish Government could hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy and removing armed forces if they wanted to do so, just as Strathclyde could hold a referendum on privatisation of water, despite it being a matter for Westminster.
The SG or a Council holding a non-binding vote on a matter doesn't change the law on a reserved matter, so it surely isn't reserved.
I think its quite possible, indeed maybe even probable, that the Supreme Court will rule that since this is non-binding, it doesn't affect any reserved matters legally, so therefore it is not reserved.
Any political speculation about the impact on politics or what happens next is not for the Supreme Court to discharge.
Setting up a referendum on a reserved matter, including using taxpayers money to run it, is by definition encroaching on a reserved power
If the referendum is legal, then so too will be the necessary concomitants.
Rather doubt that Archbishop Laud (Mark II) agrees with you.
BA Jacobsen @ba_jakobsen · 2h Replying to @KyivPost Zoom in and you can see it is still there, i don't see the point of posting something like this, your resilient - we get it. Just keep it honest though.
It did seem rather unlikely that anyone could rebuild and repaint entire roads - cratered by shells - overnight. If you look at all the pics, they are - I think - all fake
But the credulous on here wanted to believe, so they believed
I cannot speak on whether those photos are fake or not, but I cannot see why it wouldn't be possible to fill a crater and resurface overnight - particularly if there are no services underneath (or you are not bothered about the services). All you need to do is find fill material, dump it in, compact as much as possible, then pave it. Not a massive job (tm). Although they might have problems with settlement in the winter...
The video below shows a tunnel being built under a motorway in a weekend. That involves digging away the motorway, sliding the precast tunnel into place, filling, and resurfacing. A massive job, but the road is reopened to road traffic.
Several journalists have made the comment that the Ukrainians are very quick to clear war damage compared with other war zones they have been to. It seems they are culturally very tidy people, as demonstrated by the woman who threw a jar of homemade pickles from her apartment window at a passing drone and then went downstairs to sweep up the broken glass,
They are certainly very quick to remove war detritus and repair streets. Because who would want a daily reminder that they live in a war zone?
You've got to love the head of Ukrainian railways. He's just trolled Russia, saying it'd only take a couple of days to fix the railway portion of the Crimea bridge.
@HelenKennedy Elon Musk reportedly spoke with Vladimir Putin before he tweeted that proposal to end the war by permanently ceding annexed territory to Russia.
Actually I don't hold that against him. Someone should speak to Putin. Not sure Musk has the emotional bandwidth to be an effective diplomat, but that's a different issue.
"Belarus orders its troops to be tested for 'combat readiness' after 'huge quantities of Russian soldiers entered the country' - as Lukashenko's secret service says Ukrainian invasion 'turning point' will come within weeks"
Despite evidence that Belarus is sending kit to Russia, I still think Putin's plan is this:
Weaken Ukraine internally, as much as possible, by pounding the infrastructure as long as he can. As winter kicks in this will really hurt (if he is effective)
Then invade Ukraine again from the north, from Belarus, probably alongside Belarus troops (Belarus will be ordered to help)
Aim for another quick drive to seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, and win the war against a weakened Ukraine
That's the theory, I reckon
Except they are not weakened, are they? They are getting stronger week by week. Kit, better trained troops who know what salisbury plain is like etc.
I am optimistic that if Lukasheko enters the war then he will be brought down quite rapidly. The chaos could easily spread across into Russia as the military disaster unfolds and the public finally wake up.
Perhaps that is the real purpose of the reported large numbers of Russian troops ? To maintain the regime in Belarus.
There is no way Putin would waste his precious 300,000 new conscripts to police Belarus. He has an existential war to win in Ukraine
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans…
First, as you recognise, you don’t know that the troops “pouring in” to Belarus are anything more than a fraction of that number. Second, they’d be no more use, probably a great deal less, than the original relatively well trained armoured forces who tried last time around.
There’s nothing ‘natural’ about the plan at all, and Ukraine reportedly has a significant reserve maintained to deal with such a desperate effort in any event. The collapse of Belarus to revolution would be a political and strategic disaster for Putin, so there’s plenty of incentive for sending troops if Lukashenko really is in trouble. It’s a perfectly feasible alternate explanation.
Bottom line is neither of us has any idea of what’s the truth of the matter.
Oh, and you really have no idea whether or not Putin is as desperate as you intuit he is, either.
You should read the AI tweet thread I posted earlier. It’s much more interesting.
Putin is desperate. He mobilised. A phenomenally risky and unpopular move
I think that you are missing the point @Leon. 300k men without tanks, planes, rockets, the Russian equivalent of NWALS and HIMARS might, at best, use up some Ukranian ammunition but they are not going to attack or achieve anything on the brutal landscape of modern warfare where it is increasingly difficult for fragile human bodies to survive. The latest HIMARs rockets, with their frankly horrific titanium bearings exploding above the target shred human beings who are not adequately protected. Without training, food, tents, armour and the skills to use appropriate weaponary which is available they can, at the very best, release some real troops from guard duties.
Wars are won with logistics and Russia's stink. They can sacrifice or murder their own unfortunates but they cannot stop a modern, well equipped army such as Ukraine has built with a lot of help from us and a massive quantity of kit from the US. The mobilisation was significant politically for the reasons you point out but militarily it was pointless.
As I said downthread, his plans "could easily go tits up, like all his plans"
His army is indeed a pile of wank, facing better soldiers with better morale and better kit. However there is at least one way he could win: if he so weakens Ukraine from bombardment that the country semi-collapses, and his ragtag troops have an easier time, and take Kyiv
{But even then, as I also say, he will lose long term to a hostile new occupied Ukraine}
Let's focus on the here and now. Putin's short term task is difficult. My bet is that he will struggle again, and be rebuffed
But is it impossible for him to win (ie take Kyiv)? No, it's not. There are routes to victory. PB is better when we address reality, rather than bend reality to make it conform to what we want
OK, my armchair general take on it is that ...
- Putin has been in panic since the Ukranian advance started about a month ago. - Hence the 'mobilisation' - a desperate and rather hopeless attempt to 'do something'. - He was then forced to 'do something more' after the Kerch Bridge episode. - So he is throwing everything in to this current bombardment but obviously there are limited supplies of effective heavy weapons. - He is also trying again to attack from Belarus out of desperation, despite the previous retreat and failure. - Given the above he is running the risk of a revolution in Belarus, but he will run this risk because he is basically completely desperate. - His back is completely against the wall and he will also resort to any sort of tactic to get what he wants, hence the appointment of "brutal generals".
There is no way that Russia are on the cusp of winning any conventional war in Ukraine. All they are doing is destroying much of their military capability to preserve the Putin regime, and this is likely to lead to either some kind of collapse of the current regime, or nuclear escalation. Ukraine may appear to be winning, but the outlook for the world is very bad, all the options are bad.
BA Jacobsen @ba_jakobsen · 2h Replying to @KyivPost Zoom in and you can see it is still there, i don't see the point of posting something like this, your resilient - we get it. Just keep it honest though.
It did seem rather unlikely that anyone could rebuild and repaint entire roads - cratered by shells - overnight. If you look at all the pics, they are - I think - all fake
But the credulous on here wanted to believe, so they believed
I cannot speak on whether those photos are fake or not, but I cannot see why it wouldn't be possible to fill a crater and resurface overnight - particularly if there are no services underneath (or you are not bothered about the services). All you need to do is find fill material, dump it in, compact as much as possible, then pave it. Not a massive job (tm). Although they might have problems with settlement in the winter...
The video below shows a tunnel being built under a motorway in a weekend. That involves digging away the motorway, sliding the precast tunnel into place, filling, and resurfacing. A massive job, but the road is reopened to road traffic.
Am happy to report, that this Tues morning, Seattle has some of the best-quality air in the world! With Air Quality Index = 20 (compared to London = 18).
This dramatic reversal from yesterday is due to cold front coming in from North Pacific that shifted winds from east > west = offshore, to west > east = onshore.
That's the good news. Bad news is, winds are forecast to shift back to offshore by Thursday. AND also fact that there is nearly zero chance of rain for next week or more, meaning that local forest fires will keep on keeping on for foreseeable future.
This is probably the most important news from the war today.
NOËL 🇪🇺 🇺🇦 @NOELreports Belarus is handing over tanks, air defense systems and ammo to Russia. Today, several new echelons with equipment of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus in the direction of the Russian Federation were recorded at once, - Belarusian opposition media
First, Belarus will not join the war directly, otherwise it would keep its stock of spare equipment.
Second, Russia is likely reaching the limits of the usable equipment that it can bring back into service from its stores, and so it's ability to sustain the intensity of combat we have seen since February is nearing exhaustion.
Consequently, I believe we are nearer to the end of the war than the beginning.
Ukraine claims to have taken 2,500 of 3,300 Russian tanks, so far in this war. 75% of all the Russian tanks!!
Wiki reckons that Belarus has around 950 tanks, mostly T-72s. How many of those are serviceable, and how many they might let the Russians have, is unknown. Let’s say they give 300 to the Russians.
That’s ONE MONTH of tanks at the current attrition rate, assuming they don’t do anything silly like send them on the NLAW gauntlet down Chernobyl Road heading for Kiev. Again.
Oryx currently has them at 1,320 tanks lost. Which is about half of Ukraine's claims, but still a staggering number. I honestly do believe that Russia is running out of tanks, let alone trained tank crew. Especially when you consider they have a very long border that needs defence, and are already known to be withdrawing kit from other areas (Finnish border?).
Yes, even if for sake of argument we halve the Oryx tally, it's a stunningly high number.
I know Belarus is a weak place run by a Putin wannabe (even though he's been there longer), but I'm surprised even the non-opposition elements of it are resigned to accepting being a Putin proxy state.
I wouldn't halve Oryx's number - it's a very good baseline (the photos really help with that). I think most people assume Russia have lost 20-30% more than Oryx say, due to some losses being behind Russian lines and unphotographed.
Numbers won't necessarily tell the whole story though. Which equipment will Russia have used first - their best stuff, or the museum pieces? Not difficult to work out.
So their early losses might well represent a much bigger proportion of their military capability than the headline figure suggests.
I have probably said this before. An invading force has to work like a orchestra, with artillery, armour and infantry working in fine balance. It’s like scissors, paper, stone. Tanks beat artillery, artillery beats infantry, infantry beats tanks.
Ukraine has properly degraded Russia’s artillery and tanks capability. It’s just about possible to throw massive volumes of infantry at the problem to make up the difference. But those infantry must have iron clad morale and training, so that they run TOWARDS rather than away from the far better armed enemy. And as we’ve established, the morale and training of the recruited infantry is rock bottom (Ukraine increasingly so the opposite). No air dominance to paper over the cracks either, far from it in fact.
So the idea of Russia launching a successful invasion using these recruits is just fanciful. And that’s without the 1.5mln missing winter uniforms and tactical advantage Ukraine now has in both South and East etc...
Leon’s cunning plan to use the precious dregs of Russia’s precision missile reserves to target power infrastructure is a short term tactical plan, not a strategically effective one. It impedes the ability of Ukraine to conduct manoeuvre warfare but only in the short term. It reminds me a bit of Boris Johnson’s “wait for the Sue Gray report you dirty bastards”. Putin is simply hoping “something turns up”. That’s it, that’s all he has now. Buy time, see what happens.
Now Biden is an older gentleman it is true. And we know the state of thinking on sections of the American right because Elon has told us. But I think we’re reaching the point where even with the loss of US support, Ukraine would probably still win albeit at the cost of many more lives and much time.
Not keen on What3Words TBH. If you misplace a word or write a homophone, the address could be on the other side of the world. Too open to hard error.
The ones on the other side of the world, are less of a problem than the ones 10 miles from each other.
Though that's quite possible with street addresses too.
I was going to drive between my nan's house and my grandad's house a while back when I used the voice activation on my phone to pull up the route. Google repeated the address back to me adding the correct county and asked if it was correct and I said yes. It then said it was about a 15 minute drive which I knew to be correct. It took me to the motorway, which I knew to be right, but when on the motorway slip road it told me to go Northbound when I knew their house is Southbound, which was awkward as I was now on the motorway so I went off memory from there until I got off the motorway!
Turns out there's two addresses with the same street name and street number about ten miles apart and Google had chosen the wrong one.
Comments
Decisive: -32 net score
Strong leader: -40
Trustworthy: -52
Competent: -53
Likeable: -54
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/10/11/public-assessment-starmers-personal-qualities-impr https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1579859931020554240/photo/1
IF these troops are pouring into Belarus, he surely aims to attack Ukraine from the north, via Belarus. It is the natural thing to do, it is the shortest route to Kyiv. And the "easiest" way to *win* the war - for him - is what it always was. Seize Kyiv, topple Zelensky, declare victory
However we don't yet know if these reports of troop movements are genuine. And of course his plan may go tits up like nearly all of his plans
And, finally, there is no winning of this war for Putin. Even if he manages the above, he will rule a nation of 40m people that loathe him, and will never be reconciled to Russian takeover, and who will almost immediately begin a campaign of sabotage and insurrection. A tragic and colossal blunder by Putin. He started a war he could never win, not in the long term. Probably because he believed his own lies about Ukrainians yearning for Russian rule
Competent: +9 net rating (up 11pts from Aug)
Trustworthy: +1 (up 10pts)
Likeable: -2 (up 13pts)
Decisive: -7 (up 16pts)
Strong leader: -9 (up 18pts)
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/10/11/public-assessment-starmers-personal-qualities-impr https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1579859924234174465/photo/1
He seems to be a hardcore Russian patriot. He wants to win this war. Yet his analysis is often deeply critical of Russian military and Russian society, eg
"China doesn't respect Russia for its economic or technological accomplishment, but did respect it as a warrior country; that has ironically been invalidated. It's possible they've since "downgraded" it to a Myanmar, and are looking to do business if/when a junta overthrows Putin."
https://twitter.com/powerfultakes/status/1579594330104565760?s=20&t=4mIG08hqgdwd7UqbNGahDg
The reference to transhumanism is bit weird, however
1 Pulteney Street, Wick, Caithness IV34 1AA is meaningful even if you leave one or two bits out. And you don't need to pay anyone money. And if bits are misspelt it has some redundancy.
"The pissup is at Pounceney Street, Wick" will still work ...
"The safety of the patients is no longer guaranteed"
https://www.sueddeutsche.de/muenchen/muenchen-krankenhaeuser-notfallzentren-ueberlastung-personalausfall-corona-1.5672430?reduced=true
Kesslerisation itself is a much-argued topic: some claim we're already nearly there; some say it won't happen until we have orders of magnitude more satellites.
And even then, the US has other assets that are capable of observing events. And their other aircraft will just ensure those aircraft can fly unmolested...
And wrong.
It was likely partly down to not wanting to let the big man get the impression they had failed him - with a walk out a 6th floor window as their reward. Tell Putin what he wants to hear. Then hope he forgets it was you when he relies upon it for his Special Military Operation.
Second, they’d be no more use, probably a great deal less, than the original relatively well trained armoured forces who tried last time around.
There’s nothing ‘natural’ about the plan at all, and Ukraine reportedly has a significant reserve maintained to deal with such a desperate effort in any event.
The collapse of Belarus to revolution would be a political and strategic disaster for Putin, so there’s plenty of incentive for sending troops if Lukashenko really is in trouble. It’s a perfectly feasible alternate explanation.
Bottom line is neither of us has any idea of what’s the truth of the matter.
Oh, and you really have no idea whether or not Putin is as desperate as you intuit he is, either.
You should read the AI tweet thread I posted earlier. It’s much more interesting.
Wiki reckons that Belarus has around 950 tanks, mostly T-72s. How many of those are serviceable, and how many they might let the Russians have, is unknown. Let’s say they give 300 to the Russians.
That’s ONE MONTH of tanks at the current attrition rate, assuming they don’t do anything silly like send them on the NLAW gauntlet down Chernobyl Road heading for Kiev. Again.
Hell, the issues were worked out in the days of commercial codes to reduce telegraph costs.
I am not a socialist. I think it is a wrongheaded doctrine. But neither do I believe that the Tory party are the answer to any questions of substance today. Nor have they been since the times of Thatcher - and even then it was a case of a very few politicians of stature bring the party to heel even if only temporarily.
I would happily see the Tory party completely destroyed. They are unfit for purpose. All the other parties (with the exception of the Blair years) at least have the benefit of some element of hubris and self doubt.
I am really not sure what the Bank is playing at. It is still being clear that rather than buy bonds it wants to sell at least £70bn of them in the coming year. So they are increasing the supply (as if the new borrowing targets arising after the KamiKwase tax cuts were not challenging enough) but somehow expecting the yield to fall. Its nuts. If the bank wants to be serious and show that it is willing to protect the pound (reducing imported inflation) and give some credibility to government gilts it would have increased the base rate. But, again, they wimped out.
None of this excuses the fiscal incontenence and irresponsibility of the government of course but the Bank are making an already bad situation worse rather than seeking to offset the damage done by Kwarteng.
They are in a world of hurt.
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html
One for any chemists.
https://twitter.com/nickgutteridge/status/1579864383517495296
https://cybergibbons.com/security-2/what3words-the-algorithm/
Seriously? This guy? Is he for real?
Be still my aching sides.
Intervening to buy £5bn bonds here and there while saying you're going to be putting £80bn of bonds on the market to be sold, is hardly going to stabilise the market now, is it?
Other Central Banks aren't doing Quantitative Tightening. Its a bone-headed suggestion at this point of time and the Bank needs to own up to its mistake and cancel QT.
https://www.ft.com/content/5a91a3c9-edc9-4241-aa07-cf55712057c7
This is hurting the poorest the hardest.
Great that we’ve got a government and a central bank who understand this.
/sarc
My guess - no more than that - is Belarus can accommodate these troops until they are deployed in South Ukraine, while Russia can't. Belarussian military can provide at least some training when their Russian equivalents are either fighting or dead. Belarus can also feed and provide accommodation.
It’s both a fiscal and a monetary problem.
You fix it with a credible, balanced budget and an interest rate that will credibly bring down inflation.
Too many games are being played by too many actors trying to bluff the markets.
Get real. Balance the budget and immediately raise interest rates to a sensible level. 6%, perhaps.
https://twitter.com/KyivPost/status/1579832809924878336?s=20&t=4mIG08hqgdwd7UqbNGahDg
BA Jacobsen
@ba_jakobsen
·
2h
Replying to
@KyivPost
Zoom in and you can see it is still there, i don't see the point of posting something like this, your resilient - we get it. Just keep it honest though.
https://twitter.com/KyivPost/status/1579832809924878336?s=20&t=4mIG08hqgdwd7UqbNGahDg
It did seem rather unlikely that anyone could rebuild and repaint entire roads - cratered by shells - overnight. If you look at all the pics, they are - I think - all fake
But the credulous on here wanted to believe, so they believed
Nope, don't believe that
He could of course be dividing his new troops. 150,000 to the south, to defend, 150,000 to Belarus, to attack
Very hard to see how Truss can find this[60bn]. Largest areas of spending:
- NHS – can't cut
- Pensions – won't cut
- Working age benefits – see cabinet backlash
- Education – if pro-growth, wouldn't cut
- Defence – set to increase by 50%
https://twitter.com/lara_spirit/status/1579788208623476738
The ECB have decided to stop engaging in QE but to rollover existing debt as it matures.
The BoE on the other hand has decided that now is the time it feels is appropriate to start offloading eighty billion of debt. That's more than Furlough, being expected to be funded by the markets in the next year on top of whatever the Government issues.
That QT is debt being sold that has to compete with debt the Government is trying to sell and the consequences are immediate and obvious, but are getting scant attention as it all being due to the Fiscal Event rather than the Bank decision in the same 24 hour window is a much more attractive media story.
QE can't continue in a high-inflation environment but engaging in QT while there's a deficit is vandalism.
The thought is Putin might yet try to go for Kyiv, riled up as he is by his earlier disaster.
If he did and it turned into another messy rout, then Ukraine could send many of these troops south. Which could prove critical in putting a third front in play that would break the Russian forces. So for now, it is mind games. Will he really be such a stupid general? Logic says not. Lack of anything else going his way says maybe....
"General reservations
The Constitution
1 The following aspects of the constitution are reserved matters, that is—
(a) the Crown, including succession to the Crown and a regency,
(b) the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England......"
A referendum (whether binding or not) as to whether the balance of opinion in Scotland favours change in the constitutional matter of the union, and organised according to law (ie not a large opinion poll but a legislated matter) is so plainly a reserved matter that I would say the Scottish government's case has virtually Zero chance of success.
BTW by parity of reasoning if the Scottish government can do this, they can also hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy for Scotland, and removing all armed forces.
I would put it as 66/1 the Scots to win this case.
Wars are won with logistics and Russia's stink. They can sacrifice or murder their own unfortunates but they cannot stop a modern, well equipped army such as Ukraine has built with a lot of help from us and a massive quantity of kit from the US. The mobilisation was significant politically for the reasons you point out but militarily it was pointless.
I know Belarus is a weak place run by a Putin wannabe (even though he's been there longer), but I'm surprised even the non-opposition elements of it are resigned to accepting being a Putin proxy state.
Up until then, Putin had been resisting mobilisation because of the risks to domestic stability and because it would break the tacit social contract he has with the Russian people.
Just sayin'!
We can argue whether QT is a good policy in the current environment, but the Bank isn't the one causing the dysfunction.
Escalating further from there isn't necessarily simple for the SNP, but it definitely still puts pressure on the 'Just ignore it and it'll go away' strategy of the UK gov.
His army is indeed a pile of wank, facing better soldiers with better morale and better kit. However there is at least one way he could win: if he so weakens Ukraine from bombardment that the country semi-collapses, and his ragtag troops have an easier time, and take Kyiv
{But even then, as I also say, he will lose long term to a hostile new occupied Ukraine}
Let's focus on the here and now. Putin's short term task is difficult. My bet is that he will struggle again, and be rebuffed
But is it impossible for him to win (ie take Kyiv)? No, it's not. There are routes to victory. PB is better when we address reality, rather than bend reality to make it conform to what we want
@HelenKennedy
Elon Musk reportedly spoke with Vladimir Putin before he tweeted that proposal to end the war by permanently ceding annexed territory to Russia.
https://twitter.com/HelenKennedy/status/1579864858857988097
Of course the Scottish Government could hold a referendum on abolishing the monarchy and removing armed forces if they wanted to do so, just as Strathclyde could hold a referendum on privatisation of water, despite it being a matter for Westminster.
The SG or a Council holding a non-binding vote on a matter doesn't change the law on a reserved matter, so it surely isn't reserved.
I think its quite possible, indeed maybe even probable, that the Supreme Court will rule that since this is non-binding, it doesn't affect any reserved matters legally, so therefore it is not reserved.
Any political speculation about the impact on politics or what happens next is not for the Supreme Court to discharge.
Soviet Union?! £50m in the bank! Net assets of £6m.....
They'll survive, but they can't do that loss for much longer I suppose.
I wonder who the heck invested all that money. The share capital and share premium account keep going up.....
They use Caseware accounts production too.... interesting. And the audit report is as clean as a whistle. Not even an emphasis of matter on going concern, which you'd expect....
Hey ho....
I should think he’s getting dangerously close to criminality if he’s seeking to conduct diplomacy without approval, given his military clearances for space, isn’t he?
He appears to be Russian, very hardcore, very patriotic, wants to win. But he is openly contemptuous of Putin and regularly savages him
Because he is not a voice we normally hear, he unearths fascinating nuggets of info - but from the other side, as it were. Which makes him especially valuable
He's also a bit mad but then, aren't we all
OK off for drinks. Later
Of course, THAT's been dead letter since its enactment in 1799 . . .
a mass unionist boycott, giving Westminster space to ignore it
or
losing by, let us say 48/52
or
winning by 52/48
all of which compounds the problem.
The chance of getting a decent and genuine majority is almost nil.
The bad news just continues for Truss.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63206733
So their early losses might well represent a much bigger proportion of their military capability than the headline figure suggests.
The video below shows a tunnel being built under a motorway in a weekend. That involves digging away the motorway, sliding the precast tunnel into place, filling, and resurfacing. A massive job, but the road is reopened to road traffic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btOE0rcKDC0
HOWEVER, perhaps even more surprising, that some enterprising Tory MP or prospective candidate has NOT jumped into the picuture.
Indeed, cannot figure out why Liz Truss is NOT beating the anti-Russian gong? Or at least WAY more than a few occasional tweets?
Didn't she notice just how much hay her predecessor was able to make on this subject?
Could be that Boris gave UKR everything that UK could conveniently give? OR (perhaps more likely) Liz just ain't up it, even rhetorically?
Am NOT talking about actual significance and degree of HMG support for UKR, but rather political optics and persuasion.
https://www.albaparty.org/
Insert Alex Salmond jokes here...
Their written submissions seems to me to suggest
That the legislation could be interpreted broadly (anything even remotely connected to the reserved matter is reserved, even if it doesn't affect the law on reserved matters) or narrowly (only legal changes on reserved matters are reserved).
This referendum being advisory only doesn't change any reserved matters, so would be legal under a narrow reading.
That under international law Scotland should have a right to self-determination.
UK law is normally interpreted where it can be to be consistent in both national and international law.
Therefore the narrow interpretation should be used.
Seems to me to be a reasonable argument. Where is the flaw on that, how is a narrow reading of the legislation inappropriate?
If this from the BBC Coverage earlier is accurate then surely SC precedent would say that an advisory-only referendum is not reserved?
Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain continues to cite case law in reference to whether provisions in legislation "relate to" reserved matters.
She speaks about the European Union (Continuity) Bill which was passed by the Scottish Parliament as a result of Brexit.
She says the Supreme Court placed considerable emphasis on the need for there to be some form of practical or legal effect on the law on the reserved matter.
The lord advocate says it is implicit in the reasoning of the Supreme Court when it dealt with the reference on the European Union (Continuity) Bill that it would be reasonable to suggest that holding an advisory referendum on an issue of international affairs would not relate to a reserved matter by the Scottish Parliament.
If it merely asks the question, but doesn't change the law, as the Strathclyde Water Referendum did, then how is that reserved? No law change is happening on any reserved issues.
All reserved matters will still be reserved to Westminster to discharge as they see fit. It may put political pressure on Westminster, but its not the Supreme Courts job to debate politics is it, only law, and legally I can't see any way this encroaches on a reserved subject since it doesn't change the law on anything that is reserved.
This incompetence has reduced the credibility of the Bank in the market. They have certainly not been helped by the KamiKwase budget but that made the increase in rates all the more urgent. They are indeed dysfunctional, almost as bad as the Chancellor.
Which, I would point out, the Supreme Court has already determined in their Brexit ruling, with the important difference that they suggested a workaround.
@elonmusk
No, it is not [true]. I have spoken to Putin only once and that was about 18 months ago. The subject matter was space.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1579879154463690752
https://twitter.com/AKamyshin/status/1579853188022571008
(The Ukrainian railways have performed very well in fixing damage during this war, so he knows his stuff.)
- Putin has been in panic since the Ukranian advance started about a month ago.
- Hence the 'mobilisation' - a desperate and rather hopeless attempt to 'do something'.
- He was then forced to 'do something more' after the Kerch Bridge episode.
- So he is throwing everything in to this current bombardment but obviously there are limited supplies of effective heavy weapons.
- He is also trying again to attack from Belarus out of desperation, despite the previous retreat and failure.
- Given the above he is running the risk of a revolution in Belarus, but he will run this risk because he is basically completely desperate.
- His back is completely against the wall and he will also resort to any sort of tactic to get what he wants, hence the appointment of "brutal generals".
There is no way that Russia are on the cusp of winning any conventional war in Ukraine. All they are doing is destroying much of their military capability to preserve the Putin regime, and this is likely to lead to either some kind of collapse of the current regime, or nuclear escalation.
Ukraine may appear to be winning, but the outlook for the world is very bad, all the options are bad.
In some of them they even repainted the road markings, and then these have been quickly eroded by traffic. Er…
I’m calling fake. As is Twitter
Also the photos have curious anomalies
It’s a shame because they don’t need to do this. The Ukrainian war effort is phenomenal and inspiring. For real
This dramatic reversal from yesterday is due to cold front coming in from North Pacific that shifted winds from east > west = offshore, to west > east = onshore.
That's the good news. Bad news is, winds are forecast to shift back to offshore by Thursday. AND also fact that there is nearly zero chance of rain for next week or more, meaning that local forest fires will keep on keeping on for foreseeable future.
Ukraine has properly degraded Russia’s artillery and tanks capability. It’s just about possible to throw massive volumes of infantry at the problem to make up the difference. But those infantry must have iron clad morale and training, so that they run TOWARDS rather than away from the far better armed enemy. And as we’ve established, the morale and training of the recruited infantry is rock bottom (Ukraine increasingly so the opposite). No air dominance to paper over the cracks either, far from it in fact.
So the idea of Russia launching a successful invasion using these recruits is just fanciful. And that’s without the 1.5mln missing winter uniforms and tactical advantage Ukraine now has in both South and East etc...
Leon’s cunning plan to use the precious dregs of Russia’s precision missile reserves to target power infrastructure is a short term tactical plan, not a strategically effective one. It impedes the ability of Ukraine to conduct manoeuvre warfare but only in the short term. It reminds me a bit of Boris Johnson’s “wait for the Sue Gray report you dirty bastards”. Putin is simply hoping “something turns up”. That’s it, that’s all he has now. Buy time, see what happens.
Now Biden is an older gentleman it is true. And we know the state of thinking on sections of the American right because Elon has told us. But I think we’re reaching the point where even with the loss of US support, Ukraine would probably still win albeit at the cost of many more lives and much time.
I was going to drive between my nan's house and my grandad's house a while back when I used the voice activation on my phone to pull up the route. Google repeated the address back to me adding the correct county and asked if it was correct and I said yes. It then said it was about a 15 minute drive which I knew to be correct. It took me to the motorway, which I knew to be right, but when on the motorway slip road it told me to go Northbound when I knew their house is Southbound, which was awkward as I was now on the motorway so I went off memory from there until I got off the motorway!
Turns out there's two addresses with the same street name and street number about ten miles apart and Google had chosen the wrong one.