Must confess I can't get too excited about the Prime Minister not wearing a seatbelt.
There are many other things for which you can lay the blame or the accusation at the door of Number 10 which are of much greater import.
The Conservatives, unfortunately, instead of trying to move on, frantically dig back through every video, tweet etc to find something similar. It's a bit sad and desperate, isn't it? All it does is keep it in the news cycle.
Perhaps putting Starmer in an apparently equal situation will drive the legions of "Don't Knows" back to the Conservative fold. Colour me sceptical.
Must confess I can't get too excited about the Prime Minister not wearing a seatbelt.
There are many other things for which you can lay the blame or the accusation at the door of Number 10 which are of much greater import.
The Conservatives, unfortunately, instead of trying to move on, frantically dig back through every video, tweet etc to find something similar. It's a bit sad and desperate, isn't it? All it does is keep it in the news cycle.
Perhaps putting Starmer in an apparently equal situation will drive the legions of "Don't Knows" back to the Conservative fold. Colour me sceptical.
Is this Guido acting as a Conservative black channel, or Guido acting off his own bat? I'm inclined to think the latter, because going through video clips from before the millennium (?) seems a bit sad.
On the polling, the New Year hasn't brought any comfort at all for the Tories.
Some folk were, and quite rightly too, pointing out that Labour's performance in local elections wasn't matching their opinion poll leads. However, it looks to me as if that is changing, with better Labour results in recent weeks. Not sure if it's been mentioned, but Labour did very well in two Staffordshire council elections yesterday, as well as filling their boots in Stevenage.
True but two years is an eternity in today's political climate. Think how much the scene changed between 2014 and 2016 with the two referendums.
Yes. And then again recently with the implosion of a PM patently unfit for office. But this cake really does look baked now.
Must confess I can't get too excited about the Prime Minister not wearing a seatbelt.
There are many other things for which you can lay the blame or the accusation at the door of Number 10 which are of much greater import.
The Conservatives, unfortunately, instead of trying to move on, frantically dig back through every video, tweet etc to find something similar. It's a bit sad and desperate, isn't it? All it does is keep it in the news cycle.
Perhaps putting Starmer in an apparently equal situation will drive the legions of "Don't Knows" back to the Conservative fold. Colour me sceptical.
Is this Guido acting as a Conservative black channel, or Guido acting off his own bat? I'm inclined to think the latter, because going through video clips from before the millennium (?) seems a bit sad.
He is more of a Borisite than a Sunakite by inclination.
I wondered when the Boris "ambushed by a cake" crowd would be out demanding Sunak's head for this heinous offence.
I was a very big Boris fan until he raised NI, and even then still liked Boris but once partygate came along I said all along that law makers can not be law breakers and that he should go.
That the Tories replaced one law breaker with another is farcical. That he's been fined again is beyond a bad joke.
On the polling, the New Year hasn't brought any comfort at all for the Tories.
Some folk were, and quite rightly too, pointing out that Labour's performance in local elections wasn't matching their opinion poll leads. However, it looks to me as if that is changing, with better Labour results in recent weeks. Not sure if it's been mentioned, but Labour did very well in two Staffordshire council elections yesterday, as well as filling their boots in Stevenage.
True but two years is an eternity in today's political climate. Think how much the scene changed between 2014 and 2016 with the two referendums.
Yes. And then again recently with the implosion of a PM patently unfit for office. But this cake really does look baked now.
Indeed - there isn't much that looks probable to change things round, so basically they are entirely reliant on something unforeseen happening that helps them out.
That't not impossible, but it is out of their hands and a lot to pin hopes on.
I wondered when the Boris "ambushed by a cake" crowd would be out demanding Sunak's head for this heinous offence.
I was a very big Boris fan until he raised NI, and even then still liked Boris but once partygate came along I said all along that law makers can not be law breakers and that he should go.
That the Tories replaced one law breaker with another is farcical. That he's been fined again is beyond a bad joke.
Point of order. They had a horrific interregnum with a non-lawbreaker. So went back to what they knew.
I wondered when the Boris "ambushed by a cake" crowd would be out demanding Sunak's head for this heinous offence.
I was a very big Boris fan until he raised NI, and even then still liked Boris but once partygate came along I said all along that law makers can not be law breakers and that he should go.
That the Tories replaced one law breaker with another is farcical. That he's been fined again is beyond a bad joke.
Point of order. They had a horrific interregnum with a non-lawbreaker. So went back to what they knew.
It is a shame Truss went in so arrogantly without any preparation in the event people didn't greet her plans with effusive praise, she might have been interesting.
I wondered when the Boris "ambushed by a cake" crowd would be out demanding Sunak's head for this heinous offence.
I was a very big Boris fan until he raised NI, and even then still liked Boris but once partygate came along I said all along that law makers can not be law breakers and that he should go.
That the Tories replaced one law breaker with another is farcical. That he's been fined again is beyond a bad joke.
This is the same guy who thought reappointing someone who resigned 2 days earlier counted as that person taking responsibility for what they had done of course.
Still an inexplicable decision to me - no one else in the Tories wants to stop the boats as much as Braverman? Unlikely.
Well, looks like I was wrong about the tanks, which is disappointing.
I think the UK have to keep hold of a couple of dozen Challengers to fulfil our commitments in Estonia and Poland, but otherwise I hope we'll give all of the rest to Ukraine as soon as possible. Not much point in only giving them a dozen on our own. Maybe we can get the Americans, or someone to backfill for us in Estonia and Poland and just send them all.
It does make you wonder about the future of the German and Swiss arms industries. The Leopard 2s are coming up for replacement in many countries. After the big Polish sale, the Americans and South Koreans are looking good for that....
Surely the one thing everyone in Europe now understands, is the need to maintain a functioning army?
I fear Germany thinks it can save money on having to maintain a functioning army by appeasing its enemies.
What good reasons are there for them doing this? The "US must send Abrams!" is bullshit, from both a moral and a practical viewpoint, as the UK is sending MBTs (and not ignoring all the other ex-Soviet tanks sent over last year).
Yes, I know Germany's doing a lot. But this is manna from Heaven for the Kremlin; both in terms of actual hardware and messaging. As much as anything else, it shows their opposition can be easily split.
It seems pretty obvious to me that NATO is indeed following the policy of providing just enough help to Ukraine to keep Russia bogged down in a war of attrition but not enough to drive Russia back and possibly spark nuclear retaliation. This is exactly what I predicted would happen and what makes the most sense.
Your notion that Germany is going to piss everyone off just to save a few pennies on its military spending makes no sense whatsoever.
The 'just enough' argument is imv fallacious, because it's impossible to judge what level that is. It's how you end up getting an unpleasant surprise when one side suddenly breaks through.
Germany's words and actions make little sense to me. It really is playing into Moscow's hands, especially on the PR front as it screams of divisions within the allies.
If the intention of NATO really were to drive the Russians out of Ukraine as quickly as possible, the US would be sending MBTs. The fact that they are not tells you that that is not the intention.
I fear that's a logical fallacy, as there are plenty of other reasons they may be reluctant to send MBTs, from the fact they're not the best fit for Ukraine's requirements, through cost, to a need for it to be seen as a part of a coalition of nations.
As one example: perhaps it is believed that the Leo2's are the best MBT for Ukraine to get, and the Bradley the best APC/AFV.
The big question is why no-one has yet sent modern western airplanes or helicopters over (the Seakings we have sent are useful, but not that modern). Russian media got very excited earlier this week when they claimed that the UK was going to send Apaches over.
The lack of modern planes, rather than MBTs, is a better argument to support your point. But again, there are potentially better alternative explanations for that, like cost, training, spares and not wanting Russia to capture the tech.
Personally, I just don't think the Ukrainians have the combat pilots available to make a large number of gifted planes viable. Although I hope I'm wrong, and there are loads of Ukrainian pilots in the US desert.
I do wonder if the reluctance by both Germany and the US to send MBTs to Ukraine is the fear that they may end up becoming just as much sitting ducks as the Russian tanks were back in March last year, despite their superior armour. Perhaps modern warfare between relatively technologically advanced armies simply doesn't have a place for tanks.
I believe I stated that as a possibility yesterday.
AIUI US doctrine is for massive combined arms, as we saw in GW1 and GW2. Ukraine could theoretically do all of that, with training, but they lack one massive component: air cover. The US likes to have air superiority days before the tank drivers think of warming their engines. Now, the Russian air force is not exactly dominating the air space over the front lines, but it's still a very 'hot' environment for any tank to go into. An added complication is the new threat from UAVs, which did not particularly exist in GW1 or GW2.
But on the other hand: tanks, APCs, AFVs and all other vehicles in a military are there to do a job, and that risks losing them. If you don't want to risk losing them, you'll never fight, and that means its pointless having them in the first place.
There really does seem to be a movement to get rid of Sunak. When exactly did the Tory Party lose touch with the outside world?
They've gone the Corbynite route - the only thing that matters is how they feel about things.
That's not to say Sunak is popular anymore, he isn't, but the obvious goal of most of those who want him gone seems to pay no regard to what that would mean or how it would look.
I wondered when the Boris "ambushed by a cake" crowd would be out demanding Sunak's head for this heinous offence.
I was a very big Boris fan until he raised NI, and even then still liked Boris but once partygate came along I said all along that law makers can not be law breakers and that he should go.
That the Tories replaced one law breaker with another is farcical. That he's been fined again is beyond a bad joke.
Point of order. They had a horrific interregnum with a non-lawbreaker. So went back to what they knew.
It is a shame Truss went in so arrogantly without any preparation in the event people didn't greet her plans with effusive praise, she might have been interesting.
That was her though. Nothing there bar a totally unjustified self confidence.
Sometimes he's right Seatbeltgate isn't going to damage Rishi on its own. But it underlines the point I've been making - he keeps making too many avoidable mistakes. And he doesn't have enough political capital to waste on this sort of stuff. https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1616515562816868354?cxt=HHwWhMC4-d6Vgu8sAAAA
Must confess I can't get too excited about the Prime Minister not wearing a seatbelt.
There are many other things for which you can lay the blame or the accusation at the door of Number 10 which are of much greater import.
The Conservatives, unfortunately, instead of trying to move on, frantically dig back through every video, tweet etc to find something similar. It's a bit sad and desperate, isn't it? All it does is keep it in the news cycle.
Perhaps putting Starmer in an apparently equal situation will drive the legions of "Don't Knows" back to the Conservative fold. Colour me sceptical.
Is this Guido acting as a Conservative black channel, or Guido acting off his own bat? I'm inclined to think the latter, because going through video clips from before the millennium (?) seems a bit sad.
I think, as with some, the idea of a Labour (or indeed any non-Conservative) Government is so horrendous to them personally and perhaps professionally as to legitimise almost anything to prevent it.
Those opinion formers and influencers who have been "close" to or "had the ear of" Ministers and those close to power for the last decade or more would find themselves in the wilderness in the event of a change of Government.
I'm sure the "opposition" to the new Government will begin right away - trouble is, no one will listen or be interested.
Must confess I can't get too excited about the Prime Minister not wearing a seatbelt.
There are many other things for which you can lay the blame or the accusation at the door of Number 10 which are of much greater import.
The Conservatives, unfortunately, instead of trying to move on, frantically dig back through every video, tweet etc to find something similar. It's a bit sad and desperate, isn't it? All it does is keep it in the news cycle.
Perhaps putting Starmer in an apparently equal situation will drive the legions of "Don't Knows" back to the Conservative fold. Colour me sceptical.
Is this Guido acting as a Conservative black channel, or Guido acting off his own bat? I'm inclined to think the latter, because going through video clips from before the millennium (?) seems a bit sad.
I think, as with some, the idea of a Labour (or indeed any non-Conservative) Government is so horrendous to them personally and perhaps professionally as to legitimise almost anything to prevent it.
Those opinion formers and influencers who have been "close" to or "had the ear of" Ministers and those close to power for the last decade or more would find themselves in the wilderness in the event of a change of Government.
I'm sure the "opposition" to the new Government will begin right away - trouble is, no one will listen or be interested.
Thinking back to the mid 90's, there came a point where even good anti-Labour talking points weren't really heard, because everyone knew what was going to happen at the coming election.
For some in the Conservative-media nexus, the irrelevance has already begun, and it will get worse and probably drive them potty.
There really does seem to be a movement to get rid of Sunak. When exactly did the Tory Party lose touch with the outside world?
They've gone the Corbynite route - the only thing that matters is how they feel about things.
That's not to say Sunak is popular anymore, he isn't, but the obvious goal of most of those who want him gone seems to pay no regard to what that would mean or how it would look.
Until the Tory Party elect Jacob Rees Mogg as leader they have not gone down the Corbyn route!
I agree though Sunak is more popular than the Tory party at present with most voters, albeit leaking on the right to RefUK
There really does seem to be a movement to get rid of Sunak. When exactly did the Tory Party lose touch with the outside world?
They've gone the Corbynite route - the only thing that matters is how they feel about things.
That's not to say Sunak is popular anymore, he isn't, but the obvious goal of most of those who want him gone seems to pay no regard to what that would mean or how it would look.
Until the Tory Party elect Jacob Rees Mogg as leader they have not gone down the Corbyn route!
That might happen next depending on how they react to defeat.
There really does seem to be a movement to get rid of Sunak. When exactly did the Tory Party lose touch with the outside world?
They've gone the Corbynite route - the only thing that matters is how they feel about things.
That's not to say Sunak is popular anymore, he isn't, but the obvious goal of most of those who want him gone seems to pay no regard to what that would mean or how it would look.
Until the Tory Party elect Jacob Rees Mogg as leader they have not gone down the Corbyn route!
That might happen next depending on how they react to defeat.
Currently, drivers and passengers over the age of 14 caught not wearing their seatbelts can bit given an on-the-spot penalty of £100.
However, this can be waivered (sic) if the driver takes a £52 awareness course instead of paying the fine.
Is that a belt awareness course though? Or just the normal speed one?
A 'belt' awareness course? You mean there's one I haven't been on? I must apply.
Sunak's embarrassment is mildly comical but that's all it is. But never mind the FPN. One trusts the Wally in charge of the whole farago has been handed his P45.
It's a big nothing. Starmer will either not mention it or use it for gentle ribbing.
I am sure it will enthuse some hard of thinking Tory staffers to stir up another Currygate redux.
It's a long while since I have been in a London cab. That one looks like an old FX5. I can't recall using a seat belt in a London cab- ever. And I don't recall anyone with whom I have shared a London cab ever wearing a rear seat belt.
Still it's a London cab so it must be in the Met area. If only Cressida were still Chief Constable.
There really does seem to be a movement to get rid of Sunak. When exactly did the Tory Party lose touch with the outside world?
They've gone the Corbynite route - the only thing that matters is how they feel about things.
That's not to say Sunak is popular anymore, he isn't, but the obvious goal of most of those who want him gone seems to pay no regard to what that would mean or how it would look.
Until the Tory Party elect Jacob Rees Mogg as leader they have not gone down the Corbyn route!
That might happen next depending on how they react to defeat.
Maybe not next time, after 2 defeats very possibly
The seatbelt thing is largely an irrelevance, save that Rishi has failed to front foot it and has clumsily waited to be fined instead.
Zahawi’s tax bill is far more serious and Rishi, by pretending that the story had been fully disclosed, has tied himself to another attempt to deceive the public.
We should also remember that Rishi himself thought it was nobody’s business that his own wife was a supposed non-dom.
Rishi is not up to it, never was up to it, and the Tories deserve to be reduced to minor party status.
The seatbelt thing is largely an irrelevance, save that Rishi has failed to front foot it and has clumsily waited to be fined instead.
Zahawi’s tax bill is far more serious and Rishi, by pretending that the story had been fully disclosed, has tied himself to another attempt to deceive the public.
We should also remember that Rishi himself thought it was nobody’s business that his own wife was a supposed non-dom.
Rishi is not up to it, never was up to it, and the Tories deserve to be reduced to minor party status.
After the last two, I’m still enjoying the marked improvement of having a PM who is merely not very good.
There really does seem to be a movement to get rid of Sunak. When exactly did the Tory Party lose touch with the outside world?
They've gone the Corbynite route - the only thing that matters is how they feel about things.
That's not to say Sunak is popular anymore, he isn't, but the obvious goal of most of those who want him gone seems to pay no regard to what that would mean or how it would look.
Until the Tory Party elect Jacob Rees Mogg as leader they have not gone down the Corbyn route!
That might happen next depending on how they react to defeat.
Maybe not next time, after 2 defeats very possibly
Might be better to do it after 1, shortcut the road to recovery.
Sometimes he's right Seatbeltgate isn't going to damage Rishi on its own. But it underlines the point I've been making - he keeps making too many avoidable mistakes. And he doesn't have enough political capital to waste on this sort of stuff. https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1616515562816868354?cxt=HHwWhMC4-d6Vgu8sAAAA
It does feel like a series of avoidable mistakes. Which isn't _ideal_ in your Prime Minister. Even if he himself is rubbish at this 'trivial' detail - he should be good enough to have picked people to notice it on his behalf.
The seatbelt thing is largely an irrelevance, save that Rishi has failed to front foot it and has clumsily waited to be fined instead.
Zahawi’s tax bill is far more serious and Rishi, by pretending that the story had been fully disclosed, has tied himself to another attempt to deceive the public.
We should also remember that Rishi himself thought it was nobody’s business that his own wife was a supposed non-dom.
Rishi is not up to it, never was up to it, and the Tories deserve to be reduced to minor party status.
After the last two, I’m still enjoying the marked improvement of having a PM who is merely not very good.
Some truth in that. I still can’t watch clips of Johnson without a rising sense of fury at his blatant fraudulence. And Truss was a very, very dark joke.
The seatbelt thing is largely an irrelevance, save that Rishi has failed to front foot it and has clumsily waited to be fined instead.
Zahawi’s tax bill is far more serious and Rishi, by pretending that the story had been fully disclosed, has tied himself to another attempt to deceive the public.
We should also remember that Rishi himself thought it was nobody’s business that his own wife was a supposed non-dom.
Rishi is not up to it, never was up to it, and the Tories deserve to be reduced to minor party status.
He wasn't and isn't up to the job, but CotE and FS are the places where governments look for emergency Prime Ministers.
What kind of PM puts unsuitable people like Sunak and Truss in those two.slots? And if it's not to shore up their own miserable position, why?
There really does seem to be a movement to get rid of Sunak. When exactly did the Tory Party lose touch with the outside world?
They've gone the Corbynite route - the only thing that matters is how they feel about things.
That's not to say Sunak is popular anymore, he isn't, but the obvious goal of most of those who want him gone seems to pay no regard to what that would mean or how it would look.
Until the Tory Party elect Jacob Rees Mogg as leader they have not gone down the Corbyn route!
That might happen next depending on how they react to defeat.
Maybe not next time, after 2 defeats very possibly
Might be better to do it after 1, shortcut the road to recovery.
Steve Barclay is my tip for next Tory leader after 1 defeat if Rishi loses
The seatbelt thing is largely an irrelevance, save that Rishi has failed to front foot it and has clumsily waited to be fined instead.
Zahawi’s tax bill is far more serious and Rishi, by pretending that the story had been fully disclosed, has tied himself to another attempt to deceive the public.
We should also remember that Rishi himself thought it was nobody’s business that his own wife was a supposed non-dom.
Rishi is not up to it, never was up to it, and the Tories deserve to be reduced to minor party status.
After the last two, I’m still enjoying the marked improvement of having a PM who is merely not very good.
Some truth in that. I still can’t watch clips of Johnson without a rising sense of fury at his blatant fraudulence. And Truss was a very, very dark joke.
Chris Hipkins is the only nominee and therefore will become Leader of the Labour Party and next Prime Minister of New Zealand.
For a few months before likely losing the next election to the Nationals
Seems likely, though he may have a honeymoon bounce. My brother (currently in NZ) suggests he has a grating public persona like a Matt Hancock or perhaps a Gavin Williamson.
Currently, drivers and passengers over the age of 14 caught not wearing their seatbelts can bit given an on-the-spot penalty of £100.
However, this can be waivered (sic) if the driver takes a £52 awareness course instead of paying the fine.
Is that a belt awareness course though? Or just the normal speed one?
A 'belt' awareness course? You mean there's one I haven't been on? I must apply.
Sunak's embarrassment is mildly comical but that's all it is. But never mind the FPN. One trusts the Wally in charge of the whole farago has been handed his P45.
It's a big nothing. Starmer will either not mention it or use it for gentle ribbing.
I am sure it will enthuse some hard of thinking Tory staffers to stir up another Currygate redux.
It's a long while since I have been in a London cab. That one looks like an old FX5. I can't recall using a seat belt in a London cab- ever. And I don't recall anyone with whom I have shared a London cab ever wearing a rear seat belt.
Still it's a London cab so it must be in the Met area. If only Cressida were still Chief Constable.
I haven't been in a London taxi for eons. The price they charge is exorbitant. I would rather walk or bus it.
Chris Hipkins is the only nominee and therefore will become Leader of the Labour Party and next Prime Minister of New Zealand.
For a few months before likely losing the next election to the Nationals
Seems likely, though he may have a honeymoon bounce. My brother (currently in NZ) suggests he has a grating public persona like a Matt Hancock or perhaps a Gavin Williamson.
Good grief. That bad?
I'm amazed he was elected leader especially unopposed. Surely some backbencher could have put themselves forward.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
There's a proper order to these things.
You are unknown You are respected You are liked You are elected You are disliked You are hated You are unelected.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
Given the number of very hard calls he will have to make to clean up this mess, if he isn't loathed he won't be doing it right.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Political confidence is a good example of the Matthew Effect ("For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away.")
I don't know what Starmer did in Summer 2021 to turn things round after Hartlepool. Maybe nothing, but to keep buggering on. But the fact that he did probably marked the moment where he became a winner.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Political confidence is a good example of the Matthew Effect ("For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away.")
I don't know what Starmer did in Summer 2021 to turn things round after Hartlepool. Maybe nothing, but to keep buggering on. But the fact that he did probably marked the moment where he became a winner.
The keep buggering on bit was a necessary but not sufficient condition. What turned it around was the Tories spectacular self-indulgence.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Political confidence is a good example of the Matthew Effect ("For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away.")
I don't know what Starmer did in Summer 2021 to turn things round after Hartlepool. Maybe nothing, but to keep buggering on. But the fact that he did probably marked the moment where he became a winner.
The keep buggering on bit was a necessary but not sufficient condition. What turned it around was the Tories spectacular self-indulgence.
"If any doubt arises as to which is or was at any material time the party in opposition to Her Majesty’s Government having the greatest numerical strength in the House of Commons, or as to who is or was at any material time the leader in that House of such a party, the question shall be decided for the purposes of this Act by the Speaker of the House of Commons."
Hopefully if they won an equal number of seats, then count up how many they came second in.
Thanks. Now suppose this occurred after an election. Their first job is to elect a Speaker.
Perhaps it would then be up to the Father Birthparent or Birthparent's Partner of the House to decide?
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
There's a proper order to these things.
You are unknown You are respected You are liked You are elected You are disliked You are hated You are unelected.
The really impressive people are the ones who somehow manage to bypass some of those steps.
Doesn't the Bible talk about love, why does it matter who you love.
It also talks about forgiveness, which a lot of people today don't seem to believe in.
I remember an occasion where someone (completely unreligious) was trying to worm their way out of the consequences for an action that they had shown no remorse or repentence for.
Essentially they demanded I forgive them, as if forgiveness was something they were owed.
The accused me of being unchristian.
I replied that I wasn't a Christian.
They thought this was shocking.
Forgiveness requires confession and repentance. Otherwise it's just letting somebody be not responsible for their actions and their consequences.
That is entirely correct.
I’d add a further point. Repentance requires a willingness to submit with good grace to secular punishment, if one has committed a crime.
Indeed - I have encountered this riff a couple of times. Always seems to be non-Christians using this. Like it's a magic escape from consequences.
No, forgiveness doesn't require any action on the part of the transgressor. It is entirely within the gift of the afflicted party, and the reason it's encouraged, and a good thing, is for the wellbeing of that party. Forgiveness is freedom from that past affliction. If it also gives comfort to the transgressor, that's a bonus.
I wondered when the Boris "ambushed by a cake" crowd would be out demanding Sunak's head for this heinous offence.
I was a very big Boris fan until he raised NI, and even then still liked Boris but once partygate came along I said all along that law makers can not be law breakers and that he should go.
That the Tories replaced one law breaker with another is farcical. That he's been fined again is beyond a bad joke.
Point of order. They had a horrific interregnum with a non-lawbreaker. So went back to what they knew.
It is a shame Truss went in so arrogantly without any preparation in the event people didn't greet her plans with effusive praise, she might have been interesting.
It is a great shame that she was dissuaded from her original intention to offer a fully costed mini budget. I point the finger at Kwasi personally, and we'll never know his reasons for acting in the very peculiar way that he did.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
What love-in? I’ve been quite skeptical of Keir, who is not a natural media performer.
Chris Hipkins is the only nominee and therefore will become Leader of the Labour Party and next Prime Minister of New Zealand.
For a few months before likely losing the next election to the Nationals
Seems likely, though he may have a honeymoon bounce. My brother (currently in NZ) suggests he has a grating public persona like a Matt Hancock or perhaps a Gavin Williamson.
Good grief. That bad?
I'm amazed he was elected leader especially unopposed. Surely some backbencher could have put themselves forward.
I guess it’s widely understood as a “hospital pass”.
Must confess I can't get too excited about the Prime Minister not wearing a seatbelt.
There are many other things for which you can lay the blame or the accusation at the door of Number 10 which are of much greater import.
The Conservatives, unfortunately, instead of trying to move on, frantically dig back through every video, tweet etc to find something similar. It's a bit sad and desperate, isn't it? All it does is keep it in the news cycle.
Perhaps putting Starmer in an apparently equal situation will drive the legions of "Don't Knows" back to the Conservative fold. Colour me sceptical.
I'm the same. I really don't care about the seatbelt, but it's still time for Sunak to go. Just like I really didn't care about partygate, but it was still time for Boris to go.
He's a gonner. They should have a transition plan in place before the local election drubbing if he insists on hanging on till then; which I suppose he should, so that the new leader has a slightly cleaner slate.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
But Johnson was revered until he was caught red handed partying like it was 1999 all the way through the Covid pandemic. I wonder what trick Starmer has up his sleeve to become as detested as Johnson? It's a tough act to follow.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
Your mistake is to think people will vote for Starmer because of who he is. They won't. They will vote for him and make him PM because of who he isn't. He isn't Johnson, he isn't Truss and he isn't Sunak. For many that is more than enough reason to have a guarded optimism about his election.
Well, looks like I was wrong about the tanks, which is disappointing.
I think the UK have to keep hold of a couple of dozen Challengers to fulfil our commitments in Estonia and Poland, but otherwise I hope we'll give all of the rest to Ukraine as soon as possible. Not much point in only giving them a dozen on our own. Maybe we can get the Americans, or someone to backfill for us in Estonia and Poland and just send them all.
It does make you wonder about the future of the German and Swiss arms industries. The Leopard 2s are coming up for replacement in many countries. After the big Polish sale, the Americans and South Koreans are looking good for that....
Surely the one thing everyone in Europe now understands, is the need to maintain a functioning army?
I fear Germany thinks it can save money on having to maintain a functioning army by appeasing its enemies.
What good reasons are there for them doing this? The "US must send Abrams!" is bullshit, from both a moral and a practical viewpoint, as the UK is sending MBTs (and not ignoring all the other ex-Soviet tanks sent over last year).
Yes, I know Germany's doing a lot. But this is manna from Heaven for the Kremlin; both in terms of actual hardware and messaging. As much as anything else, it shows their opposition can be easily split.
It seems pretty obvious to me that NATO is indeed following the policy of providing just enough help to Ukraine to keep Russia bogged down in a war of attrition but not enough to drive Russia back and possibly spark nuclear retaliation. This is exactly what I predicted would happen and what makes the most sense.
Your notion that Germany is going to piss everyone off just to save a few pennies on its military spending makes no sense whatsoever.
The 'just enough' argument is imv fallacious, because it's impossible to judge what level that is. It's how you end up getting an unpleasant surprise when one side suddenly breaks through.
Germany's words and actions make little sense to me. It really is playing into Moscow's hands, especially on the PR front as it screams of divisions within the allies.
If the intention of NATO really were to drive the Russians out of Ukraine as quickly as possible, the US would be sending MBTs. The fact that they are not tells you that that is not the intention.
I fear that's a logical fallacy, as there are plenty of other reasons they may be reluctant to send MBTs, from the fact they're not the best fit for Ukraine's requirements, through cost, to a need for it to be seen as a part of a coalition of nations.
As one example: perhaps it is believed that the Leo2's are the best MBT for Ukraine to get, and the Bradley the best APC/AFV.
The big question is why no-one has yet sent modern western airplanes or helicopters over (the Seakings we have sent are useful, but not that modern). Russian media got very excited earlier this week when they claimed that the UK was going to send Apaches over.
The lack of modern planes, rather than MBTs, is a better argument to support your point. But again, there are potentially better alternative explanations for that, like cost, training, spares and not wanting Russia to capture the tech.
Personally, I just don't think the Ukrainians have the combat pilots available to make a large number of gifted planes viable. Although I hope I'm wrong, and there are loads of Ukrainian pilots in the US desert.
I do wonder if the reluctance by both Germany and the US to send MBTs to Ukraine is the fear that they may end up becoming just as much sitting ducks as the Russian tanks were back in March last year, despite their superior armour. Perhaps modern warfare between relatively technologically advanced armies simply doesn't have a place for tanks.
I believe I stated that as a possibility yesterday.
AIUI US doctrine is for massive combined arms, as we saw in GW1 and GW2. Ukraine could theoretically do all of that, with training, but they lack one massive component: air cover. The US likes to have air superiority days before the tank drivers think of warming their engines. Now, the Russian air force is not exactly dominating the air space over the front lines, but it's still a very 'hot' environment for any tank to go into. An added complication is the new threat from UAVs, which did not particularly exist in GW1 or GW2.
But on the other hand: tanks, APCs, AFVs and all other vehicles in a military are there to do a job, and that risks losing them. If you don't want to risk losing them, you'll never fight, and that means its pointless having them in the first place.
Tanks are certainly still necessary, and, with the aid of UAVs and satellites to gather targeting information artillery can to a certain extent perform the role performed by air superiority in NATO doctrine.
It will be very hard for Ukraine to dislodge the Russian from prepared defensive positions without more tanks, particularly as they still haven't been given the longer-range HIMARS missiles to target Russian logistics.
If you imagine what might be happening had British Challenger 2 tanks been a better option than Leopard 2 tanks for most NATO allies, one imagines that a lot more tanks would now be heading to Ukraine. This is a very tangible cost for some of the failings of British military procurement.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
But Johnson was revered until he was caught red handed partying like it was 1999 all the way through the Covid pandemic. I wonder what trick Starmer has up his sleeve to become as detested as Johnson? It's a tough act to follow.
Paterson came first, didn't he?
After that it was one thing after another. Parties, fines, Pincher, lying to cabinet, lying to parliament...
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Political confidence is a good example of the Matthew Effect ("For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away.")
I don't know what Starmer did in Summer 2021 to turn things round after Hartlepool. Maybe nothing, but to keep buggering on. But the fact that he did probably marked the moment where he became a winner.
The keep buggering on bit was a necessary but not sufficient condition. What turned it around was the Tories spectacular self-indulgence.
Hartlepool by-election was at the beginning of May. Hancock's resignation for breaching Covid rules with a co-worker was at the end of June. Labour hung on at Batley and Spen at the beginning of July, and then, at the end of October/start of November we had the Paterson scandal, and since then providing opposition to the government has been a target-rich environment.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
What love-in? I’ve been quite skeptical of Keir, who is not a natural media performer.
I do try to give credit where it’s due, though.
He’s had a slow, measured but relentless rise. Almost always he surprises on the upside. Very much the Joe Biden of British politics.
I wondered when the Boris "ambushed by a cake" crowd would be out demanding Sunak's head for this heinous offence.
I was a very big Boris fan until he raised NI, and even then still liked Boris but once partygate came along I said all along that law makers can not be law breakers and that he should go.
That the Tories replaced one law breaker with another is farcical. That he's been fined again is beyond a bad joke.
Point of order. They had a horrific interregnum with a non-lawbreaker. So went back to what they knew.
It is a shame Truss went in so arrogantly without any preparation in the event people didn't greet her plans with effusive praise, she might have been interesting.
Not being interesting wasn’t her mistake, to be fair.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
What love-in? I’ve been quite skeptical of Keir, who is not a natural media performer.
I do try to give credit where it’s due, though.
He’s had a slow, measured but relentless rise. Almost always he surprises on the upside. Very much the Joe Biden of British politics.
Well, major difference between Starmer and Biden is that Starmer has only been an MP for the same short period of time as Rishi Sunak, while Biden entered the US Senate so long ago that it was closer in time to the Presidency of Warren G Harding than the present day.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
What love-in? I’ve been quite skeptical of Keir, who is not a natural media performer.
I do try to give credit where it’s due, though.
He’s had a slow, measured but relentless rise. Almost always he surprises on the upside. Very much the Joe Biden of British politics.
Well, major difference between Starmer and Biden is that Starmer has only been an MP for the same short period of time as Rishi Sunak, while Biden entered the US Senate so long ago that it was closer in time to the Presidency of Warren G Harding than the present day.
And arguably Starmer's inexperience showed up during his time as Brexit shadow. But he has proved to be a fast learner.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
What love-in? I’ve been quite skeptical of Keir, who is not a natural media performer.
I do try to give credit where it’s due, though.
He’s had a slow, measured but relentless rise. Almost always he surprises on the upside. Very much the Joe Biden of British politics.
Well, major difference between Starmer and Biden is that Starmer has only been an MP for the same short period of time as Rishi Sunak, while Biden entered the US Senate so long ago that it was closer in time to the Presidency of Warren G Harding than the present day.
Yes true, but he’s been a public figure for much longer. At least as high profile as a back bench MP. Longer in the spotlight than either Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. Similar in length of experience to Emmanuel Macron.
Few people in international politics have anything like the length of service of Biden. He’s an exception.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
But Johnson was revered until he was caught red handed partying like it was 1999 all the way through the Covid pandemic. I wonder what trick Starmer has up his sleeve to become as detested as Johnson? It's a tough act to follow.
Paterson came first, didn't he?
After that it was one thing after another. Parties, fines, Pincher, lying to cabinet, lying to parliament...
But in today's Conservative Party they are but mere trifles compared to a seat belt infringement.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
What love-in? I’ve been quite skeptical of Keir, who is not a natural media performer.
I do try to give credit where it’s due, though.
He’s had a slow, measured but relentless rise. Almost always he surprises on the upside. Very much the Joe Biden of British politics.
Well, major difference between Starmer and Biden is that Starmer has only been an MP for the same short period of time as Rishi Sunak, while Biden entered the US Senate so long ago that it was closer in time to the Presidency of Warren G Harding than the present day.
And arguably Starmer's inexperience showed up during his time as Brexit shadow. But he has proved to be a fast learner.
Not many top politicians get more effective with time. Hague, Clarke, Balls, Mandelson, Rayner, arguably Brexit Spartan Steve Baker, Howard, Kennedy. It’s a rare and useful talent.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
But Johnson was revered until he was caught red handed partying like it was 1999 all the way through the Covid pandemic. I wonder what trick Starmer has up his sleeve to become as detested as Johnson? It's a tough act to follow.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
What love-in? I’ve been quite skeptical of Keir, who is not a natural media performer.
I do try to give credit where it’s due, though.
He’s had a slow, measured but relentless rise. Almost always he surprises on the upside. Very much the Joe Biden of British politics.
So does he have sensitive national security material stored in his garage next to the Allegro?
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
But Johnson was revered until he was caught red handed partying like it was 1999 all the way through the Covid pandemic. I wonder what trick Starmer has up his sleeve to become as detested as Johnson? It's a tough act to follow.
Paterson came first, didn't he?
After that it was one thing after another. Parties, fines, Pincher, lying to cabinet, lying to parliament...
But in today's Conservative Party they are but mere trifles compared to a seat belt infringement.
With the hilarious irony of British tabloid politics, the very immateriality of the seatbelt thing helps to shed a stark light on the more nefarious doings of other Tories like Nadim. They’re definitely in the doom loop. Just call an election now and get it over with.
Starmer is confident, lucid and impressive on the latest episode of “the News Agents”.
Whilst you are having your love in with Starmer, remember, come the election, if Starmer is PM, it won't take long for him.to be loathed, possibly as much as Boris was..
What love-in? I’ve been quite skeptical of Keir, who is not a natural media performer.
I do try to give credit where it’s due, though.
He’s had a slow, measured but relentless rise. Almost always he surprises on the upside. Very much the Joe Biden of British politics.
So does he have sensitive national security material stored in his garage next to the Allegro?
Thing is our sensitive national security data is so much less important than anything the Americans have. We’re the assistant (to the) general manager.
Watching a place in the sun. Needs an overhaul. Too much costas, Balearics and Dordogne. Not enough quirky stuff or big budgets. I want to see someone shopping for castles in Transylvania, not 2nd floor apartments in Nerja.
Well, looks like I was wrong about the tanks, which is disappointing.
I think the UK have to keep hold of a couple of dozen Challengers to fulfil our commitments in Estonia and Poland, but otherwise I hope we'll give all of the rest to Ukraine as soon as possible. Not much point in only giving them a dozen on our own. Maybe we can get the Americans, or someone to backfill for us in Estonia and Poland and just send them all.
It does make you wonder about the future of the German and Swiss arms industries. The Leopard 2s are coming up for replacement in many countries. After the big Polish sale, the Americans and South Koreans are looking good for that....
Surely the one thing everyone in Europe now understands, is the need to maintain a functioning army?
I fear Germany thinks it can save money on having to maintain a functioning army by appeasing its enemies.
What good reasons are there for them doing this? The "US must send Abrams!" is bullshit, from both a moral and a practical viewpoint, as the UK is sending MBTs (and not ignoring all the other ex-Soviet tanks sent over last year).
Yes, I know Germany's doing a lot. But this is manna from Heaven for the Kremlin; both in terms of actual hardware and messaging. As much as anything else, it shows their opposition can be easily split.
It seems pretty obvious to me that NATO is indeed following the policy of providing just enough help to Ukraine to keep Russia bogged down in a war of attrition but not enough to drive Russia back and possibly spark nuclear retaliation. This is exactly what I predicted would happen and what makes the most sense.
Your notion that Germany is going to piss everyone off just to save a few pennies on its military spending makes no sense whatsoever.
The 'just enough' argument is imv fallacious, because it's impossible to judge what level that is. It's how you end up getting an unpleasant surprise when one side suddenly breaks through.
Germany's words and actions make little sense to me. It really is playing into Moscow's hands, especially on the PR front as it screams of divisions within the allies.
If the intention of NATO really were to drive the Russians out of Ukraine as quickly as possible, the US would be sending MBTs. The fact that they are not tells you that that is not the intention.
I fear that's a logical fallacy, as there are plenty of other reasons they may be reluctant to send MBTs, from the fact they're not the best fit for Ukraine's requirements, through cost, to a need for it to be seen as a part of a coalition of nations.
As one example: perhaps it is believed that the Leo2's are the best MBT for Ukraine to get, and the Bradley the best APC/AFV.
The big question is why no-one has yet sent modern western airplanes or helicopters over (the Seakings we have sent are useful, but not that modern). Russian media got very excited earlier this week when they claimed that the UK was going to send Apaches over.
The lack of modern planes, rather than MBTs, is a better argument to support your point. But again, there are potentially better alternative explanations for that, like cost, training, spares and not wanting Russia to capture the tech.
Personally, I just don't think the Ukrainians have the combat pilots available to make a large number of gifted planes viable. Although I hope I'm wrong, and there are loads of Ukrainian pilots in the US desert.
I do wonder if the reluctance by both Germany and the US to send MBTs to Ukraine is the fear that they may end up becoming just as much sitting ducks as the Russian tanks were back in March last year, despite their superior armour. Perhaps modern warfare between relatively technologically advanced armies simply doesn't have a place for tanks.
I believe I stated that as a possibility yesterday.
AIUI US doctrine is for massive combined arms, as we saw in GW1 and GW2. Ukraine could theoretically do all of that, with training, but they lack one massive component: air cover. The US likes to have air superiority days before the tank drivers think of warming their engines. Now, the Russian air force is not exactly dominating the air space over the front lines, but it's still a very 'hot' environment for any tank to go into. An added complication is the new threat from UAVs, which did not particularly exist in GW1 or GW2.
But on the other hand: tanks, APCs, AFVs and all other vehicles in a military are there to do a job, and that risks losing them. If you don't want to risk losing them, you'll never fight, and that means its pointless having them in the first place.
Tanks are certainly still necessary, and, with the aid of UAVs and satellites to gather targeting information artillery can to a certain extent perform the role performed by air superiority in NATO doctrine.
It will be very hard for Ukraine to dislodge the Russian from prepared defensive positions without more tanks, particularly as they still haven't been given the longer-range HIMARS missiles to target Russian logistics.
If you imagine what might be happening had British Challenger 2 tanks been a better option than Leopard 2 tanks for most NATO allies, one imagines that a lot more tanks would now be heading to Ukraine. This is a very tangible cost for some of the failings of British military procurement.
Germany isn't blocking other countries from sending them are they?
According to Peskov the tanks aren't very important anyway so we shouldn't be concerned with escalation - which ought to be a bigger concern for the Kremlin anyway.
Well, looks like I was wrong about the tanks, which is disappointing.
I think the UK have to keep hold of a couple of dozen Challengers to fulfil our commitments in Estonia and Poland, but otherwise I hope we'll give all of the rest to Ukraine as soon as possible. Not much point in only giving them a dozen on our own. Maybe we can get the Americans, or someone to backfill for us in Estonia and Poland and just send them all.
It does make you wonder about the future of the German and Swiss arms industries. The Leopard 2s are coming up for replacement in many countries. After the big Polish sale, the Americans and South Koreans are looking good for that....
Surely the one thing everyone in Europe now understands, is the need to maintain a functioning army?
I fear Germany thinks it can save money on having to maintain a functioning army by appeasing its enemies.
What good reasons are there for them doing this? The "US must send Abrams!" is bullshit, from both a moral and a practical viewpoint, as the UK is sending MBTs (and not ignoring all the other ex-Soviet tanks sent over last year).
Yes, I know Germany's doing a lot. But this is manna from Heaven for the Kremlin; both in terms of actual hardware and messaging. As much as anything else, it shows their opposition can be easily split.
It seems pretty obvious to me that NATO is indeed following the policy of providing just enough help to Ukraine to keep Russia bogged down in a war of attrition but not enough to drive Russia back and possibly spark nuclear retaliation. This is exactly what I predicted would happen and what makes the most sense.
Your notion that Germany is going to piss everyone off just to save a few pennies on its military spending makes no sense whatsoever.
The 'just enough' argument is imv fallacious, because it's impossible to judge what level that is. It's how you end up getting an unpleasant surprise when one side suddenly breaks through.
Germany's words and actions make little sense to me. It really is playing into Moscow's hands, especially on the PR front as it screams of divisions within the allies.
If the intention of NATO really were to drive the Russians out of Ukraine as quickly as possible, the US would be sending MBTs. The fact that they are not tells you that that is not the intention.
I fear that's a logical fallacy, as there are plenty of other reasons they may be reluctant to send MBTs, from the fact they're not the best fit for Ukraine's requirements, through cost, to a need for it to be seen as a part of a coalition of nations.
As one example: perhaps it is believed that the Leo2's are the best MBT for Ukraine to get, and the Bradley the best APC/AFV.
The big question is why no-one has yet sent modern western airplanes or helicopters over (the Seakings we have sent are useful, but not that modern). Russian media got very excited earlier this week when they claimed that the UK was going to send Apaches over.
The lack of modern planes, rather than MBTs, is a better argument to support your point. But again, there are potentially better alternative explanations for that, like cost, training, spares and not wanting Russia to capture the tech.
Personally, I just don't think the Ukrainians have the combat pilots available to make a large number of gifted planes viable. Although I hope I'm wrong, and there are loads of Ukrainian pilots in the US desert.
I do wonder if the reluctance by both Germany and the US to send MBTs to Ukraine is the fear that they may end up becoming just as much sitting ducks as the Russian tanks were back in March last year, despite their superior armour. Perhaps modern warfare between relatively technologically advanced armies simply doesn't have a place for tanks.
I believe I stated that as a possibility yesterday.
AIUI US doctrine is for massive combined arms, as we saw in GW1 and GW2. Ukraine could theoretically do all of that, with training, but they lack one massive component: air cover. The US likes to have air superiority days before the tank drivers think of warming their engines. Now, the Russian air force is not exactly dominating the air space over the front lines, but it's still a very 'hot' environment for any tank to go into. An added complication is the new threat from UAVs, which did not particularly exist in GW1 or GW2.
But on the other hand: tanks, APCs, AFVs and all other vehicles in a military are there to do a job, and that risks losing them. If you don't want to risk losing them, you'll never fight, and that means its pointless having them in the first place.
Tanks are certainly still necessary, and, with the aid of UAVs and satellites to gather targeting information artillery can to a certain extent perform the role performed by air superiority in NATO doctrine.
It will be very hard for Ukraine to dislodge the Russian from prepared defensive positions without more tanks, particularly as they still haven't been given the longer-range HIMARS missiles to target Russian logistics.
If you imagine what might be happening had British Challenger 2 tanks been a better option than Leopard 2 tanks for most NATO allies, one imagines that a lot more tanks would now be heading to Ukraine. This is a very tangible cost for some of the failings of British military procurement.
Germany isn't blocking other countries from sending them are they?
According to Peskov the tanks aren't very important anyway so we shouldn't be concerned with escalation - which ought to be a bigger concern for the Kremlin anyway.
Well, looks like I was wrong about the tanks, which is disappointing.
I think the UK have to keep hold of a couple of dozen Challengers to fulfil our commitments in Estonia and Poland, but otherwise I hope we'll give all of the rest to Ukraine as soon as possible. Not much point in only giving them a dozen on our own. Maybe we can get the Americans, or someone to backfill for us in Estonia and Poland and just send them all.
The numbers don't work. The army has 227 CR2 but needs 148 for CR3 conversion (in toryland armour regiments are being cut from 3 to 2). So that's, in theory, 79 but 14 already donated leaves a maxium of 65 - most which will be in maintenance, training units or attrition reserves.
But... the army has to generate a force of 168 to equip the three tank regiments until Ajax is ready (when?) and King's Royal Hussars can get out of the MBT game. The army aren't clever enough to work how to buy an armoured vehicle but they are just clever enough to realise that if they give up an armour regiment now to free up tanks for Ukraine they will NEVER get it back despite any assurances to the contrary. So they will fight it bitterly with every weapon at their disposal up to and including the doomsday device of leaks to the Telegraph.
Well, looks like I was wrong about the tanks, which is disappointing.
I think the UK have to keep hold of a couple of dozen Challengers to fulfil our commitments in Estonia and Poland, but otherwise I hope we'll give all of the rest to Ukraine as soon as possible. Not much point in only giving them a dozen on our own. Maybe we can get the Americans, or someone to backfill for us in Estonia and Poland and just send them all.
The numbers don't work. The army has 227 CR2 but needs 148 for CR3 conversion (in toryland armour regiments are being cut from 3 to 2). So that's, in theory, 79 but 14 already donated leaves a maxium of 65 - most which will be in maintenance, training units or attrition reserves.
But... the army has to generate a force of 168 to equip the three tank regiments until Ajax is ready (when?) and King's Royal Hussars can get out of the MBT game. The army aren't clever enough to work how to buy an armoured vehicle but they are just clever enough to realise that if they give up an armour regiment now to free up tanks for Ukraine they will NEVER get it back despite any assurances to the contrary. So they will fight it bitterly with every weapon at their disposal up to and including the doomsday device of leaks to the Telegraph.
They're a bit late to leak to the Telegraph to prevent donation of their tanks. The associate Editor for Defence at the Telegraph has been pushing the idea of donating all of Britain's Challenger tanks for a week or two on the Telegraph Ukraine podcast. They won't find a sympathetic ear there. They might have to go to the Independent instead. LOL
Comments
There are many other things for which you can lay the blame or the accusation at the door of Number 10 which are of much greater import.
The Conservatives, unfortunately, instead of trying to move on, frantically dig back through every video, tweet etc to find something similar. It's a bit sad and desperate, isn't it? All it does is keep it in the news cycle.
Perhaps putting Starmer in an apparently equal situation will drive the legions of "Don't Knows" back to the Conservative fold. Colour me sceptical.
That the Tories replaced one law breaker with another is farcical. That he's been fined again is beyond a bad joke.
That't not impossible, but it is out of their hands and a lot to pin hopes on.
https://mobile.twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1616495969578766336
They had a horrific interregnum with a non-lawbreaker.
So went back to what they knew.
Still an inexplicable decision to me - no one else in the Tories wants to stop the boats as much as Braverman? Unlikely.
When exactly did the Tory Party lose touch with the outside world?
AIUI US doctrine is for massive combined arms, as we saw in GW1 and GW2. Ukraine could theoretically do all of that, with training, but they lack one massive component: air cover. The US likes to have air superiority days before the tank drivers think of warming their engines. Now, the Russian air force is not exactly dominating the air space over the front lines, but it's still a very 'hot' environment for any tank to go into. An added complication is the new threat from UAVs, which did not particularly exist in GW1 or GW2.
But on the other hand: tanks, APCs, AFVs and all other vehicles in a military are there to do a job, and that risks losing them. If you don't want to risk losing them, you'll never fight, and that means its pointless having them in the first place.
They might as well hang on on the off chance that something turns up.
That's not to say Sunak is popular anymore, he isn't, but the obvious goal of most of those who want him gone seems to pay no regard to what that would mean or how it would look.
Seatbeltgate isn't going to damage Rishi on its own. But it underlines the point I've been making - he keeps making too many avoidable mistakes. And he doesn't have enough political capital to waste on this sort of stuff.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1616515562816868354?cxt=HHwWhMC4-d6Vgu8sAAAA
Those opinion formers and influencers who have been "close" to or "had the ear of" Ministers and those close to power for the last decade or more would find themselves in the wilderness in the event of a change of Government.
I'm sure the "opposition" to the new Government will begin right away - trouble is, no one will listen or be interested.
For some in the Conservative-media nexus, the irrelevance has already begun, and it will get worse and probably drive them potty.
I agree though Sunak is more popular than the Tory party at present with most voters, albeit leaking on the right to RefUK
Still it's a London cab so it must be in the Met area. If only Cressida were still Chief Constable.
Zahawi’s tax bill is far more serious and Rishi, by pretending that the story had been fully disclosed, has tied himself to another attempt to deceive the public.
We should also remember that Rishi himself thought it was nobody’s business that his own wife was a supposed non-dom.
Rishi is not up to it, never was up to it, and the Tories deserve to be reduced to minor party status.
These FPNs are certainly not enough for him to be replaced by a narcissistic cad, and an absolute bounder.
I still can’t watch clips of Johnson without a rising sense of fury at his blatant fraudulence. And Truss was a very, very dark joke.
What kind of PM puts unsuitable people like Sunak and Truss in those two.slots? And if it's not to shore up their own miserable position, why?
German Ghost Fire Train
https://www.facebook.com/158085547585009/videos/487018356938937/?__so__=permalink
I'm amazed he was elected leader especially unopposed. Surely some backbencher could have put themselves forward.
You are unknown
You are respected
You are liked
You are elected
You are disliked
You are hated
You are unelected.
I don't know what Starmer did in Summer 2021 to turn things round after Hartlepool. Maybe nothing, but to keep
buggering on. But the fact that he did probably marked the moment where he became a winner.
What turned it around was the Tories spectacular self-indulgence.
I’ve been quite skeptical of Keir, who is not a natural media performer.
I do try to give credit where it’s due, though.
He's a gonner. They should have a transition plan in place before the local election drubbing if he insists on hanging on till then; which I suppose he should, so that the new leader has a slightly cleaner slate.
?? That's the first time I've heard "turn yourself in" used outside of a context in which a person is wanted in connection with a crime.
What's she supposed to have done? She can run away with her baby and boyfriend (or husband) if she wants, can't she?
200 police...
What next? Army roadblocks? General curfew?
It's being reported that her grandmother's godmother was the late queen mother...
The Independent: "Investigators say the couple appear to know how to evade authorities – making the search for them harder."
FFS. Somebody's after them, for sure.
It will be very hard for Ukraine to dislodge the Russian from prepared defensive positions without more tanks, particularly as they still haven't been given the longer-range HIMARS missiles to target Russian logistics.
If you imagine what might be happening had British Challenger 2 tanks been a better option than Leopard 2 tanks for most NATO allies, one imagines that a lot more tanks would now be heading to Ukraine. This is a very tangible cost for some of the failings of British military procurement.
After that it was one thing after another. Parties, fines, Pincher, lying to cabinet, lying to parliament...
https://twitter.com/LordRennard/status/1616539708347088919
Few people in international politics have anything like the length of service of Biden. He’s an exception.
Howard, Kennedy. It’s a rare and useful talent.
According to Peskov the tanks aren't very important anyway so we shouldn't be concerned with escalation - which ought to be a bigger concern for the Kremlin anyway.
But... the army has to generate a force of 168 to equip the three tank regiments until Ajax is ready (when?) and King's Royal Hussars can get out of the MBT game. The army aren't clever enough to work how to buy an armoured vehicle but they are just clever enough to realise that if they give up an armour regiment now to free up tanks for Ukraine they will NEVER get it back despite any assurances to the contrary. So they will fight it bitterly with every weapon at their disposal up to and including the doomsday device of leaks to the Telegraph.