Howdy, Stranger!

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

After the Veep debate Trump is now the favourite – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,056
edited 6:33AM in General
imageAfter the Veep debate Trump is now the favourite – politicalbetting.com

I haven’t watched the Veep debate in full but of the clips I have seen neither man had a gaffe and I’d probably make the result a draw but I’d give the win to Vance because he came in with very low expectations.

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,426
    edited 6:39AM
    1st like Vance.

    A very cordial and polite debate, much better than Trump and Harris, and with substantive discussions of policy differences.

    I did watch it, in a better time zone than UK, and credit is due to both men, as well as the moderators who asked difficult questions and pressed for an answer if the candidate initially ignored the question.

    The closest to a gaffe was Walz mis-speaking that he was friends with school shooters, when I think he meant to say that he had become friends with the families of the victims of school shootings.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,790
    Sandpit said:

    1st like Vance.

    A very cordial and polite debate, much better than Trump and Harris, and with substantive discussions of policy differences.

    For all his suspect attitudes, Vance is an intelligent guy in a way that Trump is not.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 118,610
    edited 6:40AM
    Well worth a read, and another example of why I am glad I didn't become an MP.

    Shhh! My dad was a Tory MP: why I didn’t tell my friends

    Growing up, Adam Hart was proud that his father, Simon, had a job that other people were interested in. Then the internet abuse started. At university having the Conservative secretary of state for Wales as a parent was social death


    ...In June 2016, when I was revising for my GCSEs, the MP Jo Cox was murdered after leaving her constituency surgery. Like everyone else, I had read many news articles about murders, but this one, with its pictures of a fortysomething MP with two kids, felt odd.

    At home, the powers-that-be reviewed our “home security”. We failed on account of the public footpath that runs past our front door. Some men fitted a panic button in my parents’ wardrobe as well as a motion-triggered alarm outside the door. The first night the alarm was in operation a badger walked past and set it off, summoning Dyfed-Powys police to our house at 3am. As my sister and I were away, my parents saw the policemen at the door and assumed one of us had died.


    https://www.thetimes.com/article/b5a924ff-7014-4a6f-9bf8-5585687d8454
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,171
    edited 6:44AM
    Kemi on Today at the moment. She’s already getting cross with Mishal for the impertinence of asking her for policy proposals.

    Her approach seems to be:

    - “this thing over here is a problem”
    - “What would you do about it”
    - “It’s far too early to talk about things like that”
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,130
    TimS said:

    Kemi on Today at the moment. She’s already getting cross with Mishal for the impertinence of asking her for policy proposals.

    She's kind of right though. Now is not the time for detailed policy, which will only invite the question of why they did not try it when they ran the country less than six months ago. Now is the time for philosophy and broad direction of travel, for strategy and tactics, for aspiration and vision.

    But not getting cross is a key political skill that Kemi needs to work on. It is useful in real life too, especially for night time posting on PB.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 61,548
    Has Trump become fav on back of the veep debate or is it more about the looming war in middle east?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,348
    TimS said:

    Kemi on Today at the moment. She’s already getting cross with Mishal for the impertinence of asking her for policy proposals.

    Her approach seems to be:

    - “this thing over here is a problem”
    - “What would you do about it”
    - “It’s far too early to talk about things like that”

    In fairness, Labour were reluctant to speak about their policy proposals right up to the election. There won't be another one for 4 years so I don't see the urgency in Kemi or any other Tory having policy proposals now. What she should be able to express are her values and principles.

    We also need to get to a point in our public discourse where all sides can acknowledge that things are not capable of being improved, let alone resolved, by a 6 or 7 word soundbite. Life is simply much more complicated than that. From the small bits I have seen Vance and Walz seem to have got closer to acknowledging that than most "debates" in this country in recent years.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,892

    TimS said:

    Kemi on Today at the moment. She’s already getting cross with Mishal for the impertinence of asking her for policy proposals.

    She's kind of right though. Now is not the time for detailed policy, which will only invite the question of why they did not try it when they ran the country less than six months ago. Now is the time for philosophy and broad direction of travel, for strategy and tactics, for aspiration and vision.

    But not getting cross is a key political skill that Kemi needs to work on. It is useful in real life too, especially for night time posting on PB.
    Is she ?
    If you raise a political topic, as a politician, you ought at least to have a rough idea of how you might go about addressing it.

    Of course no one expects detailed policy from her, but the odd clue might be good.
    Until a few months ago, she was a cabinet minister, so she's had more opportunity than most opposition MPs - indeed has been required to have considered views on all manner of policy.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,171
    Nigelb said:

    TimS said:

    Kemi on Today at the moment. She’s already getting cross with Mishal for the impertinence of asking her for policy proposals.

    She's kind of right though. Now is not the time for detailed policy, which will only invite the question of why they did not try it when they ran the country less than six months ago. Now is the time for philosophy and broad direction of travel, for strategy and tactics, for aspiration and vision.

    But not getting cross is a key political skill that Kemi needs to work on. It is useful in real life too, especially for night time posting on PB.
    Is she ?
    If you raise a political topic, as a politician, you ought at least to have a rough idea of how you might go about addressing it.

    Of course no one expects detailed policy from her, but the odd clue might be good.
    Until a few months ago, she was a cabinet minister, so she's had more opportunity than most opposition MPs - indeed has been required to have considered views on all manner of policy.
    The problem is indeed the contradiction. She’s repeatedly pointed out specific problems as examples of what needs fixing, then refused to say whether she would fix them.

    This morning it was all about small businesses having too much regulation and red tape. Then and got shirty when asked what regulations she would tackle.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,892
    Temporarily, at least, both Vance and Walt's approval ratings were up 20% immediately after the debate.

    Though you have to ask serious questions about the sampling for all immediate post debate polls. There's likely to be a huge over sampling of the politically engaged.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 21,941
    edited 7:04AM
    Good morning everyone.

    A medical negligence story at Surrey Health Trust. Lot of awful details, but this is the paragraph that concerns me the most. If commenting, I recommend reading the piece.

    The trust lost a nine-month legal battle with the BBC and The Times to block access to and redact documents in two employment tribunal cases

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62g7ed3qzxo
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,171
    Nigelb said:

    Temporarily, at least, both Vance and Walt's approval ratings were up 20% immediately after the debate.

    Though you have to ask serious questions about the sampling for all immediate post debate polls. There's likely to be a huge over sampling of the politically engaged.

    Anything that normalises the Trump campaign and makes it seem anything other than beyond the pale is bad news for the Democrats.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,892
    TimS said:

    Nigelb said:

    TimS said:

    Kemi on Today at the moment. She’s already getting cross with Mishal for the impertinence of asking her for policy proposals.

    She's kind of right though. Now is not the time for detailed policy, which will only invite the question of why they did not try it when they ran the country less than six months ago. Now is the time for philosophy and broad direction of travel, for strategy and tactics, for aspiration and vision.

    But not getting cross is a key political skill that Kemi needs to work on. It is useful in real life too, especially for night time posting on PB.
    Is she ?
    If you raise a political topic, as a politician, you ought at least to have a rough idea of how you might go about addressing it.

    Of course no one expects detailed policy from her, but the odd clue might be good.
    Until a few months ago, she was a cabinet minister, so she's had more opportunity than most opposition MPs - indeed has been required to have considered views on all manner of policy.
    The problem is indeed the contradiction. She’s repeatedly pointed out specific problems as examples of what needs fixing, then refused to say whether she would fix them.

    This morning it was all about small businesses having too much regulation and red tape. Then and got shirty when asked what regulations she would tackle.
    Opposition is, rightly, something of a luxury for politicians to float opinions. But you can't just take the piss.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,892
    I'm shocked.

    A Programming Note: 60 Minutes is scheduled to air a primetime election special on a Monday edition of the broadcast on October 7 at 8 PM. For over half a century, 60 Minutes has invited the Democratic and Republican tickets to appear on our broadcast as Americans head to the polls.

    This year, both the Harris and Trump campaigns agreed to sit down with 60 Minutes. Vice President Harris will speak with correspondent Bill Whitaker. After initially accepting 60 Minutes’ request for an interview with Scott Pelley, former President Trump’s campaign has decided not to participate. Pelley will address this Monday evening.

    Our election special will broadcast the Harris interview on Monday as planned. Our original invitation to former President Donald Trump to be interviewed on 60 Minutes stands.

    https://x.com/60Minutes/status/1841236651994915183
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,528
    TimS said:

    Kemi is an interesting contrast with Jenrick. She’s very clear about what she thinks the problem is, but vague on solutions.

    He’s very clear the solution to everything is to leave the ECHR, but he can’t explain with honesty what problems he thinks that actually fixes.

    Tbf to Jenrick he did actually suggest that leaving the ECHR would stop the SAS killing unarmed terror suspects.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 285

    TimS said:

    Kemi is an interesting contrast with Jenrick. She’s very clear about what she thinks the problem is, but vague on solutions.

    He’s very clear the solution to everything is to leave the ECHR, but he can’t explain with honesty what problems he thinks that actually fixes.

    Tbf to Jenrick he did actually suggest that leaving the ECHR would stop the SAS killing unarmed terror suspects.
    As a Cambridge educated lawyer, the SAS must be delighted he's got their back 😀
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,348
    538 has Harris more favoured to win 55 times out of 100: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/

    This is pretty much where they were 10 days ago and is some slippage on the part of Harris from the 57 or 58 times she was at the end of last week.

    One of the things that has been noted in America is that there are damned few undecideds in this race, far fewer than you normally have. I think that the vast majority have made up their minds one way or another. The question is which side will be more successful in getting their supporters to the polls. Given the early voting, specifically in PA, I am hopeful that will be Harris but I very much doubt we shall see much movement in the polls themselves over the next 4 weeks. Its going to remain tight to the end.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,528
    DavidL said:

    TimS said:

    Kemi on Today at the moment. She’s already getting cross with Mishal for the impertinence of asking her for policy proposals.

    Her approach seems to be:

    - “this thing over here is a problem”
    - “What would you do about it”
    - “It’s far too early to talk about things like that”

    In fairness, Labour were reluctant to speak about their policy proposals right up to the election. There won't be another one for 4 years so I don't see the urgency in Kemi or any other Tory having policy proposals now. What she should be able to express are her values and principles.

    We also need to get to a point in our public discourse where all sides can acknowledge that things are not capable of being improved, let alone resolved, by a 6 or 7 word soundbite. Life is simply much more complicated than that. From the small bits I have seen Vance and Walz seem to have got closer to acknowledging that than most "debates" in this country in recent years.
    North British Labour clearly stated that if elected there would be no austerity under them, that we’d have a £300 reduction in our energy bills and that Grangemouth would be saved. So yeah, probably best not to commit to stuff.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,892
    DavidL said:

    538 has Harris more favoured to win 55 times out of 100: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/

    This is pretty much where they were 10 days ago and is some slippage on the part of Harris from the 57 or 58 times she was at the end of last week.

    One of the things that has been noted in America is that there are damned few undecideds in this race, far fewer than you normally have. I think that the vast majority have made up their minds one way or another. The question is which side will be more successful in getting their supporters to the polls. Given the early voting, specifically in PA, I am hopeful that will be Harris but I very much doubt we shall see much movement in the polls themselves over the next 4 weeks. Its going to remain tight to the end.

    Perhaps going to be decided by relative turnout rather than persuasion ?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,664
    TimS said:

    Kemi is an interesting contrast with Jenrick. She’s very clear about what she thinks the problem is, but vague on solutions.

    He’s very clear the solution to everything is to leave the ECHR, but he can’t explain with honesty what problems he thinks that actually fixes.

    It fixes the problem of “how do I get these morons [Tory party members] to vote for me?”
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,348

    DavidL said:

    TimS said:

    Kemi on Today at the moment. She’s already getting cross with Mishal for the impertinence of asking her for policy proposals.

    Her approach seems to be:

    - “this thing over here is a problem”
    - “What would you do about it”
    - “It’s far too early to talk about things like that”

    In fairness, Labour were reluctant to speak about their policy proposals right up to the election. There won't be another one for 4 years so I don't see the urgency in Kemi or any other Tory having policy proposals now. What she should be able to express are her values and principles.

    We also need to get to a point in our public discourse where all sides can acknowledge that things are not capable of being improved, let alone resolved, by a 6 or 7 word soundbite. Life is simply much more complicated than that. From the small bits I have seen Vance and Walz seem to have got closer to acknowledging that than most "debates" in this country in recent years.
    North British Labour clearly stated that if elected there would be no austerity under them, that we’d have a £300 reduction in our energy bills and that Grangemouth would be saved. So yeah, probably best not to commit to stuff.
    I very much doubt Grangemouth was saveable but a policy commitment to stop new exploration in the North Sea meant that there was nothing to even discuss. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
  • eekeek Posts: 27,543
    Nigelb said:

    Underappreciated point about Iron Done, which I hadn't known; it's designed to let some missiles through.
    There's some sort of AI system which calculates trajectories and de-prioritises warheads which aren't going to hit important (however that might be pre-defined) targets.

    A good way of dealing with mass attacks like last night.

    And you do need some damage to justify the scale of retaliation we are going to see...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,790
    edited 7:20AM
    TimS said:

    Nigelb said:

    Temporarily, at least, both Vance and Walt's approval ratings were up 20% immediately after the debate.

    Though you have to ask serious questions about the sampling for all immediate post debate polls. There's likely to be a huge over sampling of the politically engaged.

    Anything that normalises the Trump campaign and makes it seem anything other than beyond the pale is bad news for the Democrats.
    Well, yes and no. Vance appearing slick, controlled and well spoken does rather shine a light on Trump. Trump's appeal to the small town MAGA base is largely from being uncouth and against slick polished Washington insiders. For those Walz may appeal.

    Some of us like slick politicians, others crave brash "authenticity". It's a large part of Populist appeal.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,348
    Nigelb said:

    I'm shocked.

    A Programming Note: 60 Minutes is scheduled to air a primetime election special on a Monday edition of the broadcast on October 7 at 8 PM. For over half a century, 60 Minutes has invited the Democratic and Republican tickets to appear on our broadcast as Americans head to the polls.

    This year, both the Harris and Trump campaigns agreed to sit down with 60 Minutes. Vice President Harris will speak with correspondent Bill Whitaker. After initially accepting 60 Minutes’ request for an interview with Scott Pelley, former President Trump’s campaign has decided not to participate. Pelley will address this Monday evening.

    Our election special will broadcast the Harris interview on Monday as planned. Our original invitation to former President Donald Trump to be interviewed on 60 Minutes stands.

    https://x.com/60Minutes/status/1841236651994915183

    The problem, once again, seems to be fact checking. Trump doesn't want to get called out on his lies. Even last night he was still claiming that some States were allowing children to be killed post partum. Ridiculous nonsense.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,130
    MattW said:

    Good morning everyone.

    A medical negligence story at Surrey Health Trust. Lot of awful details, but this is the paragraph that concerns me the most. If commenting, I recommend reading the piece.

    The trust lost a nine-month legal battle with the BBC and The Times to block access to and redact documents in two employment tribunal cases

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62g7ed3qzxo

    It all sounds a bit odd. Surely there are missing details. Why would a surgeon take his penknife into theatre? Was this perhaps an emergency in uncontrolled circumstances like outpatients, or A&E at a stretch? Of course, the unnamed surgeon could just have been an arrogant fool on a power trip at patients' expense.

  • TazTaz Posts: 13,680

    MattW said:

    Good morning everyone.

    A medical negligence story at Surrey Health Trust. Lot of awful details, but this is the paragraph that concerns me the most. If commenting, I recommend reading the piece.

    The trust lost a nine-month legal battle with the BBC and The Times to block access to and redact documents in two employment tribunal cases

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62g7ed3qzxo

    It all sounds a bit odd. Surely there are missing details. Why would a surgeon take his penknife into theatre? Was this perhaps an emergency in uncontrolled circumstances like outpatients, or A&E at a stretch? Of course, the unnamed surgeon could just have been an arrogant fool on a power trip at patients' expense.

    It seems bizarre. How does he know that knife is sterile for starters.

    I wouldn't take the story on face value.
  • eekeek Posts: 27,543
    edited 7:29AM
    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    538 has Harris more favoured to win 55 times out of 100: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/

    This is pretty much where they were 10 days ago and is some slippage on the part of Harris from the 57 or 58 times she was at the end of last week.

    One of the things that has been noted in America is that there are damned few undecideds in this race, far fewer than you normally have. I think that the vast majority have made up their minds one way or another. The question is which side will be more successful in getting their supporters to the polls. Given the early voting, specifically in PA, I am hopeful that will be Harris but I very much doubt we shall see much movement in the polls themselves over the next 4 weeks. Its going to remain tight to the end.

    Perhaps going to be decided by relative turnout rather than persuasion ?
    Which is why you are seeing so much gerrymandering of polling / voting stations and the numerous games already being played to discount various votes...

    Were this a third world country I suspect there would be reports of sophisticated poll rigging..
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,348
    Nigelb said:

    Underappreciated point about Iron Done, which I hadn't known; it's designed to let some missiles through.
    There's some sort of AI system which calculates trajectories and de-prioritises warheads which aren't going to hit important (however that might be pre-defined) targets.

    A good way of dealing with mass attacks like last night.

    And once again UK forces played a small part in its effectiveness: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Starmer had been somewhat coy about that but has confirmed it this morning. Probably not going to improve relations with his Palestinian wing.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,426
    edited 7:32AM
    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    538 has Harris more favoured to win 55 times out of 100: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/

    This is pretty much where they were 10 days ago and is some slippage on the part of Harris from the 57 or 58 times she was at the end of last week.

    One of the things that has been noted in America is that there are damned few undecideds in this race, far fewer than you normally have. I think that the vast majority have made up their minds one way or another. The question is which side will be more successful in getting their supporters to the polls. Given the early voting, specifically in PA, I am hopeful that will be Harris but I very much doubt we shall see much movement in the polls themselves over the next 4 weeks. Its going to remain tight to the end.

    Perhaps going to be decided by relative turnout rather than persuasion ?
    Almost certainly at this point.

    There’s not a lot of undecided voters, although last night’s debate might have swung a handful one way or the other. They both came across a lot better than they have done at rallies of their own supporters, realising they were talking to a much broader audience.

    It’s now all about the GOTV operations in the swing states, and there’s plenty of evidence that both teams have a lot of boots on the ground encouraging registration and early/postal voting - which is something that Trump was terrible at doing in 2020, preferring to encourage on-the-day voting.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,130
    Taz said:

    MattW said:

    Good morning everyone.

    A medical negligence story at Surrey Health Trust. Lot of awful details, but this is the paragraph that concerns me the most. If commenting, I recommend reading the piece.

    The trust lost a nine-month legal battle with the BBC and The Times to block access to and redact documents in two employment tribunal cases

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62g7ed3qzxo

    It all sounds a bit odd. Surely there are missing details. Why would a surgeon take his penknife into theatre? Was this perhaps an emergency in uncontrolled circumstances like outpatients, or A&E at a stretch? Of course, the unnamed surgeon could just have been an arrogant fool on a power trip at patients' expense.

    It seems bizarre. How does he know that knife is sterile for starters.

    I wouldn't take the story on face value.
    The surgeon must have known the knife was not sterile, which suggests some sort of emergency.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,212
    Nigelb said:

    Underappreciated point about Iron Done, which I hadn't known; it's designed to let some missiles through.
    There's some sort of AI system which calculates trajectories and de-prioritises warheads which aren't going to hit important (however that might be pre-defined) targets.

    A good way of dealing with mass attacks like last night.

    Pedantry alert: The systems in question would not have been Iron Dome (which is designed to cheaply eliminate short range unguided rockets & probably can’t intercept ballistic missiles) but Arrow or the shorter range David’s Sling systems. One problem for Israel is that these systems cost a fortune: Arrow is ~$3million / missile, Sling ~$700k. Last night’s barrage probably burnt through $3billion or so of missiles on the Israeli side.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 50,657
    Vance’s closing statement focused on the economy and the cost of living:

    https://x.com/townhallcom/status/1841310046681976902
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 61,548

    Vance’s closing statement focused on the economy and the cost of living:

    https://x.com/townhallcom/status/1841310046681976902

    Very good until the end when he said the solution was Trump.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 21,941
    edited 7:46AM
    I listened to another 'debate' yesterday - Cleverly and Jenrick member questions.

    In general imo Cleverly told a far more convincing political / personal story on the overall trends and his record as a Minister, and exposed some of Jenrick's exaggerated claims - especially around the universal solution of leaving the ECHR. TBF he went second. He was weaker and quite waffly on specifics.

    I thought Jenrick gave jabs which responded to the particular audience, which is people still attached to the Conservative Party who have the spare time and the spare cash (unless funded) to attend a conference. He was talking to the relatively wealthy people in the hall as to how he would take money from relatively poorer people and give it to them.

    Jenrick is very mathematically-challenged. He declared that his increase in the Defence budget to 3% would be funded from cutting Overseas Aid. From the 2023 number of 2.3% to 3.0% requires an extra £22bn per annum at 2023 prices. If we take the more normal 2% rather than the exceptional 2.3%, the extra required money is £31 bn.

    The total aid budget spent overseas in 2023 was £11.1bn (plus the £4.3 bn of overseas aid spent on on refugees in the UK). And I don't think even Generic Bob would aim to cut all of it 2 or 3 times.

    Go figure. Jenrick didn't. No wonder he unlawfully overspent his campaign expenses when he was first elected as an MP, and claimed he had not done so.

    Listening to the Kemi Badenoch interview half an hour ago, 1 - She said SHE set the Minimum Wage, and she would not have approved it is she thought it too high, 2 - She's was talking about Business Rates, whilst I expect her chosen micro-cafe example of a business killed-by-bureaucracy-and-taxes is below the threshold. She's a fish in a barrel waiting to be shot.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,790
    edited 7:48AM

    MattW said:

    Good morning everyone.

    A medical negligence story at Surrey Health Trust. Lot of awful details, but this is the paragraph that concerns me the most. If commenting, I recommend reading the piece.

    The trust lost a nine-month legal battle with the BBC and The Times to block access to and redact documents in two employment tribunal cases

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62g7ed3qzxo

    It all sounds a bit odd. Surely there are missing details. Why would a surgeon take his penknife into theatre? Was this perhaps an emergency in uncontrolled circumstances like outpatients, or A&E at a stretch? Of course, the unnamed surgeon could just have been an arrogant fool on a power trip at patients' expense.

    Presumably the incident was not in an operating theatre, and the surgeon not scrubbed too. There are emergency situations such as a tension pneumothorax where time is of the essence, but rarely in a hospital context. I think that the point of the criticism. In a hospital the equipment is availible, albeit often not immediately to hand. Was the procedure that time critical? Or was it a case of impatient and impetuous action?

    I found this bit in the BBC article telling:

    "After reviewing the surgeon’s employment record, which included a long wait to become a consultant, Prof Poston said: "I do not know this individual, but you would be concerned that there were problems during the course of that training and progression through training.”"

    I have experience of this, and it can be a red flag. The Trainers know the individual is a nightmare, but lack the firm evidence to "release him from training"*, so he carries on to completion, albeit with a bad reputation, but sooner or later gets a job elsewhere. I wouldn't want to be the Training Programme Director with my signature on his Specialist Registration.

    * yes this really is the euphemism for chucking someone off the programme.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 5,919
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    538 has Harris more favoured to win 55 times out of 100: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/

    This is pretty much where they were 10 days ago and is some slippage on the part of Harris from the 57 or 58 times she was at the end of last week.

    One of the things that has been noted in America is that there are damned few undecideds in this race, far fewer than you normally have. I think that the vast majority have made up their minds one way or another. The question is which side will be more successful in getting their supporters to the polls. Given the early voting, specifically in PA, I am hopeful that will be Harris but I very much doubt we shall see much movement in the polls themselves over the next 4 weeks. Its going to remain tight to the end.

    Perhaps going to be decided by relative turnout rather than persuasion ?
    Almost certainly at this point.

    There’s not a lot of undecided voters, although last night’s debate might have swung a handful one way or the other. They both came across a lot better than they have done at rallies of their own supporters, realising they were talking to a much broader audience.

    It’s now all about the GOTV operations in the swing states, and there’s plenty of evidence that both teams have a lot of boots on the ground encouraging registration and early/postal voting - which is something that Trump was terrible at doing in 2020, preferring to encourage on-the-day voting.
    This is a great site to see early voting stats . It’s updated several times a day . The info at the moment is still limited because early voting hasn’t started in most states but over the next few weeks the site will have a wealth of info .

    https://election.lab.ufl.edu/early-vote/2024-early-voting/
  • eekeek Posts: 27,543
    MattW said:

    Listening to the Kemi Badenoch interview half an hour ago, 1 - She said SHE set the Minimum Wage, and she would not have approved it is she thought it too high, 2 - She's was talking about Business Rates, whilst I expect her chosen micro-cafe example of a business killed-by-bureaucracy-and-taxes is below the threshold. She's a fish in a barrel waiting to be shot.

    Unless your micro cafe is a chain of more than 1 or it's in central London the odds of business rates actually being paid is zilch because it will be below the £15,000 threshold.

    As for minimum wage killing off a cafe, increase the prices heck everyone has done that including Costa and McDonalds.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,529
    I'm not surprised. There is a (perhaps more in hope than experience) wish that for all Trump's madness there is a set of sober, sensible people behind and around him who will enact sober, sensible policies, leaving The Donald to be The Donald.

    The debate was an indication that this might be so.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 61,548
    eek said:

    MattW said:

    Listening to the Kemi Badenoch interview half an hour ago, 1 - She said SHE set the Minimum Wage, and she would not have approved it is she thought it too high, 2 - She's was talking about Business Rates, whilst I expect her chosen micro-cafe example of a business killed-by-bureaucracy-and-taxes is below the threshold. She's a fish in a barrel waiting to be shot.

    Unless your micro cafe is a chain of more than 1 or it's in central London the odds of business rates actually being paid is zilch because it will be below the £15,000 threshold.

    As for minimum wage killing off a cafe, increase the prices heck everyone has done that including Costa and McDonalds.
    UK had its highest ever level of employment just before the pandemic and the minimum wage was in existence at the time. She is talking tosh.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,404
    TimS said:

    Kemi is an interesting contrast with Jenrick. She’s very clear about what she thinks the problem is, but vague on solutions.

    He’s very clear the solution to everything is to leave the ECHR, but he can’t explain with honesty what problems he thinks that actually fixes.

    If only we had the US system, they could complement (and, indeed, compliment) each other in a Kemrick dream team :smiley:
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,495
    edited 7:51AM
    MattW said:

    Good morning everyone.

    A medical negligence story at Surrey Health Trust. Lot of awful details, but this is the paragraph that concerns me the most. If commenting, I recommend reading the piece.

    The trust lost a nine-month legal battle with the BBC and The Times to block access to and redact documents in two employment tribunal cases

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62g7ed3qzxo

    Don't worry. The hospital didn't get the managers or senior consultants to fund the legal battle. That, properly, came out of hospital funds.

    Instead of being wasted on frivolities. Such as fixing the actual medical fucking negligence.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,790
    MattW said:

    I listened to another 'debate' yesterday - Cleverly and Jenrick member questions.

    In general imo Cleverly told a far more convincing political / personal story on the overall trends and his record as a Minister, and exposed some of Jenrick's exaggerated claims - especially around the universal solution of leaving the ECHR. TBF he went second. He was weaker and quite waffly on specifics.

    I thought Jenrick gave jabs which responded to the particular audience, which is people still attached to the Conservative Party who have the spare time and the spare cash (unless funded) to attend a conference. He was talking to the relatively wealthy people in the hall as to how he would take money from relatively poorer people and give it to them.

    Jenrick is very mathematically-challenged. He declared that his increase in the Defence budget to 3% would be funded from cutting Overseas Aid. From the 2023 number of 2.3% to 3.0% requires an extra £22bn per annum at 2023 prices. If we take the more normal 2% rather than the exceptional 2.3%, the extra required money is £31 bn.

    The total aid budget spent overseas in 2023 was £11.1bn (plus the £4.3 bn of overseas aid spent on on refugees in the UK). And I don't think even Generic Bob would aim to cut all of it 2 or 3 times.

    Go figure. Jenrick didn't. No wonder he unlawfully overspent his campaign expenses when he was first elected as an MP, and claimed he had not done so.

    Listening to the Kemi Badenoch interview half an hour ago, 1 - She said SHE set the Minimum Wage, and she would not have approved it is she thought it too high, 2 - She's was talking about Business Rates, whilst I expect her chosen micro-cafe example of a business killed-by-bureaucracy-and-taxes is below the threshold. She's a fish in a barrel waiting to be shot.

    The foreign aid budget cannot be cut to zero either, not least because a large share is accommodation for asylum seekers here, but much of the remainder is made up of contributions to international organisations like UNICEF etc. We couldn't remain members without contributing.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,151
    Morning folks

    amusing to see people slagging off Rings of Power on the previous thread on the basis that it is 'woke'.

    This is of course utter bollocks. There is nothing woke about it at all. Moreover most of those criticising its accuracy clearly don't know their Tolkein beyond the Peter Jackson films - which contained huge numbers of inaccuracies themselves.

    Rings of Power has just been renewed for its third season and is going from strength to strength. For most Tolkein fans who move beyond just Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit it is a great series filling in a lot of detail on Tolkein's lore. The 'go woke, go broke' crowd are just bitter because they weren't able to bring it down with their whining about non-white characters.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,529
    eek said:

    MattW said:

    Listening to the Kemi Badenoch interview half an hour ago, 1 - She said SHE set the Minimum Wage, and she would not have approved it is she thought it too high, 2 - She's was talking about Business Rates, whilst I expect her chosen micro-cafe example of a business killed-by-bureaucracy-and-taxes is below the threshold. She's a fish in a barrel waiting to be shot.

    Unless your micro cafe is a chain of more than 1 or it's in central London the odds of business rates actually being paid is zilch because it will be below the £15,000 threshold.

    As for minimum wage killing off a cafe, increase the prices heck everyone has done that including Costa and McDonalds.
    Nearly £4 for a coffee. Bonkers and it's amazing to see queues in almost every coffee shop.

    Just need Mickey Ds to start serving decaf, however, and I would be all over it at, what, 99p for not a bad outside coffee.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,404
    edited 7:58AM
    Nigelb said:

    Underappreciated point about Iron Done, which I hadn't known; it's designed to let some missiles through.
    There's some sort of AI system which calculates trajectories and de-prioritises warheads which aren't going to hit important (however that might be pre-defined) targets.

    A good way of dealing with mass attacks like last night.

    We have a similar 'iron done' system, but in our case natural intelligence de-prioritises items of clothing that don't really show creases or are likely to be hidden under other garments :wink:

    ETA: I must concede, the prioritisation exercise tends to mean that all garments are let through without being intercepted by an iron :disappointed:
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,548
    Mr. Tyndall, is it April the First where you are? :p
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 118,610

    Morning folks

    amusing to see people slagging off Rings of Power on the previous thread on the basis that it is 'woke'.

    This is of course utter bollocks. There is nothing woke about it at all. Moreover most of those criticising its accuracy clearly don't know their Tolkein beyond the Peter Jackson films - which contained huge numbers of inaccuracies themselves.

    Rings of Power has just been renewed for its third season and is going from strength to strength. For most Tolkein fans who move beyond just Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit it is a great series filling in a lot of detail on Tolkein's lore. The 'go woke, go broke' crowd are just bitter because they weren't able to bring it down with their whining about non-white characters.

    The thing that really amused me with last week’s episode was the fact they used the word ‘trebuchet’ which implies Middle Earth has a France.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,495
    Foxy said:

    MattW said:

    Good morning everyone.

    A medical negligence story at Surrey Health Trust. Lot of awful details, but this is the paragraph that concerns me the most. If commenting, I recommend reading the piece.

    The trust lost a nine-month legal battle with the BBC and The Times to block access to and redact documents in two employment tribunal cases

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62g7ed3qzxo

    It all sounds a bit odd. Surely there are missing details. Why would a surgeon take his penknife into theatre? Was this perhaps an emergency in uncontrolled circumstances like outpatients, or A&E at a stretch? Of course, the unnamed surgeon could just have been an arrogant fool on a power trip at patients' expense.

    Presumably the incident was not in an operating theatre, and the surgeon not scrubbed too. There are emergency situations such as a tension pneumothorax where time is of the essence, but rarely in a hospital context. I think that the point of the criticism. In a hospital the equipment is availible, albeit often not immediately to hand. Was the procedure that time critical? Or was it a case of impatient and impetuous action?

    I found this bit in the BBC article telling:

    "After reviewing the surgeon’s employment record, which included a long wait to become a consultant, Prof Poston said: "I do not know this individual, but you would be concerned that there were problems during the course of that training and progression through training.”"

    I have experience of this, and it can be a red flag. The Trainers know the individual is a nightmare, but lack the firm evidence to "release him from training"*, so he carries on to completion, albeit with a bad reputation, but sooner or later gets a job elsewhere. I wouldn't want to be the Training Programme Director with my signature on his Specialist Registration.

    * yes this really is the euphemism for chucking someone off the programme.
    I really like the idea that incompetent people can become surgeons - often enough that standardising the euphemisms around it is a thing.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 21,528
    Credit where credit is due, I've attacked the new Labour government a few times for its footing on the Middle East, but this from Starmer is 100% correct: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Calling on Iran to stop its attacks, he added: "Together with its proxies like Hezbollah, Iran has menaced the Middle East for far too long, chaos and destruction brought not just to Israel, but to the people they live amongst in Lebanon and beyond.

    "Make no mistake, Britain stands full square against such violence. We support Israel's reasonable demand for the security of its people."


    Iran has menaced the Middle East for far, far too long. Dubya Bush made a mistake prioritising Iraq for regime change in 2003 when Iran is the real puppet master.

    Its long past time for regime change in Iran. After sending a barrage of missiles against Israel last night I would 100% support all-out conflict with Iran to bring in regime change and the elimination of the Ayatollahs.

    That it would rid the world of not just the people behind such terrorists as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also one of the major arms dealers to Putin too is an added bonus.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,790

    MattW said:

    Good morning everyone.

    A medical negligence story at Surrey Health Trust. Lot of awful details, but this is the paragraph that concerns me the most. If commenting, I recommend reading the piece.

    The trust lost a nine-month legal battle with the BBC and The Times to block access to and redact documents in two employment tribunal cases

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62g7ed3qzxo

    Don't worry. The hospital didn't get the managers or senior consultants to fund the legal battle. That, properly, came out of hospital funds.

    Instead of being wasted on frivolities. Such as fixing the actual medical fucking negligence.
    Dealing with the individual is part of fixing the negligence, and the patients will be getting ongoing care if appropriate.

    Suspending senior staff is extremely expensive for Trust's. It cost a Trust near me £4 000 000 to settle a wrongful dismissal case recently when the Trust couldn't show due process in getting rid of a "nightmare" Specialist.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,529
    edited 8:01AM
    There is no doubt that the golden age of TV series is def dipping a bit. Plenty of decent stuff coming out of the UK, that said. Belatedly I began to watch I May Destroy You last night; is v promising.

    Other than that atm yes Slow Horses is the daddy; fantastic all round if a touch weaker than S1-2. Plus rapidly emerging as approaching the group of best (British) actors of their generation is none other than Bilbo Baggins himself, Martin Freeman. To take his place alongside Riz Ahmed, Tom Hardy, Gary Oldman (obvs) and Stephen Graham.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,151
    Nigelb said:

    Underappreciated point about Iron Done, which I hadn't known; it's designed to let some missiles through.
    There's some sort of AI system which calculates trajectories and de-prioritises warheads which aren't going to hit important (however that might be pre-defined) targets.

    A good way of dealing with mass attacks like last night.

    Bit of a bugger if you live in an isolated farmhouse in the middle of nowhere. ;)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,790

    Foxy said:

    MattW said:

    Good morning everyone.

    A medical negligence story at Surrey Health Trust. Lot of awful details, but this is the paragraph that concerns me the most. If commenting, I recommend reading the piece.

    The trust lost a nine-month legal battle with the BBC and The Times to block access to and redact documents in two employment tribunal cases

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62g7ed3qzxo

    It all sounds a bit odd. Surely there are missing details. Why would a surgeon take his penknife into theatre? Was this perhaps an emergency in uncontrolled circumstances like outpatients, or A&E at a stretch? Of course, the unnamed surgeon could just have been an arrogant fool on a power trip at patients' expense.

    Presumably the incident was not in an operating theatre, and the surgeon not scrubbed too. There are emergency situations such as a tension pneumothorax where time is of the essence, but rarely in a hospital context. I think that the point of the criticism. In a hospital the equipment is availible, albeit often not immediately to hand. Was the procedure that time critical? Or was it a case of impatient and impetuous action?

    I found this bit in the BBC article telling:

    "After reviewing the surgeon’s employment record, which included a long wait to become a consultant, Prof Poston said: "I do not know this individual, but you would be concerned that there were problems during the course of that training and progression through training.”"

    I have experience of this, and it can be a red flag. The Trainers know the individual is a nightmare, but lack the firm evidence to "release him from training"*, so he carries on to completion, albeit with a bad reputation, but sooner or later gets a job elsewhere. I wouldn't want to be the Training Programme Director with my signature on his Specialist Registration.

    * yes this really is the euphemism for chucking someone off the programme.
    I really like the idea that incompetent people can become surgeons - often enough that standardising the euphemisms around it is a thing.
    The point is that it can be very difficult to prove someone "incompetent" during training. They will argue that they have been bullied, not had proper instruction, discriminated against, were ill etc.

    I know because I have done it. It's a chess game, and you have to cut off these excuses before they arise. When I was TPD I didn't sign off anyone who I wouldn't have been happy treating my own family, though one case in particular ran for years.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,404

    Nigelb said:

    Underappreciated point about Iron Done, which I hadn't known; it's designed to let some missiles through.
    There's some sort of AI system which calculates trajectories and de-prioritises warheads which aren't going to hit important (however that might be pre-defined) targets.

    A good way of dealing with mass attacks like last night.

    Bit of a bugger if you live in an isolated farmhouse in the middle of nowhere. ;)
    Farmers in isolated parts of Israel would do well to have sons or daughters working on the Iron Dome/other defences prioritisation software and adding a few extra lines of code relating to specific coordinates?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,151

    Morning folks

    amusing to see people slagging off Rings of Power on the previous thread on the basis that it is 'woke'.

    This is of course utter bollocks. There is nothing woke about it at all. Moreover most of those criticising its accuracy clearly don't know their Tolkein beyond the Peter Jackson films - which contained huge numbers of inaccuracies themselves.

    Rings of Power has just been renewed for its third season and is going from strength to strength. For most Tolkein fans who move beyond just Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit it is a great series filling in a lot of detail on Tolkein's lore. The 'go woke, go broke' crowd are just bitter because they weren't able to bring it down with their whining about non-white characters.

    The thing that really amused me with last week’s episode was the fact they used the word ‘trebuchet’ which implies Middle Earth has a France.
    Of course in Tolkein's mid they probably did given so much of his work was influenced by his wartime experiences.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,790

    Morning folks

    amusing to see people slagging off Rings of Power on the previous thread on the basis that it is 'woke'.

    This is of course utter bollocks. There is nothing woke about it at all. Moreover most of those criticising its accuracy clearly don't know their Tolkein beyond the Peter Jackson films - which contained huge numbers of inaccuracies themselves.

    Rings of Power has just been renewed for its third season and is going from strength to strength. For most Tolkein fans who move beyond just Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit it is a great series filling in a lot of detail on Tolkein's lore. The 'go woke, go broke' crowd are just bitter because they weren't able to bring it down with their whining about non-white characters.

    The thing that really amused me with last week’s episode was the fact they used the word ‘trebuchet’ which implies Middle Earth has a France.
    Is that any more anachronistic than characters speaking modern English?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 118,610
    Jenrick’s such a scumbag.

    Tom Tugendhat said it is “upsetting” that his Tory leadership rival Robert Jenrick used footage of a soldier he served with in Afghanistan who died shortly after the film was taken.

    Mr Jenrick has already sparked a row with the video, in which he claimed the SAS “kill rather than capture terrorists” because of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

    In an interview with BBC Newsnight, Mr Tugendhat said the statement made by the former immigration minister “just isn’t true”.

    He added: “What’s particularly upsetting is that video is using a piece of footage of some of the people I served with, one of whom there died shortly after that film was taken in an accident.

    “And he’s not able to defend himself from the accusation that is being levelled against him. That’s footage of a soldier in northern Afghanistan in around 2002.

    “I do not think we should be using footage of our special forces in operations… I would not put that video out. In fact I’d pull it down.”

    All four Tory leadership candidates are set to address the party faithful on the final day of the annual Conservative Party Conference in Birmingham from 10:45am this morning.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/10/02/politics-latest-speech-badenoch-jenrick-cleverly-tugendhat/
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,151

    Mr. Tyndall, is it April the First where you are? :p

    Nope deadly serious. I do have to laugh when people criticise the protrayal of Galadriel (for example) because she is not like the Cate Blanchett version. Clearly they have not read any of the background material - the Silmarillion or the Unfinished Tales. The only real issue I have is with the time compression used. But that is hardly surprising given that the forging of the rings took centuries and the events portrayed in a more realistic time frame would see characters appear for one episode then be gone the next. And as soon as people mention the word 'woke' with regard to the series you know exactly what their real problem is and it has nothing to do with the acting or the narrative choices.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,495

    Morning folks

    amusing to see people slagging off Rings of Power on the previous thread on the basis that it is 'woke'.

    This is of course utter bollocks. There is nothing woke about it at all. Moreover most of those criticising its accuracy clearly don't know their Tolkein beyond the Peter Jackson films - which contained huge numbers of inaccuracies themselves.

    Rings of Power has just been renewed for its third season and is going from strength to strength. For most Tolkein fans who move beyond just Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit it is a great series filling in a lot of detail on Tolkein's lore. The 'go woke, go broke' crowd are just bitter because they weren't able to bring it down with their whining about non-white characters.

    The problem I had with it is the bizarre and utterly inconsistent plotting and characterisation. Which resembles fans fiction at times. So stopped watching.

    As a start - Galadriel as a petulant child. Who is, among other things, been alive for most of the history of the world. And lived in heaven, chatted with the archangels and told Feanor where to get off.

    And is commander of the Northern Armies. Which don't, apparently, have any actual soldiers.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,535

    Morning folks

    amusing to see people slagging off Rings of Power on the previous thread on the basis that it is 'woke'.

    This is of course utter bollocks. There is nothing woke about it at all. Moreover most of those criticising its accuracy clearly don't know their Tolkein beyond the Peter Jackson films - which contained huge numbers of inaccuracies themselves.

    Rings of Power has just been renewed for its third season and is going from strength to strength. For most Tolkein fans who move beyond just Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit it is a great series filling in a lot of detail on Tolkein's lore. The 'go woke, go broke' crowd are just bitter because they weren't able to bring it down with their whining about non-white characters.

    The thing that really amused me with last week’s episode was the fact they used the word ‘trebuchet’ which implies Middle Earth has a France.
    Of course in Tolkein's mid they probably did given so much of his work was influenced by his wartime experiences.
    I’ve been really enjoying this second run. Don’t particularly understand the backlash. It’s not for everyone but when has that ever mattered in entertainment?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,774
    I struggle to think that Tolkien envisaged Galadriel and Sauron harbouring romantic feelings for each other.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,151
    TOPPING said:

    There is no doubt that the golden age of TV series is def dipping a bit. Plenty of decent stuff coming out of the UK, that said. Belatedly I began to watch I May Destroy You last night; is v promising.

    Other than that atm yes Slow Horses is the daddy; fantastic all round if a touch weaker than S1-2. Plus rapidly emerging as approaching the group of best (British) actors of their generation is none other than Bilbo Baggins himself, Martin Freeman. To take his place alongside Riz Ahmed, Tom Hardy, Gary Oldman (obvs) and Stephen Graham.

    Stephen Graham is brilliant. A Doncaster lad originally. I see he is next due to play Bruce Springsteen's dad in a new biopic.

    I would add Toby Jones to your list as well.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,548
    Mr. Tyndall, fair enough; I'm glad you're liking it.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 21,528

    Morning folks

    amusing to see people slagging off Rings of Power on the previous thread on the basis that it is 'woke'.

    This is of course utter bollocks. There is nothing woke about it at all. Moreover most of those criticising its accuracy clearly don't know their Tolkein beyond the Peter Jackson films - which contained huge numbers of inaccuracies themselves.

    Rings of Power has just been renewed for its third season and is going from strength to strength. For most Tolkein fans who move beyond just Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit it is a great series filling in a lot of detail on Tolkein's lore. The 'go woke, go broke' crowd are just bitter because they weren't able to bring it down with their whining about non-white characters.

    The problem I had with it is the bizarre and utterly inconsistent plotting and characterisation. Which resembles fans fiction at times. So stopped watching.

    As a start - Galadriel as a petulant child. Who is, among other things, been alive for most of the history of the world. And lived in heaven, chatted with the archangels and told Feanor where to get off.

    And is commander of the Northern Armies. Which don't, apparently, have any actual soldiers.
    Gods and demigods being petulant is extremely common throughout polytheistic history though.

    The Norse, Romans, Greeks, Egyptians etc all had elements of petulant and capricious attitudes within their mythologies.

    I've not read Tolkien beyond The Hobbit/LOTR so I don't know if it is consistent with his other writings, but the idea that an immortal could be petulant is certainly consistent with historical mythologies.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,151

    Morning folks

    amusing to see people slagging off Rings of Power on the previous thread on the basis that it is 'woke'.

    This is of course utter bollocks. There is nothing woke about it at all. Moreover most of those criticising its accuracy clearly don't know their Tolkein beyond the Peter Jackson films - which contained huge numbers of inaccuracies themselves.

    Rings of Power has just been renewed for its third season and is going from strength to strength. For most Tolkein fans who move beyond just Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit it is a great series filling in a lot of detail on Tolkein's lore. The 'go woke, go broke' crowd are just bitter because they weren't able to bring it down with their whining about non-white characters.

    The problem I had with it is the bizarre and utterly inconsistent plotting and characterisation. Which resembles fans fiction at times. So stopped watching.

    As a start - Galadriel as a petulant child. Who is, among other things, been alive for most of the history of the world. And lived in heaven, chatted with the archangels and told Feanor where to get off.

    And is commander of the Northern Armies. Which don't, apparently, have any actual soldiers.
    Gods and demigods being petulant is extremely common throughout polytheistic history though.

    The Norse, Romans, Greeks, Egyptians etc all had elements of petulant and capricious attitudes within their mythologies.

    I've not read Tolkien beyond The Hobbit/LOTR so I don't know if it is consistent with his other writings, but the idea that an immortal could be petulant is certainly consistent with historical mythologies.
    As an example she was part of an Elvish rebellion/civil war prior to arriving in Middle Earth and her stated aim in coming in the first place was because she wanted her own realm to rule. Petulance is certainly an elvish trait - as was portrayed very well be Lee Pace in The Hobbit films.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,495

    Nigelb said:

    Underappreciated point about Iron Done, which I hadn't known; it's designed to let some missiles through.
    There's some sort of AI system which calculates trajectories and de-prioritises warheads which aren't going to hit important (however that might be pre-defined) targets.

    A good way of dealing with mass attacks like last night.

    Bit of a bugger if you live in an isolated farmhouse in the middle of nowhere. ;)
    Keep Out Zones were invented when ABM was created. You can massively cut down your "spend" on interceptors, if you ignore the ones that are going to hit nothing important.

    This is one of the reason that people keep trying to create manoeuvring warheads. Your basic ballistic missile is going really fast (well, the warhead is) but is following a perfectly predictable line.

    The problem is that if you want to manoeuvre, you need to "spend" a lot of energy. Which means you slow down rapidly. Which makes you an easier target - much lower tier interceptors (which are cheaper and smaller) can be used. The Americans looked at this, periodically, since the 1960s, developing various prototypes. And decided against putting them into production.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,529

    TOPPING said:

    There is no doubt that the golden age of TV series is def dipping a bit. Plenty of decent stuff coming out of the UK, that said. Belatedly I began to watch I May Destroy You last night; is v promising.

    Other than that atm yes Slow Horses is the daddy; fantastic all round if a touch weaker than S1-2. Plus rapidly emerging as approaching the group of best (British) actors of their generation is none other than Bilbo Baggins himself, Martin Freeman. To take his place alongside Riz Ahmed, Tom Hardy, Gary Oldman (obvs) and Stephen Graham.

    Stephen Graham is brilliant. A Doncaster lad originally. I see he is next due to play Bruce Springsteen's dad in a new biopic.

    I would add Toby Jones to your list as well.
    I didn't know - sounds scouse, obvs. Plus has a Jamaican grandparent IIRC, certainly he can roll out the patois. His "drunk scene" in The Virtues is Emmy/BAFTA/Oscar winning on its own. And yep Toby Jones absolutely.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,151
    Sean_F said:

    I struggle to think that Tolkien envisaged Galadriel and Sauron harbouring romantic feelings for each other.

    Sauron was one of the Maiar, basically angels. He is also known as the Great Deceiver. Hence his ability to manipulate both Galadriel and Celebrimbor so effectively
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,495
    Foxy said:

    MattW said:

    Good morning everyone.

    A medical negligence story at Surrey Health Trust. Lot of awful details, but this is the paragraph that concerns me the most. If commenting, I recommend reading the piece.

    The trust lost a nine-month legal battle with the BBC and The Times to block access to and redact documents in two employment tribunal cases

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62g7ed3qzxo

    Don't worry. The hospital didn't get the managers or senior consultants to fund the legal battle. That, properly, came out of hospital funds.

    Instead of being wasted on frivolities. Such as fixing the actual medical fucking negligence.
    Dealing with the individual is part of fixing the negligence, and the patients will be getting ongoing care if appropriate.

    Suspending senior staff is extremely expensive for Trust's. It cost a Trust near me £4 000 000 to settle a wrongful dismissal case recently when the Trust couldn't show due process in getting rid of a "nightmare" Specialist.
    I would pass a law banning gagging contracts/agreements and legal battles of the type above, in public service.

    We currently have millions being spent on lawyers to try and stop the SPMs getting their money from the Post Office.

    This seems to be a systemic problem.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,495

    Morning folks

    amusing to see people slagging off Rings of Power on the previous thread on the basis that it is 'woke'.

    This is of course utter bollocks. There is nothing woke about it at all. Moreover most of those criticising its accuracy clearly don't know their Tolkein beyond the Peter Jackson films - which contained huge numbers of inaccuracies themselves.

    Rings of Power has just been renewed for its third season and is going from strength to strength. For most Tolkein fans who move beyond just Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit it is a great series filling in a lot of detail on Tolkein's lore. The 'go woke, go broke' crowd are just bitter because they weren't able to bring it down with their whining about non-white characters.

    The thing that really amused me with last week’s episode was the fact they used the word ‘trebuchet’ which implies Middle Earth has a France.
    Didn't watch. But if the screen shot a friend sent was the right one, it wasn't a trebuchet, either.

    I know trebuchets. I built one. Everyone should have one.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,663

    Credit where credit is due, I've attacked the new Labour government a few times for its footing on the Middle East, but this from Starmer is 100% correct: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Calling on Iran to stop its attacks, he added: "Together with its proxies like Hezbollah, Iran has menaced the Middle East for far too long, chaos and destruction brought not just to Israel, but to the people they live amongst in Lebanon and beyond.

    "Make no mistake, Britain stands full square against such violence. We support Israel's reasonable demand for the security of its people."


    Iran has menaced the Middle East for far, far too long. Dubya Bush made a mistake prioritising Iraq for regime change in 2003 when Iran is the real puppet master.

    Its long past time for regime change in Iran. After sending a barrage of missiles against Israel last night I would 100% support all-out conflict with Iran to bring in regime change and the elimination of the Ayatollahs.

    That it would rid the world of not just the people behind such terrorists as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also one of the major arms dealers to Putin too is an added bonus.

    Morning.

    I don't disagree with a lot of your comment - the destabilising inpact of Hamas, Hezbollah and the pro-Iranian Houthis goes far beyond what they do or try to do to Israel. They have weakened or radicalised the incumbent Governments in their own areas and prevented said Governments from being able to adopt a more realistic relationship with Israel.

    Unfortunately, one of the more predictable impacts of the events of October 2023 (nearly a year, would you believe?) was the marginalising of moderate Arab opinion.

    However, if we have a plan to reduce Iranian influcence, we'd better have a good idea how to a) stop it returning and b) fill the vacuum removing said influence would create.

    Lebanon and Yemen need proper time and effort to return them to functioning states and that's a commitment I don't see. The greatest enemies to radicalism and populism are stability and prosperity and that's what's needed in those countries and elsewhere in the region.

    Even Gaza, and you may disagree, would benefit hugely from some proper capitalism, some proper investment, the kind which doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists but ends up helping the people. Can Abbas provide that guarantee for a post-Hamas Gaza or will we have to go elsewhere?
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 21,528
    edited 8:22AM
    stodge said:

    Credit where credit is due, I've attacked the new Labour government a few times for its footing on the Middle East, but this from Starmer is 100% correct: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Calling on Iran to stop its attacks, he added: "Together with its proxies like Hezbollah, Iran has menaced the Middle East for far too long, chaos and destruction brought not just to Israel, but to the people they live amongst in Lebanon and beyond.

    "Make no mistake, Britain stands full square against such violence. We support Israel's reasonable demand for the security of its people."


    Iran has menaced the Middle East for far, far too long. Dubya Bush made a mistake prioritising Iraq for regime change in 2003 when Iran is the real puppet master.

    Its long past time for regime change in Iran. After sending a barrage of missiles against Israel last night I would 100% support all-out conflict with Iran to bring in regime change and the elimination of the Ayatollahs.

    That it would rid the world of not just the people behind such terrorists as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also one of the major arms dealers to Putin too is an added bonus.

    Morning.

    I don't disagree with a lot of your comment - the destabilising inpact of Hamas, Hezbollah and the pro-Iranian Houthis goes far beyond what they do or try to do to Israel. They have weakened or radicalised the incumbent Governments in their own areas and prevented said Governments from being able to adopt a more realistic relationship with Israel.

    Unfortunately, one of the more predictable impacts of the events of October 2023 (nearly a year, would you believe?) was the marginalising of moderate Arab opinion.

    However, if we have a plan to reduce Iranian influcence, we'd better have a good idea how to a) stop it returning and b) fill the vacuum removing said influence would create.

    Lebanon and Yemen need proper time and effort to return them to functioning states and that's a commitment I don't see. The greatest enemies to radicalism and populism are stability and prosperity and that's what's needed in those countries and elsewhere in the region.

    Even Gaza, and you may disagree, would benefit hugely from some proper capitalism, some proper investment, the kind which doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists but ends up helping the people. Can Abbas provide that guarantee for a post-Hamas Gaza or will we have to go elsewhere?
    I not only don't disagree that Gaza would benefit hugely from that, I've said so myself - repeatedly.

    After Hamas is eradicated I would love to see nothing more than a Marshall Plan to develop Gaza into a thriving area where people have opportunities, jobs and incomes that mean they have no interest in going back to the old ways.

    The right kind of stability is needed. Stability of law and order, stability of respecting business rights, stability of peaceful transfers of power etc.

    Stability of "we have had the same leader for decades" is a problem not a good thing.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,892
    edited 8:23AM
    Phil said:

    Nigelb said:

    Underappreciated point about Iron Done, which I hadn't known; it's designed to let some missiles through.
    There's some sort of AI system which calculates trajectories and de-prioritises warheads which aren't going to hit important (however that might be pre-defined) targets.

    A good way of dealing with mass attacks like last night.

    Pedantry alert: The systems in question would not have been Iron Dome (which is designed to cheaply eliminate short range unguided rockets & probably can’t intercept ballistic missiles) but Arrow or the shorter range David’s Sling systems. One problem for Israel is that these systems cost a fortune: Arrow is ~$3million / missile, Sling ~$700k. Last night’s barrage probably burnt through $3billion or so of missiles on the Israeli side.
    Yes, but it's an integrated system; they almost certainly used both the short and medium range missiles.
    Judging from the videos online, there was at least a couple of exoatmosperic interceptions - presumably by the Arrow missiles.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,130
    eek said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    538 has Harris more favoured to win 55 times out of 100: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/

    This is pretty much where they were 10 days ago and is some slippage on the part of Harris from the 57 or 58 times she was at the end of last week.

    One of the things that has been noted in America is that there are damned few undecideds in this race, far fewer than you normally have. I think that the vast majority have made up their minds one way or another. The question is which side will be more successful in getting their supporters to the polls. Given the early voting, specifically in PA, I am hopeful that will be Harris but I very much doubt we shall see much movement in the polls themselves over the next 4 weeks. Its going to remain tight to the end.

    Perhaps going to be decided by relative turnout rather than persuasion ?
    Which is why you are seeing so much gerrymandering of polling / voting stations and the numerous games already being played to discount various votes...

    Were this a third world country I suspect there would be reports of sophisticated poll rigging..
    American democracy has always had its primitive flavour. Pictures of often voters queueing for hours as if the United States were a third world country holding its first election since the fall of a brutal dictator.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,790
    stodge said:

    Credit where credit is due, I've attacked the new Labour government a few times for its footing on the Middle East, but this from Starmer is 100% correct: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Calling on Iran to stop its attacks, he added: "Together with its proxies like Hezbollah, Iran has menaced the Middle East for far too long, chaos and destruction brought not just to Israel, but to the people they live amongst in Lebanon and beyond.

    "Make no mistake, Britain stands full square against such violence. We support Israel's reasonable demand for the security of its people."


    Iran has menaced the Middle East for far, far too long. Dubya Bush made a mistake prioritising Iraq for regime change in 2003 when Iran is the real puppet master.

    Its long past time for regime change in Iran. After sending a barrage of missiles against Israel last night I would 100% support all-out conflict with Iran to bring in regime change and the elimination of the Ayatollahs.

    That it would rid the world of not just the people behind such terrorists as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also one of the major arms dealers to Putin too is an added bonus.

    Morning.

    I don't disagree with a lot of your comment - the destabilising inpact of Hamas, Hezbollah and the pro-Iranian Houthis goes far beyond what they do or try to do to Israel. They have weakened or radicalised the incumbent Governments in their own areas and prevented said Governments from being able to adopt a more realistic relationship with Israel.

    Unfortunately, one of the more predictable impacts of the events of October 2023 (nearly a year, would you believe?) was the marginalising of moderate Arab opinion.

    However, if we have a plan to reduce Iranian influcence, we'd better have a good idea how to a) stop it returning and b) fill the vacuum removing said influence would create.

    Lebanon and Yemen need proper time and effort to return them to functioning states and that's a commitment I don't see. The greatest enemies to radicalism and populism are stability and prosperity and that's what's needed in those countries and elsewhere in the region.

    Even Gaza, and you may disagree, would benefit hugely from some proper capitalism, some proper investment, the kind which doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists but ends up helping the people. Can Abbas provide that guarantee for a post-Hamas Gaza or will we have to go elsewhere?
    Hezbolla was created by Israel destabilising the existing Lebanese state with its 1978 invasion. It only came into existence then.

    You might well argue that destabilising Lebanon to get rid of the PLO was necessary, but that is what led to the Islamisation of resistance to Israel from what had been a fairly secular nationalist movement.

    It's blowback in the same way that the USA created the Taliban.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 5,919

    eek said:

    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    538 has Harris more favoured to win 55 times out of 100: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/

    This is pretty much where they were 10 days ago and is some slippage on the part of Harris from the 57 or 58 times she was at the end of last week.

    One of the things that has been noted in America is that there are damned few undecideds in this race, far fewer than you normally have. I think that the vast majority have made up their minds one way or another. The question is which side will be more successful in getting their supporters to the polls. Given the early voting, specifically in PA, I am hopeful that will be Harris but I very much doubt we shall see much movement in the polls themselves over the next 4 weeks. Its going to remain tight to the end.

    Perhaps going to be decided by relative turnout rather than persuasion ?
    Which is why you are seeing so much gerrymandering of polling / voting stations and the numerous games already being played to discount various votes...

    Were this a third world country I suspect there would be reports of sophisticated poll rigging..
    American democracy has always had its primitive flavour. Pictures of often voters queueing for hours as if the United States were a third world country holding its first election since the fall of a brutal dictator.
    That’s been largely the result of the GOP trying to stop Dem voters . Removing drop boxes , limiting early voting etc in urban areas .
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 21,528
    Foxy said:

    stodge said:

    Credit where credit is due, I've attacked the new Labour government a few times for its footing on the Middle East, but this from Starmer is 100% correct: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Calling on Iran to stop its attacks, he added: "Together with its proxies like Hezbollah, Iran has menaced the Middle East for far too long, chaos and destruction brought not just to Israel, but to the people they live amongst in Lebanon and beyond.

    "Make no mistake, Britain stands full square against such violence. We support Israel's reasonable demand for the security of its people."


    Iran has menaced the Middle East for far, far too long. Dubya Bush made a mistake prioritising Iraq for regime change in 2003 when Iran is the real puppet master.

    Its long past time for regime change in Iran. After sending a barrage of missiles against Israel last night I would 100% support all-out conflict with Iran to bring in regime change and the elimination of the Ayatollahs.

    That it would rid the world of not just the people behind such terrorists as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also one of the major arms dealers to Putin too is an added bonus.

    Morning.

    I don't disagree with a lot of your comment - the destabilising inpact of Hamas, Hezbollah and the pro-Iranian Houthis goes far beyond what they do or try to do to Israel. They have weakened or radicalised the incumbent Governments in their own areas and prevented said Governments from being able to adopt a more realistic relationship with Israel.

    Unfortunately, one of the more predictable impacts of the events of October 2023 (nearly a year, would you believe?) was the marginalising of moderate Arab opinion.

    However, if we have a plan to reduce Iranian influcence, we'd better have a good idea how to a) stop it returning and b) fill the vacuum removing said influence would create.

    Lebanon and Yemen need proper time and effort to return them to functioning states and that's a commitment I don't see. The greatest enemies to radicalism and populism are stability and prosperity and that's what's needed in those countries and elsewhere in the region.

    Even Gaza, and you may disagree, would benefit hugely from some proper capitalism, some proper investment, the kind which doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists but ends up helping the people. Can Abbas provide that guarantee for a post-Hamas Gaza or will we have to go elsewhere?
    Hezbolla was created by Israel destabilising the existing Lebanese state with its 1978 invasion. It only came into existence then.

    You might well argue that destabilising Lebanon to get rid of the PLO was necessary, but that is what led to the Islamisation of resistance to Israel from what had been a fairly secular nationalist movement.

    It's blowback in the same way that the USA created the Taliban.
    USA?

    USSR surely?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,529
    edited 8:30AM
    You have to feel for that poor Palestinian bloke flattened by that shot down missile casing. Probably not what the IRGC had in mind for its attack although you never do know.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,663

    stodge said:

    Credit where credit is due, I've attacked the new Labour government a few times for its footing on the Middle East, but this from Starmer is 100% correct: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Calling on Iran to stop its attacks, he added: "Together with its proxies like Hezbollah, Iran has menaced the Middle East for far too long, chaos and destruction brought not just to Israel, but to the people they live amongst in Lebanon and beyond.

    "Make no mistake, Britain stands full square against such violence. We support Israel's reasonable demand for the security of its people."


    Iran has menaced the Middle East for far, far too long. Dubya Bush made a mistake prioritising Iraq for regime change in 2003 when Iran is the real puppet master.

    Its long past time for regime change in Iran. After sending a barrage of missiles against Israel last night I would 100% support all-out conflict with Iran to bring in regime change and the elimination of the Ayatollahs.

    That it would rid the world of not just the people behind such terrorists as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also one of the major arms dealers to Putin too is an added bonus.

    Morning.

    I don't disagree with a lot of your comment - the destabilising inpact of Hamas, Hezbollah and the pro-Iranian Houthis goes far beyond what they do or try to do to Israel. They have weakened or radicalised the incumbent Governments in their own areas and prevented said Governments from being able to adopt a more realistic relationship with Israel.

    Unfortunately, one of the more predictable impacts of the events of October 2023 (nearly a year, would you believe?) was the marginalising of moderate Arab opinion.

    However, if we have a plan to reduce Iranian influcence, we'd better have a good idea how to a) stop it returning and b) fill the vacuum removing said influence would create.

    Lebanon and Yemen need proper time and effort to return them to functioning states and that's a commitment I don't see. The greatest enemies to radicalism and populism are stability and prosperity and that's what's needed in those countries and elsewhere in the region.

    Even Gaza, and you may disagree, would benefit hugely from some proper capitalism, some proper investment, the kind which doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists but ends up helping the people. Can Abbas provide that guarantee for a post-Hamas Gaza or will we have to go elsewhere?
    I not only don't disagree that Gaza would benefit hugely from that, I've said so myself - repeatedly.

    After Hamas is eradicated I would love to see nothing more than a Marshall Plan to develop Gaza into a thriving area where people have opportunities, jobs and incomes that mean they have no interest in going back to the old ways.

    The right kind of stability is needed. Stability of law and order, stability of respecting business rights, stability of peaceful transfers of power etc.

    Stability of "we have had the same leader for decades" is a problem not a good thing.
    I'm glad we agree but I still don't see anyone's Middle East policy thinking beyond containment. The ghost of Iraq clearly hangs heavy when we went in to Baghdad with the aim of toppling Saddam (laudable in and of itself) but with only the sketchiest notion of what would follow (apart from the oil).

    There's no point going into conflicts like these without a clear and unambiguous post-war plan (which can be broadcast well in advance so your opponents aren't just fighting the present but the future as well).
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,495

    Sean_F said:

    I struggle to think that Tolkien envisaged Galadriel and Sauron harbouring romantic feelings for each other.

    Sauron was one of the Maiar, basically angels. He is also known as the Great Deceiver. Hence his ability to manipulate both Galadriel and Celebrimbor so effectively
    In Tolkiens actual writings, Galadriel was *the* good judge of character - she told Feanor he was an arse, long before the Kin Slaying. Because she saw darkness in him.

    *She* was the one who tried to get everyone to bar Annatar (Pretty Sauron) from the Elven realms. On the grounds that (a) He seemed a bit problematic (b) He claims to be a Maiar sent by the Valar - but she didn't recognise him from actually living in Aman.

    And she sized up the Fellowship of the Ring in about 5 minutes.

    So they turned the wise, intelligent woman into an idiot teenager. Woke?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,892
    TOPPING said:

    I'm not surprised. There is a (perhaps more in hope than experience) wish that for all Trump's madness there is a set of sober, sensible people behind and around him who will enact sober, sensible policies, leaving The Donald to be The Donald.

    The debate was an indication that this might be so.

    Vance is not a sensible person, however sober he came across.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,774

    Sean_F said:

    I struggle to think that Tolkien envisaged Galadriel and Sauron harbouring romantic feelings for each other.

    Sauron was one of the Maiar, basically angels. He is also known as the Great Deceiver. Hence his ability to manipulate both Galadriel and Celebrimbor so effectively
    I'm fully on board with the idea of Sauron as deceiver. But, this is what the Director said of the Season:

    "Sauron, I think he even really loves Galadriel and you see that at the very end. He wishes he could get her back. He has feelings, he has something, there is something... and then he goes crazy about the rings. It's about passion, he's got passion."

    I don't think it's in Sauron's nature, at this point of his life, to love anyone other than himself.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,495

    Foxy said:

    stodge said:

    Credit where credit is due, I've attacked the new Labour government a few times for its footing on the Middle East, but this from Starmer is 100% correct: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Calling on Iran to stop its attacks, he added: "Together with its proxies like Hezbollah, Iran has menaced the Middle East for far too long, chaos and destruction brought not just to Israel, but to the people they live amongst in Lebanon and beyond.

    "Make no mistake, Britain stands full square against such violence. We support Israel's reasonable demand for the security of its people."


    Iran has menaced the Middle East for far, far too long. Dubya Bush made a mistake prioritising Iraq for regime change in 2003 when Iran is the real puppet master.

    Its long past time for regime change in Iran. After sending a barrage of missiles against Israel last night I would 100% support all-out conflict with Iran to bring in regime change and the elimination of the Ayatollahs.

    That it would rid the world of not just the people behind such terrorists as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also one of the major arms dealers to Putin too is an added bonus.

    Morning.

    I don't disagree with a lot of your comment - the destabilising inpact of Hamas, Hezbollah and the pro-Iranian Houthis goes far beyond what they do or try to do to Israel. They have weakened or radicalised the incumbent Governments in their own areas and prevented said Governments from being able to adopt a more realistic relationship with Israel.

    Unfortunately, one of the more predictable impacts of the events of October 2023 (nearly a year, would you believe?) was the marginalising of moderate Arab opinion.

    However, if we have a plan to reduce Iranian influcence, we'd better have a good idea how to a) stop it returning and b) fill the vacuum removing said influence would create.

    Lebanon and Yemen need proper time and effort to return them to functioning states and that's a commitment I don't see. The greatest enemies to radicalism and populism are stability and prosperity and that's what's needed in those countries and elsewhere in the region.

    Even Gaza, and you may disagree, would benefit hugely from some proper capitalism, some proper investment, the kind which doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists but ends up helping the people. Can Abbas provide that guarantee for a post-Hamas Gaza or will we have to go elsewhere?
    Hezbolla was created by Israel destabilising the existing Lebanese state with its 1978 invasion. It only came into existence then.

    You might well argue that destabilising Lebanon to get rid of the PLO was necessary, but that is what led to the Islamisation of resistance to Israel from what had been a fairly secular nationalist movement.

    It's blowback in the same way that the USA created the Taliban.
    USA?

    USSR surely?
    The Taliban were actually created by Pakistani Intelligence (ISI). They had (and have) a politics of using radicalise Islam to create weapons against their enemies. Hence the Mumbai attacks, when a pet terrorist group they'd created got loose.

    The reason the Taliban was created, was that the government of Afghanistan, which was mostly the Northern Alliance, was getting too friendly to India for Pakistan's liking. The Afghan government was seeking a counterbalance to Pakistani attempts to control the country.

    The Northern Alliance, roughly, mapped onto the groups sponsored by the Americans during the 80s.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,151
    edited 8:31AM

    Foxy said:

    stodge said:

    Credit where credit is due, I've attacked the new Labour government a few times for its footing on the Middle East, but this from Starmer is 100% correct: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Calling on Iran to stop its attacks, he added: "Together with its proxies like Hezbollah, Iran has menaced the Middle East for far too long, chaos and destruction brought not just to Israel, but to the people they live amongst in Lebanon and beyond.

    "Make no mistake, Britain stands full square against such violence. We support Israel's reasonable demand for the security of its people."


    Iran has menaced the Middle East for far, far too long. Dubya Bush made a mistake prioritising Iraq for regime change in 2003 when Iran is the real puppet master.

    Its long past time for regime change in Iran. After sending a barrage of missiles against Israel last night I would 100% support all-out conflict with Iran to bring in regime change and the elimination of the Ayatollahs.

    That it would rid the world of not just the people behind such terrorists as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also one of the major arms dealers to Putin too is an added bonus.

    Morning.

    I don't disagree with a lot of your comment - the destabilising inpact of Hamas, Hezbollah and the pro-Iranian Houthis goes far beyond what they do or try to do to Israel. They have weakened or radicalised the incumbent Governments in their own areas and prevented said Governments from being able to adopt a more realistic relationship with Israel.

    Unfortunately, one of the more predictable impacts of the events of October 2023 (nearly a year, would you believe?) was the marginalising of moderate Arab opinion.

    However, if we have a plan to reduce Iranian influcence, we'd better have a good idea how to a) stop it returning and b) fill the vacuum removing said influence would create.

    Lebanon and Yemen need proper time and effort to return them to functioning states and that's a commitment I don't see. The greatest enemies to radicalism and populism are stability and prosperity and that's what's needed in those countries and elsewhere in the region.

    Even Gaza, and you may disagree, would benefit hugely from some proper capitalism, some proper investment, the kind which doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists but ends up helping the people. Can Abbas provide that guarantee for a post-Hamas Gaza or will we have to go elsewhere?
    Hezbolla was created by Israel destabilising the existing Lebanese state with its 1978 invasion. It only came into existence then.

    You might well argue that destabilising Lebanon to get rid of the PLO was necessary, but that is what led to the Islamisation of resistance to Israel from what had been a fairly secular nationalist movement.

    It's blowback in the same way that the USA created the Taliban.
    USA?

    USSR surely?
    No, the Taliban was born out of factions within the Mujahideen. They in turn were effectively created (or at least turned into a force to be reckoned with) by the USA to fight against the Russians. The USA provided the vast majority of the money and much of the equipment to turn the Mujahideen into an effective opposition. The Taliban elements won the subsequent civil war after the Russians withdrew. Sadly much of that equipment then got used against the Western allies after 2001.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,495

    Foxy said:

    stodge said:

    Credit where credit is due, I've attacked the new Labour government a few times for its footing on the Middle East, but this from Starmer is 100% correct: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Calling on Iran to stop its attacks, he added: "Together with its proxies like Hezbollah, Iran has menaced the Middle East for far too long, chaos and destruction brought not just to Israel, but to the people they live amongst in Lebanon and beyond.

    "Make no mistake, Britain stands full square against such violence. We support Israel's reasonable demand for the security of its people."


    Iran has menaced the Middle East for far, far too long. Dubya Bush made a mistake prioritising Iraq for regime change in 2003 when Iran is the real puppet master.

    Its long past time for regime change in Iran. After sending a barrage of missiles against Israel last night I would 100% support all-out conflict with Iran to bring in regime change and the elimination of the Ayatollahs.

    That it would rid the world of not just the people behind such terrorists as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also one of the major arms dealers to Putin too is an added bonus.

    Morning.

    I don't disagree with a lot of your comment - the destabilising inpact of Hamas, Hezbollah and the pro-Iranian Houthis goes far beyond what they do or try to do to Israel. They have weakened or radicalised the incumbent Governments in their own areas and prevented said Governments from being able to adopt a more realistic relationship with Israel.

    Unfortunately, one of the more predictable impacts of the events of October 2023 (nearly a year, would you believe?) was the marginalising of moderate Arab opinion.

    However, if we have a plan to reduce Iranian influcence, we'd better have a good idea how to a) stop it returning and b) fill the vacuum removing said influence would create.

    Lebanon and Yemen need proper time and effort to return them to functioning states and that's a commitment I don't see. The greatest enemies to radicalism and populism are stability and prosperity and that's what's needed in those countries and elsewhere in the region.

    Even Gaza, and you may disagree, would benefit hugely from some proper capitalism, some proper investment, the kind which doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists but ends up helping the people. Can Abbas provide that guarantee for a post-Hamas Gaza or will we have to go elsewhere?
    Hezbolla was created by Israel destabilising the existing Lebanese state with its 1978 invasion. It only came into existence then.

    You might well argue that destabilising Lebanon to get rid of the PLO was necessary, but that is what led to the Islamisation of resistance to Israel from what had been a fairly secular nationalist movement.

    It's blowback in the same way that the USA created the Taliban.
    USA?

    USSR surely?
    No, the Taliban was born out of factions within the Mujahideen. They in turn were effectively created (or at least turned into a force to be reckoned with) by the USA to fight against the Russians. The USA provided the vast majority of the money and much of the equipment to turn the Mujahideen into an effective opposition. The Taliban elements won the subsequent civil war after the Russians withdrew. Sadly much of that equipment then got used against the Western allies after 2001.
    The Taliban were largely a creation of Pakistani Intelligence.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,200
    TimS said:

    Kemi is an interesting contrast with Jenrick. She’s very clear about what she thinks the problem is, but vague on solutions.

    He’s very clear the solution to everything is to leave the ECHR, but he can’t explain with honesty what problems he thinks that actually fixes.

    It fixes the problem of him becoming Tory leader.

    Another reason I'm so guarded of him.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,151

    Sean_F said:

    I struggle to think that Tolkien envisaged Galadriel and Sauron harbouring romantic feelings for each other.

    Sauron was one of the Maiar, basically angels. He is also known as the Great Deceiver. Hence his ability to manipulate both Galadriel and Celebrimbor so effectively
    In Tolkiens actual writings, Galadriel was *the* good judge of character - she told Feanor he was an arse, long before the Kin Slaying. Because she saw darkness in him.

    *She* was the one who tried to get everyone to bar Annatar (Pretty Sauron) from the Elven realms. On the grounds that (a) He seemed a bit problematic (b) He claims to be a Maiar sent by the Valar - but she didn't recognise him from actually living in Aman.

    And she sized up the Fellowship of the Ring in about 5 minutes.

    So they turned the wise, intelligent woman into an idiot teenager. Woke?
    Nope. She was learning all the time. And using the LoTR version as a comparison is daft given that was thousands of years later. She was known during the first and second ages as an impetuous Amazon type figure and certainly flawed in her judgement. I don't find the portrayal in RoP in any way contrary to this. At least not to make her unrealistic or at odds with the books.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,528

    Jenrick’s such a scumbag.

    Tom Tugendhat said it is “upsetting” that his Tory leadership rival Robert Jenrick used footage of a soldier he served with in Afghanistan who died shortly after the film was taken.

    Mr Jenrick has already sparked a row with the video, in which he claimed the SAS “kill rather than capture terrorists” because of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

    In an interview with BBC Newsnight, Mr Tugendhat said the statement made by the former immigration minister “just isn’t true”.

    He added: “What’s particularly upsetting is that video is using a piece of footage of some of the people I served with, one of whom there died shortly after that film was taken in an accident.

    “And he’s not able to defend himself from the accusation that is being levelled against him. That’s footage of a soldier in northern Afghanistan in around 2002.

    “I do not think we should be using footage of our special forces in operations… I would not put that video out. In fact I’d pull it down.”

    All four Tory leadership candidates are set to address the party faithful on the final day of the annual Conservative Party Conference in Birmingham from 10:45am this morning.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/10/02/politics-latest-speech-badenoch-jenrick-cleverly-tugendhat/

    Shades of Portillo.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/portillo-rant-triggers-a-storm-in-the-forces-1577144.html

    The evidence for Jenrick being able to transform himself into a reasonably well rounded human being with a penchant for pastel coloured blazers is limited.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,258

    stodge said:

    Credit where credit is due, I've attacked the new Labour government a few times for its footing on the Middle East, but this from Starmer is 100% correct: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Calling on Iran to stop its attacks, he added: "Together with its proxies like Hezbollah, Iran has menaced the Middle East for far too long, chaos and destruction brought not just to Israel, but to the people they live amongst in Lebanon and beyond.

    "Make no mistake, Britain stands full square against such violence. We support Israel's reasonable demand for the security of its people."


    Iran has menaced the Middle East for far, far too long. Dubya Bush made a mistake prioritising Iraq for regime change in 2003 when Iran is the real puppet master.

    Its long past time for regime change in Iran. After sending a barrage of missiles against Israel last night I would 100% support all-out conflict with Iran to bring in regime change and the elimination of the Ayatollahs.

    That it would rid the world of not just the people behind such terrorists as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also one of the major arms dealers to Putin too is an added bonus.

    Morning.

    I don't disagree with a lot of your comment - the destabilising inpact of Hamas, Hezbollah and the pro-Iranian Houthis goes far beyond what they do or try to do to Israel. They have weakened or radicalised the incumbent Governments in their own areas and prevented said Governments from being able to adopt a more realistic relationship with Israel.

    Unfortunately, one of the more predictable impacts of the events of October 2023 (nearly a year, would you believe?) was the marginalising of moderate Arab opinion.

    However, if we have a plan to reduce Iranian influcence, we'd better have a good idea how to a) stop it returning and b) fill the vacuum removing said influence would create.

    Lebanon and Yemen need proper time and effort to return them to functioning states and that's a commitment I don't see. The greatest enemies to radicalism and populism are stability and prosperity and that's what's needed in those countries and elsewhere in the region.

    Even Gaza, and you may disagree, would benefit hugely from some proper capitalism, some proper investment, the kind which doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists but ends up helping the people. Can Abbas provide that guarantee for a post-Hamas Gaza or will we have to go elsewhere?
    I not only don't disagree that Gaza would benefit hugely from that, I've said so myself - repeatedly.

    After Hamas is eradicated I would love to see nothing more than a Marshall Plan to develop Gaza into a thriving area where people have opportunities, jobs and incomes that mean they have no interest in going back to the old ways.

    The right kind of stability is needed. Stability of law and order, stability of respecting business rights, stability of peaceful transfers of power etc.

    Stability of "we have had the same leader for decades" is a problem not a good thing.
    I'm glad you support the idea of a Marshall Plan for Gaza. Last year, you supported ethnically cleansing Gaza. If only Smotrich were to have a similar change of mind.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,151

    Foxy said:

    stodge said:

    Credit where credit is due, I've attacked the new Labour government a few times for its footing on the Middle East, but this from Starmer is 100% correct: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Calling on Iran to stop its attacks, he added: "Together with its proxies like Hezbollah, Iran has menaced the Middle East for far too long, chaos and destruction brought not just to Israel, but to the people they live amongst in Lebanon and beyond.

    "Make no mistake, Britain stands full square against such violence. We support Israel's reasonable demand for the security of its people."


    Iran has menaced the Middle East for far, far too long. Dubya Bush made a mistake prioritising Iraq for regime change in 2003 when Iran is the real puppet master.

    Its long past time for regime change in Iran. After sending a barrage of missiles against Israel last night I would 100% support all-out conflict with Iran to bring in regime change and the elimination of the Ayatollahs.

    That it would rid the world of not just the people behind such terrorists as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also one of the major arms dealers to Putin too is an added bonus.

    Morning.

    I don't disagree with a lot of your comment - the destabilising inpact of Hamas, Hezbollah and the pro-Iranian Houthis goes far beyond what they do or try to do to Israel. They have weakened or radicalised the incumbent Governments in their own areas and prevented said Governments from being able to adopt a more realistic relationship with Israel.

    Unfortunately, one of the more predictable impacts of the events of October 2023 (nearly a year, would you believe?) was the marginalising of moderate Arab opinion.

    However, if we have a plan to reduce Iranian influcence, we'd better have a good idea how to a) stop it returning and b) fill the vacuum removing said influence would create.

    Lebanon and Yemen need proper time and effort to return them to functioning states and that's a commitment I don't see. The greatest enemies to radicalism and populism are stability and prosperity and that's what's needed in those countries and elsewhere in the region.

    Even Gaza, and you may disagree, would benefit hugely from some proper capitalism, some proper investment, the kind which doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists but ends up helping the people. Can Abbas provide that guarantee for a post-Hamas Gaza or will we have to go elsewhere?
    Hezbolla was created by Israel destabilising the existing Lebanese state with its 1978 invasion. It only came into existence then.

    You might well argue that destabilising Lebanon to get rid of the PLO was necessary, but that is what led to the Islamisation of resistance to Israel from what had been a fairly secular nationalist movement.

    It's blowback in the same way that the USA created the Taliban.
    USA?

    USSR surely?
    No, the Taliban was born out of factions within the Mujahideen. They in turn were effectively created (or at least turned into a force to be reckoned with) by the USA to fight against the Russians. The USA provided the vast majority of the money and much of the equipment to turn the Mujahideen into an effective opposition. The Taliban elements won the subsequent civil war after the Russians withdrew. Sadly much of that equipment then got used against the Western allies after 2001.
    The Taliban were largely a creation of Pakistani Intelligence.
    In their later form. But their birth out of the Mujahideen could not have come about without the support of the USA. Indeed there is a question of how much the Pakistani intelligence agencies were doing the USAs work for them.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,548
    Mr. Tyndall, wasn't Galadriel (along with Elrond) one who immediately saw through Sauron's disguise?
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,151

    Jenrick’s such a scumbag.

    Tom Tugendhat said it is “upsetting” that his Tory leadership rival Robert Jenrick used footage of a soldier he served with in Afghanistan who died shortly after the film was taken.

    Mr Jenrick has already sparked a row with the video, in which he claimed the SAS “kill rather than capture terrorists” because of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

    In an interview with BBC Newsnight, Mr Tugendhat said the statement made by the former immigration minister “just isn’t true”.

    He added: “What’s particularly upsetting is that video is using a piece of footage of some of the people I served with, one of whom there died shortly after that film was taken in an accident.

    “And he’s not able to defend himself from the accusation that is being levelled against him. That’s footage of a soldier in northern Afghanistan in around 2002.

    “I do not think we should be using footage of our special forces in operations… I would not put that video out. In fact I’d pull it down.”

    All four Tory leadership candidates are set to address the party faithful on the final day of the annual Conservative Party Conference in Birmingham from 10:45am this morning.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/10/02/politics-latest-speech-badenoch-jenrick-cleverly-tugendhat/

    Shades of Portillo.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/portillo-rant-triggers-a-storm-in-the-forces-1577144.html

    The evidence for Jenrick being able to transform himself into a reasonably well rounded human being with a penchant for pastel coloured blazers is limited.
    Some might say non existent. Can a snake do anything other than slither?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,529
    edited 8:45AM

    Foxy said:

    stodge said:

    Credit where credit is due, I've attacked the new Labour government a few times for its footing on the Middle East, but this from Starmer is 100% correct: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Calling on Iran to stop its attacks, he added: "Together with its proxies like Hezbollah, Iran has menaced the Middle East for far too long, chaos and destruction brought not just to Israel, but to the people they live amongst in Lebanon and beyond.

    "Make no mistake, Britain stands full square against such violence. We support Israel's reasonable demand for the security of its people."


    Iran has menaced the Middle East for far, far too long. Dubya Bush made a mistake prioritising Iraq for regime change in 2003 when Iran is the real puppet master.

    Its long past time for regime change in Iran. After sending a barrage of missiles against Israel last night I would 100% support all-out conflict with Iran to bring in regime change and the elimination of the Ayatollahs.

    That it would rid the world of not just the people behind such terrorists as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also one of the major arms dealers to Putin too is an added bonus.

    Morning.

    I don't disagree with a lot of your comment - the destabilising inpact of Hamas, Hezbollah and the pro-Iranian Houthis goes far beyond what they do or try to do to Israel. They have weakened or radicalised the incumbent Governments in their own areas and prevented said Governments from being able to adopt a more realistic relationship with Israel.

    Unfortunately, one of the more predictable impacts of the events of October 2023 (nearly a year, would you believe?) was the marginalising of moderate Arab opinion.

    However, if we have a plan to reduce Iranian influcence, we'd better have a good idea how to a) stop it returning and b) fill the vacuum removing said influence would create.

    Lebanon and Yemen need proper time and effort to return them to functioning states and that's a commitment I don't see. The greatest enemies to radicalism and populism are stability and prosperity and that's what's needed in those countries and elsewhere in the region.

    Even Gaza, and you may disagree, would benefit hugely from some proper capitalism, some proper investment, the kind which doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists but ends up helping the people. Can Abbas provide that guarantee for a post-Hamas Gaza or will we have to go elsewhere?
    Hezbolla was created by Israel destabilising the existing Lebanese state with its 1978 invasion. It only came into existence then.

    You might well argue that destabilising Lebanon to get rid of the PLO was necessary, but that is what led to the Islamisation of resistance to Israel from what had been a fairly secular nationalist movement.

    It's blowback in the same way that the USA created the Taliban.
    USA?

    USSR surely?
    No, the Taliban was born out of factions within the Mujahideen. They in turn were effectively created (or at least turned into a force to be reckoned with) by the USA to fight against the Russians. The USA provided the vast majority of the money and much of the equipment to turn the Mujahideen into an effective opposition. The Taliban elements won the subsequent civil war after the Russians withdrew. Sadly much of that equipment then got used against the Western allies after 2001.
    The Taliban were largely a creation of Pakistani Intelligence.
    Yep they are/were essentially a branch of ISI. Doing whatever was deemed to be in Pakistan's interests.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,200

    Morning folks

    amusing to see people slagging off Rings of Power on the previous thread on the basis that it is 'woke'.

    This is of course utter bollocks. There is nothing woke about it at all. Moreover most of those criticising its accuracy clearly don't know their Tolkein beyond the Peter Jackson films - which contained huge numbers of inaccuracies themselves.

    Rings of Power has just been renewed for its third season and is going from strength to strength. For most Tolkein fans who move beyond just Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit it is a great series filling in a lot of detail on Tolkein's lore. The 'go woke, go broke' crowd are just bitter because they weren't able to bring it down with their whining about non-white characters.

    The thing that really amused me with last week’s episode was the fact they used the word ‘trebuchet’ which implies Middle Earth has a France.
    I hope in that Middle Earth they honoured the Treaty of Troyes, though.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 50,657
    The leadership election is going more and more Cleverly’s way.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,206
    edited 8:48AM

    Morning folks

    amusing to see people slagging off Rings of Power on the previous thread on the basis that it is 'woke'.

    This is of course utter bollocks. There is nothing woke about it at all. Moreover most of those criticising its accuracy clearly don't know their Tolkein beyond the Peter Jackson films - which contained huge numbers of inaccuracies themselves.

    Rings of Power has just been renewed for its third season and is going from strength to strength. For most Tolkein fans who move beyond just Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit it is a great series filling in a lot of detail on Tolkein's lore. The 'go woke, go broke' crowd are just bitter because they weren't able to bring it down with their whining about non-white characters.

    It hasn't been "renewed" Amazon are contractually obliged to deliver 50 hours of content or they face a huge break fee with the Tolkein estate. It also isn't going from strength to strength, it opened with around half of the viewers that the first season opener did and it has the same downwards viewing trend the first season did which indicates that by the end only around 20% of people who started the first episode of the first season will make it to the end of the second season. It's a disaster but Amazon have no choice but to continue, if they could cancel it and not end up paying the Tolkein estate hundreds of millions in break up fees I'm certain they would do so.

    I think the only saving grace for it is that the next season isn't already written like season 2 was before filming so they can start to take fan feedback into account and sack the terrible writers and bring in actual lore experts that won't give us stupid concepts like Orc wives and babies or Galadriel thirsting after Sauron even after she fucking knows it's Sauron. I think there's been an admission within Amazon studios that they need to change direction on the story and lore so I expect season 3 will be much closer to what people expected from the beginning.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,147
    I doubt the debate made the slightest difference, VP debates never do.

    However it is not that surprising Yale educated Vance was reasonably articulate in debate relative to Chadron State college educated Walz.

    Walz performed well on abortion and the 2020 riots but Vance was more confident on foreign policy and the Middle East situation. Walz also notably opposed bans on gun ownership which some liberal Democrats have pushed which might help Harris in more rural areas and small towns.

    Overall a relatively cordial affair and some agreement between them even. A CBS snap post debate poll had it effectively tied, 42% gave it to Vance and 41% to Walz
    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/vp-debate-polls-jd-vance-tim-walz-b2622415.html
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,529

    stodge said:

    Credit where credit is due, I've attacked the new Labour government a few times for its footing on the Middle East, but this from Starmer is 100% correct: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krlgekpxo

    Calling on Iran to stop its attacks, he added: "Together with its proxies like Hezbollah, Iran has menaced the Middle East for far too long, chaos and destruction brought not just to Israel, but to the people they live amongst in Lebanon and beyond.

    "Make no mistake, Britain stands full square against such violence. We support Israel's reasonable demand for the security of its people."


    Iran has menaced the Middle East for far, far too long. Dubya Bush made a mistake prioritising Iraq for regime change in 2003 when Iran is the real puppet master.

    Its long past time for regime change in Iran. After sending a barrage of missiles against Israel last night I would 100% support all-out conflict with Iran to bring in regime change and the elimination of the Ayatollahs.

    That it would rid the world of not just the people behind such terrorists as Hamas and Hezbollah, but also one of the major arms dealers to Putin too is an added bonus.

    Morning.

    I don't disagree with a lot of your comment - the destabilising inpact of Hamas, Hezbollah and the pro-Iranian Houthis goes far beyond what they do or try to do to Israel. They have weakened or radicalised the incumbent Governments in their own areas and prevented said Governments from being able to adopt a more realistic relationship with Israel.

    Unfortunately, one of the more predictable impacts of the events of October 2023 (nearly a year, would you believe?) was the marginalising of moderate Arab opinion.

    However, if we have a plan to reduce Iranian influcence, we'd better have a good idea how to a) stop it returning and b) fill the vacuum removing said influence would create.

    Lebanon and Yemen need proper time and effort to return them to functioning states and that's a commitment I don't see. The greatest enemies to radicalism and populism are stability and prosperity and that's what's needed in those countries and elsewhere in the region.

    Even Gaza, and you may disagree, would benefit hugely from some proper capitalism, some proper investment, the kind which doesn't end up in the hands of terrorists but ends up helping the people. Can Abbas provide that guarantee for a post-Hamas Gaza or will we have to go elsewhere?
    I not only don't disagree that Gaza would benefit hugely from that, I've said so myself - repeatedly.

    After Hamas is eradicated I would love to see nothing more than a Marshall Plan to develop Gaza into a thriving area where people have opportunities, jobs and incomes that mean they have no interest in going back to the old ways.

    The right kind of stability is needed. Stability of law and order, stability of respecting business rights, stability of peaceful transfers of power etc.

    Stability of "we have had the same leader for decades" is a problem not a good thing.
    I'm glad you support the idea of a Marshall Plan for Gaza. Last year, you supported ethnically cleansing Gaza. If only Smotrich were to have a similar change of mind.
    Rubbish. When Israel exited Gaza there was much hope for regeneration, Singapore on wherever it is, etc. Then Hamas was elected and all of a sudden Palestinian Authority folk were getting dragged behind vehicles or thrown off rooftops, and the tunnel system established with the aim of wiping Israel off the map.

    There's your brief, recent history of Gaza and the result of it all was October 7th and a lot of destruction there now. Hence now it requires a Marshall Plan (sans Hamas) for regeneration. Something I have no doubt the Israelis would be super in favour of, as they were the potential regeneration when the left.

    Doesn't mean that Hamas shouldn't be eliminated if that is what it takes.
Sign In or Register to comment.