Howdy, Stranger!

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

Braverman set to defect to Reform (no, not that one, yet) – politicalbetting.com

12346

Comments

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,805
    edited December 8
    Since we're on the Old Testament, I'm going to call out Raye's excellent Genesis, Pt. III, which I heard for the first time tonight when she performed on Strictly results show (Mrs P's an avid fan of Strictly, is my excuse).

    Amazing song, brilliant lyrics.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,895

    Since I've had my heating on again, I haven't turned the thermostat higher than 18⁰C

    It's reached 18 once; I turn it down to 12 when I go to work and 15 when I go to bed

    I did the same before it all got more expensive

    What temperatures do you do?

    I used to have my thermostat set to 17C, and turn it down overnight. Then we left it on 17C, but used the timer on the boiler to only have it come on for a few periods during the day - this was because our thermostat was rubbish, and the system wouldn't hold our home at a constant temperature anyway, it would have to get quite cold before clicking on and then it would stay on until it was too warm.

    Then I measured the temperature by the thermostat with a proper thermometer, and found that when the thermostat was set to 17C, it actually turned the heating on when it fell below 20C.

    Now I don't believe anyone's thermostat stories unless they've independently measured the temperature with a properly calibrated thermometer.
    What is it with people taking pride in their cold houses?

    Madness - in this day and age a warm home should be considered a fundamental right.
    As my story makes clear, my house wasn't as cold as I thought it was. But, also, we were renting at the time, and so we couldn't do anything about the uninsulated bay window or the leaky double-glazing, that made heating the place more expensive then it should have been. We were lucky that the old couple living below us received a winter fuel allowance, and so could afford to keep their home toasty warm, which provided heat to us above them.

    And, as well as that, I'm a knitter. I like being cold enough to wear the jumpers I have knit myself, or the socks likewise. Now that I'm (hopefully temporarily) in a house that I don't set the temperature of, I'm finding it a bit weird that it's so hot that I'm in shorts and a t-shirt and feeling too hot, when we're forecast a frost overnight.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,945
    Saddam Hussein 2003
    Gaddafi 2011
    Assad 2024
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,894

    I am very glad to see Assad gone. But the chances Syria gets better? Very low.

    Then why are you very glad to see him gone? This is the thing I don't get. Nobody here is inviting Assad to a family barbeque or asking him if he wants to be godfather to their kids. It just so happens that those of us who engage our brain on these issues and don't see it as our job to police 'PB morale' think he is probably less wicked and has more upsides than the alternatives. Thus, his unseatment in favour of an ISIS-adjacent warlord (or several) is not something to be 'very glad about'.
    The Syrian people clearly think that change is a better option. Let's hope that those with the guns find a way to represent the people of Syria's wishes.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,053

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

    Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

    If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

    Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation
    You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

    You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.
    In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state
    You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

    Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

    That is your mistake.
    Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...
    You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.
    Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

    In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is
    Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

    You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

    I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.
    You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

    For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

    Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

    The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

    "whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

    I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument. ;)

    If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

    So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…
    Indeed not.
    He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

    Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
    I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.
    Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews
    The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.
    Freed the Jews from slavery though.

    The God of the Old Testament was more Netantayahu than the rather more hippy God and Christ of the New
    Still your God though, up to all that mischief.

    Oh, and then there's the time he drowned everyone except for one family who were tipped off to build a boat. But they had to go and fetch a pair of kangaroos, snow leopards, sloths and every other land animal first, as the rest of their species were all drowned too.

    What an absolute psycho. Makes all the other gods look like woke snowflakes.
    Saved the righteous and each species of animal
    And thus spake Sunil unto his PB Disciples: "Know ye that the Lord God did NOT marry the mother of His only begotten son."
    And the lord god* said to Sunil "Know that ye have sinned, and ye shall be moderated until ye repenteth"

    OK, that was the Rail Forum moderators, not the lord god, but near enough.
    I discovered a fascinating and heretical fact about the Deltics the other day. A scandalous bit of trivia.

    Which was so scandalous I've forgotten the details of it... :)

    (I was at the Nene Valley Railway for a santa special. Bahamas was on; but I didn't get to travel behind it. I asked my son what it was: "Oh, it was a big green engine." He is not turning out to be a railway enthusiast...)
    Henry?
  • Andy_JS said:

    Saddam Hussein 2003
    Gaddafi 2011
    Assad 2024

    Khamenei 2025?
    Putin 2025?

    We can hope.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,433

    I am very glad to see Assad gone. But the chances Syria gets better? Very low.

    Then why are you very glad to see him gone? This is the thing I don't get. Nobody here is inviting Assad to a family barbeque or asking him if he wants to be godfather to their kids. It just so happens that those of us who engage our brain on these issues and don't see it as our job to police 'PB morale' think he is probably less wicked and has more upsides than the alternatives. Thus, his unseatment in favour of an ISIS-adjacent warlord (or several) is not something to be 'very glad about'.
    The problem is, it is easy for an evil to tell people that its replacement might be more evil. "If you get rid of me," the evil says, "there will be more evil." Believing that is a good way for evil to prosper.

    But the progress of society has showed the opposite happens as a whole: when evil goes, it is often replaced by something that, if not good, is slightly less evil. Which is why we are where we are today as a society. That progress is slow, and rocky, but it is progress.

    Many in Syria will be tired of the fighting, and want prosperity.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,805
    edited December 8

    Since I've had my heating on again, I haven't turned the thermostat higher than 18⁰C

    It's reached 18 once; I turn it down to 12 when I go to work and 15 when I go to bed

    I did the same before it all got more expensive

    What temperatures do you do?

    I used to have my thermostat set to 17C, and turn it down overnight. Then we left it on 17C, but used the timer on the boiler to only have it come on for a few periods during the day - this was because our thermostat was rubbish, and the system wouldn't hold our home at a constant temperature anyway, it would have to get quite cold before clicking on and then it would stay on until it was too warm.

    Then I measured the temperature by the thermostat with a proper thermometer, and found that when the thermostat was set to 17C, it actually turned the heating on when it fell below 20C.

    Now I don't believe anyone's thermostat stories unless they've independently measured the temperature with a properly calibrated thermometer.
    What is it with people taking pride in their cold houses?

    Madness - in this day and age a warm home should be considered a fundamental right.
    As my story makes clear, my house wasn't as cold as I thought it was. But, also, we were renting at the time, and so we couldn't do anything about the uninsulated bay window or the leaky double-glazing, that made heating the place more expensive then it should have been. We were lucky that the old couple living below us received a winter fuel allowance, and so could afford to keep their home toasty warm, which provided heat to us above them.

    And, as well as that, I'm a knitter. I like being cold enough to wear the jumpers I have knit myself, or the socks likewise. Now that I'm (hopefully temporarily) in a house that I don't set the temperature of, I'm finding it a bit weird that it's so hot that I'm in shorts and a t-shirt and feeling too hot, when we're forecast a frost overnight.
    Fair point. We're currently renting an old cottage, which is as struggle to keep warm. Some mould forming on the window frames and ceiling in the bathroom - not good.

    The house we are building will be super-insulated - every new house should be.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

    Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

    If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

    Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation
    You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

    You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.
    In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state
    You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

    Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

    That is your mistake.
    Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...
    You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.
    Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

    In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is
    Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

    You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

    I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.
    You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

    For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

    Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

    The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

    "whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

    I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument. ;)

    If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

    So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right. And it gives them no right to force their beliefs on others. which is the way religions have kept check on societies in the past, and which is increasingly hard in a modern society. Which is why Latin was used for bibles in the Middle Ages - control.

    HYUFD sees women as second-class citizens, who should not work and be baby-bearers. In that attitude, he is not so far away from the Muslim fanatics he hates. He is as much a religious bigot as they are, kept in check by social mores in this country.

    I am married to someone raised as a Muslim. As such, I think I 'understand' Islam better than an out-and-out hater such as you. It has many attractive aspects; but as with all religions, the adherents turn what should be good into something that can be very, very bad. Like communism it is good in theory. In practice, it is terrible.
    What a load of crap. Firstly, I am not 'forcing' my religious beliefs on you. Heretics like you are not burnt at the stake any longer for denying the firm belief in God and Christ and the monarch being supreme governor of our church (or the Pope if it was Mary Tudor). Nor are you fined for not attending your local C of E Parish church every Sunday as you would have been in the 16th and most of the 17th centuries.

    I never said women should never work, however there is no doubt that more women in full time work at peak fertility rate in their 20s and 30s and motherhood age has lowered our birthrate to below replacement level.

    "Heretics like you"

    Enough said.

    "I never said women should never work, however there is no doubt that more women in full time work at peak fertility rate in their 20s and 30s and motherhood age has lowered our birthrate to below replacement level."

    You posited banning them from working between those ages. Setting that aside, your belief that the falling fertility rate is all women's fault infests your posts like lice; you routinely fail to acknowledge that men have a role as well. Despite your so-called 'family' stance. You are little different from ISIS/L.
    Men need their role of being largely the breadwinners and traditional fathers and loyal to their wives too no doubt.

    However most men have not become house husbands and fathers over the past 50 years, it is more wives and single women who have become full time workers. Not necessarily always by choice, government should do more to support stay at home mothers or mothers wishing only to work part time.

    If I was ISIL I would be advocating death for homosexuals and death for non Muslims, which would include me as much as you
    "Men need their role of being largely the breadwinners and traditional fathers and loyal to their wives too no doubt."

    You are positively Victorian. Why do men 'need' that role?

    What is a 'traditional' father? Someone who demands dinner on the table, takes their wives whenever they want, and canes their kids?

    As for my ISIS/L comment: you show f-all respect for other religion and faiths.
    Never mind respect for other religion and faiths, ISIL believe all non Sunni Muslims who refuse to convert to becoming Sunni Muslims must be killed whether of faith or not
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,053

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

    Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

    If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

    Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation
    You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

    You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.
    In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state
    You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

    Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

    That is your mistake.
    Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...
    You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.
    Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

    In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is
    Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

    You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

    I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.
    You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

    For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

    Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

    The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

    "whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

    I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument. ;)

    If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

    So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…
    Indeed not.
    He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

    Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
    I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.
    Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews
    The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.
    I think that was Herod? God was the one who killed the entire world apart from the Ark (and marine life, presumably).

    However, gods should not be judged by human standards any more than sea clams or stag beetles should. The idea that gods should be 'nice', as if they're some kind of supernatural welfare state, flies in the face of the great majority of history. The fact that the very phrase 'act of god', to mean some disruptive, violent, deadly event should be clue enough ...
    Killing of the first born was the final plague of egypt
    Ah, yes. I forgot that one. Fair.

    Anyway, gods do what gods do, for their pleasure, amusement, chastisement or who knows what. They are not accountable to man's laws. Or indeed, gods laws for man.
    "God is love" is a bit of a stretch, when you look at his track record.

    More like a gangster boss who'll shoot you dead if you fart in the wrong direction.
    So, Christians follow a mass murderer who refused to marry the mother of his child. And they have the gall to lecture others on ethics? What a two faced bunch of fools!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,144

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

    Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

    If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

    Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation
    You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

    You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.
    In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state
    You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

    Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

    That is your mistake.
    Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...
    You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.
    Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

    In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is
    Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

    You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

    I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.
    You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

    For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

    Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

    The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

    "whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

    I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument. ;)

    If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

    So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…
    Indeed not.
    He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

    Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
    I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.
    Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews
    The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.
    Freed the Jews from slavery though.

    The God of the Old Testament was more Netantayahu than the rather more hippy God and Christ of the New
    Is that REALLY a recommendation? Do you think that encourages ‘belief’.
    Writing as a relatively recent convert to atheism.
    I rather suspect HY’s evangelism runs along the same path as his canvassing technique, designed not to win converts but to root out and repulse those half-believers of insufficient faith…
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    Nigelb said:

    𝐔.𝐒. 𝐂𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐬 𝐃𝐨𝐳𝐞𝐧𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐤𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐄𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐈𝐒𝐈𝐒 𝐂𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐂𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐒𝐲𝐫𝐢𝐚

    U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) forces conducted dozens of precision airstrikes targeting known ISIS camps and operatives in central Syria, Dec. 8.

    The strikes against the ISIS leaders, operatives, and camps were conducted as part of the ongoing mission to disrupt, degrade, and defeat ISIS, in order to prevent the terrorist group from conducting external operations and to ensure that ISIS does not seek to take advantage of the current situation to reconstitute in central Syria.

    The operation struck over 75 targets using multiple U.S. Air Force assets, including B-52s, F-15s, and A-10s. ..

    https://x.com/CENTCOM/status/1865841718366450013

    Go, America. Smite them without mercy
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

    Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

    If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

    Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation
    You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

    You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.
    In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state
    You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

    Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

    That is your mistake.
    Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...
    You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.
    Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

    In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is
    Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

    You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

    I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.
    You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

    For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

    Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

    The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

    "whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

    I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument. ;)

    If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

    So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…
    Indeed not.
    He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

    Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
    I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.
    Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews
    The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.
    I think that was Herod? God was the one who killed the entire world apart from the Ark (and marine life, presumably).

    However, gods should not be judged by human standards any more than sea clams or stag beetles should. The idea that gods should be 'nice', as if they're some kind of supernatural welfare state, flies in the face of the great majority of history. The fact that the very phrase 'act of god', to mean some disruptive, violent, deadly event should be clue enough ...
    Killing of the first born was the final plague of egypt
    Ah, yes. I forgot that one. Fair.

    Anyway, gods do what gods do, for their pleasure, amusement, chastisement or who knows what. They are not accountable to man's laws. Or indeed, gods laws for man.
    "God is love" is a bit of a stretch, when you look at his track record.

    More like a gangster boss who'll shoot you dead if you fart in the wrong direction.
    So, Christians follow a mass murderer who refused to marry the mother of his child. And they have the gall to lecture others on ethics? What a two faced bunch of fools!
    Joseph and Mary were to bring up Jesus and trusted in God to support them to do so
  • Since I've had my heating on again, I haven't turned the thermostat higher than 18⁰C

    It's reached 18 once; I turn it down to 12 when I go to work and 15 when I go to bed

    I did the same before it all got more expensive

    What temperatures do you do?

    I used to have my thermostat set to 17C, and turn it down overnight. Then we left it on 17C, but used the timer on the boiler to only have it come on for a few periods during the day - this was because our thermostat was rubbish, and the system wouldn't hold our home at a constant temperature anyway, it would have to get quite cold before clicking on and then it would stay on until it was too warm.

    Then I measured the temperature by the thermostat with a proper thermometer, and found that when the thermostat was set to 17C, it actually turned the heating on when it fell below 20C.

    Now I don't believe anyone's thermostat stories unless they've independently measured the temperature with a properly calibrated thermometer.
    What is it with people taking pride in their cold houses?

    Madness - in this day and age a warm home should be considered a fundamental right.
    As my story makes clear, my house wasn't as cold as I thought it was. But, also, we were renting at the time, and so we couldn't do anything about the uninsulated bay window or the leaky double-glazing, that made heating the place more expensive then it should have been. We were lucky that the old couple living below us received a winter fuel allowance, and so could afford to keep their home toasty warm, which provided heat to us above them.

    And, as well as that, I'm a knitter. I like being cold enough to wear the jumpers I have knit myself, or the socks likewise. Now that I'm (hopefully temporarily) in a house that I don't set the temperature of, I'm finding it a bit weird that it's so hot that I'm in shorts and a t-shirt and feeling too hot, when we're forecast a frost overnight.
    Fair point. We're currently renting an old cottage, which is as struggle to keep warm. Some mould forming on the window frames and ceiling in the bathroom - not good.

    The house we are building will be super-insulated - every new house should be.
    We moved nearly 2 years ago from a rented accommodation to our own new build.

    Went from needing the heating on nearly 24/7 (and even then still getting damp and mould in my children's room) to the heating turning on and turning itself off by thermostat a few minutes later.

    By owning our own new build we not only pay less than we did when we were paying a landlord's mortgage, but we are paying a fraction of the energy bills too.

    Everyone else should have the same option we have. Everyone who wants a new build like that should be able to get one, nobody should be forced to live in some damp-ridden squalor that a landlord wants to let out just because new build's might affect someone's view/property prices/other bullshit concerns.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,826
    edited December 8
    Leon said:

    Come on PB, our collective IQ must be 45,922

    We can solve this

    The USA is being swarmed by large numbers of CAR SIZED DRONES THAT NO ONE CAN UNDERSTAND

    They have now been filmed and witnessed by hundreds if not thousands of people. There are now quite clear images

    The USA - the USA! - seems at a loss. No one can explain them. I’m starting to wonder if this is connected with THE MASSIVE FUCKING OWL I saw, inexplicably, in the centre of Santa Cruz de Mompox - it would finally make sense

    So what are they?

    i see five explanations

    1. This is a mass hallucination (across the USA and in the UK?)
    2. This is American psy-ops to hide American super-tech
    3. This is the Russians or the Chinese
    4. This is some non state actor (criminal gangs? Elon Musk??) with amazing tech doing something we don’t understand
    5. This is of non human origin

    ..but I think you've been droning on far too long.....
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,112
    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

    Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

    If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

    Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation
    You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

    You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.
    In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state
    You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

    Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

    That is your mistake.
    Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...
    You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.
    Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

    In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is
    Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

    You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

    I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.
    You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

    For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

    Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

    The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

    "whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

    I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument. ;)

    If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

    So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…
    Indeed not.
    He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

    Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
    I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.
    Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews
    The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.
    I think that was Herod? God was the one who killed the entire world apart from the Ark (and marine life, presumably).

    However, gods should not be judged by human standards any more than sea clams or stag beetles should. The idea that gods should be 'nice', as if they're some kind of supernatural welfare state, flies in the face of the great majority of history. The fact that the very phrase 'act of god', to mean some disruptive, violent, deadly event should be clue enough ...
    Killing of the first born was the final plague of egypt
    Ah, yes. I forgot that one. Fair.

    Anyway, gods do what gods do, for their pleasure, amusement, chastisement or who knows what. They are not accountable to man's laws. Or indeed, gods laws for man.
    "God is love" is a bit of a stretch, when you look at his track record.

    More like a gangster boss who'll shoot you dead if you fart in the wrong direction.
    So, Christians follow a mass murderer who refused to marry the mother of his child. And they have the gall to lecture others on ethics? What a two faced bunch of fools!
    Joseph and Mary were to bring up Jesus and trusted in God to support them to do so
    The Lord God failed to marry the mother of His only begotten son.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    edited December 8
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

    Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

    If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

    Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation
    You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

    You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.
    In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state
    You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

    Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

    That is your mistake.
    Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...
    You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.
    Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

    In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is
    Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

    You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

    I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.
    You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

    For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

    Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

    The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

    "whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

    I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument. ;)

    If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

    So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…
    Indeed not.
    He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

    Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
    I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.
    Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews
    The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.
    Freed the Jews from slavery though.

    The God of the Old Testament was more Netantayahu than the rather more hippy God and Christ of the New
    Is that REALLY a recommendation? Do you think that encourages ‘belief’.
    Writing as a relatively recent convert to atheism.
    I rather suspect HY’s evangelism runs along the same path as his canvassing technique, designed not to win converts but to root out and repulse those half-believers of insufficient faith…
    If it was that I would certainly not be in the often ultra wet Church of England, the Liberal Democrats of 21st century religion
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,895

    Andy_JS said:

    Saddam Hussein 2003
    Gaddafi 2011
    Assad 2024

    Khamenei 2025?
    Putin 2025?

    We can hope.
    It's been striking how unwilling the Syrian Army were to fight for Assad since the advance on Aleppo began. There was some fighting around Hama, in which quite a few senior Syrian officers were killed, but remarkably little overall.

    This is in marked contrast to the willingness of the Russian army to keep on fighting, for more than 1,000 days now, despite the staggeringly high level of casualties they are suffering. I dearly hope that this will flip soon, and the Russian army will lose the will to fight, but it's one of Putin's successes that he's sustained the support for the war effort within the army.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,161

    I am very glad to see Assad gone. But the chances Syria gets better? Very low.

    Then why are you very glad to see him gone? This is the thing I don't get. Nobody here is inviting Assad to a family barbeque or asking him if he wants to be godfather to their kids. It just so happens that those of us who engage our brain on these issues and don't see it as our job to police 'PB morale' think he is probably less wicked and has more upsides than the alternatives. Thus, his unseatment in favour of an ISIS-adjacent warlord (or several) is not something to be 'very glad about'.
    The problem is, it is easy for an evil to tell people that its replacement might be more evil. "If you get rid of me," the evil says, "there will be more evil." Believing that is a good way for evil to prosper.

    But the progress of society has showed the opposite happens as a whole: when evil goes, it is often replaced by something that, if not good, is slightly less evil. Which is why we are where we are today as a society. That progress is slow, and rocky, but it is progress.

    Many in Syria will be tired of the fighting, and want prosperity.
    It doesn't matter what many in Syria want. It is the nutters with the heavy weapons who'll decide what they get.
  • @Foxy Hi ya, medical question if I may.

    For a week I've had a sore throat, temperature that comes and goes, trouble sleeping (night sweats) and loss of appetite. But I've been able to manage the symptoms with ibuprofen and carry on as normal.

    Just wondered if you might know how long I might expect to need to manage it, if you can't say that's fine. Thanks!
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,433

    I am very glad to see Assad gone. But the chances Syria gets better? Very low.

    Then why are you very glad to see him gone? This is the thing I don't get. Nobody here is inviting Assad to a family barbeque or asking him if he wants to be godfather to their kids. It just so happens that those of us who engage our brain on these issues and don't see it as our job to police 'PB morale' think he is probably less wicked and has more upsides than the alternatives. Thus, his unseatment in favour of an ISIS-adjacent warlord (or several) is not something to be 'very glad about'.
    The problem is, it is easy for an evil to tell people that its replacement might be more evil. "If you get rid of me," the evil says, "there will be more evil." Believing that is a good way for evil to prosper.

    But the progress of society has showed the opposite happens as a whole: when evil goes, it is often replaced by something that, if not good, is slightly less evil. Which is why we are where we are today as a society. That progress is slow, and rocky, but it is progress.

    Many in Syria will be tired of the fighting, and want prosperity.
    It doesn't matter what many in Syria want. It is the nutters with the heavy weapons who'll decide what they get.
    Assad was the nutter with heavy weapons, and he lost. The rebels did not have tanks until Assad's army melted away.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    edited December 8
    Yokes said:

    Between martial law in South Korea and the rapidity of the fall of Assad, you'd have to Eurmillions level odds of both being in anyone's prediction card for 2024.

    Just to deal with the apparent western sophisticates who go on about Assad being better than other options or because he was in theory, a non religious nut job, he might be a better bet.

    You are full of absolute shit.

    The guy is a mass murderer and his entire regime and that of his equally mass murderer father was built on sectarian grounds. As ever when it came to it not that many people in his own country really supported him, they hated him. Ipso facto the world is better shot of his regime. As uncertain as the future may be, it is no excuse for one arsehole of a dictator surviving.

    The dipshits in the West who thought 'well he might kind be kind of like us really, or 'he's a doctor who trained in Europe once' spent decades thinking they could somehow turn him into some kind Western oriented bloke. They failed miserably because, revelation everyone, he wasn't and they kept pushing that bullshit right up, believe it or not, to recent weeks. Yep, there were still US & European diplomats trying to pull a stroke that if he booted out the Iranian/Hezbollah influence, we'd cut him a bit of slack. These big brains completely missed the fact that those backers had already been absolutely battered by the Israelis so there wasnt much influence left.

    They also forgot all those prisoners he got rid of to send to Iraq to fight US forces and the nascient Iraqi government (something many Iraqis havent forgot). Well Bashar, some of them came home and were involved in booting you out, you clown.

    He should have been hung from one of da's statues.

    You just paraded an entire regiment of straw men

    At one point the choice was Assad or ISIS. That was the choice. Evil or even greater evil

    Evil is superior to even greater evil; and plenty of us are concerned that Assad will now be replaced by an even greater evil - something truly horrific for syrias many minorities - Christians, Druze, Alawites - and also horrific for women if the reports of Taliban style beliefs are true

    It seems the Americans feel the same way as they are busy liquidating ISIS on the ground with great urgency. I hope they take out every last one
  • Andy_JS said:

    Saddam Hussein 2003
    Gaddafi 2011
    Assad 2024

    Khamenei 2025?
    Putin 2025?

    We can hope.
    It's been striking how unwilling the Syrian Army were to fight for Assad since the advance on Aleppo began. There was some fighting around Hama, in which quite a few senior Syrian officers were killed, but remarkably little overall.

    This is in marked contrast to the willingness of the Russian army to keep on fighting, for more than 1,000 days now, despite the staggeringly high level of casualties they are suffering. I dearly hope that this will flip soon, and the Russian army will lose the will to fight, but it's one of Putin's successes that he's sustained the support for the war effort within the army.
    The Syrian army melted in days but it lasted 13 years of civil war before then.

    When it comes to culmination of armies it can be like the old saying of bankruptcy - it happens slowly at first, then rapidly.

    The Russian army is depleted. That is why they were unable to prop up Assad any longer. For now the Russian generals are on Putin's side, but if people start to decide enough is enough it might not take long for change to again rapidly occur.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,144

    I am very glad to see Assad gone. But the chances Syria gets better? Very low.

    Then why are you very glad to see him gone? This is the thing I don't get. Nobody here is inviting Assad to a family barbeque or asking him if he wants to be godfather to their kids. It just so happens that those of us who engage our brain on these issues and don't see it as our job to police 'PB morale' think he is probably less wicked and has more upsides than the alternatives. Thus, his unseatment in favour of an ISIS-adjacent warlord (or several) is not something to be 'very glad about'.
    Yes, it is.

    He is every bit as wicked as ISIS. He is allies and directly aided and abetted Jihadis such as Hezbollah and worked with our enemies such as Iran and Russia.

    Him falling is fantastic news. What comes next may not be better, in which case I hope what comes next also falls, until something better does come along, but nothing better was coming under him.

    Since your priorities are broken and you hate the West and love Russia I can see why you're OK with that.
    The real hope is that Putin’s regime collapses just as fast. Collapses when they come tend to be rapid, and few people see them coming, as we learned in Europe in 1989 and in Russia not that long thereafter.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,144
    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

    Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

    If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

    Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation
    You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

    You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.
    In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state
    You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

    Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

    That is your mistake.
    Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...
    You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.
    Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

    In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is
    Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

    You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

    I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.
    You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

    For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

    Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

    The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

    "whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

    I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument. ;)

    If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

    So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…
    Indeed not.
    He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

    Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
    I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.
    Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews
    The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.
    I think that was Herod? God was the one who killed the entire world apart from the Ark (and marine life, presumably).

    However, gods should not be judged by human standards any more than sea clams or stag beetles should. The idea that gods should be 'nice', as if they're some kind of supernatural welfare state, flies in the face of the great majority of history. The fact that the very phrase 'act of god', to mean some disruptive, violent, deadly event should be clue enough ...
    Killing of the first born was the final plague of egypt
    Ah, yes. I forgot that one. Fair.

    Anyway, gods do what gods do, for their pleasure, amusement, chastisement or who knows what. They are not accountable to man's laws. Or indeed, gods laws for man.
    "God is love" is a bit of a stretch, when you look at his track record.

    More like a gangster boss who'll shoot you dead if you fart in the wrong direction.
    So, Christians follow a mass murderer who refused to marry the mother of his child. And they have the gall to lecture others on ethics? What a two faced bunch of fools!
    Joseph and Mary were to bring up Jesus and trusted in God to support them to do so
    They sensibly stayed within the two child limit?
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 22,355
    edited December 8
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

    Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

    If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

    Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation
    You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

    You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.
    In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state
    You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

    Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

    That is your mistake.
    Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...
    You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.
    Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

    In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is
    Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

    You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

    I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.
    You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

    For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

    Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

    The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

    "whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

    I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument. ;)

    If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

    So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…
    Indeed not.
    He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

    Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
    I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.
    Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews
    The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.
    I think that was Herod? God was the one who killed the entire world apart from the Ark (and marine life, presumably).

    However, gods should not be judged by human standards any more than sea clams or stag beetles should. The idea that gods should be 'nice', as if they're some kind of supernatural welfare state, flies in the face of the great majority of history. The fact that the very phrase 'act of god', to mean some disruptive, violent, deadly event should be clue enough ...
    Killing of the first born was the final plague of egypt
    Ah, yes. I forgot that one. Fair.

    Anyway, gods do what gods do, for their pleasure, amusement, chastisement or who knows what. They are not accountable to man's laws. Or indeed, gods laws for man.
    "God is love" is a bit of a stretch, when you look at his track record.

    More like a gangster boss who'll shoot you dead if you fart in the wrong direction.
    So, Christians follow a mass murderer who refused to marry the mother of his child. And they have the gall to lecture others on ethics? What a two faced bunch of fools!
    Joseph and Mary were to bring up Jesus and trusted in God to support them to do so
    They sensibly stayed within the two child limit?
    They had 4 other children according to scripture.

    4 brothers and 2 sisters it seems from Google, I knew about the brothers but not the sisters. Only the brothers got named in the accounts, guess girls don't matter.
  • AnthonyTAnthonyT Posts: 92
    edited December 8

    eek said:

    kle4 said:

    Goddamnit they will never stop

    Pressure is growing for the Government to finally act and decide on whether or not to grant compensation for the WASPI generation of women.
    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/waspi-update-as-pressure-grows-for-dwp-to-grant-fair-compensation-after-milestone/ar-AA1vu4eT?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=953f1c5d28f84fbdc9563f76f5301b05&ei=8

    Yes, but probably only once Mr G Reaper has intervened.
    How many times do you have to say Nope - the fact you weren't paying attention isn't justification for compensation..
    That probably makes it worse. Nobody enjoys admitting that they themselves stuffed up, and are largely the authors of their own downfall. So it's human to contort reality so that isn't so. (It's only one of the reasons why politics is hard and populism so attractive.)

    Besides, there are lawyers and campaign professionals with fees to get.
    They went to the Supreme Court some time ago and lost.

    They should have been told after that to get stuffed.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,345
    Leon said:

    Yokes said:

    Between martial law in South Korea and the rapidity of the fall of Assad, you'd have to Eurmillions level odds of both being in anyone's prediction card for 2024.

    Just to deal with the apparent western sophisticates who go on about Assad being better than other options or because he was in theory, a non religious nut job, he might be a better bet.

    You are full of absolute shit.

    The guy is a mass murderer and his entire regime and that of his equally mass murderer father was built on sectarian grounds. As ever when it came to it not that many people in his own country really supported him, they hated him. Ipso facto the world is better shot of his regime. As uncertain as the future may be, it is no excuse for one arsehole of a dictator surviving.

    The dipshits in the West who thought 'well he might kind be kind of like us really, or 'he's a doctor who trained in Europe once' spent decades thinking they could somehow turn him into some kind Western oriented bloke. They failed miserably because, revelation everyone, he wasn't and they kept pushing that bullshit right up, believe it or not, to recent weeks. Yep, there were still US & European diplomats trying to pull a stroke that if he booted out the Iranian/Hezbollah influence, we'd cut him a bit of slack. These big brains completely missed the fact that those backers had already been absolutely battered by the Israelis so there wasnt much influence left.

    They also forgot all those prisoners he got rid of to send to Iraq to fight US forces and the nascient Iraqi government (something many Iraqis havent forgot). Well Bashar, some of them came home and were involved in booting you out, you clown.

    He should have been hung from one of da's statues.

    You just paraded an entire regiment of straw men

    At one point the choice was Assad or ISIS. That was the choice. Evil or even greater evil

    Evil is superior to even greater evil; and plenty of us are concerned that Assad will now be replaced by an even greater evil - something truly horrific for syrias many minorities - Christians, Druze, Alawites - and also horrific for women if the reports of Taliban style beliefs are true

    It seems the Americans feel the same way as they are busy liquidating ISIS on the ground with great urgency. I hope they take out every last one
    The choice was not solely between Assad and IS at any point. How many opposition groups were involved over the last decade, do you know?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,807
    Leon said:

    Yokes said:

    Between martial law in South Korea and the rapidity of the fall of Assad, you'd have to Eurmillions level odds of both being in anyone's prediction card for 2024.

    Just to deal with the apparent western sophisticates who go on about Assad being better than other options or because he was in theory, a non religious nut job, he might be a better bet.

    You are full of absolute shit.

    The guy is a mass murderer and his entire regime and that of his equally mass murderer father was built on sectarian grounds. As ever when it came to it not that many people in his own country really supported him, they hated him. Ipso facto the world is better shot of his regime. As uncertain as the future may be, it is no excuse for one arsehole of a dictator surviving.

    The dipshits in the West who thought 'well he might kind be kind of like us really, or 'he's a doctor who trained in Europe once' spent decades thinking they could somehow turn him into some kind Western oriented bloke. They failed miserably because, revelation everyone, he wasn't and they kept pushing that bullshit right up, believe it or not, to recent weeks. Yep, there were still US & European diplomats trying to pull a stroke that if he booted out the Iranian/Hezbollah influence, we'd cut him a bit of slack. These big brains completely missed the fact that those backers had already been absolutely battered by the Israelis so there wasnt much influence left.

    They also forgot all those prisoners he got rid of to send to Iraq to fight US forces and the nascient Iraqi government (something many Iraqis havent forgot). Well Bashar, some of them came home and were involved in booting you out, you clown.

    He should have been hung from one of da's statues.

    You just paraded an entire regiment of straw men

    At one point the choice was Assad or ISIS. That was the choice. Evil or even greater evil

    Evil is superior to even greater evil; and plenty of us are concerned that Assad will now be replaced by an even greater evil - something truly horrific for syrias many minorities - Christians, Druze, Alawites - and also horrific for women if the reports of Taliban style beliefs are true

    It seems the Americans feel the same way as they are busy liquidating ISIS on the ground with great urgency. I hope they take out every last one
    So do I, and I'm glad. However I would be even more impressed if they had not created the conditions for ISIS to exist in the first place, and if they had been 'destroying and degrading them' all along, regardless of who had been in power in Damascus.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,161

    I am very glad to see Assad gone. But the chances Syria gets better? Very low.

    Then why are you very glad to see him gone? This is the thing I don't get. Nobody here is inviting Assad to a family barbeque or asking him if he wants to be godfather to their kids. It just so happens that those of us who engage our brain on these issues and don't see it as our job to police 'PB morale' think he is probably less wicked and has more upsides than the alternatives. Thus, his unseatment in favour of an ISIS-adjacent warlord (or several) is not something to be 'very glad about'.
    The problem is, it is easy for an evil to tell people that its replacement might be more evil. "If you get rid of me," the evil says, "there will be more evil." Believing that is a good way for evil to prosper.

    But the progress of society has showed the opposite happens as a whole: when evil goes, it is often replaced by something that, if not good, is slightly less evil. Which is why we are where we are today as a society. That progress is slow, and rocky, but it is progress.

    Many in Syria will be tired of the fighting, and want prosperity.
    It doesn't matter what many in Syria want. It is the nutters with the heavy weapons who'll decide what they get.
    Assad was the nutter with heavy weapons, and he lost. The rebels did not have tanks until Assad's army melted away.
    Assad was anything but a nutter. Cold, calculating evil, not a nutter. His military clearly weren't nutters either, as they knew when the game was up and melted away.

    Now the country is in the hands of fanatics.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    edited December 8
    Ok I’m gonna make a prediction, seeing as this is politicalbetting.com


    This is how I see Syria panning out

    This quasi-jihadist beardy Jolani guy will be popular for a few weeks or even months and he might even try to construct the moderate tolerant government he promises - though it will still be grimly sharia and Islamic - so not great for minorities and women

    But it will be peaceful. For a bit

    Then factionalism will begin and more fighting and then Isis and al qaeda and the Taliban types will rise up seeking total triumph and the alawites will seek to defend themselves and Syria will be plunged into more chaos. And quite a few million Syrians will find life actually getting WORSE. And the anarchy will draw in outside actors…

    That’s how it will pan out as that’s how it nearly always pans out in the modern Middle East. It gets worse and more Islamist

    Inshallah I’m wrong
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,433
    Yokes said:

    Leon said:

    Yokes said:

    Between martial law in South Korea and the rapidity of the fall of Assad, you'd have to Eurmillions level odds of both being in anyone's prediction card for 2024.

    Just to deal with the apparent western sophisticates who go on about Assad being better than other options or because he was in theory, a non religious nut job, he might be a better bet.

    You are full of absolute shit.

    The guy is a mass murderer and his entire regime and that of his equally mass murderer father was built on sectarian grounds. As ever when it came to it not that many people in his own country really supported him, they hated him. Ipso facto the world is better shot of his regime. As uncertain as the future may be, it is no excuse for one arsehole of a dictator surviving.

    The dipshits in the West who thought 'well he might kind be kind of like us really, or 'he's a doctor who trained in Europe once' spent decades thinking they could somehow turn him into some kind Western oriented bloke. They failed miserably because, revelation everyone, he wasn't and they kept pushing that bullshit right up, believe it or not, to recent weeks. Yep, there were still US & European diplomats trying to pull a stroke that if he booted out the Iranian/Hezbollah influence, we'd cut him a bit of slack. These big brains completely missed the fact that those backers had already been absolutely battered by the Israelis so there wasnt much influence left.

    They also forgot all those prisoners he got rid of to send to Iraq to fight US forces and the nascient Iraqi government (something many Iraqis havent forgot). Well Bashar, some of them came home and were involved in booting you out, you clown.

    He should have been hung from one of da's statues.

    You just paraded an entire regiment of straw men

    At one point the choice was Assad or ISIS. That was the choice. Evil or even greater evil

    Evil is superior to even greater evil; and plenty of us are concerned that Assad will now be replaced by an even greater evil - something truly horrific for syrias many minorities - Christians, Druze, Alawites - and also horrific for women if the reports of Taliban style beliefs are true

    It seems the Americans feel the same way as they are busy liquidating ISIS on the ground with great urgency. I hope they take out every last one
    The choice was not solely between Assad and IS at any point. How many opposition groups were involved over the last decade, do you know?
    One of the great Russian propaganda coups of the last decade was to make people believe that anyone in Syria who was not with Assad was ISIS.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,834
    edited December 8

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Reminder that @HYUFD was certain that the majority Alawite coastal region of Syria was going to fight until the bitter end and refused to entertain any suggestion otherwise. They didn’t.

    Well Latakia and Tartus, the 2 biggest cities in the coastal Alawite heartland of Syria, have still not yet fallen to the rebels.

    Assuming they and the rest of the coastal region where the Alawites are based falls who knows what reprisals the rebels will then ultimately pursue against the Alawites and their links to the Assad family
    From "the Russians will bomb the rebel cowards" to "our small bases have not yet fallen!"

    It's been quite a week for you, hasn't it? Wrong at every step.
    Far from it, come back this time next year and we will see if Syria is the liberal peaceful nirvana you insist it will be or full of jihadis again.

    I am in this argument for the long haul, even if it takes a year, 5 years or a decade
    I have never insisted it will be a 'liberal peaceful nirvana' this time next year. I have repeatedly stated it could go either way.

    But Syria stands more chance of being at peace than it did with the stalemate with Assad in charge. Perhaps it will be worse; perhaps it will be better. But it is now up to the Syrians, and not the Assads, Russians and Iranians, to decide the future of their country.

    We can hope, and work,for Syria to become a happier, more prosperous country. You appear to want it to fail, as it was a failed state under Assad.
    I expect it will fail, but it has a chance to succeed where it had none under Assad.

    Some chance > no chance.
    With the Russians and the Iranians kicked out along with Assad, then the future of Syria is up to Syrians to an extent that it has not been for a very long time. They might still fail, but that's up to them now (if Turkey holds back).
    It's up to some Syrians. A precious few, in reality. The main question is whether they can reach some settlement amicably or whether it has to be done through fighting. But either way, the general public won't get much say because it's neither practical nor sensible nor their style. But even if it was their style, elections would be an appalling idea, one that would distract and entrench division. At this stage, some kind of power-sharing national council is the best realistic outcome in terms of delivering plurality and recovery. Whether the main groups have the desire for that and trust in each other it'd need is anyone's guess.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,378

    @Foxy Hi ya, medical question if I may.

    For a week I've had a sore throat, temperature that comes and goes, trouble sleeping (night sweats) and loss of appetite. But I've been able to manage the symptoms with ibuprofen and carry on as normal.

    Just wondered if you might know how long I might expect to need to manage it, if you can't say that's fine. Thanks!

    Are you constantly thirsty?
  • viewcode said:

    @Foxy Hi ya, medical question if I may.

    For a week I've had a sore throat, temperature that comes and goes, trouble sleeping (night sweats) and loss of appetite. But I've been able to manage the symptoms with ibuprofen and carry on as normal.

    Just wondered if you might know how long I might expect to need to manage it, if you can't say that's fine. Thanks!

    Are you constantly thirsty?
    No
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,378

    viewcode said:

    @Foxy Hi ya, medical question if I may.

    For a week I've had a sore throat, temperature that comes and goes, trouble sleeping (night sweats) and loss of appetite. But I've been able to manage the symptoms with ibuprofen and carry on as normal.

    Just wondered if you might know how long I might expect to need to manage it, if you can't say that's fine. Thanks!

    Are you constantly thirsty?
    No
    Not diabetes then. Are the whites of your eyes yellow-ish?
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,053
    Leon said:

    Ok I’m gonna make a prediction, seeing as this is politicalbetting.com


    This is how I see Syria panning out

    This quasi-jihadist beardy Jolani guy will be popular for a few weeks or even months and he might even try to construct the moderate tolerant government he promises - though it will still be grimly sharia and Islamic - so not great for minorities and women

    But it will be peaceful. For a bit

    Then factionalism will begin and more fighting and then Isis and al qaeda and the Taliban types will rise up seeking total triumph and the alawites will seek to defend themselves and Syria will be plunged into more chaos. And quite a few million Syrians will find life actually getting WORSE. And the anarchy will draw in outside actors…

    That’s how it will pan out as that’s how it nearly always pans out in the modern Middle East. It gets worse and more Islamist

    Inshallah I’m wrong

    Meanwhile, behind the scenes, Mossad and the CIA will be stirring up trouble and uncertainty.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,433

    I am very glad to see Assad gone. But the chances Syria gets better? Very low.

    Then why are you very glad to see him gone? This is the thing I don't get. Nobody here is inviting Assad to a family barbeque or asking him if he wants to be godfather to their kids. It just so happens that those of us who engage our brain on these issues and don't see it as our job to police 'PB morale' think he is probably less wicked and has more upsides than the alternatives. Thus, his unseatment in favour of an ISIS-adjacent warlord (or several) is not something to be 'very glad about'.
    The problem is, it is easy for an evil to tell people that its replacement might be more evil. "If you get rid of me," the evil says, "there will be more evil." Believing that is a good way for evil to prosper.

    But the progress of society has showed the opposite happens as a whole: when evil goes, it is often replaced by something that, if not good, is slightly less evil. Which is why we are where we are today as a society. That progress is slow, and rocky, but it is progress.

    Many in Syria will be tired of the fighting, and want prosperity.
    It doesn't matter what many in Syria want. It is the nutters with the heavy weapons who'll decide what they get.
    Assad was the nutter with heavy weapons, and he lost. The rebels did not have tanks until Assad's army melted away.
    Assad was anything but a nutter. Cold, calculating evil, not a nutter. His military clearly weren't nutters either, as they knew when the game was up and melted away.

    Now the country is in the hands of fanatics.
    Your definition of 'nutter' is obviously very different to mine. I don't think Assad was calculating; I don't think he had a plan. At the end, he was a puppet of the Russian and Iranian regimes.
  • Leon said:

    Ok I’m gonna make a prediction, seeing as this is politicalbetting.com


    This is how I see Syria panning out

    This quasi-jihadist beardy Jolani guy will be popular for a few weeks or even months and he might even try to construct the moderate tolerant government he promises - though it will still be grimly sharia and Islamic - so not great for minorities and women

    But it will be peaceful. For a bit

    Then factionalism will begin and more fighting and then Isis and al qaeda and the Taliban types will rise up seeking total triumph and the alawites will seek to defend themselves and Syria will be plunged into more chaos. And quite a few million Syrians will find life actually getting WORSE. And the anarchy will draw in outside actors…

    That’s how it will pan out as that’s how it nearly always pans out in the modern Middle East. It gets worse and more Islamist

    Inshallah I’m wrong

    Meanwhile, behind the scenes, Mossad and the CIA will be stirring up trouble and uncertainty.
    Good.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,834

    I am very glad to see Assad gone. But the chances Syria gets better? Very low.

    Then why are you very glad to see him gone? This is the thing I don't get. Nobody here is inviting Assad to a family barbeque or asking him if he wants to be godfather to their kids. It just so happens that those of us who engage our brain on these issues and don't see it as our job to police 'PB morale' think he is probably less wicked and has more upsides than the alternatives. Thus, his unseatment in favour of an ISIS-adjacent warlord (or several) is not something to be 'very glad about'.
    The problem is, it is easy for an evil to tell people that its replacement might be more evil. "If you get rid of me," the evil says, "there will be more evil." Believing that is a good way for evil to prosper.

    But the progress of society has showed the opposite happens as a whole: when evil goes, it is often replaced by something that, if not good, is slightly less evil. Which is why we are where we are today as a society. That progress is slow, and rocky, but it is progress.

    Many in Syria will be tired of the fighting, and want prosperity.
    It doesn't matter what many in Syria want. It is the nutters with the heavy weapons who'll decide what they get.
    Assad was the nutter with heavy weapons, and he lost. The rebels did not have tanks until Assad's army melted away.
    Assad was anything but a nutter. Cold, calculating evil, not a nutter. His military clearly weren't nutters either, as they knew when the game was up and melted away.

    Now the country is in the hands of fanatics.
    Your definition of 'nutter' is obviously very different to mine. I don't think Assad was calculating; I don't think he had a plan. At the end, he was a puppet of the Russian and Iranian regimes.
    People who calculate badly still calculate.

    Putin is himself some way down that road.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    .

    I am very glad to see Assad gone. But the chances Syria gets better? Very low.

    Then why are you very glad to see him gone? This is the thing I don't get. Nobody here is inviting Assad to a family barbeque or asking him if he wants to be godfather to their kids. It just so happens that those of us who engage our brain on these issues and don't see it as our job to police 'PB morale' think he is probably less wicked and has more upsides than the alternatives. Thus, his unseatment in favour of an ISIS-adjacent warlord (or several) is not something to be 'very glad about'.
    We’ve tried engaging your brain, and found it wanting.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Reminder that @HYUFD was certain that the majority Alawite coastal region of Syria was going to fight until the bitter end and refused to entertain any suggestion otherwise. They didn’t.

    Well Latakia and Tartus, the 2 biggest cities in the coastal Alawite heartland of Syria, have still not yet fallen to the rebels.

    Assuming they and the rest of the coastal region where the Alawites are based falls who knows what reprisals the rebels will then ultimately pursue against the Alawites and their links to the Assad family
    From "the Russians will bomb the rebel cowards" to "our small bases have not yet fallen!"

    It's been quite a week for you, hasn't it? Wrong at every step.
    Far from it, come back this time next year and we will see if Syria is the liberal peaceful nirvana you insist it will be or full of jihadis again.

    I am in this argument for the long haul, even if it takes a year, 5 years or a decade
    I have never insisted it will be a 'liberal peaceful nirvana' this time next year. I have repeatedly stated it could go either way.

    But Syria stands more chance of being at peace than it did with the stalemate with Assad in charge. Perhaps it will be worse; perhaps it will be better. But it is now up to the Syrians, and not the Assads, Russians and Iranians, to decide the future of their country.

    We can hope, and work,for Syria to become a happier, more prosperous country. You appear to want it to fail, as it was a failed state under Assad.
    I expect it will fail, but it has a chance to succeed where it had none under Assad.

    Some chance > no chance.
    With the Russians and the Iranians kicked out along with Assad, then the future of Syria is up to Syrians to an extent that it has not been for a very long time. They might still fail, but that's up to them now (if Turkey holds back).
    It's up to some Syrians. A precious few, in reality. The main question is whether they can reach some settlement amicably or whether it has to be done through fighting. But either way, the general public won't get much say because it's neither practical nor sensible nor their style. But even if it was their style, elections would be an appalling idea, one that would distract and entrench division. At this stage, some kind of power-sharing national council is the best realistic outcome in terms of delivering plurality and recovery. Whether the main groups have the desire for that and trust in each other it'd need is anyone's guess.
    What Syria really needs is some kind of strongman to pull it all together. He will need to be tough and brutal to impose order on a roiled country threatened by Islamism. Maybe a guy from one of the minorities so he is willing to defend them. Also hopefully he would have dynastic links to regimes abroad so they will
    assist Syria. On top of that he wouid, ideally, be skilled at ophthalmology so that any close family members with eye problems will get good advice on eye care; the last thing Syria needs is a ruling elite with cataracts
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    Ok I’m gonna make a prediction, seeing as this is politicalbetting.com


    This is how I see Syria panning out

    This quasi-jihadist beardy Jolani guy will be popular for a few weeks or even months and he might even try to construct the moderate tolerant government he promises - though it will still be grimly sharia and Islamic - so not great for minorities and women

    But it will be peaceful. For a bit

    Then factionalism will begin and more fighting and then Isis and al qaeda and the Taliban types will rise up seeking total triumph and the alawites will seek to defend themselves and Syria will be plunged into more chaos. And quite a few million Syrians will find life actually getting WORSE. And the anarchy will draw in outside actors…

    That’s how it will pan out as that’s how it nearly always pans out in the modern Middle East. It gets worse and more Islamist

    Inshallah I’m wrong

    Meanwhile, behind the scenes, Mossad and the CIA will be stirring up trouble and uncertainty.
    Good.
    Why in the name of Allah’s holy testicles are you wishing MORE anarchy on the poor people of Syria? And hoping it comes from Mossad and the CIA?

    Sometimes I wonder if you are simply insane
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,433

    I am very glad to see Assad gone. But the chances Syria gets better? Very low.

    Then why are you very glad to see him gone? This is the thing I don't get. Nobody here is inviting Assad to a family barbeque or asking him if he wants to be godfather to their kids. It just so happens that those of us who engage our brain on these issues and don't see it as our job to police 'PB morale' think he is probably less wicked and has more upsides than the alternatives. Thus, his unseatment in favour of an ISIS-adjacent warlord (or several) is not something to be 'very glad about'.
    The problem is, it is easy for an evil to tell people that its replacement might be more evil. "If you get rid of me," the evil says, "there will be more evil." Believing that is a good way for evil to prosper.

    But the progress of society has showed the opposite happens as a whole: when evil goes, it is often replaced by something that, if not good, is slightly less evil. Which is why we are where we are today as a society. That progress is slow, and rocky, but it is progress.

    Many in Syria will be tired of the fighting, and want prosperity.
    It doesn't matter what many in Syria want. It is the nutters with the heavy weapons who'll decide what they get.
    Assad was the nutter with heavy weapons, and he lost. The rebels did not have tanks until Assad's army melted away.
    Assad was anything but a nutter. Cold, calculating evil, not a nutter. His military clearly weren't nutters either, as they knew when the game was up and melted away.

    Now the country is in the hands of fanatics.
    Your definition of 'nutter' is obviously very different to mine. I don't think Assad was calculating; I don't think he had a plan. At the end, he was a puppet of the Russian and Iranian regimes.
    People who calculate badly still calculate.

    Putin is himself some way down that road.
    I don't think Assad had a plan, calculated or otherwise. Vast swathes of 'his' country were out of his control, and had been for years, and he was making no signs of either officially giving them away or taking them back.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,345
    edited December 8

    Yokes said:

    Leon said:

    Yokes said:

    Between martial law in South Korea and the rapidity of the fall of Assad, you'd have to Eurmillions level odds of both being in anyone's prediction card for 2024.

    Just to deal with the apparent western sophisticates who go on about Assad being better than other options or because he was in theory, a non religious nut job, he might be a better bet.

    You are full of absolute shit.

    The guy is a mass murderer and his entire regime and that of his equally mass murderer father was built on sectarian grounds. As ever when it came to it not that many people in his own country really supported him, they hated him. Ipso facto the world is better shot of his regime. As uncertain as the future may be, it is no excuse for one arsehole of a dictator surviving.

    The dipshits in the West who thought 'well he might kind be kind of like us really, or 'he's a doctor who trained in Europe once' spent decades thinking they could somehow turn him into some kind Western oriented bloke. They failed miserably because, revelation everyone, he wasn't and they kept pushing that bullshit right up, believe it or not, to recent weeks. Yep, there were still US & European diplomats trying to pull a stroke that if he booted out the Iranian/Hezbollah influence, we'd cut him a bit of slack. These big brains completely missed the fact that those backers had already been absolutely battered by the Israelis so there wasnt much influence left.

    They also forgot all those prisoners he got rid of to send to Iraq to fight US forces and the nascient Iraqi government (something many Iraqis havent forgot). Well Bashar, some of them came home and were involved in booting you out, you clown.

    He should have been hung from one of da's statues.

    You just paraded an entire regiment of straw men

    At one point the choice was Assad or ISIS. That was the choice. Evil or even greater evil

    Evil is superior to even greater evil; and plenty of us are concerned that Assad will now be replaced by an even greater evil - something truly horrific for syrias many minorities - Christians, Druze, Alawites - and also horrific for women if the reports of Taliban style beliefs are true

    It seems the Americans feel the same way as they are busy liquidating ISIS on the ground with great urgency. I hope they take out every last one
    The choice was not solely between Assad and IS at any point. How many opposition groups were involved over the last decade, do you know?
    One of the great Russian propaganda coups of the last decade was to make people believe that anyone in Syria who was not with Assad was ISIS.
    What people didnt notice was that Assad wasnt half as keen on eliminating IS as people would have you believe. He supported them plenty.

    1. Syria was a conduit for IS fighters going Iraq, not just the ones Assad let out jail, but imports that travelled via Syria without interference
    2. Anyone who looks as the Syrian , Iranian and Russian military effort during the civil war will notice that IS dominated areas got off fairly lightly. Others where IS was not in play in a sigificant capacity were the focus. Why was that, if the threat was seen as IS?
    3. There was a also a good commercial trading relationship between the Assad government and IS, to the tune of hundreds of millions going to IS over the years

    In fact, it was the Americans and aligned Syrian opposition fighters, again who did most of the work against IS. Does anyone remember the SAA, or the Russians or the Iranians liberating Raqqa from IS? No, they didn't lift a finger and had no interest in doing so

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,521
    A strongman who can’t keep control is, by definition, not a strongman.

    It was to nobody’s advantage for Assad to remain in place.
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Ok I’m gonna make a prediction, seeing as this is politicalbetting.com


    This is how I see Syria panning out

    This quasi-jihadist beardy Jolani guy will be popular for a few weeks or even months and he might even try to construct the moderate tolerant government he promises - though it will still be grimly sharia and Islamic - so not great for minorities and women

    But it will be peaceful. For a bit

    Then factionalism will begin and more fighting and then Isis and al qaeda and the Taliban types will rise up seeking total triumph and the alawites will seek to defend themselves and Syria will be plunged into more chaos. And quite a few million Syrians will find life actually getting WORSE. And the anarchy will draw in outside actors…

    That’s how it will pan out as that’s how it nearly always pans out in the modern Middle East. It gets worse and more Islamist

    Inshallah I’m wrong

    Meanwhile, behind the scenes, Mossad and the CIA will be stirring up trouble and uncertainty.
    Good.
    Why in the name of Allah’s holy testicles are you wishing MORE anarchy on the poor people of Syria? And hoping it comes from Mossad and the CIA?

    Sometimes I wonder if you are simply insane
    Because chaos and instability is just what is needed right now.

    Stability is a bad thing, if its stagnation or bad leadership being entrenched.

    And Mossad/CIA are on our side, not Russia's.

    Chaos leading to people more on our side ending in charge would be better than people on Russia/Iran's side being in charge.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    Sean_F said:

    A strongman who can’t keep control is, by definition, not a strongman.

    It was to nobody’s advantage for Assad to remain in place.

    But without Assad, who can bless the people with the gentleness of Chlorine, the sacrament of Sulphur Mustard, the benediction of Sarin?
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,987
    Sean_F said:

    A strongman who can’t keep control is, by definition, not a strongman.

    It was to nobody’s advantage for Assad to remain in place.

    The person who was painting his current official portrait possible disagrees. Won't someone think of the poor oppressed official portrait artists?
  • Shecorns88Shecorns88 Posts: 279

    Leon said:

    Come on PB, our collective IQ must be 45,922

    We can solve this

    The USA is being swarmed by large numbers of CAR SIZED DRONES THAT NO ONE CAN UNDERSTAND

    They have now been filmed and witnessed by hundreds if not thousands of people. There are now quite clear images

    The USA - the USA! - seems at a loss. No one can explain them. I’m starting to wonder if this is connected with THE MASSIVE FUCKING OWL I saw, inexplicably, in the centre of Santa Cruz de Mompox - it would finally make sense

    So what are they?

    i see five explanations

    1. This is a mass hallucination (across the USA and in the UK?)
    2. This is American psy-ops to hide American super-tech
    3. This is the Russians or the Chinese
    4. This is some non state actor (criminal gangs? Elon Musk??) with amazing tech doing something we don’t understand
    5. This is of non human origin

    ..but I think you've been droning on far too long.....
    Sophisticated holograms... Cleverly devised to spread conspiracy theories.

    Something Musk could easily have developed for him.

    Clue is where they are being spotted.

    Designed to spread a degree of fear.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,942
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    @Foxy Hi ya, medical question if I may.

    For a week I've had a sore throat, temperature that comes and goes, trouble sleeping (night sweats) and loss of appetite. But I've been able to manage the symptoms with ibuprofen and carry on as normal.

    Just wondered if you might know how long I might expect to need to manage it, if you can't say that's fine. Thanks!

    Are you constantly thirsty?
    No
    Not diabetes then. Are the whites of your eyes yellow-ish?
    My partner thinks an infection, possibly tonsillitis. Go to doctor.

    (Also careful with those ibuprofen over the long term - she hates it because of the number of people who end up with stomach ulcers, particularly with an empty stomach).
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,807
    Leon said:

    Ok I’m gonna make a prediction, seeing as this is politicalbetting.com


    This is how I see Syria panning out

    This quasi-jihadist beardy Jolani guy will be popular for a few weeks or even months and he might even try to construct the moderate tolerant government he promises - though it will still be grimly sharia and Islamic - so not great for minorities and women

    But it will be peaceful. For a bit

    Then factionalism will begin and more fighting and then Isis and al qaeda and the Taliban types will rise up seeking total triumph and the alawites will seek to defend themselves and Syria will be plunged into more chaos. And quite a few million Syrians will find life actually getting WORSE. And the anarchy will draw in outside actors…

    That’s how it will pan out as that’s how it nearly always pans out in the modern Middle East. It gets worse and more Islamist

    Inshallah I’m wrong

    I don't want to make any overarching predictions, but I'll make one one. No *****ng way are any of our Syrian pals going to be boarding a plane to their new Assad-free promised land and waving goodbye to our rainy haven. Even now their lawyers will be gleefully drafting up lists of reasons why they cannot *possibly* be sent back to such a dangerous hellhole the poor lambs. You can take that to the bank.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,987
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Good article on the Syrian Implications for Iran

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-is-irans-annus-horribilis/

    Obviously not the most-read article on the Spectator, that has remained the same for the last 72 hours, but still good. It hints that the Syrian drama may actually menace the Tehran regime in the end (emphasis on “may”)

    If the toppling of Assad really does lead to the end of the hideous Iranian regime then I will genuinely celebrate, as that would be an uncontestable victory for humanity

    Less likely, as Assad was a Shia leader in a majority Sunni nation (as Saddam on the other side was a Sunni leader in a majority Shia nation). The Iranian regime though are Shia leaders of a majority Shia nation
    You make the facile assumption that for most people, religion matters more than other matters in life.

    You make that assumption because you are a religious fundamentalist.
    In the Middle East it does, whether you are a Shia Muslim or Sunni Muslim (or in relation to Israel a Jew) matters far more than whether you want a socialist or capitalist run economy or even the nation state
    You see, you are seeing this from the perspective of a religious bigot.

    Most people are not religious bigots, even in the ME.

    That is your mistake.
    Yes most people in the ME are flocking to gay pride parades, women wandering around the streets in very little with the authorities not batting an eye lid. They certainly don't have public beheadings, floggings or public hangings in half the ME nations either. Oh wait...
    You are mistaking the people with the regimes. A mistake Assad has made over the last couple of decades.
    Assad was toppled because he was a Shia dictator in a majority Sunni nation. Not because he wasn't pro LGBT enough or too socially conservative and there weren't enough women in his regime.

    In reality Assad was relatively secular in ME terms, the rebels who have toppled his regime are rather more rigorous in their following of the Koran than he is
    Assad was toppled for many reasons. Because you are a religious bigot, you view events through a religious prism.

    You don't care for the tens of thousands he held in prisons without trial *before* the civil war started in 2011. In your mind, they are irrelevant to people's motivations. Ditto other matters. For you, religion is paramount.

    I'd argue the motivations of most people are much wider than the religious viewpoint you aspire to.
    You are entirely wrong on this, @HYUFD is a believer. Because of that he is able to understand the religious mindset whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot

    For many people religion is not some pleasant add-on, a collection of social rituals, and it is nothing like a political opinion or a tribal affiliation. It goes to the very core of their being, such that they will endure poverty, suffering, adversity, if they are still allowed to believe and worship (if the choice is that stark), indeed some are willing to die for their faith. This may seem so weird to you that you cannot comprehend it, but it shouldn’t be so. The west was like this until the Enlightenment, hence the wars of religion, the burning of martyrs, and so forth

    Islam has not had “an Enlightenment” so very many Muslims still believe in the way that Christians believed up until the late 17th century: their religion is bound up with their identity, it gives their life purpose and meaning, going without it would be unbearably painful

    The inability of westerners to “get” Islam, in this manner, is at the root of many of our problems with the MENA

    "whereas you, a non-believer (IIRC) cannot"

    I am agnostic, not atheist. Which adds a certain complexity to your argument. ;)

    If someone 'believed' they should murder all sinister people (left-handers...), I would be aghast. Even as a right-hander.

    So whilst someone like HYUFD might have their 'religious' beliefs down to their core, it does not make them right…
    Indeed not.
    He claims to follow the teachings of Christ - and was yesterday rooting for the Alawites to fight to the death against the rebels. On the grounds that both sides would suffer mass casualties, which might then be to our theoretical advantage.

    Not exactly Sermon in the Mount stuff.
    I can see why he resorts to the prologue of John’s Gospel in preference.
    Guess you missed out the Old Testament then when God literally used the seas to drown most of the Egyptian cavalry chasing the Jews
    The same God who killed all the first born children. Sick fecker.
    I think that was Herod? God was the one who killed the entire world apart from the Ark (and marine life, presumably).

    However, gods should not be judged by human standards any more than sea clams or stag beetles should. The idea that gods should be 'nice', as if they're some kind of supernatural welfare state, flies in the face of the great majority of history. The fact that the very phrase 'act of god', to mean some disruptive, violent, deadly event should be clue enough ...
    Killing of the first born was the final plague of egypt
    Ah, yes. I forgot that one. Fair.

    Anyway, gods do what gods do, for their pleasure, amusement, chastisement or who knows what. They are not accountable to man's laws. Or indeed, gods laws for man.
    "God is love" is a bit of a stretch, when you look at his track record.

    More like a gangster boss who'll shoot you dead if you fart in the wrong direction.
    So, Christians follow a mass murderer who refused to marry the mother of his child. And they have the gall to lecture others on ethics? What a two faced bunch of fools!
    Joseph and Mary were to bring up Jesus and trusted in God to support them to do so
    They sensibly stayed within the two child limit?
    Although as I remember it, there was a quite strict 'no male child under 2" rule going on at one point. AND YET the child made it through due to lax immigration checks.

    Farage would never have let this happen.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,987
    I've only got a week to go before I'm on holiday for Christmas. Only cheery positive news for the next few days please. I grew up watching Threads, it's the least I can ask for.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,708

    Leon said:

    Ok I’m gonna make a prediction, seeing as this is politicalbetting.com


    This is how I see Syria panning out

    This quasi-jihadist beardy Jolani guy will be popular for a few weeks or even months and he might even try to construct the moderate tolerant government he promises - though it will still be grimly sharia and Islamic - so not great for minorities and women

    But it will be peaceful. For a bit

    Then factionalism will begin and more fighting and then Isis and al qaeda and the Taliban types will rise up seeking total triumph and the alawites will seek to defend themselves and Syria will be plunged into more chaos. And quite a few million Syrians will find life actually getting WORSE. And the anarchy will draw in outside actors…

    That’s how it will pan out as that’s how it nearly always pans out in the modern Middle East. It gets worse and more Islamist

    Inshallah I’m wrong

    I don't want to make any overarching predictions, but I'll make one one. No *****ng way are any of our Syrian pals going to be boarding a plane to their new Assad-free promised land and waving goodbye to our rainy haven. Even now their lawyers will be gleefully drafting up lists of reasons why they cannot *possibly* be sent back to such a dangerous hellhole the poor lambs. You can take that to the bank.
    Not a single one? That's quite a prediction. I'd have thought some will return, if only because they have a lot of wealth and property over there and want to be re-acquainted with it.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    Ok I’m gonna make a prediction, seeing as this is politicalbetting.com


    This is how I see Syria panning out

    This quasi-jihadist beardy Jolani guy will be popular for a few weeks or even months and he might even try to construct the moderate tolerant government he promises - though it will still be grimly sharia and Islamic - so not great for minorities and women

    But it will be peaceful. For a bit

    Then factionalism will begin and more fighting and then Isis and al qaeda and the Taliban types will rise up seeking total triumph and the alawites will seek to defend themselves and Syria will be plunged into more chaos. And quite a few million Syrians will find life actually getting WORSE. And the anarchy will draw in outside actors…

    That’s how it will pan out as that’s how it nearly always pans out in the modern Middle East. It gets worse and more Islamist

    Inshallah I’m wrong

    I don't want to make any overarching predictions, but I'll make one one. No *****ng way are any of our Syrian pals going to be boarding a plane to their new Assad-free promised land and waving goodbye to our rainy haven. Even now their lawyers will be gleefully drafting up lists of reasons why they cannot *possibly* be sent back to such a dangerous hellhole the poor lambs. You can take that to the bank.
    Then we should expel them

    We won’t, but we should

    Eventually we will elect a government that does have the bollocks to do all this stuff. But not yet
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,835
    edited December 8
    It was said earlier today that they want a buffer zone beyond the Golan Heights. The Golan Heights was, of course, once a buffer zone...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,268
    carnforth said:

    It was said earlier today that they want a buffer zone beyond the Golan Heights. The Golan Heights was, of course, once s buffer zone...
    The IDF chief of staff called it the fourth front of their war:

    https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-832553

    "Since last night, we have been engaged in combat on four fronts. Ground troops are engaged in combat on four fronts: Against terrorism in Judea and Samaria, in Gaza, in Lebanon, and last night we deployed troops into Syrian territory."
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,932
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Ok I’m gonna make a prediction, seeing as this is politicalbetting.com


    This is how I see Syria panning out

    This quasi-jihadist beardy Jolani guy will be popular for a few weeks or even months and he might even try to construct the moderate tolerant government he promises - though it will still be grimly sharia and Islamic - so not great for minorities and women

    But it will be peaceful. For a bit

    Then factionalism will begin and more fighting and then Isis and al qaeda and the Taliban types will rise up seeking total triumph and the alawites will seek to defend themselves and Syria will be plunged into more chaos. And quite a few million Syrians will find life actually getting WORSE. And the anarchy will draw in outside actors…

    That’s how it will pan out as that’s how it nearly always pans out in the modern Middle East. It gets worse and more Islamist

    Inshallah I’m wrong

    I don't want to make any overarching predictions, but I'll make one one. No *****ng way are any of our Syrian pals going to be boarding a plane to their new Assad-free promised land and waving goodbye to our rainy haven. Even now their lawyers will be gleefully drafting up lists of reasons why they cannot *possibly* be sent back to such a dangerous hellhole the poor lambs. You can take that to the bank.
    Then we should expel them

    We won’t, but we should

    Eventually we will elect a government that does have the bollocks to do all this stuff. But not yet
    Sieg Heil.

    How is the battle between different groups of Syrians in Manchester going that you reported earlier?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,942
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Ok I’m gonna make a prediction, seeing as this is politicalbetting.com


    This is how I see Syria panning out

    This quasi-jihadist beardy Jolani guy will be popular for a few weeks or even months and he might even try to construct the moderate tolerant government he promises - though it will still be grimly sharia and Islamic - so not great for minorities and women

    But it will be peaceful. For a bit

    Then factionalism will begin and more fighting and then Isis and al qaeda and the Taliban types will rise up seeking total triumph and the alawites will seek to defend themselves and Syria will be plunged into more chaos. And quite a few million Syrians will find life actually getting WORSE. And the anarchy will draw in outside actors…

    That’s how it will pan out as that’s how it nearly always pans out in the modern Middle East. It gets worse and more Islamist

    Inshallah I’m wrong

    I don't want to make any overarching predictions, but I'll make one one. No *****ng way are any of our Syrian pals going to be boarding a plane to their new Assad-free promised land and waving goodbye to our rainy haven. Even now their lawyers will be gleefully drafting up lists of reasons why they cannot *possibly* be sent back to such a dangerous hellhole the poor lambs. You can take that to the bank.
    Then we should expel them

    We won’t, but we should

    Eventually we will elect a government that does have the bollocks to do all this stuff. But not yet
    Sieg Heil.

    How is the battle between different groups of Syrians in Manchester going that you reported earlier?
    Burnham is conducting peace talks in a Salford Travelodge.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Ok I’m gonna make a prediction, seeing as this is politicalbetting.com


    This is how I see Syria panning out

    This quasi-jihadist beardy Jolani guy will be popular for a few weeks or even months and he might even try to construct the moderate tolerant government he promises - though it will still be grimly sharia and Islamic - so not great for minorities and women

    But it will be peaceful. For a bit

    Then factionalism will begin and more fighting and then Isis and al qaeda and the Taliban types will rise up seeking total triumph and the alawites will seek to defend themselves and Syria will be plunged into more chaos. And quite a few million Syrians will find life actually getting WORSE. And the anarchy will draw in outside actors…

    That’s how it will pan out as that’s how it nearly always pans out in the modern Middle East. It gets worse and more Islamist

    Inshallah I’m wrong

    I don't want to make any overarching predictions, but I'll make one one. No *****ng way are any of our Syrian pals going to be boarding a plane to their new Assad-free promised land and waving goodbye to our rainy haven. Even now their lawyers will be gleefully drafting up lists of reasons why they cannot *possibly* be sent back to such a dangerous hellhole the poor lambs. You can take that to the bank.
    Then we should expel them

    We won’t, but we should

    Eventually we will elect a government that does have the bollocks to do all this stuff. But not yet
    Sieg Heil.

    How is the battle between different groups of Syrians in Manchester going that you reported earlier?
    I hear it’s stopped so every Syrian can start packing so as to go home
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,932
    Leon said:

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Ok I’m gonna make a prediction, seeing as this is politicalbetting.com


    This is how I see Syria panning out

    This quasi-jihadist beardy Jolani guy will be popular for a few weeks or even months and he might even try to construct the moderate tolerant government he promises - though it will still be grimly sharia and Islamic - so not great for minorities and women

    But it will be peaceful. For a bit

    Then factionalism will begin and more fighting and then Isis and al qaeda and the Taliban types will rise up seeking total triumph and the alawites will seek to defend themselves and Syria will be plunged into more chaos. And quite a few million Syrians will find life actually getting WORSE. And the anarchy will draw in outside actors…

    That’s how it will pan out as that’s how it nearly always pans out in the modern Middle East. It gets worse and more Islamist

    Inshallah I’m wrong

    I don't want to make any overarching predictions, but I'll make one one. No *****ng way are any of our Syrian pals going to be boarding a plane to their new Assad-free promised land and waving goodbye to our rainy haven. Even now their lawyers will be gleefully drafting up lists of reasons why they cannot *possibly* be sent back to such a dangerous hellhole the poor lambs. You can take that to the bank.
    Then we should expel them

    We won’t, but we should

    Eventually we will elect a government that does have the bollocks to do all this stuff. But not yet
    Sieg Heil.

    How is the battle between different groups of Syrians in Manchester going that you reported earlier?
    I hear it’s stopped so every Syrian can start packing so as to go home
    Do you not feel any responsibility for forwarding this bollocks. It's people who do this stuff that leads to riots, lynchings and arson of places with people living in them.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,345
    We do know that a disproportionate number of the refugees in Europe were young fellas who decided they didnt fancy hanging about to fight or fight any more, right?

    The women had a greater tendency to stay in the neighboring countries such as Turkey or Lebanon.

    So yes, I suppose they could look to head back home from Europe if there is no more fighting to worry about
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,608
    Yokes said:

    We do know that a disproportionate number of the refugees in Europe were young fellas who decided they didnt fancy hanging about to fight or fight any more, right?

    The women had a greater tendency to stay in the neighboring countries such as Turkey or Lebanon.

    So yes, I suppose they could look to head back home from Europe if there is no more fighting to worry about

    When the Ukraine war broke out, my friend Richard (who has an enormous house in Fitzroy Square) took in two Ukrainian families - six people in total. Over the last two years, one married a Brit, one is still living there, and four returned to (Western) Ukraine.

    I suspect a higher proportion of Syrians will stay (or attempt to stay) than that. But if (and it's a big if) the situation on the ground stabalizes, then some people will go home. A lot depends on what they have to go home to: do they family and friends and home there? Or were they living in apartment block in Homs that is now rubble, and those family members who didn't flee are dead?

  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,945

    Andy_JS said:

    Saddam Hussein 2003
    Gaddafi 2011
    Assad 2024

    Khamenei 2025?
    Putin 2025?

    We can hope.
    Those dates look a bit optimistic. Maybe the Ukrainians can get a morale boost out of what's just happened in Syria, ie. a bit setback for Russia.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,945
    "ANDREW NEIL: This is a disaster for Iran and the ayatollahs have never been more vulnerable. The smell of regime change is now in the Tehran air..."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-14171037/ANDREW-NEIL-Iran-collapse-Syria-dictatorship-assad.html
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,608
    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Saddam Hussein 2003
    Gaddafi 2011
    Assad 2024

    Khamenei 2025?
    Putin 2025?

    We can hope.
    Those dates look a bit optimistic. Maybe the Ukrainians can get a morale boost out of what's just happened in Syria, ie. a bit setback for Russia.
    When the end comes, it often comes unexpectedly quickly.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,945
    "How the Assad family built an empire of fear in Syria
    Hafez and his son Bashar killed countless people over five decades and oversaw the country’s descent into kleptocracy"

    https://www.ft.com/content/35855345-05b5-4e4f-a978-2754cd8b31ab
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,877
    edited December 9
    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Saddam Hussein 2003
    Gaddafi 2011
    Assad 2024

    Khamenei 2025?
    Putin 2025?

    We can hope.
    Those dates look a bit optimistic. Maybe the Ukrainians can get a morale boost out of what's just happened in Syria, ie. a bit setback for Russia.
    There's also a risk of thinking it an end, not a milestone.

    To add:

    Josip Tito 1980
    Nicolae Ceaușescu 1989
    Slobodan Milosevic 2000 (approx)

    How are those doing?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,945
    "Middle East & Africa | After Assad
    Who will rule Syria now the Assad regime has been toppled?
    Syrians are hoping for a peaceful transition of power. They may not get it"

    https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2024/12/08/who-will-rule-syria-now-the-assad-regime-has-been-toppled
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,378
    Andy_JS said:

    "ANDREW NEIL: This is a disaster for Iran and the ayatollahs have never been more vulnerable. The smell of regime change is now in the Tehran air..."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-14171037/ANDREW-NEIL-Iran-collapse-Syria-dictatorship-assad.html

    There are some things I am willing to accept Neil as an authority on, and I know he's a former editor of the Times (Sunday) and the Speccie, but is he really sufficiently expert on Syria to write this? Genuine question.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,877
    I mentioned earlier that the Russian Navy had emptied the Tartus naval base.

    Here is the video from last Thursday from Suchomimus with satellite photography:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCnl9Hsnkew
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,505
    edited December 9
    Government wants state to be more 'like a start-up'

    McFadden will launch a £100m "innovation fund" to underpin his plans, which will be used to deploy "test and learn teams" around the country. Public services will be set a challenge and be allowed to experiment and try new things to meet it, in an approach more commonly used in the business world.

    The government is also attempting to encourage workers from tech companies to join the civil service for six to 12 month secondments to help achieve the prime minister's goals.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8xjqvngekjo

    Sounds rather like Big Dom idea being rehashed (hopefully less chaotic). Will they foot the full bill of said tech workers?
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,972
    The stuff coming out about Sednaya Prison in Syria is truly horrendous.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,505
    edited December 9
    Taz said:

    The stuff coming out about Sednaya Prison in Syria is truly horrendous.

    But but but John Simpson tells us Assad was ‘weak rather than wicked’....a meek man, who is the reverse of the traditional dictator. But then John also said we needed to leave the lovely Huw Edwards alone.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,394

    Government wants state to be more 'like a start-up'

    McFadden will launch a £100m "innovation fund" to underpin his plans, which will be used to deploy "test and learn teams" around the country. Public services will be set a challenge and be allowed to experiment and try new things to meet it, in an approach more commonly used in the business world.

    The government is also attempting to encourage workers from tech companies to join the civil service for six to 12 month secondments to help achieve the prime minister's goals.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8xjqvngekjo

    Sounds rather like Big Dom idea being rehashed (hopefully less chaotic). Will they foot the full bill of said tech workers?

    It also reflects the failure of Labour to prepare for government. They have ambitions but no policies and hope that #ClassicDom and ersatz tech bros might come up with something. For all our sakes, let us hope it works.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,972

    Taz said:

    The stuff coming out about Sednaya Prison in Syria is truly horrendous.

    But but but John Simpson tells us Assad was ‘weak rather than wicked’....a meek man, who is the reverse of the traditional dictator. But then John also said we needed to leave the lovely Huw Edwards alone.
    What an utter bellend, he’s really taken a hit over both of those issues.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,505
    edited December 9

    Government wants state to be more 'like a start-up'

    McFadden will launch a £100m "innovation fund" to underpin his plans, which will be used to deploy "test and learn teams" around the country. Public services will be set a challenge and be allowed to experiment and try new things to meet it, in an approach more commonly used in the business world.

    The government is also attempting to encourage workers from tech companies to join the civil service for six to 12 month secondments to help achieve the prime minister's goals.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8xjqvngekjo

    Sounds rather like Big Dom idea being rehashed (hopefully less chaotic). Will they foot the full bill of said tech workers?

    It also reflects the failure of Labour to prepare for government. They have ambitions but no policies and hope that #ClassicDom and ersatz tech bros might come up with something. For all our sakes, let us hope it works.
    It is really obvious they didn't do their homework in the way New Labour had done, hence the 1075 reviews / consultations. If they had won an early election with a shock upset e.g. if Corbyn had beaten the Maybot, that might be some excuse (in fact I think Project Corbyn probably had much clearer idea what they would have done from day one).But everybody could see Labour would win easily in 2024.

    It is still be seen if the move fast and break stuff will ever work in conjunction with the civil service. If Big Dom is to believed (I know I know*), they were anti every approach used like this during COVID.

    * I think there is evidence he is telling at least some of the truth. Remember how poor the initial testing capacity was until Hancock to his credit put a bomb under them. The same with the COVID dashboard.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,433
    MattW said:

    I mentioned earlier that the Russian Navy had emptied the Tartus naval base.

    Here is the video from last Thursday from Suchomimus with satellite photography:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCnl9Hsnkew

    Nah, we were informed only one vessel left.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,433
    I don't like doxxing anyone, but I think I've just found an old video of LuckyGuy or HYUFD:

    https://x.com/PaulBrandITV/status/985941991203790848

    :)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,505

    Government wants state to be more 'like a start-up'

    McFadden will launch a £100m "innovation fund" to underpin his plans, which will be used to deploy "test and learn teams" around the country. Public services will be set a challenge and be allowed to experiment and try new things to meet it, in an approach more commonly used in the business world.

    The government is also attempting to encourage workers from tech companies to join the civil service for six to 12 month secondments to help achieve the prime minister's goals.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8xjqvngekjo

    Sounds rather like Big Dom idea being rehashed (hopefully less chaotic). Will they foot the full bill of said tech workers?

    It also reflects the failure of Labour to prepare for government. They have ambitions but no policies and hope that #ClassicDom and ersatz tech bros might come up with something. For all our sakes, let us hope it works.
    It is really obvious they didn't do their homework in the way New Labour had done, hence the 1075 reviews / consultations. If they had won an early election with a shock upset e.g. if Corbyn had beaten the Maybot, that might be some excuse (in fact I think Project Corbyn probably had much clearer idea what they would have done from day one).But everybody could see Labour would win easily in 2024.

    It is still be seen if the move fast and break stuff will ever work in conjunction with the civil service. If Big Dom is to believed (I know I know*), they were anti every approach used like this during COVID.

    * I think there is evidence he is telling at least some of the truth. Remember how poor the initial testing capacity was until Hancock to his credit put a bomb under them. The same with the COVID dashboard.
    Edit -> not just testing capacity, how slow and turgid the ramp up with and unwillingness to use outside help, it had to be just their labs, couldn't use university equipment etc. Only when they set the 100k tests a day did we see progress.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,505
    edited December 9

    I don't like doxxing anyone, but I think I've just found an old video of LuckyGuy or HYUFD:

    https://x.com/PaulBrandITV/status/985941991203790848

    :)

    That woman has definitely been on every single Free Palestine demo in 2024....season ticket holder.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,394

    Government wants state to be more 'like a start-up'

    McFadden will launch a £100m "innovation fund" to underpin his plans, which will be used to deploy "test and learn teams" around the country. Public services will be set a challenge and be allowed to experiment and try new things to meet it, in an approach more commonly used in the business world.

    The government is also attempting to encourage workers from tech companies to join the civil service for six to 12 month secondments to help achieve the prime minister's goals.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8xjqvngekjo

    Sounds rather like Big Dom idea being rehashed (hopefully less chaotic). Will they foot the full bill of said tech workers?

    It also reflects the failure of Labour to prepare for government. They have ambitions but no policies and hope that #ClassicDom and ersatz tech bros might come up with something. For all our sakes, let us hope it works.
    It is really obvious they didn't do their homework in the way New Labour had done, hence the 1075 reviews / consultations. If they had won an early election with a shock upset e.g. if Corbyn had beaten the Maybot, that might be some excuse (in fact I think Project Corbyn probably had much clearer idea what they would have done from day one).But everybody could see Labour would win easily in 2024.

    It is still be seen if the move fast and break stuff will ever work in conjunction with the civil service. If Big Dom is to believed (I know I know*), they were anti every approach used like this during COVID.

    * I think there is evidence he is telling at least some of the truth. Remember how poor the initial testing capacity was until Hancock to his credit put a bomb under them. The same with the COVID dashboard.
    Not to mention that tech firms long since abandoned move fast and break things.
  • Penddu2Penddu2 Posts: 717
    This is an opportunity for GCC (or at least UAE/Saudi) to step in as peacekeepers. No military objectives other than keeping US/Israel/Turkey out and discouraging local militias. Then start rebuilding country.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    Yokes said:

    Yokes said:

    Leon said:

    Yokes said:

    Between martial law in South Korea and the rapidity of the fall of Assad, you'd have to Eurmillions level odds of both being in anyone's prediction card for 2024.

    Just to deal with the apparent western sophisticates who go on about Assad being better than other options or because he was in theory, a non religious nut job, he might be a better bet.

    You are full of absolute shit.

    The guy is a mass murderer and his entire regime and that of his equally mass murderer father was built on sectarian grounds. As ever when it came to it not that many people in his own country really supported him, they hated him. Ipso facto the world is better shot of his regime. As uncertain as the future may be, it is no excuse for one arsehole of a dictator surviving.

    The dipshits in the West who thought 'well he might kind be kind of like us really, or 'he's a doctor who trained in Europe once' spent decades thinking they could somehow turn him into some kind Western oriented bloke. They failed miserably because, revelation everyone, he wasn't and they kept pushing that bullshit right up, believe it or not, to recent weeks. Yep, there were still US & European diplomats trying to pull a stroke that if he booted out the Iranian/Hezbollah influence, we'd cut him a bit of slack. These big brains completely missed the fact that those backers had already been absolutely battered by the Israelis so there wasnt much influence left.

    They also forgot all those prisoners he got rid of to send to Iraq to fight US forces and the nascient Iraqi government (something many Iraqis havent forgot). Well Bashar, some of them came home and were involved in booting you out, you clown.

    He should have been hung from one of da's statues.

    You just paraded an entire regiment of straw men

    At one point the choice was Assad or ISIS. That was the choice. Evil or even greater evil

    Evil is superior to even greater evil; and plenty of us are concerned that Assad will now be replaced by an even greater evil - something truly horrific for syrias many minorities - Christians, Druze, Alawites - and also horrific for women if the reports of Taliban style beliefs are true

    It seems the Americans feel the same way as they are busy liquidating ISIS on the ground with great urgency. I hope they take out every last one
    The choice was not solely between Assad and IS at any point. How many opposition groups were involved over the last decade, do you know?
    One of the great Russian propaganda coups of the last decade was to make people believe that anyone in Syria who was not with Assad was ISIS.
    What people didnt notice was that Assad wasnt half as keen on eliminating IS as people would have you believe. He supported them plenty.

    1. Syria was a conduit for IS fighters going Iraq, not just the ones Assad let out jail, but imports that travelled via Syria without interference
    2. Anyone who looks as the Syrian , Iranian and Russian military effort during the civil war will notice that IS dominated areas got off fairly lightly. Others where IS was not in play in a sigificant capacity were the focus. Why was that, if the threat was seen as IS?
    3. There was a also a good commercial trading relationship between the Assad government and IS, to the tune of hundreds of millions going to IS over the years

    In fact, it was the Americans and aligned Syrian opposition fighters, again who did most of the work against IS. Does anyone remember the SAA, or the Russians or the Iranians liberating Raqqa from IS? No, they didn't lift a finger and had no interest in doing so

    Assad's regime was also the biggest drug dealer in the Mediterranean.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    rcs1000 said:

    Yokes said:

    We do know that a disproportionate number of the refugees in Europe were young fellas who decided they didnt fancy hanging about to fight or fight any more, right?

    The women had a greater tendency to stay in the neighboring countries such as Turkey or Lebanon.

    So yes, I suppose they could look to head back home from Europe if there is no more fighting to worry about

    When the Ukraine war broke out, my friend Richard (who has an enormous house in Fitzroy Square) took in two Ukrainian families - six people in total. Over the last two years, one married a Brit, one is still living there, and four returned to (Western) Ukraine.

    I suspect a higher proportion of Syrians will stay (or attempt to stay) than that. But if (and it's a big if) the situation on the ground stabalizes, then some people will go home. A lot depends on what they have to go home to: do they family and friends and home there? Or were they living in apartment block in Homs that is now rubble, and those family members who didn't flee are dead?

    There are already reports of significant numbers returning from Turkey - which is probably rather less hospitable.

    PB's Assad backers (I'm still astonished we had any at all) ought to be hoping the chaos they're predicting doesn't happen.
    The future of Syria us extremely uncertain, but if they do manage to find some sort of stability, I'd expect fairly large numbers to return from Europe and the UK.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172

    Taz said:

    The stuff coming out about Sednaya Prison in Syria is truly horrendous.

    But but but John Simpson tells us Assad was ‘weak rather than wicked’....a meek man, who is the reverse of the traditional dictator. But then John also said we needed to leave the lovely Huw Edwards alone.
    He was weak and evil.
    An utterly vile man who unleashed horrors on his country.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    Taz said:

    The stuff coming out about Sednaya Prison in Syria is truly horrendous.

    It's been notorious for decades.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sednaya_Prison
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,877

    Government wants state to be more 'like a start-up'

    McFadden will launch a £100m "innovation fund" to underpin his plans, which will be used to deploy "test and learn teams" around the country. Public services will be set a challenge and be allowed to experiment and try new things to meet it, in an approach more commonly used in the business world.

    The government is also attempting to encourage workers from tech companies to join the civil service for six to 12 month secondments to help achieve the prime minister's goals.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8xjqvngekjo

    Sounds rather like Big Dom idea being rehashed (hopefully less chaotic). Will they foot the full bill of said tech workers?

    It sounds like various initiatives from Mrs Thatcher's time, or the input we (OK - me) were discussing yesterday from Tom Steinberg.

    I can't see a problem with that, as long as the secondees appreciate the different requirements.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    viewcode said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "ANDREW NEIL: This is a disaster for Iran and the ayatollahs have never been more vulnerable. The smell of regime change is now in the Tehran air..."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-14171037/ANDREW-NEIL-Iran-collapse-Syria-dictatorship-assad.html

    There are some things I am willing to accept Neil as an authority on, and I know he's a former editor of the Times (Sunday) and the Speccie, but is he really sufficiently expert on Syria to write this? Genuine question.
    He's not alone in that analysis.
    It's a strategic disaster for Iran, though I don't know whether it changes the future of its regime ?

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/08/syria-fall-of-damascus-sidelines-russia-and-brings-turkey-to-the-fore
    ...Araghchi had also been doing the rounds in Doha, insisting it was possible for Assad to survive and clinging to the point that all external powers had agreed that Syria’s territorial integrity must be protected. But he had the haunted look of a man who knew events had suddenly run away from him. In previous days every effort to persuade Iraq, Tehran’s last bastion in the Arab world, to come to Assad’s rescue had failed. Iran’s 12-year engagement in Syria was coming to an end, marking the closure of its land corridor into Lebanon and Hezbollah. Iran’s whole security strategy of forward defence had collapsed, and now the government may need to rethink how it survives.

    By contrast the Turkish foreign minister, Hakan Fidan, also a former head of Turkish intelligence, surrounded by a vast entourage, said little in public, sensing his country may be the biggest external beneficiary of Assad’s fall. Turkey has at its disposal the umbrella group of Syrian militias called the Syrian National Army and a relationship of sorts with HTS. But with power comes responsibility. More than any other country in the region it has the power to help Syrians form the independent consensus government their long struggle for liberation deserves...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    Penddu2 said:

    This is an opportunity for GCC (or at least UAE/Saudi) to step in as peacekeepers. No military objectives other than keeping US/Israel/Turkey out and discouraging local militias. Then start rebuilding country.

    How do you keep Turkey out ?
    It's a neighbour, already with substantial influence and presence in the country.

    The GCC has neither border with, nor presence in the country. Any new government will need funding, I guess, which they certainly do have. And the collapse of Iranian influence does present an opportunity.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,505
    edited December 9

    Government wants state to be more 'like a start-up'

    McFadden will launch a £100m "innovation fund" to underpin his plans, which will be used to deploy "test and learn teams" around the country. Public services will be set a challenge and be allowed to experiment and try new things to meet it, in an approach more commonly used in the business world.

    The government is also attempting to encourage workers from tech companies to join the civil service for six to 12 month secondments to help achieve the prime minister's goals.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8xjqvngekjo

    Sounds rather like Big Dom idea being rehashed (hopefully less chaotic). Will they foot the full bill of said tech workers?

    It also reflects the failure of Labour to prepare for government. They have ambitions but no policies and hope that #ClassicDom and ersatz tech bros might come up with something. For all our sakes, let us hope it works.
    It is really obvious they didn't do their homework in the way New Labour had done, hence the 1075 reviews / consultations. If they had won an early election with a shock upset e.g. if Corbyn had beaten the Maybot, that might be some excuse (in fact I think Project Corbyn probably had much clearer idea what they would have done from day one).But everybody could see Labour would win easily in 2024.

    It is still be seen if the move fast and break stuff will ever work in conjunction with the civil service. If Big Dom is to believed (I know I know*), they were anti every approach used like this during COVID.

    * I think there is evidence he is telling at least some of the truth. Remember how poor the initial testing capacity was until Hancock to his credit put a bomb under them. The same with the COVID dashboard.
    Not to mention that tech firms long since abandoned move fast and break things.
    I think start-ups that culture still remains true. But certainly not a Google, they move slowly, have another meeting about a meeting, end up tasking 3 different teams to replicate each others work and then bin it 18 months later.
  • Shecorns88Shecorns88 Posts: 279
    MattW said:

    Government wants state to be more 'like a start-up'

    McFadden will launch a £100m "innovation fund" to underpin his plans, which will be used to deploy "test and learn teams" around the country. Public services will be set a challenge and be allowed to experiment and try new things to meet it, in an approach more commonly used in the business world.

    The government is also attempting to encourage workers from tech companies to join the civil service for six to 12 month secondments to help achieve the prime minister's goals.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8xjqvngekjo

    Sounds rather like Big Dom idea being rehashed (hopefully less chaotic). Will they foot the full bill of said tech workers?

    It sounds like various initiatives from Mrs Thatcher's time, or the input we (OK - me) were discussing yesterday from Tom Steinberg.

    I can't see a problem with that, as long as the secondees appreciate the different requirements.
    McFadden and Healey are both far more effective in Government than in Opposition.

    Quietly but competently and confidently doing their jobs in the "engine room" of the Cabinet with the years of Parliamentary experience they have showing through.
  • Shecorns88Shecorns88 Posts: 279

    Government wants state to be more 'like a start-up'

    McFadden will launch a £100m "innovation fund" to underpin his plans, which will be used to deploy "test and learn teams" around the country. Public services will be set a challenge and be allowed to experiment and try new things to meet it, in an approach more commonly used in the business world.

    The government is also attempting to encourage workers from tech companies to join the civil service for six to 12 month secondments to help achieve the prime minister's goals.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8xjqvngekjo

    Sounds rather like Big Dom idea being rehashed (hopefully less chaotic). Will they foot the full bill of said tech workers?

    It also reflects the failure of Labour to prepare for government. They have ambitions but no policies and hope that #ClassicDom and ersatz tech bros might come up with something. For all our sakes, let us hope it works.
    Haigh , Miliband , Phillipson have policies off the shelf ready and already being implemented.

    Clearly the economic and fiscal situation came as a significant shock and independent bodies bought in have proven that. In the Home Office of course NO ONE could have legislated for the Riots orchestrated by Farage and the Far Right.

    Of course none of that matches the "no plan claptrap" being peddled by right wing MSM.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,505
    edited December 9
This discussion has been closed.