There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue
But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.
It’s like the ERM, Labour and the Lib Dems were all in favour but only the government took the hit when it all went wrong.
There are other examples.
Makes it tricky turning it into a campaigning issue though for anyone but the Cons. In general Starmer has succeeded by not saying very much at all, can he carry on doing the ‘otoh this but otoh that’ waltz on the gender issue all the way to the GE?
To repeat.
Starmer has taken a different stance to Sarwar on the bill, and was widely reported in Scotland as having done so.
Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.
With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.
With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.
Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.
Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.
That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?
Why are we ruling out that she wants to deliver a longstanding commitment that she also believes in?
Comes under an increasing reluctance to assume ANY good faith in the motives of one's opponents.
Which you both clearly demonstrate yourselves.
I mean the reason the move was opposed was not because people might be concerned about say convicted male rapists being allowed into women's prisons but because such people wanted to create a culture war, have a wedge issue, play dirty politics.
Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.
With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.
With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.
Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.
Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.
When the GRA process in Scotland started in 2016 it was largely shadowing what England under May was doing. Surveys regularly showed support for gender self recognition at that point. Now, you can say that voters went through some magical process of self enlightenment or they were persuaded by the issue being weaponised by various parties, but there's no doubt public perceptions have changed since then.
Wales as embodied by Welsh Labour and Drakeford appear to be shadowing Scotland. No doubt the Tories & tabloids wil be going round with pitchforks and flaming torches trying to inflame the issue there but they may have left it a bit too late before their own immolation.
'Welsh Government to seek devolution of gender recognition laws amid Scotland battle'
High level politics - statesmanship - includes the art of knowing what people will want and accept even though they don't know now what they are going to want and don't know they are going to change their mind. It's hard.
The failures in this department are getting a bit noticeable. Invading large middle eastern countries, conducting referendums so as to be prepared for not one but two outcomes come to mind. There are others.
Naah that was the other thread. This is how the massively unpopular PM and his heavily in decline in both Westminster and Holyrood voting is supposedly going to hoover up votes because the GRR Bill is the Only Issue people care about.
No, its not. I think it's more about how Sturgeon's attempt to provoke a constitutional crisis with the UK government has gone off at half cock because, while she clearly thinks that her own view is always equivalent to the "will of the Scottish people", in this case the polling shows that it isn't.
As I stated earlier, the IPSOS polling is also interesting to me because of the negative opinions it also reveals of the Scottish Government's performance on a range of issues and the fact that the SNP's net favourability rating is now no greater than that of Labour amongst Scots.
Have the trans rights organisations yet cottoned onto the fact that Sturgeon was using trans people as a pawn in that attempt?
Both of you talking mince. She did it due her own personal choices and the coterie of similar people she has in positions around her. You only need look at their favourite charities and teh only ones consulted on th etopic etc to realise it is very personal and also very very stupid. Fact she is power crazy and obviously believes teh hype that she is the messiah nowadays perhaps shows why she shot herself in both feet pursuing such a stupid policy. Her end cannot come quick enough.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Without Lend Lease we'd have been in a desperate position, and the freeing of German resources for the Eastern Front could quite conceivably have changed the outcome.
I don't know that you can say 'quite likely', but it's certainly possible.
I recently read a German focused account of Barbarossa (Barbarossa Through German Eyes?). Interestingly it stopped before the final push to Moscow, as by this time it was clear that Barbarossa had failed. It argues that it could never have succeeded - the space was too big, the German Army for the most part marched east, unlike the Americans, British and Canadians who moved by truck), the German tanks were not superior to the T34 and so on. If thats right, and its a pretty convincing case, the only way that Russia would have lost would have been if Stalin and the government fell, or fled and sued for peace (unlikely to be granted in a war of anihilation). There is no question that the western allies spent Russian lives to win the war and bought those lives with lend lease material. We avoided huge death tools in the west by letting the Russians die by the million.
But surely Russia's status as a superpower after the war was hugely dependent on the US? Could they have conquered the entirety of eastern Europe on their own?
Breaking: leading lawyer Aidan O'Neill KC has said the Scottish government may have to delay its bottle return scheme as it may be unlawfully creating a trade barrier within the U.K. single market.
Some may point out ScotGov had been forewarned of this risk by opposition MSPs..
Cobblers - its a 20p "deposit" - the suggestion that people will go and shop south of the border to avoid it feels laughable. Also, all of the devolved nations are pursuing their own different schemes with different approaches (e.g. Wales and Scotland include glass, England and NI do not) so there will be a "trade barrier" within England and Wales' shared legal system next year.
Surely the better approach would be to attack the Deposit Return Scheme for the bit that really is ludicrous - the deposit gets paid back when the bottle is returned to the vendor. Online retailers must take back the empties through the post.
Which if you are someone like Nc'nean or Raasay distilleries is environmentally mental. I can't see how a corner shop will handle returns. Its a stupid scheme on so many levels, but "creates the potential for Scottish consumers to cross the border to save 20p on their bottle of Irn Bru" is not one of them.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony...
And you'd barely have had any manufacturing at the start of the war, if you were to discount the plants built by US business.
To be clear the US sent vast amounts of help:
400,000 jeeps & trucks 14,000 airplanes 8,000 tractors 13,000 tanks 1.5 million blankets 15 million pairs of army boots 107,000 tons of cotton 2.7 million tons of petrol products 4.5 million tons of food
The US undoubtedly sent a lot of aid to the USSR during WW2/the GPW.
Fast-paced industrial growth in the USSR began in 1929 when the US didn't even recognise the Bolshevik regime. There was some assistance after 1933-34 (car industry, some in steel, etc.) but if it hadn't happened it's not as if no expansion worthy of note would have taken place. The Russians weren't complete fuzzy-wuzzies who couldn't do stuff without foreign help. Especially given all the labour "freed" from the countryside.
Remember the thesis that's being argued here: that the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US help. That's not true either of Russia or England.
Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.
With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.
With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.
Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.
Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.
That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?
Why are we ruling out that she wants to deliver a longstanding commitment that she also believes in?
Comes under an increasing reluctance to assume ANY good faith in the motives of one's opponents.
I think I've got it -
She doesn't actually want Independence (remember?) - she's happy with the status quo - so what better than to pick an unpopular issue like this to fight the UKG on and thus lose a few points of Indy support that otherwise was threatening to creep dangerously up over 50%?
Devious is not the word for this 7D chess playing politician.
Not just the GRR Bill where Sturgeon is out of touch with voters:
A mere 8 per cent of Scots want a referendum on secession this year, according to the latest poll. 👇 How did the First Minister so spectacularly misjudge what the people want?
Sunak confirming at PMQs that Ukrainian pilots being trained on Western aircraft. Not much point doing that unless they are going to get Western aircraft soon. Good news.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Without Lend Lease we'd have been in a desperate position, and the freeing of German resources for the Eastern Front could quite conceivably have changed the outcome.
I don't know that you can say 'quite likely', but it's certainly possible.
I recently read a German focused account of Barbarossa (Barbarossa Through German Eyes?). Interestingly it stopped before the final push to Moscow, as by this time it was clear that Barbarossa had failed. It argues that it could never have succeeded - the space was too big, the German Army for the most part marched east, unlike the Americans, British and Canadians who moved by truck), the German tanks were not superior to the T34 and so on. If thats right, and its a pretty convincing case, the only way that Russia would have lost would have been if Stalin and the government fell, or fled and sued for peace (unlikely to be granted in a war of anihilation). There is no question that the western allies spent Russian lives to win the war and bought those lives with lend lease material. We avoided huge death tools in the west by letting the Russians die by the million.
Yes, but Lend Lease was most critical in the early years of the war. Without it the whole calculus of the war would have changed.
Stalin's own view, according to Kruschev: ... I would like to express my candid opinion about Stalin's views on whether the Red Army and the Soviet Union could have coped with Nazi Germany and survived the war without aid from the United States and Britain. First, I would like to tell about some remarks Stalin made and repeated several times when we were "discussing freely" among ourselves. He stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany's pressure, and we would have lost the war. No one ever discussed this subject officially, and I don't think Stalin left any written evidence of his opinion, but I will state here that several times in conversations with me he noted that these were the actual circumstances. He never made a special point of holding a conversation on the subject, but when we were engaged in some kind of relaxed conversation, going over international questions of the past and present, and when we would return to the subject of the path we had traveled during the war, that is what he said. When I listened to his remarks, I was fully in agreement with him, and today I am even more so...
Not just the GRR Bill where Sturgeon is out of touch with voters:
A mere 8 per cent of Scots want a referendum on secession this year, according to the latest poll. 👇 How did the First Minister so spectacularly misjudge what the people want?
Presumably Boris's recent visit to Ukraine was part of the set up for Zelemsky's visit to the UK.
At any event, glad he is here. Britain's help for Ukraine is something to be proud about.
Is the Ukrainian leader shorter than Sunak? He certainly looks like it in the picture of them in the Graun, or is this from the PM's official photographer, who seems to have been selected specifically for his skills in this area?
They are both pretty short. Zelensky doesn't seem to care about it, though.
Z is short but stocky - the Oates in Hall & Oates template. Rishi is just very very tiny, which is harder to get yourself positive about as a man, I think. Still, it's far from his most pressing concern. That would be the ERG, I think.
I wouldn't worry about Sunak. Private wealth, will be able to cash in after he loses in 2024. The inevitable defeat won't be seen as his fault and he will walk into other roles (trans-national) if he chooses.
Sunak keeps missing out Starmer’s “right” honourable when referring to Starmer - the speaker has called him out already on it today - but he keeps doing it - sloppy.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
It's a long time ago, but I doubt it - if I recall the wargaming simulations (arguably more serious than most of uor armchair chat), US aid to Russia was overwhelmingly later in the war than the critical first winter. US aid was extremely welcome to both Britain and the USSR (and FDR deserves all the credit he got), but probably not decisive for either in holding off the Germans.
Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.
With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.
With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.
Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.
Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.
That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?
Why are we ruling out that she wants to deliver a longstanding commitment that she also believes in?
Comes under an increasing reluctance to assume ANY good faith in the motives of one's opponents.
Which you both clearly demonstrate yourselves.
I mean the reason the move was opposed was not because people might be concerned about say convicted male rapists being allowed into women's prisons but because such people wanted to create a culture war, have a wedge issue, play dirty politics.
Not getting a big benefit of the doubt vibe off you tbh. As I just pointed out in a previous post there was broad support for eg gender self identification until quite recently. If you want to pin down a reason for the public change of mood, knock yersel out.
Personally regardless of how principled I thought my cause was, the fact that Trump, Breitbart, Infowars, the tabloid press, holocaust deniers and sundry fascists were piggybacking on it might give me pause for thought.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Without Lend Lease we'd have been in a desperate position, and the freeing of German resources for the Eastern Front could quite conceivably have changed the outcome.
I don't know that you can say 'quite likely', but it's certainly possible.
I recently read a German focused account of Barbarossa (Barbarossa Through German Eyes?). Interestingly it stopped before the final push to Moscow, as by this time it was clear that Barbarossa had failed. It argues that it could never have succeeded - the space was too big, the German Army for the most part marched east, unlike the Americans, British and Canadians who moved by truck), the German tanks were not superior to the T34 and so on. If thats right, and its a pretty convincing case, the only way that Russia would have lost would have been if Stalin and the government fell, or fled and sued for peace (unlikely to be granted in a war of anihilation). There is no question that the western allies spent Russian lives to win the war and bought those lives with lend lease material. We avoided huge death tools in the west by letting the Russians die by the million.
I think that without US aid the position of the USSR in WW2 would have been more like China under the Japanese. Still in existence but starving, poorly equipped, and unable to evict the Nazis, let alone take the battle into Germany.
Presumably Boris's recent visit to Ukraine was part of the set up for Zelemsky's visit to the UK.
At any event, glad he is here. Britain's help for Ukraine is something to be proud about.
Is the Ukrainian leader shorter than Sunak? He certainly looks like it in the picture of them in the Graun, or is this from the PM's official photographer, who seems to have been selected specifically for his skills in this area?
They are both pretty short. Zelensky doesn't seem to care about it, though.
Z is short but stocky - the Oates in Hall & Oates template. Rishi is just very very tiny, which is harder to get yourself positive about as a man, I think. Still, it's far from his most pressing concern. That would be the ERG, I think.
I wouldn't worry about Sunak. Private wealth, will be able to cash in after he loses in 2024. The inevitable defeat won't be seen as his fault and he will walk into other roles (trans-national) if he chooses.
That's reassuring. I was losing sleep over his future wellbeing.
There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue
But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.
It’s like the ERM, Labour and the Lib Dems were all in favour but only the government took the hit when it all went wrong.
There are other examples.
Makes it tricky turning it into a campaigning issue though for anyone but the Cons. In general Starmer has succeeded by not saying very much at all, can he carry on doing the ‘otoh this but otoh that’ waltz on the gender issue all the way to the GE?
To repeat.
Starmer has taken a different stance to Sarwar on the bill, and was widely reported in Scotland as having done so.
But I’m sure I’d heard that SLab was an entirely autonomous wing of the Labour Party led by Anas Sarwar. Will they be campaigning separately in Scotland?
And I'm sure I'd previously heard the SNP claiming the opposite. Although now that it suits you, you're trying to change your tune.
Your point is irrelevant though, as you know. Labour will be fighting the next UK general election on a UK wide manifesto. And the decision on whether to block an unpopular bill in which the aspiring Queen Nicola has exceeded her powers is down to the UK government.
Ah, Labour (particularly the English varient) perma rage about the EssEnnPee stealing their fiefdom is one of the great fixtures of UK politics.
You haven't a clue what my tune is, but assuming it's that SLab is a powerless husk whose opinions are irrelevant to the larger Labour party, whose point is being made here do you think?
On the contrary, it is very clear that you're trying to face two ways at one, depending on which way suits you at the time. Perhaps that's why you won't commit to a specific position, not that I care what it is.
TBH you seem to be the one who is raging. I think it's reasonable to infer that the cause is the polling revelation that neither the SNP nor Sturgeon are held in any higher net regard by Scots than Labour and Starmer respectively.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Without Lend Lease we'd have been in a desperate position, and the freeing of German resources for the Eastern Front could quite conceivably have changed the outcome.
I don't know that you can say 'quite likely', but it's certainly possible.
I recently read a German focused account of Barbarossa (Barbarossa Through German Eyes?). Interestingly it stopped before the final push to Moscow, as by this time it was clear that Barbarossa had failed. It argues that it could never have succeeded - the space was too big, the German Army for the most part marched east, unlike the Americans, British and Canadians who moved by truck), the German tanks were not superior to the T34 and so on. If thats right, and its a pretty convincing case, the only way that Russia would have lost would have been if Stalin and the government fell, or fled and sued for peace (unlikely to be granted in a war of anihilation). There is no question that the western allies spent Russian lives to win the war and bought those lives with lend lease material. We avoided huge death tools in the west by letting the Russians die by the million.
But surely Russia's status as a superpower after the war was hugely dependent on the US? Could they have conquered the entirety of eastern Europe on their own?
I think eventually yes - it would likely have taken longer, but after 1941 and the failed attempt to Blitzkreig Russia out of the war (note - there was NO plan for winter warfare in the East), the overall result was not in doubt. A counterfactual might have been that the Western allies might have reached further east themselves, but to be honest the Normandy campaign and through 1945 were heavily dependent on the degradation of Germany's ability to fight (by the Russians, Bomber Command and the 8th Air Force).
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony...
And you'd barely have had any manufacturing at the start of the war, if you were to discount the plants built by US business.
To be clear the US sent vast amounts of help:
400,000 jeeps & trucks 14,000 airplanes 8,000 tractors 13,000 tanks 1.5 million blankets 15 million pairs of army boots 107,000 tons of cotton 2.7 million tons of petrol products 4.5 million tons of food
The US undoubtedly sent a lot of aid to the USSR during WW2/the GPW.
Fast-paced industrial growth in the USSR began in 1929 when the US didn't even recognise the Bolshevik regime...
The Soviet Union, which in 1928 had only 20,000 cars and a single truck factory, was eager to join the ranks of automotive production, and Ford, with its focus on engineering and manufacturing methods, was a natural choice to help. The always independent-minded Henry Ford was strongly in favor of his free-market company doing business with Communist countries. An article published in May 1929 in The New York Times quoted Ford as saying that “No matter where industry prospers, whether in India or China, or Russia, all the world is bound to catch some good from it.”...
Breaking: leading lawyer Aidan O'Neill KC has said the Scottish government may have to delay its bottle return scheme as it may be unlawfully creating a trade barrier within the U.K. single market.
Some may point out ScotGov had been forewarned of this risk by opposition MSPs..
Cobblers - its a 20p "deposit" - the suggestion that people will go and shop south of the border to avoid it feels laughable. Also, all of the devolved nations are pursuing their own different schemes with different approaches (e.g. Wales and Scotland include glass, England and NI do not) so there will be a "trade barrier" within England and Wales' shared legal system next year.
Surely the better approach would be to attack the Deposit Return Scheme for the bit that really is ludicrous - the deposit gets paid back when the bottle is returned to the vendor. Online retailers must take back the empties through the post.
Which if you are someone like Nc'nean or Raasay distilleries is environmentally mental. I can't see how a corner shop will handle returns. Its a stupid scheme on so many levels, but "creates the potential for Scottish consumers to cross the border to save 20p on their bottle of Irn Bru" is not one of them.
It’s symptomatic of an arrogant out of touch government that neither listens to nor tolerates disagreement.
The whole GRR bill mess could have been avoided had the SNP government listened to critics of the legislation who have been pointing out the bills deficiencies for years
Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.
With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.
With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.
Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.
Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.
That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?
Why are we ruling out that she wants to deliver a longstanding commitment that she also believes in?
Comes under an increasing reluctance to assume ANY good faith in the motives of one's opponents.
Which you both clearly demonstrate yourselves.
I mean the reason the move was opposed was not because people might be concerned about say convicted male rapists being allowed into women's prisons but because such people wanted to create a culture war, have a wedge issue, play dirty politics.
Not getting a big benefit of the doubt vibe off you tbh. As I just pointed out in a previous post there was broad support for eg gender self identification until quite recently. If you want to pin down a reason for the public change of mood, knock yersel out.
Personally regardless of how principled I thought my cause was, the fact that Trump, Breitbart, Infowars, the tabloid press, holocaust deniers and sundry fascists were piggybacking on it might give me pause for thought.
That's why I despise vegetarianism/veganism, Hitler was a vegetarian so pass me that steak please. 🥩
Personally, I like to consider the merits of a cause. I stayed out of the trans debate because I didn't consider myself informed enough to reach a conclusion. After having done so I've settled on my current position - treat trans people with respect, address them by whatever names or pronouns they want, but have safeguarding where it is needed to protect women - as well as safeguarding where it is needed to protect trans individuals too, but that may be different safeguarding to what exists for women.
That's something neither the Trump/Breitbar/Infowars etc crew stand for, nor the other extreme, but somewhere in the middle. A sensible compromise in my view, but your mileage may vary.
Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.
With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.
With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.
Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.
Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.
That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?
Why are we ruling out that she wants to deliver a longstanding commitment that she also believes in?
Comes under an increasing reluctance to assume ANY good faith in the motives of one's opponents.
Which you both clearly demonstrate yourselves.
I mean the reason the move was opposed was not because people might be concerned about say convicted male rapists being allowed into women's prisons but because such people wanted to create a culture war, have a wedge issue, play dirty politics.
Not getting a big benefit of the doubt vibe off you tbh. As I just pointed out in a previous post there was broad support for eg gender self identification until quite recently. If you want to pin down a reason for the public change of mood, knock yersel out.
Personally regardless of how principled I thought my cause was, the fact that Trump, Breitbart, Infowars, the tabloid press, holocaust deniers and sundry fascists were piggybacking on it might give me pause for thought.
Sturgeon either made a simple but mahoosive fuck up, or she allowed herself to be outmaneuvered by more cynical opponents due to her personal - if bizarre - dedication to this cause
Neither of these reflect well on her as a politician. There will now be no referendum, nor any election as a proxy referendum. Westminster has grown a spine and told the Nits to go jump in a loch
Not sure what else can be done now. Except wait - as promised - for that generation to elapse. So that means the latter half of the 2030s
As a pessimist when it comes to the chances of a Labour majority, I would be much happier seeing the SNP taking seats from the Tories than Labour taking seats from the SNP which leaving the Scottish Tory seats intact.
Breaking: leading lawyer Aidan O'Neill KC has said the Scottish government may have to delay its bottle return scheme as it may be unlawfully creating a trade barrier within the U.K. single market.
Some may point out ScotGov had been forewarned of this risk by opposition MSPs..
Cobblers - its a 20p "deposit" - the suggestion that people will go and shop south of the border to avoid it feels laughable. Also, all of the devolved nations are pursuing their own different schemes with different approaches (e.g. Wales and Scotland include glass, England and NI do not) so there will be a "trade barrier" within England and Wales' shared legal system next year.
Surely the better approach would be to attack the Deposit Return Scheme for the bit that really is ludicrous - the deposit gets paid back when the bottle is returned to the vendor. Online retailers must take back the empties through the post.
Which if you are someone like Nc'nean or Raasay distilleries is environmentally mental. I can't see how a corner shop will handle returns. Its a stupid scheme on so many levels, but "creates the potential for Scottish consumers to cross the border to save 20p on their bottle of Irn Bru" is not one of them.
It’s symptomatic of an arrogant out of touch government that neither listens to nor tolerates disagreement.
The whole GRR bill mess could have been avoided had the SNP government listened to critics of the legislation who have been pointing out the bills deficiencies for years
No, its not.
If an economic policy of the Scottish Government gets blocked due to something petty and ridiculous then that will further Sturgeon's cause not block it. Its a stupid policy, but its one their Parliament passed and there's no reason why it shouldn't become law. That's precisely the sort of 'wedge' that Sturgeon should be concentrating on, economic issues not whether rapists are men or women.
Quite a strange PMQs with no criticism from Starmer directed towards Sunak . Clearly mindful of Zelenskys visit and at least on this day to show a united front.
I think this was a good move . The bickering can wait a week .
Breaking: leading lawyer Aidan O'Neill KC has said the Scottish government may have to delay its bottle return scheme as it may be unlawfully creating a trade barrier within the U.K. single market.
Some may point out ScotGov had been forewarned of this risk by opposition MSPs..
Cobblers - its a 20p "deposit" - the suggestion that people will go and shop south of the border to avoid it feels laughable. Also, all of the devolved nations are pursuing their own different schemes with different approaches (e.g. Wales and Scotland include glass, England and NI do not) so there will be a "trade barrier" within England and Wales' shared legal system next year.
Surely the better approach would be to attack the Deposit Return Scheme for the bit that really is ludicrous - the deposit gets paid back when the bottle is returned to the vendor. Online retailers must take back the empties through the post.
Which if you are someone like Nc'nean or Raasay distilleries is environmentally mental. I can't see how a corner shop will handle returns. Its a stupid scheme on so many levels, but "creates the potential for Scottish consumers to cross the border to save 20p on their bottle of Irn Bru" is not one of them.
It’s symptomatic of an arrogant out of touch government that neither listens to nor tolerates disagreement.
The whole GRR bill mess could have been avoided had the SNP government listened to critics of the legislation who have been pointing out the bills deficiencies for years
I'm very happy to attack the SNP government! Remember that I ran against the SNP last year, I'm not a supporter. But the out of touch relevance of the DRS is in how it would work in practice, not because it creates a constitutional issue. Again, all 4 nations will have different schemes in 2024. And they will all be bollocks - not sure that the coming Welsh and English schemes being stupid demonstrates the arrogance of the Scottish government...
Not just the GRR Bill where Sturgeon is out of touch with voters:
A mere 8 per cent of Scots want a referendum on secession this year, according to the latest poll. 👇 How did the First Minister so spectacularly misjudge what the people want?
Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.
With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.
With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.
Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.
Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.
That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?
Why are we ruling out that she wants to deliver a longstanding commitment that she also believes in?
Comes under an increasing reluctance to assume ANY good faith in the motives of one's opponents.
I think I've got it -
She doesn't actually want Independence (remember?) - she's happy with the status quo - so what better than to pick an unpopular issue like this to fight the UKG on and thus lose a few points of Indy support that otherwise was threatening to creep dangerously up over 50%?
Devious is not the word for this 7D chess playing politician.
Decent point. Yes, I think NS thinks that independence is not for now but for much later, but I also think she would like to be respected. To combine both positions NS would, I think, accept that she can't win now (lack of support, referendum already held etc) but gain long term support by running Scotland intelligently.
The actuality of what independence would involve right now, or soon, is mind exploding.
Just think of the reality of choosing between a SM with E and W, and an SM with the EU. And there are other things too, like 20p deposits on bottles.
Quite a strange PMQs with no criticism from Starmer directed towards Sunak . Clearly mindful of Zelenskys visit and at least on this day to show a united front.
I think this was a good move . The bickering can wait a week .
It's been a rather good PMQs IMO. Even Peter Bone gave a thoughtful question.
Is it not the case that the early support gender self-id did so based on the assumption that all such individuals would have physically transitioned and divested themselves fully of male genitalia? It may have been a foolish assumption - it was certainly mine... I know what some will say but I think I was not alone in this.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Without Lend Lease we'd have been in a desperate position, and the freeing of German resources for the Eastern Front could quite conceivably have changed the outcome.
I don't know that you can say 'quite likely', but it's certainly possible.
I recently read a German focused account of Barbarossa (Barbarossa Through German Eyes?). Interestingly it stopped before the final push to Moscow, as by this time it was clear that Barbarossa had failed. It argues that it could never have succeeded - the space was too big, the German Army for the most part marched east, unlike the Americans, British and Canadians who moved by truck), the German tanks were not superior to the T34 and so on. If thats right, and its a pretty convincing case, the only way that Russia would have lost would have been if Stalin and the government fell, or fled and sued for peace (unlikely to be granted in a war of anihilation). There is no question that the western allies spent Russian lives to win the war and bought those lives with lend lease material. We avoided huge death tools in the west by letting the Russians die by the million.
Yes, but Lend Lease was most critical in the early years of the war. Without it the whole calculus of the war would have changed.
Stalin's own view, according to Kruschev: ... I would like to express my candid opinion about Stalin's views on whether the Red Army and the Soviet Union could have coped with Nazi Germany and survived the war without aid from the United States and Britain. First, I would like to tell about some remarks Stalin made and repeated several times when we were "discussing freely" among ourselves. He stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany's pressure, and we would have lost the war. No one ever discussed this subject officially, and I don't think Stalin left any written evidence of his opinion, but I will state here that several times in conversations with me he noted that these were the actual circumstances. He never made a special point of holding a conversation on the subject, but when we were engaged in some kind of relaxed conversation, going over international questions of the past and present, and when we would return to the subject of the path we had traveled during the war, that is what he said. When I listened to his remarks, I was fully in agreement with him, and today I am even more so...
This is entirely commensurate with what you find in e.g. Alan Brooke's diaries about the change in tone of Russian requests for aid just after Barbarossa (and the way we granted it) to the requests from 1943 onwards, where it is clear that it is as much a part of their post-war strategy as it is a request for material support.
Sunak keeps missing out Starmer’s “right” honourable when referring to Starmer - the speaker has called him out already on it today - but he keeps doing it - sloppy.
I'm with Rishi on this. Scrap all these archaic titles.
"President Zelensky in first UK visit since invasion of Ukraine"
"No 10 has also announced that British training of Ukrainian forces will be expanded to cover fighter jet pilots and marines.
It's also expected the UK will announce fresh sanctions targeting Russia later.
I wonder why we're bothering, other than maybe a bit of virtue signalling. Sanctions have been a complete failure so far (excepting the ones targeting specific military or dual use components), as usual against a determined dictatorship. They may have actually done more harm than good, by providing an excuse for Putin to stop Russian energy exports. If throwing hundreds of lives away each day doesn't faze Putin or undermine his popularity much, closing McDonalds and preventing his people from buying western cars certainly won't.
Weapons, weapons and more weapons are what Ukraine needs.
Sanctions are slow-burn items, and I'd disagree that they've been anything like a complete failure. They are really hurting Russia's ability to modernise their military (hence tanks coming online with very substandard optics), and are hurting the Russian economy.
Yes, that's why I excepted those on military and dual use components.
If you argue that sanctions will not bring Putin down, then I'd agree. But they really hurt Russia's ability to fight - and that's what's important.
The Economist made a useful distinction between three types of sanctions. Ones targeting military and dual use components, which I'd agree have been a partial success, though they seem still to be getting some of those components, or very good substitutes through Dubai or China or wherever. Sanctions against specific wealthy Russians, which have been a total and abject failure in stopping the war or bringing Putin down. And general economic sanctions, which may have hurt the Russian economy in some ways, but won't stop the war because Putin is a determined dictator who doesn't care. I think this is a valid distinction.
Besides, I'd argue there's a moral viewpoint as well: buying gas and oil from Russia when they're acting in the way they are is deeply immoral. We couldn't wean ourselves off it immediately, but it's good we're not paying them.
I don't see it as immoral in itself at all. We buy loads of crap from China and lots of other countries around the world with terrible governments because it benefits us as well as them. Anyway, if stopping buying energy would bring the end of the war closer, then sure, let's do it. But it isn't doing that, and the high energy prices are having perverse effects by undermining support for the war in some countries in Europe, as well as weakening our economies more than Russia's.
I think a lot of commentary on the war has underestimated how strong public support for Ukraine is. This can perhaps be seen most clearly in neutral European countries like Switzerland and Ireland.
In Switzerland there's growing public pressure for allowing re-export of Swiss military equipment and ammunition to Ukraine, or even for providing such exports directly. In Ireland public support for Ukraine is such that the government has said it is not neutral on the issue of Ukraine, but it's neutral to the extent that it won't provide lethal military equipment, a distinction that looks a bit shaky.
Bearing in mind that both these countries were able to maintain a neutral status during WWII, and I think it says a lot about how strong European public support for Ukraine is and continues to be.
As a pessimist when it comes to the chances of a Labour majority, I would be much happier seeing the SNP taking seats from the Tories than Labour taking seats from the SNP which leaving the Scottish Tory seats intact.
Indeed. Which is why loathsome as I find the idea I am quite prepared to vote for the SNP if it removes David Duguid as my MP. Vote tactically for the best option to get the Tories out of office.
Breaking: leading lawyer Aidan O'Neill KC has said the Scottish government may have to delay its bottle return scheme as it may be unlawfully creating a trade barrier within the U.K. single market.
Some may point out ScotGov had been forewarned of this risk by opposition MSPs..
Cobblers - its a 20p "deposit" - the suggestion that people will go and shop south of the border to avoid it feels laughable. Also, all of the devolved nations are pursuing their own different schemes with different approaches (e.g. Wales and Scotland include glass, England and NI do not) so there will be a "trade barrier" within England and Wales' shared legal system next year.
Surely the better approach would be to attack the Deposit Return Scheme for the bit that really is ludicrous - the deposit gets paid back when the bottle is returned to the vendor. Online retailers must take back the empties through the post.
Which if you are someone like Nc'nean or Raasay distilleries is environmentally mental. I can't see how a corner shop will handle returns. Its a stupid scheme on so many levels, but "creates the potential for Scottish consumers to cross the border to save 20p on their bottle of Irn Bru" is not one of them.
It’s symptomatic of an arrogant out of touch government that neither listens to nor tolerates disagreement.
The whole GRR bill mess could have been avoided had the SNP government listened to critics of the legislation who have been pointing out the bills deficiencies for years
No, its not.
If an economic policy of the Scottish Government gets blocked due to something petty and ridiculous then that will further Sturgeon's cause not block it. It’s a stupid policy, but its one their Parliament passed and there's no reason why it shouldn't become law. That's precisely the sort of 'wedge' that Sturgeon should be concentrating on, economic issues not whether rapists are men or women.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
It's a long time ago, but I doubt it - if I recall the wargaming simulations (arguably more serious than most of uor armchair chat), US aid to Russia was overwhelmingly later in the war than the critical first winter. US aid was extremely welcome to both Britain and the USSR (and FDR deserves all the credit he got), but probably not decisive for either in holding off the Germans.
Others disagree:
"On the whole the following conclusion can be drawn: that without these Western shipments under Lend-Lease the Soviet Union not only would not have been able to win the Great Patriotic War, it would not have been able even to oppose the German invaders, since it could not itself produce sufficient quantities of arms and military equipment or adequate supplies of fuel and ammunition. The Soviet authorities were well aware of this dependency on Lend-Lease. Thus, Stalin told Harry Hopkins [FDR's emissary to Moscow in July 1941] that the U.S.S.R. could not match Germany's might as an occupier of Europe and its resources."
Or Khrushchev on Stalin:
"He stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany's pressure, and we would have lost the war. No one ever discussed this subject officially, and I don't think Stalin left any written evidence of his opinion, but I will state here that several times in conversations with me he noted that these were the actual circumstances. He never made a special point of holding a conversation on the subject, but when we were engaged in some kind of relaxed conversation, going over international questions of the past and present, and when we would return to the subject of the path we had traveled during the war, that is what he said. When I listened to his remarks, I was fully in agreement with him, and today I am even more so."
Breaking: leading lawyer Aidan O'Neill KC has said the Scottish government may have to delay its bottle return scheme as it may be unlawfully creating a trade barrier within the U.K. single market.
Some may point out ScotGov had been forewarned of this risk by opposition MSPs..
Cobblers - its a 20p "deposit" - the suggestion that people will go and shop south of the border to avoid it feels laughable. Also, all of the devolved nations are pursuing their own different schemes with different approaches (e.g. Wales and Scotland include glass, England and NI do not) so there will be a "trade barrier" within England and Wales' shared legal system next year.
Surely the better approach would be to attack the Deposit Return Scheme for the bit that really is ludicrous - the deposit gets paid back when the bottle is returned to the vendor. Online retailers must take back the empties through the post.
Which if you are someone like Nc'nean or Raasay distilleries is environmentally mental. I can't see how a corner shop will handle returns. Its a stupid scheme on so many levels, but "creates the potential for Scottish consumers to cross the border to save 20p on their bottle of Irn Bru" is not one of them.
It’s symptomatic of an arrogant out of touch government that neither listens to nor tolerates disagreement.
The whole GRR bill mess could have been avoided had the SNP government listened to critics of the legislation who have been pointing out the bills deficiencies for years
No, its not.
If an economic policy of the Scottish Government gets blocked due to something petty and ridiculous then that will further Sturgeon's cause not block it. It’s a stupid policy, but its one their Parliament passed and there's no reason why it shouldn't become law. That's precisely the sort of 'wedge' that Sturgeon should be concentrating on, economic issues not whether rapists are men or women.
Whether a policy is good or bad is for Parliament to debate.
However if its on a devolved matter then that's for them to do, whether they choose a good policy or a bad policy. Then let the electorate vote at the next election. We call that democracy.
The spirit industry opposed the UK's high duties, which were much lower than the duties in France, while we were in the same "Single Market" but that was still Parliament's choice.
The UK's competition watchdog has moved a step closer to potentially blocking Microsoft's planned $69bn (£56bn) takeover of Call of Duty gaming firm Activision.
In a provisional ruling, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said the proposed tie-up could lead to higher prices, fewer choices and less innovation for UK gamers.
The massive deal, first announced over a year ago, is also facing opposition in the US from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on similar competition grounds.
The CMA began its in-depth probe in September after deciding further work was warranted.
The regulator said on Wednesday that it had given both parties the opportunity to resolve its concerns through possible remedies before a final decision was to be reached.
That would be made by 26 April, the statement said.
Presumably Boris's recent visit to Ukraine was part of the set up for Zelemsky's visit to the UK.
At any event, glad he is here. Britain's help for Ukraine is something to be proud about.
Is the Ukrainian leader shorter than Sunak? He certainly looks like it in the picture of them in the Graun, or is this from the PM's official photographer, who seems to have been selected specifically for his skills in this area?
They are both pretty short. Zelensky doesn't seem to care about it, though.
Z is short but stocky - the Oates in Hall & Oates template. Rishi is just very very tiny, which is harder to get yourself positive about as a man, I think. Still, it's far from his most pressing concern. That would be the ERG, I think.
I wouldn't worry about Sunak. Private wealth, will be able to cash in after he loses in 2024. The inevitable defeat won't be seen as his fault and he will walk into other roles (trans-national) if he chooses.
Yes, should the GE defeat duly occur it won't be one of those PM exits that bring a lump.
As a pessimist when it comes to the chances of a Labour majority, I would be much happier seeing the SNP taking seats from the Tories than Labour taking seats from the SNP which leaving the Scottish Tory seats intact.
Yes if you think we are likely to be in the kind of situation where a Labour majority is unlikely and the question is whether the Tories will get a majority or not then it is the SNP/Tory contests that matter. If you think a Tory majority is unlikely and the question is whether Labour will get a majority then it is the SNP/Labour contests that are paramount. I think we are much more likely to be in the second case, personally. I would also note there are for more seats that are credibly Labour vs SNP contests than Tory vs SNP ones, so the Scottish battleground becomes far more significant in that second scenario.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
It's a long time ago, but I doubt it - if I recall the wargaming simulations (arguably more serious than most of uor armchair chat), US aid to Russia was overwhelmingly later in the war than the critical first winter. US aid was extremely welcome to both Britain and the USSR (and FDR deserves all the credit he got), but probably not decisive for either in holding off the Germans.
Others disagree...
It is essentially unknowable - you can make a reasonable case either way.
Quite a strange PMQs with no criticism from Starmer directed towards Sunak . Clearly mindful of Zelenskys visit and at least on this day to show a united front.
I think this was a good move . The bickering can wait a week .
It's been a rather good PMQs IMO. Even Peter Bone gave a thoughtful question.
I know it was cold this morning but I didn't realise that hell had frozen over.
The Scots do brilliantly insulting political memes. Maybe better than anyone. Perhaps in the same way an eloquently drunk Glaswegian can hurl obscenities with a world class verve and brio
They didn’t even consult the Police on the GRR Bill
David Hamilton, Chair of the Scottish Police Federation, said the force was not consulted on these new responsibilities and raised concerns over the practical and cost implications.
He told 1919: “It was utterly irresponsible of the Scottish Parliament to foist this additional workload on Police Scotland at such a late stage in proceedings.
“I don’t know what magic money tree they think we have, because these additional responsibilities will come with a costly price-tag.
“It is frankly unbelievable that nobody consulted policing on the cost or practicalities of these well-intentioned but ill-thought-out amendments.”
Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.
With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.
With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.
Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.
Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.
That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?
Why are we ruling out that she wants to deliver a longstanding commitment that she also believes in?
Comes under an increasing reluctance to assume ANY good faith in the motives of one's opponents.
Which you both clearly demonstrate yourselves.
I mean the reason the move was opposed was not because people might be concerned about say convicted male rapists being allowed into women's prisons but because such people wanted to create a culture war, have a wedge issue, play dirty politics.
I accept totally that many of the people opposed are opposed for sincere, non cynical reasons. But there's no doubt the issue is being used by bad actors as a wedge issue and there is more of that on the anti (GRR) side than the pro. Not surprising, I guess, since that's the populist side with more votes in it.
Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.
With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.
With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.
Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.
Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.
That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?
Why are we ruling out that she wants to deliver a longstanding commitment that she also believes in?
Comes under an increasing reluctance to assume ANY good faith in the motives of one's opponents.
Which you both clearly demonstrate yourselves.
I mean the reason the move was opposed was not because people might be concerned about say convicted male rapists being allowed into women's prisons but because such people wanted to create a culture war, have a wedge issue, play dirty politics.
there is more of that on the anti (GRR) side than the pro.
Which of the concerns about the GRR Bill raised by its critics (and dismissed by Sturgeon as “not valid”) have proved not to be?
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Phillips P O'Brien wrote about this on substack a while ago.
Long story short, the vast majority of German war production was devoted to fighting the Western allies, and not the USSR. The idea that the USSR won WWII for the West is a myth borne of a focus on numbers of soldiers lost, rather than on where most industrial production was directed, and the equipment it produced was used and lost.
Breaking: leading lawyer Aidan O'Neill KC has said the Scottish government may have to delay its bottle return scheme as it may be unlawfully creating a trade barrier within the U.K. single market.
Some may point out ScotGov had been forewarned of this risk by opposition MSPs..
Cobblers - its a 20p "deposit" - the suggestion that people will go and shop south of the border to avoid it feels laughable. Also, all of the devolved nations are pursuing their own different schemes with different approaches (e.g. Wales and Scotland include glass, England and NI do not) so there will be a "trade barrier" within England and Wales' shared legal system next year.
Surely the better approach would be to attack the Deposit Return Scheme for the bit that really is ludicrous - the deposit gets paid back when the bottle is returned to the vendor. Online retailers must take back the empties through the post.
Which if you are someone like Nc'nean or Raasay distilleries is environmentally mental. I can't see how a corner shop will handle returns. Its a stupid scheme on so many levels, but "creates the potential for Scottish consumers to cross the border to save 20p on their bottle of Irn Bru" is not one of them.
It’s symptomatic of an arrogant out of touch government that neither listens to nor tolerates disagreement.
The whole GRR bill mess could have been avoided had the SNP government listened to critics of the legislation who have been pointing out the bills deficiencies for years
No, its not.
If an economic policy of the Scottish Government gets blocked due to something petty and ridiculous then that will further Sturgeon's cause not block it. It’s a stupid policy, but its one their Parliament passed and there's no reason why it shouldn't become law. That's precisely the sort of 'wedge' that Sturgeon should be concentrating on, economic issues not whether rapists are men or women.
The UK's competition watchdog has moved a step closer to potentially blocking Microsoft's planned $69bn (£56bn) takeover of Call of Duty gaming firm Activision.
In a provisional ruling, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said the proposed tie-up could lead to higher prices, fewer choices and less innovation for UK gamers.
The massive deal, first announced over a year ago, is also facing opposition in the US from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on similar competition grounds.
The CMA began its in-depth probe in September after deciding further work was warranted.
The regulator said on Wednesday that it had given both parties the opportunity to resolve its concerns through possible remedies before a final decision was to be reached.
That would be made by 26 April, the statement said.
Yes, apparently the EC are also looking to block it. I think the deal will be dead or the remedies offered so onerous (Activision must maintain a separate board from Xbox) that it's effectively over.
Hopefully it marks the end of mega consolidation within tech, it's never been good for customers.
Breaking: leading lawyer Aidan O'Neill KC has said the Scottish government may have to delay its bottle return scheme as it may be unlawfully creating a trade barrier within the U.K. single market.
Some may point out ScotGov had been forewarned of this risk by opposition MSPs..
Cobblers - its a 20p "deposit" - the suggestion that people will go and shop south of the border to avoid it feels laughable. Also, all of the devolved nations are pursuing their own different schemes with different approaches (e.g. Wales and Scotland include glass, England and NI do not) so there will be a "trade barrier" within England and Wales' shared legal system next year.
Surely the better approach would be to attack the Deposit Return Scheme for the bit that really is ludicrous - the deposit gets paid back when the bottle is returned to the vendor. Online retailers must take back the empties through the post.
Which if you are someone like Nc'nean or Raasay distilleries is environmentally mental. I can't see how a corner shop will handle returns. Its a stupid scheme on so many levels, but "creates the potential for Scottish consumers to cross the border to save 20p on their bottle of Irn Bru" is not one of them.
It’s symptomatic of an arrogant out of touch government that neither listens to nor tolerates disagreement.
The whole GRR bill mess could have been avoided had the SNP government listened to critics of the legislation who have been pointing out the bills deficiencies for years
No, its not.
If an economic policy of the Scottish Government gets blocked due to something petty and ridiculous then that will further Sturgeon's cause not block it. It’s a stupid policy, but its one their Parliament passed and there's no reason why it shouldn't become law. That's precisely the sort of 'wedge' that Sturgeon should be concentrating on, economic issues not whether rapists are men or women.
Presumably they listened to numerous sock puppet organisations telling them what they wanted to hear.
See also the Alex Massie article on bad law: "SG now contracts out significant parts of the legislative process to third parties. Often these are favoured interest groups, many of which depend on the government for a significant portion of their income...
This then helps create a closed policy loop, impervious to revision. External expertise is as useful as it is welcome, but its merits are devalued if outside voices are chiefly employed to validate pre-existing assumptions...
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Nobody seems to be willing to argue for the original assertion that the Russian nation would probably have ceased to exist had it not been for US help.
Sure, it's easy to imagine Germany winning WW2 both against the USSR and Britain. If it had, the political regimes called "the USSR" and "the UK" may have ceased to exist. It's quite possible that Britain would have ceased to exist too. But Russia and England would not have.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Phillips P O'Brien wrote about this on substack a while ago.
Long story short, the vast majority of German war production was devoted to fighting the Western allies, and not the USSR. The idea that the USSR won WWII for the West is a myth borne of a focus on numbers of soldiers lost, rather than on where most industrial production was directed, and the equipment it produced was used and lost.
Reading his book at the moment - makes a persuasive argument that traditional histories focussing on “battles” are missing the point. The war was fought - and won- in the factory. The Russians had no bauxite, so no aluminium so no aircraft - except what came by convoy.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Nobody seems to be willing to argue for the original assertion that the Russian nation would probably have ceased to exist had it not been for US help.
Sure, it's easy to imagine Germany winning WW2 both against the USSR and Britain. If it had, the political regimes called "the USSR" and "the UK" may have ceased to exist. It's quite possible that Britain would have ceased to exist too. But Russia and England would not have.
That kind of ignores the fact that Hitler's aim was not just to conquer these territories but to depopulate them and reseed them as part of his policy of Lebensraum. Whilst most of the western nations would have continued to exist as client states, it is probable that the Germans would have continued the policy started in Poland of breaking the country up into protectorates and the mass resettlement of Germans right up to the Urals. Had the axis forces won the German plans called for eventual conquest up to the Urals and the Japanese Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere would have started just to the East of the Urals.
I think soft yes left wing voters are least listening to what Labour has to say and that maybe a Starmer government deserves a chance. In 2015 they were still pissed that Labour "sided with the Tories" and didn't give a shit about whether Ed became PM or not.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
Not the driver's seat one would hope.
Yes - both front seats.
Espace, too (first, possibly?). Handy for picnics in the car
Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.
With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.
With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.
Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.
Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.
That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?
Why are we ruling out that she wants to deliver a longstanding commitment that she also believes in?
Comes under an increasing reluctance to assume ANY good faith in the motives of one's opponents.
Which you both clearly demonstrate yourselves.
I mean the reason the move was opposed was not because people might be concerned about say convicted male rapists being allowed into women's prisons but because such people wanted to create a culture war, have a wedge issue, play dirty politics.
there is more of that on the anti (GRR) side than the pro.
Which of the concerns about the GRR Bill raised by its critics (and dismissed by Sturgeon as “not valid”) have proved not to be?
Well the bill hasn't passed so one can't really say. We need to look at what's happened in countries - Ireland being the closest to home - where similar HAS been done. What we certainly do seem to have in Scotland is an issue with risk assessment for prisons. Are you claiming that this specific recent case shows that all the fears raised - no more single sex spaces, women's rights destroyed, floodgates opened for predatory men to gain GRCs for nefarious purposes, end of sex as a biological concept etc etc - are rational and justified? If you are I think that's a stretch.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Germans made it to the Moscow suburbs in WWII. It doesn't take much changes to the timeline to them making it a bit further...
For example, the US and UK provided *all* the hi octane aviation gasoline for the USSR. It was only postwar that they got their cracking plants lined up to make it.
Vast amount of machine tools - in some categories, 100% of the tools and 100% of the tooling was Lendlease supplied. Without that, Soviet production would have crawled to a halt.
And so on in many categories - the % of USSR GDP was small, but LendLease was about supplying materials and equipment they were short of. Or literally didn't have.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Phillips P O'Brien wrote about this on substack a while ago.
Long story short, the vast majority of German war production was devoted to fighting the Western allies, and not the USSR. The idea that the USSR won WWII for the West is a myth borne of a focus on numbers of soldiers lost, rather than on where most industrial production was directed, and the equipment it produced was used and lost.
Reading his book at the moment - makes a persuasive argument that traditional histories focussing on “battles” are missing the point. The war was fought - and won- in the factory. The Russians had no bauxite, so no aluminium so no aircraft - except what came by convoy.
I believe that it is called logistics. In WW2 the USA made every other nation look like amateurs. They built ships faster than the U boats could sink them, they built bombers faster than anyone could shoot them down and they supplied all their allies on the side.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Phillips P O'Brien wrote about this on substack a while ago.
Long story short, the vast majority of German war production was devoted to fighting the Western allies, and not the USSR. The idea that the USSR won WWII for the West is a myth borne of a focus on numbers of soldiers lost, rather than on where most industrial production was directed, and the equipment it produced was used and lost.
Reading his book at the moment - makes a persuasive argument that traditional histories focussing on “battles” are missing the point. The war was fought - and won- in the factory. The Russians had no bauxite, so no aluminium so no aircraft - except what came by convoy.
I believe that it is called logistics. In WW2 the USA made every other nation look like amateurs. They built ships faster than the U boats could sink them, they built bombers faster than anyone could shoot them down and they supplied all their allies on the side.
Even something as little-known as the Red Ball Express showed how the US could overcome massive logistics challenges.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Germans made it to the Moscow suburbs in WWII. It doesn't take much changes to the timeline to them making it a bit further...
For example, the US and UK provided *all* the hi octane aviation gasoline for the USSR. It was only postwar that they got their cracking plants lined up to make it.
Vast amount of machine tools - in some categories, 100% of the tools and 100% of the tooling was Lendlease supplied. Without that, Soviet production would have crawled to a halt.
And so on in many categories - the % of USSR GDP was small, but LendLease was about supplying materials and equipment they were short of. Or literally didn't have.
And food. Staggering amounts of food were provided - especially important as lots of their best agricultural land was occupied by the Germans.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Without Lend Lease we'd have been in a desperate position, and the freeing of German resources for the Eastern Front could quite conceivably have changed the outcome.
I don't know that you can say 'quite likely', but it's certainly possible.
I recently read a German focused account of Barbarossa (Barbarossa Through German Eyes?). Interestingly it stopped before the final push to Moscow, as by this time it was clear that Barbarossa had failed. It argues that it could never have succeeded - the space was too big, the German Army for the most part marched east, unlike the Americans, British and Canadians who moved by truck), the German tanks were not superior to the T34 and so on. If thats right, and its a pretty convincing case, the only way that Russia would have lost would have been if Stalin and the government fell, or fled and sued for peace (unlikely to be granted in a war of anihilation). There is no question that the western allies spent Russian lives to win the war and bought those lives with lend lease material. We avoided huge death tools in the west by letting the Russians die by the million.
The German invasion was a huge gamble, but nearly worked.
Stalin was convinced, when the Beria and chums turned up to dig him out of his funk, that they were there to shoot him.
Zelensky is a fantastic speaker. I'm sure he does this for every country but he must be making every Briton be proud to be British (with the exception of Jeremy Corbyn and his acolytes).
Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.
With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.
With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.
Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.
Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.
That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?
Why are we ruling out that she wants to deliver a longstanding commitment that she also believes in?
Comes under an increasing reluctance to assume ANY good faith in the motives of one's opponents.
Which you both clearly demonstrate yourselves.
I mean the reason the move was opposed was not because people might be concerned about say convicted male rapists being allowed into women's prisons but because such people wanted to create a culture war, have a wedge issue, play dirty politics.
there is more of that on the anti (GRR) side than the pro.
Which of the concerns about the GRR Bill raised by its critics (and dismissed by Sturgeon as “not valid”) have proved not to be?
Well the bill hasn't passed so one can't really say. We need to look at what's happened in countries - Ireland being the closest to home - where similar HAS been done. What we certainly do seem to have in Scotland is an issue with risk assessment for prisons. Are you claiming that this specific recent case shows that all the fears raised - no more single sex spaces, women's rights destroyed, floodgates opened for predatory men to gain GRCs for nefarious purposes, end of sex as a biological concept etc etc - are rational and justified? If you are I think that's a stretch.
You claimed that critics were more driving the issue as a “wedge issue” but have no evidence - so now retreat behind “the bill hasn’t passed”. I ask again, where is the evidence that critics were driven by trying to create a wedge, or were their concerns “not valid” to quote Sturgeon?
Claiming it’s a “wedge issue” is another tactic to delegitimise your opponents views - which is why they weren’t listened to, which is why it’s in the mess it’s in. If you really were interested in trans rights you’d have listened.
There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue
Actually her support looks resilient to me. Remarkably so considering the brickbats flying at her from all directions. Considering the many failures of her governments policies, and at best lacklustre performance, her popularity and that of the SNP holds up amazingly well.
Where a party’s support is based upon cultural or constitutional issues (eg SNP, Sinn Fein, Republicans, Democrats), no level of incompetence or scandal will do much to dent it.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Germans made it to the Moscow suburbs in WWII. It doesn't take much changes to the timeline to them making it a bit further...
For example, the US and UK provided *all* the hi octane aviation gasoline for the USSR. It was only postwar that they got their cracking plants lined up to make it.
Vast amount of machine tools - in some categories, 100% of the tools and 100% of the tooling was Lendlease supplied. Without that, Soviet production would have crawled to a halt.
And so on in many categories - the % of USSR GDP was small, but LendLease was about supplying materials and equipment they were short of. Or literally didn't have.
And food. Staggering amounts of food were provided - especially important as lots of their best agricultural land was occupied by the Germans.
Indeed - another special item was prepared/canned meals. The Red Army marched on American rations, carried in American trucks, coordinated on American radios....
Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.
With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.
With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.
Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.
Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.
That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?
Why are we ruling out that she wants to deliver a longstanding commitment that she also believes in?
Comes under an increasing reluctance to assume ANY good faith in the motives of one's opponents.
Which you both clearly demonstrate yourselves.
I mean the reason the move was opposed was not because people might be concerned about say convicted male rapists being allowed into women's prisons but because such people wanted to create a culture war, have a wedge issue, play dirty politics.
there is more of that on the anti (GRR) side than the pro.
Which of the concerns about the GRR Bill raised by its critics (and dismissed by Sturgeon as “not valid”) have proved not to be?
Well the bill hasn't passed so one can't really say. We need to look at what's happened in countries - Ireland being the closest to home - where similar HAS been done. What we certainly do seem to have in Scotland is an issue with risk assessment for prisons. Are you claiming that this specific recent case shows that all the fears raised - no more single sex spaces, women's rights destroyed, floodgates opened for predatory men to gain GRCs for nefarious purposes, end of sex as a biological concept etc etc - are rational and justified? If you are I think that's a stretch.
Don’t think Carlotta or anyone else is saying that. What is clear is that an easy right to change gender needs safeguards to protect vulnerable women and ensure that their existing protections continue to operate.
Put those safeguards in place and I for one have absolutely no problem with the bill.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Phillips P O'Brien wrote about this on substack a while ago.
Long story short, the vast majority of German war production was devoted to fighting the Western allies, and not the USSR. The idea that the USSR won WWII for the West is a myth borne of a focus on numbers of soldiers lost, rather than on where most industrial production was directed, and the equipment it produced was used and lost.
Reading his book at the moment - makes a persuasive argument that traditional histories focussing on “battles” are missing the point. The war was fought - and won- in the factory. The Russians had no bauxite, so no aluminium so no aircraft - except what came by convoy.
I believe that it is called logistics. In WW2 the USA made every other nation look like amateurs. They built ships faster than the U boats could sink them, they built bombers faster than anyone could shoot them down and they supplied all their allies on the side.
Britain was no slouch in gearing up production either - by 1941 we were further along than the Nazis were by 1943 - by which time bombing was degrading their capabilities. While it’s a great story there was little chance of Britain losing the “Battle of Britain” and almost no chance that the Nazi’s could have invaded.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Phillips P O'Brien wrote about this on substack a while ago.
Long story short, the vast majority of German war production was devoted to fighting the Western allies, and not the USSR. The idea that the USSR won WWII for the West is a myth borne of a focus on numbers of soldiers lost, rather than on where most industrial production was directed, and the equipment it produced was used and lost.
Reading his book at the moment - makes a persuasive argument that traditional histories focussing on “battles” are missing the point. The war was fought - and won- in the factory. The Russians had no bauxite, so no aluminium so no aircraft - except what came by convoy.
I believe that it is called logistics. In WW2 the USA made every other nation look like amateurs. They built ships faster than the U boats could sink them, they built bombers faster than anyone could shoot them down and they supplied all their allies on the side.
Britain was no slouch in gearing up production either - by 1941 we were further along than the Nazis were by 1943 - by which time bombing was degrading their capabilities. While it’s a great story there was little chance of Britain losing the “Battle of Britain” and almost no chance that the Nazi’s could have invaded.
Without the Atlantic convoys we would eventually have been starved into submission.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Phillips P O'Brien wrote about this on substack a while ago.
Long story short, the vast majority of German war production was devoted to fighting the Western allies, and not the USSR. The idea that the USSR won WWII for the West is a myth borne of a focus on numbers of soldiers lost, rather than on where most industrial production was directed, and the equipment it produced was used and lost.
Reading his book at the moment - makes a persuasive argument that traditional histories focussing on “battles” are missing the point. The war was fought - and won- in the factory. The Russians had no bauxite, so no aluminium so no aircraft - except what came by convoy.
I believe that it is called logistics. In WW2 the USA made every other nation look like amateurs. They built ships faster than the U boats could sink them, they built bombers faster than anyone could shoot them down and they supplied all their allies on the side.
And much of Germany's war strategy was actually about oil production, once they had failed to knock Britain and France out in a single blow in 1940. They were involved in North Africa (once it was apparent that the Italians couldn't hold down that front), and in the East, primarily to gain access to (routes to) oil.
Zelensky going all-out on getting fighters now. I hope they get them soon.
No resting on his laurels, no sooner than the tank issue was resolved it is quite rightly turning the attention to aircraft - and quite sensible coming to the UK too where that is getting the most positive reception.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Phillips P O'Brien wrote about this on substack a while ago.
Long story short, the vast majority of German war production was devoted to fighting the Western allies, and not the USSR. The idea that the USSR won WWII for the West is a myth borne of a focus on numbers of soldiers lost, rather than on where most industrial production was directed, and the equipment it produced was used and lost.
Reading his book at the moment - makes a persuasive argument that traditional histories focussing on “battles” are missing the point. The war was fought - and won- in the factory. The Russians had no bauxite, so no aluminium so no aircraft - except what came by convoy.
I believe that it is called logistics. In WW2 the USA made every other nation look like amateurs. They built ships faster than the U boats could sink them, they built bombers faster than anyone could shoot them down and they supplied all their allies on the side.
And much of Germany's war strategy was actually about oil production, once they had failed to knock Britain and France out in a single blow in 1940. They were involved in North Africa (once it was apparent that the Italians couldn't hold down that front), and in the East, primarily to gain access to (routes to) oil.
The weird thing is that a small sliver of the force used on Russia could have had Rommel in charge of the Saudi oilfields. Really poor judgement by Hitler.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Phillips P O'Brien wrote about this on substack a while ago.
Long story short, the vast majority of German war production was devoted to fighting the Western allies, and not the USSR. The idea that the USSR won WWII for the West is a myth borne of a focus on numbers of soldiers lost, rather than on where most industrial production was directed, and the equipment it produced was used and lost.
Reading his book at the moment - makes a persuasive argument that traditional histories focussing on “battles” are missing the point. The war was fought - and won- in the factory. The Russians had no bauxite, so no aluminium so no aircraft - except what came by convoy.
I believe that it is called logistics. In WW2 the USA made every other nation look like amateurs. They built ships faster than the U boats could sink them, they built bombers faster than anyone could shoot them down and they supplied all their allies on the side.
Britain was no slouch in gearing up production either - by 1941 we were further along than the Nazis were by 1943 - by which time bombing was degrading their capabilities. While it’s a great story there was little chance of Britain losing the “Battle of Britain” and almost no chance that the Nazi’s could have invaded.
Without the Atlantic convoys we would eventually have been starved into submission.
Yes - but most shipping losses were non-convoy shipping and the British and Canadians were quick to get organised and learned quickly. The Americans were slower off the mark (King’s fault) but once they were in place shipping losses declined markedly. The British were also good and fast at developing and deploying (and sharing) technology such as ASDIC.
The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.
We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.
So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.
PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?
PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.
The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.
The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.
Phillips P O'Brien wrote about this on substack a while ago.
Long story short, the vast majority of German war production was devoted to fighting the Western allies, and not the USSR. The idea that the USSR won WWII for the West is a myth borne of a focus on numbers of soldiers lost, rather than on where most industrial production was directed, and the equipment it produced was used and lost.
Reading his book at the moment - makes a persuasive argument that traditional histories focussing on “battles” are missing the point. The war was fought - and won- in the factory. The Russians had no bauxite, so no aluminium so no aircraft - except what came by convoy.
I believe that it is called logistics. In WW2 the USA made every other nation look like amateurs. They built ships faster than the U boats could sink them, they built bombers faster than anyone could shoot them down and they supplied all their allies on the side.
And much of Germany's war strategy was actually about oil production, once they had failed to knock Britain and France out in a single blow in 1940. They were involved in North Africa (once it was apparent that the Italians couldn't hold down that front), and in the East, primarily to gain access to (routes to) oil.
The weird thing is that a small sliver of the force used on Russia could have had Rommel in charge of the Saudi oilfields. Really poor judgement by Hitler.
Part of that, I guess, was ideology trumping strategy.
But another part of it was probably the recognition that it had moved from a blitz to a war of attrition, and a fear of what the Soviets could do to them if they didn't have a sufficient force there.
Many of the German failures of WW2 can be attributed to a more precarious industrial production and manpower situation than we imagine - not least the total lack of mechanisation in the German armed forces. For all that they had better tanks and armour doctrine in 1940 than the Allies, they had insufficient mechanised infantry right to the end of the war.
Comments
I mean the reason the move was opposed was not because people might be concerned about say convicted male rapists being allowed into women's prisons but because such people wanted to create a culture war, have a wedge issue, play dirty politics.
The failures in this department are getting a bit noticeable. Invading large middle eastern countries, conducting referendums so as to be prepared for not one but two outcomes come to mind. There are others.
Surely the better approach would be to attack the Deposit Return Scheme for the bit that really is ludicrous - the deposit gets paid back when the bottle is returned to the vendor. Online retailers must take back the empties through the post.
Which if you are someone like Nc'nean or Raasay distilleries is environmentally mental. I can't see how a corner shop will handle returns. Its a stupid scheme on so many levels, but "creates the potential for Scottish consumers to cross the border to save 20p on their bottle of Irn Bru" is not one of them.
Fast-paced industrial growth in the USSR began in 1929 when the US didn't even recognise the Bolshevik regime. There was some assistance after 1933-34 (car industry, some in steel, etc.) but if it hadn't happened it's not as if no expansion worthy of note would have taken place. The Russians weren't complete fuzzy-wuzzies who couldn't do stuff without foreign help. Especially given all the labour "freed" from the countryside.
Remember the thesis that's being argued here: that the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US help. That's not true either of Russia or England.
She doesn't actually want Independence (remember?) - she's happy with the status quo - so what better than to pick an unpopular issue like this to fight the UKG on and thus lose a few points of Indy support that otherwise was threatening to creep dangerously up over 50%?
Devious is not the word for this 7D chess playing politician.
Stalin's own view, according to Kruschev:
... I would like to express my candid opinion about Stalin's views on whether the Red Army and the Soviet Union could have coped with Nazi Germany and survived the war without aid from the United States and Britain. First, I would like to tell about some remarks Stalin made and repeated several times when we were "discussing freely" among ourselves. He stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany's pressure, and we would have lost the war. No one ever discussed this subject officially, and I don't think Stalin left any written evidence of his opinion, but I will state here that several times in conversations with me he noted that these were the actual circumstances. He never made a special point of holding a conversation on the subject, but when we were engaged in some kind of relaxed conversation, going over international questions of the past and present, and when we would return to the subject of the path we had traveled during the war, that is what he said. When I listened to his remarks, I was fully in agreement with him, and today I am even more so...
EIGHT PERCENT???
When the SNP adopted the slogan “free in’23” I didn’t realize they meant in 2123. Or perhaps they means “in 23 years?” Or Decades?
As I just pointed out in a previous post there was broad support for eg gender self identification until quite recently. If you want to pin down a reason for the public change of mood, knock yersel out.
Personally regardless of how principled I thought my cause was, the fact that Trump, Breitbart, Infowars, the tabloid press, holocaust deniers and sundry fascists were piggybacking on it might give me pause for thought.
TBH you seem to be the one who is raging. I think it's reasonable to infer that the cause is the polling revelation that neither the SNP nor Sturgeon are held in any higher net regard by Scots than Labour and Starmer respectively.
A counterfactual might have been that the Western allies might have reached further east themselves, but to be honest the Normandy campaign and through 1945 were heavily dependent on the degradation of Germany's ability to fight (by the Russians, Bomber Command and the 8th Air Force).
1929 May 31
Ford Motor Company signs agreement with Soviet Union
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/ford-signs-agreement-with-soviet-union
After two years of exploratory visits and friendly negotiations, Ford Motor Company signs a landmark agreement to produce cars in the Soviet Union on May 30, 1929.
The Soviet Union, which in 1928 had only 20,000 cars and a single truck factory, was eager to join the ranks of automotive production, and Ford, with its focus on engineering and manufacturing methods, was a natural choice to help. The always independent-minded Henry Ford was strongly in favor of his free-market company doing business with Communist countries. An article published in May 1929 in The New York Times quoted Ford as saying that “No matter where industry prospers, whether in India or China, or Russia, all the world is bound to catch some good from it.”...
The whole GRR bill mess could have been avoided had the SNP government listened to critics of the legislation who have been pointing out the bills deficiencies for years
Personally, I like to consider the merits of a cause. I stayed out of the trans debate because I didn't consider myself informed enough to reach a conclusion. After having done so I've settled on my current position - treat trans people with respect, address them by whatever names or pronouns they want, but have safeguarding where it is needed to protect women - as well as safeguarding where it is needed to protect trans individuals too, but that may be different safeguarding to what exists for women.
That's something neither the Trump/Breitbar/Infowars etc crew stand for, nor the other extreme, but somewhere in the middle. A sensible compromise in my view, but your mileage may vary.
Neither of these reflect well on her as a politician. There will now be no referendum, nor any election as a proxy referendum. Westminster has grown a spine and told the Nits to go jump in a loch
Not sure what else can be done now. Except wait - as promised - for that generation to elapse. So that means the latter half of the 2030s
If an economic policy of the Scottish Government gets blocked due to something petty and ridiculous then that will further Sturgeon's cause not block it. Its a stupid policy, but its one their Parliament passed and there's no reason why it shouldn't become law. That's precisely the sort of 'wedge' that Sturgeon should be concentrating on, economic issues not whether rapists are men or women.
Welcome back to the UK, @ZelenskyyUa. Look forward to hearing you address Parliament 🇬🇧🇺🇦 #Ukrainemustwin
https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1623294431460818948
I think this was a good move . The bickering can wait a week .
The actuality of what independence would involve right now, or soon, is mind exploding.
Just think of the reality of choosing between a SM with E and W, and an SM with the EU. And there are other things too, like 20p deposits on bottles.
Yes, that does say £2 million
https://twitter.com/AvaSantina/status/1623296371489927170/photo/1
In Switzerland there's growing public pressure for allowing re-export of Swiss military equipment and ammunition to Ukraine, or even for providing such exports directly. In Ireland public support for Ukraine is such that the government has said it is not neutral on the issue of Ukraine, but it's neutral to the extent that it won't provide lethal military equipment, a distinction that looks a bit shaky.
Bearing in mind that both these countries were able to maintain a neutral status during WWII, and I think it says a lot about how strong European public support for Ukraine is and continues to be.
https://www.thespiritsbusiness.com/2023/01/deposit-return-scheme-good-or-bad/
"On the whole the following conclusion can be drawn: that without these Western shipments under Lend-Lease the Soviet Union not only would not have been able to win the Great Patriotic War, it would not have been able even to oppose the German invaders, since it could not itself produce sufficient quantities of arms and military equipment or adequate supplies of fuel and ammunition. The Soviet authorities were well aware of this dependency on Lend-Lease. Thus, Stalin told Harry Hopkins [FDR's emissary to Moscow in July 1941] that the U.S.S.R. could not match Germany's might as an occupier of Europe and its resources."
Or Khrushchev on Stalin:
"He stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany's pressure, and we would have lost the war. No one ever discussed this subject officially, and I don't think Stalin left any written evidence of his opinion, but I will state here that several times in conversations with me he noted that these were the actual circumstances. He never made a special point of holding a conversation on the subject, but when we were engaged in some kind of relaxed conversation, going over international questions of the past and present, and when we would return to the subject of the path we had traveled during the war, that is what he said. When I listened to his remarks, I was fully in agreement with him, and today I am even more so."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease
However if its on a devolved matter then that's for them to do, whether they choose a good policy or a bad policy. Then let the electorate vote at the next election. We call that democracy.
The spirit industry opposed the UK's high duties, which were much lower than the duties in France, while we were in the same "Single Market" but that was still Parliament's choice.
In a provisional ruling, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said the proposed tie-up could lead to higher prices, fewer choices and less innovation for UK gamers.
The massive deal, first announced over a year ago, is also facing opposition in the US from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on similar competition grounds.
The CMA began its in-depth probe in September after deciding further work was warranted.
The regulator said on Wednesday that it had given both parties the opportunity to resolve its concerns through possible remedies before a final decision was to be reached.
That would be made by 26 April, the statement said.
https://news.sky.com/story/microsofts-69bn-takeover-of-activision-a-step-closer-to-being-blocked-by-uk-watchdog-12806016
But you can't ignore it.
David Hamilton, Chair of the Scottish Police Federation, said the force was not consulted on these new responsibilities and raised concerns over the practical and cost implications.
He told 1919: “It was utterly irresponsible of the Scottish Parliament to foist this additional workload on Police Scotland at such a late stage in proceedings.
“I don’t know what magic money tree they think we have, because these additional responsibilities will come with a costly price-tag.
“It is frankly unbelievable that nobody consulted policing on the cost or practicalities of these well-intentioned but ill-thought-out amendments.”
https://1919magazine.co.uk/february2023/?i=4
https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/69bf8d25-b8cd-43ba-b3b7-10cd625d9bc8
https://phillipspobrien.substack.com/p/misunderstanding-soviet-power-in?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web
Long story short, the vast majority of German war production was devoted to fighting the Western allies, and not the USSR. The idea that the USSR won WWII for the West is a myth borne of a focus on numbers of soldiers lost, rather than on where most industrial production was directed, and the equipment it produced was used and lost.
Hopefully it marks the end of mega consolidation within tech, it's never been good for customers.
"SG now contracts out significant parts of the legislative process to third parties. Often these are favoured interest groups, many of which depend on the government for a significant portion of their income...
This then helps create a closed policy loop, impervious to revision. External expertise is as useful as it is welcome, but its merits are devalued if outside voices are chiefly employed to validate pre-existing assumptions...
https://twitter.com/kathmurray1/status/1623024379205505024
Sure, it's easy to imagine Germany winning WW2 both against the USSR and Britain. If it had, the political regimes called "the USSR" and "the UK" may have ceased to exist. It's quite possible that Britain would have ceased to exist too. But Russia and England would not have.
They have 41 overs to get 9 Zimbabwe wickets. The Zimbabwe side is young and up and coming but inexperienced in tests.
The West Indies already have the first wicket, a few more and the pressure may get to the Zimbabweans.
For example, the US and UK provided *all* the hi octane aviation gasoline for the USSR. It was only postwar that they got their cracking plants lined up to make it.
Vast amount of machine tools - in some categories, 100% of the tools and 100% of the tooling was Lendlease supplied. Without that, Soviet production would have crawled to a halt.
And so on in many categories - the % of USSR GDP was small, but LendLease was about supplying materials and equipment they were short of. Or literally didn't have.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Ball_Express
Stalin was convinced, when the Beria and chums turned up to dig him out of his funk, that they were there to shoot him.
Claiming it’s a “wedge issue” is another tactic to delegitimise your opponents views - which is why they weren’t listened to, which is why it’s in the mess it’s in. If you really were interested in trans rights you’d have listened.
Put those safeguards in place and I for one have absolutely no problem with the bill.
No, *you're* having to dab your eyes.
Slava Ukraini.
He'll get whatever he asks for, I should think. Well worth the trip.
But another part of it was probably the recognition that it had moved from a blitz to a war of attrition, and a fear of what the Soviets could do to them if they didn't have a sufficient force there.
Many of the German failures of WW2 can be attributed to a more precarious industrial production and manpower situation than we imagine - not least the total lack of mechanisation in the German armed forces. For all that they had better tanks and armour doctrine in 1940 than the Allies, they had insufficient mechanised infantry right to the end of the war.