“Storm Shadow” is trending on Twitter, as the US wakes up and reads the Times story that Biden is blocking the British from using them in Russia.
Er, you sure? Some mistake ...
That’s the story going round (except Sandpit means Ukraine, not ‘the British’, I think ?)
The Biden administration has been incredibly cautious about allowing anything which might cross some kind of NATO vs Russia red line (wrongly, IMO, but I understand the motivation), and they have the leverage to stop Ukraine using them in Russia. Might be true.
“Storm Shadow” is trending on Twitter, as the US wakes up and reads the Times story that Biden is blocking the British from using them in Russia.
Er, you sure? Some mistake ...
That’s the story going round (except Sandpit means Ukraine, not ‘the British’).
The Biden administration has been incredibly cautious about allowing anything which might cross some kind of NATO vs Russia red line (wrongly, IMO, but I understand the motivation), and they have the leverage to stop Ukraine using them in Russia. Might be true.
It's not just about NATO v Russia but about maintaining NATO unity. Biden is very deferential to German sensitivities in particular, which is not something that would bother Trump.
I remember 2014 very well. Steinmeier was all over the place accommodating Russia, Merkel refused to name Russia as an aggressor in Donbas. I got the feeling that German leaders just wanted Ukraine to go away, just surrender so Germany could continue feeding itself with Russian trade...
.. Just look at how respected Schröder still is. Somebody so obvious a traitor should have been ostracized long ago in a normal environment. But he is still around, Steinmeier is still president, Scholz might still be controlled by both of the former, since Scholz appears to lack any character or ideas himself…
In 2 days the situation in the special military operation zone changed dramatically. Western countries suffered multi-billion dollar losses, losing a huge number of HIMARS, PATRIOT and IRIS-T air defense systems. Apparently, Ukraine and its allies will not be able to restore their combat capability after such losses in the near future.
DISASTER5 PATRIOT Launchers, 1 IRIS-T And SU-24 Destroyed By Iskanders Military Summary And Analysis For 2024.08.17
Man, he didn't take long to get onto his "specialist subject:
He's right though. The number of HIMARS and other rocket systems that have been destroyed on Russian bridges, train lines, military columns and defensive positions over the last week is remarkable.
Indeed. Look at the damage this Russian bridge did to a poor HIMARS rocket.
If the Tweet is right it was launched by a fighter and not a rocket.
Remarkable what having air superiority used well can do.
Yes there’s actually some confusion about whether it was a ground-based or air-based rocket that took out that bridge, but the bridge got taken out nonetheless.
Air superiority is awfully close for Ukraine now, and the first few F-16s are in theatre as well. The Russians lost another one of their bomber aircraft yesterday, crashed just after takeoff, and there’s rumours around that they don’t have an awful lot of an Air Force left, which would be astonishing if true.
As someone said earlier, they’ve gone quickly from having the second best military force in the world, to having the second best military force in Ukraine, to having the second best military force in Russia.
Multiple ironies involved in Tulsi Gabbard reportedly playing the role of Harris for Trump’s debate prep.
My favourite is this one - in one of the Democratic primary debates last time around, she accused Buttigieg of wanting to invade Mexico (and here gets cut off at the knees): https://x.com/Lis_Smith/status/1824811315992412464
Lee David Evans @LeeDavidEvansUK · 6h The Conservative leadership candidates were asked to name their political hero. Here’s who they said:
Badenoch: Airey Neave Cleverly: Ronald Reagan Jenrick: Keith Joseph, Margaret Thatcher & Nigel Lawson Patel: Thatcher Stride: John F. Kennedy Tugendhat: Dwight Eisenhower
Multiple ironies involved in Tulsi Gabbard reportedly playing the role of Harris for Trump’s debate prep.
My favourite is this one - in one of the Democratic primary debates last time around, she accused Buttigieg of wanting to invade Mexico (and here gets cut off at the knees): https://x.com/Lis_Smith/status/1824811315992412464
I see she hasn't stopped sitting down with murderous dictators...
“Storm Shadow” is trending on Twitter, as the US wakes up and reads the Times story that Biden is blocking the British from using them in Russia.
Trump would ban Ukraine from using any weapons...
Trump has a problem now. His "peace within 24 hours" in Ukr promise was obviously based on telling Zelensky there is no more ammo or rockets coming matey so you better agree a ceasefire and freeze the conflict.
Freezing it now means Ukr keeping part of Russia! Vlad aint agreeing to that.
As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.
A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.
Lib Dems becoming second party I think depends on Labour winning further seats from the Conservatives, which by is by no means impossible. It does depend on what happens with Reform, Labour remaining a lot more popular relative to the Conservatives and continued Labour/LD/Green tactical voting.
On the other hand I could also Lib Dems winning more seats off the Conservatives as that party wins seats off Labour if Labour goes into decline. The Lib Dems will become challengers at Labour's expense in some Tory seats.
Why would this form of Labour government, pursuing classic socialism, appeal even further to Tory voters?
Some people have taken leave of their senses.
Socialism itself isn't the problem. I don't think the majority of people have a principled objection to tax and spend. What tends to rile people is tax-and-piss-up-the-wall.
I think socialism is the problem.
I don't think that's how most British people are wired. They're open to a little more tax on public services if it delivers better outcomes, a bit like paying more for good service, but it ends there.
Hm. I reckon there is quite a market in this country for Scandi-style socialism. Most people would perveive themselves as net gainers (taxes would rise on me but mostly on someone else). But it's never been offered, or convincingly sold. British left-wingery has been of the angry "more power to the unions" or "more money to public sector workers" or "more laws to promote the interests of favoured minorities" or the like, which voters rightly perceive as mainly beneficial to someone else or no one at all.
FWIW, I'm pretty sceptical of the Scandi system as applied to Britain. But I think there's a market for it.
It also depends on a very high level of mutual trust and confidence.
That's true, and that's an interesting subject in its own right. A high trust society is one of the most important factors - possibly the most important - in delivering happiness and prosperity. Britain used to be amongst the highest-trust socities in the world, and my gut feeling is that this has been slipping. I would very much like to see this addressed, although I have only the haziest ideas how.
That’s the consequence of multiculturalism (as opposed to melting-pot) as an approach to immigration
Donald Trump has a table full of groceries next to him with before and after prices to illustrate inflation.
He then starts rambling wistfully about how nice some of them look, especially 'the Cheerios. I haven't seen Cheerios in a long time, I'm going to take them back to my cottage and have a lot of fun with them.'
What the actual fuckety fuck? I mean, sharks were bad enough, but - for real? He makes campaign speeches on the economy and says he hasn't seen cheerios in ages?
I like the complacency here by Tories regarding the seats the LDs won off them. 4 - 5 years is a long time and the pendulum may swing back and obliterate the LDs once more because of whatever.
But if you want then back you are going to have to work them or rely on luck.
As @Cicero said there are some impressive LDs elected and they haven't stopped working the seats since the election. Interestingly in Guildford we have continued canvassing and the results show a big increase in support. Now that is probably just a winners bonus that will fade and I assume only happening in seats we won because there is no obvious national swing. But if the Tories want it back they are either going to have to rely on the luck of changing fortunes or work their arses off, which they weren't able to do at the General Election because of lack of volunteers.
Next year is the Counties. The Tories are likely to take a hammering there because they are defending gains. I fully expect the Tories to lose Surrey County Council for only the second time ever and in 1993 they were still the largest party. I suspect they won't be in 2025 and there is an outside chance the LDs may take it. That will be a challenge for the new leader early in their leadership.
If things are going to change it is going to take time. 4 - 5 years may be enough. It might not be and it may get worse.
You and @Cicero are core praetorian activist guard of the Liberal Democrats, so it's no wonder you want to big up your seats.
To hold them you'd have to move much further to the Right than you'd ever be comfortable doing, and that'd involve things like consistently voting with the Tories against Labour budget measures.
Instead, I expect little Sir Echo with a bit more sandals. You know, the usual.
Perhaps, perhaps not. I'd certainly be comfortable with a LibDem party which accommodated elements of one nation conservatism. Social liberalism and economic pragmatism (something neither Labour nor the Tories have had much truck with this century) would be a very appealing combination.
It's funny that nobody is making a pitch for the "you know, the 2010-15 government wasn't so bad" vote. Given what happened in 2015, it's sort of understandable that the Lib Dems aren't saying it out loud, I guess.
The 2010-15 Government was reasonably stable, both in terms of membership (idiots like Huhne aside) and policy. It was entirely wrong on tuition fees and children's issues (two child policy and, especially, Sure Start) and indeed on financial cutbacks generally, though.
Two child cap was after the 2015 election, wasn't it? Agree on Sure Start, though.
As for austerity in general, something had to happen and none of it would have been pretty. But it has become harder to justify as a five year response to a crisis has rolled out three times as long.
Yup, just checked. 2017. You're right.
Whether Osborne's 'economic crisis' would have last as long has to be one of those great unknowns. What wouldn't have happened under the Coalition, of course, was the Brexit Referendum.
Of course, only the Lib Dems had an EU referendum in their 2010 manifesto
The fate of the Tories is what happens to you when you cease to be anything resembling a broad based entity seeking to appeal to the wider electorate, and become a lobby group consisting mostly of, and only interested in, one sectional interest. .
The thing is they were so discredited after the covid parties they were never going to appeal to a broad base anyway. So their irrational descent into pandering to the far right kind of makes sense because those people are solely concerned with their own irrational concerns. No one normal would have voted Tory anyway so you might as well go for people on the fringe.
Comments
The Biden administration has been incredibly cautious about allowing anything which might cross some kind of NATO vs Russia red line (wrongly, IMO, but I understand the motivation), and they have the leverage to stop Ukraine using them in Russia.
Might be true.
.. Just look at how respected Schröder still is. Somebody so obvious a traitor should have been ostracized long ago in a normal environment. But he is still around, Steinmeier is still president, Scholz might still be controlled by both of the former, since Scholz appears to lack any character or ideas himself…
https://x.com/andersostlund/status/1824754791303577959
Report reveals travel agents offering ‘discreet’ packages enabling Afghans to visit nation they fled from, breaching asylum laws"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/08/16/asylum-seekers-in-germany-risk-deportation-holiday-country
My favourite is this one - in one of the Democratic primary debates last time around, she accused Buttigieg of wanting to invade Mexico (and here gets cut off at the knees):
https://x.com/Lis_Smith/status/1824811315992412464
@LeeDavidEvansUK
·
6h
The Conservative leadership candidates were asked to name their political hero. Here’s who they said:
Badenoch: Airey Neave
Cleverly: Ronald Reagan
Jenrick: Keith Joseph, Margaret Thatcher & Nigel Lawson
Patel: Thatcher
Stride: John F. Kennedy
Tugendhat: Dwight Eisenhower
https://x.com/LeeDavidEvansUK/status/1824715580873564168
NEW THREAD
That is not going to help Trump hold on to the state.
New NYT-Siena poll of downballot Sun Belt races:
Arizona Senate
Gallego (D) 51%
Lake (R) 42%
Nevada Senate
Rosen (D) 49%
Brown (R) 40%
NC Governor
Stein (D) 49%
Robinson (R) 39%
https://x.com/kylegriffin1/status/1824783286855487943
Freezing it now means Ukr keeping part of Russia! Vlad aint agreeing to that.
Honestly, Vance’s shooting a line about his background is bad enough, but really.