SAS 'not justified' in 1992 shooting of four IRA men
The use of lethal force by SAS soldiers was unjustified when they opened fire killing four IRA men in an ambush at Clonoe in County Tyrone, an inquest has ruled.
Kevin Barry O'Donnell, 21, Sean O'Farrell, 22, Peter Clancy, 21, and Patrick Vincent, 20, died in February 1992, minutes after they had carried out a gun attack on Coalisland police station.
The soldiers opened fire as the men arrived at St Patrick's Church car park in a hijacked lorry which had a heavy machine gun welded to its tailgate. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq8kpxgdyyvo
This will not help the narrative.
Powers that be can gtf on this one.
The powers that be do not (thankfully) control the decision-making of inquests.
On topic, why is everyone always on a rush with this talk. Sack Badenoch after only a few weeks. Con / Reform pact or die.
It's 4 and 1/2 years away. The time for any pact is not remotely this year, why would either side want to tie itself to someone else, this far away from an election.
It's all excited chatter from people who like to throw mischief and create news.
Limited attention spans plus 24 h news cycle.
Life was better when (a) TV actually stopped broadcasting for some of the day and night and (b) people were rather more grown up about stuff. If you went through the second world war I suspect you'd have a lot less truck with the flippancy of modern life.
And lastly our media is terrible. They made fools of themselves during covid, but I don't think they have ever realised let alone apologised for it. Every pathetic attempted 'gotcha' question was another nail in the coffin for serious public office/media relations. Why would MP's engage with twats who just want to lead the news with their stupid question about 'substantive meals' or how many times a day can you exercise...
Kay Burley is going though. Might make a difference.
PBers who think Trump wont be able to change the constitution to allow a third term because 'there's hurdles' and lots of people like state senators would have to agree need to look at what is happening to those who are trying to stop a non-security cleared Musk from accessing every national security secret and private federal government information source.
SAS 'not justified' in 1992 shooting of four IRA men
The use of lethal force by SAS soldiers was unjustified when they opened fire killing four IRA men in an ambush at Clonoe in County Tyrone, an inquest has ruled.
Kevin Barry O'Donnell, 21, Sean O'Farrell, 22, Peter Clancy, 21, and Patrick Vincent, 20, died in February 1992, minutes after they had carried out a gun attack on Coalisland police station.
The soldiers opened fire as the men arrived at St Patrick's Church car park in a hijacked lorry which had a heavy machine gun welded to its tailgate. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq8kpxgdyyvo
"Steve Coogan has been banned for driving for two months instead of six, after telling the judge that a lengthier ban would impact the filming of his popular TV comedy series The Trip.
The actor and comedian was caught going at 97mph, well over the 70mph speed limit, while travelling in a Range Rover on the M6 in Staffordshire in July last year."
I have never seen what is to be gained by a pact, from either party. The left wing of politics has benefitted enormously from offering Labour, Lib Dem, Green and Nationalist flavours. Now the Tories and Reform are doing the same, we're already edging closer to right/left parity in polling. Stay apart, and only make an informal pact whilst remaining publicly opposed and appealing to different demographics would be my suggestion.
That’s within the MoE of a year without growth. Total stagnancy
This government likely won’t recover from this disastrous beginning. Still, great time to give Mauritius £18bn, eh?
Come on, how will Starmer be able to show his face at Matrix Chambers to sue the UK for god knows what after he's booted out if he doesn't acquiesce with the right sort of opinions regarding ICJ rulings ? Think of how awkward the dinner parties with Sands and his friends will be. Isn't £18 Bn a mere pittance to save Starmer from personal embarrassment ?!
I don’t believe the Chagos deal with go through now. It is so absurdly high profile and it could doom the government by itself
People have no clue where these islands are, they mostly couldnt give a fuck, but EIGHTEEN BILLION QUID
There is no way you can spin that
There’s a very amusing TwiX thread saying “it’s like seeing a nice table in IKEA for sale for £175,000 and you go the till presuming it’s £175 because…. Surely not….”
😂 I know YOU as the spinner in the PB works, on this Chagos Island deal you and those using this false and very wishful £18B clearly know nothing about.
I urge you and others to stop it, as you are only going to make things far worse for yourselves as this Chagos thing unfolds in coming weeks.
Because I have this Chagos thing sussed, I know exactly how it plays out and joins up in the history books. 😊
You might be right. But the lack of clarity from the government about what the deal actually is, and its cost, allows febrile minds to flourish. And the amounts are so vast that openness is a requirement.
We need a full discussion in parliament, followed by a vote - before the deal is signed. What's wrong with that?
I think the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 requires the Government to lay the treaty before Parliament for scrutiny? But that doesn't entail a vote, I think.
"Steve Coogan has been banned for driving for two months instead of six, after telling the judge that a lengthier ban would impact the filming of his popular TV comedy series The Trip.
The actor and comedian was caught going at 97mph, well over the 70mph speed limit, while travelling in a Range Rover on the M6 in Staffordshire in July last year."
"Steve Coogan has been banned for driving for two months instead of six, after telling the judge that a lengthier ban would impact the filming of his popular TV comedy series The Trip.
The actor and comedian was caught going at 97mph, well over the 70mph speed limit, while travelling in a Range Rover on the M6 in Staffordshire in July last year."
"Steve Coogan has been banned for driving for two months instead of six, after telling the judge that a lengthier ban would impact the filming of his popular TV comedy series The Trip.
The actor and comedian was caught going at 97mph, well over the 70mph speed limit, while travelling in a Range Rover on the M6 in Staffordshire in July last year."
A friend of ours worked for an F1 team when he got a driving ban. Speeding convictions were frowned upon by the management, so he ended up booking a B&B nearby for months, and taking very expensive taxi trips at weekends back to his home, a long way away.
I was bemused by the fact that a racing team did not like their employees getting speeding tickets, but apparently it was all part of F1's safety drive at the time, and a concern about bad PR.
"Steve Coogan has been banned for driving for two months instead of six, after telling the judge that a lengthier ban would impact the filming of his popular TV comedy series The Trip.
The actor and comedian was caught going at 97mph, well over the 70mph speed limit, while travelling in a Range Rover on the M6 in Staffordshire in July last year."
Off topic: Will American voters blame Trump (and Musk) for higher egg prices? "The average retail egg price increased 37 percent between December 2023 and December 2024, according to consumer price index data. At the wholesale level, the price for a dozen Midwest Large eggs recently hit $7.76, compared with about $1.50 in early January 2022, before the outbreak began, according to the food market research firm Expana. Prices for egg products, such as liquid and dried eggs, also have gone up, said Brian Moscogiuri, vice president of Eggs Unlimited, a large supplier." source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/02/04/waffle-house-egg-surcharge-bird-flu-outbreak/
Ten years or so ago, in my area large eggs typically sold for 2 dollars a dozen, with occasional specials for 1 dollar.
(For the record: I don't blame the Loser, although I do expect his policies will increase inflation, overall. Incidentally, one of the reasons for higher prices -- in some states -- is that those states have required eggs be "cage free" or even "open range". That makes it more likely that avian flu will be transmitted from wild birds. Scientists seem to be worried, rightly, that the flu may become a serious problem for humans, too.)
If it’s any consolation I’ve just paid £4.50 ($5.50) for six Burford brown eggs so you are still getting a good deal at $7.60 for 12.
What are Burford brown eggs? I just bought 10 organic eggs for 3.39 euros in the local supermarket in Germany. Normal free range eggs are 2.39 euros for 10
Its eggs from a breed (is that the right term for birds?) of chicken.
10 organic eggs 4.6 gbp (5.50 euros) in Tesco, 3.39 euros in Rewe - and that includes 7% German VAT. Seems a massive difference
Think I paid £1.70-ish for six free-range eggs last time. You can get better value on bigger packs, obviously, but we don't cook many things that need them.
How can free range eggs also be organic? Are they accompanied on their roving around the fields.
When the fuck is Congress and the court system going to do something?
If 'something unfortunate' happened to Trump, is there actually anything that would stop Musk seizing control? Certainly not Vance, who's preoccupied with waging X IQ battles with Mensa Man Rory Stewart.
He has already seized control.
What would be the difference other he would move his laptop into the oval office rather than the one next door?
On topic, why is everyone always on a rush with this talk. Sack Badenoch after only a few weeks. Con / Reform pact or die.
It's 4 and 1/2 years away. The time for any pact is not remotely this year, why would either side want to tie itself to someone else, this far away from an election.
It's all excited chatter from people who like to throw mischief and create news.
Well, every time our resident tumescent media bitch mentions Farage or Trump he seems to feel the surge and requires some "me" time.
Meanwhile in the real world, sales of Teslas are 40-60% down across Europe and there is a growing consumer boycott of US goods in Canada. So while the in house mag of the vermin right may be feeling it, I think history will judge both Farage and Trump in quite a different way.
C´mon Leon, whats the odds on Reform? Its a betting site.
Nice.
I guess a refreshingly different angle from the usual pompous bloviating.
I’m gratified I’m such a dominant, almost supernatural figure in the fearful psyches of so many pb-ers
I cast aspersions on a comment in the last thread and fifteen or more rushed to Like it. As if I am Old Nick passing by and they are god fearing Salem folk rushing loudly to the aid of a stricken goodwife
Too late you fools. You have voted to end your democracy.
Trump told you what he was and still you voted him as your candidate.
This is the tragedy of it. They chose this. In a way it would be less concerning if he'd led a successful military coup. You could understand it then. You'd know where you stood.
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
Off topic: Will American voters blame Trump (and Musk) for higher egg prices? "The average retail egg price increased 37 percent between December 2023 and December 2024, according to consumer price index data. At the wholesale level, the price for a dozen Midwest Large eggs recently hit $7.76, compared with about $1.50 in early January 2022, before the outbreak began, according to the food market research firm Expana. Prices for egg products, such as liquid and dried eggs, also have gone up, said Brian Moscogiuri, vice president of Eggs Unlimited, a large supplier." source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/02/04/waffle-house-egg-surcharge-bird-flu-outbreak/
Ten years or so ago, in my area large eggs typically sold for 2 dollars a dozen, with occasional specials for 1 dollar.
(For the record: I don't blame the Loser, although I do expect his policies will increase inflation, overall. Incidentally, one of the reasons for higher prices -- in some states -- is that those states have required eggs be "cage free" or even "open range". That makes it more likely that avian flu will be transmitted from wild birds. Scientists seem to be worried, rightly, that the flu may become a serious problem for humans, too.)
If it’s any consolation I’ve just paid £4.50 ($5.50) for six Burford brown eggs so you are still getting a good deal at $7.60 for 12.
What are Burford brown eggs? I just bought 10 organic eggs for 3.39 euros in the local supermarket in Germany. Normal free range eggs are 2.39 euros for 10
Its eggs from a breed (is that the right term for birds?) of chicken.
10 organic eggs 4.6 gbp (5.50 euros) in Tesco, 3.39 euros in Rewe - and that includes 7% German VAT. Seems a massive difference
Think I paid £1.70-ish for six free-range eggs last time. You can get better value on bigger packs, obviously, but we don't cook many things that need them.
How can free range eggs also be organic? Are they accompanied on their roving around the fields.
That’s within the MoE of a year without growth. Total stagnancy
This government likely won’t recover from this disastrous beginning. Still, great time to give Mauritius £18bn, eh?
Come on, how will Starmer be able to show his face at Matrix Chambers to sue the UK for god knows what after he's booted out if he doesn't acquiesce with the right sort of opinions regarding ICJ rulings ? Think of how awkward the dinner parties with Sands and his friends will be. Isn't £18 Bn a mere pittance to save Starmer from personal embarrassment ?!
I don’t believe the Chagos deal with go through now. It is so absurdly high profile and it could doom the government by itself
People have no clue where these islands are, they mostly couldnt give a fuck, but EIGHTEEN BILLION QUID
There is no way you can spin that
There’s a very amusing TwiX thread saying “it’s like seeing a nice table in IKEA for sale for £175,000 and you go the till presuming it’s £175 because…. Surely not….”
😂 I know YOU as the spinner in the PB works, on this Chagos Island deal you and those using this false and very wishful £18B clearly know nothing about.
I urge you and others to stop it, as you are only going to make things far worse for yourselves as this Chagos thing unfolds in coming weeks.
Because I have this Chagos thing sussed, I know exactly how it plays out and joins up in the history books. 😊
You might be right. But the lack of clarity from the government about what the deal actually is, and its cost, allows febrile minds to flourish. And the amounts are so vast that openness is a requirement.
We need a full discussion in parliament, followed by a vote - before the deal is signed. What's wrong with that?
I am right. Starmer will get all the ticks and nods to enable America’s plan easy enough. And likely more praise from Trump for being America’s good little doggy.
There’s something going on in Kursk Oblast this evening. Looks like a major Ukranian offensive, on the six-month anniversary of their initial incursion into Russia.
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
We should simply keep the Islands we have. The whole International order thing is just nonsense. I've no idea what the Americans are paying us for their lease, but I suspect it isn't enough.
This whole running away nonsense really needs to end.
(I say this as someone that would never vote Reform)
“Labour has launched a series of adverts with Reform-style branding and messaging as the party seeks to combat the rise of the rightwing party.
Exclusive: Some MPs and activists upset at tone of party’s Facebook campaign aimed at countering Farage
The Facebook adverts include a series from a group called UK Migration Updates boasting about how many people the government has deported. The adverts do not display the Labour logo and are in a similar shade of blue to that used by Reform UK.”
SAS 'not justified' in 1992 shooting of four IRA men
The use of lethal force by SAS soldiers was unjustified when they opened fire killing four IRA men in an ambush at Clonoe in County Tyrone, an inquest has ruled.
Kevin Barry O'Donnell, 21, Sean O'Farrell, 22, Peter Clancy, 21, and Patrick Vincent, 20, died in February 1992, minutes after they had carried out a gun attack on Coalisland police station.
The soldiers opened fire as the men arrived at St Patrick's Church car park in a hijacked lorry which had a heavy machine gun welded to its tailgate. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq8kpxgdyyvo
This will not help the narrative.
'Not justified in killing people that have carried out a gun attack'. Excellent. There may be some quibbles here and there, but it strikes me that they should get medals for killing the people that carried out a gun attack.
Shooting them in the back, though, as they were running away? Or when they were already incapacitated?
SAS 'not justified' in 1992 shooting of four IRA men
The use of lethal force by SAS soldiers was unjustified when they opened fire killing four IRA men in an ambush at Clonoe in County Tyrone, an inquest has ruled.
Kevin Barry O'Donnell, 21, Sean O'Farrell, 22, Peter Clancy, 21, and Patrick Vincent, 20, died in February 1992, minutes after they had carried out a gun attack on Coalisland police station.
The soldiers opened fire as the men arrived at St Patrick's Church car park in a hijacked lorry which had a heavy machine gun welded to its tailgate. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq8kpxgdyyvo
This will not help the narrative.
Lethal force was utterly justified IMO, if those facts are true.
Interesting point. We had (and trained around) the Yellow Card which set out the rules of engagement so eg "masked man pointing gun at you - ok to engage; masked man pointing gun at floor facing other way - not so ok to engage, etc. But that really referred to certain ops, and mainly to chance encounters.
But this op (and the Loughall one) was of a different type. Tacint would have had int (ok that is their job...) which pointed towards a known trajectory of PIRA (or whoever) and the SF would have acted accordingly. According, that is, to what Whitehall deemed was the appropriate action to take in the circumstances. Eff off machine gun on the back of a wagon having just put in a hit on an RUC station (not by any means an unknown or unprecedented MO by PIRA) = green army out of the area and let the games begin.
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
We should simply keep the Islands we have. The whole International order thing is just nonsense. I've no idea what the Americans are paying us for their lease, but I suspect it isn't enough.
This whole running away nonsense really needs to end.
(I say this as someone that would never vote Reform)
AIUI, we receive an annual discount on Polaris in return for Diego Garcia, and said discount is in the tens of millions.
Man who thinks the UK is dying posts from overseas again
Why do you think I’m overseas you fucking dimwit?
Because the Conservative Party house comic paid for your passage and digs. Perhaps you should remember that when you imply the Conservatives are toast!
SAS 'not justified' in 1992 shooting of four IRA men
The use of lethal force by SAS soldiers was unjustified when they opened fire killing four IRA men in an ambush at Clonoe in County Tyrone, an inquest has ruled.
Kevin Barry O'Donnell, 21, Sean O'Farrell, 22, Peter Clancy, 21, and Patrick Vincent, 20, died in February 1992, minutes after they had carried out a gun attack on Coalisland police station.
The soldiers opened fire as the men arrived at St Patrick's Church car park in a hijacked lorry which had a heavy machine gun welded to its tailgate. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq8kpxgdyyvo
This will not help the narrative.
'Not justified in killing people that have carried out a gun attack'. Excellent. There may be some quibbles here and there, but it strikes me that they should get medals for killing the people that carried out a gun attack.
Shooting them in the back, though, as they were running away? Or when they were already incapacitated?
I'm not that fussed. The fate of gun attackers really doesn't bother me other than they should be dead. (Obviously this just applies to 100% certain gun attackers)
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
We should simply keep the Islands we have. The whole International order thing is just nonsense. I've no idea what the Americans are paying us for their lease, but I suspect it isn't enough.
This whole running away nonsense really needs to end.
(I say this as someone that would never vote Reform)
AIUI, we receive an annual discount on Polaris in return for Diego Garcia, and said discount is in the tens of millions.
SAS 'not justified' in 1992 shooting of four IRA men
The use of lethal force by SAS soldiers was unjustified when they opened fire killing four IRA men in an ambush at Clonoe in County Tyrone, an inquest has ruled.
Kevin Barry O'Donnell, 21, Sean O'Farrell, 22, Peter Clancy, 21, and Patrick Vincent, 20, died in February 1992, minutes after they had carried out a gun attack on Coalisland police station.
The soldiers opened fire as the men arrived at St Patrick's Church car park in a hijacked lorry which had a heavy machine gun welded to its tailgate. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq8kpxgdyyvo
This will not help the narrative.
Lethal force was utterly justified IMO, if those facts are true.
Interesting point. We had (and trained around) the Yellow Card which set out the rules of engagement so eg "masked man pointing gun at you - ok to engage; masked man pointing gun at floor facing other way - not so ok to engage, etc. But that really referred to certain ops, and mainly to chance encounters.
But this op (and the Loughall one) was of a different type. Tacint would have had int (ok that is their job...) which pointed towards a known trajectory of PIRA (or whoever) and the SF would have acted accordingly. According, that is, to what Whitehall deemed was the appropriate action to take in the circumstances. Eff off machine gun on the back of a wagon having just put in a hit on an RUC station (not by any means an unknown or unprecedented MO by PIRA) = green army out of the area and let the games begin.
Isn’t taking out terrorists exactly what we expect the Hereford branch of the diplomatic service to be doing?
SAS 'not justified' in 1992 shooting of four IRA men
The use of lethal force by SAS soldiers was unjustified when they opened fire killing four IRA men in an ambush at Clonoe in County Tyrone, an inquest has ruled.
Kevin Barry O'Donnell, 21, Sean O'Farrell, 22, Peter Clancy, 21, and Patrick Vincent, 20, died in February 1992, minutes after they had carried out a gun attack on Coalisland police station.
The soldiers opened fire as the men arrived at St Patrick's Church car park in a hijacked lorry which had a heavy machine gun welded to its tailgate. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq8kpxgdyyvo
This will not help the narrative.
Lethal force was utterly justified IMO, if those facts are true.
Interesting point. We had (and trained around) the Yellow Card which set out the rules of engagement so eg "masked man pointing gun at you - ok to engage; masked man pointing gun at floor facing other way - not so ok to engage, etc. But that really referred to certain ops, and mainly to chance encounters.
But this op (and the Loughall one) was of a different type. Tacint would have had int (ok that is their job...) which pointed towards a known trajectory of PIRA (or whoever) and the SF would have acted accordingly. According, that is, to what Whitehall deemed was the appropriate action to take in the circumstances. Eff off machine gun on the back of a wagon having just put in a hit on an RUC station (not by any means an unknown or unprecedented MO by PIRA) = green army out of the area and let the games begin.
Brave men risked their lives in action to take out evil men with guns who wanted to kill Britons, and these evil enemies were caught in the act
That’s it. That’s the alpha and omega of it
We must be the most diseased and insane society on earth that we allow our veteran soldiers to be pursued by rancid lawyers in this way
Off topic: Will American voters blame Trump (and Musk) for higher egg prices? "The average retail egg price increased 37 percent between December 2023 and December 2024, according to consumer price index data. At the wholesale level, the price for a dozen Midwest Large eggs recently hit $7.76, compared with about $1.50 in early January 2022, before the outbreak began, according to the food market research firm Expana. Prices for egg products, such as liquid and dried eggs, also have gone up, said Brian Moscogiuri, vice president of Eggs Unlimited, a large supplier." source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/02/04/waffle-house-egg-surcharge-bird-flu-outbreak/
Ten years or so ago, in my area large eggs typically sold for 2 dollars a dozen, with occasional specials for 1 dollar.
(For the record: I don't blame the Loser, although I do expect his policies will increase inflation, overall. Incidentally, one of the reasons for higher prices -- in some states -- is that those states have required eggs be "cage free" or even "open range". That makes it more likely that avian flu will be transmitted from wild birds. Scientists seem to be worried, rightly, that the flu may become a serious problem for humans, too.)
If it’s any consolation I’ve just paid £4.50 ($5.50) for six Burford brown eggs so you are still getting a good deal at $7.60 for 12.
What are Burford brown eggs? I just bought 10 organic eggs for 3.39 euros in the local supermarket in Germany. Normal free range eggs are 2.39 euros for 10
Its eggs from a breed (is that the right term for birds?) of chicken.
10 organic eggs 4.6 gbp (5.50 euros) in Tesco, 3.39 euros in Rewe - and that includes 7% German VAT. Seems a massive difference
Think I paid £1.70-ish for six free-range eggs last time. You can get better value on bigger packs, obviously, but we don't cook many things that need them.
How can free range eggs also be organic? Are they accompanied on their roving around the fields.
Why would they not be organic?
Because they could presumably find all kinds of unorganic matter on their free range travels.
The Tories are tostada. They are the liberals in 1924
Reform will win in 2028 and they probably won’t even need Tory help, as things stand
To go from 5 MP's to a majority government would be a pretty unbelievable political earthquake..but I suppose the hyperbole is in keeping with most of your posts..🧐😏
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
We should simply keep the Islands we have. The whole International order thing is just nonsense. I've no idea what the Americans are paying us for their lease, but I suspect it isn't enough.
This whole running away nonsense really needs to end.
(I say this as someone that would never vote Reform)
AIUI, we receive an annual discount on Polaris in return for Diego Garcia, and said discount is in the tens of millions.
Whoopy doo - tens of millions vs tens of billions!?
The Tories are tostada. They are the liberals in 1924
Reform will win in 2028 and they probably won’t even need Tory help, as things stand
To go from 5 MP's to a majority government would be a pretty unbelievable political earthquake..but I suppose the hyperbole is in keeping with most of your posts..🧐😏
Remember when it comes to tips Leon is no John McCririck.
The Tories are tostada. They are the liberals in 1924
Reform will win in 2028 and they probably won’t even need Tory help, as things stand
To go from 5 MP's to a majority government would be a pretty unbelievable political earthquake..but I suppose the hyperbole is in keeping with most of your posts..🧐😏
Remember when it comes to tips Leon is no John McCririck.
SAS 'not justified' in 1992 shooting of four IRA men
The use of lethal force by SAS soldiers was unjustified when they opened fire killing four IRA men in an ambush at Clonoe in County Tyrone, an inquest has ruled.
Kevin Barry O'Donnell, 21, Sean O'Farrell, 22, Peter Clancy, 21, and Patrick Vincent, 20, died in February 1992, minutes after they had carried out a gun attack on Coalisland police station.
The soldiers opened fire as the men arrived at St Patrick's Church car park in a hijacked lorry which had a heavy machine gun welded to its tailgate. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq8kpxgdyyvo
This will not help the narrative.
Lethal force was utterly justified IMO, if those facts are true.
Interesting point. We had (and trained around) the Yellow Card which set out the rules of engagement so eg "masked man pointing gun at you - ok to engage; masked man pointing gun at floor facing other way - not so ok to engage, etc. But that really referred to certain ops, and mainly to chance encounters.
But this op (and the Loughall one) was of a different type. Tacint would have had int (ok that is their job...) which pointed towards a known trajectory of PIRA (or whoever) and the SF would have acted accordingly. According, that is, to what Whitehall deemed was the appropriate action to take in the circumstances. Eff off machine gun on the back of a wagon having just put in a hit on an RUC station (not by any means an unknown or unprecedented MO by PIRA) = green army out of the area and let the games begin.
Brave men risked their lives in action to take out evil men with guns who wanted to kill Britons, and these evil enemies were caught in the act
That’s it. That’s the alpha and omega of it
We must be the most diseased and insane society on earth that we allow our veteran soldiers to be pursued by rancid lawyers in this way
Enough. Vote Reform. Cleanse the system
The point being (as mentioned on the previous thread) they didn't just decide to up and put in an ambush on the off chance that someone would drive through. The entire British establishment "conspired" or, rather, was structured such that the end result was an ambush of these types.
If they are going after anyone they have to go after the PM. And I believe at this point that was none other than John Major. But I doubt pre-1979 things were that different. Post-1997 plenty had happened to change the facts on the ground.
Off topic: Will American voters blame Trump (and Musk) for higher egg prices? "The average retail egg price increased 37 percent between December 2023 and December 2024, according to consumer price index data. At the wholesale level, the price for a dozen Midwest Large eggs recently hit $7.76, compared with about $1.50 in early January 2022, before the outbreak began, according to the food market research firm Expana. Prices for egg products, such as liquid and dried eggs, also have gone up, said Brian Moscogiuri, vice president of Eggs Unlimited, a large supplier." source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/02/04/waffle-house-egg-surcharge-bird-flu-outbreak/
Ten years or so ago, in my area large eggs typically sold for 2 dollars a dozen, with occasional specials for 1 dollar.
(For the record: I don't blame the Loser, although I do expect his policies will increase inflation, overall. Incidentally, one of the reasons for higher prices -- in some states -- is that those states have required eggs be "cage free" or even "open range". That makes it more likely that avian flu will be transmitted from wild birds. Scientists seem to be worried, rightly, that the flu may become a serious problem for humans, too.)
If it’s any consolation I’ve just paid £4.50 ($5.50) for six Burford brown eggs so you are still getting a good deal at $7.60 for 12.
What are Burford brown eggs? I just bought 10 organic eggs for 3.39 euros in the local supermarket in Germany. Normal free range eggs are 2.39 euros for 10
Its eggs from a breed (is that the right term for birds?) of chicken.
10 organic eggs 4.6 gbp (5.50 euros) in Tesco, 3.39 euros in Rewe - and that includes 7% German VAT. Seems a massive difference
Think I paid £1.70-ish for six free-range eggs last time. You can get better value on bigger packs, obviously, but we don't cook many things that need them.
£1.43 for ten eggs in Lidl today. Probably extra cruel version. I feel bad.
They need to stop exporting them to the foreigners:
In 2023, the United States exported $760.89 million worth of eggs and egg products, which was 30,411 metric tons. The top destinations for US egg exports include Canada, Mexico, Jamaica, Brazil, and Trinidad and Tobago.
I wonder if anyone has told DJT, if it is still happening.
When the fuck is Congress and the court system going to do something?
If 'something unfortunate' happened to Trump, is there actually anything that would stop Musk seizing control? Certainly not Vance, who's preoccupied with waging X IQ battles with Mensa Man Rory Stewart.
The Courts are escalating.
There is now an injunction against the Executive Order trying to override the constitutional right to Birth Right Citizenship, which was the first set of lawsuits immediately after Chump started issuing bits of paper.
The Tories are tostada. They are the liberals in 1924
Reform will win in 2028 and they probably won’t even need Tory help, as things stand
To go from 5 MP's to a majority government would be a pretty unbelievable political earthquake..but I suppose the hyperbole is in keeping with most of your posts..🧐😏
Remember when it comes to tips Leon is no John McCririck.
Still Liz Truss did surprise us all.
She's surprised, one too many times. No matter what the content of 'The Liz Truss Show' should there ever be one, I won't watch.
Too late you fools. You have voted to end your democracy.
Trump told you what he was and still you voted him as your candidate.
This is the tragedy of it. They chose this. In a way it would be less concerning if he'd led a successful military coup. You could understand it then. You'd know where you stood.
Did they? Or did they believe Trump when he repeatedly distanced himself from Project2025
Eg from last August
"They've been told officially, legally, in every way, that we have nothing to do with Project 25,” Trump said. “They know it, but they bring it up anyway. They bring up every single thing that you can bring up. Every one of them was false.”
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
We should simply keep the Islands we have. The whole International order thing is just nonsense. I've no idea what the Americans are paying us for their lease, but I suspect it isn't enough.
This whole running away nonsense really needs to end.
(I say this as someone that would never vote Reform)
AIUI, we receive an annual discount on Polaris in return for Diego Garcia, and said discount is in the tens of millions.
Whoopy doo - tens of millions vs tens of billions!?
Off topic: Will American voters blame Trump (and Musk) for higher egg prices? "The average retail egg price increased 37 percent between December 2023 and December 2024, according to consumer price index data. At the wholesale level, the price for a dozen Midwest Large eggs recently hit $7.76, compared with about $1.50 in early January 2022, before the outbreak began, according to the food market research firm Expana. Prices for egg products, such as liquid and dried eggs, also have gone up, said Brian Moscogiuri, vice president of Eggs Unlimited, a large supplier." source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/02/04/waffle-house-egg-surcharge-bird-flu-outbreak/
Ten years or so ago, in my area large eggs typically sold for 2 dollars a dozen, with occasional specials for 1 dollar.
(For the record: I don't blame the Loser, although I do expect his policies will increase inflation, overall. Incidentally, one of the reasons for higher prices -- in some states -- is that those states have required eggs be "cage free" or even "open range". That makes it more likely that avian flu will be transmitted from wild birds. Scientists seem to be worried, rightly, that the flu may become a serious problem for humans, too.)
He isn't. The trend right now is clear - Labour belly-flopped post election and appear to have knocked themselves out. Tories sink lower every time Badenoch speaks. Reform quietly continue their momentum, LD and Green reversion to the mean post election is no longer a thing and they're still in play.
Continue these trends and yes, we find a way for Reform to win. But these trends won't continue because politics. Multiple potential events to play out: Tories ditch Badenoch and get better Tories ditch Badenoch and get worse Someone in Reform opens their stupid gob and says something catastrophic The economy finally starts to heal and someone in Labour finds a line which resonates Labour slowly wither with internal bickering External black swan (Trump's war with Romania to free Andrew Tate)
Some or all of these may happen, and they will change the current trend. I'm not saying this to pooh-pooh the electoral threat of Reform - I've been talking up the rise of Reform after Labour screw up for a good few years now. But to go from 5 seats to power is politically impossible. The only thing in Farage's favour is that all we seem to experience now are political events which until they happen were considered impossible...
While we’re on the subject of potential dictators, I’m reading the biography of Xi Jinping
It’s quite a story with many fascinating angles. Inter alia, he was a very handsome young man
It might be interesting to follow that with a biography of Deng Xiaoping. Who we really did think had brought an end to history.
He gets an interesting write-up in this book
Deng was crucial in the crushing of Tiananmen Square. Why? Because he thought China was too naive and chaotic to cope with democracy in 1989, if ever
He saw a vastly different route to greater prosperity for China and the Chinese
And it looks like he was right. Which puts Tiananmen in a rather different context. Doesn’t make me comfortable but it’s a challenging thesis
Kids, always read challenging books that make you uncomfortable. Then you too can get the major calls right, to a spooky extent, such that feebler minds on an Internet forum fear you like the Devil
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
We should simply keep the Islands we have. The whole International order thing is just nonsense. I've no idea what the Americans are paying us for their lease, but I suspect it isn't enough.
This whole running away nonsense really needs to end.
(I say this as someone that would never vote Reform)
AIUI, we receive an annual discount on Polaris in return for Diego Garcia, and said discount is in the tens of millions.
Good deal. Garcia is past it. Get something for him before he goes out of contract.
On topic, why is everyone always on a rush with this talk. Sack Badenoch after only a few weeks. Con / Reform pact or die.
It's 4 and 1/2 years away. The time for any pact is not remotely this year, why would either side want to tie itself to someone else, this far away from an election.
It's all excited chatter from people who like to throw mischief and create news.
Limited attention spans plus 24 h news cycle.
Life was better when (a) TV actually stopped broadcasting for some of the day and night and (b) people were rather more grown up about stuff. If you went through the second world war I suspect you'd have a lot less truck with the flippancy of modern life.
And lastly our media is terrible. They made fools of themselves during covid, but I don't think they have ever realised let alone apologised for it. Every pathetic attempted 'gotcha' question was another nail in the coffin for serious public office/media relations. Why would MP's engage with twats who just want to lead the news with their stupid question about 'substantive meals' or how many times a day can you exercise...
Kay Burley is going though. Might make a difference.
Why do you think people are turning off the BBC in droves and Sky is in financial trouble..people have finally had enough of the legacy media..🧐
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
We should simply keep the Islands we have. The whole International order thing is just nonsense. I've no idea what the Americans are paying us for their lease, but I suspect it isn't enough.
This whole running away nonsense really needs to end.
(I say this as someone that would never vote Reform)
AIUI, we receive an annual discount on Polaris in return for Diego Garcia, and said discount is in the tens of millions.
Whoopy doo - tens of millions vs tens of billions!?
Oi - you can't compare an annual to an aggregate. C'mon.
I've only been dipping into the site over the past few weeks (life is busy) so apologies if this has already been covered, but...
I think it is interesting to do an objective (ish) assessment of Trump 47 now he has been in power for a couple of weeks.
I am a firm believer in the adage that we should judge Trump on what he (and those around him) does not what he says. Back in November when he won, the big questions in my mind were: 1. How bought into Project 2025 is he? and 2. Will he sideline Musk or will Musk effectively run the show (I've always thought Musk is the true fascist, whereas Trump is just an attention - seeking narcissist).
On both measures I think the reality is about as bad as it could be. From the USAID shutdown to the attacks on trans rights (whatever you think of each individual act) this is very much Project 2025 in action.
And Musk is very clearly running amok, with a lot of power and few restraints. I think he has the potential to box Trump's administration into a very dark place quite quickly because he is breaking so many laws: either he will be held accountable (unlikely) or Trump will have to go big on dismantling the rule of law.
It is easy to overreact to this stuff (perhaps in another week the judicial reviews will get going and DOGE will actually pay some attention to the courts). But it's also easy to underreact as it seems so inconceivable that American rule of law could fall apart so quickly.
In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.
I've only been dipping into the site over the past few weeks (life is busy) so apologies if this has already been covered, but...
I think it is interesting to do an objective (ish) assessment of Trump 47 now he has been in power for a couple of weeks.
I am a firm believer in the adage that we should judge Trump on what he (and those around him) does not what he says. Back in November when he won, the big questions in my mind were: 1. How bought into Project 2025 is he? and 2. Will he sideline Musk or will Musk effectively run the show (I've always thought Musk is the true fascist, whereas Trump is just an attention - seeking narcissist).
On both measures I think the reality is about as bad as it could be. From the USAID shutdown to the attacks on trans rights (whatever you think of each individual act) this is very much Project 2025 in action.
And Musk is very clearly running amok, with a lot of power and few restraints. I think he has the potential to box Trump's administration into a very dark place quite quickly because he is breaking so many laws: either he will be held accountable (unlikely) or Trump will have to go big on dismantling the rule of law.
It is easy to overreact to this stuff (perhaps in another week then judicial reviews will get going and DOGE will actually pay some attention to the courts). But it's also easy to underreact as it seems so inconceivable that American rule of law could fall apart so quickly.
In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.
The Tories are tostada. They are the liberals in 1924
Reform will win in 2028 and they probably won’t even need Tory help, as things stand
To go from 5 MP's to a majority government would be a pretty unbelievable political earthquake..but I suppose the hyperbole is in keeping with most of your posts..🧐😏
Remember when it comes to tips Leon is no John McCririck.
Still Liz Truss did surprise us all.
She's surprised, one too many times. No matter what the content of 'The Liz Truss Show' should there ever be one, I won't watch.
She certainly surprised me when she negotiated an entire Chagos Deal despite having left office before negotiations commenced.
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
We should simply keep the Islands we have. The whole International order thing is just nonsense. I've no idea what the Americans are paying us for their lease, but I suspect it isn't enough.
This whole running away nonsense really needs to end.
(I say this as someone that would never vote Reform)
AIUI, we receive an annual discount on Polaris in return for Diego Garcia, and said discount is in the tens of millions.
Whoopy doo - tens of millions vs tens of billions!?
Oi - you can't compare an annual to an aggregate. C'mon.
You're quite right. Nonetheless there's surely a disparity.
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
We should simply keep the Islands we have. The whole International order thing is just nonsense. I've no idea what the Americans are paying us for their lease, but I suspect it isn't enough.
This whole running away nonsense really needs to end.
(I say this as someone that would never vote Reform)
AIUI, we receive an annual discount on Polaris in return for Diego Garcia, and said discount is in the tens of millions.
Whoopy doo - tens of millions vs tens of billions!?
Tens of millions per annum, possibly in both cases ? (I’m assuming Robert is talking about Trident too ?)
The eleventy billion, or whatever it is, is spread over 99years, isn’t it ?
It’s shit politics, as the government has conspired in creating a narrative that it’s paying many billions to give something away, while cutting sickness benefit, etc. (and the penny pinching over a mere £12m on the AZN deal looks even more ridiculous) - but it’s probably of very limited economic significance.
While we’re on the subject of potential dictators, I’m reading the biography of Xi Jinping
It’s quite a story with many fascinating angles. Inter alia, he was a very handsome young man
It might be interesting to follow that with a biography of Deng Xiaoping. Who we really did think had brought an end to history.
He gets an interesting write-up in this book
Deng was crucial in the crushing of Tiananmen Square. Why? Because he thought China was too naive and chaotic to cope with democracy in 1989, if ever
He saw a vastly different route to greater prosperity for China and the Chinese
And it looks like he was right. Which puts Tiananmen in a rather different context. Doesn’t make me comfortable but it’s a challenging thesis
Kids, always read challenging books that make you uncomfortable. Then you too can get the major calls right, to a spooky extent, such that feebler minds on an Internet forum fear you like the Devil
He never forgot he was head of the CPC and had a very good feel for what might or might not work. I many years ago read a long write-up of Tiananmen Square which, IIRC (I probably don't) described how a hard core of students, some of whom weren't students, were determined to force a reaction from the authorities. Whether that was a good or a not good plan is up for debate ofc.
The UK just needs to get together with <<< checks notes >>> the mighty military forces of…. Er…. Ireland. And, I dunno, Portugal? Who? France no. Germany no. Maybe Peru? The Isle of Man? The guy down the chip shop who always eats eggs
On topic, why is everyone always on a rush with this talk. Sack Badenoch after only a few weeks. Con / Reform pact or die.
It's 4 and 1/2 years away. The time for any pact is not remotely this year, why would either side want to tie itself to someone else, this far away from an election.
It's all excited chatter from people who like to throw mischief and create news.
Limited attention spans plus 24 h news cycle.
Life was better when (a) TV actually stopped broadcasting for some of the day and night and (b) people were rather more grown up about stuff. If you went through the second world war I suspect you'd have a lot less truck with the flippancy of modern life.
And lastly our media is terrible. They made fools of themselves during covid, but I don't think they have ever realised let alone apologised for it. Every pathetic attempted 'gotcha' question was another nail in the coffin for serious public office/media relations. Why would MP's engage with twats who just want to lead the news with their stupid question about 'substantive meals' or how many times a day can you exercise...
Kay Burley is going though. Might make a difference.
Why do you think people are turning off the BBC in droves and Sky is in financial trouble..people have finally had enough of the legacy media..🧐
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
We should simply keep the Islands we have. The whole International order thing is just nonsense. I've no idea what the Americans are paying us for their lease, but I suspect it isn't enough.
This whole running away nonsense really needs to end.
(I say this as someone that would never vote Reform)
AIUI, we receive an annual discount on Polaris in return for Diego Garcia, and said discount is in the tens of millions.
Whoopy doo - tens of millions vs tens of billions!?
Tens of millions per annum, possibly in both cases ? (I’m assuming Robert is talking about Trident too ?) The eleventy billion, or whatever it is, is spread over 99years, isn’t it ?
It’s shit politics, as the government has conspired in creating a narrative that it’s paying many billions to give something away, while cutting sickness benefit, etc. (and the penny pinching over a mere £12m on the AZN deal looks even more ridiculous) - but it’s probably of very limited economic significance.
Politically, though, you are right.
It was alleged to be "front loaded", whatever the details of that would be.
"Steve Coogan has been banned for driving for two months instead of six, after telling the judge that a lengthier ban would impact the filming of his popular TV comedy series The Trip.
The actor and comedian was caught going at 97mph, well over the 70mph speed limit, while travelling in a Range Rover on the M6 in Staffordshire in July last year."
I've only been dipping into the site over the past few weeks (life is busy) so apologies if this has already been covered, but...
I think it is interesting to do an objective (ish) assessment of Trump 47 now he has been in power for a couple of weeks.
I am a firm believer in the adage that we should judge Trump on what he (and those around him) does not what he says. Back in November when he won, the big questions in my mind were: 1. How bought into Project 2025 is he? and 2. Will he sideline Musk or will Musk effectively run the show (I've always thought Musk is the true fascist, whereas Trump is just an attention - seeking narcissist).
On both measures I think the reality is about as bad as it could be. From the USAID shutdown to the attacks on trans rights (whatever you think of each individual act) this is very much Project 2025 in action.
And Musk is very clearly running amok, with a lot of power and few restraints. I think he has the potential to box Trump's administration into a very dark place quite quickly because he is breaking so many laws: either he will be held accountable (unlikely) or Trump will have to go big on dismantling the rule of law.
It is easy to overreact to this stuff (perhaps in another week then judicial reviews will get going and DOGE will actually pay some attention to the courts). But it's also easy to underreact as it seems so inconceivable that American rule of law could fall apart so quickly.
In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.
I've only been dipping into the site over the past few weeks (life is busy) so apologies if this has already been covered, but...
I think it is interesting to do an objective (ish) assessment of Trump 47 now he has been in power for a couple of weeks.
I am a firm believer in the adage that we should judge Trump on what he (and those around him) does not what he says. Back in November when he won, the big questions in my mind were: 1. How bought into Project 2025 is he? and 2. Will he sideline Musk or will Musk effectively run the show (I've always thought Musk is the true fascist, whereas Trump is just an attention - seeking narcissist).
On both measures I think the reality is about as bad as it could be. From the USAID shutdown to the attacks on trans rights (whatever you think of each individual act) this is very much Project 2025 in action.
And Musk is very clearly running amok, with a lot of power and few restraints. I think he has the potential to box Trump's administration into a very dark place quite quickly because he is breaking so many laws: either he will be held accountable (unlikely) or Trump will have to go big on dismantling the rule of law.
It is easy to overreact to this stuff (perhaps in another week the judicial reviews will get going and DOGE will actually pay some attention to the courts). But it's also easy to underreact as it seems so inconceivable that American rule of law could fall apart so quickly.
In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.
The Tories are tostada. They are the liberals in 1924
Reform will win in 2028 and they probably won’t even need Tory help, as things stand
To go from 5 MP's to a majority government would be a pretty unbelievable political earthquake..but I suppose the hyperbole is in keeping with most of your posts..🧐😏
Remember when it comes to tips Leon is no John McCririck.
Still Liz Truss did surprise us all.
She's surprised, one too many times. No matter what the content of 'The Liz Truss Show' should there ever be one, I won't watch.
She certainly surprised me when she negotiated an entire Chagos Deal despite having left office before negotiations commenced.
Is there anything bad going on these days she’s not responsible for ?
The UK just needs to get together with <<< checks notes >>> the mighty military forces of…. Er…. Ireland. And, I dunno, Portugal? Who? France no. Germany no. Maybe Peru? The Isle of Man? The guy down the chip shop who always eats eggs
Then…. Invade America
So we can
<<<<< checks notes again >>>>
Impose force on a chaotic American state
Yes
Be careful. Your impersonation of a simpleton might make people suspicious of your claims of superlative IQ scores.
I've only been dipping into the site over the past few weeks (life is busy) so apologies if this has already been covered, but...
I think it is interesting to do an objective (ish) assessment of Trump 47 now he has been in power for a couple of weeks.
I am a firm believer in the adage that we should judge Trump on what he (and those around him) does not what he says. Back in November when he won, the big questions in my mind were: 1. How bought into Project 2025 is he? and 2. Will he sideline Musk or will Musk effectively run the show (I've always thought Musk is the true fascist, whereas Trump is just an attention - seeking narcissist).
On both measures I think the reality is about as bad as it could be. From the USAID shutdown to the attacks on trans rights (whatever you think of each individual act) this is very much Project 2025 in action.
And Musk is very clearly running amok, with a lot of power and few restraints. I think he has the potential to box Trump's administration into a very dark place quite quickly because he is breaking so many laws: either he will be held accountable (unlikely) or Trump will have to go big on dismantling the rule of law.
It is easy to overreact to this stuff (perhaps in another week then judicial reviews will get going and DOGE will actually pay some attention to the courts). But it's also easy to underreact as it seems so inconceivable that American rule of law could fall apart so quickly.
In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.
I've only been dipping into the site over the past few weeks (life is busy) so apologies if this has already been covered, but...
I think it is interesting to do an objective (ish) assessment of Trump 47 now he has been in power for a couple of weeks.
I am a firm believer in the adage that we should judge Trump on what he (and those around him) does not what he says. Back in November when he won, the big questions in my mind were: 1. How bought into Project 2025 is he? and 2. Will he sideline Musk or will Musk effectively run the show (I've always thought Musk is the true fascist, whereas Trump is just an attention - seeking narcissist).
On both measures I think the reality is about as bad as it could be. From the USAID shutdown to the attacks on trans rights (whatever you think of each individual act) this is very much Project 2025 in action.
And Musk is very clearly running amok, with a lot of power and few restraints. I think he has the potential to box Trump's administration into a very dark place quite quickly because he is breaking so many laws: either he will be held accountable (unlikely) or Trump will have to go big on dismantling the rule of law.
It is easy to overreact to this stuff (perhaps in another week the judicial reviews will get going and DOGE will actually pay some attention to the courts). But it's also easy to underreact as it seems so inconceivable that American rule of law could fall apart so quickly.
In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
We should simply keep the Islands we have. The whole International order thing is just nonsense. I've no idea what the Americans are paying us for their lease, but I suspect it isn't enough.
This whole running away nonsense really needs to end.
(I say this as someone that would never vote Reform)
AIUI, we receive an annual discount on Polaris in return for Diego Garcia, and said discount is in the tens of millions.
Whoopy doo - tens of millions vs tens of billions!?
No. Why has everyone lost their minds on this?
Because they feel it as a loss of national virility to which their own is linked.
SAS 'not justified' in 1992 shooting of four IRA men
The use of lethal force by SAS soldiers was unjustified when they opened fire killing four IRA men in an ambush at Clonoe in County Tyrone, an inquest has ruled.
Kevin Barry O'Donnell, 21, Sean O'Farrell, 22, Peter Clancy, 21, and Patrick Vincent, 20, died in February 1992, minutes after they had carried out a gun attack on Coalisland police station.
The soldiers opened fire as the men arrived at St Patrick's Church car park in a hijacked lorry which had a heavy machine gun welded to its tailgate. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq8kpxgdyyvo
This will not help the narrative.
Lethal force was utterly justified IMO, if those facts are true.
Interesting point. We had (and trained around) the Yellow Card which set out the rules of engagement so eg "masked man pointing gun at you - ok to engage; masked man pointing gun at floor facing other way - not so ok to engage, etc. But that really referred to certain ops, and mainly to chance encounters.
But this op (and the Loughall one) was of a different type. Tacint would have had int (ok that is their job...) which pointed towards a known trajectory of PIRA (or whoever) and the SF would have acted accordingly. According, that is, to what Whitehall deemed was the appropriate action to take in the circumstances. Eff off machine gun on the back of a wagon having just put in a hit on an RUC station (not by any means an unknown or unprecedented MO by PIRA) = green army out of the area and let the games begin.
Brave men risked their lives in action to take out evil men with guns who wanted to kill Britons, and these evil enemies were caught in the act
That’s it. That’s the alpha and omega of it
We must be the most diseased and insane society on earth that we allow our veteran soldiers to be pursued by rancid lawyers in this way
Enough. Vote Reform. Cleanse the system
The point being (as mentioned on the previous thread) they didn't just decide to up and put in an ambush on the off chance that someone would drive through. The entire British establishment "conspired" or, rather, was structured such that the end result was an ambush of these types.
If they are going after anyone they have to go after the PM. And I believe at this point that was none other than John Major. But I doubt pre-1979 things were that different. Post-1997 plenty had happened to change the facts on the ground.
The other points being that it’s the decision of a coroner, so could simply be ignored; and that they did arrest a couple of the terrorist, and some escaped (it was a sizeable group, also carrying AKs), so it wasn’t an “execution”.
And of course we’ve amnestied a load of Irish terrorist murderers since then.
The Tories are tostada. They are the liberals in 1924
Reform will win in 2028 and they probably won’t even need Tory help, as things stand
To go from 5 MP's to a majority government would be a pretty unbelievable political earthquake..but I suppose the hyperbole is in keeping with most of your posts..🧐😏
Remember when it comes to tips Leon is no John McCririck.
The Tories are tostada. They are the liberals in 1924
Reform will win in 2028 and they probably won’t even need Tory help, as things stand
To go from 5 MP's to a majority government would be a pretty unbelievable political earthquake..but I suppose the hyperbole is in keeping with most of your posts..🧐😏
Remember when it comes to tips Leon is no John McCririck.
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
You really do believe that the world is led by nice people who do what the UN tells them.
I've only been dipping into the site over the past few weeks (life is busy) so apologies if this has already been covered, but...
I think it is interesting to do an objective (ish) assessment of Trump 47 now he has been in power for a couple of weeks.
I am a firm believer in the adage that we should judge Trump on what he (and those around him) does not what he says. Back in November when he won, the big questions in my mind were: 1. How bought into Project 2025 is he? and 2. Will he sideline Musk or will Musk effectively run the show (I've always thought Musk is the true fascist, whereas Trump is just an attention - seeking narcissist).
On both measures I think the reality is about as bad as it could be. From the USAID shutdown to the attacks on trans rights (whatever you think of each individual act) this is very much Project 2025 in action.
And Musk is very clearly running amok, with a lot of power and few restraints. I think he has the potential to box Trump's administration into a very dark place quite quickly because he is breaking so many laws: either he will be held accountable (unlikely) or Trump will have to go big on dismantling the rule of law.
It is easy to overreact to this stuff (perhaps in another week the judicial reviews will get going and DOGE will actually pay some attention to the courts). But it's also easy to underreact as it seems so inconceivable that American rule of law could fall apart so quickly.
In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.
Who are these “unsavoury allies” we need to be working with, in order to invade America and impose order on it: when things go wrong across the pond?
Iran? Afghanistan? Should we reach out to the Taliban? Ask for their help in parachuting into DC so we can give them British judges that convict US troops for defending the USA?
Or do you mean North Korea? China? Burundi? Mars?
How “unsavoury” do we get when choosing allies to invade the USA?
The UK just needs to get together with <<< checks notes >>> the mighty military forces of…. Er…. Ireland. And, I dunno, Portugal? Who? France no. Germany no. Maybe Peru? The Isle of Man? The guy down the chip shop who always eats eggs
Then…. Invade America
So we can
<<<<< checks notes again >>>>
Impose force on a chaotic American state
Yes
Be careful. Your impersonation of a simpleton might make people suspicious of your claims of superlative IQ scores.
Who are these “unsavoury allies” we need to hook up with when we are invading the United States?
Some very tasty local by-elections tonight for Reform.
3 Lab defences in Medway 1 Lab defence in Hyndburn I Con defence in Tendring
If the polls are right, Ref should be making gains here.
Also for completeness the other by election is in Wokingham. Penny Mordaunt was reportedly seen canvassing.
Medway-Gillingham: May 2023 result Lab 1617/1531/1491 C 509/471/373 Grn 373 LD 322 Medway-Rochester (2 seats): May 2023 result Lab 1658/1517/1347 C 784/755/665 Grn 370 LD 206
Tendring: May 2023 result C 450 LD 173 Ind 126 Lab 102 Grn 87
Winnersh: May 2024 result LD 1703/1473/1460 C 755/620/603 Lab 305/301/263 TUSC 83
I've only been dipping into the site over the past few weeks (life is busy) so apologies if this has already been covered, but...
I think it is interesting to do an objective (ish) assessment of Trump 47 now he has been in power for a couple of weeks.
I am a firm believer in the adage that we should judge Trump on what he (and those around him) does not what he says. Back in November when he won, the big questions in my mind were: 1. How bought into Project 2025 is he? and 2. Will he sideline Musk or will Musk effectively run the show (I've always thought Musk is the true fascist, whereas Trump is just an attention - seeking narcissist).
On both measures I think the reality is about as bad as it could be. From the USAID shutdown to the attacks on trans rights (whatever you think of each individual act) this is very much Project 2025 in action.
And Musk is very clearly running amok, with a lot of power and few restraints. I think he has the potential to box Trump's administration into a very dark place quite quickly because he is breaking so many laws: either he will be held accountable (unlikely) or Trump will have to go big on dismantling the rule of law.
It is easy to overreact to this stuff (perhaps in another week the judicial reviews will get going and DOGE will actually pay some attention to the courts). But it's also easy to underreact as it seems so inconceivable that American rule of law could fall apart so quickly.
In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.
Who are these “unsavoury allies” we need to be working with, in order to invade America and impose order on it: when things go wrong across the pond?
Iran? Afghanistan? Should we reach out to the Taliban? Ask for their help in parachuting into DC so we can give them British judges that convict US troops for defending the USA?
Or do you mean North Korea? China? Burundi? Mars?
How “unsavoury” do we get when choosing allies to invade the USA?
You never took those remedial reading comprehension classes everyone's been recommending, did you?
"Steve Coogan has been banned for driving for two months instead of six, after telling the judge that a lengthier ban would impact the filming of his popular TV comedy series The Trip.
The actor and comedian was caught going at 97mph, well over the 70mph speed limit, while travelling in a Range Rover on the M6 in Staffordshire in July last year."
The UK just needs to get together with <<< checks notes >>> the mighty military forces of…. Er…. Ireland. And, I dunno, Portugal? Who? France no. Germany no. Maybe Peru? The Isle of Man? The guy down the chip shop who always eats eggs
Then…. Invade America
So we can
<<<<< checks notes again >>>>
Impose force on a chaotic American state
Yes
Be careful. Your impersonation of a simpleton might make people suspicious of your claims of superlative IQ scores.
Who are these “unsavoury allies” we need to hook up with when we are invading the United States?
Could you be a bit more specific?
[swaggering] The Brits burnt down the White House in 1814, man!
Too late you fools. You have voted to end your democracy.
Trump told you what he was and still you voted him as your candidate.
This is the tragedy of it. They chose this. In a way it would be less concerning if he'd led a successful military coup. You could understand it then. You'd know where you stood.
Did they? Or did they believe Trump when he repeatedly distanced himself from Project2025
Eg from last August
"They've been told officially, legally, in every way, that we have nothing to do with Project 25,” Trump said. “They know it, but they bring it up anyway. They bring up every single thing that you can bring up. Every one of them was false.”
The UK just needs to get together with <<< checks notes >>> the mighty military forces of…. Er…. Ireland. And, I dunno, Portugal? Who? France no. Germany no. Maybe Peru? The Isle of Man? The guy down the chip shop who always eats eggs
Then…. Invade America
So we can
<<<<< checks notes again >>>>
Impose force on a chaotic American state
Yes
Be careful. Your impersonation of a simpleton might make people suspicious of your claims of superlative IQ scores.
Who are these “unsavoury allies” we need to hook up with when we are invading the United States?
Could you be a bit more specific?
I'll bother to answer when you bother to actually read what I have written rather than assuming something I haven't.
I've only been dipping into the site over the past few weeks (life is busy) so apologies if this has already been covered, but...
I think it is interesting to do an objective (ish) assessment of Trump 47 now he has been in power for a couple of weeks.
I am a firm believer in the adage that we should judge Trump on what he (and those around him) does not what he says. Back in November when he won, the big questions in my mind were: 1. How bought into Project 2025 is he? and 2. Will he sideline Musk or will Musk effectively run the show (I've always thought Musk is the true fascist, whereas Trump is just an attention - seeking narcissist).
On both measures I think the reality is about as bad as it could be. From the USAID shutdown to the attacks on trans rights (whatever you think of each individual act) this is very much Project 2025 in action.
And Musk is very clearly running amok, with a lot of power and few restraints. I think he has the potential to box Trump's administration into a very dark place quite quickly because he is breaking so many laws: either he will be held accountable (unlikely) or Trump will have to go big on dismantling the rule of law.
It is easy to overreact to this stuff (perhaps in another week the judicial reviews will get going and DOGE will actually pay some attention to the courts). But it's also easy to underreact as it seems so inconceivable that American rule of law could fall apart so quickly.
In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.
Who are these “unsavoury allies” we need to be working with, in order to invade America and impose order on it: when things go wrong across the pond?
Iran? Afghanistan? Should we reach out to the Taliban? Ask for their help in parachuting into DC so we can give them British judges that convict US troops for defending the USA?
Or do you mean North Korea? China? Burundi? Mars?
How “unsavoury” do we get when choosing allies to invade the USA?
You never took those remedial reading comprehension classes everyone's been recommending, did you?
Who are these “unsavoury allies” we need to hook up with when we are invading the United States?
Could you be a bit more specific? Have you got the answer from @maxh because he’s not replying to me
You have utterly embarrassed yourself on Chagos deal 🥹
Finally, I get it
😈
The Chagos island plan B. Let me explain it to you.
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
We should simply keep the Islands we have. The whole International order thing is just nonsense. I've no idea what the Americans are paying us for their lease, but I suspect it isn't enough.
This whole running away nonsense really needs to end.
(I say this as someone that would never vote Reform)
AIUI, we receive an annual discount on Polaris in return for Diego Garcia, and said discount is in the tens of millions.
Whoopy doo - tens of millions vs tens of billions!?
Oi - you can't compare an annual to an aggregate. C'mon.
You're quite right. Nonetheless there's surely a disparity.
Unless the detail of both deals is published, we have no real idea.
What Starmer should have done is list it in the defence budget as the cost of maintaining the base, and published the full detail at the outset. At least it would count towards the 2.5% target.
I've only been dipping into the site over the past few weeks (life is busy) so apologies if this has already been covered, but...
I think it is interesting to do an objective (ish) assessment of Trump 47 now he has been in power for a couple of weeks.
I am a firm believer in the adage that we should judge Trump on what he (and those around him) does not what he says. Back in November when he won, the big questions in my mind were: 1. How bought into Project 2025 is he? and 2. Will he sideline Musk or will Musk effectively run the show (I've always thought Musk is the true fascist, whereas Trump is just an attention - seeking narcissist).
On both measures I think the reality is about as bad as it could be. From the USAID shutdown to the attacks on trans rights (whatever you think of each individual act) this is very much Project 2025 in action.
And Musk is very clearly running amok, with a lot of power and few restraints. I think he has the potential to box Trump's administration into a very dark place quite quickly because he is breaking so many laws: either he will be held accountable (unlikely) or Trump will have to go big on dismantling the rule of law.
It is easy to overreact to this stuff (perhaps in another week the judicial reviews will get going and DOGE will actually pay some attention to the courts). But it's also easy to underreact as it seems so inconceivable that American rule of law could fall apart so quickly.
In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.
Who are these “unsavoury allies” we need to be working with, in order to invade America and impose order on it: when things go wrong across the pond?
Iran? Afghanistan? Should we reach out to the Taliban? Ask for their help in parachuting into DC so we can give them British judges that convict US troops for defending the USA?
Or do you mean North Korea? China? Burundi? Mars?
How “unsavoury” do we get when choosing allies to invade the USA?
You never took those remedial reading comprehension classes everyone's been recommending, did you?
Who are these “unsavoury allies” we need to hook up with when we are invading the United States?
Could you be a bit more specific? Have you got the answer from @maxh because he’s not replying to me
I've only been dipping into the site over the past few weeks (life is busy) so apologies if this has already been covered, but...
I think it is interesting to do an objective (ish) assessment of Trump 47 now he has been in power for a couple of weeks.
I am a firm believer in the adage that we should judge Trump on what he (and those around him) does not what he says. Back in November when he won, the big questions in my mind were: 1. How bought into Project 2025 is he? and 2. Will he sideline Musk or will Musk effectively run the show (I've always thought Musk is the true fascist, whereas Trump is just an attention - seeking narcissist).
On both measures I think the reality is about as bad as it could be. From the USAID shutdown to the attacks on trans rights (whatever you think of each individual act) this is very much Project 2025 in action.
And Musk is very clearly running amok, with a lot of power and few restraints. I think he has the potential to box Trump's administration into a very dark place quite quickly because he is breaking so many laws: either he will be held accountable (unlikely) or Trump will have to go big on dismantling the rule of law.
It is easy to overreact to this stuff (perhaps in another week then judicial reviews will get going and DOGE will actually pay some attention to the courts). But it's also easy to underreact as it seems so inconceivable that American rule of law could fall apart so quickly.
In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.
Hahah hahahaha
HAHAHAHAHA
It's another 15 liker, isn't it.
I really really really really hope so
Go on. Go and like it. Go on
Course I have. It's a refreshing perspective.
Bored of all the "might is right so long as it's America" takes.
The UK just needs to get together with <<< checks notes >>> the mighty military forces of…. Er…. Ireland. And, I dunno, Portugal? Who? France no. Germany no. Maybe Peru? The Isle of Man? The guy down the chip shop who always eats eggs
Then…. Invade America
So we can
<<<<< checks notes again >>>>
Impose force on a chaotic American state
Yes
Be careful. Your impersonation of a simpleton might make people suspicious of your claims of superlative IQ scores.
Who are these “unsavoury allies” we need to hook up with when we are invading the United States?
Could you be a bit more specific?
I'll bother to answer when you bother to actually read what I have written rather than assuming something I haven't.
Well then tell us what you meant by writing that American is going full fascist and then writing
“In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.”
Who are these unsavoury allies? What do you propose we do with them?
The UK just needs to get together with <<< checks notes >>> the mighty military forces of…. Er…. Ireland. And, I dunno, Portugal? Who? France no. Germany no. Maybe Peru? The Isle of Man? The guy down the chip shop who always eats eggs
Then…. Invade America
So we can
<<<<< checks notes again >>>>
Impose force on a chaotic American state
Yes
Be careful. Your impersonation of a simpleton might make people suspicious of your claims of superlative IQ scores.
Comments
As predicted. Everyone get on board
The actor and comedian was caught going at 97mph, well over the 70mph speed limit, while travelling in a Range Rover on the M6 in Staffordshire in July last year."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g9vp24z6qo
A friend of ours worked for an F1 team when he got a driving ban. Speeding convictions were frowned upon by the management, so he ended up booking a B&B nearby for months, and taking very expensive taxi trips at weekends back to his home, a long way away.
I was bemused by the fact that a racing team did not like their employees getting speeding tickets, but apparently it was all part of F1's safety drive at the time, and a concern about bad PR.
Pro tip, don’t turn up to court in Gucci shoes and a bespoke suit and try and plead poverty when it comes to the fines.
What would be the difference other he would move his laptop into the oval office rather than the one next door?
Plan A wa UK, at request of US, expelling inhabitants off Chagos - concluding “forced deportations” in 1973. Ethnic cleansing carried out by both Tory and Labour government, on orders from Vietnam era Washington.
government of Mauritius successfully argued. in UN's highest court, it was illegally forced to give Chago away, the court ruled the UK's administration of the territory unlawful. In 2019, the International Court of Justice issued opinion UK did not have sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, administration of the whole archipelago should be handed over "as rapidly as possible" to Mauritius. The UN General Assembly gave UK 6 month deadline to begin process of handing over the islands. In 2021, UN International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, ruled Mauritius is sovereign over Chagos Islands.
If you want to be part of the institution settling international disputes, like UN, want others to abide by its decisions, and you lose a case in the courtroom, what would you do?
This question smokes out the daft populists amongst you. Does it depend upon what you merely regard as arbitrary international law, we can simply ignore without suffering any damage? Have cake and eat it membership of the UN? Or a leadership role?
In my opinion, for UK and US role in UN, it now needs a Plan B. If you think it UK Labour government Plan B, think again. As the US Plan A from 1968 hit the rocks, US told UK to use a cheat code to get round the legal difficulties, avoid hit to reputational damage of both countries – the century lease and banging them lolly does this - don’t even need to negotiate lease renewal and extra lolly for 95 years, all the while fully legally compliant.
I will be proved right in my analysis. Because despite their cakeist approach to international relations, this latest order from US to us to do their bidding, is probably going to be little different from Trump and his administration, than the instruction we got from Biden. When it’s all joined up together in the history books, it’s a clear example of USA - never a great friend of UK, definitely never a friend of UK colonialism - using UK as their bitch for the Cold War dirty work. To bastardise the UN rulings by bunging someone money in order to bypass the spirit of those rulings, is clearly underhand and morally wrong.
And When Trumps America enables “Starmer’s” Chagos deal to happen, it with prove everything in my analysis. Watch this space. ☺️
Reform will win in 2028 and they probably won’t even need Tory help, as things stand
https://x.com/secretsqrl123/status/1887510207233712143
This whole running away nonsense really needs to end.
(I say this as someone that would never vote Reform)
“Labour has launched a series of adverts with Reform-style branding and messaging as the party seeks to combat the rise of the rightwing party.
Exclusive: Some MPs and activists upset at tone of party’s Facebook campaign aimed at countering Farage
The Facebook adverts include a series from a group called UK Migration Updates boasting about how many people the government has deported. The adverts do not display the Labour logo and are in a similar shade of blue to that used by Reform UK.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/feb/06/labour-launches-ads-in-reform-style-livery-to-boast-about-deportations
But this op (and the Loughall one) was of a different type. Tacint would have had int (ok that is their job...) which pointed towards a known trajectory of PIRA (or whoever) and the SF would have acted accordingly. According, that is, to what Whitehall deemed was the appropriate action to take in the circumstances. Eff off machine gun on the back of a wagon having just put in a hit on an RUC station (not by any means an unknown or unprecedented MO by PIRA) = green army out of the area and let the games begin.
Find your Tramadol and stop being rude to Tubbs!
That’s it. That’s the alpha and omega of it
We must be the most diseased and insane society on earth that we allow our veteran soldiers to be pursued by rancid lawyers in this way
Enough. Vote Reform. Cleanse the system
It’s quite a story with many fascinating angles. Inter alia, he was a very handsome young man
If they are going after anyone they have to go after the PM. And I believe at this point that was none other than John Major. But I doubt pre-1979 things were that different. Post-1997 plenty had happened to change the facts on the ground.
In 2023, the United States exported $760.89 million worth of eggs and egg products, which was 30,411 metric tons. The top destinations for US egg exports include Canada, Mexico, Jamaica, Brazil, and Trinidad and Tobago.
I wonder if anyone has told DJT, if it is still happening.
There is now an injunction against the Executive Order trying to override the constitutional right to Birth Right Citizenship, which was the first set of lawsuits immediately after Chump started issuing bits of paper.
That's about as fast as it works.
Eg from last August
"They've been told officially, legally, in every way, that we have nothing to do with Project 25,” Trump said. “They know it, but they bring it up anyway. They bring up every single thing that you can bring up. Every one of them was false.”
https://www.npr.org/2024/08/22/g-s1-19202/trump-project-2025-border-immigration
Now he seems to be carrying it out.
FM forced into a denial after a report from the government's own advisory commission.
Have we done this. Surely there's a Speccie article in there somewhere.
Continue these trends and yes, we find a way for Reform to win. But these trends won't continue because politics. Multiple potential events to play out:
Tories ditch Badenoch and get better
Tories ditch Badenoch and get worse
Someone in Reform opens their stupid gob and says something catastrophic
The economy finally starts to heal and someone in Labour finds a line which resonates
Labour slowly wither with internal bickering
External black swan (Trump's war with Romania to free Andrew Tate)
Some or all of these may happen, and they will change the current trend. I'm not saying this to pooh-pooh the electoral threat of Reform - I've been talking up the rise of Reform after Labour screw up for a good few years now. But to go from 5 seats to power is politically impossible. The only thing in Farage's favour is that all we seem to experience now are political events which until they happen were considered impossible...
Deng was crucial in the crushing of Tiananmen Square. Why? Because he thought China was too naive and chaotic to cope with democracy in 1989, if ever
He saw a vastly different route to greater prosperity for China and the Chinese
And it looks like he was right. Which puts Tiananmen in a rather different context. Doesn’t make me comfortable but it’s a challenging thesis
Kids, always read challenging books that make you uncomfortable. Then you too can get the major calls right, to a spooky extent, such that feebler minds on an Internet forum fear you like the Devil
I think it is interesting to do an objective (ish) assessment of Trump 47 now he has been in power for a couple of weeks.
I am a firm believer in the adage that we should judge Trump on what he (and those around him) does not what he says. Back in November when he won, the big questions in my mind were:
1. How bought into Project 2025 is he? and
2. Will he sideline Musk or will Musk effectively run the show (I've always thought Musk is the true fascist, whereas Trump is just an attention - seeking narcissist).
On both measures I think the reality is about as bad as it could be. From the USAID shutdown to the attacks on trans rights (whatever you think of each individual act) this is very much Project 2025 in action.
And Musk is very clearly running amok, with a lot of power and few restraints. I think he has the potential to box Trump's administration into a very dark place quite quickly because he is breaking so many laws: either he will be held accountable (unlikely) or Trump will have to go big on dismantling the rule of law.
It is easy to overreact to this stuff (perhaps in another week the judicial reviews will get going and DOGE will actually pay some attention to the courts). But it's also easy to underreact as it seems so inconceivable that American rule of law could fall apart so quickly.
In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.
HAHAHAHAHA
(I’m assuming Robert is talking about Trident too ?)
The eleventy billion, or whatever it is, is spread over 99years, isn’t it ?
It’s shit politics, as the government has conspired in creating a narrative that it’s paying many billions to give something away, while cutting sickness benefit, etc. (and the penny pinching over a mere £12m on the AZN deal looks even more ridiculous) - but it’s probably of very limited economic significance.
Politically, though, you are right.
The UK just needs to get together with <<< checks notes >>> the mighty military forces of…. Er…. Ireland. And, I dunno, Portugal? Who? France no. Germany no. Maybe Peru? The Isle of Man? The guy down the chip shop who always eats eggs
Then…. Invade America
So we can
<<<<< checks notes again >>>>
Impose force on a chaotic American state
Yes
3 Lab defences in Medway
1 Lab defence in Hyndburn
I Con defence in Tendring
If the polls are right, Ref should be making gains here.
Also for completeness the other by election is in Wokingham. Penny Mordaunt was reportedly seen canvassing.
“In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond”
Go on. Go and like it. Go on
Otherwise known as small dick energy.
And of course we’ve amnestied a load of Irish terrorist murderers since then.
Move on.
Alas, Pollyanna is no guide to realpolitik.
Iran? Afghanistan? Should we reach out to the Taliban? Ask for their help in parachuting into DC so we can give them British judges that convict US troops for defending the USA?
Or do you mean North Korea? China? Burundi? Mars?
How “unsavoury” do we get when choosing allies to invade the USA?
Could you be a bit more specific?
Medway-Rochester (2 seats): May 2023 result Lab 1658/1517/1347 C 784/755/665 Grn 370 LD 206
Tendring: May 2023 result C 450 LD 173 Ind 126 Lab 102 Grn 87
Winnersh: May 2024 result LD 1703/1473/1460 C 755/620/603 Lab 305/301/263 TUSC 83
Hyndburn: May 2024 result Lab 553 C 529
https://andrewspreviews.substack.com/p/previewing-the-five-council-by-elections-23d
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burning_of_Washington
He was always going to implement Project 2025. And if he drops the baton, then JD Vance is waking in the wings to implement it in full.
Could you be a bit more specific? Have you got the answer from @maxh because he’s not replying to me
What Starmer should have done is list it in the defence budget as the cost of maintaining the base, and published the full detail at the outset. At least it would count towards the 2.5% target.
Or just told Mauritius politely to FO.
Either would have been better.
Bored of all the "might is right so long as it's America" takes.
“In my view we need to work with allies to be ready to react to things falling apart much more quickly than we expected over the pond. That might mean reaching out to some more unsavoury allies in the event that we need to call on more military might than our puny armed forces can manage on their own.”
Who are these unsavoury allies? What do you propose we do with them?