Just had a text from EDF confirming that as we had reduced our peak energy use we have free electricity from 8.00am to 8.00pm next Sunday plus free electricity on Christmas day between 8.00am and 4.00pm
Seems Sundays are becoming laundry days !!!!!!
And when that nice Mr Miliband gets his way, that sort of thing will happen more often. It's not going to need unimaginably more turbines and panels to get fairly regular times when production exceeds demand. And then consumption patterns will adapt to fit, because why wouldn't you?
(Same as the old Economy 7 system; that worked because turning coal power stations up and down was a massive pain in the neck.)
Spot price of electricity was negative for a few hours last night. Grid would have paid you to store some of it.
(I'm interested by the floor in gas generation of about 4GW, even when we have excess wind and are exporting to Europe. Anyone know why? I imagine it's something simple like it's difficult to fully shut down a gas power station)
Local pricing would sort that very quickly. More quickly than we can fully upgrade the grid.
Are you suggesting it's because there aren't the power cables too take the wind energy to the places that the 4GW of gas is supplying electricity?
Just had a text from EDF confirming that as we had reduced our peak energy use we have free electricity from 8.00am to 8.00pm next Sunday plus free electricity on Christmas day between 8.00am and 4.00pm
Seems Sundays are becoming laundry days !!!!!!
And when that nice Mr Miliband gets his way, that sort of thing will happen more often. It's not going to need unimaginably more turbines and panels to get fairly regular times when production exceeds demand. And then consumption patterns will adapt to fit, because why wouldn't you?
(Same as the old Economy 7 system; that worked because turning coal power stations up and down was a massive pain in the neck.)
Spot price of electricity was negative for a few hours last night. Grid would have paid you to store some of it.
(I'm interested by the floor in gas generation of about 4GW, even when we have excess wind and are exporting to Europe. Anyone know why? I imagine it's something simple like it's difficult to fully shut down a gas power station)
Local pricing would sort that very quickly. More quickly than we can fully upgrade the grid.
Shame it's been ruled out; the economics of it would have been brilliant for Scotland.
A more determined Germany might equally have prevented the invasion outright. As it is, possibly a quarter million dead by the time this ends. And Germany’s economy semi-ruined, along with the rest of Europe.
Didn't end too well last time German troops took on the Russians in Ukraine.
Only keeping Ukraine's nuclear weapons would have really secured its security
This idea keeps recurring and I have my doubts. (1) They were Soviet nukes, not Ukrainian; (2) nukes need a lot of money and expertise for maintenance; (3) Ukraine didn't have independent control of the technology; (4) Ukraine didn't have a plausible delivery system ... (5) ... or a plausible policy for deployment and (6) Chernobyl (1986) sums up the state of Soviet engineering at the time.
All true. But on the other hand, despite what pro-Russians say, Ukraine is not a technologically backwards nation. In fact, a lot of the weapons, including high-tech ones, made by the USSR were made in Ukraine. Which is one reason Russia has problems building major warships.
Also, deterrence can occur if enemy nations have reasons to *think* you have got the weapons. If Ukraine had let it be known that they had a program to renew Soviet warheads and delivery systems, along with indications they had such a program ("Oh noes! Our documents were leaked!!!"), then it may well have worked as well as spending much more developing weapons.
Against this; if they had done this, then there might be much less sympathy for them in the civilised world given non-proliferation requirements.
The nuclear warhead programs were not in the Ukraine. A number of the missile programs were.
So the Ukrainians had possession of warheads they didn’t have the designs for. Or the specifications. Or the maintenance details.
Due to a lack of tritium production in Ukraine, all the warheads would become unusable in a year or 2. Tritium decays to Helium-3. Tritium is used in advanced nuclear weapons for 2 things. Boosting the primary (a bomb) and for the secondary (the h bomb bit). Helium-3 is a reaction poison - if even a small percentage of the tritium has turned into Helium-3, the primary will have nearly no yield if the gas is injected for boosting.
If you removed the tritium canisters completely, the primaries would yield perhaps 300 tons (TNT) equivalent. Which would be a very small bang.
And that would be dubious - the rest of the warhead needs maintenance. Soviet plutonium cores had corrosion problems due to crap nickel plating. Yes, really.
Ukraine would really have had to started a bomb program from scratch, using the material from the old Soviet warheads.
That doesn't actually really go against anything I said. The Ukrainians are not dumb; and all they needed was enough *doubt* about what they were doing.
After all, Israel in no way managed to have a nuclear weapons program that developed a nuclear weapon that they absolutely do not have.
The Israelis engineered the nuclear weapons they don't have. Complete with the design and research facilities they don't have.
The Ukrainians would have had to have created this, otherwise they would have been the proud owners of some paperweights. At the time the Ukrainian economy was in the toilet. And after Chernobyl, enthusiasm for nuclear stuff wasn't exactly high.
A more determined Germany might equally have prevented the invasion outright. As it is, possibly a quarter million dead by the time this ends. And Germany’s economy semi-ruined, along with the rest of Europe.
Didn't end too well last time German troops took on the Russians in Ukraine.
Only keeping Ukraine's nuclear weapons would have really secured its security
This idea keeps recurring and I have my doubts. (1) They were Soviet nukes, not Ukrainian; (2) nukes need a lot of money and expertise for maintenance; (3) Ukraine didn't have independent control of the technology; (4) Ukraine didn't have a plausible delivery system ... (5) ... or a plausible policy for deployment and (6) Chernobyl (1986) sums up the state of Soviet engineering at the time.
All true. But on the other hand, despite what pro-Russians say, Ukraine is not a technologically backwards nation. In fact, a lot of the weapons, including high-tech ones, made by the USSR were made in Ukraine. Which is one reason Russia has problems building major warships.
Also, deterrence can occur if enemy nations have reasons to *think* you have got the weapons. If Ukraine had let it be known that they had a program to renew Soviet warheads and delivery systems, along with indications they had such a program ("Oh noes! Our documents were leaked!!!"), then it may well have worked as well as spending much more developing weapons.
Against this; if they had done this, then there might be much less sympathy for them in the civilised world given non-proliferation requirements.
The nuclear warhead programs were not in the Ukraine. A number of the missile programs were.
So the Ukrainians had possession of warheads they didn’t have the designs for. Or the specifications. Or the maintenance details.
Due to a lack of tritium production in Ukraine, all the warheads would become unusable in a year or 2. Tritium decays to Helium-3. Tritium is used in advanced nuclear weapons for 2 things. Boosting the primary (a bomb) and for the secondary (the h bomb bit). Helium-3 is a reaction poison - if even a small percentage of the tritium has turned into Helium-3, the primary will have nearly no yield if the gas is injected for boosting.
If you removed the tritium canisters completely, the primaries would yield perhaps 300 tons (TNT) equivalent. Which would be a very small bang.
And that would be dubious - the rest of the warhead needs maintenance. Soviet plutonium cores had corrosion problems due to crap nickel plating. Yes, really.
Ukraine would really have had to started a bomb program from scratch, using the material from the old Soviet warheads.
But, as you’ve noted, it isn’t that complicated, if you have an existing arms industry and decent engineering expertise.
And they were not party to the non-proliferation treaty. It was clearly significant enough for us to provide security guarantees regarding Ukraine's territorial integrity.
Obviously the petition is going nowhere, but I think it does highlight a fundamental truth for why we are seeing the plummet in Labour's support and in Starmers personal ratings - which is that on taking office Labour have been very cynically doing things that for which they have no mandate.
The point was raised by Sir John Curtice during the election that Labour would have been better telling people what they planned to do rather than blatantly being dishonest.
Yes, they may only have formed a government with a majority of 50 rather than 170 but they would have been in a much better position now to actually implement the policies they are implementing.
This very much seems to be shaping up to be a one term government and most of that is because Labour wasn't transparent before and during the election.
We, and Labour, are in a muddle. People are saying they should have campaigned differently - ie more honestly about tax, spend, borrow and so on.
But the thing I notice is that despite Reform's intervention from the right splitting the vote, Labour while winning, both did very badly in % terms and much worse than the polling said. The conclusion has to be that they could easily have lost, just as in 1992.
Sadly the Ming vase strategy was essential. Yes, it limits their options. But there is no such thing as a popular tax rise, and no-one has really suggested (eg CBI today) what they should have done instead.
However, their useless presentation, PR, comms, unforced errors and apparent lack of direction are 100% Labour's fault.
On assisted dying, I don't want anyone to die in pain. But as per Foxy's comment that the NHS can offer 'potentially dangerous' levels of pain medication at the end of life, I don't see why dying in pain would be necessary. Why can't we just agree that nobody suffers at the end unless that's what they want? That's really as far as I think I want the NHS to go. And I don't really know, or see why Dame Diana Rigg apparently died in pain, or why Esther Rantzen thinks she might.
Because - AIUI - doctors are terrified of legal action claiming they accelerated death with diamorphine etc
It's a really fine line to tread. I essentially agree with you, indeed I likely agree with the principle of Assisted Dying. But something in the Bill makes me deeply queasy, and those adverts, UGH
Vote this Bill down, but try again with all parties behind it. We can do better. And the creeps behind those ads need to be removed from the conversation. They remind me of the feminists in America who are so polarised by the abortion debate they start to believe abortion is itself a brilliant thing, and there should be MORE abortions!
And such legal actions have occurred in the context of Shipman and others. Not to mention the Liverpool Pathway.
Which is the reason that a proper ethical & legal structure needs to be created.
I do not think, however, that this is the right one.
Not really. It's a recognised bit of medical practice to treat pain or respiratory distress with diamorphine, though obviously should be discussed with patient and relatives.
Shipman, Gosport etc are very different as not in discussion with patient or family.
Probably the most blatant British Euthanasia was the death of Lilian Boyes at the hands of Dr Nigel Cox* in 1991. He was convicted of attempted murder, given a suspended sentance and let off by the GMC. He returned to work at the same hospital shortly after.
*lovely man and very caring. I looked after his patients as a junior doctor, possibly including Mrs Boyes.
Reading the Wikipedia article, it seems that Cox was a very caring man. From the article I wouldn't call it "blatant Euthanasia". It was compassionate and desired by the patient and her family. It was a brave thing he did, given the legal peril.
That is why we need the assisted dying bill to clarify and legitimise this area. Otherwise it is grey and unmonitored.
It was blatant euthanasia, and incidentally beyond the proposed bill in my understanding.
I think that bureaucratising End of Life Care into legalistic forms is not really a good thing. These events generally happen quickly, often over a few days. It should just have good practice guidelines, nothing more.
Have you read the Wikipedia article? Can you place yourself in his position and feel the compassion? Or not?
I know the story very well, having worked with Dr Cox. His actions were driven by compassion but were also blatant euthanasia. That is what euthanasia means.
I don't think under the proposed law that Doctors are to administer the fatal agent.
The point of the euthanasia bill, though, is that relying on Dr Coxes is basically a lottery for terminal patients in severe pain.
It’s a hard problem, but I think your solution is something of an easy, and somewhat unconvincing out. That’s not a criticism of you; it’s just that I’ve encountered far too many doctors who are lacking in that compassion.
No, I support the bill, just not sure on the legalistic bit. In part it is practical as our judges are busy people. If they weigh evidence carefully it takes time, and often there isn't much time, or if alternatively they rubber stamp decisions taken elsewhere. I don't think we need to nationalise death.
I am marginally in favour of the Bill despite my concerns.
I’m probably in quite close agreement with you, then.
Obviously the petition is going nowhere, but I think it does highlight a fundamental truth for why we are seeing the plummet in Labour's support and in Starmers personal ratings - which is that on taking office Labour have been very cynically doing things for which they have no mandate.
The point was raised by Sir John Curtice during the election that Labour would have been better telling people what they planned to do rather than blatantly being dishonest.
Yes, they may only have formed a government with a majority of 50 rather than 170 but they would have been in a much better position now to actually implement the policies they are implementing.
This very much seems to be shaping up to be a one term government and most of that is because Labour wasn't transparent before and during the election.
Yes the next GE is shaping up as a choice between a Labour government propped up by the LDs or a Tory and Reform government.
Another Labour majority looks the least likely outcome
A more determined Germany might equally have prevented the invasion outright. As it is, possibly a quarter million dead by the time this ends. And Germany’s economy semi-ruined, along with the rest of Europe.
Didn't end too well last time German troops took on the Russians in Ukraine.
Only keeping Ukraine's nuclear weapons would have really secured its security
This idea keeps recurring and I have my doubts. (1) They were Soviet nukes, not Ukrainian; (2) nukes need a lot of money and expertise for maintenance; (3) Ukraine didn't have independent control of the technology; (4) Ukraine didn't have a plausible delivery system ... (5) ... or a plausible policy for deployment and (6) Chernobyl (1986) sums up the state of Soviet engineering at the time.
All true. But on the other hand, despite what pro-Russians say, Ukraine is not a technologically backwards nation. In fact, a lot of the weapons, including high-tech ones, made by the USSR were made in Ukraine. Which is one reason Russia has problems building major warships.
Also, deterrence can occur if enemy nations have reasons to *think* you have got the weapons. If Ukraine had let it be known that they had a program to renew Soviet warheads and delivery systems, along with indications they had such a program ("Oh noes! Our documents were leaked!!!"), then it may well have worked as well as spending much more developing weapons.
Against this; if they had done this, then there might be much less sympathy for them in the civilised world given non-proliferation requirements.
The nuclear warhead programs were not in the Ukraine. A number of the missile programs were.
So the Ukrainians had possession of warheads they didn’t have the designs for. Or the specifications. Or the maintenance details.
Due to a lack of tritium production in Ukraine, all the warheads would become unusable in a year or 2. Tritium decays to Helium-3. Tritium is used in advanced nuclear weapons for 2 things. Boosting the primary (a bomb) and for the secondary (the h bomb bit). Helium-3 is a reaction poison - if even a small percentage of the tritium has turned into Helium-3, the primary will have nearly no yield if the gas is injected for boosting.
If you removed the tritium canisters completely, the primaries would yield perhaps 300 tons (TNT) equivalent. Which would be a very small bang.
And that would be dubious - the rest of the warhead needs maintenance. Soviet plutonium cores had corrosion problems due to crap nickel plating. Yes, really.
Ukraine would really have had to started a bomb program from scratch, using the material from the old Soviet warheads.
But, as you’ve noted, it isn’t that complicated, if you have an existing arms industry and decent engineering expertise.
I'm not accusing Malms of this, but there is a hefty undercurrent of downplaying Ukrainian technology and engineering prowess in much of the talk over Ukraine. I suspect much of this comes from Soviet times, where all the other constituent states were subservient to Russia. The achievements of those states were therefore 'Russian' in the eyes of Russians and their supporters around the world.
We still see it in this war, with people underplaying a lot of the technological stuff Ukraine is doing to keep Russia at bay, preferring to think only of the stuff Ukraine's been given.
This Russian superiority complex might explain the butthurt that Putin and many Russians feel when those 'lesser' states became more prosperous members of another, more open, political block.
He was just (correctly, I think) pointing out that hanging onto and maintaining the Soviet warheads was likely beyond them at the time. Particularly given the then political constraints. Building new, simpler plutonium bombs would be quite another matter now.
We're talking about the technical side of it, not the political. And I disagree that the technical side would have been beyond Ukraine, even setting aside Malms' comments. Pakistan built a nuclear weapons program from scratch to weapons in ?25? years. Ukraine had *far* more going for it - including existent although degrading weapons.
The technical side of *creating* nukes would not have been beyond Ukraine. I've argued that they will probably resort to building nukes in the near future... And given that they will be using reactor grade plutonium they will be some interesting designs.
But they would have had to create a nuclear weapons program from scratch - the weapons they "gave away" were unmaintainable. And they had no money at the time. Feeding people was a problem, let alone weapons.
An advanced multistage warhead is a very elaborate sculpture in physics. To reverse engineer it, is according to those who have built them, is something close to impractical. The nuances in the design and manufacturer that make it easier to build your own design from scratch - unless you had a design and engineering team fluent in building and maintaining advanced multistagers.
Just had a text from EDF confirming that as we had reduced our peak energy use we have free electricity from 8.00am to 8.00pm next Sunday plus free electricity on Christmas day between 8.00am and 4.00pm
Seems Sundays are becoming laundry days !!!!!!
And when that nice Mr Miliband gets his way, that sort of thing will happen more often. It's not going to need unimaginably more turbines and panels to get fairly regular times when production exceeds demand. And then consumption patterns will adapt to fit, because why wouldn't you?
(Same as the old Economy 7 system; that worked because turning coal power stations up and down was a massive pain in the neck.)
Spot price of electricity was negative for a few hours last night. Grid would have paid you to store some of it.
(I'm interested by the floor in gas generation of about 4GW, even when we have excess wind and are exporting to Europe. Anyone know why? I imagine it's something simple like it's difficult to fully shut down a gas power station)
Local pricing would sort that very quickly. More quickly than we can fully upgrade the grid.
Shame it's been ruled out; the economics of it would have been brilliant for Scotland.
Possibly why it was. But our current electricity market is rubbish. And disadvantages everyone, overall.
It is with regret that I need to inform you all that my wife has just put up some Christmas lights outside our house.
And you permit this?
Good, we are supposed to keep the spirit of Christmas with us all year round.
It's exactly a month before Chrimbo. In the absence of a UK Thanksgiving, we just have to accept we need Christmas to last us through to Christmas, from about mid-November. Bravo, Mrs Rentool
As I said before, the real problem is the total absence of ANY fun between New Year and March (at the earliest). We desperately need a European-style Carnival. FFS just invent it from scratch. Anything
We have Shrove Tuesday and Pancakes in January and Burns Night and piped haggis at the end of January
On assisted dying, I don't want anyone to die in pain. But as per Foxy's comment that the NHS can offer 'potentially dangerous' levels of pain medication at the end of life, I don't see why dying in pain would be necessary. Why can't we just agree that nobody suffers at the end unless that's what they want? That's really as far as I think I want the NHS to go. And I don't really know, or see why Dame Diana Rigg apparently died in pain, or why Esther Rantzen thinks she might.
Because - AIUI - doctors are terrified of legal action claiming they accelerated death with diamorphine etc
It's a really fine line to tread. I essentially agree with you, indeed I likely agree with the principle of Assisted Dying. But something in the Bill makes me deeply queasy, and those adverts, UGH
Vote this Bill down, but try again with all parties behind it. We can do better. And the creeps behind those ads need to be removed from the conversation. They remind me of the feminists in America who are so polarised by the abortion debate they start to believe abortion is itself a brilliant thing, and there should be MORE abortions!
And such legal actions have occurred in the context of Shipman and others. Not to mention the Liverpool Pathway.
Which is the reason that a proper ethical & legal structure needs to be created.
I do not think, however, that this is the right one.
Not really. It's a recognised bit of medical practice to treat pain or respiratory distress with diamorphine, though obviously should be discussed with patient and relatives.
Shipman, Gosport etc are very different as not in discussion with patient or family.
Probably the most blatant British Euthanasia was the death of Lilian Boyes at the hands of Dr Nigel Cox* in 1991. He was convicted of attempted murder, given a suspended sentance and let off by the GMC. He returned to work at the same hospital shortly after.
*lovely man and very caring. I looked after his patients as a junior doctor, possibly including Mrs Boyes.
Reading the Wikipedia article, it seems that Cox was a very caring man. From the article I wouldn't call it "blatant Euthanasia". It was compassionate and desired by the patient and her family. It was a brave thing he did, given the legal peril.
That is why we need the assisted dying bill to clarify and legitimise this area. Otherwise it is grey and unmonitored.
It was blatant euthanasia, and incidentally beyond the proposed bill in my understanding.
I think that bureaucratising End of Life Care into legalistic forms is not really a good thing. These events generally happen quickly, often over a few days. It should just have good practice guidelines, nothing more.
Have you read the Wikipedia article? Can you place yourself in his position and feel the compassion? Or not?
I know the story very well, having worked with Dr Cox. His actions were driven by compassion but were also blatant euthanasia. That is what euthanasia means.
I don't think under the proposed law that Doctors are to administer the fatal agent.
The point of the euthanasia bill, though, is that relying on Dr Coxes is basically a lottery for terminal patients in severe pain.
It’s a hard problem, but I think your solution is something of an easy, and somewhat unconvincing out. That’s not a criticism of you; it’s just that I’ve encountered far too many doctors who are lacking in that compassion.
Or have the compassion but other medics don't, and snitch on them, as they did with Cox.
It was a ward nurse that raised the concern, not a medic. Mostly because he acted alone. A Consultant personally giving IVs is highly unusual, it is a delegated task and usually to the most junior of staff. He also wrote it in the notes including recording the fatal dosage. Dr Cox made no attempt at all to conceal what he did.
I think the case was handled well, as clearly there should be an inquiry when a doctor deliberately kills a patient. The sentance was suspended and Dr Cox continued to work afterwards. I think the authorities turning a blind eye would have been a dangerous precedent.
Just had a text from EDF confirming that as we had reduced our peak energy use we have free electricity from 8.00am to 8.00pm next Sunday plus free electricity on Christmas day between 8.00am and 4.00pm
Seems Sundays are becoming laundry days !!!!!!
And when that nice Mr Miliband gets his way, that sort of thing will happen more often. It's not going to need unimaginably more turbines and panels to get fairly regular times when production exceeds demand. And then consumption patterns will adapt to fit, because why wouldn't you?
(Same as the old Economy 7 system; that worked because turning coal power stations up and down was a massive pain in the neck.)
Spot price of electricity was negative for a few hours last night. Grid would have paid you to store some of it.
(I'm interested by the floor in gas generation of about 4GW, even when we have excess wind and are exporting to Europe. Anyone know why? I imagine it's something simple like it's difficult to fully shut down a gas power station)
Local pricing would sort that very quickly. More quickly than we can fully upgrade the grid.
Are you suggesting it's because there aren't the power cables too take the wind energy to the places that the 4GW of gas is supplying electricity?
It’s not as simple as that. But there’s no capacity to present the excess power to areas where industrial development might rapidly take it up - and no local pricing to incentivise that development where it’s now available.
A more determined Germany might equally have prevented the invasion outright. As it is, possibly a quarter million dead by the time this ends. And Germany’s economy semi-ruined, along with the rest of Europe.
Didn't end too well last time German troops took on the Russians in Ukraine.
Only keeping Ukraine's nuclear weapons would have really secured its security
This idea keeps recurring and I have my doubts. (1) They were Soviet nukes, not Ukrainian; (2) nukes need a lot of money and expertise for maintenance; (3) Ukraine didn't have independent control of the technology; (4) Ukraine didn't have a plausible delivery system ... (5) ... or a plausible policy for deployment and (6) Chernobyl (1986) sums up the state of Soviet engineering at the time.
All true. But on the other hand, despite what pro-Russians say, Ukraine is not a technologically backwards nation. In fact, a lot of the weapons, including high-tech ones, made by the USSR were made in Ukraine. Which is one reason Russia has problems building major warships.
Also, deterrence can occur if enemy nations have reasons to *think* you have got the weapons. If Ukraine had let it be known that they had a program to renew Soviet warheads and delivery systems, along with indications they had such a program ("Oh noes! Our documents were leaked!!!"), then it may well have worked as well as spending much more developing weapons.
Against this; if they had done this, then there might be much less sympathy for them in the civilised world given non-proliferation requirements.
The nuclear warhead programs were not in the Ukraine. A number of the missile programs were.
So the Ukrainians had possession of warheads they didn’t have the designs for. Or the specifications. Or the maintenance details.
Due to a lack of tritium production in Ukraine, all the warheads would become unusable in a year or 2. Tritium decays to Helium-3. Tritium is used in advanced nuclear weapons for 2 things. Boosting the primary (a bomb) and for the secondary (the h bomb bit). Helium-3 is a reaction poison - if even a small percentage of the tritium has turned into Helium-3, the primary will have nearly no yield if the gas is injected for boosting.
If you removed the tritium canisters completely, the primaries would yield perhaps 300 tons (TNT) equivalent. Which would be a very small bang.
And that would be dubious - the rest of the warhead needs maintenance. Soviet plutonium cores had corrosion problems due to crap nickel plating. Yes, really.
Ukraine would really have had to started a bomb program from scratch, using the material from the old Soviet warheads.
But, as you’ve noted, it isn’t that complicated, if you have an existing arms industry and decent engineering expertise.
I'm not accusing Malms of this, but there is a hefty undercurrent of downplaying Ukrainian technology and engineering prowess in much of the talk over Ukraine. I suspect much of this comes from Soviet times, where all the other constituent states were subservient to Russia. The achievements of those states were therefore 'Russian' in the eyes of Russians and their supporters around the world.
We still see it in this war, with people underplaying a lot of the technological stuff Ukraine is doing to keep Russia at bay, preferring to think only of the stuff Ukraine's been given.
This Russian superiority complex might explain the butthurt that Putin and many Russians feel when those 'lesser' states became more prosperous members of another, more open, political block.
He was just (correctly, I think) pointing out that hanging onto and maintaining the Soviet warheads was likely beyond them at the time. Particularly given the then political constraints. Building new, simpler plutonium bombs would be quite another matter now.
We're talking about the technical side of it, not the political. And I disagree that the technical side would have been beyond Ukraine, even setting aside Malms' comments. Pakistan built a nuclear weapons program from scratch to weapons in ?25? years. Ukraine had *far* more going for it - including existent although degrading weapons.
The technical side of *creating* nukes would not have been beyond Ukraine. I've argued that they will probably resort to building nukes in the near future... And given that they will be using reactor grade plutonium they will be some interesting designs.
But they would have had to create a nuclear weapons program from scratch - the weapons they "gave away" were unmaintainable. And they had no money at the time. Feeding people was a problem, let alone weapons.
An advanced multistage warhead is a very elaborate sculpture in physics. To reverse engineer it, is according to those who have built them, is something close to impractical. The nuances in the design and manufacturer that make it easier to build your own design from scratch - unless you had a design and engineering team fluent in building and maintaining advanced multistagers.
Not all nukes are equal: muti-stage hydrogen bombs are the biggies, but not vital to make a boom that no-one wants over their cities.
Again, the mere *threat* of having weapons can be a deterrence. Even if you do not have them.
I would also point out that Pakistan (and NK!) managed to make weapons without bothering too much about the state of the population. And they also had to design and build delivery systems, which can be more expensive than the weapons themselves to develop (witness Manhattan Project cost versus the much more expensive B-29 project. And he sad thing is, in the long run it may have been better if Ukraine had done that. It may have saved many Ukrainian lives.
Went to Norway for 5 days, no transport problems, come back to the UK and one of the trains I was travelling on was cancelled due to flooding, in a place that must have been flooding for centuries.
Went to Norway for 5 days, no transport problems, come back to the UK and one of the trains I was travelling on was cancelled due to flooding, in a place that must have been flooding for centuries.
Well, that's climate change for you. Weather that we used to cope with we no longer can, or at least not all the time.
On assisted dying, I don't want anyone to die in pain. But as per Foxy's comment that the NHS can offer 'potentially dangerous' levels of pain medication at the end of life, I don't see why dying in pain would be necessary. Why can't we just agree that nobody suffers at the end unless that's what they want? That's really as far as I think I want the NHS to go. And I don't really know, or see why Dame Diana Rigg apparently died in pain, or why Esther Rantzen thinks she might.
Because - AIUI - doctors are terrified of legal action claiming they accelerated death with diamorphine etc
It's a really fine line to tread. I essentially agree with you, indeed I likely agree with the principle of Assisted Dying. But something in the Bill makes me deeply queasy, and those adverts, UGH
Vote this Bill down, but try again with all parties behind it. We can do better. And the creeps behind those ads need to be removed from the conversation. They remind me of the feminists in America who are so polarised by the abortion debate they start to believe abortion is itself a brilliant thing, and there should be MORE abortions!
And such legal actions have occurred in the context of Shipman and others. Not to mention the Liverpool Pathway.
Which is the reason that a proper ethical & legal structure needs to be created.
I do not think, however, that this is the right one.
Not really. It's a recognised bit of medical practice to treat pain or respiratory distress with diamorphine, though obviously should be discussed with patient and relatives.
Shipman, Gosport etc are very different as not in discussion with patient or family.
Probably the most blatant British Euthanasia was the death of Lilian Boyes at the hands of Dr Nigel Cox* in 1991. He was convicted of attempted murder, given a suspended sentance and let off by the GMC. He returned to work at the same hospital shortly after.
*lovely man and very caring. I looked after his patients as a junior doctor, possibly including Mrs Boyes.
Reading the Wikipedia article, it seems that Cox was a very caring man. From the article I wouldn't call it "blatant Euthanasia". It was compassionate and desired by the patient and her family. It was a brave thing he did, given the legal peril.
That is why we need the assisted dying bill to clarify and legitimise this area. Otherwise it is grey and unmonitored.
It was blatant euthanasia, and incidentally beyond the proposed bill in my understanding.
I think that bureaucratising End of Life Care into legalistic forms is not really a good thing. These events generally happen quickly, often over a few days. It should just have good practice guidelines, nothing more.
Have you read the Wikipedia article? Can you place yourself in his position and feel the compassion? Or not?
I know the story very well, having worked with Dr Cox. His actions were driven by compassion but were also blatant euthanasia. That is what euthanasia means.
I don't think under the proposed law that Doctors are to administer the fatal agent.
The point of the euthanasia bill, though, is that relying on Dr Coxes is basically a lottery for terminal patients in severe pain.
It’s a hard problem, but I think your solution is something of an easy, and somewhat unconvincing out. That’s not a criticism of you; it’s just that I’ve encountered far too many doctors who are lacking in that compassion.
Or have the compassion but other medics don't, and snitch on them, as they did with Cox.
It was a ward nurse that raised the concern, not a medic. Mostly because he acted alone. A Consultant personally giving IVs is highly unusual, it is a delegated task and usually to the most junior of staff. He also wrote it in the notes including recording the fatal dosage. Dr Cox made no attempt at all to conceal what he did.
I think the case was handled well, as clearly there should be an inquiry when a doctor deliberately kills a patient. The sentance was suspended and Dr Cox continued to work afterwards. I think the authorities turning a blind eye would have been a dangerous precedent.
God. I remember the Cox case now it has been mentioned. The terrible descriptions of the patient's state come straight back to my memory.
I'm not entirely sure but it may have been that case that made me in favour of assisted dying. Certainly I have been for several decades.
I fear the vote will be lost at end of this week thanks to Starmer making a horlicks of it all and the usual stupid arguments about tens of thousands of grans being coerced into death every few weeks. Ridiculous.
Went to Norway for 5 days, no transport problems, come back to the UK and one of the trains I was travelling on was cancelled due to flooding, in a place that must have been flooding for centuries.
Anyone trying to catch the WCML today would now understand why HS2 is required..
Went to Norway for 5 days, no transport problems, come back to the UK and one of the trains I was travelling on was cancelled due to flooding, in a place that must have been flooding for centuries.
Well, that's climate change for you. Weather that we used to cope with we no longer can, or at least not all the time.
Just had a text from EDF confirming that as we had reduced our peak energy use we have free electricity from 8.00am to 8.00pm next Sunday plus free electricity on Christmas day between 8.00am and 4.00pm
Seems Sundays are becoming laundry days !!!!!!
I'm surprised they're doing that at that time on Christmas Day, since IIRC that's a very high demand period.
You might be thinking about domestic use, but don’t forget the businesses are all shut.
It is with regret that I need to inform you all that my wife has just put up some Christmas lights outside our house.
And you permit this?
Good, we are supposed to keep the spirit of Christmas with us all year round.
It's exactly a month before Chrimbo. In the absence of a UK Thanksgiving, we just have to accept we need Christmas to last us through to Christmas, from about mid-November. Bravo, Mrs Rentool
As I said before, the real problem is the total absence of ANY fun between New Year and March (at the earliest). We desperately need a European-style Carnival. FFS just invent it from scratch. Anything
We have Shrove Tuesday and Pancakes in January and Burns Night and piped haggis at the end of January
Shrove Tuesday is a moveable date, and can fall on a date from 3rd February to 9th March. This year it fell on 13th Feb, and next year on 4th March. So never January.
Unlike Burns night in January which never moves. I stay at home with my ear plugs in even though I like haggis.
A more determined Germany might equally have prevented the invasion outright. As it is, possibly a quarter million dead by the time this ends. And Germany’s economy semi-ruined, along with the rest of Europe.
Didn't end too well last time German troops took on the Russians in Ukraine.
Only keeping Ukraine's nuclear weapons would have really secured its security
This idea keeps recurring and I have my doubts. (1) They were Soviet nukes, not Ukrainian; (2) nukes need a lot of money and expertise for maintenance; (3) Ukraine didn't have independent control of the technology; (4) Ukraine didn't have a plausible delivery system ... (5) ... or a plausible policy for deployment and (6) Chernobyl (1986) sums up the state of Soviet engineering at the time.
All true. But on the other hand, despite what pro-Russians say, Ukraine is not a technologically backwards nation. In fact, a lot of the weapons, including high-tech ones, made by the USSR were made in Ukraine. Which is one reason Russia has problems building major warships.
Also, deterrence can occur if enemy nations have reasons to *think* you have got the weapons. If Ukraine had let it be known that they had a program to renew Soviet warheads and delivery systems, along with indications they had such a program ("Oh noes! Our documents were leaked!!!"), then it may well have worked as well as spending much more developing weapons.
Against this; if they had done this, then there might be much less sympathy for them in the civilised world given non-proliferation requirements.
The nuclear warhead programs were not in the Ukraine. A number of the missile programs were.
So the Ukrainians had possession of warheads they didn’t have the designs for. Or the specifications. Or the maintenance details.
Due to a lack of tritium production in Ukraine, all the warheads would become unusable in a year or 2. Tritium decays to Helium-3. Tritium is used in advanced nuclear weapons for 2 things. Boosting the primary (a bomb) and for the secondary (the h bomb bit). Helium-3 is a reaction poison - if even a small percentage of the tritium has turned into Helium-3, the primary will have nearly no yield if the gas is injected for boosting.
If you removed the tritium canisters completely, the primaries would yield perhaps 300 tons (TNT) equivalent. Which would be a very small bang.
And that would be dubious - the rest of the warhead needs maintenance. Soviet plutonium cores had corrosion problems due to crap nickel plating. Yes, really.
Ukraine would really have had to started a bomb program from scratch, using the material from the old Soviet warheads.
But, as you’ve noted, it isn’t that complicated, if you have an existing arms industry and decent engineering expertise.
I'm not accusing Malms of this, but there is a hefty undercurrent of downplaying Ukrainian technology and engineering prowess in much of the talk over Ukraine. I suspect much of this comes from Soviet times, where all the other constituent states were subservient to Russia. The achievements of those states were therefore 'Russian' in the eyes of Russians and their supporters around the world.
We still see it in this war, with people underplaying a lot of the technological stuff Ukraine is doing to keep Russia at bay, preferring to think only of the stuff Ukraine's been given.
This Russian superiority complex might explain the butthurt that Putin and many Russians feel when those 'lesser' states became more prosperous members of another, more open, political block.
He was just (correctly, I think) pointing out that hanging onto and maintaining the Soviet warheads was likely beyond them at the time. Particularly given the then political constraints. Building new, simpler plutonium bombs would be quite another matter now.
We're talking about the technical side of it, not the political. And I disagree that the technical side would have been beyond Ukraine, even setting aside Malms' comments. Pakistan built a nuclear weapons program from scratch to weapons in ?25? years. Ukraine had *far* more going for it - including existent although degrading weapons.
The technical side of *creating* nukes would not have been beyond Ukraine. I've argued that they will probably resort to building nukes in the near future... And given that they will be using reactor grade plutonium they will be some interesting designs.
But they would have had to create a nuclear weapons program from scratch - the weapons they "gave away" were unmaintainable. And they had no money at the time. Feeding people was a problem, let alone weapons.
An advanced multistage warhead is a very elaborate sculpture in physics. To reverse engineer it, is according to those who have built them, is something close to impractical. The nuances in the design and manufacturer that make it easier to build your own design from scratch - unless you had a design and engineering team fluent in building and maintaining advanced multistagers.
Or...go and buy a few bombs and rent a team of specialists from Pakistan.
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the longest-serving Senate leader, is stepping down from his leadership post in January, a move he has told colleagues has left him feeling “liberated.” McConnell has telegraphed that he plans to prioritize two issues that just happen to be subjects on which he disagrees strongly with Trump: foreign policy and the Senate’s institutional independence.
I do not like this government, I do not like its mindset, I do not like its actions generally, and I do not like this action specifically. And it's a effort of will to express that politely.
It is with regret that I need to inform you all that my wife has just put up some Christmas lights outside our house.
And you permit this?
Good, we are supposed to keep the spirit of Christmas with us all year round.
It's exactly a month before Chrimbo. In the absence of a UK Thanksgiving, we just have to accept we need Christmas to last us through to Christmas, from about mid-November. Bravo, Mrs Rentool
As I said before, the real problem is the total absence of ANY fun between New Year and March (at the earliest). We desperately need a European-style Carnival. FFS just invent it from scratch. Anything
We have Shrove Tuesday and Pancakes in January and Burns Night and piped haggis at the end of January
Shrove Tuesday is a moveable date, and can fall on a date from 3rd February to 9th March. This year it fell on 13th Feb, and next year on 4th March. So never January.
Sorry, should indeed have been February for Shrove Tuesday but again still pre Spring
Went to Norway for 5 days, no transport problems, come back to the UK and one of the trains I was travelling on was cancelled due to flooding, in a place that must have been flooding for centuries.
Anyone trying to catch the WCML today would now understand why HS2 is required..
Travelling by train from the SW to Glasgow on Wednesday. Probably 50:50 at best it is sorted by then.
A more determined Germany might equally have prevented the invasion outright. As it is, possibly a quarter million dead by the time this ends. And Germany’s economy semi-ruined, along with the rest of Europe.
Didn't end too well last time German troops took on the Russians in Ukraine.
Only keeping Ukraine's nuclear weapons would have really secured its security
This idea keeps recurring and I have my doubts. (1) They were Soviet nukes, not Ukrainian; (2) nukes need a lot of money and expertise for maintenance; (3) Ukraine didn't have independent control of the technology; (4) Ukraine didn't have a plausible delivery system ... (5) ... or a plausible policy for deployment and (6) Chernobyl (1986) sums up the state of Soviet engineering at the time.
All true. But on the other hand, despite what pro-Russians say, Ukraine is not a technologically backwards nation. In fact, a lot of the weapons, including high-tech ones, made by the USSR were made in Ukraine. Which is one reason Russia has problems building major warships.
Also, deterrence can occur if enemy nations have reasons to *think* you have got the weapons. If Ukraine had let it be known that they had a program to renew Soviet warheads and delivery systems, along with indications they had such a program ("Oh noes! Our documents were leaked!!!"), then it may well have worked as well as spending much more developing weapons.
Against this; if they had done this, then there might be much less sympathy for them in the civilised world given non-proliferation requirements.
The nuclear warhead programs were not in the Ukraine. A number of the missile programs were.
So the Ukrainians had possession of warheads they didn’t have the designs for. Or the specifications. Or the maintenance details.
Due to a lack of tritium production in Ukraine, all the warheads would become unusable in a year or 2. Tritium decays to Helium-3. Tritium is used in advanced nuclear weapons for 2 things. Boosting the primary (a bomb) and for the secondary (the h bomb bit). Helium-3 is a reaction poison - if even a small percentage of the tritium has turned into Helium-3, the primary will have nearly no yield if the gas is injected for boosting.
If you removed the tritium canisters completely, the primaries would yield perhaps 300 tons (TNT) equivalent. Which would be a very small bang.
And that would be dubious - the rest of the warhead needs maintenance. Soviet plutonium cores had corrosion problems due to crap nickel plating. Yes, really.
Ukraine would really have had to started a bomb program from scratch, using the material from the old Soviet warheads.
But, as you’ve noted, it isn’t that complicated, if you have an existing arms industry and decent engineering expertise.
I'm not accusing Malms of this, but there is a hefty undercurrent of downplaying Ukrainian technology and engineering prowess in much of the talk over Ukraine. I suspect much of this comes from Soviet times, where all the other constituent states were subservient to Russia. The achievements of those states were therefore 'Russian' in the eyes of Russians and their supporters around the world.
We still see it in this war, with people underplaying a lot of the technological stuff Ukraine is doing to keep Russia at bay, preferring to think only of the stuff Ukraine's been given.
This Russian superiority complex might explain the butthurt that Putin and many Russians feel when those 'lesser' states became more prosperous members of another, more open, political block.
He was just (correctly, I think) pointing out that hanging onto and maintaining the Soviet warheads was likely beyond them at the time. Particularly given the then political constraints. Building new, simpler plutonium bombs would be quite another matter now.
We're talking about the technical side of it, not the political. And I disagree that the technical side would have been beyond Ukraine, even setting aside Malms' comments. Pakistan built a nuclear weapons program from scratch to weapons in ?25? years. Ukraine had *far* more going for it - including existent although degrading weapons.
The technical side of *creating* nukes would not have been beyond Ukraine. I've argued that they will probably resort to building nukes in the near future... And given that they will be using reactor grade plutonium they will be some interesting designs.
But they would have had to create a nuclear weapons program from scratch - the weapons they "gave away" were unmaintainable. And they had no money at the time. Feeding people was a problem, let alone weapons.
An advanced multistage warhead is a very elaborate sculpture in physics. To reverse engineer it, is according to those who have built them, is something close to impractical. The nuances in the design and manufacturer that make it easier to build your own design from scratch - unless you had a design and engineering team fluent in building and maintaining advanced multistagers.
Not all nukes are equal: muti-stage hydrogen bombs are the biggies, but not vital to make a boom that no-one wants over their cities.
Again, the mere *threat* of having weapons can be a deterrence. Even if you do not have them.
I would also point out that Pakistan (and NK!) managed to make weapons without bothering too much about the state of the population. And they also had to design and build delivery systems, which can be more expensive than the weapons themselves to develop (witness Manhattan Project cost versus the much more expensive B-29 project. And he sad thing is, in the long run it may have been better if Ukraine had done that. It may have saved many Ukrainian lives.
The B29 project was expensive because they wanted factories to build 10,000 of them. If they had wanted to build a dozen, hand built prototypes for dropping nukes, it would have been much cheaper. See the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_XF-12_Rainbow
When the Ukrainians gave up nukes, they were existing on foreign aid. Russia was in collapse as well. No one was thinking of war. Getting rid of nukes in return for more foreign aid was an obvious move - they couldn’t maintain them, had no one to point them at….
After 9/11, a US Airforce General was asked why they didn’t have interceptors in the air. He pointed out, that given that the only intercontinental bombers the Russians had left were a couple of Blackjacks and prop driven Badgers, there was no bomber threat. They all stayed in bases out of range of the US (weather). To stage a strike would require moving them north first. So the US would literally have days of notice.
Given that, he said, imagine asking for money for a standing air patrol to shoot down civilian airliners off course. On 9/10 he would have been dismissed from the Air Force as insane.
It is with regret that I need to inform you all that my wife has just put up some Christmas lights outside our house.
And you permit this?
Good, we are supposed to keep the spirit of Christmas with us all year round.
It's exactly a month before Chrimbo. In the absence of a UK Thanksgiving, we just have to accept we need Christmas to last us through to Christmas, from about mid-November. Bravo, Mrs Rentool
As I said before, the real problem is the total absence of ANY fun between New Year and March (at the earliest). We desperately need a European-style Carnival. FFS just invent it from scratch. Anything
We have Shrove Tuesday and Pancakes in January and Burns Night and piped haggis at the end of January
Here’s something to keep you entertained through January.
It is with regret that I need to inform you all that my wife has just put up some Christmas lights outside our house.
And you permit this?
Good, we are supposed to keep the spirit of Christmas with us all year round.
It's exactly a month before Chrimbo. In the absence of a UK Thanksgiving, we just have to accept we need Christmas to last us through to Christmas, from about mid-November. Bravo, Mrs Rentool
As I said before, the real problem is the total absence of ANY fun between New Year and March (at the earliest). We desperately need a European-style Carnival. FFS just invent it from scratch. Anything
We have Shrove Tuesday and Pancakes in January and Burns Night and piped haggis at the end of January
I'd be broadly content, nowadays, to start Christmas early. As long as it's after Remembrance Sunday. These days, there's not enough time in December to do all the things I want to do in December.
I'd quite like something mid Jan to look forward to. Let's have a bank holiday about the 18th with some sort of concocted tradition - mud, drink, cold weather, meat, some sort of seasonal cake. Light. Fellowship. You know the sort of thing.
By pancake day the worst of winter is really over.
I do not like this government, I do not like its mindset, I do not like its actions generally, and I do not like this action specifically. And it's a effort of will to express that politely.
You know this is a policy that this Government inherited from the previous one.
And the sheer number of adverts telling me to stop betting - tells me that the current scheme isn't working and the betting firms know as much.ll
I cannot begin to tell you how personally upsetting that tube ad is. It has brought back some hideous memories. It is repulsive - frivolously insensitive and cruel. In my current - deeply upset - mood, were I to meet the person approving them for use in the tube and be anywhere near a tube line, I'd be very inclined to push them onto the line into the path of an oncoming train and plead insanity.
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the longest-serving Senate leader, is stepping down from his leadership post in January, a move he has told colleagues has left him feeling “liberated.” McConnell has telegraphed that he plans to prioritize two issues that just happen to be subjects on which he disagrees strongly with Trump: foreign policy and the Senate’s institutional independence.
NY Times
He’s a miserable shit, but on this occasion, he’s right.
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the longest-serving Senate leader, is stepping down from his leadership post in January, a move he has told colleagues has left him feeling “liberated.” McConnell has telegraphed that he plans to prioritize two issues that just happen to be subjects on which he disagrees strongly with Trump: foreign policy and the Senate’s institutional independence.
NY Times
Yeah, they start out saying that. He beats them all down in the end.
I cannot begin to tell you how personally upsetting that tube ad is. It has brought back some hideous memories. It is repulsive - frivolously insensitive and cruel. In my current - deeply upset - mood, were I to meet the person approving them for use in the tube and be anywhere near a tube line, I'd be very inclined to push them onto the line into the path of an oncoming train and plead insanity.
Just as well I'm not in London.
The very fact it was designed and approved tells me society has already changed a lot on this issue, whether or not the proposed bill moves forward and is ultimately passed.
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
Went to Norway for 5 days, no transport problems, come back to the UK and one of the trains I was travelling on was cancelled due to flooding, in a place that must have been flooding for centuries.
Well, that's climate change for you. Weather that we used to cope with we no longer can, or at least not all the time.
Could we ever cope with it?
Instead of spending billions trying to persuade Africa to produce less CO2, we need to spend the money protecting our own towns, villages and infrastructure from the effects of climate change.
Went to Norway for 5 days, no transport problems, come back to the UK and one of the trains I was travelling on was cancelled due to flooding, in a place that must have been flooding for centuries.
Well, that's climate change for you. Weather that we used to cope with we no longer can, or at least not all the time.
Could we ever cope with it?
Instead of spending billions trying to persuade Africa to produce less CO2, we need to spend the money protecting our own towns, villages and infrastructure from the effects of climate change.
Or rebuild our criminal justice system, armed forces and potholed roads, while giving our vastly overburdened taxpayers a break ...
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
It's almost certainly Jupiter. Jupiter is brilliant and white and not twinkly. Aldebaran is a reddish, not as bright and twinkles.
I quite like the idea of Burns suppers the length and breadth of the land. As it happens I'd been to them anyway when I was little because our vicar was Scottish and the Church held one. Haggis is delicious and more people should experience it. And whisky, tartan, poetry - what's not to love? Burns himself was a fan of Scottish independence turned agent of the British crown, so there's something there for all to celebrate.
I'd do a lot more cross cultural stuff im general if I ran DCMS. When friends and colleagues come from down South to Scotland they can't believe that such a place exists within the UK.
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
Jupiter. In a couple of hours, Mars will also be visible.
Obviously the petition is going nowhere, but I think it does highlight a fundamental truth for why we are seeing the plummet in Labour's support and in Starmers personal ratings - which is that on taking office Labour have been very cynically doing things that for which they have no mandate.
The point was raised by Sir John Curtice during the election that Labour would have been better telling people what they planned to do rather than blatantly being dishonest.
Yes, they may only have formed a government with a majority of 50 rather than 170 but they would have been in a much better position now to actually implement the policies they are implementing.
This very much seems to be shaping up to be a one term government and most of that is because Labour wasn't transparent before and during the election.
We, and Labour, are in a muddle. People are saying they should have campaigned differently - ie more honestly about tax, spend, borrow and so on.
But the thing I notice is that despite Reform's intervention from the right splitting the vote, Labour while winning, both did very badly in % terms and much worse than the polling said. The conclusion has to be that they could easily have lost, just as in 1992.
Sadly the Ming vase strategy was essential. Yes, it limits their options. But there is no such thing as a popular tax rise, and no-one has really suggested (eg CBI today) what they should have done instead.
However, their useless presentation, PR, comms, unforced errors and apparent lack of direction are 100% Labour's fault.
... although all those problems could be said about their opponents, many of them even more so.
It's difficult to escape the view that we have a completely useless political class - not just useless at government, but even at short-term politics. I think NOTA, if it were offered on our ballot papers would probably get a landslide next time.
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
Jupiter can be very bright, notably in clear winter skies. If you have binoculars you should be able to see the larger moons to the side or sides.
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
Jupiter. In a couple of hours, Mars will also be visible.
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
Jupiter. In a couple of hours, Mars will also be visible.
It's out now!
Presumabky yours are London visibility times? Amazing it should be so different. Is Jupiter normally this bright?
I am really enjoying this. Though also wishing right noe I lived sonewhere with darker skies.
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the longest-serving Senate leader, is stepping down from his leadership post in January, a move he has told colleagues has left him feeling “liberated.” McConnell has telegraphed that he plans to prioritize two issues that just happen to be subjects on which he disagrees strongly with Trump: foreign policy and the Senate’s institutional independence.
NY Times
He’s a miserable shit, but on this occasion, he’s right.
Let's hope the fact that he no longer cares if Elon pays to have a primary against him means he will vote against some of the more egregious kristallnacht stuff.
Ministers will announce millions in extra funding for lawyers to represent asylum seekers to help clear a large backlog of appeals that is blocking efforts to move migrants out of hotels, The Times can reveal. A major shortage of lawyers is causing lengthy delays to the outcome of asylum appeals.
Late winter celebrations. Lots here we can work with: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candlemas Plus, it's, I think, a quarter day. Slap in a bank holiday, concoct a few feel good traditions involving alcohol and meat and just enough fresh air and some cadles, natch,and we're good to go.
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
Jupiter. In a couple of hours, Mars will also be visible.
It's out now!
Presumabky yours are London visibility times? Amazing it should be so different. Is Jupiter normally this bright?
I am really enjoying this. Though also wishing right noe I lived sonewhere with darker skies.
Jupiter can be very bright, the fourth brightest natural object in the sky after the sun, the moon and Venus. It may possibly be beaten by occasional artificial objects such as ISS though, as well as transient natural phenomena like meteors.
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
Jupiter. In a couple of hours, Mars will also be visible.
It's out now!
Presumabky yours are London visibility times? Amazing it should be so different. Is Jupiter normally this bright?
I am really enjoying this. Though also wishing right noe I lived sonewhere with darker skies.
Jupiter can be very bright, the fourth brightest natural object in the sky after the sun, the moon and Venus. It may possibly be beaten by occasional artificial objects such as ISS though, as well as transient natural phenomena like meteors.
I did not know that. I assumed its far-awayness would outweigh its bigness.
Express reporting exclusive that bumper 2 day bank holiday for 80th celebrations of end of WWII is planned.
One has to ask if it’s VE Day and VJ Day, or will they cock up and give us May 8th and 9th…
I’d rather both around VJ Day for the weather. Celebrate the end of the war in one.
Hate to be a grinch, but the cost of so-called bank holidays falls entirely on private sector employers. When Charles'n'Di got married I had to give a day's paid holiday to a staff of 20. Didn't get a penny back when they divorced. I do believe the favourable end of WW2 is worth celebrating, but not perhaps by yet another tax on employment.
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
Jupiter. In a couple of hours, Mars will also be visible.
It's out now!
Presumabky yours are London visibility times? Amazing it should be so different. Is Jupiter normally this bright?
I am really enjoying this. Though also wishing right noe I lived sonewhere with darker skies.
Jupiter can be very bright, the fourth brightest natural object in the sky after the sun, the moon and Venus. It may possibly be beaten by occasional artificial objects such as ISS though, as well as transient natural phenomena like meteors.
Express reporting exclusive that bumper 2 day bank holiday for 80th celebrations of end of WWII is planned.
One has to ask if it’s VE Day and VJ Day, or will they cock up and give us May 8th and 9th…
I’d rather both around VJ Day for the weather. Celebrate the end of the war in one.
Hate to be a grinch, but the cost of so-called bank holidays falls entirely on private sector employers. When Charles'n'Di got married I had to give a day's paid holiday to a staff of 20. Didn't get a penny back when they divorced. I do believe that the favourable end of WW2 is worth celebrating, but not perhaps by yet another tax on employment.
I understand your point, and that’s why we cannot have a crazy number of B/Hs permanently, but on the other side of the ledger it will increase consumption one would think, and some businesses will benefit. And one would think it would be good for staff morale?
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
Jupiter. In a couple of hours, Mars will also be visible.
It's out now!
Presumabky yours are London visibility times? Amazing it should be so different. Is Jupiter normally this bright?
I am really enjoying this. Though also wishing right noe I lived sonewhere with darker skies.
Jupiter can be very bright, the fourth brightest natural object in the sky after the sun, the moon and Venus. It may possibly be beaten by occasional artificial objects such as ISS though, as well as transient natural phenomena like meteors.
Brought to mind the early Pink Floyd track Astronomy Domine:
Ministers will announce millions in extra funding for lawyers to represent asylum seekers to help clear a large backlog of appeals that is blocking efforts to move migrants out of hotels, The Times can reveal. A major shortage of lawyers is causing lengthy delays to the outcome of asylum appeals.
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
Jupiter. In a couple of hours, Mars will also be visible.
It's out now!
Presumabky yours are London visibility times? Amazing it should be so different. Is Jupiter normally this bright?
I am really enjoying this. Though also wishing right noe I lived sonewhere with darker skies.
Jupiter can be very bright, the fourth brightest natural object in the sky after the sun, the moon and Venus. It may possibly be beaten by occasional artificial objects such as ISS though, as well as transient natural phenomena like meteors.
I did not know that. I assumed its far-awayness would outweigh its bigness.
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
Jupiter. In a couple of hours, Mars will also be visible.
It's out now!
Presumabky yours are London visibility times? Amazing it should be so different. Is Jupiter normally this bright?
I am really enjoying this. Though also wishing right noe I lived sonewhere with darker skies.
Jupiter can be very bright, the fourth brightest natural object in the sky after the sun, the moon and Venus. It may possibly be beaten by occasional artificial objects such as ISS though, as well as transient natural phenomena like meteors.
I did not know that. I assumed its far-awayness would outweigh its bigness.
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
Jupiter. In a couple of hours, Mars will also be visible.
It's out now!
Presumabky yours are London visibility times? Amazing it should be so different. Is Jupiter normally this bright?
I am really enjoying this. Though also wishing right noe I lived sonewhere with darker skies.
Jupiter can be very bright, the fourth brightest natural object in the sky after the sun, the moon and Venus. It may possibly be beaten by occasional artificial objects such as ISS though, as well as transient natural phenomena like meteors.
I did not know that. I assumed its far-awayness would outweigh its bigness.
As well as being big, Jupiter also has a highly reflective upper cloud layer and its lit side always more or less faces Earth, so it looks bright despite its distance. It's well worth taking up TT's suggestion and having a look through binoculars if you have any, and you may be able to spot the four Galilean moons strung out either, or one, side of Jupiter like little white dots. Then you'll know for sure that it's Jupiter!
Indian Premier League auction, which saw 13-year-old Vaibhav Suryavanshi picked up by Rajasthan Royals for 1.1 crore (£105,000).
Adil Rashid, Jonny Bairstow and Ben Duckett were among the England players to go unsold, while Australia batters Steve Smith and David Warner also failed to secure a deal.
Rashid in particular seems an odd choice not for somebody to buy. Heart bleeds for Cheaty McCeaty face not getting a deal after retiring from international cricket to do this.
The Hyundai plant is in the Georgia district of US House Representative Buddy Carter, one of the 18 House Republicans who wrote a letter against repealing the IRA's clean energy tax credits. He's also chair of the Environment, Manufacturing and Critical Materials Subcommittee. https://x.com/kyleichan/status/1861153663739175093
The Hyundai plant is in the Georgia district of US House Representative Buddy Carter, one of the 18 House Republicans who wrote a letter against repealing the IRA's clean energy tax credits. He's also chair of the Environment, Manufacturing and Critical Materials Subcommittee. https://x.com/kyleichan/status/1861153663739175093
The Hyundai plant is in the Georgia district of US House Representative Buddy Carter, one of the 18 House Republicans who wrote a letter against repealing the IRA's clean energy tax credits. He's also chair of the Environment, Manufacturing and Critical Materials Subcommittee. https://x.com/kyleichan/status/1861153663739175093
Meanwhile the big German carmakers are all cutting back and seeing declining profits.
It's beyond bizarre. It is the single most inappropriate ad I have ever seen, given the context. WTAF
The lady in the ad is a big supporters of assisted dying.
I don't care if she is Martian
The ad is crass, creepy. weird, repugnant and they put it in a Tube station on a Tube network where thousands attempt suicide every year
The ad is sensible, appropriate and restrained. You need to get the stick out of your arse, as does @Cyclefree with her remarkably homicidal impression of it.
The fact that people have no safe, legal and humane clinical way to end their lives so are forced to do so via the Tube and other inhumane methods that have wretched consequences to others is what is truly repugnant.
Just had a text from EDF confirming that as we had reduced our peak energy use we have free electricity from 8.00am to 8.00pm next Sunday plus free electricity on Christmas day between 8.00am and 4.00pm
Seems Sundays are becoming laundry days !!!!!!
And when that nice Mr Miliband gets his way, that sort of thing will happen more often. It's not going to need unimaginably more turbines and panels to get fairly regular times when production exceeds demand. And then consumption patterns will adapt to fit, because why wouldn't you?
(Same as the old Economy 7 system; that worked because turning coal power stations up and down was a massive pain in the neck.)
Spot price of electricity was negative for a few hours last night. Grid would have paid you to store some of it.
(I'm interested by the floor in gas generation of about 4GW, even when we have excess wind and are exporting to Europe. Anyone know why? I imagine it's something simple like it's difficult to fully shut down a gas power station)
Local pricing would sort that very quickly. More quickly than we can fully upgrade the grid.
Are you suggesting it's because there aren't the power cables too take the wind energy to the places that the 4GW of gas is supplying electricity?
It’s not as simple as that. But there’s no capacity to present the excess power to areas where industrial development might rapidly take it up - and no local pricing to incentivise that development where it’s now available.
Regional pricing is a cause the LibDems should take up.
It’s economically efficient, and would benefit the regions in particular. It would be a big boost for renewables.
Statist Labour probably won’t like it. Nor will the foreign owners of the monopoly Grid. It’s probably against the centralising tendency of the Tories, too. Though the dilution of the grid monopoly ought to appeal to their market and pro-business instincts.
Davey was a pretty good energy minister. He really ought to get it.
The Hyundai plant is in the Georgia district of US House Representative Buddy Carter, one of the 18 House Republicans who wrote a letter against repealing the IRA's clean energy tax credits. He's also chair of the Environment, Manufacturing and Critical Materials Subcommittee. https://x.com/kyleichan/status/1861153663739175093
Meanwhile the big German carmakers are all cutting back and seeing declining profits.
Hyundai Kia have come a long way over the past 10 or so years. If I remember correctly they hired a number of top Germans.
The Hyundai plant is in the Georgia district of US House Representative Buddy Carter, one of the 18 House Republicans who wrote a letter against repealing the IRA's clean energy tax credits. He's also chair of the Environment, Manufacturing and Critical Materials Subcommittee. https://x.com/kyleichan/status/1861153663739175093
Obviously no problems with bats....
It’s a lesson in what’s possible.
Reforming the planning aspects would cost us nothing.
The Hyundai plant is in the Georgia district of US House Representative Buddy Carter, one of the 18 House Republicans who wrote a letter against repealing the IRA's clean energy tax credits. He's also chair of the Environment, Manufacturing and Critical Materials Subcommittee. https://x.com/kyleichan/status/1861153663739175093
Meanwhile the big German carmakers are all cutting back and seeing declining profits.
How long before American middle ground Trump 2.0 voters are looking back wistfully at the Biden years and wondering what the actual fuck they have done?
It's beyond bizarre. It is the single most inappropriate ad I have ever seen, given the context. WTAF
The lady in the ad is a big supporters of assisted dying.
I don't care if she is Martian
The ad is crass, creepy. weird, repugnant and they put it in a Tube station on a Tube network where thousands attempt suicide every year
The ad is sensible, appropriate and restrained. You need to get the stick out of your arse, as does @Cyclefree with her remarkably homicidal impression of it.
The fact that people have no safe, legal and humane clinical way to end their lives so are forced to do so via the Tube and other inhumane methods that have wretched consequences to others is what is truly repugnant.
You have no fucking idea what you are talking about. None. If I shared the reasons for my upset, some here might understand. But not you. You have no empathy. None.
It's beyond bizarre. It is the single most inappropriate ad I have ever seen, given the context. WTAF
The lady in the ad is a big supporters of assisted dying.
I don't care if she is Martian
The ad is crass, creepy. weird, repugnant and they put it in a Tube station on a Tube network where thousands attempt suicide every year
The ad is sensible, appropriate and restrained. You need to get the stick out of your arse, as does @Cyclefree with her remarkably homicidal impression of it.
The fact that people have no safe, legal and humane clinical way to end their lives so are forced to do so via the Tube and other inhumane methods that have wretched consequences to others is what is truly repugnant.
You have no fucking idea what you are talking about. None. If I shared the reasons for my upset, some here might understand. But not you. You have no empathy. None.
GTF. Really. I don't care if I get banned.
If the woman had been sitting in a chair gently smiling would you have been so upset? Or in a hospital bed? Is it the act itself, or the portrayal of her as happy (that she will have control)?
This is an emotive issue, and it’s a bad choice been made, but a sense of perspective is needed perhaps.
It's beyond bizarre. It is the single most inappropriate ad I have ever seen, given the context. WTAF
The lady in the ad is a big supporters of assisted dying.
I don't care if she is Martian
The ad is crass, creepy. weird, repugnant and they put it in a Tube station on a Tube network where thousands attempt suicide every year
The ad is sensible, appropriate and restrained. You need to get the stick out of your arse, as does @Cyclefree with her remarkably homicidal impression of it.
The fact that people have no safe, legal and humane clinical way to end their lives so are forced to do so via the Tube and other inhumane methods that have wretched consequences to others is what is truly repugnant.
You have no fucking idea what you are talking about. None. If I shared the reasons for my upset, some here might understand. But not you. You have no empathy. None.
GTF. Really. I don't care if I get banned.
I have plenty of empathy. You don't know me.
I've lost friends to suicide. It is horrific.
I led a seminar earlier today on mental health and suicide prevention.
The fact you have said there's no need for legalised assisted dying because suicide is already legal I found deeply offensive.
Assisted dying is not suicide. They are totally different things. Your continued attempts to conflate the two shows you are the one lacking in empathy.
It's beyond bizarre. It is the single most inappropriate ad I have ever seen, given the context. WTAF
The lady in the ad is a big supporters of assisted dying.
I don't care if she is Martian
The ad is crass, creepy. weird, repugnant and they put it in a Tube station on a Tube network where thousands attempt suicide every year
The ad is sensible, appropriate and restrained. You need to get the stick out of your arse, as does Cyclefree with her remarkably homicidal impression of it.
The fact that people have no safe, legal and humane clinical way to end their lives so are forced to do so via the Tube and other inhumane methods that have wretched consequences to others is what is truly repugnant.
I respectfully disagree. And I don't really see how it makes a good point to call objections to the ad as having a stick up one's arse, even if you do think it is a good ad. Could you not have left that sentence out entirely, thus not making it personal? I'd be interested in arguments that it was, in fact, restrained, but rather than develop that point you went instead with mocking people who object as, I guess, being too prim and uptight?
It's beyond bizarre. It is the single most inappropriate ad I have ever seen, given the context. WTAF
The lady in the ad is a big supporters of assisted dying.
I don't care if she is Martian
The ad is crass, creepy. weird, repugnant and they put it in a Tube station on a Tube network where thousands attempt suicide every year
The ad is sensible, appropriate and restrained. You need to get the stick out of your arse, as does Cyclefree with her remarkably homicidal impression of it.
The fact that people have no safe, legal and humane clinical way to end their lives so are forced to do so via the Tube and other inhumane methods that have wretched consequences to others is what is truly repugnant.
I respectfully disagree. And I don't really see how it makes a good point to call objections to the ad as having a stick up one's arse, even if you do think it is a good ad. Could you not have left that sentence out entirely, thus not making it personal?
You're right, I reacted badly and I apologise.
I was triggered by remarks like "I'd be very inclined to push them onto the line into the path of an oncoming train" and reacted badly, I'm sorry.
Ministers will announce millions in extra funding for lawyers to represent asylum seekers to help clear a large backlog of appeals that is blocking efforts to move migrants out of hotels, The Times can reveal. A major shortage of lawyers is causing lengthy delays to the outcome of asylum appeals.
Underfunding the asylum system usually costs more than it saves.
Just the justice system generally really.
(Someone might suggest 'under' funding anything by definition costs more than it saves or it would not be underfunding, but I don't think it applies to everything)
It's beyond bizarre. It is the single most inappropriate ad I have ever seen, given the context. WTAF
The lady in the ad is a big supporters of assisted dying.
I don't care if she is Martian
The ad is crass, creepy. weird, repugnant and they put it in a Tube station on a Tube network where thousands attempt suicide every year
The ad is sensible, appropriate and restrained. You need to get the stick out of your arse, as does Cyclefree with her remarkably homicidal impression of it.
The fact that people have no safe, legal and humane clinical way to end their lives so are forced to do so via the Tube and other inhumane methods that have wretched consequences to others is what is truly repugnant.
I respectfully disagree. And I don't really see how it makes a good point to call objections to the ad as having a stick up one's arse, even if you do think it is a good ad. Could you not have left that sentence out entirely, thus not making it personal?
You're right, I reacted badly and I apologise.
I was triggered by remarks like "I'd be very inclined to push them onto the line into the path of an oncoming train" and reacted badly, I'm sorry.
Thank you, and for what it's worth I agree even righteous passion (in the eye of the beholder) crosses lines when it invokes deaths.
"At least he didn’t say Die Hard, a film released in July 1988, was a Christmas film"
One of the quintissential Christmas films, Holiday Inn, the film that gave us the song 'White Christmas' Was released in July 1942.
Christmas in Connecticut was released in June 1945 Miracle on 34th Street was released in June 1947.
Date of release has no bearing on whether a film is Christmas film or not.
And a reminder that whilst the general public (including TSE) may be ignorant about what constitutes a Christmas film, those in the know - such as the experts at Empire and Rotten Tomatoes - definitely class Die Hard as a Christmas film.
Any astrononers in? There's a remarkably bright light in the south eastern sky, about 45 degrees abive the horizon. I've just installed an app which suggests its either Aldebaran or Jupiter. Should Jupiter be this bright?
Jupiter. In a couple of hours, Mars will also be visible.
It's out now!
Presumabky yours are London visibility times? Amazing it should be so different. Is Jupiter normally this bright?
I am really enjoying this. Though also wishing right noe I lived sonewhere with darker skies.
Jupiter can be very bright, the fourth brightest natural object in the sky after the sun, the moon and Venus. It may possibly be beaten by occasional artificial objects such as ISS though, as well as transient natural phenomena like meteors.
I did not know that. I assumed its far-awayness would outweigh its bigness.
This is reminding me of Randall Monroe's 'Thing Explainer', the book about describing complex things using only the 1000 most commonly used words in the English language.
It's beyond bizarre. It is the single most inappropriate ad I have ever seen, given the context. WTAF
The lady in the ad is a big supporters of assisted dying.
I don't care if she is Martian
The ad is crass, creepy. weird, repugnant and they put it in a Tube station on a Tube network where thousands attempt suicide every year
The ad is sensible, appropriate and restrained. You need to get the stick out of your arse, as does @Cyclefree with her remarkably homicidal impression of it.
The fact that people have no safe, legal and humane clinical way to end their lives so are forced to do so via the Tube and other inhumane methods that have wretched consequences to others is what is truly repugnant.
You have no fucking idea what you are talking about. None. If I shared the reasons for my upset, some here might understand. But not you. You have no empathy. None.
GTF. Really. I don't care if I get banned.
I’m with Leon and Cyclefree on this. When TSE posted the polling in support of Assisted Suicide, I felt glad I live in a parliamentary democracy, and important decisions like this are never given to the clueless masses.
It’s clear Starmer’s cabinet are virtually all against it, and operating an orchestrated campaign to kill the bill off, thank goodness.
Ministers will announce millions in extra funding for lawyers to represent asylum seekers to help clear a large backlog of appeals that is blocking efforts to move migrants out of hotels, The Times can reveal. A major shortage of lawyers is causing lengthy delays to the outcome of asylum appeals.
Underfunding the asylum system usually costs more than it saves.
Just the justice system generally really.
(Someone might suggest 'under' funding anything by definition costs more than it saves or it would not be underfunding, but I don't think it applies to everything)
There comes a point, though, where underfunding leads to a partial or complete breakdown of a service, which has consequences and costs beyond its immediate remit.
The justice system reached that point some time back.
"At least he didn’t say Die Hard, a film released in July 1988, was a Christmas film"
One of the quintissential Christmas films, Holiday Inn, the film that gave us the song 'White Christmas' Was released in July 1942.
Christmas in Connecticut was released in June 1945 Miracle on 34th Street was released in June 1947.
Date of release has no bearing on whether a film is Christmas film or not.
And a reminder that whilst the general public (including TSE) may be ignorant about what constitutes a Christmas film, those in the know - such as the experts at Empire and Rotten Tomatoes - definitely class Die Hard as a Christmas film.
For me a true 'Christmas' film needs to have a central theme which requires the specific holiday, or at least could not easily be swapped out for any other one*. Despite people's insistence that Die Hard does actually thematically (rather than superficially) invoke Christmas that way, I've never bought that as a serious argument, just a comedic argument that can be fun to have. Like people getting upset about Pineapple on Pizza obviously no one really cares, that's why it can be good to pretend to care. Die Hard is now a Christmas film purely because people have been faux-arguing about it so long that it has become one, not because you couldn't edit it to be set at Thanksgiving and have basically the same movie, as you could.
*Very few films would actually make the cut if that standard was applied however.
Comments
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/ukraine-and-soviet-nuclear-history
https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1861154258411720940?t=jxQWkIBM9iG3xwPAEs4s3w&s=19
But the thing I notice is that despite Reform's intervention from the right splitting the vote, Labour while winning, both did very badly in % terms and much worse than the polling said. The conclusion has to be that they could easily have lost, just as in 1992.
Sadly the Ming vase strategy was essential. Yes, it limits their options. But there is no such thing as a popular tax rise, and no-one has really suggested (eg CBI today) what they should have done instead.
However, their useless presentation, PR, comms, unforced errors and apparent lack of direction are 100% Labour's fault.
Another Labour majority looks the least likely outcome
But they would have had to create a nuclear weapons program from scratch - the weapons they "gave away" were unmaintainable. And they had no money at the time. Feeding people was a problem, let alone weapons.
An advanced multistage warhead is a very elaborate sculpture in physics. To reverse engineer it, is according to those who have built them, is something close to impractical. The nuances in the design and manufacturer that make it easier to build your own design from scratch - unless you had a design and engineering team fluent in building and maintaining advanced multistagers.
But our current electricity market is rubbish. And disadvantages everyone, overall.
I think the case was handled well, as clearly there should be an inquiry when a doctor deliberately kills a patient. The sentance was suspended and Dr Cox continued to work afterwards. I think the authorities turning a blind eye would have been a dangerous precedent.
But there’s no capacity to present the excess power to areas where industrial development might rapidly take it up - and no local pricing to incentivise that development where it’s now available.
Again, the mere *threat* of having weapons can be a deterrence. Even if you do not have them.
I would also point out that Pakistan (and NK!) managed to make weapons without bothering too much about the state of the population. And they also had to design and build delivery systems, which can be more expensive than the weapons themselves to develop (witness Manhattan Project cost versus the much more expensive B-29 project. And he sad thing is, in the long run it may have been better if Ukraine had done that. It may have saved many Ukrainian lives.
I'm not entirely sure but it may have been that case that made me in favour of assisted dying. Certainly I have been for several decades.
I fear the vote will be lost at end of this week thanks to Starmer making a horlicks of it all and the usual stupid arguments about tens of thousands of grans being coerced into death every few weeks. Ridiculous.
It's official: Judge Chutkan GRANTS the prosecution's motion to dismiss Trump's federal election subversion case in Washington, D.C.
https://x.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1861163334067732975
Unlike Burns night in January which never moves. I stay at home with my ear plugs in even though I like haggis.
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the longest-serving Senate leader, is stepping down from his leadership post in January, a move he has told colleagues has left him feeling “liberated.” McConnell has telegraphed that he plans to prioritize two issues that just happen to be subjects on which he disagrees strongly with Trump: foreign policy and the Senate’s institutional independence.
NY Times
When the Ukrainians gave up nukes, they were existing on foreign aid. Russia was in collapse as well. No one was thinking of war. Getting rid of nukes in return for more foreign aid was an obvious move - they couldn’t maintain them, had no one to point them at….
After 9/11, a US Airforce General was asked why they didn’t have interceptors in the air. He pointed out, that given that the only intercontinental bombers the Russians had left were a couple of Blackjacks and prop driven Badgers, there was no bomber threat. They all stayed in bases out of range of the US (weather). To stage a strike would require moving them north first. So the US would literally have days of notice.
Given that, he said, imagine asking for money for a standing air patrol to shoot down civilian airliners off course. On 9/10 he would have been dismissed from the Air Force as insane.
Ivory Coast were bowled out for just 7 to lose to Nigeria by 264 runs in their T20 World Cup qualifier.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/cjw05n1185jo
Top score 4 - they collapsed from 4-0 to 7 all out.
That's a proper collapse unlike the namby pamby wishy washy snowflake cancel culture England collapses.
https://www.celticconnections.com/
I'd quite like something mid Jan to look forward to. Let's have a bank holiday about the 18th with some sort of concocted tradition - mud, drink, cold weather, meat, some sort of seasonal cake. Light. Fellowship. You know the sort of thing.
By pancake day the worst of winter is really over.
And the sheer number of adverts telling me to stop betting - tells me that the current scheme isn't working and the betting firms know as much.ll
Just as well I'm not in London.
Seems a bit much for bacon eggs and hostages
Remarkably little coverage of the ongoing incursion into our air space.
I'd do a lot more cross cultural stuff im general if I ran DCMS. When friends and colleagues come from down South to Scotland they can't believe that such a place exists within the UK.
It's difficult to escape the view that we have a completely useless political class - not just useless at government, but even at short-term politics. I think NOTA, if it were offered on our ballot papers would probably get a landslide next time.
I am really enjoying this. Though also wishing right noe I lived sonewhere with darker skies.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/government-pledges-millions-in-legal-aid-to-clear-asylum-backlog-cdlmlvqff
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candlemas
Plus, it's, I think, a quarter day. Slap in a bank holiday, concoct a few feel good traditions involving alcohol and meat and just enough fresh air and some cadles, natch,and we're good to go.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3exQLmJBoAY
Adil Rashid, Jonny Bairstow and Ben Duckett were among the England players to go unsold, while Australia batters Steve Smith and David Warner also failed to secure a deal.
Rashid in particular seems an odd choice not for somebody to buy. Heart bleeds for Cheaty McCeaty face not getting a deal after retiring from international cricket to do this.
It's pretty cool to watch a $7.6 billion, 300,000 vehicle capacity EV plant get built in less than 2 years.
This one isn't in China. It's in Georgia, USA.
https://x.com/kyleichan/status/1861144052223050148
And this guy.
The Hyundai plant is in the Georgia district of US House Representative Buddy Carter, one of the 18 House Republicans who wrote a letter against repealing the IRA's clean energy tax credits. He's also chair of the Environment, Manufacturing and Critical Materials Subcommittee.
https://x.com/kyleichan/status/1861153663739175093
If this clears the backlog what is the problem?
The fact that people have no safe, legal and humane clinical way to end their lives so are forced to do so via the Tube and other inhumane methods that have wretched consequences to others is what is truly repugnant.
It’s economically efficient, and would benefit the regions in particular.
It would be a big boost for renewables.
Statist Labour probably won’t like it. Nor will the foreign owners of the monopoly Grid.
It’s probably against the centralising tendency of the Tories, too. Though the dilution of the grid monopoly ought to appeal to their market and pro-business instincts.
Davey was a pretty good energy minister. He really ought to get it.
Reforming the planning aspects would cost us nothing.
GTF. Really. I don't care if I get banned.
This is an emotive issue, and it’s a bad choice been made, but a sense of perspective is needed perhaps.
I've lost friends to suicide. It is horrific.
I led a seminar earlier today on mental health and suicide prevention.
The fact you have said there's no need for legalised assisted dying because suicide is already legal I found deeply offensive.
Assisted dying is not suicide. They are totally different things. Your continued attempts to conflate the two shows you are the one lacking in empathy.
I was triggered by remarks like "I'd be very inclined to push them onto the line into the path of an oncoming train" and reacted badly, I'm sorry.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/matt-cartoons-november-2024/
(Someone might suggest 'under' funding anything by definition costs more than it saves or it would not be underfunding, but I don't think it applies to everything)
"At least he didn’t say Die Hard, a film released in July 1988, was a Christmas film"
One of the quintissential Christmas films, Holiday Inn, the film that gave us the song 'White Christmas' Was released in July 1942.
Christmas in Connecticut was released in June 1945
Miracle on 34th Street was released in June 1947.
Date of release has no bearing on whether a film is Christmas film or not.
And a reminder that whilst the general public (including TSE) may be ignorant about what constitutes a Christmas film, those in the know - such as the experts at Empire and Rotten Tomatoes - definitely class Die Hard as a Christmas film.
California’s progressive epicenter just went YIMBY
Adena Ishii’s rise to become Berkeley’s new mayor marks a decisive shift for the city and its politics
https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/berkeley-adena-ishii-politics-progressive-19936980.php
The right wing caricature of California will need rewriting in a couple of years time, I suspect.
At a time when the Trump administration is likely to be facing some headwinds.
It’s clear Starmer’s cabinet are virtually all against it, and operating an orchestrated campaign to kill the bill off, thank goodness.
The justice system reached that point some time back.
*Very few films would actually make the cut if that standard was applied however.
Neil Henderson
@hendopolis
·
1h
I: Public spending cuts on the way from 2026 #TomorrowsPapersToday
https://x.com/hendopolis/status/1861168130321498433