I have just found out my train home tomorrow will be making an extra stop at Castle Cary to collect drug addled degenerates from Glastonbury smelling to high heaven who havent had a bath or shower in days.
Think I will go via Bristol instead.
Clearly spoken like someone who has never been to Bristol...
I have been to Bristol several times but never set foot outside either Temple Meads or Parkway Stations.
Have I missed anything?
Bristol is a great city.
But it has some pretty dodgy areas.
The dodgy parts are now central, rather than St Pauls etc. Up on the downs there are shitty caravans everywhere.
That’s the issue. Bristol tries to have too many centres. The nicest stuff being in Clifton means it can’t be by the harbour.
10 years ago its was. Clifton is always nice but a very different world. The harbourside redevelopment is ok, but I believe a lot of the companies have left the offices down there (or only inhabit a small portion of them). And centre of town with Cabot Circus was going well, loads of restaurants, shops etc. But the massive cinema in Cabot closed down recently because nobody goes there anymore. I wouldn't hang around that part of town after dark these days.
Has that cinema closed?! Been years since I lived there but I liked that place. Comfy seats. Can’t overestimate the value of a comfy seat in a cinema. Also one of the first cinemas I remember routinely offering beer.
Dec 2023
Cinema De Lux in Bristol's Cabot Circus to close next week - One of Bristol's biggest cinemas will close later this month after 15 years.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
I do appreciate how these candidates are grouped in the wiki page - anyone up for a vote for 'micellaneous centre*'? *Includes 8 Ensemble candidates, 13 non-Ensemble Union of Democrats and Independents candidates of 38 total UDI candidates, 5 of 7 Les Centristes candidates, 2 LR candidates, 1 non-Ensemble Radical Party candidate, and 1 Ensemble dissident out of 149 total candidate
I love the idea of the “ecologists” as a political block. Never struck me as the type.
“What do we want?”
“More information so we can form a reasoned assessment of what’s happening to the stoats in this area”.
“When do we want it?”
“In due course, once we have taken time to conduct a proper peer reviewed study”.
Our Green Party were originally the Ecology Party.
Really? That’s interesting? Did they start off mostly on WWF type causes? I suppose it makes sense, thinking about it.
One lovely old lady accurately listed all of Labour's policies, told me she was undecided, she liked our candidate but that unfortunately Keir Starmer is a communist.
I have just found out my train home tomorrow will be making an extra stop at Castle Cary to collect drug addled degenerates from Glastonbury smelling to high heaven who havent had a bath or shower in days.
Think I will go via Bristol instead.
Clearly spoken like someone who has never been to Bristol...
I have been to Bristol several times but never set foot outside either Temple Meads or Parkway Stations.
Have I missed anything?
Bristol is a great city.
But it has some pretty dodgy areas.
The dodgy parts are now central, rather than St Pauls etc. Up on the downs there are shitty caravans everywhere.
That’s the issue. Bristol tries to have too many centres. The nicest stuff being in Clifton means it can’t be by the harbour.
10 years ago its was. Clifton is always nice but a very different world. The harbourside redevelopment is ok, but I believe a lot of the companies have left the offices down there (or only inhabit a small portion of them). And centre of town with Cabot Circus was going well, loads of restaurants, shops etc. But the massive cinema in Cabot closed down recently because nobody goes there anymore. I wouldn't hang around that part of town after dark these days.
Has that cinema closed?! Been years since I lived there but I liked that place. Comfy seats. Can’t overestimate the value of a comfy seat in a cinema. Also one of the first cinemas I remember routinely offering beer.
Wait till you hear what they call a quarter pounder there.
Jude Bellingham says the win was not down to Jude Bellingham or Harry Kane it was a team effort. No Jude! It was almost entirely down to a moment of magic in the 94th minute by Jude Bellingham. The "team" were shite!
One lovely old lady accurately listed all of Labour's policies, told me she was undecided, she liked our candidate but that unfortunately Keir Starmer is a communist.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
Well I have met Peter Hitchens socially a few times, and I have to say he does, at times, seem a little... slow.
I’ve always liked the “the Japanese were provoked” argument for WWII
Yes, the Americans and others cut off oil and steel supplies (among other things) - not an embargo, but refusing to sell. Refusing to sell to a country that was using these materials to attack an ally of the US (China) and threatening to use them to attack the US itself and allied countries. For being friends with China.
So the US was supposed to sell oil and steel so the Japanese could build more Yamato class battleships to attack… the US?
The bad joke is that the Japanese invasion of South East Asia netted them *three* shipments of oil from the conquered territories
There never was a Japanese war strategy. The Kwantung Army was defeated in Siberia, the war in China was going nowhere, and the navy wanted to show that it could do better than the army. After Midway, Japan had lost.
Jude Bellingham says the win was not down to Jude Bellingham or Harry Kane it was a team effort. No Jude! It was almost entirely down to a moment of magic in the 94th minute by Jude Bellingham. The "team" were shite!
I liked his response to stupid question of who writes these scripts...I do.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
Well I have met Peter Hitchens socially a few times, and I have to say he does, at times, seem a little... slow.
I’ve always liked the “the Japanese were provoked” argument for WWII
Yes, the Americans and others cut off oil and steel supplies (among other things) - not an embargo, but refusing to sell. Refusing to sell to a country that was using these materials to attack an ally of the US (China) and threatening to use them to attack the US itself and allied countries. For being friends with China.
So the US was supposed to sell oil and steel so the Japanese could build more Yamato class battleships to attack… the US?
It's bollocks anyway. Japan started its war in the east back in 1937.
The U.S. sanctions might have promoted the Japanese attack, but 'provoked' suggests Japan wasn't already waging a brutal war of aggressive conquest.
PB I need your advice. I’ve got one more day in st malo (which is of course gorgeous - why didn’t we rebuild Exeter and Coventry and derby and and and SOB)
So where do I go? Dinard for the beauty or Cancale for the oysters? I adore oysters so I think I should make a pilgrimage to the oyster capital of the world BUT Dinard is said to be lovely…
Dinard. You should have gone over the weekend as good fun bars and the Casino etc but still a lovely beach to overlook from a nice bar.
Edit to add, you can drop the car off in st malo and get the sea bus between St Malo and Dinard so you can indulge and not worry about drink driving.
Yes maybe. Also I can surely get Cancale oysters in Dinard
Have a break from the oysters and just get a dirty big tray of langoustine with proper mayonnaise and crispy bread with a nice bottle of white.
Skip oysters? Here??? Are you mad????
That said I’ve done the langoustine thing a few times on this trip and it too is lovely
Think that’s my plan for Monday. Head to dinard and have a douzaine cancales and then the langoustines with mayo for lunch. And a proper white not this cheap muscadet crap
That’s how to begin the working week
This is the website re the 10 min water bus between St M and Dinard.
I do appreciate how these candidates are grouped in the wiki page - anyone up for a vote for 'micellaneous centre*'? *Includes 8 Ensemble candidates, 13 non-Ensemble Union of Democrats and Independents candidates of 38 total UDI candidates, 5 of 7 Les Centristes candidates, 2 LR candidates, 1 non-Ensemble Radical Party candidate, and 1 Ensemble dissident out of 149 total candidate
I love the idea of the “ecologists” as a political block. Never struck me as the type.
“What do we want?”
“More information so we can form a reasoned assessment of what’s happening to the stoats in this area”.
“When do we want it?”
“In due course, once we have taken time to conduct a proper peer reviewed study”.
Our Green Party were originally the Ecology Party.
Really? That’s interesting? Did they start off mostly on WWF type causes? I suppose it makes sense, thinking about it.
They were the Ecology Party from 1975-1985, before that they were "People".
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
I do appreciate how these candidates are grouped in the wiki page - anyone up for a vote for 'micellaneous centre*'? *Includes 8 Ensemble candidates, 13 non-Ensemble Union of Democrats and Independents candidates of 38 total UDI candidates, 5 of 7 Les Centristes candidates, 2 LR candidates, 1 non-Ensemble Radical Party candidate, and 1 Ensemble dissident out of 149 total candidate
I love the idea of the “ecologists” as a political block. Never struck me as the type.
“What do we want?”
“More information so we can form a reasoned assessment of what’s happening to the stoats in this area”.
“When do we want it?”
“In due course, once we have taken time to conduct a proper peer reviewed study”.
Our Green Party were originally the Ecology Party.
Yes and it refused to have a "leader" in an anarchic culture that at least had some soul .Now it bans any views that differ from the hard left trans gender viewpoint.
I do appreciate how these candidates are grouped in the wiki page - anyone up for a vote for 'micellaneous centre*'? *Includes 8 Ensemble candidates, 13 non-Ensemble Union of Democrats and Independents candidates of 38 total UDI candidates, 5 of 7 Les Centristes candidates, 2 LR candidates, 1 non-Ensemble Radical Party candidate, and 1 Ensemble dissident out of 149 total candidate
I love the idea of the “ecologists” as a political block. Never struck me as the type.
“What do we want?”
“More information so we can form a reasoned assessment of what’s happening to the stoats in this area”.
“When do we want it?”
“In due course, once we have taken time to conduct a proper peer reviewed study”.
Our Green Party were originally the Ecology Party.
Really? That’s interesting? Did they start off mostly on WWF type causes? I suppose it makes sense, thinking about it.
They were the Ecology Party from 1975-1985, before that they were "People".
Oh, I see. It came out of the 70s thinking on overpopulation. You don’t see that line of thought much any more do you? I wonder why? Perfectly legitimate point of view. I don’t agree with it but I understand it.
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
Particularly as Leicester had to sell KDH in order to meet our FFP criteria.
£30 million will go some way to fixing our finances. He is a decent player at Championship level, and Maresca is a fan. A local lad from Shepshed, but I really don't think he will set the Premiership alight.
I have just found out my train home tomorrow will be making an extra stop at Castle Cary to collect drug addled degenerates from Glastonbury smelling to high heaven who havent had a bath or shower in days.
Think I will go via Bristol instead.
Clearly spoken like someone who has never been to Bristol...
I have been to Bristol several times but never set foot outside either Temple Meads or Parkway Stations.
Have I missed anything?
Bristol is a great city.
But it has some pretty dodgy areas.
Like most of them then.
Probably the only place in the country where you are likely to be mugged by someone who thinks it is "speak like a pirate day" every day though.
You’re very irritating.
Unless you are a parody account, in which case well played.
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
Remarkably. Leicester have sold to stay within FFP! It's a farce.
Leicester will already get a hefty penalty for missing it last time they were in the premier league, but they might get a smaller points penalty now I guess.
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
Bonkers. Maybe they are happy to just take the points penalty? Also, £30m for KDH? Really?
Chelsea already have about 50 players that aren't exactly world beaters. They just keep adding to that list. What's KDH going to do, stand in the wall or be there to do shape for training?
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
Well I have met Peter Hitchens socially a few times, and I have to say he does, at times, seem a little... slow.
I’ve always liked the “the Japanese were provoked” argument for WWII
Yes, the Americans and others cut off oil and steel supplies (among other things) - not an embargo, but refusing to sell. Refusing to sell to a country that was using these materials to attack an ally of the US (China) and threatening to use them to attack the US itself and allied countries. For being friends with China.
So the US was supposed to sell oil and steel so the Japanese could build more Yamato class battleships to attack… the US?
It's bollocks anyway. Japan started its war in the east back in 1937.
The U.S. sanctions might have promoted the Japanese attack, but 'provoked' suggests Japan wasn't already waging a brutal war of aggressive conquest.
Thing that REALLY "provoked" Japan to attack Pearl Harbor - and also Hong Kong & Malaya - in 1941, was fact that Japanese troops got whupped by Soviets in border clashes in 1938 & 1939. Which pushed the dominoes in Toyko in favor of attacking Western powers instead of USSR.
Of course the perceived need to attacking ANYTHING including China was symptom of the desperation and rottenness of the Japanese right-wing military dictatorship.
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
Particularly as Leicester had to sell KDH in order to meet our FFP criteria.
£30 million will go some way to fixing our finances. He is a decent player at Championship level, and Maresca is a fan. A local lad from Shepshed, but I really don't think he will set the Premiership alight.
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
Bonkers. Maybe they are happy to just take the points penalty? Also, £30m for KDH? Really?
Chelsea already have about 50 players that aren't exactly world beaters. They just keep adding to that list. What's KDH going to do, stand in the wall or be there to do shape for training?
Danny Drinkwater - another overrated former Leicester player - is still on their books I believe.
Damn, I stopped watching the football 5 minutes before the end of normal time in the England match. It's Murphy's Law that all the interesting stuff has happened since then, including Georgia going ahead against Spain.
Spain Vs Georgia, which I can half-watch because the pain factor is removed, is quite entertaining, but when the Spanish attack is described in the commentary I can't help but hear that Limahl is playing for them. See also: Cher at centre back for Switzerland.
I have just found out my train home tomorrow will be making an extra stop at Castle Cary to collect drug addled degenerates from Glastonbury smelling to high heaven who havent had a bath or shower in days.
Think I will go via Bristol instead.
Clearly spoken like someone who has never been to Bristol...
I have been to Bristol several times but never set foot outside either Temple Meads or Parkway Stations.
Have I missed anything?
Bristol is a great city.
But it has some pretty dodgy areas.
Like most of them then.
Probably the only place in the country where you are likely to be mugged by someone who thinks it is "speak like a pirate day" every day though.
You’re very irritating.
Unless you are a parody account, in which case well played.
I just need to trigger Anabobazina now.
Jus\t talk about giving cash to Glasto refugees to go away from your bit of the train. Infallible.
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
Bonkers. Maybe they are happy to just take the points penalty? Also, £30m for KDH? Really?
Chelsea already have about 50 players that aren't exactly world beaters. They just keep adding to that list. What's KDH going to do, stand in the wall or be there to do shape for training?
Danny Drinkwater - another overrated former Leicester player - is still on their books I believe.
No, he retired. There are absolutely loads that are still on the books who you look and think never getting a game.
I have just found out my train home tomorrow will be making an extra stop at Castle Cary to collect drug addled degenerates from Glastonbury smelling to high heaven who havent had a bath or shower in days.
Think I will go via Bristol instead.
Clearly spoken like someone who has never been to Bristol...
I have been to Bristol several times but never set foot outside either Temple Meads or Parkway Stations.
Have I missed anything?
Bristol is a great city.
But it has some pretty dodgy areas.
Like most of them then.
Probably the only place in the country where you are likely to be mugged by someone who thinks it is "speak like a pirate day" every day though.
You’re very irritating.
Unless you are a parody account, in which case well played.
I just need to trigger Anabobazina now.
Do your job and continue arse-licking your hero Trump and stop bothering me!!!
I do appreciate how these candidates are grouped in the wiki page - anyone up for a vote for 'micellaneous centre*'? *Includes 8 Ensemble candidates, 13 non-Ensemble Union of Democrats and Independents candidates of 38 total UDI candidates, 5 of 7 Les Centristes candidates, 2 LR candidates, 1 non-Ensemble Radical Party candidate, and 1 Ensemble dissident out of 149 total candidate
I love the idea of the “ecologists” as a political block. Never struck me as the type.
“What do we want?”
“More information so we can form a reasoned assessment of what’s happening to the stoats in this area”.
“When do we want it?”
“In due course, once we have taken time to conduct a proper peer reviewed study”.
Our Green Party were originally the Ecology Party.
Meanwhile, in the US, the GOP again comes out in favour of Biden.
… asked what his greatest accomplishment in the Senate is, Vance cites funding for the Great Lakes that was part of the infrastructure bill he voted against.. https://x.com/atrupar/status/1807428972579315897
I closed out my VP bet on him for a profit. Doug ‘Boring’ Burgum is the current, short odds favourite.
I met Doug Burgum in the last 90s when he was the CEO of Great Plains, and he seemed like a very smart guy.
Until the last year - when he decided he wanted to become the Republican Presidential nominee - he was notably moderate, particularly on social issues, where he vetoed a number of his own parties bills on transgender issues.
Being Trump's VP he would:
1) Have a strong chance of becoming President within four years 2) Have a strong chance of being GOP candidate in 2028
Is it definitely the case that Trump can only serve one more term or is there any possibility of the supreme court ruling that this only applies to consecutive terms?
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
Bonkers. Maybe they are happy to just take the points penalty? Also, £30m for KDH? Really?
Chelsea already have about 50 players that aren't exactly world beaters. They just keep adding to that list. What's KDH going to do, stand in the wall or be there to do shape for training?
He will start. Maresca is very stubborn with his system. KDH will play inside left.
Get used to some very one dimensional football Chelsea fans, Maresca makes Southgate seem flexible.
Which is why Leicester fans were happy to see him go, despite taking us up as Champions. His football is tedious to watch, and ultimately atkick off we want to see some entertainment.
Damn, I stopped watching the football 5 minutes before the end of normal time in the England match. It's Murphy's Law that all the interesting stuff has happened since then, including Georgia going ahead against Spain.
Why did you stop watching? Are you new to this live sport thing?
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
Don't be a twat. He threw a strop over Ukraine wanting to join the EU. Which had nothing to do with US 'hegemony'.
And the Bag of Pigs, and Kruschev's ill considered move, were sixty years ago.
Was Kruschev's move "ill-considered"? It was, in my view, a strategic victory for the Soviets. It resulted in the protection of Cuba and the removal of US nuclear missiles from the Mediterranean.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
Well I have met Peter Hitchens socially a few times, and I have to say he does, at times, seem a little... slow.
I’ve always liked the “the Japanese were provoked” argument for WWII
Yes, the Americans and others cut off oil and steel supplies (among other things) - not an embargo, but refusing to sell. Refusing to sell to a country that was using these materials to attack an ally of the US (China) and threatening to use them to attack the US itself and allied countries. For being friends with China.
So the US was supposed to sell oil and steel so the Japanese could build more Yamato class battleships to attack… the US?
The bad joke is that the Japanese invasion of South East Asia netted them *three* shipments of oil from the conquered territories
There never was a Japanese war strategy. The Kwantung Army was defeated in Siberia, the war in China was going nowhere, and the navy wanted to show that it could do better than the army. After Midway, Japan had lost.
I'm trying to think of a WWII naval encounter between Allies and Axis that was decided by gunnery alone.
Struggling beyond the Battle of the River Plate.
You could argue the hunt for the Bismarck was, but that was ultimately settled by aircraft.
Spain Vs Georgia, which I can half-watch because the pain factor is removed, is quite entertaining, but when the Spanish attack is described in the commentary I can't help but hear that Limahl is playing for them. See also: Cher at centre back for Switzerland.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
Don't be a twat. He threw a strop over Ukraine wanting to join the EU. Which had nothing to do with US 'hegemony'.
And the Bag of Pigs, and Kruschev's ill considered move, were sixty years ago.
Was Kruschev's move "ill-considered"? It was, in my view, a strategic victory for the Soviets. It resulted in the protection of Cuba and the removal of US nuclear missiles from the Mediterranean.
Since it (predictably) came pretty close to triggering nuclear war, yes.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
Well I have met Peter Hitchens socially a few times, and I have to say he does, at times, seem a little... slow.
I’ve always liked the “the Japanese were provoked” argument for WWII
Yes, the Americans and others cut off oil and steel supplies (among other things) - not an embargo, but refusing to sell. Refusing to sell to a country that was using these materials to attack an ally of the US (China) and threatening to use them to attack the US itself and allied countries. For being friends with China.
So the US was supposed to sell oil and steel so the Japanese could build more Yamato class battleships to attack… the US?
The bad joke is that the Japanese invasion of South East Asia netted them *three* shipments of oil from the conquered territories
There never was a Japanese war strategy. The Kwantung Army was defeated in Siberia, the war in China was going nowhere, and the navy wanted to show that it could do better than the army. After Midway, Japan had lost.
I'm trying to think of a WWII naval encounter between Allies and Axis that was decided by gunnery alone.
Struggling beyond the Battle of the River Plate.
You could argue the hunt for the Bismarck was, but that was ultimately settled by aircraft.
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
Bonkers. Maybe they are happy to just take the points penalty? Also, £30m for KDH? Really?
Chelsea already have about 50 players that aren't exactly world beaters. They just keep adding to that list. What's KDH going to do, stand in the wall or be there to do shape for training?
He will start. Maresca is very stubborn with his system. KDH will play inside left.
Get used to some very one dimensional football Chelsea fans, Maresca makes Southgate seem flexible.
Which is why Leicester fans were happy to see him go, despite taking us up as Champions. His football is tedious to watch, and ultimately atkick off we want to see some entertainment.
There are going to be some very angry international footballers at Chelsea if that is the case.
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
Bonkers. Maybe they are happy to just take the points penalty? Also, £30m for KDH? Really?
Didn’t they recently sell a hotel that was an asset of the club for a lot of money to a company that is conveniently owned by the same owners and therefore eased a lot of the financial issues with regards to the club’s balance sheet.
They will also likely have a clear out of more players like Gallagher over the summer who count as home grown and all new players on the long 6/7 year contracts.
Its a farce and if they don’t start winning things soon then they will fall into a mess as their assets they can offset will be gone and the players signed on long contracts will be closer to end of careers so very little sell on value.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
Don't be a twat. He threw a strop over Ukraine wanting to join the EU. Which had nothing to do with US 'hegemony'.
And the Bag of Pigs, and Kruschev's ill considered move, were sixty years ago.
Was Kruschev's move "ill-considered"? It was, in my view, a strategic victory for the Soviets. It resulted in the protection of Cuba and the removal of US nuclear missiles from the Mediterranean.
Since it (predictably) came pretty close to triggering nuclear war, yes.
But it didn't, and the Soviets gained from it. Brinksmanship is dangerous, but can be rewarding.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
Don't be a twat. He threw a strop over Ukraine wanting to join the EU. Which had nothing to do with US 'hegemony'.
And the Bag of Pigs, and Kruschev's ill considered move, were sixty years ago.
Was Kruschev's move "ill-considered"? It was, in my view, a strategic victory for the Soviets. It resulted in the protection of Cuba and the removal of US nuclear missiles from the Mediterranean.
Since it (predictably) came pretty close to triggering nuclear war, yes.
But it didn't, and the Soviets gained from it. Brinksmanship is dangerous, but can be rewarding.
Theresa May, door knocking and on a recording doorbell.
Say what you like about Britain and it’s politics .. but there ain’t many western democracies where you’d get a former Prime Minister leaving a lovely little message on your ring doorbell.
Spain Vs Georgia, which I can half-watch because the pain factor is removed, is quite entertaining, but when the Spanish attack is described in the commentary I can't help but hear that Limahl is playing for them. See also: Cher at centre back for Switzerland.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
More Russian twattery,
Russia has attacked its peaceful neighbour for reasons of pure imperialism, in order to deny the freely expressed democratic will of Ukraine not to be a province of a threadbare Russian empire of brutality and poverty,
The cost has been massive for Ukraine, but equally Russia itself has taken nearly half a million casualties. The vile and depraved way the Russian army has behaved has made the entire Kremlin complicit in and responsible for war crimes as defined under the UN Charter and International law. Russia is loathed for its despicable behaviour and its influence in all spheres of life around the world is going down the drain.
There is little to no constituency in the UK that supports the mafia thugs of Putin`s Russia, despite the subversion, corruption, threats, bribery and hybrid war that Putinistan launches against the West on a daily basis.
Eventually you will lose, but unless you push Putin out of the window there is no way back for Russia. Since 1945 Germany apologised for its crimes. Since 1991, Russia has repeated its crimes, and before you get on your high horse, OF COURSE Soviet Socialism was as disgusting as National Socialism. It killed more people, more brutally and for longer. Stalin and Hitler were both equally vile, morally bankrupt criminals. For as long as Russia defends its crimes, the more it will be shunned and held in ever greater contempt.
But thanks for coming by our little forum, anyway.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
Don't be a twat. He threw a strop over Ukraine wanting to join the EU. Which had nothing to do with US 'hegemony'.
And the Bag of Pigs, and Kruschev's ill considered move, were sixty years ago.
Was Kruschev's move "ill-considered"? It was, in my view, a strategic victory for the Soviets. It resulted in the protection of Cuba and the removal of US nuclear missiles from the Mediterranean.
The removal of the missiles from Turkey and Italy had already been decided the previous summer, as they were obsolete. Their inclusion in the deal was essentially a device to help Khrushchev save face.
With regard to Cuba, since the Americans had decided not to make any more immediate attempts after the Bay of Pigs fiasco and that allowed Castro to build up strong conventional forces. I think it's doubtful it can be claimed as a strategic success on those grounds.
Bottom line is, it didn't achieve what Khrushchev wanted, gained no additional security for Cuba or the Soviets, nearly provoked a nuclear war, severely embarrassed the Soviets in front of their allies by making the leadership look weak and was a key factor in Khrushchev's own removal in 1964.
It's hard to see that as anything other than a strategic failure for the Soviets..
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
Bonkers. Maybe they are happy to just take the points penalty? Also, £30m for KDH? Really?
Didn’t they recently sell a hotel that was an asset of the club for a lot of money to a company that is conveniently owned by the same owners and therefore eased a lot of the financial issues with regards to the club’s balance sheet.
They will also likely have a clear out of more players like Gallagher over the summer who count as home grown and all new players on the long 6/7 year contracts.
Its a farce and if they don’t start winning things soon then they will fall into a mess as their assets they can offset will be gone and the players signed on long contracts will be closer to end of careers so very little sell on value.
Postecoglou is an admirer of Gallagher so they might be able to sell him to Spurs. It would enrage their fans but the crackpot Americans who own the club have no grasp of or interest in traditional rivalries. Getting rid of Poch was moronic: he’d sorted the team out against all odds by the end of the season. The club is a basket case.
Theresa May, door knocking and on a recording doorbell.
Say what you like about Britain and it’s politics .. but there ain’t many western democracies where you’d get a former Prime Minister leaving a lovely little message on your ring doorbell.
I do appreciate how these candidates are grouped in the wiki page - anyone up for a vote for 'micellaneous centre*'? *Includes 8 Ensemble candidates, 13 non-Ensemble Union of Democrats and Independents candidates of 38 total UDI candidates, 5 of 7 Les Centristes candidates, 2 LR candidates, 1 non-Ensemble Radical Party candidate, and 1 Ensemble dissident out of 149 total candidate
I love the idea of the “ecologists” as a political block. Never struck me as the type.
“What do we want?”
“More information so we can form a reasoned assessment of what’s happening to the stoats in this area”.
“When do we want it?”
“In due course, once we have taken time to conduct a proper peer reviewed study”.
Our Green Party were originally the Ecology Party.
Yes and it refused to have a "leader" in an anarchic culture that at least had some soul .Now it bans any views that differ from the hard left trans gender viewpoint.
Trans rights are entirely consistent with libertarianism. It's neither the state's business what anyone does with their own body, nor anyone else's.
There are already laws to prevent harm to other people in the unlikely event a trans person assaulted another person, same as if a non trans person assaults another person. And I have news for you - there is no special forcefield around the girls' loo, so if a man looking to expose himself or assault a woman wants to enter a 'female only' space, legislating against trans women (who are far more likely to be the victims of sexual assault than the perpetrators) will not prevent them.
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
FFP doesn't apply to Chelsea or Citeh it would seem, just Leicester, Forest, Everton and their ilk. Aren't they forcing Villa to sell players too?
They are. Villa have sold Tim Iroegbunam to Everton for £9m. They get the full 9 mill credit for him as he is an Academy player. And Everton can spread the costs across the length of his contract. So Villa are heftily in profit. And we only take on a small FFP hit. The fact that we've sold Lewis Dobbin (also an Academy product) to them for exactly the same fee, and length of contract, is, of course, entirely coincidental.
Meanwhile, in the US, the GOP again comes out in favour of Biden.
… asked what his greatest accomplishment in the Senate is, Vance cites funding for the Great Lakes that was part of the infrastructure bill he voted against.. https://x.com/atrupar/status/1807428972579315897
I closed out my VP bet on him for a profit. Doug ‘Boring’ Burgum is the current, short odds favourite.
I met Doug Burgum in the last 90s when he was the CEO of Great Plains, and he seemed like a very smart guy.
Until the last year - when he decided he wanted to become the Republican Presidential nominee - he was notably moderate, particularly on social issues, where he vetoed a number of his own parties bills on transgender issues.
Being Trump's VP he would:
1) Have a strong chance of becoming President within four years 2) Have a strong chance of being GOP candidate in 2028
Is it definitely the case that Trump can only serve one more term or is there any possibility of the supreme court ruling that this only applies to consecutive terms?
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
I don't recall the USA invading Cuba recently.
MrBed is incapable of seeing nations having their own interests beyond those of the U.S. and Russia, apparently.
A key feature of this position is denying the Ukrainians have their own agency. Zelensky is just a puppet of Washington/NATO etc.
All hegemonic imperial powers treat neighbouring states as their back yard.
Watch what happens if China set up PLA bases in Mexico. It wouldn't be pretty.
Its not just, its just reality.
If the US invaded, that makes the US the aggressor. Mind you, the US hasn't needed anything like that big an excuse to meddle in other American states' business. It's wrong when America does it so why should it be ok for Russia?
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
Don't be a twat. He threw a strop over Ukraine wanting to join the EU. Which had nothing to do with US 'hegemony'.
And the Bag of Pigs, and Kruschev's ill considered move, were sixty years ago.
Was Kruschev's move "ill-considered"? It was, in my view, a strategic victory for the Soviets. It resulted in the protection of Cuba and the removal of US nuclear missiles from the Mediterranean.
Yes. Khrushchev got krucified and was out on his tod for Brezhnev within a year.
Cuba was freed from threat of invasion but the land based nuclear missiles were rendered strategically irrelevant by Polaris. And Western Europe was chock-full of NATO tactical nukes on top.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
Well I have met Peter Hitchens socially a few times, and I have to say he does, at times, seem a little... slow.
I’ve always liked the “the Japanese were provoked” argument for WWII
Yes, the Americans and others cut off oil and steel supplies (among other things) - not an embargo, but refusing to sell. Refusing to sell to a country that was using these materials to attack an ally of the US (China) and threatening to use them to attack the US itself and allied countries. For being friends with China.
So the US was supposed to sell oil and steel so the Japanese could build more Yamato class battleships to attack… the US?
The bad joke is that the Japanese invasion of South East Asia netted them *three* shipments of oil from the conquered territories
There never was a Japanese war strategy. The Kwantung Army was defeated in Siberia, the war in China was going nowhere, and the navy wanted to show that it could do better than the army. After Midway, Japan had lost.
I'm trying to think of a WWII naval encounter between Allies and Axis that was decided by gunnery alone.
Struggling beyond the Battle of the River Plate.
You could argue the hunt for the Bismarck was, but that was ultimately settled by aircraft.
They have some big issues coming up, like their population halving in the next 50 years.
Role models for the rest of the world.
Yes, I'm sure the crisis of economically providing for such a large elderly population with a vanishing working age population will do wonders for them, and have no possible negative consequences for the world.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
I don't recall the USA invading Cuba recently.
MrBed is incapable of seeing nations having their own interests beyond those of the U.S. and Russia, apparently.
A key feature of this position is denying the Ukrainians have their own agency. Zelensky is just a puppet of Washington/NATO etc.
All hegemonic imperial powers treat neighbouring states as their back yard.
Watch what happens if China set up PLA bases in Mexico. It wouldn't be pretty.
Its not just, its just reality.
If the US invaded, that makes the US the aggressor. Mind you, the US hasn't needed anything like that big an excuse to meddle in other American states' business. It's wrong when America does it so why should it be ok for Russia?
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
Don't be a twat. He threw a strop over Ukraine wanting to join the EU. Which had nothing to do with US 'hegemony'.
And the Bag of Pigs, and Kruschev's ill considered move, were sixty years ago.
Was Kruschev's move "ill-considered"? It was, in my view, a strategic victory for the Soviets. It resulted in the protection of Cuba and the removal of US nuclear missiles from the Mediterranean.
Yes. Khrushchev got krucified and was out on his tod for Brezhnev within a year.
Cuba was freed from threat of invasion but the land based nuclear missiles were rendered strategically irrelevant by Polaris. And Western Europe was chock-full of NATO tactical nukes on top.
Actually it was two years (almost exactly two years).
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
Well I have met Peter Hitchens socially a few times, and I have to say he does, at times, seem a little... slow.
I’ve always liked the “the Japanese were provoked” argument for WWII
Yes, the Americans and others cut off oil and steel supplies (among other things) - not an embargo, but refusing to sell. Refusing to sell to a country that was using these materials to attack an ally of the US (China) and threatening to use them to attack the US itself and allied countries. For being friends with China.
So the US was supposed to sell oil and steel so the Japanese could build more Yamato class battleships to attack… the US?
The bad joke is that the Japanese invasion of South East Asia netted them *three* shipments of oil from the conquered territories
There never was a Japanese war strategy. The Kwantung Army was defeated in Siberia, the war in China was going nowhere, and the navy wanted to show that it could do better than the army. After Midway, Japan had lost.
I'm trying to think of a WWII naval encounter between Allies and Axis that was decided by gunnery alone.
Struggling beyond the Battle of the River Plate.
You could argue the hunt for the Bismarck was, but that was ultimately settled by aircraft.
Narvik?
Oh, that's a point.
We actually did rather well at that and basically wiped out half the surface fleet of the Kriegsmarine.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
FFP doesn't apply to Chelsea or Citeh it would seem, just Leicester, Forest, Everton and their ilk. Aren't they forcing Villa to sell players too?
They are. Villa have sold Tim Iroegbunam to Everton for £9m. They get the full 9 mill credit for him as he is an Academy player. And Everton can spread the costs across the length of his contract. So Villa are heftily in profit. And we only take on a small FFP hit. The fact that we've sold Lewis Dobbin (also an Academy product) to them for exactly the same fee, and length of contract, is, of course, entirely coincidental.
When do you think Citeh will get their 90 point deduction reduced to 3 on appeal?
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
£30 million amortised over the next five years and a £37 million profit on an academy player accrued this current year = budget within allowable losses.
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
FFP doesn't apply to Chelsea or Citeh it would seem, just Leicester, Forest, Everton and their ilk. Aren't they forcing Villa to sell players too?
They are. Villa have sold Tim Iroegbunam to Everton for £9m. They get the full 9 mill credit for him as he is an Academy player. And Everton can spread the costs across the length of his contract. So Villa are heftily in profit. And we only take on a small FFP hit. The fact that we've sold Lewis Dobbin (also an Academy product) to them for exactly the same fee, and length of contract, is, of course, entirely coincidental.
Omari Kellyman has also been bought by Chelsea for £20m from Villa. And Aston Villa have bought Ian Maatsen.
This merry go round of youth products isn't looking dodgy at all....
Gabriel Milland @gabrielmilland · 1h That awkward moment when you discover the idyllic bit of rural France where you booked the lovely gîte for this summer just voted massively for the fascists.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
Don't be a twat. He threw a strop over Ukraine wanting to join the EU. Which had nothing to do with US 'hegemony'.
And the Bag of Pigs, and Kruschev's ill considered move, were sixty years ago.
Was Kruschev's move "ill-considered"? It was, in my view, a strategic victory for the Soviets. It resulted in the protection of Cuba and the removal of US nuclear missiles from the Mediterranean.
Yes. Khrushchev got krucified and was out on his tod for Brezhnev within a year.
Cuba was freed from threat of invasion but the land based nuclear missiles were rendered strategically irrelevant by Polaris. And Western Europe was chock-full of NATO tactical nukes on top.
Actually it was two years (almost exactly two years).
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
£30 million amortised over the next five years and a £37 million profit on an academy player accrued this current year = budget within allowable losses.
I thought they were stopping the amortised valuation loophole?
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
Well I have met Peter Hitchens socially a few times, and I have to say he does, at times, seem a little... slow.
I’ve always liked the “the Japanese were provoked” argument for WWII
Yes, the Americans and others cut off oil and steel supplies (among other things) - not an embargo, but refusing to sell. Refusing to sell to a country that was using these materials to attack an ally of the US (China) and threatening to use them to attack the US itself and allied countries. For being friends with China.
So the US was supposed to sell oil and steel so the Japanese could build more Yamato class battleships to attack… the US?
The bad joke is that the Japanese invasion of South East Asia netted them *three* shipments of oil from the conquered territories
There never was a Japanese war strategy. The Kwantung Army was defeated in Siberia, the war in China was going nowhere, and the navy wanted to show that it could do better than the army. After Midway, Japan had lost.
I'm trying to think of a WWII naval encounter between Allies and Axis that was decided by gunnery alone.
Struggling beyond the Battle of the River Plate.
You could argue the hunt for the Bismarck was, but that was ultimately settled by aircraft.
I think there were others in the Solomans campaign.
Battle of the North Cape (sinking of the Scharnhorst). Battle of the Denmark Strait (sinking of the Hood). Battle of the Oslo Narrows - rather small though.
Plus, I think, various ones in the Med, in defence of convoys etc.
Is there anything in 1943 when the US had essentially no (or maybe one) aircraft carriers, and were waiting to get the one into action they borrowed from us?
Gabriel Milland @gabrielmilland · 1h That awkward moment when you discover the idyllic bit of rural France where you booked the lovely gîte for this summer just voted massively for the fascists.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
Well I have met Peter Hitchens socially a few times, and I have to say he does, at times, seem a little... slow.
I’ve always liked the “the Japanese were provoked” argument for WWII
Yes, the Americans and others cut off oil and steel supplies (among other things) - not an embargo, but refusing to sell. Refusing to sell to a country that was using these materials to attack an ally of the US (China) and threatening to use them to attack the US itself and allied countries. For being friends with China.
So the US was supposed to sell oil and steel so the Japanese could build more Yamato class battleships to attack… the US?
The bad joke is that the Japanese invasion of South East Asia netted them *three* shipments of oil from the conquered territories
There never was a Japanese war strategy. The Kwantung Army was defeated in Siberia, the war in China was going nowhere, and the navy wanted to show that it could do better than the army. After Midway, Japan had lost.
I'm trying to think of a WWII naval encounter between Allies and Axis that was decided by gunnery alone.
Struggling beyond the Battle of the River Plate.
You could argue the hunt for the Bismarck was, but that was ultimately settled by aircraft.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
Well I have met Peter Hitchens socially a few times, and I have to say he does, at times, seem a little... slow.
I’ve always liked the “the Japanese were provoked” argument for WWII
Yes, the Americans and others cut off oil and steel supplies (among other things) - not an embargo, but refusing to sell. Refusing to sell to a country that was using these materials to attack an ally of the US (China) and threatening to use them to attack the US itself and allied countries. For being friends with China.
So the US was supposed to sell oil and steel so the Japanese could build more Yamato class battleships to attack… the US?
The bad joke is that the Japanese invasion of South East Asia netted them *three* shipments of oil from the conquered territories
There never was a Japanese war strategy. The Kwantung Army was defeated in Siberia, the war in China was going nowhere, and the navy wanted to show that it could do better than the army. After Midway, Japan had lost.
I'm trying to think of a WWII naval encounter between Allies and Axis that was decided by gunnery alone.
Struggling beyond the Battle of the River Plate.
You could argue the hunt for the Bismarck was, but that was ultimately settled by aircraft.
Narvik?
Oh, that's a point.
We actually did rather well at that and basically wiped out half the surface fleet of the Kriegsmarine.
One of PB’s quaint traditions is History-Today style discussions of military encounters on WW2. I learn a lot from them.
My grandfather was on HMS Dorsetshire during the battle of the Bismarck. He spoke of the sickening sight of hundreds of German crew being left to drown after the ships withdrew for fear of u-boats.
Damn, I stopped watching the football 5 minutes before the end of normal time in the England match. It's Murphy's Law that all the interesting stuff has happened since then, including Georgia going ahead against Spain.
Why did you stop watching? Are you new to this live sport thing?
I had to go to a golf/swimming club with some other people.
I do appreciate how these candidates are grouped in the wiki page - anyone up for a vote for 'micellaneous centre*'? *Includes 8 Ensemble candidates, 13 non-Ensemble Union of Democrats and Independents candidates of 38 total UDI candidates, 5 of 7 Les Centristes candidates, 2 LR candidates, 1 non-Ensemble Radical Party candidate, and 1 Ensemble dissident out of 149 total candidate
I love the idea of the “ecologists” as a political block. Never struck me as the type.
“What do we want?”
“More information so we can form a reasoned assessment of what’s happening to the stoats in this area”.
“When do we want it?”
“In due course, once we have taken time to conduct a proper peer reviewed study”.
Our Green Party were originally the Ecology Party.
Yes and it refused to have a "leader" in an anarchic culture that at least had some soul .Now it bans any views that differ from the hard left trans gender viewpoint.
Trans rights are entirely consistent with libertarianism. It's neither the state's business what anyone does with their own body, nor anyone else's.
There are already laws to prevent harm to other people in the unlikely event a trans person assaulted another person, same as if a non trans person assaults another person. And I have news for you - there is no special forcefield around the girls' loo, so if a man looking to expose himself or assault a woman wants to enter a 'female only' space, legislating against trans women (who are far more likely to be the victims of sexual assault than the perpetrators) will not prevent them.
Why are trans people unlikely to commit assaults? Normal people do, at a rather easily assessed rate. I hope you are not saying that trans people are fundamentally abnormal?
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
£30 million amortised over the next five years and a £37 million profit on an academy player accrued this current year = budget within allowable losses.
I thought they were stopping the amortised valuation loophole?
Limiting it to five years max instead of Chelsea’s previous of up to eight.
I do appreciate how these candidates are grouped in the wiki page - anyone up for a vote for 'micellaneous centre*'? *Includes 8 Ensemble candidates, 13 non-Ensemble Union of Democrats and Independents candidates of 38 total UDI candidates, 5 of 7 Les Centristes candidates, 2 LR candidates, 1 non-Ensemble Radical Party candidate, and 1 Ensemble dissident out of 149 total candidate
I love the idea of the “ecologists” as a political block. Never struck me as the type.
“What do we want?”
“More information so we can form a reasoned assessment of what’s happening to the stoats in this area”.
“When do we want it?”
“In due course, once we have taken time to conduct a proper peer reviewed study”.
Our Green Party were originally the Ecology Party.
Yes and it refused to have a "leader" in an anarchic culture that at least had some soul .Now it bans any views that differ from the hard left trans gender viewpoint.
Trans rights are entirely consistent with libertarianism. It's neither the state's business what anyone does with their own body, nor anyone else's.
There are already laws to prevent harm to other people in the unlikely event a trans person assaulted another person, same as if a non trans person assaults another person. And I have news for you - there is no special forcefield around the girls' loo, so if a man looking to expose himself or assault a woman wants to enter a 'female only' space, legislating against trans women (who are far more likely to be the victims of sexual assault than the perpetrators) will not prevent them.
Why are trans people unlikely to commit assaults? Normal people do, at a rather easily assessed rate. I hope you are not saying that trans people are fundamentally abnormal?
I'm suggesting they're no more likely to commit assaults than any other person. 99.999999999999% of people - trans or not - go about their daily business without assaulting anyone else.
Damn, I stopped watching the football 5 minutes before the end of normal time in the England match. It's Murphy's Law that all the interesting stuff has happened since then, including Georgia going ahead against Spain.
Why did you stop watching? Are you new to this live sport thing?
I had to go to a golf/swimming club with some other people.
I've played water polo but I'd never heard of golf swimming. Sounds both intriguing and difficult.
Chelsea have agreed a £30m fee with Leicester for midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
Bonkers. Maybe they are happy to just take the points penalty? Also, £30m for KDH? Really?
Chelsea already have about 50 players that aren't exactly world beaters. They just keep adding to that list. What's KDH going to do, stand in the wall or be there to do shape for training?
He will start. Maresca is very stubborn with his system. KDH will play inside left.
Get used to some very one dimensional football Chelsea fans, Maresca makes Southgate seem flexible.
Which is why Leicester fans were happy to see him go, despite taking us up as Champions. His football is tedious to watch, and ultimately atkick off we want to see some entertainment.
There are going to be some very angry international footballers at Chelsea if that is the case.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
I don't recall the USA invading Cuba recently.
MrBed is incapable of seeing nations having their own interests beyond those of the U.S. and Russia, apparently.
A key feature of this position is denying the Ukrainians have their own agency. Zelensky is just a puppet of Washington/NATO etc.
All hegemonic imperial powers treat neighbouring states as their back yard.
Watch what happens if China set up PLA bases in Mexico. It wouldn't be pretty.
Its not just, its just reality.
If the US invaded, that makes the US the aggressor. Mind you, the US hasn't needed anything like that big an excuse to meddle in other American states' business. It's wrong when America does it so why should it be ok for Russia?
It is wrong on both sides. But it is reality.
We've already seen a large portion of the world deciding that Russia shouldn't get its own way in Ukraine.
That's the most real part of realpolitik: in the end, people can only be pushed so far before someone takes aim at the bully. Russia has spend a little too long fucking about and it's got a little taste of find out. That's good.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Damn, I stopped watching the football 5 minutes before the end of normal time in the England match. It's Murphy's Law that all the interesting stuff has happened since then, including Georgia going ahead against Spain.
Why did you stop watching? Are you new to this live sport thing?
I had to go to a golf/swimming club with some other people.
I've played water polo but I'd never heard of golf swimming. Sounds both intriguing and difficult.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
I don't recall the USA invading Cuba recently.
MrBed is incapable of seeing nations having their own interests beyond those of the U.S. and Russia, apparently.
A key feature of this position is denying the Ukrainians have their own agency. Zelensky is just a puppet of Washington/NATO etc.
All hegemonic imperial powers treat neighbouring states as their back yard.
Watch what happens if China set up PLA bases in Mexico. It wouldn't be pretty.
Its not just, its just reality.
If the US invaded, that makes the US the aggressor. Mind you, the US hasn't needed anything like that big an excuse to meddle in other American states' business. It's wrong when America does it so why should it be ok for Russia?
It is wrong on both sides. But it is reality.
We've already seen a large portion of the world deciding that Russia shouldn't get its own way in Ukraine.
That's the most real part of realpolitik: in the end, people can only be pushed so far before someone takes aim at the bully. Russia has spend a little too long fucking about and it's got a little taste of find out. That's good.
They still may come out 'ahead' in the short to medium term, but hopefully the world has learned something from it.
Gabriel Milland @gabrielmilland · 1h That awkward moment when you discover the idyllic bit of rural France where you booked the lovely gîte for this summer just voted massively for the fascists.
Gabriel Milland @gabrielmilland · 1h That awkward moment when you discover the idyllic bit of rural France where you booked the lovely gîte for this summer just voted massively for the fascists.
Damn, I stopped watching the football 5 minutes before the end of normal time in the England match. It's Murphy's Law that all the interesting stuff has happened since then, including Georgia going ahead against Spain.
Why did you stop watching? Are you new to this live sport thing?
I had to go to a golf/swimming club with some other people.
Golf/swimming sounds like an interesting and challenging game.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
I have finally tracked down the article that Hitchins was quoting about ‘Russia being provoked.’ It was not easy because not only was what he quoted rather inaccurate but it was so ripped out of context anyway as to actually reverse the meaning of what was said.
Here are Kagan’s very precise words:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading. Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe. Putin alone is to blame for his actions, but the invasion of Ukraine is taking place in a historical and geopolitical context in which the United States has played and still plays the principal role, and Americans must grapple with this fact
The thrust of the article is that Putin was provoked by his inability to deal with how much the Russians were hated in their traditional sphere of influence, as demonstrated by the collapse of the Yanukovych government and the desperation of Eastern European states to join NATO as a guarantee against a relapse. He argues that the key provocation was how the United States’ response was clumsy and chaotic leading Russia and now China to think they could keep getting away with their crimes.
This was of course seized on by Kremlin propagandists and anti-American twits like Hitchins who claimed Kagan said the US provoked the invasion of Ukraine - when in fact he was saying pretty much the exact opposite.
So basically - Hitchins either lied, or is so stupid he should not be allowed near a keyboard. Or both, of course.
Hitchens is not stupid, so one should conclude that he is a deliberate liar.
One can only speculate as to why he would want to lie for Putin.
He isn't lying.
The guy said "Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe."
So he reacted much the same way that the US did when Kruschev decided to put missiles in Cuba.
I don't recall the USA invading Cuba recently.
MrBed is incapable of seeing nations having their own interests beyond those of the U.S. and Russia, apparently.
A key feature of this position is denying the Ukrainians have their own agency. Zelensky is just a puppet of Washington/NATO etc.
All hegemonic imperial powers treat neighbouring states as their back yard.
Watch what happens if China set up PLA bases in Mexico. It wouldn't be pretty.
Its not just, its just reality.
If the US invaded, that makes the US the aggressor. Mind you, the US hasn't needed anything like that big an excuse to meddle in other American states' business. It's wrong when America does it so why should it be ok for Russia?
It is wrong on both sides. But it is reality.
We've already seen a large portion of the world deciding that Russia shouldn't get its own way in Ukraine.
That's the most real part of realpolitik: in the end, people can only be pushed so far before someone takes aim at the bully. Russia has spend a little too long fucking about and it's got a little taste of find out. That's good.
Bollocks. China, India, Brazil South Africa, Saudi and half of South America, South Africa and the far east and middle east are all either supporting Russia actively or in a nudge nudge way.
Gabriel Milland @gabrielmilland · 1h That awkward moment when you discover the idyllic bit of rural France where you booked the lovely gîte for this summer just voted massively for the fascists.
Comments
Cinema De Lux in Bristol's Cabot Circus to close next week - One of Bristol's biggest cinemas will close later this month after 15 years.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-67476637
One lovely old lady accurately listed all of Labour's policies, told me she was undecided, she liked our candidate but that unfortunately Keir Starmer is a communist.
https://x.com/maitlis/status/1807465936766586934
The accurate listing of policy was the giveaway.
There never was a Japanese war strategy. The Kwantung Army was defeated in Siberia, the war in China was going nowhere, and the navy wanted to show that it could do better than the army. After Midway, Japan had lost.
Japan started its war in the east back in 1937.
The U.S. sanctions might have promoted the Japanese attack, but 'provoked' suggests Japan wasn't already waging a brutal war of aggressive conquest.
How the f##k are Chelsea within financial fair play. They have spent like £1bn and still spending.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Party_(UK)
Leicester have sold to stay within FFP!
It's a farce.
£30 million will go some way to fixing our finances. He is a decent player at Championship level, and Maresca is a fan. A local lad from Shepshed, but I really don't think he will set the Premiership alight.
Of course the perceived need to attacking ANYTHING including China was symptom of the desperation and rottenness of the Japanese right-wing military dictatorship.
Get used to some very one dimensional football Chelsea fans, Maresca makes Southgate seem flexible.
Which is why Leicester fans were happy to see him go, despite taking us up as Champions. His football is tedious to watch, and ultimately atkick off we want to see some entertainment.
Struggling beyond the Battle of the River Plate.
You could argue the hunt for the Bismarck was, but that was ultimately settled by aircraft.
Almost 700,000 citizens call for Yoon's impeachment in online petition
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=377738
They will also likely have a clear out of more players like Gallagher over the summer who count as home grown and all new players on the long 6/7 year contracts.
Its a farce and if they don’t start winning things soon then they will fall into a mess as their assets they can offset will be gone and the players signed on long contracts will be closer to end of careers so very little sell on value.
Brinksmanship is dangerous, but can be rewarding.
Watch what happens if China set up PLA bases in Mexico. It wouldn't be pretty.
Its not just, its just reality.
Say what you like about Britain and it’s politics .. but there ain’t many western democracies where you’d get a former Prime Minister leaving a lovely little message on your ring doorbell.
https://x.com/cllr_aston/status/1807467159032901901
Russia has attacked its peaceful neighbour for reasons of pure imperialism, in order to deny the freely expressed democratic will of Ukraine not to be a province of a threadbare Russian empire of brutality and poverty,
The cost has been massive for Ukraine, but equally Russia itself has taken nearly half a million casualties. The vile and depraved way the Russian army has behaved has made the entire Kremlin complicit in and responsible for war crimes as defined under the UN Charter and International law. Russia is loathed for its despicable behaviour and its influence in all spheres of life around the world is going down the drain.
There is little to no constituency in the UK that supports the mafia thugs of Putin`s Russia, despite the subversion, corruption, threats, bribery and hybrid war that Putinistan launches against the West on a daily basis.
Eventually you will lose, but unless you push Putin out of the window there is no way back for Russia. Since 1945 Germany apologised for its crimes. Since 1991, Russia has repeated its crimes, and before you get on your high horse, OF COURSE Soviet Socialism was as disgusting as National Socialism. It killed more people, more brutally and for longer. Stalin and Hitler were both equally vile, morally bankrupt criminals. For as long as Russia defends its crimes, the more it will be shunned and held in ever greater contempt.
But thanks for coming by our little forum, anyway.
With regard to Cuba, since the Americans had decided not to make any more immediate attempts after the Bay of Pigs fiasco and that allowed Castro to build up strong conventional forces. I think it's doubtful it can be claimed as a strategic success on those grounds.
Bottom line is, it didn't achieve what Khrushchev wanted, gained no additional security for Cuba or the Soviets, nearly provoked a nuclear war, severely embarrassed the Soviets in front of their allies by making the leadership look weak and was a key factor in Khrushchev's own removal in 1964.
It's hard to see that as anything other than a strategic failure for the Soviets..
There are already laws to prevent harm to other people in the unlikely event a trans person assaulted another person, same as if a non trans person assaults another person. And I have news for you - there is no special forcefield around the girls' loo, so if a man looking to expose himself or assault a woman wants to enter a 'female only' space, legislating against trans women (who are far more likely to be the victims of sexual assault than the perpetrators) will not prevent them.
The fact that we've sold Lewis Dobbin (also an Academy product) to them for exactly the same fee, and length of contract, is, of course, entirely coincidental.
Mind you, the US hasn't needed anything like that big an excuse to meddle in other American states' business. It's wrong when America does it so why should it be ok for Russia?
Cuba was freed from threat of invasion but the land based nuclear missiles were rendered strategically irrelevant by Polaris. And Western Europe was chock-full of NATO tactical nukes on top.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Savo_Island#:~:text=During the naval surface battle,were also killed in action
I think there were others in the Solomans campaign.
We actually did rather well at that and basically wiped out half the surface fleet of the Kriegsmarine.
That's the reality.
This merry go round of youth products isn't looking dodgy at all....
Gabriel Milland
@gabrielmilland
·
1h
That awkward moment when you discover the idyllic bit of rural France where you booked the lovely gîte for this summer just voted massively for the fascists.
https://x.com/gabrielmilland/status/1807497170477834241
Battle of the Denmark Strait (sinking of the Hood).
Battle of the Oslo Narrows - rather small though.
Plus, I think, various ones in the Med, in defence of convoys etc.
Is there anything in 1943 when the US had essentially no (or maybe one) aircraft carriers, and were waiting to get the one into action they borrowed from us?
Battle of cap bon wasn't a big battle but fits the bill. Also at night.
My grandfather was on HMS Dorsetshire during the battle of the Bismarck. He spoke of the sickening sight of hundreds of German crew being left to drown after the ships withdrew for fear of u-boats.
Tripe Marketing Board 💚
@TripeUK
As they say at the D-Day Commemoration...
Quote
Rishi Sunak
@RishiSunak
It’s not over until it’s over.
That's the most real part of realpolitik: in the end, people can only be pushed so far before someone takes aim at the bully. Russia has spend a little too long fucking about and it's got a little taste of find out. That's good.
The question is will the UK just accept it (as the UK did) or will they go down with a big war, as is the norm.
It’s like the Tiverton and Honiton of rural France.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ap-UM1O9RBU
The US and Europe isn't the world anymore.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Leonid-Grinin/publication/323143515/figure/fig1/AS:593473241632768@1518506455424/Dynamics-of-the-share-of-the-West-and-the-rest-of-the-world-the-Rest-in-the-global.png