Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Starmer’s Trump card – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,158
edited August 4 in General
Starmer’s Trump card – politicalbetting.com

Meanwhile JD Vance has also called for the end of all US support for Ukraine as it has "nothing to do with our national security, [and] no American interest is served by our intervention" pic.twitter.com/S6LAb7oFsL

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,157
    Do we have a list of defence spend across Europe by gdp % ?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,569
    VP like Vance.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,716
    edited July 16
    Pulpstar said:

    Do we have a list of defence spend across Europe by gdp % ?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_in_Europe_by_military_expenditures

    ETA: Oh, and second, like Russia? third, like Armenia
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,015
    Also, how much will the 10% tariff on all imports affect UK exports to the US (which are not insubstantial) ?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,574

    In case you are wondering WHY Trump picked Vance as his running mate, anti-UKRism is one key reason, methinks.

    Putin-pimpers & Trump-fluffers (ditto visa versa) please explain?

    It's easy to explain why you think that. Because Putin is your favourite scapegoat for everything that happens in US politics that you don't like.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,806
    If you change your mind
    I'm the first in line
    Honey, I'm still free
    Take a Vance on me
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,806

    In case you are wondering WHY Trump picked Vance as his running mate, anti-UKRism is one key reason, methinks.

    Putin-pimpers & Trump-fluffers (ditto visa versa) please explain?

    It's easy to explain why you think that. Because Putin is your favourite scapegoat for everything that happens in US politics that you don't like.
    Do you support the territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognised borders?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,574

    In case you are wondering WHY Trump picked Vance as his running mate, anti-UKRism is one key reason, methinks.

    Putin-pimpers & Trump-fluffers (ditto visa versa) please explain?

    It's easy to explain why you think that. Because Putin is your favourite scapegoat for everything that happens in US politics that you don't like.
    Do you support the territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognised borders?
    I think that anyone who claims that they do but does not want to intervene directly is just virtue signalling.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,544

    In case you are wondering WHY Trump picked Vance as his running mate, anti-UKRism is one key reason, methinks.

    Putin-pimpers & Trump-fluffers (ditto visa versa) please explain?

    It's easy to explain why you think that. Because Putin is your favourite scapegoat for everything that happens in US politics that you don't like.
    Do you support the territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognised borders?
    I think that anyone who claims that they do but does not want to intervene directly is just virtue signalling.
    So what is your answer? Yes or no?
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,566
    Nigelb said:

    Also, how much will the 10% tariff on all imports affect UK exports to the US (which are not insubstantial) ?

    Goods exports are about £60bn. Of course, much of that already has tariffs - 10% on cars, for example. As I undestand it, the new 10% would be on top.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,806

    In case you are wondering WHY Trump picked Vance as his running mate, anti-UKRism is one key reason, methinks.

    Putin-pimpers & Trump-fluffers (ditto visa versa) please explain?

    It's easy to explain why you think that. Because Putin is your favourite scapegoat for everything that happens in US politics that you don't like.
    Do you support the territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognised borders?
    I think that anyone who claims that they do but does not want to intervene directly is just virtue signalling.
    So you support Putin's dubious territorial claims?
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,566
    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Also, how much will the 10% tariff on all imports affect UK exports to the US (which are not insubstantial) ?

    Goods exports are about £60bn. Of course, much of that already has tariffs - 10% on cars, for example. As I undestand it, the new 10% would be on top.
    Just looked it up: we export more goods to the US than we import. Just.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,906
    Vance is the guy we should worry about when the US Supreme Court makes the President a King. Vance has a lot less baggage than Trump, and is smarter than Trump, but every bit as bonkers.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,687

    Nate Silver
    @NateSilver538
    ·
    1h
    I mean Jaime Harrison and the DNC are blatantly lying about this (Ohio changed its law so there's no reason to nominate Biden early) but the good news is that there very much will be consequences if they force Biden's nomination thru and he loses

    https://x.com/NateSilver538
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,015

    In case you are wondering WHY Trump picked Vance as his running mate, anti-UKRism is one key reason, methinks.

    Putin-pimpers & Trump-fluffers (ditto visa versa) please explain?

    It's easy to explain why you think that. Because Putin is your favourite scapegoat for everything that happens in US politics that you don't like.
    Do you support the territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognised borders?
    I think that anyone who claims that they do but does not want to intervene directly is just virtue signalling.
    Ukraine sold already have been defeated without NATO countries' help.
    "Just virtue signalling", is just nonsense.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,598
    edited July 16
    Nigelb said:

    Also, how much will the 10% tariff on all imports affect UK exports to the US (which are not insubstantial) ?

    Will it make the cost of my Apple products more expensive?

    Is this the justification i need to buy the Apple Vision Pro?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,574

    Nigelb said:

    Also, how much will the 10% tariff on all imports affect UK exports to the US (which are not insubstantial) ?

    Will it make the cost of my Apple products more expensive?

    Is this the justification i need to buy the Apple Vision Pro?
    You should buy it because it might become a collector's item after the product is discontinued.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,574

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    Vance’s comments about the UK as an Islamist nation are delusional. Again, I hope a wake-up call for those who think there’s any sense coming out of today’s GOP.

    Are the French security services delusional when they refer to us as 'Londonistan'?
  • TweedledeeTweedledee Posts: 1,405

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    Vance’s comments about the UK as an Islamist nation are delusional. Again, I hope a wake-up call for those who think there’s any sense coming out of today’s GOP.

    Are the French security services delusional when they refer to us as 'Londonistan'?
    Bit rich from people headquartered in Paristan.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,839
    carnforth said:

    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Also, how much will the 10% tariff on all imports affect UK exports to the US (which are not insubstantial) ?

    Goods exports are about £60bn. Of course, much of that already has tariffs - 10% on cars, for example. As I undestand it, the new 10% would be on top.
    Just looked it up: we export more goods to the US than we import. Just.
    Look again.

    There is a strange feature of UK/US trade. By our figures, we are in surplus, but by their figures, they are in surplus.

    US government figures: U.S. goods and services trade with United Kingdom totaled an estimated $295.6 billion in 2022. Exports were $158.2 billion; imports were $137.4 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade surplus with United Kingdom was $20.8 billion in 2022.
    https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/europe-middle-east/europe/united-kingdom

    UK government figures: export £191 billion; import £119 billion
    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-trade-in-numbers/uk-trade-in-numbers-web-version
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,228
    I just asked an American friend about the Trump rally. His credentials: 20 years in UK security services or equivalent parts of the army. Several years literally guarding VIPs in Iraq and Africa

    He detests Trump btw

    His verdict:

    “I’m waiting for the initial frenzy of misinformation to fizzle out a bit and for more established facts before I form an opinion.

    One thing is clear: the Secret Service failed at their job.”

    So this is definitely a headrollerrooy sitch, but we still don’t know if there is a more sinister explanation
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,185
    edited July 16

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    Vance’s comments about the UK as an Islamist nation are delusional. Again, I hope a wake-up call for those who think there’s any sense coming out of today’s GOP.

    Are the French security services delusional when they refer to us as 'Londonistan'?
    That was in reference to a Blair era policy of

    1) Using ACPO (yes really) to mount illegal spying operations* on dangerous terrorists like people who climb trees to halt development and Fathers For Justice - an organisation known for chubby, middle aged men dressing up in super hero costumes and standing on top of buildings with banners.
    2) Totally ignoring violent lunatics screaming "Death To The West", taking part in terrorist attacks abroad and becoming increasing violent at home. Including planning terrorist attacks in the UK and assembling bombs.
    3) When Capn' Hook took over a Mosque, by manner of his goons beating the rightful guardians up and throwing them in the street, the Police specially refused to interfere.
    4) When he was preaching violent racist lunacy, all attempts at legal action were stymied.

    The above led some to speculate that Blair and Co had done some kind of deal with the violent nutters - which was nonsense, they were just incompetent and stupid.

    Then came the London bombings.

    Government policy changed to wanting to lock up random people with suntans forever. And shooting Brazilian electricians.

    *See the court cases, still ongoing, about women the undercover policeman slept with. And revelations about using dead peoples identities.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,615
    Leon said:

    I just asked an American friend about the Trump rally. His credentials: 20 years in UK security services or equivalent parts of the army. Several years literally guarding VIPs in Iraq and Africa

    He detests Trump btw

    His verdict:

    “I’m waiting for the initial frenzy of misinformation to fizzle out a bit and for more established facts before I form an opinion.

    One thing is clear: the Secret Service failed at their job.”

    So this is definitely a headrollerrooy sitch, but we still don’t know if there is a more sinister explanation

    Good advice on the frenzy of misinformation.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,185
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    I just asked an American friend about the Trump rally. His credentials: 20 years in UK security services or equivalent parts of the army. Several years literally guarding VIPs in Iraq and Africa

    He detests Trump btw

    His verdict:

    “I’m waiting for the initial frenzy of misinformation to fizzle out a bit and for more established facts before I form an opinion.

    One thing is clear: the Secret Service failed at their job.”

    So this is definitely a headrollerrooy sitch, but we still don’t know if there is a more sinister explanation

    Well given that the job of the Secret Service is to prevent the President from being shot, saying that they failed at their job is a statement of the bleeding obvious!
    Indeed. Especially since shooters on rooftops/windows is

    1) A known, previous problem. See JFK.
    2) Fucking obvious.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,015

    carnforth said:

    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Also, how much will the 10% tariff on all imports affect UK exports to the US (which are not insubstantial) ?

    Goods exports are about £60bn. Of course, much of that already has tariffs - 10% on cars, for example. As I undestand it, the new 10% would be on top.
    Just looked it up: we export more goods to the US than we import. Just.
    Look again.

    There is a strange feature of UK/US trade. By our figures, we are in surplus, but by their figures, they are in surplus.

    US government figures: U.S. goods and services trade with United Kingdom totaled an estimated $295.6 billion in 2022. Exports were $158.2 billion; imports were $137.4 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade surplus with United Kingdom was $20.8 billion in 2022.
    https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/europe-middle-east/europe/united-kingdom

    UK government figures: export £191 billion; import £119 billion
    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-trade-in-numbers/uk-trade-in-numbers-web-version
    Shhhh.
    Don't tell them.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,392

    In case you are wondering WHY Trump picked Vance as his running mate, anti-UKRism is one key reason, methinks.

    Putin-pimpers & Trump-fluffers (ditto visa versa) please explain?

    How could he be more anti UK than Biden ?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,015

    Nigelb said:

    Also, how much will the 10% tariff on all imports affect UK exports to the US (which are not insubstantial) ?

    Will it make the cost of my Apple products more expensive?

    Is this the justification i need to buy the Apple Vision Pro?
    Only if Starmer decides to punish you by retaliating.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,015

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    Vance’s comments about the UK as an Islamist nation are delusional. Again, I hope a wake-up call for those who think there’s any sense coming out of today’s GOP.

    Are the French security services delusional when they refer to us as 'Londonistan'?
    No, they're just being rude.
    That you think in slogans is the problem.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,228
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    I just asked an American friend about the Trump rally. His credentials: 20 years in UK security services or equivalent parts of the army. Several years literally guarding VIPs in Iraq and Africa

    He detests Trump btw

    His verdict:

    “I’m waiting for the initial frenzy of misinformation to fizzle out a bit and for more established facts before I form an opinion.

    One thing is clear: the Secret Service failed at their job.”

    So this is definitely a headrollerrooy sitch, but we still don’t know if there is a more sinister explanation

    Well given that the job of the Secret Service is to prevent the President from being shot, saying that they failed at their job is a statement of the bleeding obvious!

    But we’ve had people on here saying this is possibly just a series of unfortunate coincidences, not a massive failure

    Btw I’ve just checked. Pennsylvania has the 2nd largest Ukrainian population in the USA after NY

    My mad theory is still the best one out there. IF you want a mad theory
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559

    In case you are wondering WHY Trump picked Vance as his running mate, anti-UKRism is one key reason, methinks.

    Putin-pimpers & Trump-fluffers (ditto visa versa) please explain?

    How could he be more anti UK than Biden ?
    That's a load of pigeon poop.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,574

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    It follows logically from your position that Ukraine would be better off with Trump because there certainly wouldn’t be any chance of direct intervention with Biden calling the shots and worrying about NATO unity.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,392

    In case you are wondering WHY Trump picked Vance as his running mate, anti-UKRism is one key reason, methinks.

    Putin-pimpers & Trump-fluffers (ditto visa versa) please explain?

    How could he be more anti UK than Biden ?
    That's a load of pigeon poop.
    Biden is the most anti UK Pres in years.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,228
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    I just asked an American friend about the Trump rally. His credentials: 20 years in UK security services or equivalent parts of the army. Several years literally guarding VIPs in Iraq and Africa

    He detests Trump btw

    His verdict:

    “I’m waiting for the initial frenzy of misinformation to fizzle out a bit and for more established facts before I form an opinion.

    One thing is clear: the Secret Service failed at their job.”

    So this is definitely a headrollerrooy sitch, but we still don’t know if there is a more sinister explanation

    Good advice on the frenzy of misinformation.
    I LOVE “initial frenzies of misinformation” - almost as much as outdoor showers with views of the Luberon
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,806

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    It follows logically from your position that Ukraine would be better off with Trump because there certainly wouldn’t be any chance of direct intervention with Biden calling the shots and worrying about NATO unity.
    Do you support Putin's territorial claims against Ukraine?
  • MisterBedfordshireMisterBedfordshire Posts: 2,252
    edited July 16
    FPT

    @MattW said:

    » show previous quotes
    Speaking of barbers, there seem to be a repeated claim in Reform type circles about Turkish barbers' shops and money laundering.
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KSIKPMkKw2E?app=desktop

    It rather reminds me of the former claims by around nail bars.
    In every market town in the district, often several of them, rarely a customer, guy in a flash car turns up on occasion to get the takings or whatever.

    Places like Barbers that do smallish cash transactions in multiple are ideal for money laundering via fake customers
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,015
    .
    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    I just asked an American friend about the Trump rally. His credentials: 20 years in UK security services or equivalent parts of the army. Several years literally guarding VIPs in Iraq and Africa

    He detests Trump btw

    His verdict:

    “I’m waiting for the initial frenzy of misinformation to fizzle out a bit and for more established facts before I form an opinion.

    One thing is clear: the Secret Service failed at their job.”

    So this is definitely a headrollerrooy sitch, but we still don’t know if there is a more sinister explanation

    Well given that the job of the Secret Service is to prevent the President from being shot, saying that they failed at their job is a statement of the bleeding obvious!

    But we’ve had people on here saying this is possibly just a series of unfortunate coincidences, not a massive failure

    Btw I’ve just checked. Pennsylvania has the 2nd largest Ukrainian population in the USA after NY

    My mad theory is still the best one out there. IF you want a mad theory
    No - that it's an unfortunate chain of coincidences and a massive failure.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,569

    FPT

    @MattW said:

    » show previous quotes
    Speaking of barbers, there seem to be a repeated claim in Reform type circles about Turkish barbers' shops and money laundering.
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KSIKPMkKw2E?app=desktop

    It rather reminds me of the former claims by around nail bars.
    In every market town in the district, often several of them, rarely a customer, guy in a flash car turns up on occasion to get the takings or whatever.

    Places like Barbers that do smallish cash transactions in multiple are ideal for money laundering via fake customers

    It’s Walter White’s Car Wash.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    See what I mean about Trump-fluffers & Putin-pimps? (Apologies for redundancy).
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,484

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    If Europe, and by that I really mean the EU, lose the threat of NATO as a deterrent to Russia then they will need to be creative in how to make the EU a deterrent and that might mean some big changes.

    Firstly they would need an EU military combining resources and agreements replicating NATO’s mutual defence obligation. Any EU country that refuses to join by contributing militarily and abiding the mutual defence pact must leave the EU (looking at you Ireland - no more free ride, and you Hungary - time to choose which side your bread is buttered).

    Then they need to allow Ukraine in so that an attack on what is left of Ukraine, if Russia keeps occupied territories, activates the pact.

    Then, and probably most controversial, they will need to bring Turkey in as the largest military and a threat to Russia which Russia can’t ignore. Why should Turkey be expected to back up Europe if it’s treated as a second class country not worthy of joining the club.

    If the US is not prepared to pay the bill anymore and back it up with thousands of their troops and their kit then unless Europe changes its attitude to military size and spending then big changes such as above might be the only options.
  • In case you are wondering WHY Trump picked Vance as his running mate, anti-UKRism is one key reason, methinks.

    Putin-pimpers & Trump-fluffers (ditto visa versa) please explain?

    How could he be more anti UK than Biden ?
    That's a load of pigeon poop.
    Biden is the most anti UK Pres in years.
    Massive difference between not being an Anglophile on a personal level on the one hand, and espousing policies that are badly misaligned with British interests on the other.

    Much better to have a US President who has no great affinity with the UK but shares its outlook on a wide range of issues than the opposite of that.
  • Sandpit said:

    FPT

    @MattW said:

    » show previous quotes
    Speaking of barbers, there seem to be a repeated claim in Reform type circles about Turkish barbers' shops and money laundering.
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KSIKPMkKw2E?app=desktop

    It rather reminds me of the former claims by around nail bars.
    In every market town in the district, often several of them, rarely a customer, guy in a flash car turns up on occasion to get the takings or whatever.

    Places like Barbers that do smallish cash transactions in multiple are ideal for money laundering via fake customers

    It’s Walter White’s Car Wash.
    Not as if its Just Tice saying it. Det Supt Knacker is too.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13083199/Police-chief-warns-cheap-barber-shop-deals-criminal-gangs-exploit-workers-profit.html
  • TweedledeeTweedledee Posts: 1,405
    boulay said:

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    If Europe, and by that I really mean the EU, lose the threat of NATO as a deterrent to Russia then they will need to be creative in how to make the EU a deterrent and that might mean some big changes.

    Firstly they would need an EU military combining resources and agreements replicating NATO’s mutual defence obligation. Any EU country that refuses to join by contributing militarily and abiding the mutual defence pact must leave the EU (looking at you Ireland - no more free ride, and you Hungary - time to choose which side your bread is buttered).

    Then they need to allow Ukraine in so that an attack on what is left of Ukraine, if Russia keeps occupied territories, activates the pact.

    Then, and probably most controversial, they will need to bring Turkey in as the largest military and a threat to Russia which Russia can’t ignore. Why should Turkey be expected to back up Europe if it’s treated as a second class country not worthy of joining the club.

    If the US is not prepared to pay the bill anymore and back it up with thousands of their troops and their kit then unless Europe changes its attitude to military size and spending then big changes such as above might be the only options.
    Most elegant way of doing it is if the US leaves NATO.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,839

    FPT

    @MattW said:

    » show previous quotes
    Speaking of barbers, there seem to be a repeated claim in Reform type circles about Turkish barbers' shops and money laundering.
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KSIKPMkKw2E?app=desktop

    It rather reminds me of the former claims by around nail bars.
    In every market town in the district, often several of them, rarely a customer, guy in a flash car turns up on occasion to get the takings or whatever.

    Places like Barbers that do smallish cash transactions in multiple are ideal for money laundering via fake customers

    Part money-laundering; part failed business model based on renting chairs to the actual hairdressers who would then earn money without the expense of their own salon.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,484

    boulay said:

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    If Europe, and by that I really mean the EU, lose the threat of NATO as a deterrent to Russia then they will need to be creative in how to make the EU a deterrent and that might mean some big changes.

    Firstly they would need an EU military combining resources and agreements replicating NATO’s mutual defence obligation. Any EU country that refuses to join by contributing militarily and abiding the mutual defence pact must leave the EU (looking at you Ireland - no more free ride, and you Hungary - time to choose which side your bread is buttered).

    Then they need to allow Ukraine in so that an attack on what is left of Ukraine, if Russia keeps occupied territories, activates the pact.

    Then, and probably most controversial, they will need to bring Turkey in as the largest military and a threat to Russia which Russia can’t ignore. Why should Turkey be expected to back up Europe if it’s treated as a second class country not worthy of joining the club.

    If the US is not prepared to pay the bill anymore and back it up with thousands of their troops and their kit then unless Europe changes its attitude to military size and spending then big changes such as above might be the only options.
    Most elegant way of doing it is if the US leaves NATO.
    Would also remove any sense of obligation to back them in the far east if/when things go pear shaped there.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,015
    The evidence is actually that Vance's references to Moslem counties are as much random terms of abuse to be deployed, as they are anything which might approach analysis.

    See also, for example:

    It's odd that one of Vance's signature lines about how to deal with the American bureaucracy is to subject it to "de-ba’athification," one of the US policies in Iraq that everyone seems to agree was a huge failure..
    https://x.com/AASchapiro/status/1813241849374474670
  • WildernessPt2WildernessPt2 Posts: 715
    So much bien pensant.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,998
    "Will it make the cost of my Apple products more expensive?"

    Apple products are mostly manufacured by the ChiComs.

    Which is why I sent Tim Cook a letter offering him a "Free Tibet" bumper sticker, if he would display it prominently. (He hasn't replied, so I think I will offer it to someone else.)
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    Seattle Times ($) - Bob Ferguson has single-digit lead over Dave Reichert [for Governor] in new WA Poll

    OLYMPIA — A new statewide poll shows Democrat Bob Ferguson 9 percentage points ahead of his main rival, Republican Dave Reichert, in the battle for the governor’s mansion.

    The two are far ahead in a crowded field and will likely face off in November’s general election, the WA Poll shows.

    Among 564 surveyed voters likely to cast a ballot in the Aug. 6 primary, 42% said that if the primary were today they would vote for Ferguson, and 33% said they’d vote for Reichert.

    The next largest group of voters, about 14%, said they were undecided.

    Republican Semi Bird followed with 7%, and Democrat Mark Mullet, a state senator, fell in last place, with 4% of voters saying they’d back him in August. Only three poll respondents said they would vote for another candidate, but they did not name any of the other 24 candidates who will appear on the primary ballot. . . .

    The WA poll reveals a stark partisan divide, with 72% of Democrats saying they would vote for Ferguson while 76% of Republicans said they’d back Reichert. The two had roughly even support among independents, with 32% saying they’d back Reichert and 33% behind Ferguson.

    According to SurveyUSA, which conducted the poll, Bird saw “outsized support among very conservative voters,” with 16% of those voters choosing him. Mullet, who has campaigned as a moderate, saw the most support from “very liberal” voters along the political spectrum, picking up 11% of that group.

    Ferguson appeared to be ahead of Reichert in all age groups. The attorney general was also more popular among women, at 50% of respondents compared with Reichert’s 28%, while Reichert was narrowly more popular among men, getting support from 37% of men compared with Ferguson’s 35%.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,598
    Jurgen Klopp will not be available to replace Gareth Southgate in time for the start of the World Cup qualifiers as the former Liverpool coach has no intention of returning to top-level management for another 12 months.

    Klopp announced when he left Anfield that he would be taking at least a year off and will not join a club or a national federation during that time.

    Despite a clamour for him to be a leading candidate to replace Southgate following his resignation as England coach, Telegraph Sport understands Klopp’s position is unchanged and there is no prospect of him performing a U-turn.

    It will be July 2025 before Klopp is ready to return to management. That means the Football Association would have to begin their World Cup qualification with a caretaker or interim manager before they could entertain the idea of the German coach taking over in the build-up to the 2026 tournament.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/07/16/jurgen-klopp-not-next-england-manager-gareth-southgate-quit/
  • Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    It follows logically from your position that Ukraine would be better off with Trump because there certainly wouldn’t be any chance of direct intervention with Biden calling the shots and worrying about NATO unity.
    Do you support Putin's territorial claims against Ukraine?
    You don't have to support them to agree that they are inevitable and better to get it over with than have more death (and more territory taken) and possible escalation into out of control conflagration.

    Given the price they have paid for getting Ulster Donbass, they won't be causing much further trouble any timesoon
  • WildernessPt2WildernessPt2 Posts: 715

    FPT

    @MattW said:

    » show previous quotes
    Speaking of barbers, there seem to be a repeated claim in Reform type circles about Turkish barbers' shops and money laundering.
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KSIKPMkKw2E?app=desktop

    It rather reminds me of the former claims by around nail bars.
    In every market town in the district, often several of them, rarely a customer, guy in a flash car turns up on occasion to get the takings or whatever.

    Places like Barbers that do smallish cash transactions in multiple are ideal for money laundering via fake customers

    Part money-laundering; part failed business model based on renting chairs to the actual hairdressers who would then earn money without the expense of their own salon.
    It used to be a combined tax credit/visa scam on taxis. Four of you buy a taxi, set up a company all four directors. Pay yourself below minimum wage to maximise tax credits and company directorship sufficient to get ILTR.

    A few changes were made to tax credits in the early 2010s put haste to this little tax dodge...
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,998
    FPT: Off topic, but an interesting political tidbit: Here in Washington state, the top two Democrats running for governor, Bob Ferguson and Mark Mullet, are touting their family credentials, and promising to get tough on crime and cut housing costs.

    In short, they are running as moderate Republicans would -- and as Bill Clinton did in his 1992 run for the presidency. (He promised to put another 100,000 police officers o the street--and claimed to be a good family man.)

    In Ferguson's case, it is fair to say that he is, to some extent, running against his own record, as attorney general.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Ferguson_(politician)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Mullet

    (Ferguson and his wife have two kids, Mullet and his wife, six, in a "blended" family.)
  • WildernessPt2WildernessPt2 Posts: 715

    boulay said:

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    If Europe, and by that I really mean the EU, lose the threat of NATO as a deterrent to Russia then they will need to be creative in how to make the EU a deterrent and that might mean some big changes.

    Firstly they would need an EU military combining resources and agreements replicating NATO’s mutual defence obligation. Any EU country that refuses to join by contributing militarily and abiding the mutual defence pact must leave the EU (looking at you Ireland - no more free ride, and you Hungary - time to choose which side your bread is buttered).

    Then they need to allow Ukraine in so that an attack on what is left of Ukraine, if Russia keeps occupied territories, activates the pact.

    Then, and probably most controversial, they will need to bring Turkey in as the largest military and a threat to Russia which Russia can’t ignore. Why should Turkey be expected to back up Europe if it’s treated as a second class country not worthy of joining the club.

    If the US is not prepared to pay the bill anymore and back it up with thousands of their troops and their kit then unless Europe changes its attitude to military size and spending then big changes such as above might be the only options.
    Most elegant way of doing it is if the US leaves NATO.
    That would have been like John, Paul and George leaving The Beatles. The rest of NATO is Ringo on the drums.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,228

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    It follows logically from your position that Ukraine would be better off with Trump because there certainly wouldn’t be any chance of direct intervention with Biden calling the shots and worrying about NATO unity.
    Do you support Putin's territorial claims against Ukraine?
    You don't have to support them to agree that they are inevitable and better to get it over with than have more death (and more territory taken) and possible escalation into out of control conflagration.

    Given the price they have paid for getting Ulster Donbass, they won't be causing much further trouble any timesoon
    A very recent poll has a plurality of Ukrainians wanting to negotiate a peace with Putin now

    Of course the Ukes don’t want to yield to many of Putin’s demands but then a peace deal always means compromises - for both sides
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,774
    Another bowl of shit for Labour - Sadiq has asked for a £0.5bn annual subsidy for TFL, the Tories refused this and it played, IMO, a fairly big role in them becoming very unpopular in London but the reasons for refusing were sound so now Labour will be faced with giving in and getting slammed by their voters in the north for subsidising the richest part of the country or continuing to refuse and take on the unpopularity in London it comes with.

    Being in government is a series of shit bowls and now Labour are going to eat them everyday.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,569
    boulay said:

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    If Europe, and by that I really mean the EU, lose the threat of NATO as a deterrent to Russia then they will need to be creative in how to make the EU a deterrent and that might mean some big changes.

    Firstly they would need an EU military combining resources and agreements replicating NATO’s mutual defence obligation. Any EU country that refuses to join by contributing militarily and abiding the mutual defence pact must leave the EU (looking at you Ireland - no more free ride, and you Hungary - time to choose which side your bread is buttered).

    Then they need to allow Ukraine in so that an attack on what is left of Ukraine, if Russia keeps occupied territories, activates the pact.

    Then, and probably most controversial, they will need to bring Turkey in as the largest military and a threat to Russia which Russia can’t ignore. Why should Turkey be expected to back up Europe if it’s treated as a second class country not worthy of joining the club.

    If the US is not prepared to pay the bill anymore and back it up with thousands of their troops and their kit then unless Europe changes its attitude to military size and spending then big changes such as above might be the only options.
    We will agree to disagree, but IMHO the last thing European defence needs is the EU sticking its nose in. Having one large Western military in the UK outside its structures, as well as the other one you’ve also identified, is very helpful in this regard.

    If the US is going to turn more inward, or look more to what we would call the East (their West, with China as the major threat), then Europe can no longer rely on the US bankrolling European security as it has done in the past. Which means everyone up to 3% of GDP on defence, and some well-organised projects to quickly get production lines up and running for standardised weapons systems and their ammunition.

    FWIW, I see a change in administration in the US leading mainly to a change in language rather than a material change in support. We’ve seen it already with the latest aid package, reframed as protecting American jobs (and large donor companies) rather than sending aid overseas.
  • MisterBedfordshireMisterBedfordshire Posts: 2,252
    edited July 16

    FPT

    @MattW said:

    » show previous quotes
    Speaking of barbers, there seem to be a repeated claim in Reform type circles about Turkish barbers' shops and money laundering.
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KSIKPMkKw2E?app=desktop

    It rather reminds me of the former claims by around nail bars.
    In every market town in the district, often several of them, rarely a customer, guy in a flash car turns up on occasion to get the takings or whatever.

    Places like Barbers that do smallish cash transactions in multiple are ideal for money laundering via fake customers

    Part money-laundering; part failed business model based on renting chairs to the actual hairdressers who would then earn money without the expense of their own salon.
    It probably worked until too many people piled in. Also the money launderers operating such places would be able to afford to undercut genuine establishments by offering much lower "rent" to self employed barbers working in them.

    Meanwhile Landlord and Council pocket rent and business rates and HMRC gets tax on the fake customer payments. So not a great deal of enthusiasm to knock it on the head.

    A back door way of extracting tax from the black market.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,015
    boulay said:

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    If Europe, and by that I really mean the EU, lose the threat of NATO as a deterrent to Russia then they will need to be creative in how to make the EU a deterrent and that might mean some big changes.

    Firstly they would need an EU military combining resources and agreements replicating NATO’s mutual defence obligation. Any EU country that refuses to join by contributing militarily and abiding the mutual defence pact must leave the EU (looking at you Ireland - no more free ride, and you Hungary - time to choose which side your bread is buttered).

    Then they need to allow Ukraine in so that an attack on what is left of Ukraine, if Russia keeps occupied territories, activates the pact.

    Then, and probably most controversial, they will need to bring Turkey in as the largest military and a threat to Russia which Russia can’t ignore. Why should Turkey be expected to back up Europe if it’s treated as a second class country not worthy of joining the club.

    If the US is not prepared to pay the bill anymore and back it up with thousands of their troops and their kit then unless Europe changes its attitude to military size and spending then big changes such as above might be the only options.
    Trump adviser Fiona Hill to (help) lead UK defense review
    https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-adviser-fiona-hill-lead-uk-labour-defense-review/
    ..A British-born Russia expert, Hill served as a national security adviser to the former president for two years until 2019.
    The daughter of a coal miner from the northeast of England, Hill moved to the U.S. to study her post-graduate degree in Russian at Harvard and later worked as an intelligence analyst under both the Bush and Obama administrations before being hired to work for Trump.
    Since leaving the White House, she has continued to be an influential voice on Vladimir Putin's Russia, last year telling POLITICO that the war in Ukraine is a "proxy war against the United States."
    "Putin would be thrilled if Trump would come back to power because he also anticipates that Trump will pull the United States out of NATO, that Trump will rupture the U.S. alliance system, and that Trump will hand over Ukraine," she said.
    The Labour Party is traditionally seen as allied with Joe Biden's Democrats. However, in recent months, as it prepared for government, Keir Starmer's team has been on a mission to reach out to Trump-supporting Republicans...
    ..David Lammy, the foreign secretary, has met several Trump allies this year, and has praised the work of new vice presidential pick, J.D. Vance.
    The new administration may have felt there was work to make up, after several members of Starmer’s Cabinet previously made critical statements about Trump, including Lammy, who called the then-president a “neo-Nazi-sympathizing sociopath” in 2018...
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,826
    If Vance doesn't think a nuclear armed state engaging in aggressive territorial expansion isn't an issue for the United States it's hard to know where to start, frankly.

    My guess is he's a narrow nationalist with no grasp of the value of alliances.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,569

    FPT

    @MattW said:

    » show previous quotes
    Speaking of barbers, there seem to be a repeated claim in Reform type circles about Turkish barbers' shops and money laundering.
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KSIKPMkKw2E?app=desktop

    It rather reminds me of the former claims by around nail bars.
    In every market town in the district, often several of them, rarely a customer, guy in a flash car turns up on occasion to get the takings or whatever.

    Places like Barbers that do smallish cash transactions in multiple are ideal for money laundering via fake customers

    Part money-laundering; part failed business model based on renting chairs to the actual hairdressers who would then earn money without the expense of their own salon.
    It used to be a combined tax credit/visa scam on taxis. Four of you buy a taxi, set up a company all four directors. Pay yourself below minimum wage to maximise tax credits and company directorship sufficient to get ILTR.

    A few changes were made to tax credits in the early 2010s put haste to this little tax dodge...
    Now the same thing is an immigration scam, with the four drivers taking it turn to be the one declaring all the income, to enable them to get married and obtain a spousal visa.
  • FPT

    @MattW said:

    » show previous quotes
    Speaking of barbers, there seem to be a repeated claim in Reform type circles about Turkish barbers' shops and money laundering.
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KSIKPMkKw2E?app=desktop

    It rather reminds me of the former claims by around nail bars.
    In every market town in the district, often several of them, rarely a customer, guy in a flash car turns up on occasion to get the takings or whatever.

    Places like Barbers that do smallish cash transactions in multiple are ideal for money laundering via fake customers

    Part money-laundering; part failed business model based on renting chairs to the actual hairdressers who would then earn money without the expense of their own salon.
    It used to be a combined tax credit/visa scam on taxis. Four of you buy a taxi, set up a company all four directors. Pay yourself below minimum wage to maximise tax credits and company directorship sufficient to get ILTR.

    A few changes were made to tax credits in the early 2010s put haste to this little tax dodge...
    Now they are so high on the hog on money from councils for transporting fake SEND claims (to get round the 2 child UC limit) to school, they don't need to worry about scams.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,782
    edited July 16
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    I just asked an American friend about the Trump rally. His credentials: 20 years in UK security services or equivalent parts of the army. Several years literally guarding VIPs in Iraq and Africa

    He detests Trump btw

    His verdict:

    “I’m waiting for the initial frenzy of misinformation to fizzle out a bit and for more established facts before I form an opinion.

    One thing is clear: the Secret Service failed at their job.”

    So this is definitely a headrollerrooy sitch, but we still don’t know if there is a more sinister explanation

    Good advice on the frenzy of misinformation.
    If we are dropping names of people we know, I know an ex Royal Protection Officer. He was responsible for one of the senior royals. He is now head of security at one of the palaces and he tells us absolutely nothing as they are told not to. All I have ever managed to get out of him is Andrew rescued a cat and guns get left in train loos and hotel bedroom safes more often than you might think (He says he never has).
  • WildernessPt2WildernessPt2 Posts: 715

    FPT

    @MattW said:

    » show previous quotes
    Speaking of barbers, there seem to be a repeated claim in Reform type circles about Turkish barbers' shops and money laundering.
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KSIKPMkKw2E?app=desktop

    It rather reminds me of the former claims by around nail bars.
    In every market town in the district, often several of them, rarely a customer, guy in a flash car turns up on occasion to get the takings or whatever.

    Places like Barbers that do smallish cash transactions in multiple are ideal for money laundering via fake customers

    Part money-laundering; part failed business model based on renting chairs to the actual hairdressers who would then earn money without the expense of their own salon.
    It used to be a combined tax credit/visa scam on taxis. Four of you buy a taxi, set up a company all four directors. Pay yourself below minimum wage to maximise tax credits and company directorship sufficient to get ILTR.

    A few changes were made to tax credits in the early 2010s put haste to this little tax dodge...
    Now they are so high on the hog on money from councils for transporting fake SEND claims (to get round the 2 child UC limit) to school, they don't need to worry about scams.
    Taxis ferrying people is huge and something largely non existent prior to 2010.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,826
    Leon said:

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    It follows logically from your position that Ukraine would be better off with Trump because there certainly wouldn’t be any chance of direct intervention with Biden calling the shots and worrying about NATO unity.
    Do you support Putin's territorial claims against Ukraine?
    You don't have to support them to agree that they are inevitable and better to get it over with than have more death (and more territory taken) and possible escalation into out of control conflagration.

    Given the price they have paid for getting Ulster Donbass, they won't be causing much further trouble any timesoon
    A very recent poll has a plurality of Ukrainians wanting to negotiate a peace with Putin now

    Of course the Ukes don’t want to yield to many of Putin’s demands but then a peace deal always means compromises - for both sides
    If it's the poll I'm thinking of it got rather short shrift here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dei-Lvsbkio&t=3s
  • FPT

    @MattW said:

    » show previous quotes
    Speaking of barbers, there seem to be a repeated claim in Reform type circles about Turkish barbers' shops and money laundering.
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KSIKPMkKw2E?app=desktop

    It rather reminds me of the former claims by around nail bars.
    In every market town in the district, often several of them, rarely a customer, guy in a flash car turns up on occasion to get the takings or whatever.

    Places like Barbers that do smallish cash transactions in multiple are ideal for money laundering via fake customers

    Part money-laundering; part failed business model based on renting chairs to the actual hairdressers who would then earn money without the expense of their own salon.
    It used to be a combined tax credit/visa scam on taxis. Four of you buy a taxi, set up a company all four directors. Pay yourself below minimum wage to maximise tax credits and company directorship sufficient to get ILTR.

    A few changes were made to tax credits in the early 2010s put haste to this little tax dodge...
    Abolishing them and replacing them with UC which means tested on capital (as well as income) was one of them.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,228

    Leon said:

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    It follows logically from your position that Ukraine would be better off with Trump because there certainly wouldn’t be any chance of direct intervention with Biden calling the shots and worrying about NATO unity.
    Do you support Putin's territorial claims against Ukraine?
    You don't have to support them to agree that they are inevitable and better to get it over with than have more death (and more territory taken) and possible escalation into out of control conflagration.

    Given the price they have paid for getting Ulster Donbass, they won't be causing much further trouble any timesoon
    A very recent poll has a plurality of Ukrainians wanting to negotiate a peace with Putin now

    Of course the Ukes don’t want to yield to many of Putin’s demands but then a peace deal always means compromises - for both sides
    If it's the poll I'm thinking of it got rather short shrift here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dei-Lvsbkio&t=3s
    I never click on links to videos. It’s nothing personal. Just an aversion to having my screen filled with YouTube and having to wait for the important info
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,544
    kjh said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    I just asked an American friend about the Trump rally. His credentials: 20 years in UK security services or equivalent parts of the army. Several years literally guarding VIPs in Iraq and Africa

    He detests Trump btw

    His verdict:

    “I’m waiting for the initial frenzy of misinformation to fizzle out a bit and for more established facts before I form an opinion.

    One thing is clear: the Secret Service failed at their job.”

    So this is definitely a headrollerrooy sitch, but we still don’t know if there is a more sinister explanation

    Good advice on the frenzy of misinformation.
    If we are dropping names of people we know, I know an ex Royal Protection Officer. He was responsible for one of the senior royals. He is now head of security at one of the palaces and he tells us absolutely nothing as they are told not to. All I have ever managed to get out of him is Andrew rescued a cat and guns get left in train loos and hotel bedroom safes more often than you might think (He says he never has).
    It's like forums that claim to have knowledgeable people giving inside info on a topic of interest that hint at company-confidential stuff. They're either b/s'ers, representatives of the company doing it with the company's knowledge (good PR), or soon to be unemployed.

    I had a friend who worked at Williams for years. He would wax lyrical about historical stuff in F1, less about Williams, and f-all about current and future developments. The few times he let the cat out of the bag was, on occasion, in reaction to something newsworthy happening that was not race related, such as the pit fire.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,826
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    It follows logically from your position that Ukraine would be better off with Trump because there certainly wouldn’t be any chance of direct intervention with Biden calling the shots and worrying about NATO unity.
    Do you support Putin's territorial claims against Ukraine?
    You don't have to support them to agree that they are inevitable and better to get it over with than have more death (and more territory taken) and possible escalation into out of control conflagration.

    Given the price they have paid for getting Ulster Donbass, they won't be causing much further trouble any timesoon
    A very recent poll has a plurality of Ukrainians wanting to negotiate a peace with Putin now

    Of course the Ukes don’t want to yield to many of Putin’s demands but then a peace deal always means compromises - for both sides
    If it's the poll I'm thinking of it got rather short shrift here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dei-Lvsbkio&t=3s
    I never click on links to videos. It’s nothing personal. Just an aversion to having my screen filled with YouTube and having to wait for the important info
    A prominent Ukrainian vlogger, Anna, dismissing a poll that 44% of Ukrainians favoured negotiations. It might be to do with the small print. 'They favour negotiations on their own terms' something like that. Doesn't mean they want to stop fighting as of now.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,950
    Nigelb said:

    The evidence is actually that Vance's references to Moslem counties are as much random terms of abuse to be deployed, as they are anything which might approach analysis.

    See also, for example:

    It's odd that one of Vance's signature lines about how to deal with the American bureaucracy is to subject it to "de-ba’athification," one of the US policies in Iraq that everyone seems to agree was a huge failure..
    https://x.com/AASchapiro/status/1813241849374474670

    Since Vance thought Trump might be the American Hitler, perhaps the earlier and more successful de-Nazification may be a better model?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,409

    In case you are wondering WHY Trump picked Vance as his running mate, anti-UKRism is one key reason, methinks.

    Putin-pimpers & Trump-fluffers (ditto visa versa) please explain?

    I think that if Putinism/anti-hawkism were the deciding factor, Tulsi Gabbard would have been the pick. I don’t know anything about JD Vance but he jyst seems like a fairly solid Trumpian pick. Also an interesting indication that Trump can forgive.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559

    FPT: Off topic, but an interesting political tidbit: Here in Washington state, the top two Democrats running for governor, Bob Ferguson and Mark Mullet, are touting their family credentials, and promising to get tough on crime and cut housing costs.

    In short, they are running as moderate Republicans would -- and as Bill Clinton did in his 1992 run for the presidency. (He promised to put another 100,000 police officers o the street--and claimed to be a good family man.)

    In Ferguson's case, it is fair to say that he is, to some extent, running against his own record, as attorney general.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Ferguson_(politician)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Mullet

    (Ferguson and his wife have two kids, Mullet and his wife, six, in a "blended" family.)

    "It is fair to say" above doing some heavy lifting here.

    BTW, that is attack message against AG Ferguson highlighted in new TV ad by former King Co Sheriff (and US Rep) Reichert. Who famously apprehended the "Green River Killer" (via DNA evidence) after about two decades of trying.

    So not surprising that both candidates are touting their law enforcement credentials, which is standard operating procedure for state attorney general candidates & incumbents.

    BTW, Ferguson is campaigning on law & order like a moderate DEMOCRAT, for example the newly-elected District Attorney for Multnomah County (Portland) Oregon.
  • MisterBedfordshireMisterBedfordshire Posts: 2,252
    edited July 16

    kjh said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    I just asked an American friend about the Trump rally. His credentials: 20 years in UK security services or equivalent parts of the army. Several years literally guarding VIPs in Iraq and Africa

    He detests Trump btw

    His verdict:

    “I’m waiting for the initial frenzy of misinformation to fizzle out a bit and for more established facts before I form an opinion.

    One thing is clear: the Secret Service failed at their job.”

    So this is definitely a headrollerrooy sitch, but we still don’t know if there is a more sinister explanation

    Good advice on the frenzy of misinformation.
    If we are dropping names of people we know, I know an ex Royal Protection Officer. He was responsible for one of the senior royals. He is now head of security at one of the palaces and he tells us absolutely nothing as they are told not to. All I have ever managed to get out of him is Andrew rescued a cat and guns get left in train loos and hotel bedroom safes more often than you might think (He says he never has).
    It's like forums that claim to have knowledgeable people giving inside info on a topic of interest that hint at company-confidential stuff. They're either b/s'ers, representatives of the company doing it with the company's knowledge (good PR), or soon to be unemployed.
    I'm pretty confident that at least one "insider" posting regularly on rail forums is being paid to do it as part of their job as a spin doctor in Network Rail's publicity department.

    No way you would get away with divulging so much non public information for years unless that is the case.

    Of course if so (and said poster(s) are quite forthright) this means their posts are what NR want to be the case (not necessarily what is the case).

    It could be a great forum but for anal micromanagement by the moderators.

    This post would be banished to subforum 94 with a warning email from the moderator about the iniquities of posting speculative posts anywhere except the speculative posts sub forum and a request to edit it to correct some grammatical error or other.


  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,774

    Nigelb said:

    The evidence is actually that Vance's references to Moslem counties are as much random terms of abuse to be deployed, as they are anything which might approach analysis.

    See also, for example:

    It's odd that one of Vance's signature lines about how to deal with the American bureaucracy is to subject it to "de-ba’athification," one of the US policies in Iraq that everyone seems to agree was a huge failure..
    https://x.com/AASchapiro/status/1813241849374474670

    Since Vance thought Trump might be the American Hitler, perhaps the earlier and more successful de-Nazification may be a better model?
    We all assume that Vance was being negative about Trump when he pronounced him American Hitler, the truth could very well be the opposite.
  • Nigelb said:

    The evidence is actually that Vance's references to Moslem counties are as much random terms of abuse to be deployed, as they are anything which might approach analysis.

    See also, for example:

    It's odd that one of Vance's signature lines about how to deal with the American bureaucracy is to subject it to "de-ba’athification," one of the US policies in Iraq that everyone seems to agree was a huge failure..
    https://x.com/AASchapiro/status/1813241849374474670

    Since Vance thought Trump might be the American Hitler, perhaps the earlier and more successful de-Nazification may be a better model?
    As Vance is a convert to Catholicism and Trump seems to have found God big time since being shot, perhaps there is a conversion underway?
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559

    In case you are wondering WHY Trump picked Vance as his running mate, anti-UKRism is one key reason, methinks.

    Putin-pimpers & Trump-fluffers (ditto visa versa) please explain?

    I think that if Putinism/anti-hawkism were the deciding factor, Tulsi Gabbard would have been the pick. I don’t know anything about JD Vance but he jyst seems like a fairly solid Trumpian pick. Also an interesting indication that Trump can forgive.
    Tulsi Gabbard is a busted flush. Was NEVER in the frame for Trump's VP running mate.

    Though agree she'd have been an interesting choice. Though fact she's Hindu might have proved an impediment for some evangelical voters. Suspect she's also toooooo much of a loose cannon for DJT & etc.

    As for forgiveness, Trump has displayed willingness to let bygones be bygones PROVIDED the bygoners capitulate completely and make abject obeisance, as with Vance & bunch of other eagerly ambitious politicos.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,484
    Sandpit said:

    boulay said:

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    If Europe, and by that I really mean the EU, lose the threat of NATO as a deterrent to Russia then they will need to be creative in how to make the EU a deterrent and that might mean some big changes.

    Firstly they would need an EU military combining resources and agreements replicating NATO’s mutual defence obligation. Any EU country that refuses to join by contributing militarily and abiding the mutual defence pact must leave the EU (looking at you Ireland - no more free ride, and you Hungary - time to choose which side your bread is buttered).

    Then they need to allow Ukraine in so that an attack on what is left of Ukraine, if Russia keeps occupied territories, activates the pact.

    Then, and probably most controversial, they will need to bring Turkey in as the largest military and a threat to Russia which Russia can’t ignore. Why should Turkey be expected to back up Europe if it’s treated as a second class country not worthy of joining the club.

    If the US is not prepared to pay the bill anymore and back it up with thousands of their troops and their kit then unless Europe changes its attitude to military size and spending then big changes such as above might be the only options.
    We will agree to disagree, but IMHO the last thing European defence needs is the EU sticking its nose in. Having one large Western military in the UK outside its structures, as well as the other one you’ve also identified, is very helpful in this regard.

    If the US is going to turn more inward, or look more to what we would call the East (their West, with China as the major threat), then Europe can no longer rely on the US bankrolling European security as it has done in the past. Which means everyone up to 3% of GDP on defence, and some well-organised projects to quickly get production lines up and running for standardised weapons systems and their ammunition.

    FWIW, I see a change in administration in the US leading mainly to a change in language rather than a material change in support. We’ve seen it already with the latest aid package, reframed as protecting American jobs (and large donor companies) rather than sending aid overseas.
    I’m no fan of the EU but I see them as vital in ensuring members pull their weight and pick a side. Ireland has a potentially important role to play in the Atlantic and should bear the financial and resource weight and stop the neutrality bollocks. Hungary needs to decide if it’s an EU country or wants to go back to the good old bad old days in Russia’s sphere. The EU is the stick to make them do this. It’s also the carrot to bind Turkey in.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652
    It seems pretty clear that Trump/Vance are going to drive the UK and the EU much closer together.

    What I do not get about the MAGA crowd, though, is their thinking on Ukraine. If Putin wins there, so do the Chinese, the North Koreans and the Iranians. By pulling US support for Kyiv, the GOP will be empowering the regimes they claim to what to constrain. Furthermore, what strategic logic is there in Europe distancing itself from China if the US has essentially pulled out of Europe?

    You square the circle, I reckon, by understanding that Trump and the party he now controls admire Putin and want him to succeed above all else.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,274
    Where’s Bozo to tell us Vance would be marvelous for Ukraine . And how the hell do you support Trump if you want Ukraine to prevail .

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,574

    It seems pretty clear that Trump/Vance are going to drive the UK and the EU much closer together.

    What I do not get about the MAGA crowd, though, is their thinking on Ukraine. If Putin wins there, so do the Chinese, the North Koreans and the Iranians. By pulling US support for Kyiv, the GOP will be empowering the regimes they claim to what to constrain. Furthermore, what strategic logic is there in Europe distancing itself from China if the US has essentially pulled out of Europe?

    You square the circle, I reckon, by understanding that Trump and the party he now controls admire Putin and want him to succeed above all else.

    You're starting from a false premise because you assume that the policy is aimed at Russia when it's actually aimed at Western Europe.

    They think wealthy Europeans should sort out their own defence because the US can't afford to be committed everywhere globally at once.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559

    If Vance doesn't think a nuclear armed state engaging in aggressive territorial expansion isn't an issue for the United States it's hard to know where to start, frankly.

    My guess is he's a narrow nationalist with no grasp of the value of alliances.

    Very hard to tell, as Vance is an smart guy (also a smart ass) who is total focused on becoming POTUS some day. So will say ANYTHING he believes, for present-day consumption, that he believes will further his ambitions for the not-very-distant future.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,774

    MaxPB said:

    Another bowl of shit for Labour - Sadiq has asked for a £0.5bn annual subsidy for TFL, the Tories refused this and it played, IMO, a fairly big role in them becoming very unpopular in London but the reasons for refusing were sound so now Labour will be faced with giving in and getting slammed by their voters in the north for subsidising the richest part of the country or continuing to refuse and take on the unpopularity in London it comes with.

    Being in government is a series of shit bowls and now Labour are going to eat them everyday.

    Yes, the previous government left the country in a disastrously bad state. The vast majority of voters know this.

    Where does the money come from SO? Subsidising TFL should be very low down the priority list and I say that as a Londoner.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,496
    Regretfully agree with TSE with one exception: if a return in Europe to 1940/1941 is Starmer's trump card, what is his two of clubs?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,950

    Nigelb said:

    The evidence is actually that Vance's references to Moslem counties are as much random terms of abuse to be deployed, as they are anything which might approach analysis.

    See also, for example:

    It's odd that one of Vance's signature lines about how to deal with the American bureaucracy is to subject it to "de-ba’athification," one of the US policies in Iraq that everyone seems to agree was a huge failure..
    https://x.com/AASchapiro/status/1813241849374474670

    Since Vance thought Trump might be the American Hitler, perhaps the earlier and more successful de-Nazification may be a better model?
    As Vance is a convert to Catholicism and Trump seems to have found God big time since being shot, perhaps there is a conversion underway?
    You know who else started off as a Catholic?
  • In case you are wondering WHY Trump picked Vance as his running mate, anti-UKRism is one key reason, methinks.

    Putin-pimpers & Trump-fluffers (ditto visa versa) please explain?

    I think that if Putinism/anti-hawkism were the deciding factor, Tulsi Gabbard would have been the pick. I don’t know anything about JD Vance but he jyst seems like a fairly solid Trumpian pick. Also an interesting indication that Trump can forgive.
    So could Boris - and made the error of forgiving Gove.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,409

    Nigelb said:

    The evidence is actually that Vance's references to Moslem counties are as much random terms of abuse to be deployed, as they are anything which might approach analysis.

    See also, for example:

    It's odd that one of Vance's signature lines about how to deal with the American bureaucracy is to subject it to "de-ba’athification," one of the US policies in Iraq that everyone seems to agree was a huge failure..
    https://x.com/AASchapiro/status/1813241849374474670

    Since Vance thought Trump might be the American Hitler, perhaps the earlier and more successful de-Nazification may be a better model?
    As Vance is a convert to Catholicism and Trump seems to have found God big time since being shot, perhaps there is a conversion underway?
    You know who else started off as a Catholic?
    Madonna? Vance to don a conical bra and simulate masturbation on stage?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,569
    edited July 16
    boulay said:

    Sandpit said:

    boulay said:

    Several posters here have repeatedly claimed that Trump won’t be bad for Ukraine. I hope they’ve seen the reality of the situation now.

    I don't think such people can even spell reality.

    Trump's attitude to Ukraine is plain to anyone who cares to listen and the outcome is patently obvious. He will immediately stop all aid - money, weapons and intel - to force a 'peace' that involves Ukraine giving up all occupied territories and promising never to join NATO or the EU.

    Zelensky will tell Trump to go to hell.

    At that point Europe will be faced the realisation that direct intervention is the only way to stop Russia taking Ukraine and, in time, surrounding countries. Too many are deluding themselves this won't happen, but Trump has already given us the seeds of the future and it's not hard to determine what kind of ugly and poisonous plants will grow from them.
    If Europe, and by that I really mean the EU, lose the threat of NATO as a deterrent to Russia then they will need to be creative in how to make the EU a deterrent and that might mean some big changes.

    Firstly they would need an EU military combining resources and agreements replicating NATO’s mutual defence obligation. Any EU country that refuses to join by contributing militarily and abiding the mutual defence pact must leave the EU (looking at you Ireland - no more free ride, and you Hungary - time to choose which side your bread is buttered).

    Then they need to allow Ukraine in so that an attack on what is left of Ukraine, if Russia keeps occupied territories, activates the pact.

    Then, and probably most controversial, they will need to bring Turkey in as the largest military and a threat to Russia which Russia can’t ignore. Why should Turkey be expected to back up Europe if it’s treated as a second class country not worthy of joining the club.

    If the US is not prepared to pay the bill anymore and back it up with thousands of their troops and their kit then unless Europe changes its attitude to military size and spending then big changes such as above might be the only options.
    We will agree to disagree, but IMHO the last thing European defence needs is the EU sticking its nose in. Having one large Western military in the UK outside its structures, as well as the other one you’ve also identified, is very helpful in this regard.

    If the US is going to turn more inward, or look more to what we would call the East (their West, with China as the major threat), then Europe can no longer rely on the US bankrolling European security as it has done in the past. Which means everyone up to 3% of GDP on defence, and some well-organised projects to quickly get production lines up and running for standardised weapons systems and their ammunition.

    FWIW, I see a change in administration in the US leading mainly to a change in language rather than a material change in support. We’ve seen it already with the latest aid package, reframed as protecting American jobs (and large donor companies) rather than sending aid overseas.
    I’m no fan of the EU but I see them as vital in ensuring members pull their weight and pick a side. Ireland has a potentially important role to play in the Atlantic and should bear the financial and resource weight and stop the neutrality bollocks. Hungary needs to decide if it’s an EU country or wants to go back to the good old bad old days in Russia’s sphere. The EU is the stick to make them do this. It’s also the carrot to bind Turkey in.
    Perhaps they have a role in ensuring the likes of Ireland and Hungary pull their weight financially; but definitely not an EU Army, nor any direct EU role in procurement, which would end up as a bureaucratic Hell with little money actually going to the front lines.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,566
    Nigelb said:

    carnforth said:

    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Also, how much will the 10% tariff on all imports affect UK exports to the US (which are not insubstantial) ?

    Goods exports are about £60bn. Of course, much of that already has tariffs - 10% on cars, for example. As I undestand it, the new 10% would be on top.
    Just looked it up: we export more goods to the US than we import. Just.
    Look again.

    There is a strange feature of UK/US trade. By our figures, we are in surplus, but by their figures, they are in surplus.

    US government figures: U.S. goods and services trade with United Kingdom totaled an estimated $295.6 billion in 2022. Exports were $158.2 billion; imports were $137.4 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade surplus with United Kingdom was $20.8 billion in 2022.
    https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/europe-middle-east/europe/united-kingdom

    UK government figures: export £191 billion; import £119 billion
    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-trade-in-numbers/uk-trade-in-numbers-web-version
    Shhhh.
    Don't tell them.
    Seems to be an interesting mystery. Not sure why the snide response.

    https://archive.is/SqUkF

    "UK and US report trade surplus with each other: Statisticians attempt to solve mystery of differing figures"
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652

    It seems pretty clear that Trump/Vance are going to drive the UK and the EU much closer together.

    What I do not get about the MAGA crowd, though, is their thinking on Ukraine. If Putin wins there, so do the Chinese, the North Koreans and the Iranians. By pulling US support for Kyiv, the GOP will be empowering the regimes they claim to what to constrain. Furthermore, what strategic logic is there in Europe distancing itself from China if the US has essentially pulled out of Europe?

    You square the circle, I reckon, by understanding that Trump and the party he now controls admire Putin and want him to succeed above all else.

    You're starting from a false premise because you assume that the policy is aimed at Russia when it's actually aimed at Western Europe.

    They think wealthy Europeans should sort out their own defence because the US can't afford to be committed everywhere globally at once.

    I am starting from the premise that neither Trump nor Vance are concerned with the defence of Ukraine and that they will be in charge in seven months. I totally agree that over the last four years, European leaders - including those in the UK - failed totally to plan for this eventuality, but we are where we are. People who admire Putin and his politics will soon be in the White House, Ukraine will be forced into a temporary and entirely disadvantageous peace deal (because Putin will undoubtedly attack again), Europe will be humiliated and key UK security, defence and economic interests will lie in tatters. That'll show the libs, eh!!

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,950
    edited July 16

    ...

    Nigelb said:

    The evidence is actually that Vance's references to Moslem counties are as much random terms of abuse to be deployed, as they are anything which might approach analysis.

    See also, for example:

    It's odd that one of Vance's signature lines about how to deal with the American bureaucracy is to subject it to "de-ba’athification," one of the US policies in Iraq that everyone seems to agree was a huge failure..
    https://x.com/AASchapiro/status/1813241849374474670

    Since Vance thought Trump might be the American Hitler, perhaps the earlier and more successful de-Nazification may be a better model?
    As Vance is a convert to Catholicism and Trump seems to have found God big time since being shot, perhaps there is a conversion underway?
    I wouldn't believe Trump if he said he:d had a loft conversion.
    Thomas Crooks almost imposed a loft conversion on him.

    Just remembered I know a Tommy Crooks, one of the numerous band members that passed through The Fall. Probably getting on for a three digit number so not really name dropping.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Another bowl of shit for Labour - Sadiq has asked for a £0.5bn annual subsidy for TFL, the Tories refused this and it played, IMO, a fairly big role in them becoming very unpopular in London but the reasons for refusing were sound so now Labour will be faced with giving in and getting slammed by their voters in the north for subsidising the richest part of the country or continuing to refuse and take on the unpopularity in London it comes with.

    Being in government is a series of shit bowls and now Labour are going to eat them everyday.

    Yes, the previous government left the country in a disastrously bad state. The vast majority of voters know this.

    Where does the money come from SO? Subsidising TFL should be very low down the priority list and I say that as a Londoner.

    There is no money left, it seems. Again, voters understand what a disastrous government they have just expelled.

  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,207

    Nigelb said:

    The evidence is actually that Vance's references to Moslem counties are as much random terms of abuse to be deployed, as they are anything which might approach analysis.

    See also, for example:

    It's odd that one of Vance's signature lines about how to deal with the American bureaucracy is to subject it to "de-ba’athification," one of the US policies in Iraq that everyone seems to agree was a huge failure..
    https://x.com/AASchapiro/status/1813241849374474670

    Since Vance thought Trump might be the American Hitler, perhaps the earlier and more successful de-Nazification may be a better model?
    As Vance is a convert to Catholicism and Trump seems to have found God big time since being shot, perhaps there is a conversion underway?
    You know who else started off as a Catholic?
    Madonna? Vance to don a conical bra and simulate masturbation on stage?
    If The Donald told him to, he probably would.
This discussion has been closed.