Just got in, slightly pissed.. some bloke just spat in my face in a brentwood cab office! Nice! And I can almost guarantee you he was far far far to the right of me politically!
All I can say to the left wingers that answered my post on the previous thread is that if you like to live in a country where a significant minority speak another language as their first port of call, then fair enough. I think that's not for me, its not the best way for a country to live in happiness.. what more can I say?
Sorry to hear you were spat at; that's never pleasant.
I answered your post and disagreed with you; you say that you're an ex-Labour voter, and so I'm probably to the right of you in some ways. As with most things in politics, immigration and languages has far from a perfect left<->right split.
Besides you were using figures of 22% for London, and now saying the entire country?
Last night's thread should be a must-read for anyone interested in the fear that people have about immigration. I mean, a burly man feeling afraid to walk through Whitechapel Market!
Where did I say I was afraid? I've stood on the Southbank at West Ham and fought toe to toe with the ICF in their heyday, not out of choice we were attacked, and done the same in the Cold Blow Lane end at the Old Den. Not much frightens me , and if I was scared to walk through the market I would just get a cab from the station.
All I said was it is a bit scary, the last time I walked through was in November, and I guarantee you I was the only white face walking through and also none of the stall holders are white. I did not hear anyone speaking English, and lots of them are dressed in Burgas etc' and seem quite hostile to a white man walking through.
I suppose now you will deem me as racist for posting that, however that is the reality. Go and try it one weekday.
On topic, David's' points are irrelevant the big predictor of the government is the colour of the league champions shirts. With David Moyes in place Cameron's nailed on.
True. That goes back a long way - linking the general election winner to the colour of the top team's shirts.
Just got in, slightly pissed.. some bloke just spat in my face in a brentwood cab office! Nice! And I can almost guarantee you he was far far far to the right of me politically!
All I can say to the left wingers that answered my post on the previous thread is that if you like to live in a country where a significant minority speak another language as their first port of call, then fair enough. I think that's not for me, its not the best way for a country to live in happiness.. what more can I say?
Sorry to hear you were spat at; that's never pleasant.
I answered your post and disagreed with you; you say that you're an ex-Labour voter, and so I'm probably to the right of you in some ways. As with most things in politics, immigration and languages has far from a perfect left<->right split.
Besides you were using figures of 22% for London, and now saying the entire country?
Last night's thread should be a must-read for anyone interested in the fear that people have about immigration. I mean, a burly man feeling afraid to walk through Whitechapel Market!
Where did I say I was afraid? I've stood on the Southbank at West Ham and fought toe to toe with the ICF in their heyday, not out of choice we were attacked, and done the same in the Cold Blow Lane end at the Old Den. Not much frightens me , and if I was scared to walk through the market I would just get a cab from the station.
All I said was it is a bit scary, the last time I walked through was in November, and I guarantee you I was the only white face walking through and also none of the stall holders are white. I did not hear anyone speaking English, and lots of them are dressed in Burgas etc' and seem quite hostile to a white man walking through.
I suppose now you will deem me as racist for posting that, however that is the reality. Go and try it one weekday.
I have, thanks. There's some interesting stuff on sale. There's also a couple of nice shops behind the market as well. Although a lot of what is on sale is fairly grotty (but that's the same with so many markets throughout the country).
So what if none of the stall holders are white? Does it matter? If so, why?
Perhaps their hostility was a projection of your own reaction to seeing them.
Got to say I'm somewhat concerned by this notion that the response to rape convictions being 'too low' is to try and lower the bar for conviction. Victims deserve justice, and the innocent deserve a fair trial. Rape usually (because of the crime's nature) involves one man and one woman in a private place. If court procedures can be altered to make it easier, or at least less harrowing, for victims then that should be done. However, lowering the bar for conviction is no justice at all.
As well as increasing the chances of the innocent being convicted, that means the guilty may be likelier to get away with it (if an innocent man is accused, arrested, charged and convicted the case is closed and the rapist will remain at large).
given conviction rates are a fraction of the crimes committed it is unlikely to make a huge difference. More get away due to lack of spectators needed to corrobrate. Far better to get chance to jail more guilty people in my mind. Re the headline , if the SNP followed the London headlines it would have been split asunder and disbanded years ago. Usual bollocks nonsense on the SNP.
Mr. Dickson, hard to see any military response. The guarantors (according to the news the other day) of Ukraine's territorial integrity are Russia, France, the UK and the US. Obama won't get involved, and it's hard to see us and the frogs alone directly opposing Russia, particularly when they already have forces on the ground and the theatre of operations is so near Russia itself.
Still, Obama and the EU have a Nobel Peace Prize each, so I'm sure they'll make it alright.
Be careful, according to one Scottish Nationalist it's all Washington and London's fault, with the EU blameless ...
No bluster from Cameron , few weeks ago he was begging Putin for help to defeat Scotland and now he is begging Putin not to embarrass him over Ukraine. What chance he will be waving a paper soon stating "peace in our lifetime", we are Better Together I have tamed the Russians.
A good thread leader. However, I suspect there is one huge one over-riding difference now to anything previously and the implications are far too readily overlooked. It is the fact that no-one (well with one group exception) is thinking about an election. I know that might be a shock to political anoraks (the one group) but truly no-one else is focused on it at all.
There is another group currently thinking about an election: the Scots.
Not to mention a referendum, and an Euro election as well ...
One point about a Yes vote however would help Mr M and that is it would reduce the Old Labour tendency that he has to control, as well as simplifying having to fight both the SNP to his left, and the Tories/LDs a whisker to his right. However the other effects might swamp it ...
On topic, David's' points are irrelevant the big predictor of the government is the colour of the league champions shirts. With David Moyes in place Cameron's nailed on.
True. That goes back a long way - linking the general election winner to the colour of the top team's shirts.
But earlier this week, pb's Greek chorus of cybernats were telling us that Plan B had always been stark staring obvious. I look forward to their explanation as to why the absence of a Plan B is entirely consistent with this.
Calling the Yes campaign a shambles on this point is to insult your ordinary hard-working shambles.
Any idiot can read the 5 options published last year. Being a dolt and trying to pretend otherwise is at best obtuse. I expect it from a cretin like Scott but you are supposed to be intelligent.
Mr. Dickson, hard to see any military response. The guarantors (according to the news the other day) of Ukraine's territorial integrity are Russia, France, the UK and the US. Obama won't get involved, and it's hard to see us and the frogs alone directly opposing Russia, particularly when they already have forces on the ground and the theatre of operations is so near Russia itself.
Still, Obama and the EU have a Nobel Peace Prize each, so I'm sure they'll make it alright.
Be careful, according to one Scottish Nationalist it's all Washington and London's fault, with the EU blameless ...
No bluster from Cameron , few weeks ago he was begging Putin for help to defeat Scotland and now he is begging Putin not to embarrass him over Ukraine. What chance he will be waving a paper soon stating "peace in our lifetime", we are Better Together I have tamed the Russians.
Are there any evils you will not place at Cameron's feet?
I was quite young when Wilson was PM, but he was not too bad, and also benefited from having the unlikeable Ted Heath as his opponent. Wilson did have a very capable cabinet though, much more heavyweight than Labours current front bench.
I find comparing Miliband to Wilson problematic. I never much liked Wilson (who did apart from the unions?) and he certainly shared the ability to connive and collude but he was still a heavyweight. I might not have liked his politics but I never listened to him and thought 'oh dearie me.' When I heard Miliband's leadership victory speech I felt like one of the audience to Marlin's joke in Finding Nemo. See their expressions around 30s? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRad4Y3FPdM
Miliband is younger at the same stage but can I see him ever having Wilson's gravitas? You must be joking, right?
As said below, he simply isn't Prime Minister material.
In fairness Mr sox I would rank the 1970s Labour cabinet well ahead of the current cabinet. Wilson had a double first and Crossman and.Crossland were no slouches. I am not sure politics attracts that kind of intellectual heavyweight anymore.
Russia's meddling in Ukraine has been disgraceful, but given its history I can understand them wanting to take the chance to reclaim the Crimea. Its status as part of Ukraine is an anomaly.
That's not to say that we should stand idly by if we have an option. The problem is that we don't seem to have an option.
The UK and the USA both guaranteed the sovereignty of Ukraine in exchange for the country giving up nuclear weapons in the 1990s. If we do nothing, it makes all our guarantees completely worthless, which is very dangerous in the case of the NATO alliance.
I got that bit. I couldnt understand how it was a Unionist conspiracy to maintain the Scottish legal system. It just sounded like a paranoiac who sees every issue through a Yes campaign prism.
Mr. Foxinsox, the independence issue is because the minister involved had some sort of ramble about a Tory-led unionist conspiracy being behind those who opposed the proposal.
I have not been following it in detail, but is not the problem in part because Labour, or at least many Labour politicians, wanted corroboration to be abolished in the first place? And have now turned round and voted against.
I agree with some on here.The best chance for the Conservatives is the global economy getting worse and Britain continuing to do well. The other chance is some sort of conflict when people will avoid change and vote Tory again.
Russia's meddling in Ukraine has been disgraceful, but given its history I can understand them wanting to take the chance to reclaim the Crimea. Its status as part of Ukraine is an anomaly.
That's not to say that we should stand idly by if we have an option. The problem is that we don't seem to have an option.
My guess is nothing would happen, even if Russia occupied the whole Ukraine.
After years of cuts, US and Western military power is a paper tiger.
@Antifrank Germany's meddling in Czechoslovakia has been disgraceful, but given its history I can understand them wanting to take the chance to reclaim the Sudetenland. Its status as part of Czechoslovakia is an anomaly.
That's not to say that we should stand idly by if we have an option. The problem is that we don't seem to have an option.
Russia's meddling in Ukraine has been disgraceful, but given its history I can understand them wanting to take the chance to reclaim the Crimea. Its status as part of Ukraine is an anomaly.
That's not to say that we should stand idly by if we have an option. The problem is that we don't seem to have an option.
The UK and the USA both guaranteed the sovereignty of Ukraine in exchange for the country giving up nuclear weapons in the 1990s. If we do nothing, it makes all our guarantees completely worthless, which is very dangerous in the case of the NATO alliance.
LOL, you expect the cowardy custards to do anything other than beg.
Got to say I'm somewhat concerned by this notion that the response to rape convictions being 'too low' is to try and lower the bar for conviction. Victims deserve justice, and the innocent deserve a fair trial. Rape usually (because of the crime's nature) involves one man and one woman in a private place. If court procedures can be altered to make it easier, or at least less harrowing, for victims then that should be done. However, lowering the bar for conviction is no justice at all.
As well as increasing the chances of the innocent being convicted, that means the guilty may be likelier to get away with it (if an innocent man is accused, arrested, charged and convicted the case is closed and the rapist will remain at large).
Quite likely juries would react by refusing to convict where evidence was weak.
Russia's meddling in Ukraine has been disgraceful, but given its history I can understand them wanting to take the chance to reclaim the Crimea. Its status as part of Ukraine is an anomaly.
That's not to say that we should stand idly by if we have an option. The problem is that we don't seem to have an option.
My guess is nothing would happen, even if Russia occupied the whole Ukraine.
After years of cuts, US and Western military power is a paper tiger.
Cuts or not cuts, the United States still spends more money on their military than virtually everyone else put together, even if the current government has decimated the UK military.
What we can do though, is do what we do with every rogue state: tough economic sanctions, asset seizures and bans on international travel for the Russian leadership.
For those recommending the West do nothing in response to the illegal invasion of Crimea, how do they expect Russia to react to no response? The most Eastern two provinces of Ukraine are also dominated by ethnic Russians. I guess they could seize them too. What if we don't react to that? Would they take the entire Russian-speaking East? And if there's no reaction there, how about the rest of Ukraine? Where would that put other traditionally Russian states? There are large Russian populations in the Baltics....
We're not talking about intervention to prevent a country doing something domestically here. This is about a basic challenge to the integrity of an independent country. I'm not saying we should start firing shots, but there needs to be a very clear show of alliance and willingness to uphold our guarantee to Ukraine, in order to get Russia to back down.
I got that bit. I couldnt understand how it was a Unionist conspiracy to maintain the Scottish legal system. It just sounded like a paranoiac who sees every issue through a Yes campaign prism.
Mr. Foxinsox, the independence issue is because the minister involved had some sort of ramble about a Tory-led unionist conspiracy being behind those who opposed the proposal.
I have not been following it in detail, but is not the problem in part because Labour, or at least many Labour politicians, wanted corroboration to be abolished in the first place? And have now turned round and voted against.
Carnyx, once again just people commenting on a subject they do not understand. Labour as ever voted against their policy just because it was proposed by the SNP. They would rather support the Tories than vote for their preferred policy. Labour have no clue what they are doing other than vote against the SNP. Pathetic London rag lies and says SNP split blah blah.
Indeed, Mr. Socrates. The US has to take the lead, but I don't think it will. I don't think Obama has the backbone, and the UK and France (even if the political will is there) lack the muscle to do it by themselves.
Russia's meddling in Ukraine has been disgraceful, but given its history I can understand them wanting to take the chance to reclaim the Crimea. Its status as part of Ukraine is an anomaly.
That's not to say that we should stand idly by if we have an option. The problem is that we don't seem to have an option.
My guess is nothing would happen, even if Russia occupied the whole Ukraine.
After years of cuts, US and Western military power is a paper tiger.
Whilst I agree that the west would probably just grumble if Russia invaded the Ukraine, the US military (and indeed our own) is far more than a paper tiger. Both have very significant capabilities and - sadly - are very combat hardened.
I was quite young when Wilson was PM, but he was not too bad, and also benefited from having the unlikeable Ted Heath as his opponent. Wilson did have a very capable cabinet though, much more heavyweight than Labours current front bench.
I find comparing Miliband to Wilson problematic. I never much liked Wilson (who did apart from the unions?) and he certainly shared the ability to connive and collude but he was still a heavyweight. I might not have liked his politics but I never listened to him and thought 'oh dearie me.' When I heard Miliband's leadership victory speech I felt like one of the audience to Marlin's joke in Finding Nemo. See their expressions around 30s? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRad4Y3FPdM
Miliband is younger at the same stage but can I see him ever having Wilson's gravitas? You must be joking, right?
As said below, he simply isn't Prime Minister material.
In fairness Mr sox I would rank the 1970s Labour cabinet well ahead of the current cabinet. Wilson had a double first and Crossman and.Crossland were no slouches. I am not sure politics attracts that kind of intellectual heavyweight anymore.
I would disagree with you. They had an unhealthy ideology that for some included Marxism - Healey was the best of a bad bunch and some (e.g. Brown) were really clueless.
Some may have been intellectual heavyweights, but it was all theory and no experience.
We won't be going to war over Ukraine. Day 1 the Ruskies go chemical, Day 3 we go nuclear as the war stocks of ammo are depleted. Asset seizure and travel bans will focus Eaśtern minds.
Stupid and amateur EU meddling, both politically and on the ground with 'advisers' has brought this crisis upon us.
For those recommending the West do nothing in response to the illegal invasion of Crimea, how do they expect Russia to react to no response? The most Eastern two provinces of Ukraine are also dominated by ethnic Russians. I guess they could seize them too. What if we don't react to that? Would they take the entire Russian-speaking East? And if there's no reaction there, how about the rest of Ukraine? Where would that put other traditionally Russian states? There are large Russian populations in the Baltics....
We're not talking about intervention to prevent a country doing something domestically here. This is about a basic challenge to the integrity of an independent country. I'm not saying we should start firing shots, but there needs to be a very clear show of alliance and willingness to uphold our guarantee to Ukraine, in order to get Russia to back down.
You think the overthrow of a democratically elected government in a coup was OK but decry Russia protecting Russian people. Strange opinions on democracy, OK if west arrange a coup but terrible if Russia do anything to help the Russian side.
Russia's meddling in Ukraine has been disgraceful, but given its history I can understand them wanting to take the chance to reclaim the Crimea. Its status as part of Ukraine is an anomaly.
That's not to say that we should stand idly by if we have an option. The problem is that we don't seem to have an option.
My guess is nothing would happen, even if Russia occupied the whole Ukraine.
After years of cuts, US and Western military power is a paper tiger.
Whilst I agree that the west would probably just grumble if Russia invaded the Ukraine, the US military (and indeed our own) is far more than a paper tiger. Both have very significant capabilities and - sadly - are very combat hardened.
Indeed, Mr. Socrates. The US has to take the lead, but I don't think it will. I don't think Obama has the backbone, and the UK and France (even if the political will is there) lack the muscle to do it by themselves.
MD , UK has no backbone unless it is against a wee boy , we will do nothing as it would result in a real drubbing. We cannot beat a few peasants in Afghanistan what a laugh the Russians would have if we threatened them. Best UK would do is hang on to US coattails and do what it is told
Indeed, Mr. Socrates. The US has to take the lead, but I don't think it will. I don't think Obama has the backbone, and the UK and France (even if the political will is there) lack the muscle to do it by themselves.
The reason Europe lacks the muscle is because European countries have refused to step up to the plate to create the necessary strength to defend their own continent for years. Even Cameron's government is now moving in this direction, with Bob Gates stating how we will no longer be a serious partnership with the US. We're just becoming an average European country.
It certainly makes sense to close the submarine bases in Scotland at this time..because Russia is such a friendly State..we need to get on building a few more Nuclear Power stations..as Russia supplies huge amounts of gas to Europe..he could switch us of in ten minutes..nice chap is old Putin..
For those recommending the West do nothing in response to the illegal invasion of Crimea, how do they expect Russia to react to no response? The most Eastern two provinces of Ukraine are also dominated by ethnic Russians. I guess they could seize them too. What if we don't react to that? Would they take the entire Russian-speaking East? And if there's no reaction there, how about the rest of Ukraine? Where would that put other traditionally Russian states? There are large Russian populations in the Baltics....
We're not talking about intervention to prevent a country doing something domestically here. This is about a basic challenge to the integrity of an independent country. I'm not saying we should start firing shots, but there needs to be a very clear show of alliance and willingness to uphold our guarantee to Ukraine, in order to get Russia to back down.
You make some good points.
I can easily see how the recent events could be seen as being anti-democratic, and can also see the other side of that argument that says that deposing Yanokovich was right.
IMHO the best result would be a quick independence referendum in all the relevant eastern states. Make it clear that the choice is between staying with Ukraine, or becoming an independent satellite of Russia. Have all sides: Ukraine, Russia and the EU agree that the people's vote will be respected.
But that can only be done in a sane atmosphere without Russian troops on the ground. And I fail to see who could run the vote that would be trusted by all sides.
For those recommending the West do nothing in response to the illegal invasion of Crimea, how do they expect Russia to react to no response? The most Eastern two provinces of Ukraine are also dominated by ethnic Russians. I guess they could seize them too. What if we don't react to that? Would they take the entire Russian-speaking East? And if there's no reaction there, how about the rest of Ukraine? Where would that put other traditionally Russian states? There are large Russian populations in the Baltics....
We're not talking about intervention to prevent a country doing something domestically here. This is about a basic challenge to the integrity of an independent country. I'm not saying we should start firing shots, but there needs to be a very clear show of alliance and willingness to uphold our guarantee to Ukraine, in order to get Russia to back down.
Agreed completely and would add that the US and UK gave guarantees to Ukraine and in return Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons. If Russia gets away with dismembering Ukraine who would trust our treaties again? The whole basis of nuclear non-proliferation comes crashing down. Our world becomes much more dangerous and we become weaker.
Russia's meddling in Ukraine has been disgraceful, but given its history I can understand them wanting to take the chance to reclaim the Crimea. Its status as part of Ukraine is an anomaly.
That's not to say that we should stand idly by if we have an option. The problem is that we don't seem to have an option.
My guess is nothing would happen, even if Russia occupied the whole Ukraine.
After years of cuts, US and Western military power is a paper tiger.
Whilst I agree that the west would probably just grumble if Russia invaded the Ukraine, the US military (and indeed our own) is far more than a paper tiger. Both have very significant capabilities and - sadly - are very combat hardened.
Punch drunk from being drubbed by peasants more like. They will stay behind the sofa and call Putin names. They do not like to challenge the big boys, it always ends in disaster. They remember previous forays too well. Best they stick to easy targets.
"The Lab Achilles heel is the quangocracy / nomenklatura i.e. the caste of people who hijacked the welfare state and turned it into their personal (and increasingly hereditary) cradle to gravy train."
This is very well illustrated by what has happened to those who were associated with NCCL. Most are still in the public sector or pesudo public sector gravy train (including becoming judges).
Just got in, slightly pissed.. some bloke just spat in my face in a brentwood cab office! Nice! And I can almost guarantee you he was far far far to the right of me politically!
All I can say to the left wingers that answered my post on the previous thread is that if you like to live in a country where a significant minority speak another language as their first port of call, then fair enough. I think that's not for me, its not the best way for a country to live in happiness.. what more can I say?
Sorry to hear you were spat at; that's never pleasant.
I answered your post and disagreed with you; you say that you're an ex-Labour voter, and so I'm probably to the right of you in some ways. As with most things in politics, immigration and languages has far from a perfect left<->right split.
Besides you were using figures of 22% for London, and now saying the entire country?
Last night's thread should be a must-read for anyone interested in the fear that people have about immigration. I mean, a burly man feeling afraid to walk through Whitechapel Market!
Who was Feeling afraid? @Nigel4England said it was hard to know what country you were in
Russia's meddling in Ukraine has been disgraceful, but given its history I can understand them wanting to take the chance to reclaim the Crimea. Its status as part of Ukraine is an anomaly.
That's not to say that we should stand idly by if we have an option. The problem is that we don't seem to have an option.
The UK and the USA both guaranteed the sovereignty of Ukraine in exchange for the country giving up nuclear weapons in the 1990s. If we do nothing, it makes all our guarantees completely worthless, which is very dangerous in the case of the NATO alliance.
Russian military intervention in the Crimea to date has been consistent and compliant with the Black Sea agreement entered into Ukraine and Russia in 2010. This claim has been made by Russia's UN Ambassador to the UN Security Council.
Judging by the reaction of the new Kiev government, who have called for the Black Sea Agreement to be cancelled by the Ukrainian parliament, it appears Russia's justification may be sound. It also explains why Obama has been fairly mild in his condemnation of Russia's actions in Crimea.
Moving troop protection forces (2,000 troops) into the Crimea in order to secure a naval base at a time of political upheaval and with the threat of civil unrest across the Ukraine is not an unreasonable action. After all it is just what the UK would do to secure its bases if, for example, hostilities broke out between North and South Cyprus.
The troop movements in Crimea are certainly not grounds for the Ukraine to invoke UK and US military assistance under the provisions of the UK-USA-Ukraine nuclear non-proliferation treaty of 1994.
The bad news is that after raising a nice (literally) round number in 2 days, it was pulled.
TUD , what a laugh, gets better and better. They have same number of people in local organisations , no people , no websites and dependent on foreign Tory donations.
For those recommending the West do nothing in response to the illegal invasion of Crimea, how do they expect Russia to react to no response? The most Eastern two provinces of Ukraine are also dominated by ethnic Russians. I guess they could seize them too. What if we don't react to that? Would they take the entire Russian-speaking East? And if there's no reaction there, how about the rest of Ukraine? Where would that put other traditionally Russian states? There are large Russian populations in the Baltics....
We're not talking about intervention to prevent a country doing something domestically here. This is about a basic challenge to the integrity of an independent country. I'm not saying we should start firing shots, but there needs to be a very clear show of alliance and willingness to uphold our guarantee to Ukraine, in order to get Russia to back down.
You make some good points.
I can easily see how the recent events could be seen as being anti-democratic, and can also see the other side of that argument that says that deposing Yanokovich was right.
IMHO the best result would be a quick independence referendum in all the relevant eastern states. Make it clear that the choice is between staying with Ukraine, or becoming an independent satellite of Russia. Have all sides: Ukraine, Russia and the EU agree that the people's vote will be respected.
But that can only be done in a sane atmosphere without Russian troops on the ground. And I fail to see who could run the vote that would be trusted by all sides.
The precedent for a quick independence vote whenever Russia flexes its military might is a precedent for deeply destabilizing the Baltic states, which have large Russian minorities. I think it would be reckless for us to start military aggression with Russia, but the West should announce it stands by its guarantee to Ukraine. It should, with Ukrainian permission of course, put troops in the country on a "training exercise" or some such, to make clear if Russia invades the East of the country it is risking war with the West, and we should demand removal of Russian troops from non-Sevastopol Crimea under the threat of economic sanctions.
Indeed, Mr. Socrates. The US has to take the lead, but I don't think it will. I don't think Obama has the backbone, and the UK and France (even if the political will is there) lack the muscle to do it by themselves.
The reason Europe lacks the muscle is because European countries have refused to step up to the plate to create the necessary strength to defend their own continent for years. Even Cameron's government is now moving in this direction, with Bob Gates stating how we will no longer be a serious partnership with the US. We're just becoming an average European country.
Isn't there a long and illustrious history of US SecDef's stating that Europe isn't pulling it's weight, going back all the way through the cold war?
America obviously wants its NATO allies to do more, because it means it will have to do less. For that reason I didn't take Gates' comments that seriously.
But you make a good point that the peace dividend has probably gone too far.
And how do you define an 'average European country'
Indeed, Mr. Socrates. The US has to take the lead, but I don't think it will. I don't think Obama has the backbone, and the UK and France (even if the political will is there) lack the muscle to do it by themselves.
The reason Europe lacks the muscle is because European countries have refused to step up to the plate to create the necessary strength to defend their own continent for years. Even Cameron's government is now moving in this direction, with Bob Gates stating how we will no longer be a serious partnership with the US. We're just becoming an average European country.
No , it is because they are not stupid, they prefer to get on with their lives rather than meddle in other countries trying to destabilise them. Only the US and their lap dog the UK try to interfere and make a mess of it. Bye bye Ukraine , US and UK made a grand job of getting that out of Russian sphere of influence. Where is their next balls up.
In the event of vote in favour of leaving the UK, Scotland would become an entirely new state. Companies based in an independent Scottish state would therefore no longer be eligible for contracts that the UK chose to place or compete domestically for national security reasons; this would also apply to Scotland-based subsidiaries of UK companies. Where they could continue to compete they would be pitching for business against other international competitors.
Russia's meddling in Ukraine has been disgraceful, but given its history I can understand them wanting to take the chance to reclaim the Crimea. Its status as part of Ukraine is an anomaly.
That's not to say that we should stand idly by if we have an option. The problem is that we don't seem to have an option.
My guess is nothing would happen, even if Russia occupied the whole Ukraine.
After years of cuts, US and Western military power is a paper tiger.
Cuts or not cuts, the United States still spends more money on their military than virtually everyone else put together, even if the current government has decimated the UK military.
What we can do though, is do what we do with every rogue state: tough economic sanctions, asset seizures and bans on international travel for the Russian leadership.
True, although I understand the US is planning to cut it's forces to pre-WWII levels. That's not the action of a country that's interested in maintaing it's global power.
But, you're right to point out the bigger fault lies with the UK and Europe. Over 20 years, their share of NATO expenditure has fallen from 50% to 25%.
For those recommending the West do nothing in response to the illegal invasion of Crimea, how do they expect Russia to react to no response? The most Eastern two provinces of Ukraine are also dominated by ethnic Russians. I guess they could seize them too. What if we don't react to that? Would they take the entire Russian-speaking East? And if there's no reaction there, how about the rest of Ukraine? Where would that put other traditionally Russian states? There are large Russian populations in the Baltics....
We're not talking about intervention to prevent a country doing something domestically here. This is about a basic challenge to the integrity of an independent country. I'm not saying we should start firing shots, but there needs to be a very clear show of alliance and willingness to uphold our guarantee to Ukraine, in order to get Russia to back down.
You think the overthrow of a democratically elected government in a coup was OK but decry Russia protecting Russian people. Strange opinions on democracy, OK if west arrange a coup but terrible if Russia do anything to help the Russian side.
A coup is a violent seizure of power from government. This was parliament, also democratically elected, removing the President from power. The Russian minority in Crimea are under no threat from the Ukrainian government, no more than Sudeten Germans were under threat from the Czech government. It is amazing how much people's anti-Western and anti-American bigotries allow them to side with despotic regimes, even during the most outrageous conflagration of international law. You're one of the ones that has decried the Iraq War as illegal: what legal basis does Russia have for this invasion? Could you cite the relevant treaties?
Just got in, slightly pissed.. some bloke just spat in my face in a brentwood cab office! Nice! And I can almost guarantee you he was far far far to the right of me politically!
All I can say to the left wingers that answered my post on the previous thread is that if you like to live in a country where a significant minority speak another language as their first port of call, then fair enough. I think that's not for me, its not the best way for a country to live in happiness.. what more can I say?
Sorry to hear you were spat at; that's never pleasant.
I answered your post and disagreed with you; you say that you're an ex-Labour voter, and so I'm probably to the right of you in some ways. As with most things in politics, immigration and languages has far from a perfect left<->right split.
Besides you were using figures of 22% for London, and now saying the entire country?
Last night's thread should be a must-read for anyone interested in the fear that people have about immigration. I mean, a burly man feeling afraid to walk through Whitechapel Market!
Who was Feeling afraid? @Nigel4England said it was hard to know what country you were in
Maybe it's a 'must read again' for you!,
His quote from last night: "The walk from the station up to Vallance Road, the market is like a third world country, quite scary actually and I am a big bloke."
It's laughably pathetic from someone who appears to take pride in fighting with football hooligans: "I've stood on the Southbank at West Ham and fought toe to toe with the ICF in their heyday, not out of choice we were attacked, and done the same in the Cold Blow Lane end at the Old Den. Not much frightens me."
For those recommending the West do nothing in response to the illegal invasion of Crimea, how do they expect Russia to react to no response? The most Eastern two provinces of Ukraine are also dominated by ethnic Russians. I guess they could seize them too. What if we don't react to that? Would they take the entire Russian-speaking East? And if there's no reaction there, how about the rest of Ukraine? Where would that put other traditionally Russian states? There are large Russian populations in the Baltics....
We're not talking about intervention to prevent a country doing something domestically here. This is about a basic challenge to the integrity of an independent country. I'm not saying we should start firing shots, but there needs to be a very clear show of alliance and willingness to uphold our guarantee to Ukraine, in order to get Russia to back down.
You make some good points.
I can easily see how the recent events could be seen as being anti-democratic, and can also see the other side of that argument that says that deposing Yanokovich was right.
IMHO the best result would be a quick independence referendum in all the relevant eastern states. Make it clear that the choice is between staying with Ukraine, or becoming an independent satellite of Russia. Have all sides: Ukraine, Russia and the EU agree that the people's vote will be respected.
But that can only be done in a sane atmosphere without Russian troops on the ground. And I fail to see who could run the vote that would be trusted by all sides.
The precedent for a quick independence vote whenever Russia flexes its military might is a precedent for deeply destabilizing the Baltic states, which have large Russian minorities. I think it would be reckless for us to start military aggression with Russia, but the West should announce it stands by its guarantee to Ukraine. It should, with Ukrainian permission of course, put troops in the country on a "training exercise" or some such, to make clear if Russia invades the East of the country it is risking war with the West, and we should demand removal of Russian troops from non-Sevastopol Crimea under the threat of economic sanctions.
LOL, as if , the minute troops were in the game would be finished, full scale invasion. Best idea is for US and UK to get back in their box and stop prodding the Bear. As for economic sanctions , what a laugh. Gas switched off and we would have begging bowl out.
For those recommending the West do nothing in response to the illegal invasion of Crimea, how do they expect Russia to react to no response? The most Eastern two provinces of Ukraine are also dominated by ethnic Russians. I guess they could seize them too. What if we don't react to that? Would they take the entire Russian-speaking East? And if there's no reaction there, how about the rest of Ukraine? Where would that put other traditionally Russian states? There are large Russian populations in the Baltics....
We're not talking about intervention to prevent a country doing something domestically here. This is about a basic challenge to the integrity of an independent country. I'm not saying we should start firing shots, but there needs to be a very clear show of alliance and willingness to uphold our guarantee to Ukraine, in order to get Russia to back down.
You make some good points.
I can easily see how the recent events could be seen as being anti-democratic, and can also see the other side of that argument that says that deposing Yanokovich was right.
IMHO the best result would be a quick independence referendum in all the relevant eastern states. Make it clear that the choice is between staying with Ukraine, or becoming an independent satellite of Russia. Have all sides: Ukraine, Russia and the EU agree that the people's vote will be respected.
But that can only be done in a sane atmosphere without Russian troops on the ground. And I fail to see who could run the vote that would be trusted by all sides.
The precedent for a quick independence vote whenever Russia flexes its military might is a precedent for deeply destabilizing the Baltic states, which have large Russian minorities. I think it would be reckless for us to start military aggression with Russia, but the West should announce it stands by its guarantee to Ukraine. It should, with Ukrainian permission of course, put troops in the country on a "training exercise" or some such, to make clear if Russia invades the East of the country it is risking war with the West, and we should demand removal of Russian troops from non-Sevastopol Crimea under the threat of economic sanctions.
The will of the people in those states should be pre-eminent. If some choose to split, so be it.
It's exactly the same as Scotland. We in the Europe and the west have to give a better 'offer' to the people of those states than Russia.
For those recommending the West do nothing in response to the illegal invasion of Crimea, how do they expect Russia to react to no response? The most Eastern two provinces of Ukraine are also dominated by ethnic Russians. I guess they could seize them too. What if we don't react to that? Would they take the entire Russian-speaking East? And if there's no reaction there, how about the rest of Ukraine? Where would that put other traditionally Russian states? There are large Russian populations in the Baltics....
We're not talking about intervention to prevent a country doing something domestically here. This is about a basic challenge to the integrity of an independent country. I'm not saying we should start firing shots, but there needs to be a very clear show of alliance and willingness to uphold our guarantee to Ukraine, in order to get Russia to back down.
You make some good points.
I can easily see how the recent events could be seen as being anti-democratic, and can also see the other side of that argument that says that deposing Yanokovich was right.
IMHO the best result would be a quick independence referendum in all the relevant eastern states. Make it clear that the choice is between staying with Ukraine, or becoming an independent satellite of Russia. Have all sides: Ukraine, Russia and the EU agree that the people's vote will be respected.
But that can only be done in a sane atmosphere without Russian troops on the ground. And I fail to see who could run the vote that would be trusted by all sides.
The precedent for a quick independence vote whenever Russia flexes its military might is a precedent for deeply destabilizing the Baltic states, which have large Russian minorities. I think it would be reckless for us to start military aggression with Russia, but the West should announce it stands by its guarantee to Ukraine. It should, with Ukrainian permission of course, put troops in the country on a "training exercise" or some such, to make clear if Russia invades the East of the country it is risking war with the West, and we should demand removal of Russian troops from non-Sevastopol Crimea under the threat of economic sanctions.
LOL, as if , the minute troops were in the game would be finished, full scale invasion. Best idea is for US and UK to get back in their box and stop prodding the Bear. As for economic sanctions , what a laugh. Gas switched off and we would have begging bowl out.
Switch off the gas, and the flow of money the other way stops too. Not going to happen.
For those recommending the West do nothing in response to the illegal invasion of Crimea, how do they expect Russia to react to no response? The most Eastern two provinces of Ukraine are also dominated by ethnic Russians. I guess they could seize them too. What if we don't react to that? Would they take the entire Russian-speaking East? And if there's no reaction there, how about the rest of Ukraine? Where would that put other traditionally Russian states? There are large Russian populations in the Baltics....
We're not talking about intervention to prevent a country doing something domestically here. This is about a basic challenge to the integrity of an independent country. I'm not saying we should start firing shots, but there needs to be a very clear show of alliance and willingness to uphold our guarantee to Ukraine, in order to get Russia to back down.
You think the overthrow of a democratically elected government in a coup was OK but decry Russia protecting Russian people. Strange opinions on democracy, OK if west arrange a coup but terrible if Russia do anything to help the Russian side.
A coup is a violent seizure of power from government. This was parliament, also democratically elected, removing the President from power. The Russian minority in Crimea are under no threat from the Ukrainian government, no more than Sudeten Germans were under threat from the Czech government. It is amazing how much people's anti-Western and anti-American bigotries allow them to side with despotic regimes, even during the most outrageous conflagration of international law. You're one of the ones that has decried the Iraq War as illegal: what legal basis does Russia have for this invasion? Could you cite the relevant treaties?
As I said you are happy that the democratically elected government is deposed in a coup and an unelected dictatorship put in its place. I saw all those MP's in the square for months bashing police and burning buildings etc as they voted to depose parliament. You seem to have tunnel vision.
Russia's meddling in Ukraine has been disgraceful, but given its history I can understand them wanting to take the chance to reclaim the Crimea. Its status as part of Ukraine is an anomaly.
That's not to say that we should stand idly by if we have an option. The problem is that we don't seem to have an option.
My guess is nothing would happen, even if Russia occupied the whole Ukraine.
After years of cuts, US and Western military power is a paper tiger.
Cuts or not cuts, the United States still spends more money on their military than virtually everyone else put together, even if the current government has decimated the UK military.
What we can do though, is do what we do with every rogue state: tough economic sanctions, asset seizures and bans on international travel for the Russian leadership.
True, although I understand the US is planning to cut it's forces to pre-WWII levels. That's not the action of a country that's interested in maintaing it's global power.
But, you're right to point out the bigger fault lies with the UK and Europe. Over 20 years, their share of NATO expenditure has fallen from 50% to 25%.
I disagree. There would still be a standing army of 450,000 troops and they will still have the budget to ramp up in the event of conflagration. Let's also not forget that the US military is the best equipped in the world, and that much more of the budget is being focused on drones and other robotics, that can decimate the other side before any battle. This is a natural reaction to technological change, and the cyclical scaling down between wars.
Just got in, slightly pissed.. some bloke just spat in my face in a brentwood cab office! Nice! And I can almost guarantee you he was far far far to the right of me politically!
All I can say to the left wingers that answered my post on the previous thread is that if you like to live in a country where a significant minority speak another language as their first port of call, then fair enough. I think that's not for me, its not the best way for a country to live in happiness.. what more can I say?
Sorry to hear you were spat at; that's never pleasant.
I answered your post and disagreed with you; you say that you're an ex-Labour voter, and so I'm probably to the right of you in some ways. As with most things in politics, immigration and languages has far from a perfect left<->right split.
Besides you were using figures of 22% for London, and now saying the entire country?
Last night's thread should be a must-read for anyone interested in the fear that people have about immigration. I mean, a burly man feeling afraid to walk through Whitechapel Market!
Who was Feeling afraid? @Nigel4England said it was hard to know what country you were in
Maybe it's a 'must read again' for you!,
His quote from last night: "The walk from the station up to Vallance Road, the market is like a third world country, quite scary actually and I am a big bloke."
It's laughably pathetic from someone who appears to take pride in fighting with football hooligans: "I've stood on the Southbank at West Ham and fought toe to toe with the ICF in their heyday, not out of choice we were attacked, and done the same in the Cold Blow Lane end at the Old Den. Not much frightens me."
I agree with him, there is something sinister about walking through a neighbourhood where everyone is a different race and religion to you, speaking in a different language and writing in a different alphabet, especially when there are fundamentalists in that religion that think it's ok to behead people like us, egged on by multicultural loving excuse makers
Indeed, Mr. Socrates. The US has to take the lead, but I don't think it will. I don't think Obama has the backbone, and the UK and France (even if the political will is there) lack the muscle to do it by themselves.
The reason Europe lacks the muscle is because European countries have refused to step up to the plate to create the necessary strength to defend their own continent for years. Even Cameron's government is now moving in this direction, with Bob Gates stating how we will no longer be a serious partnership with the US. We're just becoming an average European country.
No , it is because they are not stupid, they prefer to get on with their lives rather than meddle in other countries trying to destabilise them. Only the US and their lap dog the UK try to interfere and make a mess of it. Bye bye Ukraine , US and UK made a grand job of getting that out of Russian sphere of influence. Where is their next balls up.
It is Russia that is doing the meddling, we are merely reacting to that, even if your emotional hatred of the major English powers blinds you to that. It has been our willingness to stand by countries under threat that allows the rest of Europe to be democratic today. Ukrainians have bravely stood up and fought for their democratic rights, and yet you would sell them down the river. As too would the central European powers that owe their own freedom to the benevolence of the UK and the USA.
Just got in, slightly pissed.. some bloke just spat in my face in a brentwood cab office! Nice! And I can almost guarantee you he was far far far to the right of me politically!
All I can say to the left wingers that answered my post on the previous thread is that if you like to live in a country where a significant minority speak another language as their first port of call, then fair enough. I think that's not for me, its not the best way for a country to live in happiness.. what more can I say?
Sorry to hear you were spat at; that's never pleasant.
I answered your post and disagreed with you; you say that you're an ex-Labour voter, and so I'm probably to the right of you in some ways. As with most things in politics, immigration and languages has far from a perfect left<->right split.
Besides you were using figures of 22% for London, and now saying the entire country?
Last night's thread should be a must-read for anyone interested in the fear that people have about immigration. I mean, a burly man feeling afraid to walk through Whitechapel Market!
Who was Feeling afraid? @Nigel4England said it was hard to know what country you were in
Maybe it's a 'must read again' for you!,
His quote from last night: "The walk from the station up to Vallance Road, the market is like a third world country, quite scary actually and I am a big bloke."
It's laughably pathetic from someone who appears to take pride in fighting with football hooligans: "I've stood on the Southbank at West Ham and fought toe to toe with the ICF in their heyday, not out of choice we were attacked, and done the same in the Cold Blow Lane end at the Old Den. Not much frightens me."
You really like to twist things to suit your own agenda don't you?
Where do I take pride in fighting with football hooligans? On both those occasions I was standing in the away section, it was infiltrated by home fans who then attacked the opposition fans. Believe me if I could have got away I would have done, but it was impossible in such a confined area so we had to act in self defence.
All I did last night was to state I felt like a stranger in my own city, is that too difficult to understand? Do you not agree that mass immigration has brought some problems with it?
By agreeing wholesale with the PC policies we now have you are opening yourself up to ridicule, is their nothing about mass immigration you disagree with?
In the event of vote in favour of leaving the UK, Scotland would become an entirely new state. Companies based in an independent Scottish state would therefore no longer be eligible for contracts that the UK chose to place or compete domestically for national security reasons; this would also apply to Scotland-based subsidiaries of UK companies. Where they could continue to compete they would be pitching for business against other international competitors.
What should be of much greater concern to the West than a few Russian soldiers wandering around the Crimea in unmarked camouflage dress, is a series of administrative moves being taken in the Russian Duma to 'support' Russian speaking Ukraine.
1. An emergency measure is being passed by the Duma to provide automatic Russian citizenship to Russian speakers resident in the Ukraine;
2. A planned referendum on secession of the Crimea by its residents has been brought forward to March 20th (not formally a Russian Government decision);
3. Activities of the inter Russia-Ukraine industrial cooperation group have been temporarily suspended, effectively curtailing trade with and inbound investment to Ukrainian industrial groups.
Effectively Russia has so many levers available to use in applying pressure on The Ukraine, that it has no need, certainly at this stage, to break existing international agreements by more widespread deployment of its forces on Ukrainian territory.
At least the humour of the Russians hasn't suffered attrition during the crisis. Here a jibe at the UK by Vitaly Churkin at the UN (courtesy of Bloomberg which takes Interfax feeds from Moscow):
Russian Ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin said he had no specific information on extra Russian forces having been deployed to Crimea or elsewhere in Ukraine.
“I recall from history books that when World War I started, some newspapers in the United Kingdom reported that they saw Russian cossacks in the railway station. So those reports -- they’re not always true,” Churkin said.
Incidentally my membership card for the Waitrose scheme only arrived yesterday so thanks a bunch Labour for potentially knackering it before I've even managed to get to use it!
What a strange organisation for Labour to actually attack - I suppose with their Co-op sponsor now following Labour economic policy/tradition in a massive deficit too, perhaps they've got a downer on worker-owned businesses now as well?
These predators are terrible aren't they.....
Waitrose website: About our company We’re not owned by shareholders and the City. Instead, we’re owned by everyone who works for the Partnership, which is why we’re all on the same mission to bring you the best.
The will of the people in those states should be pre-eminent. If some choose to split, so be it.
It's exactly the same as Scotland. We in the Europe and the west have to give a better 'offer' to the people of those states than Russia.
I support the principle of self-determination, but only for long standing populations (i.e. over a century or so) and only through the democratic processes of the country in question, unless the minority is clearly being persecuted. Otherwise you just create hugely distorted interests for imperial states like Russia.
Just got in, slightly pissed.. some bloke just spat in my face in a brentwood cab office! Nice! And I can almost guarantee you he was far far far to the right of me politically!
All I can say to the left wingers that answered my post on the previous thread is that if you like to live in a country where a significant minority speak another language as their first port of call, then fair enough. I think that's not for me, its not the best way for a country to live in happiness.. what more can I say?
Sorry to hear you were spat at; that's never pleasant.
I answered your post and disagreed with you; you say that you're an ex-Labour voter, and so I'm probably to the right of you in some ways. As with most things in politics, immigration and languages has far from a perfect left<->right split.
Besides you were using figures of 22% for London, and now saying the entire country?
Last night's thread should be a must-read for anyone interested in the fear that people have about immigration. I mean, a burly man feeling afraid to walk through Whitechapel Market!
Who was Feeling afraid? @Nigel4England said it was hard to know what country you were in
Maybe it's a 'must read again' for you!,
His quote from last night: "The walk from the station up to Vallance Road, the market is like a third world country, quite scary actually and I am a big bloke."
It's laughably pathetic from someone who appears to take pride in fighting with football hooligans: "I've stood on the Southbank at West Ham and fought toe to toe with the ICF in their heyday, not out of choice we were attacked, and done the same in the Cold Blow Lane end at the Old Den. Not much frightens me."
I agree with him, there is something sinister about walking through a neighbourhood where everyone is a different race and religion to you, speaking in a different language and writing in a different alphabet, especially when there are fundamentalists in that religion that think it's ok to behead people like us, egged on by multicultural loving excuse makers
So unless you feel there is something sinister about walking through an area in which people are mostly non-white and not speaking English you are a multicultural excuse maker? I have to say I have never felt remotely threated walking through Chinatown, but then I am a lefty who hates my country.
For those that don't know the history, Crimea's Russian population has only been there since the 1940s, when Stalin ethnically cleansed the Crimean Tatars in the area...
Just got in, slightly pissed.. some bloke just spat in my face in a brentwood cab office! Nice! And I can almost guarantee you he was far far far to the right of me politically!
All I can say to the left wingers that answered my post on the previous thread is that if you like to live in a country where a significant minority speak another language as their first port of call, then fair enough. I think that's not for me, its not the best way for a country to live in happiness.. what more can I say?
Sorry to hear you were spat at; that's never pleasant.
I answered your post and disagreed with you; you say that you're an ex-Labour voter, and so I'm probably to the right of you in some ways. As with most things in politics, immigration and languages has far from a perfect left<->right split.
Besides you were using figures of 22% for London, and now saying the entire country?
Last night's thread should be a must-read for anyone interested in the fear that people have about immigration. I mean, a burly man feeling afraid to walk through Whitechapel Market!
Who was Feeling afraid? @Nigel4England said it was hard to know what country you were in
Maybe it's a 'must read again' for you!,
His quote from last night: "The walk from the station up to Vallance Road, the market is like a third world country, quite scary actually and I am a big bloke."
It's laughably pathetic from someone who appears to take pride in fighting with football hooligans: "I've stood on the Southbank at West Ham and fought toe to toe with the ICF in their heyday, not out of choice we were attacked, and done the same in the Cold Blow Lane end at the Old Den. Not much frightens me."
You really like to twist things to suit your own agenda don't you?
Where do I take pride in fighting with football hooligans? On both those occasions I was standing in the away section, it was infiltrated by home fans who then attacked the opposition fans. Believe me if I could have got away I would have done, but it was impossible in such a confined area so we had to act in self defence.
All I did last night was to state I felt like a stranger in my own city, is that too difficult to understand? Do you not agree that mass immigration has brought some problems with it?
By agreeing wholesale with the PC policies we now have you are opening yourself up to ridicule, is their nothing about mass immigration you disagree with?
No doubt if a Pakistani man expressed sadness about the westernisation of Lahore, the closure of the mosques, the pubs opening , the football shirts etc etc Josias would taunt him about it
To follow on from my previous post, the only time I have ever felt threatened in the East End is walking to and from the tube when Spurs have played at West Ham. Now that really isn't nice and those screaming abuse and lobbing missiles really do look like they want to kill you.
your emotional hatred of the major English powers blinds you to tha
Wot's the 'major English powers' then?
The major economic and military powers of predominantly English culture: mainly the United States and the United Kingdom, but to a lesser extent Canada and Australia.
Shambles, like many political terms, is overused to the point where its impact and meaning is diluted utterly. Likewise 'learning the lessons' and 'human rights'. Human rights mean everything from the right not to be a sex slave to the right not to be deported after a murder conviction because you can't speak Italian.
A wider political vocabulary and a more intelligent use of it would lead to debates that had more meaning.
Indeed, Mr. Socrates. The US has to take the lead, but I don't think it will. I don't think Obama has the backbone, and the UK and France (even if the political will is there) lack the muscle to do it by themselves.
The reason Europe lacks the muscle is because European countries have refused to step up to the plate to create the necessary strength to defend their own continent for years. Even Cameron's government is now moving in this direction, with Bob Gates stating how we will no longer be a serious partnership with the US. We're just becoming an average European country.
No , it is because they are not stupid, they prefer to get on with their lives rather than meddle in other countries trying to destabilise them. Only the US and their lap dog the UK try to interfere and make a mess of it. Bye bye Ukraine , US and UK made a grand job of getting that out of Russian sphere of influence. Where is their next balls up.
It is Russia that is doing the meddling, we are merely reacting to that, even if your emotional hatred of the major English powers blinds you to that. It has been our willingness to stand by countries under threat that allows the rest of Europe to be democratic today. Ukrainians have bravely stood up and fought for their democratic rights, and yet you would sell them down the river. As too would the central European powers that owe their own freedom to the benevolence of the UK and the USA.
Bollocks, they voted democratically in the whole country and elected a government which was overthrown by a coup in Kiev only. The voters were not asked.
For those that don't know the history, Crimea's Russian population has only been there since the 1940s, when Stalin ethnically cleansed the Crimean Tatars in the area...
The same can be said about East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia. Shall we take them off Poland and give them back to Germany or just recognise the world as it is today ?
your emotional hatred of the major English powers blinds you to tha
Wot's the 'major English powers' then?
The major economic and military powers of predominantly English culture: mainly the United States and the United Kingdom, but to a lesser extent Canada and Australia.
I don't think that any of those countries would recognise themselves as being culturally "English" in any way. They all have strong British connections, but that is very, very different.
your emotional hatred of the major English powers blinds you to tha
Wot's the 'major English powers' then?
The major economic and military powers of predominantly English culture: mainly the United States and the United Kingdom, but to a lesser extent Canada and Australia.
Is 'English powers' a recognised socio-historical & geopolitical term? I'd like to read more on this new-to-me concept.
In military terms Russia is a second-tier player: She had to buy French Amphibs because she has no knowledge of LHD/LHA development. Her tanks are target practice for the CH-II clones.
Russia plays in-and-with second-world countries: India, Venezuela, Angola: The rich Arabs avoid her widow-makers. Russia may bully Georgia or decimate the Chechyns but Russia cannot compete toe-to-toe with nations with ISTAR support, global reach and integrated systems.
Just got in, slightly pissed.. some bloke just spat in my face in a brentwood cab office! Nice! And I can almost guarantee you he was far far far to the right of me politically!
All I can say to the left wingers that answered my post on the previous thread is that if you like to live in a country where a significant minority speak another language as their first port of call, then fair enough. I think that's not for me, its not the best way for a country to live in happiness.. what more can I say?
Sorry to hear you were spat at; that's never pleasant.
I answered your post and disagreed with you; you say that you're an ex-Labour voter, and so I'm probably to the right of you in some ways. As with most things in politics, immigration and languages has far from a perfect left<->right split.
Besides you were using figures of 22% for London, and now saying the entire country?
Last night's thread should be a must-read for anyone interested in the fear that people have about immigration. I mean, a burly man feeling afraid to walk through Whitechapel Market!
Who was Feeling afraid? @Nigel4England said it was hard to know what country you were in
Maybe it's a 'must read again' for you!,
His quote from last night: "The walk from the station up to Vallance Road, the market is like a third world country, quite scary actually and I am a big bloke."
It's laughably pathetic from someone who appears to take pride in fighting with football hooligans: "I've stood on the Southbank at West Ham and fought toe to toe with the ICF in their heyday, not out of choice we were attacked, and done the same in the Cold Blow Lane end at the Old Den. Not much frightens me."
I agree with him, there is something sinister about walking through a neighbourhood where everyone is a different race and religion to you, speaking in a different language and writing in a different alphabet, especially when there are fundamentalists in that religion that think it's ok to behead people like us, egged on by multicultural loving excuse makers
So unless you feel there is something sinister about walking through an area in which people are mostly non-white and not speaking English you are a multicultural excuse maker? I have to say I have never felt remotely threated walking through Chinatown, but then I am a lefty who hates my country.
Crikey theres a bit of word twisting that Mick Pork would be proud of!
I didn't say that, I said I personally feel there is something a bit sinister about it. You feel differently, fair enough.
your emotional hatred of the major English powers blinds you to tha
Wot's the 'major English powers' then?
The major economic and military powers of predominantly English culture: mainly the United States and the United Kingdom, but to a lesser extent Canada and Australia.
Is 'English powers' a recognised socio-historical & geopolitical term? I'd like to read more on this new-to-me concept.
Well, anglosphere is sometimes used I believe, but it's mostly shared language and very basic cultural similarities I think.
your emotional hatred of the major English powers blinds you to tha
Wot's the 'major English powers' then?
The major economic and military powers of predominantly English culture: mainly the United States and the United Kingdom, but to a lesser extent Canada and Australia.
Just got in, slightly pissed.. some bloke just spat in my face in a brentwood cab office! Nice! And I can almost guarantee you he was far far far to the right of me politically!
All I can say to the left wingers that answered my post on the previous thread is that if you like to live in a country where a significant minority speak another language as their first port of call, then fair enough. I think that's not for me, its not the best way for a country to live in happiness.. what more can I say?
Sorry to hear you were spat at; that's never pleasant.
I answered your post and disagreed with you; you say that you're an ex-Labour voter, and so I'm probably to the right of you in some ways. As with most things in politics, immigration and languages has far from a perfect left<->right split.
Besides you were using figures of 22% for London, and now saying the entire country?
Last night's thread should be a must-read for anyone interested in the fear that people have about immigration. I mean, a burly man feeling afraid to walk through Whitechapel Market!
Who was Feeling afraid? @Nigel4England said it was hard to know what country you were in
Maybe it's a 'must read again' for you!,
His quote from last night: "The walk from the station up to Vallance Road, the market is like a third world country, quite scary actually and I am a big bloke."
It's laughably pathetic from someone who appears to take pride in fighting with football hooligans: "I've stood on the Southbank at West Ham and fought toe to toe with the ICF in their heyday, not out of choice we were attacked, and done the same in the Cold Blow Lane end at the Old Den. Not much frightens me."
I agree with him, there is something sinister about walking through a neighbourhood where everyone is a different race and religion to you, speaking in a different language and writing in a different alphabet, especially when there are fundamentalists in that religion that think it's ok to behead people like us, egged on by multicultural loving excuse makers
So unless you feel there is something sinister about walking through an area in which people are mostly non-white and not speaking English you are a multicultural excuse maker? I have to say I have never felt remotely threated walking through Chinatown, but then I am a lefty who hates my country.
I'll get the "Tongs"after you, Southam, next time you walk through Chinatown. LOL
The people who will take the Russians on IF it comes to armed confrontation of some kind are the Ukrainians themselves. If the West wants to give Russia a hard time it a) isolates Russia as much as it can economically and b) it supports the Ukrainians and indirectly the almost certain associated guerilla groups who would spring up in such a prolonged armed situation with the wherewithal.
Secondly its not about how big Russia's military is its about its its ability to sustain expeditionary warfare on territory where it does not have an absolute land border. This is severely limited in proportion to its armed forces size. Crimea has nothing but water round one way, no matter how narrow and the Ukrainian border on the other.
Looking at the facts the Russians took 6 days alone to put in a total of around 6000 additional troops in an area that they a) had a port in, b) isn't far from their border and c) they had unchallenged access to. I can tell you now that was a reasonable stretch to get what were rapid reaction forces who were already gearing up to move and by their nature are designed to in totality within 72 hours.
The Russian bear is over estimated in its conventional force strength. Forget the nuclear issue its simply not going to come to that. The Ukrainians alone have the numbers to make Russian life a misery. This of course, forgets about Tatars and their traditional friends in Turkey and other parties within the Ukraine who are perfectly willing to go launch some slow bleed activity against the Russians in Crimea.
The critical question is not that the West will send boats to make Boris think again. They are:
1. How long Russian troops stay on the streets. It sis likely they will want them offside soon enough if they can and hand over to local security forces and then return to barracks as a 'dont get any ideas' force. If they get them offside fast the West will probably mysteriously forget the whole thing.
2. Whether the West will actually do anything in practice at all other than talk. Remember its Obama, a man frankly who if you wanted to mug someone would be a good target because he'd not bother fighting back.
In military terms Russia is a second-tier player: She had to buy French Amphibs because she has no knowledge of LHD/LHA development. Her tanks are target practice for the CH-II clones.
Russia plays in-and-with second-world countries: India, Venezuela, Angola: The rich Arabs avoid her widow-makers. Russia may bully Georgia or decimate the Chechyns but Russia cannot compete toe-to-toe with nations with ISTAR support, global reach and integrated systems.
:sad-but-true:
LOL, I await UK and US doing anything with such superiority. tumbleweed.......
Comments
Can't imagine Wilson criticising a successful British firm for offering free coffee to customers. Was not really much of a fan.
The Labour Party in Opposition 1970-1974 (British Politics and Society) by Patrick Bell
Haven't read it but £100 for a study of the Labour party? That is a cost of living crisis - one way to stop people reading about Old Labour...
http://www.waterstones.com/waterstonesweb/products/patrick+bell/labour+party+in+opposition+1970-1974/3787669/
All I said was it is a bit scary, the last time I walked through was in November, and I guarantee you I was the only white face walking through and also none of the stall holders are white. I did not hear anyone speaking English, and lots of them are dressed in Burgas etc' and seem quite hostile to a white man walking through.
I suppose now you will deem me as racist for posting that, however that is the reality. Go and try it one weekday.
Is Ed the daftest Loto ever ?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfMz6UINfSw&
So what if none of the stall holders are white? Does it matter? If so, why?
Perhaps their hostility was a projection of your own reaction to seeing them.
Re the headline , if the SNP followed the London headlines it would have been split asunder and disbanded years ago. Usual bollocks nonsense on the SNP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter_City_Firm
Enough said.
One point about a Yes vote however would help Mr M and that is it would reduce the Old Labour tendency that he has to control, as well as simplifying having to fight both the SNP to his left, and the Tories/LDs a whisker to his right. However the other effects might swamp it ...
In fairness Mr sox I would rank the 1970s Labour cabinet well ahead of the current cabinet. Wilson had a double first and Crossman and.Crossland were no slouches. I am not sure politics attracts that kind of intellectual heavyweight anymore.
F1: Vettel's yet to complete a lap. His car broke on the installation lap, and later didn't even reach the end of the pit lane.
The other chance is some sort of conflict when people will avoid change and vote Tory again.
After years of cuts, US and Western military power is a paper tiger.
Germany's meddling in Czechoslovakia has been disgraceful, but given its history I can understand them wanting to take the chance to reclaim the Sudetenland. Its status as part of Czechoslovakia is an anomaly.
That's not to say that we should stand idly by if we have an option. The problem is that we don't seem to have an option.
"A far away people..."
What we can do though, is do what we do with every rogue state: tough economic sanctions, asset seizures and bans on international travel for the Russian leadership.
We're not talking about intervention to prevent a country doing something domestically here. This is about a basic challenge to the integrity of an independent country. I'm not saying we should start firing shots, but there needs to be a very clear show of alliance and willingness to uphold our guarantee to Ukraine, in order to get Russia to back down.
Some may have been intellectual heavyweights, but it was all theory and no experience.
Stupid and amateur EU meddling, both politically and on the ground with 'advisers' has brought this crisis upon us.
http://tinyurl.com/oqvvox4
The bad news is that after raising a nice (literally) round number in 2 days, it was pulled.
you have a private message
I can easily see how the recent events could be seen as being anti-democratic, and can also see the other side of that argument that says that deposing Yanokovich was right.
IMHO the best result would be a quick independence referendum in all the relevant eastern states. Make it clear that the choice is between staying with Ukraine, or becoming an independent satellite of Russia. Have all sides: Ukraine, Russia and the EU agree that the people's vote will be respected.
But that can only be done in a sane atmosphere without Russian troops on the ground. And I fail to see who could run the vote that would be trusted by all sides.
"The Lab Achilles heel is the quangocracy / nomenklatura i.e. the caste of people who hijacked the welfare state and turned it into their personal (and increasingly hereditary) cradle to gravy train."
This is very well illustrated by what has happened to those who were associated with NCCL. Most are still in the public sector or pesudo public sector gravy train (including becoming judges).
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2570675/The-Lefts-web-shame-Its-not-just-Harman-Dromey-Hewitt-As-reveal-members-Britains-ruling-liberal-elite-held-senior-posts-NCCL-closely-linked-paedophiles.html
Maybe it's a 'must read again' for you!,
Judging by the reaction of the new Kiev government, who have called for the Black Sea Agreement to be cancelled by the Ukrainian parliament, it appears Russia's justification may be sound. It also explains why Obama has been fairly mild in his condemnation of Russia's actions in Crimea.
Moving troop protection forces (2,000 troops) into the Crimea in order to secure a naval base at a time of political upheaval and with the threat of civil unrest across the Ukraine is not an unreasonable action. After all it is just what the UK would do to secure its bases if, for example, hostilities broke out between North and South Cyprus.
The troop movements in Crimea are certainly not grounds for the Ukraine to invoke UK and US military assistance under the provisions of the UK-USA-Ukraine nuclear non-proliferation treaty of 1994.
America obviously wants its NATO allies to do more, because it means it will have to do less. For that reason I didn't take Gates' comments that seriously.
But you make a good point that the peace dividend has probably gone too far.
And how do you define an 'average European country'
But, you're right to point out the bigger fault lies with the UK and Europe. Over 20 years, their share of NATO expenditure has fallen from 50% to 25%.
It's laughably pathetic from someone who appears to take pride in fighting with football hooligans:
"I've stood on the Southbank at West Ham and fought toe to toe with the ICF in their heyday, not out of choice we were attacked, and done the same in the Cold Blow Lane end at the Old Den. Not much frightens me."
It's exactly the same as Scotland. We in the Europe and the west have to give a better 'offer' to the people of those states than Russia.
I agree with him, there is something sinister about walking through a neighbourhood where everyone is a different race and religion to you, speaking in a different language and writing in a different alphabet, especially when there are fundamentalists in that religion that think it's ok to behead people like us, egged on by multicultural loving excuse makers
I've filled in that isidewith link that OGH has tweeted and I'm nearly a LibDem 84%!
Tory first however ... phew....
Where do I take pride in fighting with football hooligans? On both those occasions I was standing in the away section, it was infiltrated by home fans who then attacked the opposition fans. Believe me if I could have got away I would have done, but it was impossible in such a confined area so we had to act in self defence.
All I did last night was to state I felt like a stranger in my own city, is that too difficult to understand? Do you not agree that mass immigration has brought some problems with it?
By agreeing wholesale with the PC policies we now have you are opening yourself up to ridicule, is their nothing about mass immigration you disagree with?
Bye Bye Rosyth, Hello Cumbria.
1. An emergency measure is being passed by the Duma to provide automatic Russian citizenship to Russian speakers resident in the Ukraine;
2. A planned referendum on secession of the Crimea by its residents has been brought forward to March 20th (not formally a Russian Government decision);
3. Activities of the inter Russia-Ukraine industrial cooperation group have been temporarily suspended, effectively curtailing trade with and inbound investment to Ukrainian industrial groups.
Effectively Russia has so many levers available to use in applying pressure on The Ukraine, that it has no need, certainly at this stage, to break existing international agreements by more widespread deployment of its forces on Ukrainian territory.
At least the humour of the Russians hasn't suffered attrition during the crisis. Here a jibe at the UK by Vitaly Churkin at the UN (courtesy of Bloomberg which takes Interfax feeds from Moscow):
Russian Ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin said he had no specific information on extra Russian forces having been deployed to Crimea or elsewhere in Ukraine.
“I recall from history books that when World War I started, some newspapers in the United Kingdom reported that they saw Russian cossacks in the railway station. So those reports -- they’re not always true,” Churkin said.
What a strange organisation for Labour to actually attack - I suppose with their Co-op sponsor now following Labour economic policy/tradition in a massive deficit too, perhaps they've got a downer on worker-owned businesses now as well?
These predators are terrible aren't they.....
Waitrose website:
About our company
We’re not owned by shareholders and the City. Instead, we’re owned by everyone who works for the Partnership, which is why we’re all on the same mission to bring you the best.
Calling the No campaign a shambles at this point is to insult your ordinary hard-working shambles.
LOL
She lost the seat by 66 votes in 2010 to George Eustice.
A wider political vocabulary and a more intelligent use of it would lead to debates that had more meaning.
Russia plays in-and-with second-world countries: India, Venezuela, Angola: The rich Arabs avoid her widow-makers. Russia may bully Georgia or decimate the Chechyns but Russia cannot compete toe-to-toe with nations with ISTAR support, global reach and integrated systems.
:sad-but-true:
They were Celgg's own remarks reported across all the media you amusingly pompous and petulant joke.
I didn't say that, I said I personally feel there is something a bit sinister about it. You feel differently, fair enough.
Lewis Coakley @LewisCoakley 11 Sep 2011
Very interesting, according to Whitehall sources, no diplomat or minister has spoken to Putin in years. Cameron's visit will be significant
Daily Mail Online @MailOnline 9 Sep 2011
David Cameron to visit Moscow to thaw icy relationship with Vladimir Putin http://bit.ly/qTGrwv
Dennis Canavan @DennisCanavan Jan 12
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/camerons-plea-to-putin-help-me-stop-salmond.23138182 … Cameron,Putin&Rajoy.What an unholy trinity! #BetterTogether with friends like that?No thanks.We're better with #Indy
No questions on civil liberties, mind.
You seem upset Malcolm. Is it the realisation that Rosyth and Yarrow face the prospect of being stripped out and shut down, if there's a 'Yes' vote?
The people who will take the Russians on IF it comes to armed confrontation of some kind are the Ukrainians themselves. If the West wants to give Russia a hard time it a) isolates Russia as much as it can economically and b) it supports the Ukrainians and indirectly the almost certain associated guerilla groups who would spring up in such a prolonged armed situation with the wherewithal.
Secondly its not about how big Russia's military is its about its its ability to sustain expeditionary warfare on territory where it does not have an absolute land border. This is severely limited in proportion to its armed forces size. Crimea has nothing but water round one way, no matter how narrow and the Ukrainian border on the other.
Looking at the facts the Russians took 6 days alone to put in a total of around 6000 additional troops in an area that they a) had a port in, b) isn't far from their border and c) they had unchallenged access to. I can tell you now that was a reasonable stretch to get what were rapid reaction forces who were already gearing up to move and by their nature are designed to in totality within 72 hours.
The Russian bear is over estimated in its conventional force strength. Forget the nuclear issue its simply not going to come to that. The Ukrainians alone have the numbers to make Russian life a misery. This of course, forgets about Tatars and their traditional friends in Turkey and other parties within the Ukraine who are perfectly willing to go launch some slow bleed activity against the Russians in Crimea.
The critical question is not that the West will send boats to make Boris think again. They are:
1. How long Russian troops stay on the streets. It sis likely they will want them offside soon enough if they can and hand over to local security forces and then return to barracks as a 'dont get any ideas' force. If they get them offside fast the West will probably mysteriously forget the whole thing.
2. Whether the West will actually do anything in practice at all other than talk. Remember its Obama, a man frankly who if you wanted to mug someone would be a good target because he'd not bother fighting back.
3. What the Ukrainians do.