In regards to the Don't Knows.... wouldn't a reasonable number of them be low-information voters disillusioned with politics and who probably didn't vote prior to the Brexit referendum? If so, I think there's a strong likelihood they won't show up at the next election.
At one time, the government in England legally went into remission between the death of a sovereign and the coronation of his (usually) successor. There would be a council empowered to carry out the necessary day to day business of government. On those occasions the heir was significantly under age and would not be crowned for some time (e.g. 1422 or 1547) Protectors were empowered to act on behalf of the council, but not to the extent of being King in all but name. The whole thing was a process, starting with the Accession Council and finishing fairly soon after with the Coronation. It also gave a little time to gather all the key nobles and clerics so they would swear loyalty to the king and make it all nice, neat and official. This was doubly important because until The Act of Settlement there was no clearly defined mechanism for succeeding to the throne, which frequently caused a great deal of trouble. Both Henry VIII and Edward III willed the crown away, for example, although in Edward's case it was in a logical fashion following male line primogeniture.
I'm not quite sure when that ended, but since the seventeenth century at least the tradition has been the monarch takes charge at the moment of the death of the previous monarch, and acts as their own regent. I'm also not quite sure whether legally there now has to be a coronation for a King to be properly counted as king. That may have been ditched because of Edward V - given Henry VII's urgent need to underline Richard III's position as a usurper - but certainly nobody seemed to doubt Edward VIII was King even though he was never crowned.
Therefore, you do have to wonder a bit whether the televised Accession Council itself wasn't more than sufficient and the Coronation rather pointless.
From what I gather, and despite some words from people organising the coronation, there is no formal requirement whatsoever, since it is the case now that the formal reign began the moment he was proclaimed (if not instantly upon the death of Her Majesty).
Now we are a long way removed from any possible contesting of who might be monarch, and they are not going to be uncontactable for long periods (ie off slaughtering people in the holy land when the old king pops it), then there's no need for any formal delay I guess.
The Coronation is therefore just the Accession Council but with a bit more flair and mysticism.
So basically all that was needed was for that herald chappie to make his announcement from the Mercat Cross in Edinburgh (edit: and wherever else they did it) and the rest is a waste of time, space and money - not to mention economic damage comparable to a non-trivial strike.
I've never been in favour of the voter ID policy, but it might be worth speculating at this point what will happen if the local elections in May are not, in fact, a disaster.
I believe most voters are generically in favour of policies like this as they sound reasonable - who doesn't think voting security should be high? - and the actual results this time are likely to be a Tory bloodbath, so it won't look like they have gained any advantage (even if that was the intent I'm sceptical it would have worked).
Which means election chaos and administrative problems are key. Councils and others have done as much as they can to remind people of the new rules, but there's still been a lot of warnings it could go very badly.
So what if it doesn't?
My worry is we get a few teething problems but nothing too dramatic, and it becomes one of those rules oppositions criticise but dont bother to change once they get in.
I'm in favour of id for voting. It doesn't seem too onerous and it's not as if we're the only country to demand it. However, I probably won't get round to voting now as a result. I know my ward and constituency are both safe seats and my vote is largely useless. A walk to the polling booth is pleasant; hunting through the big drawer for my passport or driving license is not.
Last week there was a story about a flat in Cardiff getting VAT bills for 11,000 Chinese companies. It really illustrates the contrast in this govenment's priorities. They introduce the Voter ID bill to tackle the virtually non-existent problem of personation. But there is no requirement for a company registering for VAT in the UK to actually prove they exist at that address, thus enabling millions worth of tax evasion.
A bit off topic, but searching for interesting comparisons between Sunak and Callaghan's sunny manner in public, this I think quite good summary came up, of what I've always agreed was an underrated PM :
<<Against some pretty stiff competition, Callaghan’s election postponement must rank high on any list of the greatest missed political opportunities of all time.
Putting these disasters to one side, however (if that’s possible), Callaghan’s premiership was up until late 1978, pretty successful. He inherited a dire economic situation from Harold Wilson and was thrown into the IMF Crisis of 1976 almost immediately afterwards. But he and his Chancellor, Denis Healey thereafter handled the economy pretty well. The economy was recovering and unemployment was falling when Labour left office.
In an incredibly fractious situation, he also did very well to manage rising tensions within his own party and cabinet. Despite clashes between Right and Left and the sometimes mischievous activities of Tony Benn, there were, almost uniquely, no major cabinet resignations during his premiership.
Finally, Callaghan was consistently popular and always preferred by most to his sometimes shrill younger opponent, Margaret Thatcher. It is little wonder he came so close to re-election in the autumn of 1978.>>
Mr. B, sorry for the slow reply, but Egypt being Rome's granary is both true and partially true. Africa (which then essentially meant Carthage/modern day Tunisia) was also critical. When the empire split, Carthage supplied Rome, Egypt supplied Constantinople.
Mr. Doethur, I think Edward I was the first man to become king (post-Conquest, anyway) without coronation first. He was on war in the Holy Land, and immediately acknowledged by everyone as king, so his reign began before he knew it.
At one time, the government in England legally went into remission between the death of a sovereign and the coronation of his (usually) successor. There would be a council empowered to carry out the necessary day to day business of government. On those occasions the heir was significantly under age and would not be crowned for some time (e.g. 1422 or 1547) Protectors were empowered to act on behalf of the council, but not to the extent of being King in all but name. The whole thing was a process, starting with the Accession Council and finishing fairly soon after with the Coronation. It also gave a little time to gather all the key nobles and clerics so they would swear loyalty to the king and make it all nice, neat and official. This was doubly important because until The Act of Settlement there was no clearly defined mechanism for succeeding to the throne, which frequently caused a great deal of trouble. Both Henry VIII and Edward III willed the crown away, for example, although in Edward's case it was in a logical fashion following male line primogeniture.
I'm not quite sure when that ended, but since the seventeenth century at least the tradition has been the monarch takes charge at the moment of the death of the previous monarch, and acts as their own regent. I'm also not quite sure whether legally there now has to be a coronation for a King to be properly counted as king. That may have been ditched because of Edward V - given Henry VII's urgent need to underline Richard III's position as a usurper - but certainly nobody seemed to doubt Edward VIII was King even though he was never crowned.
Therefore, you do have to wonder a bit whether the televised Accession Council itself wasn't more than sufficient and the Coronation rather pointless.
From what I gather, and despite some words from people organising the coronation, there is no formal requirement whatsoever, since it is the case now that the formal reign began the moment he was proclaimed (if not instantly upon the death of Her Majesty).
Now we are a long way removed from any possible contesting of who might be monarch, and they are not going to be uncontactable for long periods (ie off slaughtering people in the holy land when the old king pops it), then there's no need for any formal delay I guess.
The Coronation is therefore just the Accession Council but with a bit more flair and mysticism.
So basically all that was needed was for that herald chappie to make his announcement from the Mercat Cross in Edinburgh (edit: and wherever else they did it) and the rest is a waste of time, space and money - not to mention economic damage comparable to a non-trivial strike.
Mr. B, sorry for the slow reply, but Egypt being Rome's granary is both true and partially true. Africa (which then essentially meant Carthage/modern day Tunisia) was also critical. When the empire split, Carthage supplied Rome, Egypt supplied Constantinople.
Mr. Doethur, I think Edward I was the first man to become king (post-Conquest, anyway) without coronation first. He was on war in the Holy Land, and immediately acknowledged by everyone as king, so his reign began before he knew it.
Sounds about right. Compare and contrast with William, who spent some weeks even after Hastings sacking every town in southern England before finally being crowned on Christmas Day, or Stephen, whose succession was contested by both his brother and his cousin and for whom therefore coronation was vital in pushing his own claims ahead of them.
If you are a Don’t Know or Not Sure now, then you are likely to be Tory-leaning. Clearly, some of those are now returning home and that is also very clearly down to Sunak. But the real challenge the Tories have is winning back that part of their 2019 vote that has already jumped to Labour. As yet, there is no indication this is happening in any meaningful way. If it doesn’t, Labour takes power - possibly with a small overall majority if Scotland is seriously in play, but more likely as a minority government.
If that is the case, does Sunak resign as Tory leader or stay on? Will he be able to? Has the Truss/Johnson tendency in the Conservative party been beaten or is it just biding its time?
Taking the figures that are in the article, even Conservative + Don't Know gives 34%. The Labour figure isn't reported, but given that percentages have to add up to 100, I think we can assume that it's more than 34.
And thinking of posters here, the long-term Conservative members/activists who wobbled over late BoJo and Truss are back on board,but I'm not seeing any shift amongst those who decided "time for a change" earlier than that. If anything, there's a hardening of sentiment there.
I may be misremembering, but I think in the latest Ipsos-Mori poll, something like 65% said the next election would be a change one. In a similar vein, over 50% of respondents in the R&W poll regularly state that a general election should be called now. Those are indicators that look very bad for the Tories.
It’s worth remembering that even in 1997 the Tory press was running stories that Don’t Knows could decide the outcome.
You need to give your supporters hope. Sunak has undoubtedly given some to his party. Right now, though, I just don’t see a different election outcome to the one I’ve been predicting for a couple of years: a Labour minority government. If anything, Scotland coming into play tilts things further towards a small Labour majority.
Yup. And had you offered that to Labour on New Year's Day 2020, I suspect they would have bitten your arm off. Or whatever the vegan woke equivalent of that is.
A deer's hoof.
Woke, perhaps, but hardly vegan.
I thought we had been assured by A Correspondent that venison was the Woke Vegan approved meat?
Well, @Dura_Ace is in a better position to judge whether a particular meat is vegan or not. But AIUI the whole idea of veganism is you don't eat any animal products.
The question is settled.
It's quite tragic that you seem to have nothing better to do than search and quote my old posts (which I have no clue how to do) and troll old ladies on the parish council.
If he used his time more wisely he could attain a totally non-tragic 50k+ posts on here.
Mr. Doethur, I always think of Henry I, whose older brother very sadly and accidentally died during a hunting accident, necessitating Henry to immediately have a coronation ahead of his other older brother (Duke of Normandy Robert Curthose).
At one time, the government in England legally went into remission between the death of a sovereign and the coronation of his (usually) successor. There would be a council empowered to carry out the necessary day to day business of government. On those occasions the heir was significantly under age and would not be crowned for some time (e.g. 1422 or 1547) Protectors were empowered to act on behalf of the council, but not to the extent of being King in all but name. The whole thing was a process, starting with the Accession Council and finishing fairly soon after with the Coronation. It also gave a little time to gather all the key nobles and clerics so they would swear loyalty to the king and make it all nice, neat and official. This was doubly important because until The Act of Settlement there was no clearly defined mechanism for succeeding to the throne, which frequently caused a great deal of trouble. Both Henry VIII and Edward III willed the crown away, for example, although in Edward's case it was in a logical fashion following male line primogeniture.
I'm not quite sure when that ended, but since the seventeenth century at least the tradition has been the monarch takes charge at the moment of the death of the previous monarch, and acts as their own regent. I'm also not quite sure whether legally there now has to be a coronation for a King to be properly counted as king. That may have been ditched because of Edward V - given Henry VII's urgent need to underline Richard III's position as a usurper - but certainly nobody seemed to doubt Edward VIII was King even though he was never crowned.
Therefore, you do have to wonder a bit whether the televised Accession Council itself wasn't more than sufficient and the Coronation rather pointless.
From what I gather, and despite some words from people organising the coronation, there is no formal requirement whatsoever, since it is the case now that the formal reign began the moment he was proclaimed (if not instantly upon the death of Her Majesty).
Now we are a long way removed from any possible contesting of who might be monarch, and they are not going to be uncontactable for long periods (ie off slaughtering people in the holy land when the old king pops it), then there's no need for any formal delay I guess.
The Coronation is therefore just the Accession Council but with a bit more flair and mysticism.
So basically all that was needed was for that herald chappie to make his announcement from the Mercat Cross in Edinburgh (edit: and wherever else they did it) and the rest is a waste of time, space and money - not to mention economic damage comparable to a non-trivial strike.
Basically.
Would have been easy to merge the two. Charles in the Lords or the Abbey in the presence of the Privy Council including the High Commissioners of the Commonwealth Realms, taking the oath and signing the orders, everyone acclaiming him as a sign of loyalty, finishing with him being presented with the crown by the Archbishop, whether he chooses to wear it or not.
Easy.
But not done. Because I think Charles is a traditionalist and wants to have all the things his mother and grandfather had.
The plight of dukes unable to wear the coronation robes their families have stored for generations and not worn since 1953 might not make the next Labour campaign poster but does call into question what the coronation is for, if not for OTT pageantry. After all, Charles is already King.
'Forbidden' on the advice of the government. Tory freedoms. 😊
Conservatives do seem to retain a weird hankering after sumptuary laws.
"The Memphis Police Department is introducing an eight-officer unit that will arrest unaccompanied minors that sell food, play loud music, are 'inappropriately dressed' or dancing in the street in Downtown Memphis" .. https://mobile.twitter.com/ldtestino/status/1647010575166087169
You do realise memphis voted 64% democrat in 2020? Not sure you can blame this on republicans therefore
Mr. Doethur, I always think of Henry I, whose older brother very sadly and accidentally died during a hunting accident, necessitating Henry to immediately have a coronation ahead of his other older brother (Duke of Normandy Robert Curthose).
His seizing of the royal treasury beforehand I am sure in no way helped make his case about how necessary it was.
Edit: I like Henry I though, seems to have had a real head on his shoulders - look at this creativity from wikipedia. I think he was meant to be quite literate for the time as well. Henry argued that, unlike Robert, he had been born to a reigning king and queen, thereby giving him a claim under the right of porphyrogeniture
At one time, the government in England legally went into remission between the death of a sovereign and the coronation of his (usually) successor. There would be a council empowered to carry out the necessary day to day business of government. On those occasions the heir was significantly under age and would not be crowned for some time (e.g. 1422 or 1547) Protectors were empowered to act on behalf of the council, but not to the extent of being King in all but name. The whole thing was a process, starting with the Accession Council and finishing fairly soon after with the Coronation. It also gave a little time to gather all the key nobles and clerics so they would swear loyalty to the king and make it all nice, neat and official. This was doubly important because until The Act of Settlement there was no clearly defined mechanism for succeeding to the throne, which frequently caused a great deal of trouble. Both Henry VIII and Edward III willed the crown away, for example, although in Edward's case it was in a logical fashion following male line primogeniture.
I'm not quite sure when that ended, but since the seventeenth century at least the tradition has been the monarch takes charge at the moment of the death of the previous monarch, and acts as their own regent. I'm also not quite sure whether legally there now has to be a coronation for a King to be properly counted as king. That may have been ditched because of Edward V - given Henry VII's urgent need to underline Richard III's position as a usurper - but certainly nobody seemed to doubt Edward VIII was King even though he was never crowned.
Therefore, you do have to wonder a bit whether the televised Accession Council itself wasn't more than sufficient and the Coronation rather pointless.
From what I gather, and despite some words from people organising the coronation, there is no formal requirement whatsoever, since it is the case now that the formal reign began the moment he was proclaimed (if not instantly upon the death of Her Majesty).
Now we are a long way removed from any possible contesting of who might be monarch, and they are not going to be uncontactable for long periods (ie off slaughtering people in the holy land when the old king pops it), then there's no need for any formal delay I guess.
The Coronation is therefore just the Accession Council but with a bit more flair and mysticism.
So basically all that was needed was for that herald chappie to make his announcement from the Mercat Cross in Edinburgh (edit: and wherever else they did it) and the rest is a waste of time, space and money - not to mention economic damage comparable to a non-trivial strike.
Basically.
Would have been easy to merge the two. Charles in the Lords or the Abbey in the presence of the Privy Council including the High Commissioners of the Commonwealth Realms, taking the oath and signing the orders, everyone acclaiming him as a sign of loyalty, finishing with him being presented with the crown by the Archbishop, whether he chooses to wear it or not.
Easy.
But not done. Because I think Charles is a traditionalist and wants to have all the things his mother and grandfather had.
I wonder if William will see it differently.
I think they need an excuse to keep a now increasing percentage of the armed forces on horseback or in Hawks painted red.
Which makes me wonder. Are we getting a Coronation Review of the Fleet? My dad was [edit} in his best No 1 uniform manning ship at the last one, and I found the official programme in his papers after he died recently. It was quite something. Nowadays ...
Mr. Doethur, I always think of Henry I, whose older brother very sadly and accidentally died during a hunting accident, necessitating Henry to immediately have a coronation ahead of his other older brother (Duke of Normandy Robert Curthose).
His seizing of the royal treasury beforehand I am sure in no way helped make his case about how necessary it was.
Robert also did have a few other disadvantages:
1) He had gone on Crusade, so was absent; 2) He had mortgaged the Duchy of Normandy to the Kingdom of England to pay for it; 3) He was known to be as mad as a box of frogs, which is why William I had passed him over for William Rufus to start with.
Mr. Doethur, I always think of Henry I, whose older brother very sadly and accidentally died during a hunting accident, necessitating Henry to immediately have a coronation ahead of his other older brother (Duke of Normandy Robert Curthose).
His seizing of the royal treasury beforehand I am sure in no way helped make his case about how necessary it was.
Robert also did have a few other disadvantages:
1) He had gone on Crusade, so was absent; 2) He had mortgaged the Duchy of Normandy to the Kingdom of England to pay for it; 3) He was known to be as mad as a box of frogs, which is why William I had passed him over for William Rufus to start with.
Wasn't he in rebellion against his father shortly before he died, which presumably did not help? Not that being in rebellion againast one's father or sibling always ended up ruling people out, as certain Angevins could tell us.
Having been skipped over once it's not much of a stretch to do so again. Says something about the different situation for Edward I that being on the spot was not in any way necessary, since it could be critical at other periods.
At one time, the government in England legally went into remission between the death of a sovereign and the coronation of his (usually) successor. There would be a council empowered to carry out the necessary day to day business of government. On those occasions the heir was significantly under age and would not be crowned for some time (e.g. 1422 or 1547) Protectors were empowered to act on behalf of the council, but not to the extent of being King in all but name. The whole thing was a process, starting with the Accession Council and finishing fairly soon after with the Coronation. It also gave a little time to gather all the key nobles and clerics so they would swear loyalty to the king and make it all nice, neat and official. This was doubly important because until The Act of Settlement there was no clearly defined mechanism for succeeding to the throne, which frequently caused a great deal of trouble. Both Henry VIII and Edward III willed the crown away, for example, although in Edward's case it was in a logical fashion following male line primogeniture.
I'm not quite sure when that ended, but since the seventeenth century at least the tradition has been the monarch takes charge at the moment of the death of the previous monarch, and acts as their own regent. I'm also not quite sure whether legally there now has to be a coronation for a King to be properly counted as king. That may have been ditched because of Edward V - given Henry VII's urgent need to underline Richard III's position as a usurper - but certainly nobody seemed to doubt Edward VIII was King even though he was never crowned.
Therefore, you do have to wonder a bit whether the televised Accession Council itself wasn't more than sufficient and the Coronation rather pointless.
From what I gather, and despite some words from people organising the coronation, there is no formal requirement whatsoever, since it is the case now that the formal reign began the moment he was proclaimed (if not instantly upon the death of Her Majesty).
Now we are a long way removed from any possible contesting of who might be monarch, and they are not going to be uncontactable for long periods (ie off slaughtering people in the holy land when the old king pops it), then there's no need for any formal delay I guess.
The Coronation is therefore just the Accession Council but with a bit more flair and mysticism.
So basically all that was needed was for that herald chappie to make his announcement from the Mercat Cross in Edinburgh (edit: and wherever else they did it) and the rest is a waste of time, space and money - not to mention economic damage comparable to a non-trivial strike.
Basically.
Would have been easy to merge the two. Charles in the Lords or the Abbey in the presence of the Privy Council including the High Commissioners of the Commonwealth Realms, taking the oath and signing the orders, everyone acclaiming him as a sign of loyalty, finishing with him being presented with the crown by the Archbishop, whether he chooses to wear it or not.
Easy.
But not done. Because I think Charles is a traditionalist and wants to have all the things his mother and grandfather had.
I wonder if William will see it differently.
I think they need an excuse to keep a now increasing percentage of the armed forces on horseback or in Hawks painted red.
Which makes me wonder. Are we getting a Coronation Review of the Fleet? My dad was at the last one, and I found the official programme in his papers after he died recently. It was quite something. Nowadays ...
If the figures I have seen are correct, which they may not be, in 1953 the Royal Navy was still the world's second largest navy. Now, however, such a review might be embarrassing and in taking what few ships they have away from where they are needed, actually counter-productive.
Peyer Cardwell on talttv now saying we are being lied to and Ukraine is losing the war. And this from Tucker Carlson
Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing"
Tucker Carlson declares the United States is at direct war with Russia according to the recently leaked Pentagon documents. “As we speak, American soldiers are fighting Russian soldiers... This is a hot war between the two primary nuclear superpowers on Earth… This is a crime
Mr. Doethur, I always think of Henry I, whose older brother very sadly and accidentally died during a hunting accident, necessitating Henry to immediately have a coronation ahead of his other older brother (Duke of Normandy Robert Curthose).
His seizing of the royal treasury beforehand I am sure in no way helped make his case about how necessary it was.
Robert also did have a few other disadvantages:
1) He had gone on Crusade, so was absent; 2) He had mortgaged the Duchy of Normandy to the Kingdom of England to pay for it; 3) He was known to be as mad as a box of frogs, which is why William I had passed him over for William Rufus to start with.
Wasn't he in rebellion against his father shortly before he died, which presumably did not help? Not that being in rebellion againast one's father or sibling always ended up ruling people out, as certain Angevins could tell us.
Having been skipped over once it's not much of a stretch to do so again. Says something about the different situation for Edward I that being on the spot was not in any way necessary, since it could be critical at other periods.
People respected Edward I. He was a proven war leader and a much abler administrator than his father. Moreover, the one person who might have been seen as an alternative, his brother Edmund, was partially disabled which in those times ruled him out even if he doesn't seem to have been both devoted to and rather in awe of his brother.
Peyer Cardwell on talttv now saying we are being lied to and Ukraine is losing the war. And this from Tucker Carlson
Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing"
Reuters: Ukrainian troops are forced to cede area after area in Bakhmut in the face of a renewed Russian offensive. Britain said on Friday that Russian troops and Wagner PMCs are improving cooperation. The capture of the city will be a major achievement for Moscow.
Peyer Cardwell on talttv now saying we are being lied to and Ukraine is losing the war. And this from Tucker Carlson
Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing"
Demos now being organised against the ukraine war.
week tomorrow. The first UK full public demonstration against our involvement in Ukraine. Everyday more and more comes out about the criminal Zelensky regime. We need to say http://notourwar.co
At one time, the government in England legally went into remission between the death of a sovereign and the coronation of his (usually) successor. There would be a council empowered to carry out the necessary day to day business of government. On those occasions the heir was significantly under age and would not be crowned for some time (e.g. 1422 or 1547) Protectors were empowered to act on behalf of the council, but not to the extent of being King in all but name. The whole thing was a process, starting with the Accession Council and finishing fairly soon after with the Coronation. It also gave a little time to gather all the key nobles and clerics so they would swear loyalty to the king and make it all nice, neat and official. This was doubly important because until The Act of Settlement there was no clearly defined mechanism for succeeding to the throne, which frequently caused a great deal of trouble. Both Henry VIII and Edward III willed the crown away, for example, although in Edward's case it was in a logical fashion following male line primogeniture.
I'm not quite sure when that ended, but since the seventeenth century at least the tradition has been the monarch takes charge at the moment of the death of the previous monarch, and acts as their own regent. I'm also not quite sure whether legally there now has to be a coronation for a King to be properly counted as king. That may have been ditched because of Edward V - given Henry VII's urgent need to underline Richard III's position as a usurper - but certainly nobody seemed to doubt Edward VIII was King even though he was never crowned.
Therefore, you do have to wonder a bit whether the televised Accession Council itself wasn't more than sufficient and the Coronation rather pointless.
From what I gather, and despite some words from people organising the coronation, there is no formal requirement whatsoever, since it is the case now that the formal reign began the moment he was proclaimed (if not instantly upon the death of Her Majesty).
Now we are a long way removed from any possible contesting of who might be monarch, and they are not going to be uncontactable for long periods (ie off slaughtering people in the holy land when the old king pops it), then there's no need for any formal delay I guess.
The Coronation is therefore just the Accession Council but with a bit more flair and mysticism.
So basically all that was needed was for that herald chappie to make his announcement from the Mercat Cross in Edinburgh (edit: and wherever else they did it) and the rest is a waste of time, space and money - not to mention economic damage comparable to a non-trivial strike.
Basically.
Would have been easy to merge the two. Charles in the Lords or the Abbey in the presence of the Privy Council including the High Commissioners of the Commonwealth Realms, taking the oath and signing the orders, everyone acclaiming him as a sign of loyalty, finishing with him being presented with the crown by the Archbishop, whether he chooses to wear it or not.
Easy.
But not done. Because I think Charles is a traditionalist and wants to have all the things his mother and grandfather had.
I wonder if William will see it differently.
I think they need an excuse to keep a now increasing percentage of the armed forces on horseback or in Hawks painted red.
Which makes me wonder. Are we getting a Coronation Review of the Fleet? My dad was at the last one, and I found the official programme in his papers after he died recently. It was quite something. Nowadays ...
If the figures I have seen are correct, which they may not be, in 1953 the Royal Navy was still the world's second largest navy. Now, however, such a review might be embarrassing and in taking what few ships they have away from where they are needed, actually counter-productive.
It was, pretty much, though one needs to allow for how muich was mothballed and swinging round a buoy near Portchester Castle or off Faslane. As well, as you say, as those on duty elsewhere. Wiki says "Present were 197 Royal Navy warships, together with 13 from the Commonwealth and 16 from foreign navies, as well as representative vessels from the British Merchant Navy and Fishing Fleets." Those would have included proper battleship and aircraft carriers downwards to motor torpedo boats. And some yachts, rather oddly - tyhough logically enough if from the RYS at Cowes.
Peyer Cardwell on talttv now saying we are being lied to and Ukraine is losing the war. And this from Tucker Carlson
Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing"
For reference in future weeks start it's best to start by replying to a few other comments instead of talking about Ukraine when we are talking about other things - the year's big (but pointless for betting) horse race and random bits of ancient history.
Bradford Council has sent out an email reminding voters that ID is required. It advises that it will take longer at the polling station while everyone has their documents checked. Probably not a big deal for low turnout local elections, but potentially long queues next year at the GE.
They have also included a photo of a dog at a polling station, which is nice.
Did the dog have ID? Did it express a view on FPTP vs AV?
Ukrainian soldier near Bakhmut says people are sent here without firing a single shot in training. They don’t even know how to reload a magazine. Guy next to him has 5 children but was still conscripted. He says Ukrainians are just cannon fodder in a war of foreign countries.
Tucker Carlson declares the United States is at direct war with Russia according to the recently leaked Pentagon documents. “As we speak, American soldiers are fighting Russian soldiers... This is a hot war between the two primary nuclear superpowers on Earth… This is a crime
TOTAL breakdown of order and discipline in Ukrainian military ranks. The NATO proxy war is a bloody mess. No one wants to die for a meaningless technocratic scam. So soldiers retreat against orders, or flee. The war is coming to its logical conclusion.
Tucker Carlson declares the United States is at direct war with Russia according to the recently leaked Pentagon documents. “As we speak, American soldiers are fighting Russian soldiers... This is a hot war between the two primary nuclear superpowers on Earth… This is a crime
Mr. Doethur, I always think of Henry I, whose older brother very sadly and accidentally died during a hunting accident, necessitating Henry to immediately have a coronation ahead of his other older brother (Duke of Normandy Robert Curthose).
His seizing of the royal treasury beforehand I am sure in no way helped make his case about how necessary it was.
Robert also did have a few other disadvantages:
1) He had gone on Crusade, so was absent; 2) He had mortgaged the Duchy of Normandy to the Kingdom of England to pay for it; 3) He was known to be as mad as a box of frogs, which is why William I had passed him over for William Rufus to start with.
Wasn't he in rebellion against his father shortly before he died, which presumably did not help? Not that being in rebellion againast one's father or sibling always ended up ruling people out, as certain Angevins could tell us.
Having been skipped over once it's not much of a stretch to do so again. Says something about the different situation for Edward I that being on the spot was not in any way necessary, since it could be critical at other periods.
People respected Edward I. He was a proven war leader and a much abler administrator than his father. Moreover, the one person who might have been seen as an alternative, his brother Edmund, was partially disabled which in those times ruled him out even if he doesn't seem to have been both devoted to and rather in awe of his brother.
Brothers could be a right pain in that period (Edward IV, Richard III and the Duke of Clarence spring to mind), but if consistently loyal could be real assets. David Miliband could probably relate.
Tucker Carlson declares the United States is at direct war with Russia according to the recently leaked Pentagon documents. “As we speak, American soldiers are fighting Russian soldiers... This is a hot war between the two primary nuclear superpowers on Earth… This is a crime
Vlad is doing well, 6 posts without being hammered.
To be honest - I've said hello and I'm then just ignoring his rambling... It may be true, it may not be but it's got nothing to do with today's conversations.
The weird thing about the 'total breakdown in Ukrainian ranks' type attempts is if it were even close to true then NATO money flowing in would not be making a difference to hold back the mighty avenging army of Vladimir's justice or whatever. So what has made 'progress' be so slow?
Whilst there's been plenty of over optimism about a collapse of Russian operational capability, I think results on the ground would show if it was happening on the other side!
Vlad is doing well, 6 posts without being hammered.
To be honest - I've said hello and I'm then just ignoring his rambling... It may be true, it may not be but it's got nothing to do with today's conversations.
Thats because you have no arguments. You know ukraine is losing. What happened to the spring offensive.
On horse racing, how do we know the horses enjoy it? They don’t speak English.
A reasonable question which I was asked once by a Year 9 group. My answer was that although we can't know, it's interesting and possibly suggestive that even horses who have unseated their jockeys will often carry on running and even jumping the fences. Whether that's enjoyment, herd mentality or something else is another question.
Ukrainian warriors are indignant - continuing to cling to Bakhmut, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are losing the best, most fired units and reserves accumulated with difficulty
Vlad is doing well, 6 posts without being hammered.
To be honest - I've said hello and I'm then just ignoring his rambling... It may be true, it may not be but it's got nothing to do with today's conversations.
Thats because you have no arguments. You know ukraine is losing. What happened to the spring offensive.
But how do you know? What makes your news sources better than my news sources?
Ukrainian warriors are indignant - continuing to cling to Bakhmut, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are losing the best, most fired units and reserves accumulated with difficulty
Vlad is doing well, 6 posts without being hammered.
To be honest - I've said hello and I'm then just ignoring his rambling... It may be true, it may not be but it's got nothing to do with today's conversations.
Thats because you have no arguments. You know ukraine is losing. What happened to the spring offensive.
The none supportive comments seem to be about The Sun newspaper which is sort of unavoidable - key audience for politicians outside of Liverpool polonium levels of toxicity in Liverpool..
Vlad is doing well, 6 posts without being hammered.
To be honest - I've said hello and I'm then just ignoring his rambling... It may be true, it may not be but it's got nothing to do with today's conversations.
Thats because you have no arguments. You know ukraine is losing. What happened to the spring offensive.
Looking at the calendar, doesn’t spring end about mid June technically?
Ukrainian warriors are indignant - continuing to cling to Bakhmut, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are losing the best, most fired units and reserves accumulated with difficulty
Ukrainian warriors are indignant - continuing to cling to Bakhmut, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are losing the best, most fired units and reserves accumulated with difficulty
Anyway it seems like talk tv moving to the anti war camp too
Thanks for that information, it will help me avoid it. Assuming you mean anti-war in the Stop the War Coalition sense of being in favour of war waged by non USA aligned imperialists.
Bakhmut is a meat grinder for those poor ukrainians. All good people want the war to end.
They sure do - you are aware that one side is attacking and the other defending? So the attacker could, now bare with me on this, stop attacking.
Needs new material, the 'I am just so worried about Ukrainian lives so they should just surrender and be oppressed' stuff was old a year ago.
Ok ill have a polite word with putin and tell him to stop...pathetic
Make sure he's sober first. Otherwise he probably won't listen.
I realize he isn't sober often, particularly given the pressure he's under due to Russia's collapsing economy and imploding military. But if you catch him about 8.30am there's a chance in a thousand.
Anyway it seems like talk tv moving to the anti war camp too
Thanks for that information, it will help me avoid it. Assuming you mean anti-war in the Stop the War Coalition sense of being in favour of war waged by non USA aligned imperialists.
Anyway it seems like talk tv moving to the anti war camp too
Thanks for that information, it will help me avoid it. Assuming you mean anti-war in the Stop the War Coalition sense of being in favour of war waged by non USA aligned imperialists.
We are being driven towards ww3.
Well, tell Putin to hand over the wheel.
Admittedly, it's hard to see whom he could hand it over to that wouldn't be worse in the current cabal of drunken failed small man syndrome sufferers.
Bakhmut is a meat grinder for those poor ukrainians. All good people want the war to end.
They sure do - you are aware that one side is attacking and the other defending? So the attacker could, now bare with me on this, stop attacking.
Needs new material, the 'I am just so worried about Ukrainian lives so they should just surrender and be oppressed' stuff was old a year ago.
Ok ill have a polite word with putin and tell him to stop...pathetic
Correct, it is - yet you claim you want the war to end, but are against the Ukrainians defending themselves, so your own words admit that you either want to ask Putin to stop, or you want him to win.
None of that is a surprise, but intellectually these efforts are so lazy.
One of the worst efforts for awhile - no build up, transparently phony 'peace' messages, a belief Tucker Carlson is some kind of reputable sage, and too swift descent into lame sarcasm when the absurdity of the pro-russia position is pointed out.
Anyway it seems like talk tv moving to the anti war camp too
Thanks for that information, it will help me avoid it. Assuming you mean anti-war in the Stop the War Coalition sense of being in favour of war waged by non USA aligned imperialists.
We are being driven towards ww3.
Not what three words again please. Can't we do aliens instead?
Anyway it seems like talk tv moving to the anti war camp too
Thanks for that information, it will help me avoid it. Assuming you mean anti-war in the Stop the War Coalition sense of being in favour of war waged by non USA aligned imperialists.
We are being driven towards ww3.
Not what three words again please. Can't we do aliens instead?
@Leon appears to have given up his desire for 'doing' aliens now AI does porn.
Anyway it seems like talk tv moving to the anti war camp too
Thanks for that information, it will help me avoid it. Assuming you mean anti-war in the Stop the War Coalition sense of being in favour of war waged by non USA aligned imperialists.
We are being driven towards ww3.
Not what three words again please. Can't we do aliens instead?
Anyway it seems like talk tv moving to the anti war camp too
Thanks for that information, it will help me avoid it. Assuming you mean anti-war in the Stop the War Coalition sense of being in favour of war waged by non USA aligned imperialists.
We are being driven towards ww3.
Not what three words again please. Can't we do aliens instead?
@Leon appears to have given up his desire for 'doing' aliens now AI does porn.
I believe they might. As for horses much better to watch the race without a bet so you aren't willing horses to do badly.
If you want to satisfy your betting urge you can get 22s about Boris being Cons leader at the next election.
My horses for National
Corach Rambler Delta Work Gallard Du Mesnil
Good Luck to everyone having a Flutter
With respect malc, I hope people bet their house, life savings, kids inheritance and the shirts on their backs but lose the lot in some bizarre loophole caused by cancellation of the race due to animal rights protests. A niche aspiration, I grant you. If it has to be run, let's hope it's the jockeys who get hurt, and the horses have a bit of a shake, trot off and have a nibble on some grass.
How are you planning to dispose of the tens of thousands of racehorses once you've ended racing.
I dunno, some sort of tax on all gambling, maybe? Send them all to nice sanctuaries. Get all the wealthy owners to pay for their upkeep? The government like to fund scrappage schemes, maybe a bit of that? Maybe go really radical, and any horse that gets hurt at a race, the owner and jockey get dragged behind the vetinary screen and bolt gunned (I know it's lethal injection, but a bolt gun adds a bit of theatre) It's a tough one isn't it? No easy answers, and I know no one on here wants a horse to die, and that you are far more knowledgeable than most (including me) on horse racing, but the average punter probably never thinks about what happens behind that vet screen but they probably should.
You sound quite angry, as well as deranged.
Maybe eat some more kale and do some more mediation?
I believe they might. As for horses much better to watch the race without a bet so you aren't willing horses to do badly.
If you want to satisfy your betting urge you can get 22s about Boris being Cons leader at the next election.
My horses for National
Corach Rambler Delta Work Gallard Du Mesnil
Good Luck to everyone having a Flutter
With respect malc, I hope people bet their house, life savings, kids inheritance and the shirts on their backs but lose the lot in some bizarre loophole caused by cancellation of the race due to animal rights protests. A niche aspiration, I grant you. If it has to be run, let's hope it's the jockeys who get hurt, and the horses have a bit of a shake, trot off and have a nibble on some grass.
How are you planning to dispose of the tens of thousands of racehorses once you've ended racing.
I dunno, some sort of tax on all gambling, maybe? Send them all to nice sanctuaries. Get all the wealthy owners to pay for their upkeep? The government like to fund scrappage schemes, maybe a bit of that? Maybe go really radical, and any horse that gets hurt at a race, the owner and jockey get dragged behind the vetinary screen and bolt gunned (I know it's lethal injection, but a bolt gun adds a bit of theatre) It's a tough one isn't it? No easy answers, and I know no one on here wants a horse to die, and that you are far more knowledgeable than most (including me) on horse racing, but the average punter probably never thinks about what happens behind that vet screen but they probably should.
You sound quite angry, as well as deranged.
Maybe eat some more kale and do some more mediation?
Chill out, man.
The clue is in the first part of his online persona....
We were getting a much better class of troll than this. Is the world's second-smallest dicked leader even running out of manpower for his troll farms?
The problem is we seem to be getting a new Troll every week - I much prefer it where they have 2 or 3 attempts so they realise how the site works and what they should post.
Heck one of our beloved posters @malcolmg failed in their first 6 attempts and was only successful in her 7th iteration.
@Topping et al, being a racehorse is one of the best lives an animal can have. They are absolutely cosseted.
In general, domesticated animals enjoy much better lives than wild animals, which is why it’s so easy to domesticate them.
And, death rates are much lower for domestication. Wild horses suffer far more fatalities from bad jumps and broken bones in herds.
Let's not degenerate into our usual petty squabble, but... Deaths out in the wild are natural. I'd far rather an animal died doing animal things, living a free life. A cosseted life as a race horse doesn't mitigate racing it to its death for human enjoyment . If domestication is better for animal welfare, do we domesticate every wild animal, then?
Peyer Cardwell on talttv now saying we are being lied to and Ukraine is losing the war. And this from Tucker Carlson
Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing"
For reference in future weeks start it's best to start by replying to a few other comments instead of talking about Ukraine when we are talking about other things - the year's big (but pointless for betting) horse race and random bits of ancient history.
We have lost interest in the SMO though. This time last year was all breathless analysis of truck tyres and furious googling of desant tactics. Now it's just sporadic and half-hearted C&P of Ukrainian psyop tweets.
Vlad is doing well, 6 posts without being hammered.
To be honest - I've said hello and I'm then just ignoring his rambling... It may be true, it may not be but it's got nothing to do with today's conversations.
Thats because you have no arguments. You know ukraine is losing. What happened to the spring offensive.
Looking at the calendar, doesn’t spring end about mid June technically?
The season that matters in Ukraine is mud season and that isn't over yet. There were some recent videos of British AS90s in the mud.
Ukraine will launch their counteroffensive when they're ready.
@Topping et al, being a racehorse is one of the best lives an animal can have. They are absolutely cosseted.
In general, domesticated animals enjoy much better lives than wild animals, which is why it’s so easy to domesticate them.
And, death rates are much lower for domestication. Wild horses suffer far more fatalities from bad jumps and broken bones in herds.
Let's not degenerate into our usual petty squabble, but... Deaths out in the wild are natural. I'd far rather an animal died doing animal things, living a free life. A cosseted life as a race horse doesn't mitigate racing it to its death for human enjoyment . If domestication is better for animal welfare, do we domesticate every wild animal, then?
They are doing animal things, do live a wonderful life and the vast vast majority come home safe and have happy retirements.
Like all animal rights activists, you both struggle to express yourself and are a bit of a misanthrope who struggles to empathise with your fellow man.
Thus, you project your repressed emotions onto animals and both anthropomorphise them and idealise them.
I believe they might. As for horses much better to watch the race without a bet so you aren't willing horses to do badly.
If you want to satisfy your betting urge you can get 22s about Boris being Cons leader at the next election.
My horses for National
Corach Rambler Delta Work Gallard Du Mesnil
Good Luck to everyone having a Flutter
With respect malc, I hope people bet their house, life savings, kids inheritance and the shirts on their backs but lose the lot in some bizarre loophole caused by cancellation of the race due to animal rights protests. A niche aspiration, I grant you. If it has to be run, let's hope it's the jockeys who get hurt, and the horses have a bit of a shake, trot off and have a nibble on some grass.
How are you planning to dispose of the tens of thousands of racehorses once you've ended racing.
I dunno, some sort of tax on all gambling, maybe? Send them all to nice sanctuaries. Get all the wealthy owners to pay for their upkeep? The government like to fund scrappage schemes, maybe a bit of that? Maybe go really radical, and any horse that gets hurt at a race, the owner and jockey get dragged behind the vetinary screen and bolt gunned (I know it's lethal injection, but a bolt gun adds a bit of theatre) It's a tough one isn't it? No easy answers, and I know no one on here wants a horse to die, and that you are far more knowledgeable than most (including me) on horse racing, but the average punter probably never thinks about what happens behind that vet screen but they probably should.
You sound quite angry, as well as deranged.
Maybe eat some more kale and do some more mediation?
Chill out, man.
Give over, man. Haven't you got some blood to wade through?
Peyer Cardwell on talttv now saying we are being lied to and Ukraine is losing the war. And this from Tucker Carlson
Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing"
For reference in future weeks start it's best to start by replying to a few other comments instead of talking about Ukraine when we are talking about other things - the year's big (but pointless for betting) horse race and random bits of ancient history.
We have lost interest in the SMO though. This time last year was all breathless analysis of truck tyres and furious googling of desant tactics. Now it's just sporadic and half-hearted C&P of Ukrainian psyop tweets.
At the moment there isn't much happening. The Russians clearly can't advance and the Ukrainians haven't, maybe because they can't, maybe because they're waiting on something (or both). The war therefore is less interesting in a news sense.
If the Ukrainians and the Russians are both stuck, we have a stalemate. We don't know where that would lead - whether a negotiated peace could be managed (seems unlikely, bluntly) that would allow the lifting of sanctions, or whether sanctions will persist and eventually Russia will suffer enough to offer meaningful concessions. Or, indeed, whether changes of government in the West might weaken support for Ukraine and allow Russia to consolidate their hold on the east bank.
There isn't really a lot to say until we have more data.
@Topping et al, being a racehorse is one of the best lives an animal can have. They are absolutely cosseted.
In general, domesticated animals enjoy much better lives than wild animals, which is why it’s so easy to domesticate them.
And, death rates are much lower for domestication. Wild horses suffer far more fatalities from bad jumps and broken bones in herds.
Let's not degenerate into our usual petty squabble, but... Deaths out in the wild are natural. I'd far rather an animal died doing animal things, living a free life. A cosseted life as a race horse doesn't mitigate racing it to its death for human enjoyment . If domestication is better for animal welfare, do we domesticate every wild animal, then?
They are doing animal things, do live a wonderful life and the vast vast majority come home safe and have happy retirements.
Like all animal rights activists, you both struggle to express yourself and are a bit of a misanthrope who struggles to empathise with your fellow man.
Thus, you project your repressed emotions onto animals and both anthropomorphise them and idealise them.
That's all it is.
But you're the one going buckwild every post on here....
Peyer Cardwell on talttv now saying we are being lied to and Ukraine is losing the war. And this from Tucker Carlson
Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing"
For reference in future weeks start it's best to start by replying to a few other comments instead of talking about Ukraine when we are talking about other things - the year's big (but pointless for betting) horse race and random bits of ancient history.
We have lost interest in the SMO though. This time last year was all breathless analysis of truck tyres and furious googling of desant tactics. Now it's just sporadic and half-hearted C&P of Ukrainian psyop tweets.
Well of course people have, no one can sustain that level of interest and outrage permanently, it doesn't mean anything. Do you think those who were breathless and furious as you put it should have been expected to still be so after more than a year? That'd be absurd.
I've actually been astonished that political leaders have sustained support as much and as long as they have, given the grinding nature of the warfare, and for the most part the public support has remained in place.
So the 'lost interest' point is partly true, but I'd argue the level of interest lost is far less than might have been expected, especially after the lack of dramatic occurrences for at least 6 months.
Comments
It really illustrates the contrast in this govenment's priorities.
They introduce the Voter ID bill to tackle the virtually non-existent problem of personation.
But there is no requirement for a company registering for VAT in the UK to actually prove they exist at that address, thus enabling millions worth of tax evasion.
<<Against some pretty stiff competition, Callaghan’s election postponement must rank high on any list of the greatest missed political opportunities of all time.
Putting these disasters to one side, however (if that’s possible), Callaghan’s premiership was up until late 1978, pretty successful. He inherited a dire economic situation from Harold Wilson and was thrown into the IMF Crisis of 1976 almost immediately afterwards. But he and his Chancellor, Denis Healey thereafter handled the economy pretty well. The economy was recovering and unemployment was falling when Labour left office.
In an incredibly fractious situation, he also did very well to manage rising tensions within his own party and cabinet. Despite clashes between Right and Left and the sometimes mischievous activities of Tony Benn, there were, almost uniquely, no major cabinet resignations during his premiership.
Finally, Callaghan was consistently popular and always preferred by most to his sometimes shrill younger opponent, Margaret Thatcher. It is little wonder he came so close to re-election in the autumn of 1978.>>
The clue is in the name...
Mr. Doethur, I think Edward I was the first man to become king (post-Conquest, anyway) without coronation first. He was on war in the Holy Land, and immediately acknowledged by everyone as king, so his reign began before he knew it.
Easy.
But not done. Because I think Charles is a traditionalist and wants to have all the things his mother and grandfather had.
I wonder if William will see it differently.
Edit: I like Henry I though, seems to have had a real head on his shoulders - look at this creativity from wikipedia. I think he was meant to be quite literate for the time as well.
Henry argued that, unlike Robert, he had been born to a reigning king and queen, thereby giving him a claim under the right of porphyrogeniture
Which makes me wonder. Are we getting a Coronation Review of the Fleet? My dad was [edit} in his best No 1 uniform manning ship at the last one, and I found the official programme in his papers after he died recently. It was quite something. Nowadays ...
1) He had gone on Crusade, so was absent;
2) He had mortgaged the Duchy of Normandy to the Kingdom of England to pay for it;
3) He was known to be as mad as a box of frogs, which is why William I had passed him over for William Rufus to start with.
Having been skipped over once it's not much of a stretch to do so again. Says something about the different situation for Edward I that being on the spot was not in any way necessary, since it could be critical at other periods.
If the White Ship Disaster hadn't happened, things would've been very different.
Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing"
https://twitter.com/Sinnaig/status/1646959620538220544?s=20
https://twitter.com/Spriter99880/status/1646979100056387584?s=20
https://twitter.com/Spriter99880/status/1646938500015464466?s=20
week tomorrow. The first UK full public demonstration against our involvement in Ukraine. Everyday more and more comes out about the criminal Zelensky regime. We need to say http://notourwar.co
https://twitter.com/UnityNewsNet/status/1646970027063537664?s=20
http://cloudobservers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2013/05/07.-Jul-Spithead-Review-1953.pdf
For reference in future weeks start it's best to start by replying to a few other comments instead of talking about Ukraine when we are talking about other things - the year's big (but pointless for betting) horse race and random bits of ancient history.
https://twitter.com/narrative_hole/status/1646808935083520003?s=20
He's not even hiding the outcomes he wants now, which would be less worrying if he was not delivering what his audience wants.
https://twitter.com/RealPepeEscobar/status/1646474286356475907?s=20
https://twitter.com/ErrataRob/status/1646963331415121920?t=oZRGppbGSpzjlsdhcS0Tig&s=19
Whilst there's been plenty of over optimism about a collapse of Russian operational capability, I think results on the ground would show if it was happening on the other side!
"34 years since the Hillsborough disaster, I'm thinking of those for whom the pain is still so raw and for whom injustice remains.
My Labour government will create a Hillsborough Law. Victims of major tragedies must get the same legal support as the authorities which failed them."
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1647163872149909506
The comments below are not wholly supportive...
Needs new material, the 'I am just so worried about Ukrainian lives so they should just surrender and be oppressed' stuff was old a year ago.
https://twitter.com/Spriter99880/status/1646259454252400644?s=20
Somewhere else, obviously.
I realize he isn't sober often, particularly given the pressure he's under due to Russia's collapsing economy and imploding military. But if you catch him about 8.30am there's a chance in a thousand.
Admittedly, it's hard to see whom he could hand it over to that wouldn't be worse in the current cabal of drunken failed small man syndrome sufferers.
None of that is a surprise, but intellectually these efforts are so lazy.
2 out of 5.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/video/offers?benefitId=thegreatcourses
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/apr/15/rap-drill-music-life-violence-youtube-ancient-athens-catharsis-music-teenagers
Maybe eat some more kale and do some more mediation?
Chill out, man.
Heck one of our beloved posters @malcolmg failed in their first 6 attempts and was only successful in her 7th iteration.
Deaths out in the wild are natural. I'd far rather an animal died doing animal things, living a free life. A cosseted life as a race horse doesn't mitigate racing it to its death for human enjoyment . If domestication is better for animal welfare, do we domesticate every wild animal, then?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/04/15/us-arms-factory-pennsylvania-churning-out-shells-ukraine/
Ukraine will launch their counteroffensive when they're ready.
Like all animal rights activists, you both struggle to express yourself and are a bit of a misanthrope who struggles to empathise with your fellow man.
Thus, you project your repressed emotions onto animals and both anthropomorphise them and idealise them.
That's all it is.
If the Ukrainians and the Russians are both stuck, we have a stalemate. We don't know where that would lead - whether a negotiated peace could be managed (seems unlikely, bluntly) that would allow the lifting of sanctions, or whether sanctions will persist and eventually Russia will suffer enough to offer meaningful concessions. Or, indeed, whether changes of government in the West might weaken support for Ukraine and allow Russia to consolidate their hold on the east bank.
There isn't really a lot to say until we have more data.
I've actually been astonished that political leaders have sustained support as much and as long as they have, given the grinding nature of the warfare, and for the most part the public support has remained in place.
So the 'lost interest' point is partly true, but I'd argue the level of interest lost is far less than might have been expected, especially after the lack of dramatic occurrences for at least 6 months.