Seems like a pissweak Israeli response if that's it.
Netanyahu is weak.
PB’s very own John Bolton is dissapointed.
Don’t worry Bart, it’s unlikely to be the only retaliatory strike.
I think it will be. Netanyahu is weak and prefers sabre rattling to action.
Still not dealt with Hamas in Rafah. He'd rather let the war drag on and everyone suffer for longer than actually go and fight Hamas in Rafah. That this impotent response is all he's done is par for the course.
What do you think his response to Israel should have been. I know little of this whole conflict to be honest but what I read from those who day it appears all,sides do not want an escalation. Be it israel.,the US, hezbollah or Iran. So how does he respond to save face but not escalate.
Not everyone. I think there should have been an escalation.
Ideally striking Iran hard enough it leads to full regime change.
Failing that, at a bare minimum, striking and destroying all of Irans nuclear facilities and program.
Has regime change ever been accomplished by aerial bombardment alone?
Has it ever been achieved by anything short of occupying the regime's capital?
How would you propose that Israel occupy Tehran?
Yes, many times.
See the fall of Gaddafi for instance.
There were rebel forces in Libya fighting against the regime. So the Western air strikes did not topple the regime alone. Where are the rebel forces fighting a civil war in Iran?
Why? They are adults. They register where they want providing it is legal and that can be multiple addresses providing they only vote once. This is normal for children who have more than one residence eg my children were on the register elsewhere when they were students for instance as well as at our house (they can pick one or the other or both). If their parents have two houses between them then either or both are reasonable. And if both are in the same constituency what on earth is the issue as there is no motivation to pick one or the other (even though that would be both legal and normal)
I seem to remember, back in the dim distant past, a policy from conservative headquarters which suggested that people with second homes should consider where they should register to vote.
The idea was that conservative voters should vote where they were most likely to benefit the conservative cause!
Seems like a pissweak Israeli response if that's it.
Netanyahu is weak.
PB’s very own John Bolton is dissapointed.
Don’t worry Bart, it’s unlikely to be the only retaliatory strike.
I think it will be. Netanyahu is weak and prefers sabre rattling to action.
Still not dealt with Hamas in Rafah. He'd rather let the war drag on and everyone suffer for longer than actually go and fight Hamas in Rafah. That this impotent response is all he's done is par for the course.
What do you think his response to Israel should have been. I know little of this whole conflict to be honest but what I read from those who day it appears all,sides do not want an escalation. Be it israel.,the US, hezbollah or Iran. So how does he respond to save face but not escalate.
Not everyone. I think there should have been an escalation.
Ideally striking Iran hard enough it leads to full regime change.
Failing that, at a bare minimum, striking and destroying all of Irans nuclear facilities and program.
Has regime change ever been accomplished by aerial bombardment alone?
Has it ever been achieved by anything short of occupying the regime's capital?
How would you propose that Israel occupy Tehran?
Yes, many times.
See the fall of Gaddafi for instance.
There were rebel forces in Libya fighting against the regime. So the Western air strikes did not topple the regime alone. Where are the rebel forces fighting a civil war in Iran?
Libya may be suboptimal when looking for an example of regime change.
Seems like a pissweak Israeli response if that's it.
Netanyahu is weak.
PB’s very own John Bolton is dissapointed.
Don’t worry Bart, it’s unlikely to be the only retaliatory strike.
I think it will be. Netanyahu is weak and prefers sabre rattling to action.
Still not dealt with Hamas in Rafah. He'd rather let the war drag on and everyone suffer for longer than actually go and fight Hamas in Rafah. That this impotent response is all he's done is par for the course.
What do you think his response to Israel should have been. I know little of this whole conflict to be honest but what I read from those who day it appears all,sides do not want an escalation. Be it israel.,the US, hezbollah or Iran. So how does he respond to save face but not escalate.
Not everyone. I think there should have been an escalation.
Ideally striking Iran hard enough it leads to full regime change...
For the nth time, people can register to vote at places other than their main address, or multiple addresses, including students for example. They merely need a reasonable connection to the address. If they were splitting their time between two addresses there is nothing wrong with one of them choosing address A and the other address B.
Now how do you feel about Menzies?
Can you really register at the addresses in the same constituency? Students are a special case (not a Rayner point)
But all the evidence - circumstantial - points to most of her life being orientated towards her husband’s house.
I suspect that she tried to pull a fast one on PPR and got caught. That’s why she won’t reveal the advice - which she would presumably do if it exonerated her.
For the nth time, people can register to vote at places other than their main address, or multiple addresses, including students for example. They merely need a reasonable connection to the address. If they were splitting their time between two addresses there is nothing wrong with one of them choosing address A and the other address B.
Now how do you feel about Menzies?
Can you really register at the addresses in the same constituency? Students are a special case (not a Rayner point)
But all the evidence - circumstantial - points to most of her life being orientated towards her husband’s house.
I suspect that she tried to pull a fast one on PPR and got caught. That’s why she won’t reveal the advice - which she would presumably do if it exonerated her.
The suggestion is that her legal advice contains a lot of sensitive information about her family, including her kids, and does not want that shared in the public domain.
And just as she has no interest in arguing about why she is correct, when it comes to her ideological opponents — Leftists, educationalists, environmentalists, Tory wets, the legal establishment, the Westminster blob — she is equally uninterested in explaining why they are wrong. Everything she disagrees with is basically the fault of Michel Foucault, who she “discovered while taking a course in political sociology”.
If Stock is desperate for evidence of that the leftists, educationalists, environmentalists, Tory wets, the legal establishment, the Westminster blob are wrong, perhaps she should leave the house. We are dealing with the economic and social consequences of an unbroken social democrat ascendancy as we speak.
Comments
NEW THREAD
Bad news: it's literally impossible for both sides to have the last word.
https://twitter.com/lea_ypi/status/1780875319735411088?t=gMy5X4EXw6O-UqJtLWNBnA&s=19
New thread BTW.
The idea was that conservative voters should vote where they were most likely to benefit the conservative cause!
How the world changes!
But all the evidence - circumstantial - points to most of her life being orientated towards her husband’s house.
I suspect that she tried to pull a fast one on PPR and got caught. That’s why she won’t reveal the advice - which she would presumably do if it exonerated her.