Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
"No downsides", as the Brexit Secretary said.
Now this downside is pretty small, and there are technical fixes for the worst of it. Then we're down to the useful life of a passport being 9.5 years instead of 10. But it is another bit of grit in the system.
I assume you haven’t travelled outside of Europe otherwise you would have had to comply with this rule
Yes I have, but clearly a lot of people haven't. Their passports are now five percent less useful than they were before.
It's a small extra hassle to add to the pile. It's what we voted for, and it's not going to be reversed soon. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be aware of the pile of hassles we have created for ourselves.
No, it’s not.
They have to do the same thing slightly earlier.
I doubt there is anyone who will have to change their passport many more times in their life as a result
Rough guess, it's about a third of the population having to get one extra passport renewal over their lifetime.
Not a deal-breaker, sure. But it's another bit of grit.
Yes while the UK spends the NATO target on defence it should be aiming for the 4% of GDP Poland spends on defence to contain Putin. As should all NATO members, especially those closest to Russia. Funds are also still needed on counter terrorism and national security.
In terms of containing China though that is more a problem for the nations nearby, ie Japan, South Korea, Australia, Singapore and India who would certainly need to increase defence spending if China invaded Taiwan. Since we returned Hong Kong to China in 1997 the only intervention we would make in the Far East would be under US leadership
I’m anti-nuclear for a number of reasons, but Trident’s uselessness aiui is a significant one.
Is it a genuine deterrent or a vestigial status symbol we cling on to as a former Great Power?
I do wish we would bin off the military-imperial crap and embrace our true global role as a cultural superpower. Ditch the nukes and the adventurism and instead build culture and tech industries.
The assumptions of the 90s about the general direction of the world were wrong, free market economics and the collapse of communism were meant to eventually turn Russia and China into broadly liberal and at least somewhat democratic countries. We were collectively completely wrong. If we can't defend ourselves it will be Chinese and Russian culture taking over the world, including here at home in time.
Yes and while Putin has nuclear weapons so must we
It'll be fascinating to see if Labour does bite the bullet (sorry) and make a significant increase in defence spending. I mean, given the noises off about lack of cash and the ever ballooning health and pensions bills it doesn't seem likely, but perhaps those who insist that everything will be different once they've dispensed with the need to lure the grey vote into backing them will be proven right?
Given our geography, even if the Government feels it can't afford the spectrum of capabilities that it would like, you'd at least think it could be persuaded to fork out for a functioning navy?
More like use the existing money efficiently, rather than buy frigates without fixed antisubmarine torpedo tubes and ear-killing armoured vehicles when perfectly good designs exist off the shelf from other suppliers.
Do any new frigates have fixed torpedo tubes these days?
I thought it was either via helicopter, or rocket from a vertical cell, in latest versions.
In can understand why so many of today's Tories are Trumpers. Copy the Donald - you don't need to spend money defending us against Russia if we just become bezzies with Putin.
The more notable Trump supporters within the party (Truss, Boris) are also the most anti-Putin. I am not sure I am aware of anyone prominent in the party favouring a more neutral attitude.
You can't logically be anti Putin and pro Trump as Trump being re-elected will undoubtedly aid Russia.
It was more clear that reelecting Obama in 2012 would aid Putin.
Obama was wrong. That's history.
Trump essentially never criticises Putin, and has literally taken Russia's side over his own intelligence agencies. Anyone thinking Trump will be tough on Russia is a clown. There is nothing ambigous about Trump's cosying up to autocrats and his unwillingness to support America's democratic allies.
If Trump's opponents had any sense what they would do is suggest that he is AFRAID of Putin. I mean the one thing you could say about Trump is that he shoots from the hip and doesn't care about offending people. So why not Putin? What is he scared of?
The Biden administration is making Ukraine fight with one hand tied behind their back.
The US has urged Ukraine to halt attacks on Russia’s energy infrastructure, warning that the drone strikes risk driving up global oil prices and provoking retaliation, according to three people familiar with the discussions.
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's Lib Dem policy to rejoin the SM and while being likely on the opposition benches next Parliament they may well be need for 2029.
It looks like increasingly people are less bothered by keeping Sterling. Perhaps because people rarely use cash anymore, so it's just numbers on a card account.
48% Rejoin is the same as the 48% who voted Remain in 2016. That plunges to just 39% Rejoin with the Euro which is a big difference
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
Look, why can't these so-called foreigners respect the 17.4m people who voted to leave? Them imposing rules on us wasn't the idea, we're supposed to be imposing the rules on THEM. Don't they know their so-called tourist spots like Marbellah would be dead without us?
Cleethorpes has no entry requirements.
Don't you have to show your tattoos?
One of the minor mysteries of the country is why the Lincolnshire coastal resorts are so much more downmarket than the Yorkshire ones.
Won't part of that be that the weather becomes miserable as soon as one crosses the Pennines?
I had an ultrasound scan the other week, and it was cold and slippery like having a Thai Massage outdoors in Manchester.
99. Ensuring the territorial integrity of the UK and security of overseas possessions.
They should start by flogging the aircraft carriers to whichever country needs an ego boost. If we are looking at getting involved in a country that is so far away we need floating airstrips then we shouldn’t be getting involved in the first place as it’s not our business.
Spend all the money on defensive kit. As long as no missile, ships, planes etc can hit British territory then that’s the most important thing. Defensive kit can also be used in conjunction with European allies if we need to get involved stopping the Russians and their tank from driving through Poland.
Blow it all on Iron dome and patriot. Keep the nuclear subs as a last resort threat. Bring recruitment in house and make it rewarding for NCOs who are about to retire or quit to run it.
We are a permanent UN Security council member and still have the Falklands to defend in the unlikely event Argentina tried to invade again. Both require aircraft carriers
It'll be fascinating to see if Labour does bite the bullet (sorry) and make a significant increase in defence spending. I mean, given the noises off about lack of cash and the ever ballooning health and pensions bills it doesn't seem likely, but perhaps those who insist that everything will be different once they've dispensed with the need to lure the grey vote into backing them will be proven right?
Given our geography, even if the Government feels it can't afford the spectrum of capabilities that it would like, you'd at least think it could be persuaded to fork out for a functioning navy?
More like use the existing money efficiently, rather than buy frigates without fixed antisubmarine torpedo tubes and ear-killing armoured vehicles when perfectly good designs exist off the shelf from other suppliers.
Do any new frigates have fixed torpedo tubes these days?
I thought it was either via helicopter, or rocket from a vertical cell, in latest versions.
A fixed torpedo tube is a large bomb on the upper deck of your ship.
During WWII, it is quite likely that the famous Long Lance torpedoes sank as many Japanese ships as Allied - even the Japanese reworked their torpedo cruiser attempt.
A light torpedo from a ship range has short range. Unless an enemy sub tries boarding, they are not much use.
As you say, a useful weapon needs more range - hence rocket boosting or helicopters.
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's Lib Dem policy to rejoin the SM and while being likely on the opposition benches next Parliament they may well be need for 2029.
It looks like increasingly people are less bothered by keeping Sterling. Perhaps because people rarely use cash anymore, so it's just numbers on a card account.
48% Rejoin is the same as the 48% who voted Remain in 2016. That plunges to just 39% Rejoin with the Euro which is a big difference
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's impossible to resist the polling forever.
Rejoin: 48% (=) Stay out: 32% (=)
How long do you think polling on the death penalty can be resisted?
What was defence spending as a percentage of GDP pre-2010? Wasn't it about 3%. The main criticism of Blair was that he made big demands without increasing the budget.
5% around 1980. 4% around 1990. 2.5% to 2.0% since about 2000, and that includes some fudging of what counts as defence spending. Capital expenditure has dwindled since the 1990s. We have decades of underinvestment to make up now.
Er..... sorry, show me the charts. Has there not been a big drop since 2010?
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's Lib Dem policy to rejoin the SM and while being likely on the opposition benches next Parliament they may well be need for 2029.
It looks like increasingly people are less bothered by keeping Sterling. Perhaps because people rarely use cash anymore, so it's just numbers on a card account.
48% Rejoin is the same as the 48% who voted Remain in 2016. That plunges to just 39% Rejoin with the Euro which is a big difference
32% is less than 52% though. Ignoring DKs as poll wrangling is fine if you don't want to face the Truth. Bodged Brexit is a large part of the destruction of the Conservative Party.
Hardly. There will always be a silly rump in all parties that thinks odd things on their side of the political spectrum. Labour being the party of the left, they are liable to think odd far left things. Just as the Tories have their harrumphing ghouls who salivate over war with France or that women have it far too good.
What matters is whether or not you try to appease them. Though not unimpeachable, Starmer has generally told those being daft where to go.
On that front I'd just note Rishi Sunak recently created 'Sir' Philip Davies.
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's impossible to resist the polling forever.
Rejoin: 48% (=) Stay out: 32% (=)
How long do you think polling on the death penalty can be resisted?
99. Ensuring the territorial integrity of the UK and security of overseas possessions.
They should start by flogging the aircraft carriers to whichever country needs an ego boost. If we are looking at getting involved in a country that is so far away we need floating airstrips then we shouldn’t be getting involved in the first place as it’s not our business.
Spend all the money on defensive kit. As long as no missile, ships, planes etc can hit British territory then that’s the most important thing. Defensive kit can also be used in conjunction with European allies if we need to get involved stopping the Russians and their tank from driving through Poland.
Blow it all on Iron dome and patriot. Keep the nuclear subs as a last resort threat. Bring recruitment in house and make it rewarding for NCOs who are about to retire or quit to run it.
We are a permanent UN Security council member and still have the Falklands to defend in the unlikely event Argentina tried to invade again. Both require aircraft carriers
I'm pretty sure the UN Security Council can defend itself without the help of our aircraft carriers.
Hardly. There will always be a silly rump in all parties that thinks odd things on their side of the political spectrum. Labour being the party of the left, they are liable to think odd far left things. Just as the Tories have their harrumphing ghouls who salivate over war with France or that women have it far too good.
What matters is whether or not you try to appease them. Though not unimpeachable, Starmer has generally told those being daft where to go.
On that front I'd just note Rishi Sunak recently created 'Sir' Philip Davies.
And let's not forget, in addition to Sir Philip we get Lady Esther as a Brucie Bonus.
Hardly. There will always be a silly rump in all parties that thinks odd things on their side of the political spectrum. Labour being the party of the left, they are liable to think odd far left things. Just as the Tories have their harrumphing ghouls who salivate over war with France or that women have it far too good.
What matters is whether or not you try to appease them. Though not unimpeachable, Starmer has generally told those being daft where to go.
On that front I'd just note Rishi Sunak recently created 'Sir' Philip Davies.
I think the best comment on this was a BBC interview with a Black, Black Cab driver, years back.
Ken was mayor of London, and a rugby World Cup on. It was announced that any Black Cab driver flying a Cross of St George would lose his license.
The Black, Black cab driver put one on his cab. And explained, very articulately, why - he was reclaiming *his* flag from bigots. He said it was stupid to try and deny the flag existed - so either you reclaim it (he mentioned what the gay community had done with the word “queer”) or you let the arseholes have it.
I see the second leader in The Times agrees with me that Angela Rayner should come clean about the teddy paid or not paid on her property transaction.
As for the subject under discussion we need first to articulate the "threats that the UK faces" and then agree a suitable and appropriate level of preparedness.
What was defence spending as a percentage of GDP pre-2010? Wasn't it about 3%. The main criticism of Blair was that he made big demands without increasing the budget.
5% around 1980. 4% around 1990. 2.5% to 2.0% since about 2000, and that includes some fudging of what counts as defence spending. Capital expenditure has dwindled since the 1990s. We have decades of underinvestment to make up now.
Er..... sorry, show me the charts. Has there not been a big drop since 2010?
We haven't spent 3% of GDP on defence since about 1995. Defence has been in the 2.0-2.5% range for about the last two decades now.
I see the second leader in The Times agrees with me that Angela Rayner should come clean about the teddy paid or not paid on her property transaction.
As for the subject under discussion we need first to articulate the "threats that the UK faces" and then agree a suitable and appropriate level of preparedness.
Airstrike, missile attack, nuclear first strike, terrorism are the realistic threats. Invasion under the current world situation is not a risk, at least not until 'last domino' rules come into play
Is it really correct to blame Trident? Latest iteration was a 100bn headline project, always quoted as if a one off CapEx cost, but aiui spent in trickle fashion over some years. cf also HS2.
Spread that out over 20-30 years though, and what % of defence spending does it actually entail in the long run. 10%? 20%? A chunk for sure, but to the exclusion of substantial spending elsewhere that should deliver a lot?
It's a huge question. I can point to causes, but difficult to quantify as we have little transparency. In no particular order:
Penny wise pound foolish short-termist culture at the Treasury - just like the £50bn pissed away on building enough of HS2 to negate the benefits, whilst wasting most money. Famously Gordon Brown delayed aircraft carriers by a year two to save money in the short term and meet this year's targets, increasing the overall cost by ~25% ie wasting £1-2bn and getting a worse outcome.
Cooking the books. eg Adding things into the Defence Budget such as pensions, and I think Trident was folded in in the last decade having been treated separately before. AFAICS that's mainly Cameron trying to hide salami slicing whilst in power. I could be wrong on this - not sure, but GCHQ - £2-3bn a year - could be in there as well.
Ill-considered privatisation culture, without maintaining adequate control. So now we are over a barrel being continuously porked by BAE on various fronts. Combine that with a fits-and-starts culture at the MoD, and guess what happens?
Gold plating. Which is basically continuous requirements changes whilst demanding "British made". Consider current armoured vehicle programmes, and compare the cost of our lets-deafen-the-troops versions, with buying from elsewhere. Ajax are costing £10m each, where we could have had CV90 (from BAE Sweden) for about 25-30% less off the shelf.
Project and programme management, impossible to do effectively in the face of pushmi-pullu politicians, about which a book could be written.
I'd add culture of secrecy - observe just how little is communicated in response to Commons' Questions for 'security reasons', and selecting shysters as Ministers - which I will leave there for the sake of OGH Jr.
I'm sure our resident pilot can be more detailed and more vitriolic, and correct me on some points.
I suspect the USA system is far worse however, given how corrupt their voting system is; I hate to think what % of the US Defence Budget is p*ssed away on pork barrels and earmarks.
Ajax costs a lot more than £10m each, given we've already spent £5bn and don't have any in service. There's a stronger case for cancelling that, than there was doing so to HS2.
The US is worse in some ways; far better in others. There's huge waste - but there's also huge capability. And they are probably quicker at innovating at the edges of the system (partly because they have a large enough economy to support far more startup ideas).
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's impossible to resist the polling forever.
Rejoin: 48% (=) Stay out: 32% (=)
How long do you think polling on the death penalty can be resisted?
Pretty well forever. Until 60% of the electorate actually care about it enough to make a difference to the way they vote (they don't), nothing will happen.
Similarly with the EU - though the political salience of that is possibly rather more. It certainly was a decade ago, even if for now it's quiescent, But it's managed completely to wreck the Tory party in the meantime.
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's impossible to resist the polling forever.
Rejoin: 48% (=) Stay out: 32% (=)
How long do you think polling on the death penalty can be resisted?
Pretty well forever. Until 60% of the electorate actually care about it enough to make a difference to the way they vote (they don't), nothing will happen.
Similarly with the EU - though the political salience of that is possibly rather more. It certainly was a decade ago, even if for now it's quiescent, But it's managed completely to wreck the Tory party in the meantime.
I think putting a Referendum on the death penalty in the Tory Manifesto is pretty much their best weapon in GE2024
99. Ensuring the territorial integrity of the UK and security of overseas possessions.
They should start by flogging the aircraft carriers to whichever country needs an ego boost. If we are looking at getting involved in a country that is so far away we need floating airstrips then we shouldn’t be getting involved in the first place as it’s not our business.
Spend all the money on defensive kit. As long as no missile, ships, planes etc can hit British territory then that’s the most important thing. Defensive kit can also be used in conjunction with European allies if we need to get involved stopping the Russians and their tank from driving through Poland.
Blow it all on Iron dome and patriot. Keep the nuclear subs as a last resort threat. Bring recruitment in house and make it rewarding for NCOs who are about to retire or quit to run it.
We are a permanent UN Security council member and still have the Falklands to defend in the unlikely event Argentina tried to invade again. Both require aircraft carriers
Surely the issue was that there were not the troops present to defend the Falklands. There are now 1500 troops and Typhoon fighters and air defences based there plus a frigate and presumably a sub wandering about. I presume that would be quite a deterrent even if Argentine does buy F16s.
Rather deter than the huge cost in lives and lost ships in regaining it. That was our failure last time.
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's impossible to resist the polling forever.
Rejoin: 48% (=) Stay out: 32% (=)
How long do you think polling on the death penalty can be resisted?
Pretty well forever. Until 60% of the electorate actually care about it enough to make a difference to the way they vote (they don't), nothing will happen.
Similarly with the EU - though the political salience of that is possibly rather more. It certainly was a decade ago, even if for now it's quiescent, But it's managed completely to wreck the Tory party in the meantime.
I think putting a Referendum on the death penalty in the Tory Manifesto is pretty much their best weapon in GE2024
That just shows what a hopeless state they're in. Still, it would at least be a clear test of how important the issue is to electors.
"Vote for us: we're shit, but we'll kill a handful of people" isn't a particularly convincing platform.
I see the second leader in The Times agrees with me that Angela Rayner should come clean about the teddy paid or not paid on her property transaction.
As for the subject under discussion we need first to articulate the "threats that the UK faces" and then agree a suitable and appropriate level of preparedness.
We need to have contingencies for all threats, and these include an invasion by continental European powers (including Russia), an invasion by China, and an invasion by the USA. We are constantly told that Trump coming to power will be a disaster for world security - this can happen in a democracy. It therefore follows that a plan to resist a US invasion should our security interests and relations diverge dramatically is necessary.
“I've just run some planning casework through Claude. It identified within a few seconds the grounds on which a legal challenge could be pursued. This is a skill that only the most experienced people working in the industry have and they will have built it up over careers of many years.”
Indeed. Claude is completely extraordinary. I’ve just been chatting with my lady novelist friend. I told you that she fed her latest novel into Claude and it gave her a detailed summary and analysis in forty five seconds. 😶
Now she has given Claude her editor’s feedback - several pages of deep advice - and Claude has decided the editor is right on this, this, this and not this. All in a few seconds. Stunningly good and incomparably fast
99. Ensuring the territorial integrity of the UK and security of overseas possessions.
They should start by flogging the aircraft carriers to whichever country needs an ego boost. If we are looking at getting involved in a country that is so far away we need floating airstrips then we shouldn’t be getting involved in the first place as it’s not our business.
Spend all the money on defensive kit. As long as no missile, ships, planes etc can hit British territory then that’s the most important thing. Defensive kit can also be used in conjunction with European allies if we need to get involved stopping the Russians and their tank from driving through Poland.
Blow it all on Iron dome and patriot. Keep the nuclear subs as a last resort threat. Bring recruitment in house and make it rewarding for NCOs who are about to retire or quit to run it.
We are a permanent UN Security council member and still have the Falklands to defend in the unlikely event Argentina tried to invade again. Both require aircraft carriers
Surely the issue was that there were not the troops present to defend the Falklands. There are now 1500 troops and Typhoon fighters and air defences based there plus a frigate and presumably a sub wandering about. I presume that would be quite a deterrent even if Argentine does buy F16s.
Rather deter than the huge cost in lives and lost ships in regaining it. That was our failure last time.
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's impossible to resist the polling forever.
Rejoin: 48% (=) Stay out: 32% (=)
How long do you think polling on the death penalty can be resisted?
Pretty well forever. Until 60% of the electorate actually care about it enough to make a difference to the way they vote (they don't), nothing will happen.
Similarly with the EU - though the political salience of that is possibly rather more. It certainly was a decade ago, even if for now it's quiescent, But it's managed completely to wreck the Tory party in the meantime.
I think putting a Referendum on the death penalty in the Tory Manifesto is pretty much their best weapon in GE2024
That just shows what a hopeless state they're in. Still, it would at least be a clear test of how important the issue is to electors.
"Vote for us: we're shit, but we'll kill a handful of people" isn't a particularly convincing platform.
Its effectiveness as a policy depends on the other side saying, "Don't vote for them. They want the state to kill violent murderers!"
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
Look, why can't these so-called foreigners respect the 17.4m people who voted to leave? Them imposing rules on us wasn't the idea, we're supposed to be imposing the rules on THEM. Don't they know their so-called tourist spots like Marbellah would be dead without us?
Cleethorpes has no entry requirements.
Don't you have to show your tattoos?
No you are thinking of Ingoldmells. Cleethorpes is Lytham St Anne's comparatively.
Is it really correct to blame Trident? Latest iteration was a 100bn headline project, always quoted as if a one off CapEx cost, but aiui spent in trickle fashion over some years. cf also HS2.
Spread that out over 20-30 years though, and what % of defence spending does it actually entail in the long run. 10%? 20%? A chunk for sure, but to the exclusion of substantial spending elsewhere that should deliver a lot?
If HS2 is a comparison with Trident, does that mean the missiles will stop at Birmingham?
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
Look, why can't these so-called foreigners respect the 17.4m people who voted to leave? Them imposing rules on us wasn't the idea, we're supposed to be imposing the rules on THEM. Don't they know their so-called tourist spots like Marbellah would be dead without us?
Cleethorpes has no entry requirements.
Don't you have to show your tattoos?
No you are thinking of Ingoldmells. Cleethorpes is Lytham St Anne's comparatively.
I have arrived at the coastal railway.
Most of the other passengers have children with them. Fortunately I have a whole compartment to me.
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's impossible to resist the polling forever.
Rejoin: 48% (=) Stay out: 32% (=)
How long do you think polling on the death penalty can be resisted?
Pretty well forever. Until 60% of the electorate actually care about it enough to make a difference to the way they vote (they don't), nothing will happen.
Similarly with the EU - though the political salience of that is possibly rather more. It certainly was a decade ago, even if for now it's quiescent, But it's managed completely to wreck the Tory party in the meantime.
I think putting a Referendum on the death penalty in the Tory Manifesto is pretty much their best weapon in GE2024
That just shows what a hopeless state they're in. Still, it would at least be a clear test of how important the issue is to electors.
"Vote for us: we're shit, but we'll kill a handful of people" isn't a particularly convincing platform.
Well yes but I guess from their perspective desperate times desperate policies.
What's the betting SKS would say we will offer one too. Would definitely be good news for LDs/ Greens if so. #Hangmanslackenyournoose
99. Ensuring the territorial integrity of the UK and security of overseas possessions.
They should start by flogging the aircraft carriers to whichever country needs an ego boost. If we are looking at getting involved in a country that is so far away we need floating airstrips then we shouldn’t be getting involved in the first place as it’s not our business.
Spend all the money on defensive kit. As long as no missile, ships, planes etc can hit British territory then that’s the most important thing. Defensive kit can also be used in conjunction with European allies if we need to get involved stopping the Russians and their tank from driving through Poland.
Blow it all on Iron dome and patriot. Keep the nuclear subs as a last resort threat. Bring recruitment in house and make it rewarding for NCOs who are about to retire or quit to run it.
We are a permanent UN Security council member and still have the Falklands to defend in the unlikely event Argentina tried to invade again. Both require aircraft carriers
Surely the issue was that there were not the troops present to defend the Falklands. There are now 1500 troops and Typhoon fighters and air defences based there plus a frigate and presumably a sub wandering about. I presume that would be quite a deterrent even if Argentine does buy F16s.
Rather deter than the huge cost in lives and lost ships in regaining it. That was our failure last time.
Plus Argentina is a shadow of its 1982 self
Argentina has been unable to buy weapons, because
1) they have no money 2) they have defaulted so often that no one will lend them the money to buy arms (a loan + arms is the classic deal) 3) The UK, via BAe and others, vetos them buying a variety of weapons from other countries, due to U.K. content/tech.
There is an urban legend that the catapults from the Argentine carriers still in a warehouse somewhere in Scotland. They were being refurbished at the time of the Falklands war and never returned.
In can understand why so many of today's Tories are Trumpers. Copy the Donald - you don't need to spend money defending us against Russia if we just become bezzies with Putin.
The more notable Trump supporters within the party (Truss, Boris) are also the most anti-Putin. I am not sure I am aware of anyone prominent in the party favouring a more neutral attitude.
You can't logically be anti Putin and pro Trump as Trump being re-elected will undoubtedly aid Russia.
It was more clear that reelecting Obama in 2012 would aid Putin.
Obama was wrong. That's history.
Trump essentially never criticises Putin, and has literally taken Russia's side over his own intelligence agencies. Anyone thinking Trump will be tough on Russia is a clown. There is nothing ambigous about Trump's cosying up to autocrats and his unwillingness to support America's democratic allies.
If Trump's opponents had any sense what they would do is suggest that he is AFRAID of Putin. I mean the one thing you could say about Trump is that he shoots from the hip and doesn't care about offending people. So why not Putin? What is he scared of?
The Biden administration is making Ukraine fight with one hand tied behind their back.
The US has urged Ukraine to halt attacks on Russia’s energy infrastructure, warning that the drone strikes risk driving up global oil prices and provoking retaliation, according to three people familiar with the discussions.
“I've just run some planning casework through Claude. It identified within a few seconds the grounds on which a legal challenge could be pursued. This is a skill that only the most experienced people working in the industry have and they will have built it up over careers of many years.”
Indeed. Claude is completely extraordinary. I’ve just been chatting with my lady novelist friend. I told you that she fed her latest novel into Claude and it gave her a detailed summary and analysis in forty five seconds. 😶
Now she has given Claude her editor’s feedback - several pages of deep advice - and Claude has decided the editor is right on this, this, this and not this. All in a few seconds. Stunningly good and incomparably fast
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's impossible to resist the polling forever.
Rejoin: 48% (=) Stay out: 32% (=)
How long do you think polling on the death penalty can be resisted?
Pretty well forever. Until 60% of the electorate actually care about it enough to make a difference to the way they vote (they don't), nothing will happen.
Similarly with the EU - though the political salience of that is possibly rather more. It certainly was a decade ago, even if for now it's quiescent, But it's managed completely to wreck the Tory party in the meantime.
I think putting a Referendum on the death penalty in the Tory Manifesto is pretty much their best weapon in GE2024
That just shows what a hopeless state they're in. Still, it would at least be a clear test of how important the issue is to electors.
"Vote for us: we're shit, but we'll kill a handful of people" isn't a particularly convincing platform.
Well yes but I guess from their perspective desperate times desperate policies.
What's the betting SKS would say we will offer one too. Would definitely be good news for LDs/ Greens if so. #Hangmanslackenyournoose
Labour will kill more, sooner. Only Labour can be trusted with State human disposal
Trident is reliable - The US has been firing them yearly since they came into service. With a very high success rate
Since we are literally using the same missile - it’s on the RN to explain the failures.
Your information is incorrect. The failure of the test under Cameron was a fault in the US guidance systems and Obama asked us to keep it secret because it was detrimental to the reputation of the US programme. We must assume that something similar happened under May when the missiles turned tail and decided to head back to the US.
Whether this points to some difference in systems, potentially allowing the US to alter the outcome of a British missile strike, is entering the realms of conspiracy theory. It is a theory that events aren't entirely inconsistent woth though.
Worth noting that Claude still has serious limitations. It can make basic errors of comprehension, and it has to reread an entire conversation - and, in this case, a novel - every time it answers
But even that is quite amazing. It reads a whole novel every time you ask, and it does that in about 1 minute. PB-ers need to try this machine. You need to try the pro opus version
Trident is reliable - The US has been firing them yearly since they came into service. With a very high success rate
Since we are literally using the same missile - it’s on the RN to explain the failures.
Your information is incorrect. The failure of the test under Cameron was a fault in the US guidance systems and Obama asked us to keep it secret because it was detrimental to the reputation of the US programme. We must assume that something similar happened under May when the missiles turned tail and decided to head back to the US.
Whether this points to some difference in systems, potentially allowing the US to alter the outcome of a British missile strike, is entering the realms of conspiracy theory. It is a theory that events aren't entirely inconsistent woth though.
It'll be fascinating to see if Labour does bite the bullet (sorry) and make a significant increase in defence spending. I mean, given the noises off about lack of cash and the ever ballooning health and pensions bills it doesn't seem likely, but perhaps those who insist that everything will be different once they've dispensed with the need to lure the grey vote into backing them will be proven right?
Given our geography, even if the Government feels it can't afford the spectrum of capabilities that it would like, you'd at least think it could be persuaded to fork out for a functioning navy?
More like use the existing money efficiently, rather than buy frigates without fixed antisubmarine torpedo tubes and ear-killing armoured vehicles when perfectly good designs exist off the shelf from other suppliers.
Do any new frigates have fixed torpedo tubes these days?
I thought it was either via helicopter, or rocket from a vertical cell, in latest versions.
Bog standard, it seems. DA commented, when we were discussing the omission in a recent RN class, that it was an essential backup if the ship's helicopter was ill or the sea state was too rough to launch the helo. And AIUI torpedoes are often wire guided - not something thast can be done with a rocket-delivered one.
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's impossible to resist the polling forever.
Rejoin: 48% (=) Stay out: 32% (=)
How long do you think polling on the death penalty can be resisted?
Pretty well forever. Until 60% of the electorate actually care about it enough to make a difference to the way they vote (they don't), nothing will happen.
Similarly with the EU - though the political salience of that is possibly rather more. It certainly was a decade ago, even if for now it's quiescent, But it's managed completely to wreck the Tory party in the meantime.
I think putting a Referendum on the death penalty in the Tory Manifesto is pretty much their best weapon in GE2024
That just shows what a hopeless state they're in. Still, it would at least be a clear test of how important the issue is to electors.
"Vote for us: we're shit, but we'll kill a handful of people" isn't a particularly convincing platform.
Its effectiveness as a policy depends on the other side saying, "Don't vote for them. They want the state to kill violent murderers!"
Yes BREXIT all over again possibly with both main Parties on the same side under the we have changed to be the real Conservatives party.
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's impossible to resist the polling forever.
Rejoin: 48% (=) Stay out: 32% (=)
How long do you think polling on the death penalty can be resisted?
Pretty well forever. Until 60% of the electorate actually care about it enough to make a difference to the way they vote (they don't), nothing will happen.
Similarly with the EU - though the political salience of that is possibly rather more. It certainly was a decade ago, even if for now it's quiescent, But it's managed completely to wreck the Tory party in the meantime.
If you're looking for a Brexit benefit then "wrecked the Tory Party" is a prime candidate. Though I'd be happier about that if I wasn't very concerned that the next iteration of the Tory Party (or its successor) will be something much, much worse.
As for the death penalty that, at least, is one of those non-issues, like Lords reform or republicanism. You can find definite views on each if you go out of your way to ask, but few people actually care that much about them.
“I've just run some planning casework through Claude. It identified within a few seconds the grounds on which a legal challenge could be pursued. This is a skill that only the most experienced people working in the industry have and they will have built it up over careers of many years.”
Indeed. Claude is completely extraordinary. I’ve just been chatting with my lady novelist friend. I told you that she fed her latest novel into Claude and it gave her a detailed summary and analysis in forty five seconds. 😶
Now she has given Claude her editor’s feedback - several pages of deep advice - and Claude has decided the editor is right on this, this, this and not this. All in a few seconds. Stunningly good and incomparably fast
We’re chatting now. I had an idea for her novel and I messaged her a moment ago with the idea. Her reply: “Claude just suggested exactly that”
True story
What’s terrifying here is that if Claude can be this good at editing then I see no reason why Claude cannot actually write books on top of editing them. Given that it understands plot, tension, narrative, character, everything
This is Claude 3. Unless progress suddenly stops - why? - clause 6.5 will write brilliant novels. In seconds
1) Nearly everyone in rowing wants to concentrate on 2km on a straight course on a lake. 2) For those who want to row a 20 minute race on a tidal river, there are various Heads. 3) Racing more than 2 racing shells side by side on the Thames is difficult and even dangerous. This is because of turns, currents and very shallow water. The rules of navigation on the Thames actually say not to do more than 2. 4) This is why the Heads are time trials. 5) Anyone who can row the course at a competitive time is at the top of British rowing and is in the few hundred candidates for the national team 6) Rowing is actually a cheap sport. Nearly no one owns more than a single sculling boat (one person boat). You don’t even need shoes - they are fixed in the boat*. Nearly all boats are owned by clubs. For a couple of hundred pounds a year, you can join nearly any club.
*I actually built my own foot stretcher (structure that holds the shoes) so I can put my own shoes in a club boat.
Trident is reliable - The US has been firing them yearly since they came into service. With a very high success rate
Since we are literally using the same missile - it’s on the RN to explain the failures.
Your information is incorrect. The failure of the test under Cameron was a fault in the US guidance systems and Obama asked us to keep it secret because it was detrimental to the reputation of the US programme. We must assume that something similar happened under May when the missiles turned tail and decided to head back to the US.
Whether this points to some difference in systems, potentially allowing the US to alter the outcome of a British missile strike, is entering the realms of conspiracy theory. It is a theory that events aren't entirely inconsistent woth though.
Another Brexit dividend - my 11yo daughter just got a new passport delivered, and was so disgusted that it was a blue one that she threw it on the ground, where it landed on my toe!
Trident is reliable - The US has been firing them yearly since they came into service. With a very high success rate
Since we are literally using the same missile - it’s on the RN to explain the failures.
Your information is incorrect. The failure of the test under Cameron was a fault in the US guidance systems and Obama asked us to keep it secret because it was detrimental to the reputation of the US programme. We must assume that something similar happened under May when the missiles turned tail and decided to head back to the US.
Whether this points to some difference in systems, potentially allowing the US to alter the outcome of a British missile strike, is entering the realms of conspiracy theory. It is a theory that events aren't entirely inconsistent woth though.
No, it wasn’t.
The simple fact is that the US repeatedly succeeds with their Trident tests. Probably because they do them regularly.
We don’t and we don’t.
The lesson is that practise is expensive, but vital.
Worth noting that Claude still has serious limitations. It can make basic errors of comprehension, and it has to reread an entire conversation - and, in this case, a novel - every time it answers
But even that is quite amazing. It reads a whole novel every time you ask, and it does that in about 1 minute. PB-ers need to try this machine. You need to try the pro opus version
I have only used the basic version of ChatGPT, and don't pretend to have any insight, but the mistakes in its output to me seem deliberate, and aimed at prolonging the interaction, presumably so it can learn more. It's like Facebook - if something is free, *you* are the product.
Just perfecting my Cleetorpes Coast light railway wave.
Is the Royal wave clockwise or anti clockwise
I think it's clockwise with the left hand and anti clockwise with the right?
How's the weather in Cleethorpes? It's vest and shorts in Hertfordshire for the first time in at least six months. It won't last, of course, but I went out and bought cake to celebrate. As good an excuse as any.
It'll be fascinating to see if Labour does bite the bullet (sorry) and make a significant increase in defence spending. I mean, given the noises off about lack of cash and the ever ballooning health and pensions bills it doesn't seem likely, but perhaps those who insist that everything will be different once they've dispensed with the need to lure the grey vote into backing them will be proven right?
Given our geography, even if the Government feels it can't afford the spectrum of capabilities that it would like, you'd at least think it could be persuaded to fork out for a functioning navy?
More like use the existing money efficiently, rather than buy frigates without fixed antisubmarine torpedo tubes and ear-killing armoured vehicles when perfectly good designs exist off the shelf from other suppliers.
Do any new frigates have fixed torpedo tubes these days?
I thought it was either via helicopter, or rocket from a vertical cell, in latest versions.
Bog standard, it seems. DA commented, when we were discussing the omission in a recent RN class, that it was an essential backup if the ship's helicopter was ill or the sea state was too rough to launch the helo. And AIUI torpedoes are often wire guided - not something thast can be done with a rocket-delivered one.
You’d lose the wires the moment the ship started to manoeuvre. Which is why nearly all ship launched torpedos didn’t use wires
Rocket boosted torpedos answer all of the issues. Which is why they are quite popular.
Trident is reliable - The US has been firing them yearly since they came into service. With a very high success rate
Since we are literally using the same missile - it’s on the RN to explain the failures.
Your information is incorrect. The failure of the test under Cameron was a fault in the US guidance systems and Obama asked us to keep it secret because it was detrimental to the reputation of the US programme. We must assume that something similar happened under May when the missiles turned tail and decided to head back to the US.
Whether this points to some difference in systems, potentially allowing the US to alter the outcome of a British missile strike, is entering the realms of conspiracy theory. It is a theory that events aren't entirely inconsistent woth though.
No, it wasn’t.
The simple fact is that the US repeatedly succeeds with their Trident tests. Probably because they do them regularly.
We don’t and we don’t.
The lesson is that practise is expensive, but vital.
The fact that the test failed due to US technology is a matter of public record. Are you suggesting that this is false?
What exactly is the Navy doing wrong that would make a missile fire off but either fail or go to the wrong place - what ability to influence the process once the missile fires does the Navy even have?
99. Ensuring the territorial integrity of the UK and security of overseas possessions.
They should start by flogging the aircraft carriers to whichever country needs an ego boost. If we are looking at getting involved in a country that is so far away we need floating airstrips then we shouldn’t be getting involved in the first place as it’s not our business.
Spend all the money on defensive kit. As long as no missile, ships, planes etc can hit British territory then that’s the most important thing. Defensive kit can also be used in conjunction with European allies if we need to get involved stopping the Russians and their tank from driving through Poland.
Blow it all on Iron dome and patriot. Keep the nuclear subs as a last resort threat. Bring recruitment in house and make it rewarding for NCOs who are about to retire or quit to run it.
We are a permanent UN Security council member and still have the Falklands to defend in the unlikely event Argentina tried to invade again. Both require aircraft carriers
Surely the issue was that there were not the troops present to defend the Falklands. There are now 1500 troops and Typhoon fighters and air defences based there plus a frigate and presumably a sub wandering about. I presume that would be quite a deterrent even if Argentine does buy F16s.
Rather deter than the huge cost in lives and lost ships in regaining it. That was our failure last time.
You need the former and latter if that does not work
Another Brexit dividend - my 11yo daughter just got a new passport delivered, and was so disgusted that it was a blue one that she threw it on the ground, where it landed on my toe!
An 11 year old cares about passport colours? What colour was she hoping for?
Can I ask, with these people being turned away at the airport because of impending out of date passports - didn't they think to check the entry requirements for the country first?
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
I made this point on the last thread
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
Nah. Rejoin is just off the agenda for the next 5 years, not forever.
It's Lib Dem policy to rejoin the SM and while being likely on the opposition benches next Parliament they may well be need for 2029.
It looks like increasingly people are less bothered by keeping Sterling. Perhaps because people rarely use cash anymore, so it's just numbers on a card account.
48% Rejoin is the same as the 48% who voted Remain in 2016. That plunges to just 39% Rejoin with the Euro which is a big difference
32% is less than 52% though. Ignoring DKs as poll wrangling is fine if you don't want to face the Truth. Bodged Brexit is a large part of the destruction of the Conservative Party.
Except Rishi would give anything for the Tories to be on 32% now!
It'll be fascinating to see if Labour does bite the bullet (sorry) and make a significant increase in defence spending. I mean, given the noises off about lack of cash and the ever ballooning health and pensions bills it doesn't seem likely, but perhaps those who insist that everything will be different once they've dispensed with the need to lure the grey vote into backing them will be proven right?
Given our geography, even if the Government feels it can't afford the spectrum of capabilities that it would like, you'd at least think it could be persuaded to fork out for a functioning navy?
More like use the existing money efficiently, rather than buy frigates without fixed antisubmarine torpedo tubes and ear-killing armoured vehicles when perfectly good designs exist off the shelf from other suppliers.
Do any new frigates have fixed torpedo tubes these days?
I thought it was either via helicopter, or rocket from a vertical cell, in latest versions.
Bog standard, it seems. DA commented, when we were discussing the omission in a recent RN class, that it was an essential backup if the ship's helicopter was ill or the sea state was too rough to launch the helo. And AIUI torpedoes are often wire guided - not something thast can be done with a rocket-delivered one.
You’d lose the wires the moment the ship started to manoeuvre. Which is why nearly all ship launched torpedos didn’t use wires
Rocket boosted torpedos answer all of the issues. Which is why they are quite popular.
Points taken (also yours earlier) - but fixed tubes are still standard fit these days (e.g. FREMM class French ships and the new Koreans) so there must be something to them. Of course the surface ship has towed arrays anyway, quite often, also. Plus it saves space in the vertical launch system.
99. Ensuring the territorial integrity of the UK and security of overseas possessions.
They should start by flogging the aircraft carriers to whichever country needs an ego boost. If we are looking at getting involved in a country that is so far away we need floating airstrips then we shouldn’t be getting involved in the first place as it’s not our business.
Spend all the money on defensive kit. As long as no missile, ships, planes etc can hit British territory then that’s the most important thing. Defensive kit can also be used in conjunction with European allies if we need to get involved stopping the Russians and their tank from driving through Poland.
Blow it all on Iron dome and patriot. Keep the nuclear subs as a last resort threat. Bring recruitment in house and make it rewarding for NCOs who are about to retire or quit to run it.
We are a permanent UN Security council member and still have the Falklands to defend in the unlikely event Argentina tried to invade again. Both require aircraft carriers
Surely the issue was that there were not the troops present to defend the Falklands. There are now 1500 troops and Typhoon fighters and air defences based there plus a frigate and presumably a sub wandering about. I presume that would be quite a deterrent even if Argentine does buy F16s.
Rather deter than the huge cost in lives and lost ships in regaining it. That was our failure last time.
Argentinian F-16s are a done deal as of this week. Biden made Denmark sell them 24 jets with AIM-120.
By 2026 Club 14-35 in the Flaklands will be flying the last 4 Tranche 1 Typhoons in the RAF. I think we can all see where this is going...
Another Brexit dividend - my 11yo daughter just got a new passport delivered, and was so disgusted that it was a blue one that she threw it on the ground, where it landed on my toe!
An 11 year old cares about passport colours? What colour was she hoping for?
OLB has presumably been filling her head with utter nonsense the poor girl.
Another Brexit dividend - my 11yo daughter just got a new passport delivered, and was so disgusted that it was a blue one that she threw it on the ground, where it landed on my toe!
An 11 year old cares about passport colours? What colour was she hoping for?
OLB has presumably been filling her head with utter nonsense the poor girl.
That's my best guess. Give she was two or three years old when we voted to LEAVE she's never known anything else, so if she's upset at getting a blue passport she must have picked it up from someone...
Trident is reliable - The US has been firing them yearly since they came into service. With a very high success rate
Since we are literally using the same missile - it’s on the RN to explain the failures.
Your information is incorrect. The failure of the test under Cameron was a fault in the US guidance systems and Obama asked us to keep it secret because it was detrimental to the reputation of the US programme. We must assume that something similar happened under May when the missiles turned tail and decided to head back to the US.
Whether this points to some difference in systems, potentially allowing the US to alter the outcome of a British missile strike, is entering the realms of conspiracy theory. It is a theory that events aren't entirely inconsistent woth though.
No, it wasn’t.
The simple fact is that the US repeatedly succeeds with their Trident tests. Probably because they do them regularly.
We don’t and we don’t.
The lesson is that practise is expensive, but vital.
The fact that the test failed due to US technology is a matter of public record. Are you suggesting that this is false?
What exactly is the Navy doing wrong that would make a missile fire off but either fail or go to the wrong place - what ability to influence the process once the missile fires does the Navy even have?
The launch process for a ballistic missile is a complex one. It isn’t a matter of “press a button”.
It’s a slightly automated space launch.
In the case of an SLBM it is even more complicated. The entire crew of the submarine (both watches) is involved and have to do a large number of things in exact sequence to launch successfully. And that includes getting the missile into the exact state, that after launch, it will do its thing.
Another Brexit dividend - my 11yo daughter just got a new passport delivered, and was so disgusted that it was a blue one that she threw it on the ground, where it landed on my toe!
An 11 year old cares about passport colours? What colour was she hoping for?
OLB has presumably been filling her head with utter nonsense the poor girl.
That's my best guess. Give she was two or three years old when we voted to LEAVE she's never known anything else, so if she's upset at getting a blue passport she must have picked it up from someone...
What miseries you two are. Little girls tend to like pink, or pershaps some other pastel shade.
“I've just run some planning casework through Claude. It identified within a few seconds the grounds on which a legal challenge could be pursued. This is a skill that only the most experienced people working in the industry have and they will have built it up over careers of many years.”
Indeed. Claude is completely extraordinary. I’ve just been chatting with my lady novelist friend. I told you that she fed her latest novel into Claude and it gave her a detailed summary and analysis in forty five seconds. 😶
Now she has given Claude her editor’s feedback - several pages of deep advice - and Claude has decided the editor is right on this, this, this and not this. All in a few seconds. Stunningly good and incomparably fast
We’re chatting now. I had an idea for her novel and I messaged her a moment ago with the idea. Her reply: “Claude just suggested exactly that”
True story
What’s terrifying here is that if Claude can be this good at editing then I see no reason why Claude cannot actually write books on top of editing them. Given that it understands plot, tension, narrative, character, everything
This is Claude 3. Unless progress suddenly stops - why? - clause 6.5 will write brilliant novels. In seconds
@leon. Indeed - I was using GPT before but Claude is a game changer. After last nights output I have been hypothetically planning out all morning how we can completely redesign the service at work based on this technology. Productivity and accuracy could increase exponentially by effectively outsourcing about 80% of the work in report writing. The hard part of checking written output can also be done through AI. It creates vast opportunities to improve 'customer service' by moving resource in to customer facing roles and deliver on enormously neglected areas of the service.
My question is that how would I build a system that generates these reports that isn't in a chat format, IE I get Claude to 'learn' various rules set out in policy documents, then generates text based on variable inputs that the operator gives it? I've seen some people tout these things on linkedin, how do you build these systems?
(I am not in charge of the department - the above is all a thought experiment). Very interested in feedback.
99. Ensuring the territorial integrity of the UK and security of overseas possessions.
They should start by flogging the aircraft carriers to whichever country needs an ego boost. If we are looking at getting involved in a country that is so far away we need floating airstrips then we shouldn’t be getting involved in the first place as it’s not our business.
Spend all the money on defensive kit. As long as no missile, ships, planes etc can hit British territory then that’s the most important thing. Defensive kit can also be used in conjunction with European allies if we need to get involved stopping the Russians and their tank from driving through Poland.
Blow it all on Iron dome and patriot. Keep the nuclear subs as a last resort threat. Bring recruitment in house and make it rewarding for NCOs who are about to retire or quit to run it.
I find it hard to disagree with you or Dura on this.
He wants to keep Trident and you've stated expressly that you're against it. Apart from that, I agree with everything too.
I have always been of the opinion that the CASD is useless and cripples the Navy with its vast cost. Conventional subs with no nukes would be a more useful defence asset. We don't need the vast range of SSNs to defend the UK.
“I've just run some planning casework through Claude. It identified within a few seconds the grounds on which a legal challenge could be pursued. This is a skill that only the most experienced people working in the industry have and they will have built it up over careers of many years.”
Indeed. Claude is completely extraordinary. I’ve just been chatting with my lady novelist friend. I told you that she fed her latest novel into Claude and it gave her a detailed summary and analysis in forty five seconds. 😶
Now she has given Claude her editor’s feedback - several pages of deep advice - and Claude has decided the editor is right on this, this, this and not this. All in a few seconds. Stunningly good and incomparably fast
We’re chatting now. I had an idea for her novel and I messaged her a moment ago with the idea. Her reply: “Claude just suggested exactly that”
True story
What’s terrifying here is that if Claude can be this good at editing then I see no reason why Claude cannot actually write books on top of editing them. Given that it understands plot, tension, narrative, character, everything
This is Claude 3. Unless progress suddenly stops - why? - clause 6.5 will write brilliant novels. In seconds
@leon. Indeed - I was using GPT before but Claude is a game changer. After last nights output I have been hypothetically planning out all morning how we can completely redesign the service at work based on this technology. Productivity and accuracy could increase exponentially by effectively outsourcing about 80% of the work in report writing. The hard part of checking written output can also be done through AI. It creates vast opportunities to improve 'customer service' by moving resource in to customer facing roles and deliver on enormously neglected areas of the service.
My question is that how would I build a system that generates these reports that isn't in a chat format, IE I get Claude to 'learn' various rules set out in policy documents, then generates text based on variable inputs that the operator gives it? I've seen some people tout these things on linkedin, how do you build these systems?
(I am not in charge of the department - the above is all a thought experiment). Very interested in feedback.
Pay attention to your own IP (intellectual property). Do your customers (and directors, and regulators) know you are freely sending it outside? As a corollary to that, are you making arrangements to self-host AI?
“I've just run some planning casework through Claude. It identified within a few seconds the grounds on which a legal challenge could be pursued. This is a skill that only the most experienced people working in the industry have and they will have built it up over careers of many years.”
Indeed. Claude is completely extraordinary. I’ve just been chatting with my lady novelist friend. I told you that she fed her latest novel into Claude and it gave her a detailed summary and analysis in forty five seconds. 😶
Now she has given Claude her editor’s feedback - several pages of deep advice - and Claude has decided the editor is right on this, this, this and not this. All in a few seconds. Stunningly good and incomparably fast
We’re chatting now. I had an idea for her novel and I messaged her a moment ago with the idea. Her reply: “Claude just suggested exactly that”
True story
What’s terrifying here is that if Claude can be this good at editing then I see no reason why Claude cannot actually write books on top of editing them. Given that it understands plot, tension, narrative, character, everything
This is Claude 3. Unless progress suddenly stops - why? - clause 6.5 will write brilliant novels. In seconds
@leon. Indeed - I was using GPT before but Claude is a game changer. After last nights output I have been hypothetically planning out all morning how we can completely redesign the service at work based on this technology. Productivity and accuracy could increase exponentially by effectively outsourcing about 80% of the work in report writing. The hard part of checking written output can also be done through AI. It creates vast opportunities to improve 'customer service' by moving resource in to customer facing roles and deliver on enormously neglected areas of the service.
My question is that how would I build a system that generates these reports that isn't in a chat format, IE I get Claude to 'learn' various rules set out in policy documents, then generates text based on variable inputs that the operator gives it? I've seen some people tout these things on linkedin, how do you build these systems?
(I am not in charge of the department - the above is all a thought experiment). Very interested in feedback.
This is why any economic or political forecast - or maybe any forecast at all - that doesn’t factor in AI is completely pointless, redundant and probably counter productive. This technology is going to transform the world within a decade or less
Its revolutionary. As I said before, if you’re under 45 and paying into a pension you’re probably an idiot
“I've just run some planning casework through Claude. It identified within a few seconds the grounds on which a legal challenge could be pursued. This is a skill that only the most experienced people working in the industry have and they will have built it up over careers of many years.”
Indeed. Claude is completely extraordinary. I’ve just been chatting with my lady novelist friend. I told you that she fed her latest novel into Claude and it gave her a detailed summary and analysis in forty five seconds. 😶
Now she has given Claude her editor’s feedback - several pages of deep advice - and Claude has decided the editor is right on this, this, this and not this. All in a few seconds. Stunningly good and incomparably fast
We’re chatting now. I had an idea for her novel and I messaged her a moment ago with the idea. Her reply: “Claude just suggested exactly that”
True story
What’s terrifying here is that if Claude can be this good at editing then I see no reason why Claude cannot actually write books on top of editing them. Given that it understands plot, tension, narrative, character, everything
This is Claude 3. Unless progress suddenly stops - why? - clause 6.5 will write brilliant novels. In seconds
@leon. Indeed - I was using GPT before but Claude is a game changer. After last nights output I have been hypothetically planning out all morning how we can completely redesign the service at work based on this technology. Productivity and accuracy could increase exponentially by effectively outsourcing about 80% of the work in report writing. The hard part of checking written output can also be done through AI. It creates vast opportunities to improve 'customer service' by moving resource in to customer facing roles and deliver on enormously neglected areas of the service.
My question is that how would I build a system that generates these reports that isn't in a chat format, IE I get Claude to 'learn' various rules set out in policy documents, then generates text based on variable inputs that the operator gives it? I've seen some people tout these things on linkedin, how do you build these systems?
(I am not in charge of the department - the above is all a thought experiment). Very interested in feedback.
PS I agree that the perfect set up would TWO different AIs. Claude can make basic mistakes. But if you had another AI system checking Claude’s output you’d probably get near-perfect answers every time
My friend says “what my editor would take a week to do, Claude does in ten minutes”
If SKS managed to get proper planning reform that would probably be the largest change to the country in a generation.
It's one of those things that almost all politicians favour until they have to make tough choices about somewhere local. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to happen.
If SKS managed to get proper planning reform that would probably be the largest change to the country in a generation.
It’s not planning reform (at the moment)
It is the throttling of building to below the rate at which planning is *used*
It’s straight out of Adam Smith - in the case of a local or partial monopoly, the producer can stage a *sellers strike* to prevent prices falling.
This is why the Victorians and Edwardians sold pre planned plots by the street, to different developers. Which is why in such suburbs, you see small differences from one side of the road to the other, or a style change after 50 houses or whatever.
The reason this occurs is that it is convenient for a confluence of interests. Planning rules are set centrally. Local politics tends towards less building being popular *among the politically active*.
“I've just run some planning casework through Claude. It identified within a few seconds the grounds on which a legal challenge could be pursued. This is a skill that only the most experienced people working in the industry have and they will have built it up over careers of many years.”
Indeed. Claude is completely extraordinary. I’ve just been chatting with my lady novelist friend. I told you that she fed her latest novel into Claude and it gave her a detailed summary and analysis in forty five seconds. 😶
Now she has given Claude her editor’s feedback - several pages of deep advice - and Claude has decided the editor is right on this, this, this and not this. All in a few seconds. Stunningly good and incomparably fast
We’re chatting now. I had an idea for her novel and I messaged her a moment ago with the idea. Her reply: “Claude just suggested exactly that”
True story
What’s terrifying here is that if Claude can be this good at editing then I see no reason why Claude cannot actually write books on top of editing them. Given that it understands plot, tension, narrative, character, everything
This is Claude 3. Unless progress suddenly stops - why? - clause 6.5 will write brilliant novels. In seconds
@leon. Indeed - I was using GPT before but Claude is a game changer. After last nights output I have been hypothetically planning out all morning how we can completely redesign the service at work based on this technology. Productivity and accuracy could increase exponentially by effectively outsourcing about 80% of the work in report writing. The hard part of checking written output can also be done through AI. It creates vast opportunities to improve 'customer service' by moving resource in to customer facing roles and deliver on enormously neglected areas of the service.
My question is that how would I build a system that generates these reports that isn't in a chat format, IE I get Claude to 'learn' various rules set out in policy documents, then generates text based on variable inputs that the operator gives it? I've seen some people tout these things on linkedin, how do you build these systems?
(I am not in charge of the department - the above is all a thought experiment). Very interested in feedback.
Pay attention to your own IP (intellectual property). Do your customers (and directors, and regulators) know you are freely sending it outside? As a corollary to that, are you making arrangements to self-host AI?
That is a good point - I can't say too much but for the purposes of what I have been feeding to AI, all the data is open source and publicly available, so not disclosing any protected IP. One hazard with these AI systems though is they are recording all the data you give to them forever and they can certainly also identify you.
Claude also stores your conversations. So you can leave it and log out for an hour or a week. Then you return to the dialogue and it re-reads it all in one minute and resumes the brainstorming instantly, as smart and alert as ever, whenever you want
No editor can do that. They get tired, they menstruate, they sleep, they get ill or bored or move jobs
They’d better move jobs because editing is over as a job
I don't think governments can be blamed for cutting defence spending, in the immediate aftermath of the Cold War.
I certainly do think that the Coalition can and should be blamed, for cutting our armed forces, when it was plain that the world was becoming a more dangerous place. I'm not surprised by the poll's findings.
It'll be fascinating to see if Labour does bite the bullet (sorry) and make a significant increase in defence spending. I mean, given the noises off about lack of cash and the ever ballooning health and pensions bills it doesn't seem likely, but perhaps those who insist that everything will be different once they've dispensed with the need to lure the grey vote into backing them will be proven right?
Given our geography, even if the Government feels it can't afford the spectrum of capabilities that it would like, you'd at least think it could be persuaded to fork out for a functioning navy?
More like use the existing money efficiently, rather than buy frigates without fixed antisubmarine torpedo tubes and ear-killing armoured vehicles when perfectly good designs exist off the shelf from other suppliers.
Do any new frigates have fixed torpedo tubes these days?
I thought it was either via helicopter, or rocket from a vertical cell, in latest versions.
Bog standard, it seems. DA commented, when we were discussing the omission in a recent RN class, that it was an essential backup if the ship's helicopter was ill or the sea state was too rough to launch the helo. And AIUI torpedoes are often wire guided - not something thast can be done with a rocket-delivered one.
You’d lose the wires the moment the ship started to manoeuvre. Which is why nearly all ship launched torpedos didn’t use wires
Rocket boosted torpedos answer all of the issues. Which is why they are quite popular.
Points taken (also yours earlier) - but fixed tubes are still standard fit these days (e.g. FREMM class French ships and the new Koreans) so there must be something to them. Of course the surface ship has towed arrays anyway, quite often, also. Plus it saves space in the vertical launch system.
The towed arrays have quite a bit of range, on the right conditions - not just 500 yards of the port quarter. How many CZs is classified, of course. But definitely beyond the horizon.
An extra 6 or 8 cells in a VLS would be barely noticed - would put the mass marginally lower, helping with the stability curve of the ship.
If SKS managed to get proper planning reform that would probably be the largest change to the country in a generation.
It's one of those things that almost all politicians favour until they have to make tough choices about somewhere local. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to happen.
While we're talking about the Nimby vote, can I share this video which the Friends of Carrington Moss have released in opposition to local development. All of it is jaw dropping in its awfulness (I particularly enjoy thw contrast between the full throated enthusiasts and those who are dimly aware of how excrutiating it all is). But after you've got the gist forward on to about 3 minutes to get the reaction to development. https://youtu.be/KUVJ2ur_oMQ?si=lsIigoYsRDc255nr
Another Brexit dividend - my 11yo daughter just got a new passport delivered, and was so disgusted that it was a blue one that she threw it on the ground, where it landed on my toe!
An 11 year old cares about passport colours? What colour was she hoping for?
If SKS managed to get proper planning reform that would probably be the largest change to the country in a generation.
It's one of those things that almost all politicians favour until they have to make tough choices about somewhere local. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to happen.
On the other hand, Starmer himself (MP for Holborn), the bulk of his MPs (even in a landslide, biased towards the urban) and his electorate (predominantly young and screwed by the current setup) all have a bias towards getting more stuff built.
If SKS managed to get proper planning reform that would probably be the largest change to the country in a generation.
It's one of those things that almost all politicians favour until they have to make tough choices about somewhere local. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to happen.
That's my concern with any attempt to enact mass scale housebuilding. An outright Labour election victory implies substantial numbers of newly minted Labour MPs in just the kinds of commuter belt seats where most of the houses are going to need to go. And each of them will be scrambling for excuses as to why their particular patch isn't suitable.
Another Brexit dividend - my 11yo daughter just got a new passport delivered, and was so disgusted that it was a blue one that she threw it on the ground, where it landed on my toe!
An 11 year old cares about passport colours? What colour was she hoping for?
She liked the colour of the old one.
And that's partly why the current settlement isn't settling. One of the factors in 2016 was the nostalgic one, for the good old days before Ted Heath. Doesn't matter what the balance of good and bad is, nostalgia just is. People who grew up with blue passports wanted them back, people who grew up with burgundy will feel the same. Why shouldn't they? It may be silly, but it's also human.
As time passes, the ratio of nostalgia for pre-EEC and nostalgia for in-EEC/EU will evolve in a predictable way.
Comments
Not a deal-breaker, sure. But it's another bit of grit.
SKS still has much to do
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/30/starmer-faces-discontent-as-labour-mps-criticise-election-flyers-union-jacks
In terms of containing China though that is more a problem for the nations nearby, ie Japan, South Korea, Australia, Singapore and India who would certainly need to increase defence spending if China invaded Taiwan. Since we returned Hong Kong to China in 1997 the only intervention we would make in the Far East would be under US leadership
I thought it was either via helicopter, or rocket from a vertical cell, in latest versions.
https://www.ft.com/content/98f15b60-bc4d-4d3c-9e57-cbdde122ac0c
The US has urged Ukraine to halt attacks on Russia’s energy infrastructure, warning that the drone strikes risk driving up global oil prices and provoking retaliation, according to three people familiar with the discussions.
I had an ultrasound scan the other week, and it was cold and slippery like having a Thai Massage outdoors in Manchester.
During WWII, it is quite likely that the famous Long Lance torpedoes sank as many Japanese ships as Allied - even the Japanese reworked their torpedo cruiser attempt.
A light torpedo from a ship range has short range. Unless an enemy sub tries boarding, they are not much use.
As you say, a useful weapon needs more range - hence rocket boosting or helicopters.
Reintroduce: 60% (+1)
Oppose reintroduction: 31% (-1)
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/should-the-death-penalty-be-reintroduced-for-cases-of-multiple-murder
Trident is reliable - The US has been firing them yearly since they came into service. With a very high success rate
Since we are literally using the same missile - it’s on the RN to explain the failures.
What matters is whether or not you try to appease them. Though not unimpeachable, Starmer has generally told those being daft where to go.
On that front I'd just note Rishi Sunak recently created 'Sir' Philip Davies.
https://www.hamptons.co.uk/properties/18848455/sales/A1NQ5000006HTU1IAI#/
Terraced house in Brent with no parking for £5.25m - bargain.
It has wood reclaimed from a Romanian barn and a 'decadent principal suite' ie the en-suite bathroom doesn't have a door.
Its council tax band D ie £68k to £88k in 1991.
If Starmer wants to fund local authorities more progressively then a council tax revaluation with bands from A to Z would be a way to do it.
Ken was mayor of London, and a rugby World Cup on. It was announced that any Black Cab driver flying a Cross of St George would lose his license.
The Black, Black cab driver put one on his cab. And explained, very articulately, why - he was reclaiming *his* flag from bigots. He said it was stupid to try and deny the flag existed - so either you reclaim it (he mentioned what the gay community had done with the word “queer”) or you let the arseholes have it.
The ban was rapidly dropped.
For another 100 grand they cut a trough for you to piss in
As for the subject under discussion we need first to articulate the "threats that the UK faces" and then agree a suitable and appropriate level of preparedness.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?locations=GB
The US is worse in some ways; far better in others.
There's huge waste - but there's also huge capability. And they are probably quicker at innovating at the edges of the system (partly because they have a large enough economy to support far more startup ideas).
Until 60% of the electorate actually care about it enough to make a difference to the way they vote (they don't), nothing will happen.
Similarly with the EU - though the political salience of that is possibly rather more. It certainly was a decade ago, even if for now it's quiescent, But it's managed completely to wreck the Tory party in the meantime.
Rather deter than the huge cost in lives and lost ships in regaining it. That was our failure last time.
Still, it would at least be a clear test of how important the issue is to electors.
"Vote for us: we're shit, but we'll kill a handful of people" isn't a particularly convincing platform.
“I've just run some planning casework through Claude. It identified within a few seconds the grounds on which a legal challenge could be pursued. This is a skill that only the most experienced people working in the industry have and they will have built it up over careers of many years.”
Indeed. Claude is completely extraordinary. I’ve just been chatting with my lady novelist friend. I told you that she fed her latest novel into Claude and it gave her a detailed summary and analysis in forty five seconds. 😶
Now she has given Claude her editor’s feedback - several pages of deep advice - and Claude has decided the editor is right on this, this, this and not this. All in a few seconds. Stunningly good and incomparably fast
I have arrived at the coastal railway.
One of the advantages of being BIG johnowls.
Steels fish and chips at noon.
What's the betting SKS would say we will offer one too. Would definitely be good news for LDs/ Greens if so. #Hangmanslackenyournoose
1) they have no money
2) they have defaulted so often that no one will lend them the money to buy arms (a loan + arms is the classic deal)
3) The UK, via BAe and others, vetos them buying a variety of weapons from other countries, due to U.K. content/tech.
There is an urban legend that the catapults from the Argentine carriers still in a warehouse somewhere in Scotland. They were being refurbished at the time of the Falklands war and never returned.
Is the Royal wave clockwise or anti clockwise
Whether this points to some difference in systems, potentially allowing the US to alter the outcome of a British missile strike, is entering the realms of conspiracy theory. It is a theory that events aren't entirely inconsistent woth though.
But even that is quite amazing. It reads a whole novel every time you ask, and it does that in about 1 minute. PB-ers need to try this machine. You need to try the pro opus version
As for the death penalty that, at least, is one of those non-issues, like Lords reform or republicanism. You can find definite views on each if you go out of your way to ask, but few people actually care that much about them.
We’re chatting now. I had an idea for her novel and I messaged her a moment ago with the idea. Her reply: “Claude just suggested exactly that”
True story
What’s terrifying here is that if Claude can be this good at editing then I see no reason why Claude cannot actually write books on top of editing them. Given that it understands plot, tension, narrative, character, everything
This is Claude 3. Unless progress suddenly stops - why? - clause 6.5 will write brilliant novels. In seconds
1) Nearly everyone in rowing wants to concentrate on 2km on a straight course on a lake.
2) For those who want to row a 20 minute race on a tidal river, there are various Heads.
3) Racing more than 2 racing shells side by side on the Thames is difficult and even dangerous. This is because of turns, currents and very shallow water. The rules of navigation on the Thames actually say not to do more than 2.
4) This is why the Heads are time trials.
5) Anyone who can row the course at a competitive time is at the top of British rowing and is in the few hundred candidates for the national team
6) Rowing is actually a cheap sport. Nearly no one owns more than a single sculling boat (one person boat). You don’t even need shoes - they are fixed in the boat*. Nearly all boats are owned by clubs. For a couple of hundred pounds a year, you can join nearly any club.
*I actually built my own foot stretcher (structure that holds the shoes) so I can put my own shoes in a club boat.
The simple fact is that the US repeatedly succeeds with their Trident tests. Probably because they do them regularly.
We don’t and we don’t.
The lesson is that practise is expensive, but vital.
How's the weather in Cleethorpes? It's vest and shorts in Hertfordshire for the first time in at least six months. It won't last, of course, but I went out and bought cake to celebrate. As good an excuse as any.
Rocket boosted torpedos answer all of the issues. Which is why they are quite popular.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trident-barack-obama-administration-david-cameron-failed-nuclear-missile-test-launch-secret-theresa-may-florida-a7542756.html
The fact that the test failed due to US technology is a matter of public record. Are you suggesting that this is false?
What exactly is the Navy doing wrong that would make a missile fire off but either fail or go to the wrong place - what ability to influence the process once the missile fires does the Navy even have?
By 2026 Club 14-35 in the Flaklands will be flying the last 4 Tranche 1 Typhoons in the RAF. I think we can all see where this is going...
It’s a slightly automated space launch.
In the case of an SLBM it is even more complicated. The entire crew of the submarine (both watches) is involved and have to do a large number of things in exact sequence to launch successfully. And that includes getting the missile into the exact state, that after launch, it will do its thing.
Very easy, if not trained to the T, to fuck up.
My question is that how would I build a system that generates these reports that isn't in a chat format, IE I get Claude to 'learn' various rules set out in policy documents, then generates text based on variable inputs that the operator gives it? I've seen some people tout these things on linkedin, how do you build these systems?
(I am not in charge of the department - the above is all a thought experiment). Very interested in feedback.
Its revolutionary. As I said before, if you’re under 45 and paying into a pension you’re probably an idiot
My friend says “what my editor would take a week to do, Claude does in ten minutes”
It is the throttling of building to below the rate at which planning is *used*
It’s straight out of Adam Smith - in the case of a local or partial monopoly, the producer can stage a *sellers strike* to prevent prices falling.
This is why the Victorians and Edwardians sold pre planned plots by the street, to different developers. Which is why in such suburbs, you see small differences from one side of the road to the other, or a style change after 50 houses or whatever.
The reason this occurs is that it is convenient for a confluence of interests. Planning rules are set centrally. Local politics tends towards less building being popular *among the politically active*.
Glad that’s sorted
No editor can do that. They get tired, they menstruate, they sleep, they get ill or bored or move jobs
They’d better move jobs because editing is over as a job
I certainly do think that the Coalition can and should be blamed, for cutting our armed forces, when it was plain that the world was becoming a more dangerous place. I'm not surprised by the poll's findings.
An extra 6 or 8 cells in a VLS would be barely noticed - would put the mass marginally lower, helping with the stability curve of the ship.
https://youtu.be/KUVJ2ur_oMQ?si=lsIigoYsRDc255nr
He just can’t help himself .
https://news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-accused-of-inciting-political-violence-after-posting-video-with-an-image-of-joe-biden-hog-tied-13104322
This might go down well with his brain dead base but just highlights to everyone else why he should be nowhere near the WH .
It may still not happen, but he's our best hope.
As time passes, the ratio of nostalgia for pre-EEC and nostalgia for in-EEC/EU will evolve in a predictable way.