On Starmer. I think he's having rather a good 'war', being both statesmanlike and diplomatic. He's barely put a foot wrong in dealing with Trump/Musk and Putin, and with EU leaders. As ever, I think he's underestimated by most.
I found myself wondering how well other recent PMs would be coping, and found myself looking more favourably on Starmer. Boris would be torn between Zelensky and Trump. Sunak would be a nothing. Truss would be lost. Blair would be too sycophantic to Trump. May may be okay - hard to tell. Cameron - not sure.
In the long, long journey to the next GE, regardless of opinion polls I suspect Starmer will currently be improving his estimation by the British public.
Churchill "won" WWII and was immediately thrown out by the voters.
I suspect SKS having a "good war" will be make no difference either way.
So you're not disagreeing? And, of course, it was Labour voters who kicked Churchill into touch.
I don't really agree or disagree. 🤷♂️
You should be in the Lib Dems.
We always like to see a bit if Lab > Lib shade being thrown! 😂
I've disagreed with him on some things, and been infuriated by others. But on the whole I think he's been a reasonable pope, and better than his last few predecessors.
Regardless of all that, I hope he recovers soon.
Me too. I like him a lot. Pope Benedict apparently did his unprecedented retirement so that someone could come in and decorrupt the Vatican. Francis seems a very moral Pope, though I don't agree with him about everything. Health and long life to him.
There can't be any progress unless Ukraine is also included and Lavrov has already humiliated Rubio by refusing NATO European states permission to enforce a ceasefire deal there. Who else are they going to get to do it? China and India?
Not just NATO European states but all NATO states.
What's wrong with China or India doing it?
Putin's lickspittles? Marvellous idea.
I hope you're joking. Putin must be some kind of demon if he controls both China and India. He probably has more influence in the USA than in either of those countries. Does he own the Pope too?
Clearly Putin derangement syndrome exists.
So how much military assistance have the world's two most populous countries supplied to Ukraine? Or are they too busy buying Russian oil to have got round to it yet?
Modi is a fascist. He likes to hobnob with other fascists.
India has always had a very close (post colonial) relationship with Russia, and seems to much prefer them to us (perhaps for understandable reasons). This was the case when they were a communist dictatorship, so there's not much reason why it would have changed now they're an authoritarian state with the remnants of a democracy.
In my opinion we need to be a good deal less starry-eyed about India. They do not wish us well. We should at the very least not be trying to exercise 'soft power' by hosing aid money at them when they have a space programme. The same goes for China.
We don't hose aid money at India.
"The British Government stopped providing traditional development aid to India in 2015. Most UK funding to India is in the form of investments in priority areas like climate change. These investments have the dual aims of supporting development and backing private enterprises with the potential to be commercially viable, creating new partners, markets and jobs for the UK as well as India. They also generate returns which the British Government can reinvest in India or elsewhere. To date we have invested £330 million and over £100 million has been returned. We expect to get all our investments back over time."
There can't be any progress unless Ukraine is also included and Lavrov has already humiliated Rubio by refusing NATO European states permission to enforce a ceasefire deal there. Who else are they going to get to do it? China and India?
Not just NATO European states but all NATO states.
What's wrong with China or India doing it?
Putin's lickspittles? Marvellous idea.
I hope you're joking. Putin must be some kind of demon if he controls both China and India. He probably has more influence in the USA than in either of those countries. Does he own the Pope too?
Clearly Putin derangement syndrome exists.
So how much military assistance have the world's two most populous countries supplied to Ukraine? Or are they too busy buying Russian oil to have got round to it yet?
Modi is a fascist. He likes to hobnob with other fascists.
India has always had a very close (post colonial) relationship with Russia, and seems to much prefer them to us (perhaps for understandable reasons). This was the case when they were a communist dictatorship, so there's not much reason why it would have changed now they're an authoritarian state with the remnants of a democracy.
In my opinion we need to be a good deal less starry-eyed about India. They do not wish us well. We should at the very least not be trying to exercise 'soft power' by hosing aid money at them when they have a space programme. The same goes for China.
Indeed. Famously India did not sympathise with the UK over Salisbury.
The political choices in India come down to Hindu Nationalism (anti-Muslim, anti-British, and anti-much else) or Congress style Socialism (non-aligned, left-wing and Russia sympathising).
I really don't hold out much hope for any sort of allyship from it. The old time they would is to check Chinese expansion if it directly impinged their interests or borders.
The problem is the assumption of American support underpins European security. Even if we replace it with all the extra investment, it's a ten year project at best. We probably don't have a choice. We will have to spend a lot more on defence as a continent while depending on what's left of American goodwill in the meantime. It's a desperate situation to be in.
We don't have a choice.
And look on the bright side: historically, we would have mostly bought American kit. Now, that doesn't look like such a great idea, and I suspect the domestic defence industry is going to get a boost.
The USA is now dangerous to its allies, and harmless to its enemies.
My view is that a lot more countries need to get nuclear weapons. The US will not provide cover to any allies who face nuclear threats.
NATO’s nuclear deterrent is now the 515 British. and French warheads.
The French ones anyway. Ours are not truly independent of the USA.
Yes they are. Don’t spread this.
I suspect you mean in the long term, refurbing the missiles sense, which is somewhat correct but has limited meaning, because we could take other choices before it was a major issue.
What evidence do you have to back up your viewpoint?
Google it. This is all publicly available. Just stick to reputable sources.
So basically none - given that Google is full of AI generated bulltulip nowadays.
Erm, no, loads. Parliamentary questions and answers, hundreds of books, multiple magazine and journal articles. To anyone who knows the subject my comment might as well have said “the sun will rise tomorrow” or “water is wet”.
Given how fast and loss Trump plays with the rule of law - I doubt pre January 2025 answers are worth much..
The point of an independent military force is to underpin national sovereignty and the ability to support the power of a nation-state. But in contrast to the other major nuclear powers, the United Kingdom has no independence of procurement and great difficulty even in the short-term in using the system it has procured from the United States.
I've disagreed with him on some things, and been infuriated by others. But on the whole I think he's been a reasonable pope, and better than his last few predecessors.
Regardless of all that, I hope he recovers soon.
Me too. I like him a lot. Pope Benedict apparently did his unprecedented retirement so that someone could come in and decorrupt the Vatican. Francis seems a very moral Pope, though I don't agree with him about everything. Health and long life to him.
He's been the best Pope since maybe forever.
Note to self: find out the Jesuit position on AI.
As long as the AI dies with the name of Jesus on its screen, then it goes to heaven.
Could Britain realistically withdraw from NATO and Five Eyes? I.e. is it militarily feasible?
Yes, but at what cost? The UK's defence posture would instantly collapse to protecting the Home Islands and Atlantic possessions like Gib and Falklands. Russia would start picking off the border nations, and the peace engineered for 80 years would disappear.
I don't want to withdraw from Five Eyes.
There's a huge amount of intelligence sharing that goes on, particularly between us and the US, and the other nations give great satellite and telecommunications coverage. It's also one where the UK really does bring something to the table with GCHQ, MI6, its interception stations and special forces.
It will just have to be more carefully managed under this administration.
I've disagreed with him on some things, and been infuriated by others. But on the whole I think he's been a reasonable pope, and better than his last few predecessors.
Regardless of all that, I hope he recovers soon.
Me too. I like him a lot. Pope Benedict apparently did his unprecedented retirement so that someone could come in and decorrupt the Vatican. Francis seems a very moral Pope, though I don't agree with him about everything. Health and long life to him.
He's been the best Pope since maybe forever.
Note to self: find out the Jesuit position on AI.
As long as the AI dies with the name of Jesus on its screen, then it goes to heaven.
Somewhat related, this TV show seemed to fly under the radar somewhat :
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
Yes: we do need a defence pact outside of the EU.
It needs, I think we'd all agree, to include Norway, Iceland and us, for a start. Plus, for the reasons you outlined, we don't probably don't want Hungary to be a part.
The question is this: do we want to completely cut ties with the US? That is, is the current Trump administration an aberration, and if the European countries step up and put the spending in, then NATO continues? Or is that it? Is NATO effectively over?
Two months ago, I would have said "tough it out, America is ultimately our friend", but the problem is that the current administration doesn't think in terms of long term allies, it thinks transactionally here and now. And the cost to remaining in its orbit is likely to rise and rise.
For that reason, I fear we do need to start thinking beyond NATO.
Yes, moving beyond NATO feels necessary now. We can't rely on America to secure Europe's borders. This has been true for 20 years but until now it hasn't meant anything because we didn't have America negotiating away our security to a despot. The ExCo of the UK, France and Poland should be at the head of the table against Putin with Ukraine also present and if we had raised defence spending to 4% in 2014 when Obama effectively opted out of NATO and Trump very bluntly told us to increase spending that would be the case.
We also need more restrictive military buying policies and start excluding Germany and other unreliable nations from supply chains if they want final say over the use of purchased armaments. I also think a policy change to prefer domestic suppliers and rebuilding supply chains within the UK and specific allies (maybe including the US) is necessary.
There is a lot of hard work to be done and not a lot of time to do it but we need to start now.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
Yes: we do need a defence pact outside of the EU.
It needs, I think we'd all agree, to include Norway, Iceland and us, for a start. Plus, for the reasons you outlined, we don't probably don't want Hungary to be a part.
The question is this: do we want to completely cut ties with the US? That is, is the current Trump administration an aberration, and if the European countries step up and put the spending in, then NATO continues? Or is that it? Is NATO effectively over?
Two months ago, I would have said "tough it out, America is ultimately our friend", but the problem is that the current administration doesn't think in terms of long term allies, it thinks transactionally here and now. And the cost to remaining in its orbit is likely to rise and rise.
For that reason, I fear we do need to start thinking beyond NATO.
We need to be prepared to go further if necessary, and be prepared to stand up to Trump if he threatens us.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
Yes: we do need a defence pact outside of the EU.
It needs, I think we'd all agree, to include Norway, Iceland and us, for a start. Plus, for the reasons you outlined, we don't probably don't want Hungary to be a part.
The question is this: do we want to completely cut ties with the US? That is, is the current Trump administration an aberration, and if the European countries step up and put the spending in, then NATO continues? Or is that it? Is NATO effectively over?
Two months ago, I would have said "tough it out, America is ultimately our friend", but the problem is that the current administration doesn't think in terms of long term allies, it thinks transactionally here and now. And the cost to remaining in its orbit is likely to rise and rise.
For that reason, I fear we do need to start thinking beyond NATO.
Yes, moving beyond NATO feels necessary now. We can't rely on America to secure Europe's borders. This has been true for 20 years but until now it hasn't meant anything because we didn't have America negotiating away our security to a despot. The ExCo of the UK, France and Poland should be at the head of the table against Putin with Ukraine also present and if we had raised defence spending to 4% in 2014 when Obama effectively opted out of NATO and Trump very bluntly told us to increase spending that would be the case.
We also need more restrictive military buying policies and start excluding Germany and other unreliable nations from supply chains if they want final say over the use of purchased armaments. I also think a policy change to prefer domestic suppliers and rebuilding supply chains within the UK and specific allies (maybe including the US) is necessary.
There is a lot of hard work to be done and not a lot of time to do it but we need to start now.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
There can't be any progress unless Ukraine is also included and Lavrov has already humiliated Rubio by refusing NATO European states permission to enforce a ceasefire deal there. Who else are they going to get to do it? China and India?
Not just NATO European states but all NATO states.
What's wrong with China or India doing it?
Putin's lickspittles? Marvellous idea.
I hope you're joking. Putin must be some kind of demon if he controls both China and India. He probably has more influence in the USA than in either of those countries. Does he own the Pope too?
Clearly Putin derangement syndrome exists.
So how much military assistance have the world's two most populous countries supplied to Ukraine? Or are they too busy buying Russian oil to have got round to it yet?
Modi is a fascist. He likes to hobnob with other fascists.
India has always had a very close (post colonial) relationship with Russia, and seems to much prefer them to us (perhaps for understandable reasons). This was the case when they were a communist dictatorship, so there's not much reason why it would have changed now they're an authoritarian state with the remnants of a democracy.
In my opinion we need to be a good deal less starry-eyed about India. They do not wish us well. We should at the very least not be trying to exercise 'soft power' by hosing aid money at them when they have a space programme. The same goes for China.
They are both authoritarian states with the remnants of a democracy.
I've disagreed with him on some things, and been infuriated by others. But on the whole I think he's been a reasonable pope, and better than his last few predecessors.
Regardless of all that, I hope he recovers soon.
Hopefully Pope Francis recovers but if not it's always fascinating to see the "Conclave" and the white smoke.
I've long thought the Conservative Party should deploy the grey/white smoke trick for their seemingly never ending, insufferable leadership contests... 😂
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
Yes: we do need a defence pact outside of the EU.
It needs, I think we'd all agree, to include Norway, Iceland and us, for a start. Plus, for the reasons you outlined, we don't probably don't want Hungary to be a part.
The question is this: do we want to completely cut ties with the US? That is, is the current Trump administration an aberration, and if the European countries step up and put the spending in, then NATO continues? Or is that it? Is NATO effectively over?
Two months ago, I would have said "tough it out, America is ultimately our friend", but the problem is that the current administration doesn't think in terms of long term allies, it thinks transactionally here and now. And the cost to remaining in its orbit is likely to rise and rise.
For that reason, I fear we do need to start thinking beyond NATO.
We need to be prepared to go further if necessary, and be prepared to stand up to Trump if he threatens us.
I think the only thing he will understand is a straight up choice between democratic European nations and despotic ones. Fundamentally Trump responds to strength so refusing his capitulation, supporting Ukraine and telling Trump that European countries will continue and step up sanctions against Russia despite his "deal" is the only way forwards. If the US has opted out of European security that's not great but that also means the US doesn't get to dictate our security to us.
There can't be any progress unless Ukraine is also included and Lavrov has already humiliated Rubio by refusing NATO European states permission to enforce a ceasefire deal there. Who else are they going to get to do it? China and India?
Not just NATO European states but all NATO states.
What's wrong with China or India doing it?
Putin's lickspittles? Marvellous idea.
I hope you're joking. Putin must be some kind of demon if he controls both China and India. He probably has more influence in the USA than in either of those countries. Does he own the Pope too?
Clearly Putin derangement syndrome exists.
So how much military assistance have the world's two most populous countries supplied to Ukraine? Or are they too busy buying Russian oil to have got round to it yet?
Modi is a fascist. He likes to hobnob with other fascists.
India has always had a very close (post colonial) relationship with Russia, and seems to much prefer them to us (perhaps for understandable reasons). This was the case when they were a communist dictatorship, so there's not much reason why it would have changed now they're an authoritarian state with the remnants of a democracy.
In my opinion we need to be a good deal less starry-eyed about India. They do not wish us well. We should at the very least not be trying to exercise 'soft power' by hosing aid money at them when they have a space programme. The same goes for China.
Indeed. Famously India did not sympathise with the UK over Salisbury.
The political choices in India come down to Hindu Nationalism (anti-Muslim, anti-British, and anti-much else) or Congress style Socialism (non-aligned, left-wing and Russia sympathising).
I really don't hold out much hope for any sort of allyship from it. The old time they would is to check Chinese expansion if it directly impinged their interests or borders.
If we decided tactically to be closer to China, we could expect even less support from India.
Man jailed for abusive emails to politicians ... A 39-year-old man has been jailed for sending malicious communications to a government minister, the mayor of London and a senior Met Police officer.
Jack Bennett, of Newlands Park, Seaton, Devon, pleaded guilty to four counts of sending malicious emails; one to Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips, one to Metropolitan police officer Matt Twist, and two counts to Mayor Sadiq Khan. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3rndxj705jo
"The Crown Prosecution Service said the email to Phillips was sent on 2 January, one day after Musk said the MP “deserves to be in prison” for denying requests to the Home Office for a public inquiry into child sexual exploitation in Oldham. The X owner also later called her a “rape genocide apologist”.
The prime minister suggested that a line has been crossed and that Musk’s comments had led to threats against the minister."
The case reached its conclusion very quickly, even if the chap did hold his hands up and the action took place in a magistrates' court. One of the emails was sent as recently as 2 January.
Gotta wonder whether the government would okay a Musk visit to this country.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
And we know what you'd have been saying in September 1939.
There can't be any progress unless Ukraine is also included and Lavrov has already humiliated Rubio by refusing NATO European states permission to enforce a ceasefire deal there. Who else are they going to get to do it? China and India?
Not just NATO European states but all NATO states.
What's wrong with China or India doing it?
Putin's lickspittles? Marvellous idea.
I hope you're joking. Putin must be some kind of demon if he controls both China and India. He probably has more influence in the USA than in either of those countries. Does he own the Pope too?
Clearly Putin derangement syndrome exists.
So how much military assistance have the world's two most populous countries supplied to Ukraine? Or are they too busy buying Russian oil to have got round to it yet?
Modi is a fascist. He likes to hobnob with other fascists.
India has always had a very close (post colonial) relationship with Russia, and seems to much prefer them to us (perhaps for understandable reasons). This was the case when they were a communist dictatorship, so there's not much reason why it would have changed now they're an authoritarian state with the remnants of a democracy.
In my opinion we need to be a good deal less starry-eyed about India. They do not wish us well. We should at the very least not be trying to exercise 'soft power' by hosing aid money at them when they have a space programme. The same goes for China.
We don't hose aid money at India.
"The British Government stopped providing traditional development aid to India in 2015. Most UK funding to India is in the form of investments in priority areas like climate change. These investments have the dual aims of supporting development and backing private enterprises with the potential to be commercially viable, creating new partners, markets and jobs for the UK as well as India. They also generate returns which the British Government can reinvest in India or elsewhere. To date we have invested £330 million and over £100 million has been returned. We expect to get all our investments back over time."
I've disagreed with him on some things, and been infuriated by others. But on the whole I think he's been a reasonable pope, and better than his last few predecessors.
Regardless of all that, I hope he recovers soon.
Hopefully Pope France recovers but if not it's always fascinating to see the "Conclave" and the white smoke.
I've long thought the Conservative Party should deploy the grey/white smoke trick for their seemingly never ending, insufferable leadership contests... 😂
I've disagreed with him on some things, and been infuriated by others. But on the whole I think he's been a reasonable pope, and better than his last few predecessors.
Regardless of all that, I hope he recovers soon.
Hopefully Pope Francis recovers but if not it's always fascinating to see the "Conclave" and the white smoke.
I've long thought the Conservative Party should deploy the grey/white smoke trick for their seemingly never ending, insufferable leadership contests... 😂
Man jailed for abusive emails to politicians ... A 39-year-old man has been jailed for sending malicious communications to a government minister, the mayor of London and a senior Met Police officer.
Jack Bennett, of Newlands Park, Seaton, Devon, pleaded guilty to four counts of sending malicious emails; one to Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips, one to Metropolitan police officer Matt Twist, and two counts to Mayor Sadiq Khan. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3rndxj705jo
"The Crown Prosecution Service said the email to Phillips was sent on 2 January, one day after Musk said the MP “deserves to be in prison” for denying requests to the Home Office for a public inquiry into child sexual exploitation in Oldham. The X owner also later called her a “rape genocide apologist”.
The prime minister suggested that a line has been crossed and that Musk’s comments had led to threats against the minister."
The case reached its conclusion very quickly, even if the chap did hold his hands up and the action took place in a magistrates' court. One of the emails was sent as recently as 2 January.
Gotta wonder whether the government would okay a Musk visit to this country.
Didn't Sunak kiss Musk's arse on a visit a year ago?
I've disagreed with him on some things, and been infuriated by others. But on the whole I think he's been a reasonable pope, and better than his last few predecessors.
Regardless of all that, I hope he recovers soon.
Me too. I like him a lot. Pope Benedict apparently did his unprecedented retirement so that someone could come in and decorrupt the Vatican. Francis seems a very moral Pope, though I don't agree with him about everything. Health and long life to him.
He's been the best Pope since maybe forever.
Note to self: find out the Jesuit position on AI.
Disappointing on Ukraine though. A black mark against him for that.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
That's complete nonsense. Russia poses a naval and air threat to our borders and allowing them to takeover Eastern Europe hurts our security and our economy. Beyond our own self interest, allowing tens of millions to be subjugated by a despot is fundamentally wrong, Europe is faced with a similar choice to 1939. We needed US support against Nazi Germany, we don't need US support against a clapped out Russia we can step up and do it ourselves.
The pressure for labour to drop their red lines just keeps building and building. It is turning from a whisper into a roar. There is no way that policy survives till GE2029
P.s. i will bet you the next statista poll has stay out at well below 30% due to the new world order that has appeared since Jan 20.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
Yes: we do need a defence pact outside of the EU.
It needs, I think we'd all agree, to include Norway, Iceland and us, for a start. Plus, for the reasons you outlined, we don't probably don't want Hungary to be a part.
The question is this: do we want to completely cut ties with the US? That is, is the current Trump administration an aberration, and if the European countries step up and put the spending in, then NATO continues? Or is that it? Is NATO effectively over?
Two months ago, I would have said "tough it out, America is ultimately our friend", but the problem is that the current administration doesn't think in terms of long term allies, it thinks transactionally here and now. And the cost to remaining in its orbit is likely to rise and rise.
For that reason, I fear we do need to start thinking beyond NATO.
Yes, moving beyond NATO feels necessary now. We can't rely on America to secure Europe's borders. This has been true for 20 years but until now it hasn't meant anything because we didn't have America negotiating away our security to a despot. The ExCo of the UK, France and Poland should be at the head of the table against Putin with Ukraine also present and if we had raised defence spending to 4% in 2014 when Obama effectively opted out of NATO and Trump very bluntly told us to increase spending that would be the case.
We also need more restrictive military buying policies and start excluding Germany and other unreliable nations from supply chains if they want final say over the use of purchased armaments. I also think a policy change to prefer domestic suppliers and rebuilding supply chains within the UK and specific allies (maybe including the US) is necessary.
There is a lot of hard work to be done and not a lot of time to do it but we need to start now.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
The War of the Spanish Succession led to Britain becoming the dominant commerical power in Europe, establishment of our naval superiority over our competitors, acquisition of strategic Mediterranean ports, such as Gibraltar, and French acceptance of the Protestant succession, ensuring a smooth inheritance by George I in August 1714 and our rise as a great power later in the century.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
And we know what you'd have been saying in September 1939.
It's definitely what I'd have been saying in 1914, when foolish warmongers thought a jolly war on the continent would blow the cobwebs away and toughen us up a bit. Followed by The Somme, mustard gas, and the end of Britain's remarkable and peace-promoting leadership of the world economy. And without which there would have been no Hitler.
There can't be any progress unless Ukraine is also included and Lavrov has already humiliated Rubio by refusing NATO European states permission to enforce a ceasefire deal there. Who else are they going to get to do it? China and India?
Not just NATO European states but all NATO states.
What's wrong with China or India doing it?
Putin's lickspittles? Marvellous idea.
I hope you're joking. Putin must be some kind of demon if he controls both China and India. He probably has more influence in the USA than in either of those countries. Does he own the Pope too?
Clearly Putin derangement syndrome exists.
So how much military assistance have the world's two most populous countries supplied to Ukraine? Or are they too busy buying Russian oil to have got round to it yet?
Modi is a fascist. He likes to hobnob with other fascists.
India has always had a very close (post colonial) relationship with Russia, and seems to much prefer them to us (perhaps for understandable reasons). This was the case when they were a communist dictatorship, so there's not much reason why it would have changed now they're an authoritarian state with the remnants of a democracy.
In my opinion we need to be a good deal less starry-eyed about India. They do not wish us well. We should at the very least not be trying to exercise 'soft power' by hosing aid money at them when they have a space programme. The same goes for China.
Indeed. Famously India did not sympathise with the UK over Salisbury.
The political choices in India come down to Hindu Nationalism (anti-Muslim, anti-British, and anti-much else) or Congress style Socialism (non-aligned, left-wing and Russia sympathising).
I really don't hold out much hope for any sort of allyship from it. The old time they would is to check Chinese expansion if it directly impinged their interests or borders.
If we decided tactically to be closer to China, we could expect even less support from India.
China has occupied Indian territory for many decades. And supplied nuclear weapons technology to Pakistan.
An uneasy love triangle between Modi, Xi and Putin.
Man jailed for abusive emails to politicians ... A 39-year-old man has been jailed for sending malicious communications to a government minister, the mayor of London and a senior Met Police officer.
Jack Bennett, of Newlands Park, Seaton, Devon, pleaded guilty to four counts of sending malicious emails; one to Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips, one to Metropolitan police officer Matt Twist, and two counts to Mayor Sadiq Khan. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3rndxj705jo
"The Crown Prosecution Service said the email to Phillips was sent on 2 January, one day after Musk said the MP “deserves to be in prison” for denying requests to the Home Office for a public inquiry into child sexual exploitation in Oldham. The X owner also later called her a “rape genocide apologist”.
The prime minister suggested that a line has been crossed and that Musk’s comments had led to threats against the minister."
The case reached its conclusion very quickly, even if the chap did hold his hands up and the action took place in a magistrates' court. One of the emails was sent as recently as 2 January.
Gotta wonder whether the government would okay a Musk visit to this country.
Not seen all the details, obviously, but if there is no threat aren’t these just unpleasant opinions?
I'm not totally panicking about the US and Trump because, regardless of the damage they are doing atm, and my belief that the lead European powers need to up their game and police their own backyard, I don't think that's where most Americans are at, who are quite reasonable, share most of our values, and have a fondness for their European roots.
We just don't know how long it will last, or where we'll be when it finishes. Which is why we must act now.
I've disagreed with him on some things, and been infuriated by others. But on the whole I think he's been a reasonable pope, and better than his last few predecessors.
Regardless of all that, I hope he recovers soon.
Hopefully Pope France recovers but if not it's always fascinating to see the "Conclave" and the white smoke.
I've long thought the Conservative Party should deploy the grey/white smoke trick for their seemingly never ending, insufferable leadership contests... 😂
Blue smoke?
Grey or white underpants (I believe John Major may have a supplier)
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
And we know what you'd have been saying in September 1939.
It's definitely what I'd have been saying in 1914, when foolish warmongers thought a jolly war on the continent would blow the cobwebs away and toughen us up a bit. Followed by The Somme, mustard gas, and the end of Britain's remarkable and peace-promoting leadership of the world economy. And without which there would have been no Hitler.
You might want to think what German war aims were in 1914. And consider how they treated occupied countries. And what they extracted from Russia in 1918. Nazi Germany didn’t spring out of nothing. The Germany of WW1 was not some cuddly set of chaps, just on the wrong side.
I'm not totally panicking about the US and Trump because, regardless of the damage they are doing atm, and my belief that the lead European powers need to up their game and police their own backyard, I don't think that's where most Americans are at, who are quite reasonable, share most of our values, and have a fondness for their European roots.
We just don't know how long it will last, or where we'll be when it finishes. Which is why we must act now.
And this is the point, we need to stop being beholden to the US agenda as it is no longer reliable and hasn't been for 20 years. We need to step up and that means cutting welfare spending to fund our national defence. It's time for the "sick" to go back to work.
Morning all from my final day in God’s own country as Richard Seddon, the tallest and one of the longest serving Kiwi Prime Ministers, described coming back to New Zealand in his final message before dying in 1906.
The tone of some of the comments takes hyperbole to whole new depths.
Plain speaking - America has always acted in America’s best interests and if that means screwing over allies, so be it. How soon we have forgotten how they utilized economic pressure against us over Suez and in the immediate post war period. Had it been someone other than Reagan in the WH, we’d have been forced to do a deal over the Falklands.
NATO’s purpose effectively ended in 1989 and for the past 35 years, we’ve coasted on inertia in terms of strategic thinking. The collapse of Yugoslavia laid bare the weaknesses in European military thinking and capability.
I always imagined the Americans would become increasingly Pacific focused with China the new enemy and Europe would be a backwater on the other side of the planet. It’s interesting one of Trump’s smoothest early meetings has been with Japan - the Japanese worked out how to “play” Trump and got everything they wanted.
I'm not totally panicking about the US and Trump because, regardless of the damage they are doing atm, and my belief that the lead European powers need to up their game and police their own backyard, I don't think that's where most Americans are at, who are quite reasonable, share most of our values, and have a fondness for their European roots.
We just don't know how long it will last, or where we'll be when it finishes. Which is why we must act now.
And this is the point, we need to stop being beholden to the US agenda as it is no longer reliable and hasn't been for 20 years. We need to step up and that means cutting welfare spending to fund our national defence. It's time for the "sick" to go back to work.
And its time to stop featherbedding pensioners and the NHS.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
Yes: we do need a defence pact outside of the EU.
It needs, I think we'd all agree, to include Norway, Iceland and us, for a start. Plus, for the reasons you outlined, we don't probably don't want Hungary to be a part.
The question is this: do we want to completely cut ties with the US? That is, is the current Trump administration an aberration, and if the European countries step up and put the spending in, then NATO continues? Or is that it? Is NATO effectively over?
Two months ago, I would have said "tough it out, America is ultimately our friend", but the problem is that the current administration doesn't think in terms of long term allies, it thinks transactionally here and now. And the cost to remaining in its orbit is likely to rise and rise.
For that reason, I fear we do need to start thinking beyond NATO.
Yes, moving beyond NATO feels necessary now. We can't rely on America to secure Europe's borders. This has been true for 20 years but until now it hasn't meant anything because we didn't have America negotiating away our security to a despot. The ExCo of the UK, France and Poland should be at the head of the table against Putin with Ukraine also present and if we had raised defence spending to 4% in 2014 when Obama effectively opted out of NATO and Trump very bluntly told us to increase spending that would be the case.
We also need more restrictive military buying policies and start excluding Germany and other unreliable nations from supply chains if they want final say over the use of purchased armaments. I also think a policy change to prefer domestic suppliers and rebuilding supply chains within the UK and specific allies (maybe including the US) is necessary.
There is a lot of hard work to be done and not a lot of time to do it but we need to start now.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
The War of the Spanish Succession led to Britain becoming the dominant commerical power in Europe, establishment of our naval superiority over our competitors, acquisition of strategic Mediterranean ports, such as Gibraltar, and French acceptance of the Protestant succession, ensuring a smooth inheritance by George I in August 1714 and our rise as a great power later in the century.
Do you ever tire of being wrong?
The war did not lead to any of those things. The decision to stop fighting on Britain's part, followed by the peace treaty, led to those things.
It must be very embarrassing being you on PB. It's like watching someone banging their head on a table reading your posts at times. For what it's worth, I do genuinely like you, but barely seem to have got past one crashing error of judgement before you're racing for another one like a rat up a drainpipe. The latest being this re-heated entente-cordiale. Just stop and think sometimes for goodness sake.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
And we know what you'd have been saying in September 1939.
It's definitely what I'd have been saying in 1914, when foolish warmongers thought a jolly war on the continent would blow the cobwebs away and toughen us up a bit. Followed by The Somme, mustard gas, and the end of Britain's remarkable and peace-promoting leadership of the world economy. And without which there would have been no Hitler.
We didn't have a choice.
We all wish (and now largely want) to believe it could have been different given the horrendous casualties we suffered but France would have collapsed by 1916 without us, possibly earlier, and the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk- shows the terms that a vindictive Kaiser Wilhelm II would have imposed on his defeated enemies.
We'd have risked an entirely German dominated Europe, including across the French side of the Channel and the low countries, with a large and hostile naval fleet in being, pointed right at our necks, and having dodged our commitments to several bilateral treaties to save us the trouble. They could have dictated trading conditions to us and minor powers would have turned to them, not us, for buttressing and protection. We could not have continued as a free and independent power under those conditions.
Man jailed for abusive emails to politicians ... A 39-year-old man has been jailed for sending malicious communications to a government minister, the mayor of London and a senior Met Police officer.
Jack Bennett, of Newlands Park, Seaton, Devon, pleaded guilty to four counts of sending malicious emails; one to Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips, one to Metropolitan police officer Matt Twist, and two counts to Mayor Sadiq Khan. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3rndxj705jo
"The Crown Prosecution Service said the email to Phillips was sent on 2 January, one day after Musk said the MP “deserves to be in prison” for denying requests to the Home Office for a public inquiry into child sexual exploitation in Oldham. The X owner also later called her a “rape genocide apologist”.
The prime minister suggested that a line has been crossed and that Musk’s comments had led to threats against the minister."
The case reached its conclusion very quickly, even if the chap did hold his hands up and the action took place in a magistrates' court. One of the emails was sent as recently as 2 January.
Gotta wonder whether the government would okay a Musk visit to this country.
Didn't Sunak kiss Musk's arse on a visit a year ago?
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
And we know what you'd have been saying in September 1939.
It's definitely what I'd have been saying in 1914, when foolish warmongers thought a jolly war on the continent would blow the cobwebs away and toughen us up a bit. Followed by The Somme, mustard gas, and the end of Britain's remarkable and peace-promoting leadership of the world economy. And without which there would have been no Hitler.
Britain's problem was that if we'd sat the war out and Germany / Austria-Hungary had won, then the continent would have ended up dominated by a powerful enemy. If France / Russia has managed to prevail without us, then our allies would never have trusted us again and we'd have been left friendless. In the end, going to war was seen as the least worst option.
The pressure for labour to drop their red lines just keeps building and building. It is turning from a whisper into a roar. There is no way that policy survives till GE2029
P.s. i will bet you the next statista poll has stay out at well below 30% due to the new world order that has appeared since Jan 20.
Honestly, it’s like the League of Empire Loyalists. Our EU membership has gone and isn’t coming back. Joining is just not practical. No rational U.K. Government will go for a customs union or the single market either.
However, this situation will engender good will in the EU and U.K., and we’ll end up with narrow equivalence deals and some dynamic alignment. I doubt we’ll argue too strongly over things like fishing either, as we turn our collective minds to something more like a boosted European community beyond the EU, and structures growing out of NATO without the U.S.
I've disagreed with him on some things, and been infuriated by others. But on the whole I think he's been a reasonable pope, and better than his last few predecessors.
Regardless of all that, I hope he recovers soon.
Me too. I like him a lot. Pope Benedict apparently did his unprecedented retirement so that someone could come in and decorrupt the Vatican. Francis seems a very moral Pope, though I don't agree with him about everything. Health and long life to him.
He's been the best Pope since maybe forever.
Note to self: find out the Jesuit position on AI.
As long as the AI dies with the name of Jesus on its screen, then it goes to heaven.
No. It has to ask forgiveness for all it's many sins. Ai is incapable of requesting forgiveness.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
And we know what you'd have been saying in September 1939.
It's definitely what I'd have been saying in 1914, when foolish warmongers thought a jolly war on the continent would blow the cobwebs away and toughen us up a bit. Followed by The Somme, mustard gas, and the end of Britain's remarkable and peace-promoting leadership of the world economy. And without which there would have been no Hitler.
Britain's problem was that if we'd sat the war out and Germany / Austria-Hungary had won, then the continent would have ended up dominated by a powerful enemy. If France / Russia has managed to prevail without us, then our allies would never have trusted us again and we'd have been left friendless. In the end, going to war was seen as the least worst option.
Morning all from my final day in God’s own country as Richard Seddon, the tallest and one of the longest serving Kiwi Prime Ministers, described coming back to New Zealand in his final message before dying in 1906.
The tone of some of the comments takes hyperbole to whole new depths.
Plain speaking - America has always acted in America’s best interests and if that means screwing over allies, so be it. How soon we have forgotten how they utilized economic pressure against us over Suez and in the immediate post war period. Had it been someone other than Reagan in the WH, we’d have been forced to do a deal over the Falklands.
NATO’s purpose effectively ended in 1989 and for the past 35 years, we’ve coasted on inertia in terms of strategic thinking. The collapse of Yugoslavia laid bare the weaknesses in European military thinking and capability.
I always imagined the Americans would become increasingly Pacific focused with China the new enemy and Europe would be a backwater on the other side of the planet. It’s interesting one of Trump’s smoothest early meetings has been with Japan - the Japanese worked out how to “play” Trump and got everything they wanted.
None of that helps us or Ukraine much.
"America has always acted in America’s best interests"
I agree with that.
But that is not what we're seeing. We're currently seeing America's leadership acting in the best interests of a few, very rich, people. Not all of whom are American. That is rather different.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
Europe shouldn't have run down its military capabilities over the last few decades. Totally stupid.
Momentum Chaser @electricfutures · 4h So we're down to $6.5B in savings, and an alarming trend emerges:
@DOGE does not seem to understand how the government contracts they are canceling work. The savings they are claiming are not annual savings, but rather hypothetical savings if we spent every unobligated penny.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
Yes: we do need a defence pact outside of the EU.
It needs, I think we'd all agree, to include Norway, Iceland and us, for a start. Plus, for the reasons you outlined, we don't probably don't want Hungary to be a part.
The question is this: do we want to completely cut ties with the US? That is, is the current Trump administration an aberration, and if the European countries step up and put the spending in, then NATO continues? Or is that it? Is NATO effectively over?
Two months ago, I would have said "tough it out, America is ultimately our friend", but the problem is that the current administration doesn't think in terms of long term allies, it thinks transactionally here and now. And the cost to remaining in its orbit is likely to rise and rise.
For that reason, I fear we do need to start thinking beyond NATO.
Yes, that's roughly where I am at, but with the caveat that in my limited knowledge there appears to be a gap of perhaps 5 years between our current heavy reliance on USA (and therefore NATO) and our ability to cobble together a respectable post-NATO alliance.
I see the estimated chance of that asteroid hitting Earth has gone up to 3.1%...
At this stage the increasing probability of collision was what the astronomers expected.
At the time of the possible collision, the object approaches travelling in the same direction as earth from behind.
We pretty much know its orbit North to South - any collision with the earth would be slightly into the northern hemisphere, at a time of day when off the African coast around Ghana would be a direct bullseye hit*, and glancing blows* could occur anywhere from the Pacific off Central America to Bangladesh.
It is the left-right path of approach we don't know to within a couple of hundred thousand miles. It could pass inside the earth's orbit, it could pass outside, it could hit. But as we narrow this error, it's the bits on either side get shaved off first and the earth stays in target up until an inside pass or an outside pass is ruled out, and then the earth is shaved off.
So, the probability of an earth strike initially goes up and then, we hope, is ruled out quickly.
If you set your frame of reference such that this object were making a straight line approach, it would loom larger and larger until the point the parallax makes it obvious it is going to one side. We are just at the larger and larger phase now.
* hit and blow perhaps inaccurate here, as the object's size suggests air burst.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
That's complete nonsense. Russia poses a naval and air threat to our borders and allowing them to takeover Eastern Europe hurts our security and our economy. Beyond our own self interest, allowing tens of millions to be subjugated by a despot is fundamentally wrong, Europe is faced with a similar choice to 1939. We needed US support against Nazi Germany, we don't need US support against a clapped out Russia we can step up and do it ourselves.
Piss off. What navy do they have left that floats? Assuming that they even can take over Eastern Europe (they can't even do Ukraine), how does that harm our economy? How does that harm our security? The best UK threat that number 1 Russia policeman Josias could come up yesterday was that they might subvert an election through social media. And I don't think he'd miss a trick if there was one.
There's certainly a moral case for containing them, but you have not successfully made a national interest argument.
Good evening I see that PB is on the verge of declaring war on the US.
I suppose it's the last vestige of British exceptionalism that so many people on here and beyond find comfort in.
Edit: and I see we plan to enlist Iceland and the Faroe Islands in a military pact.
It's not about "declaring war on the US" we need to defend our own borders and not rely on the US to do it for us, we needed to start this journey 20 years ago but now is as good a time as any.
The pressure for labour to drop their red lines just keeps building and building. It is turning from a whisper into a roar. There is no way that policy survives till GE2029
P.s. i will bet you the next statista poll has stay out at well below 30% due to the new world order that has appeared since Jan 20.
The more immediate questions are firstly, is the Government really committed to a significant investment in defence and rearmament, or is this all just grandstanding to conceal an actual commitment of tuppence ha'penny; and secondly, if they are, who gets the pleasure of being rinsed to pay for it? The answers will tell us a lot about what their priorities really are.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
And we know what you'd have been saying in September 1939.
It's definitely what I'd have been saying in 1914, when foolish warmongers thought a jolly war on the continent would blow the cobwebs away and toughen us up a bit. Followed by The Somme, mustard gas, and the end of Britain's remarkable and peace-promoting leadership of the world economy. And without which there would have been no Hitler.
You might want to think what German war aims were in 1914. And consider how they treated occupied countries. And what they extracted from Russia in 1918. Nazi Germany didn’t spring out of nothing. The Germany of WW1 was not some cuddly set of chaps, just on the wrong side.
And? It didn't do the USA any harm to stand on the sidelines and get rich supplying munitions, joining later to deliver the decisive blow. It didn't do them any harm as far as posterity is concerned either. Those who suggest that I'm a would-be Nazi appeaser seem to have very little cricitism of the US war records.
The pressure for labour to drop their red lines just keeps building and building. It is turning from a whisper into a roar. There is no way that policy survives till GE2029
P.s. i will bet you the next statista poll has stay out at well below 30% due to the new world order that has appeared since Jan 20.
Honestly, it’s like the League of Empire Loyalists. Our EU membership has gone and isn’t coming back. Joining is just not practical. No rational U.K. Government will go for a customs union or the single market either.
However, this situation will engender good will in the EU and U.K., and we’ll end up with narrow equivalence deals and some dynamic alignment. I doubt we’ll argue too strongly over things like fishing either, as we turn our collective minds to something more like a boosted European community beyond the EU, and structures growing out of NATO without the U.S.
There can't be any progress unless Ukraine is also included and Lavrov has already humiliated Rubio by refusing NATO European states permission to enforce a ceasefire deal there. Who else are they going to get to do it? China and India?
Not just NATO European states but all NATO states.
What's wrong with China or India doing it?
Putin's lickspittles? Marvellous idea.
I hope you're joking. Putin must be some kind of demon if he controls both China and India. He probably has more influence in the USA than in either of those countries. Does he own the Pope too?
Clearly Putin derangement syndrome exists.
So how much military assistance have the world's two most populous countries supplied to Ukraine? Or are they too busy buying Russian oil to have got round to it yet?
Modi is a fascist. He likes to hobnob with other fascists.
Other things being equal, it's better to have a country enforce the ceasefire that has been neutral. China hasn't been neutral, but they given less assistance to Russia than the US and other NATO countries have to Ukraine, and less than Iran and North Korea have given to Russia, although tbf I wouldn't be surprised if they flashed a little bit of a pale green light in Pyongyang's direction regarding the NK assistance. But the idea of Poland or Germany enforcing the ceasefire would be absurd. I can't think of many better countries to step up and do it than China and India.
India is the most Pro-Putin country outside Russia.
Good evening I see that PB is on the verge of declaring war on the US.
I suppose it's the last vestige of British exceptionalism that so many people on here and beyond find comfort in.
Edit: and I see we plan to enlist Iceland and the Faroe Islands in a military pact.
It's not about "declaring war on the US" we need to defend our own borders and not rely on the US to do it for us, we needed to start this journey 20 years ago but now is as good a time as any.
Where do you see the next threat to our borders emanating.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
Yes: we do need a defence pact outside of the EU.
It needs, I think we'd all agree, to include Norway, Iceland and us, for a start. Plus, for the reasons you outlined, we don't probably don't want Hungary to be a part.
The question is this: do we want to completely cut ties with the US? That is, is the current Trump administration an aberration, and if the European countries step up and put the spending in, then NATO continues? Or is that it? Is NATO effectively over?
Two months ago, I would have said "tough it out, America is ultimately our friend", but the problem is that the current administration doesn't think in terms of long term allies, it thinks transactionally here and now. And the cost to remaining in its orbit is likely to rise and rise.
For that reason, I fear we do need to start thinking beyond NATO.
Yes, that's roughly where I am at, but with the caveat that in my limited knowledge there appears to be a gap of perhaps 5 years between our current heavy reliance on USA (and therefore NATO) and our ability to cobble together a respectable post-NATO alliance.
I'm not sure how we bridge that gap.
We don't. You'd have to do an emergency call up with what you had, and remobilise anything mothballed or requistion anything you could from civilian life.
It's not much commented on now but Baldwin/Chamberlain's decision to leave re-armament so late (effectively just 18 months for the army before the outbreak of WWII) had a material impact on the fighting efficacy of the BEF in France in 1940.
The RAF, that had been better funded for years before, did not.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
And we know what you'd have been saying in September 1939.
It's definitely what I'd have been saying in 1914, when foolish warmongers thought a jolly war on the continent would blow the cobwebs away and toughen us up a bit. Followed by The Somme, mustard gas, and the end of Britain's remarkable and peace-promoting leadership of the world economy. And without which there would have been no Hitler.
Britain's problem was that if we'd sat the war out and Germany / Austria-Hungary had won, then the continent would have ended up dominated by a powerful enemy. If France / Russia has managed to prevail without us, then our allies would never have trusted us again and we'd have been left friendless. In the end, going to war was seen as the least worst option.
Neither France and certainly not Russia were Britain's allies prior to the outbreak of the first world war.
I'm not totally panicking about the US and Trump because, regardless of the damage they are doing atm, and my belief that the lead European powers need to up their game and police their own backyard, I don't think that's where most Americans are at, who are quite reasonable, share most of our values, and have a fondness for their European roots.
We just don't know how long it will last, or where we'll be when it finishes. Which is why we must act now.
And this is the point, we need to stop being beholden to the US agenda as it is no longer reliable and hasn't been for 20 years. We need to step up and that means cutting welfare spending to fund our national defence. It's time for the "sick" to go back to work.
If the sick didn’t have to spend so long on a waiting list, they could go back to work sooner.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
That's complete nonsense. Russia poses a naval and air threat to our borders and allowing them to takeover Eastern Europe hurts our security and our economy. Beyond our own self interest, allowing tens of millions to be subjugated by a despot is fundamentally wrong, Europe is faced with a similar choice to 1939. We needed US support against Nazi Germany, we don't need US support against a clapped out Russia we can step up and do it ourselves.
Piss off. What navy do they have left that floats? Assuming that they even can take over Eastern Europe (they can't even do Ukraine), how does that harm our economy? How does that harm our security? The best UK threat that number 1 Russia policeman Josias could come up yesterday was that they might subvert an election through social media. And I don't think he'd miss a trick if there was one.
There's certainly a moral case for containing them, but you have not successfully made a national interest argument.
It's not in the national interests of Russia, that's for sure.
Momentum Chaser @electricfutures · 4h So we're down to $6.5B in savings, and an alarming trend emerges:
@DOGE does not seem to understand how the government contracts they are canceling work. The savings they are claiming are not annual savings, but rather hypothetical savings if we spent every unobligated penny.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
Yes: we do need a defence pact outside of the EU.
It needs, I think we'd all agree, to include Norway, Iceland and us, for a start. Plus, for the reasons you outlined, we don't probably don't want Hungary to be a part.
The question is this: do we want to completely cut ties with the US? That is, is the current Trump administration an aberration, and if the European countries step up and put the spending in, then NATO continues? Or is that it? Is NATO effectively over?
Two months ago, I would have said "tough it out, America is ultimately our friend", but the problem is that the current administration doesn't think in terms of long term allies, it thinks transactionally here and now. And the cost to remaining in its orbit is likely to rise and rise.
For that reason, I fear we do need to start thinking beyond NATO.
We need to be prepared to go further if necessary, and be prepared to stand up to Trump if he threatens us.
If Trump takes the Faroe Islands he will inherit the Danish claim to Rockall.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
That's complete nonsense. Russia poses a naval and air threat to our borders and allowing them to takeover Eastern Europe hurts our security and our economy. Beyond our own self interest, allowing tens of millions to be subjugated by a despot is fundamentally wrong, Europe is faced with a similar choice to 1939. We needed US support against Nazi Germany, we don't need US support against a clapped out Russia we can step up and do it ourselves.
Piss off. What navy do they have left that floats? Assuming that they even can take over Eastern Europe (they can't even do Ukraine), how does that harm our economy? How does that harm our security? The best UK threat that number 1 Russia policeman Josias could come up yesterday was that they might subvert an election through social media. And I don't think he'd miss a trick if there was one.
There's certainly a moral case for containing them, but you have not successfully made a national interest argument.
So our subsea communications lines have been cut by who, Sweden? Our airspace has been buzzed constantly by Finland? We depend heavily on subsea power transmission too, it's a huge dependency on not having Russian ships destroying our interconnectors and subsea infrastructure.
Do you really think that Eastern Europe run by Putin acolytes would trade with us or buy British goods and services? There's a huge economic downside to allowing Putin to invade and subvert Eastern European countries, it is in out national interest to defend them.
You keep talking peace and yet your idea of peace is millions of people being subjugated and our own security and economy being put at risk. You're as bad as Corbyn.
The pressure for labour to drop their red lines just keeps building and building. It is turning from a whisper into a roar. There is no way that policy survives till GE2029
P.s. i will bet you the next statista poll has stay out at well below 30% due to the new world order that has appeared since Jan 20.
The more immediate questions are firstly, is the Government really committed to a significant investment in defence and rearmament, or is this all just grandstanding to conceal an actual commitment of tuppence ha'penny; and secondly, if they are, who gets the pleasure of being rinsed to pay for it? The answers will tell us a lot about what their priorities really are.
I don’t consider having to pay for my country to protect me and my family as being rinsed.
The pressure for labour to drop their red lines just keeps building and building. It is turning from a whisper into a roar. There is no way that policy survives till GE2029
P.s. i will bet you the next statista poll has stay out at well below 30% due to the new world order that has appeared since Jan 20.
Honestly, it’s like the League of Empire Loyalists. Our EU membership has gone and isn’t coming back. Joining is just not practical. No rational U.K. Government will go for a customs union or the single market either.
However, this situation will engender good will in the EU and U.K., and we’ll end up with narrow equivalence deals and some dynamic alignment. I doubt we’ll argue too strongly over things like fishing either, as we turn our collective minds to something more like a boosted European community beyond the EU, and structures growing out of NATO without the U.S.
You are living in a dream world mate.
In what way? If you think we’re going to join the EU, then I am afraid you don’t understand what that would mean. No sensible politician is going to push for a referendum on the Euro and Schengen, but those sorts of aspirations may be overtaken by events anyway.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
And we know what you'd have been saying in September 1939.
It's definitely what I'd have been saying in 1914, when foolish warmongers thought a jolly war on the continent would blow the cobwebs away and toughen us up a bit. Followed by The Somme, mustard gas, and the end of Britain's remarkable and peace-promoting leadership of the world economy. And without which there would have been no Hitler.
Britain's problem was that if we'd sat the war out and Germany / Austria-Hungary had won, then the continent would have ended up dominated by a powerful enemy. If France / Russia has managed to prevail without us, then our allies would never have trusted us again and we'd have been left friendless. In the end, going to war was seen as the least worst option.
So by your calculation, America's attitude to both wars would have made them completely friendless - they seem to have coped with that crushing blow quite well don't they?
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
Europe shouldn't have run down its military capabilities over the last few decades. Totally stupid.
When the Warsaw Pact collapsed in 1989 and the USSR soon after, the natural response was to assume the “threat” was over and there was no longer a need for large scale conventional forces to be based in Germany (though as the Germans were happy to pay for them to be there, it suited us for them to stay for a while).
Remember “the Peace Dividend”? The money saved on defence was going to go on schools, hospitals, tax cuts or whatever your ideological preference.
As with so much else, it seemed like a good idea at the time.
I'm not totally panicking about the US and Trump because, regardless of the damage they are doing atm, and my belief that the lead European powers need to up their game and police their own backyard, I don't think that's where most Americans are at, who are quite reasonable, share most of our values, and have a fondness for their European roots.
We just don't know how long it will last, or where we'll be when it finishes. Which is why we must act now.
And this is the point, we need to stop being beholden to the US agenda as it is no longer reliable and hasn't been for 20 years. We need to step up and that means cutting welfare spending to fund our national defence. It's time for the "sick" to go back to work.
If the sick didn’t have to spend so long on a waiting list, they could go back to work sooner.
You really think all the people on waiting lists are non-workers who want to work and can be easily cured ?
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
Yes: we do need a defence pact outside of the EU.
It needs, I think we'd all agree, to include Norway, Iceland and us, for a start. Plus, for the reasons you outlined, we don't probably don't want Hungary to be a part.
The question is this: do we want to completely cut ties with the US? That is, is the current Trump administration an aberration, and if the European countries step up and put the spending in, then NATO continues? Or is that it? Is NATO effectively over?
Two months ago, I would have said "tough it out, America is ultimately our friend", but the problem is that the current administration doesn't think in terms of long term allies, it thinks transactionally here and now. And the cost to remaining in its orbit is likely to rise and rise.
For that reason, I fear we do need to start thinking beyond NATO.
Yes, that's roughly where I am at, but with the caveat that in my limited knowledge there appears to be a gap of perhaps 5 years between our current heavy reliance on USA (and therefore NATO) and our ability to cobble together a respectable post-NATO alliance.
I'm not sure how we bridge that gap.
We don't. You'd have to do an emergency call up with what you had, and remobilise anything mothballed or requistion anything you could from civilian life.
It's not much commented on now but Baldwin/Chamberlain's decision to leave re-armament so late (effectively just 18 months for the army before the outbreak of WWII) had a material impact on the fighting efficacy of the BEF in France in 1940.
The RAF, that had been better funded for years before, did not.
So (again speaking from relative naivete) does it not then follow that we might need to tiptoe around the current US administration rather than throw our toys out of the pram over Ukraine?
Much as I don't like it, perhaps we need to keep Trump relatively onside for a few years until we can tell him to fuck off from a position of strength?
Which, to his credit, Starmer appears to be doing at the moment.
I'm not totally panicking about the US and Trump because, regardless of the damage they are doing atm, and my belief that the lead European powers need to up their game and police their own backyard, I don't think that's where most Americans are at, who are quite reasonable, share most of our values, and have a fondness for their European roots.
We just don't know how long it will last, or where we'll be when it finishes. Which is why we must act now.
And this is the point, we need to stop being beholden to the US agenda as it is no longer reliable and hasn't been for 20 years. We need to step up and that means cutting welfare spending to fund our national defence. It's time for the "sick" to go back to work.
If the sick didn’t have to spend so long on a waiting list, they could go back to work sooner.
You don't understand the nature of our problem if you think that's true. The PIP is basically UBI for people who can pass the assessment. The only way to end that spend is to shit can the PIP.
Momentum Chaser @electricfutures · 4h So we're down to $6.5B in savings, and an alarming trend emerges:
@DOGE does not seem to understand how the government contracts they are canceling work. The savings they are claiming are not annual savings, but rather hypothetical savings if we spent every unobligated penny.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
Europe shouldn't have run down its military capabilities over the last few decades. Totally stupid.
When the Warsaw Pact collapsed in 1989 and the USSR soon after, the natural response was to assume the “threat” was over and there was no longer a need for large scale conventional forces to be based in Germany (though as the Germans were happy to pay for them to be there, it suited us for them to stay for a while).
Remember “the Peace Dividend”? The money saved on defence was going to go on schools, hospitals, tax cuts or whatever your ideological preference.
As with so much else, it seemed like a good idea at the time.
Cameron, Osborne, Clegg, and Alexander, are the most guilty of the guilty men. They made deep cuts in 2010 when the Russian threat was already emerging. Pre-2010 Labour had maintained a seed corn set of capabilities whilst throwing a chunk of cash at Iraq and Afghanistan like they had to. Cameron and chums cut and cut while also posturing in Libya.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
And we know what you'd have been saying in September 1939.
It's definitely what I'd have been saying in 1914, when foolish warmongers thought a jolly war on the continent would blow the cobwebs away and toughen us up a bit. Followed by The Somme, mustard gas, and the end of Britain's remarkable and peace-promoting leadership of the world economy. And without which there would have been no Hitler.
You might want to think what German war aims were in 1914. And consider how they treated occupied countries. And what they extracted from Russia in 1918. Nazi Germany didn’t spring out of nothing. The Germany of WW1 was not some cuddly set of chaps, just on the wrong side.
And? It didn't do the USA any harm to stand on the sidelines and get rich supplying munitions, joining later to deliver the decisive blow. It didn't do them any harm as far as posterity is concerned either. Those who suggest that I'm a would-be Nazi appeaser seem to have very little cricitism of the US war records.
Revealing that you wouldn’t have given a shit for the Belgians, or the French, the Poles, the Russians either in 1914 or presumably 1939. Good clarification, thanks.
Momentum Chaser @electricfutures · 4h So we're down to $6.5B in savings, and an alarming trend emerges:
@DOGE does not seem to understand how the government contracts they are canceling work. The savings they are claiming are not annual savings, but rather hypothetical savings if we spent every unobligated penny.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
And we know what you'd have been saying in September 1939.
It's definitely what I'd have been saying in 1914, when foolish warmongers thought a jolly war on the continent would blow the cobwebs away and toughen us up a bit. Followed by The Somme, mustard gas, and the end of Britain's remarkable and peace-promoting leadership of the world economy. And without which there would have been no Hitler.
You might want to think what German war aims were in 1914. And consider how they treated occupied countries. And what they extracted from Russia in 1918. Nazi Germany didn’t spring out of nothing. The Germany of WW1 was not some cuddly set of chaps, just on the wrong side.
And? It didn't do the USA any harm to stand on the sidelines and get rich supplying munitions, joining later to deliver the decisive blow. It didn't do them any harm as far as posterity is concerned either. Those who suggest that I'm a would-be Nazi appeaser seem to have very little cricitism of the US war records.
Revealing that you wouldn’t have given a shit for the Belgians, or the French, the Poles, the Russians either in 1914 or presumably 1939. Good clarification, thanks.
I think LuckyGuy has been clear all along that he is talking about what is in Britain's interest rather than what might help 1914 Russians (not sure Britain declaring war did anything to help them anyway)
I'm not totally panicking about the US and Trump because, regardless of the damage they are doing atm, and my belief that the lead European powers need to up their game and police their own backyard, I don't think that's where most Americans are at, who are quite reasonable, share most of our values, and have a fondness for their European roots.
We just don't know how long it will last, or where we'll be when it finishes. Which is why we must act now.
And this is the point, we need to stop being beholden to the US agenda as it is no longer reliable and hasn't been for 20 years. We need to step up and that means cutting welfare spending to fund our national defence. It's time for the "sick" to go back to work.
If the sick didn’t have to spend so long on a waiting list, they could go back to work sooner.
You really think all the people on waiting lists are non-workers who want to work and can be easily cured ?
Not all, but many are. Those above retirement age on waiting lists are having a knock on effect too. Many of their carers are of working age.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
And we know what you'd have been saying in September 1939.
It's definitely what I'd have been saying in 1914, when foolish warmongers thought a jolly war on the continent would blow the cobwebs away and toughen us up a bit. Followed by The Somme, mustard gas, and the end of Britain's remarkable and peace-promoting leadership of the world economy. And without which there would have been no Hitler.
Britain's problem was that if we'd sat the war out and Germany / Austria-Hungary had won, then the continent would have ended up dominated by a powerful enemy. If France / Russia has managed to prevail without us, then our allies would never have trusted us again and we'd have been left friendless. In the end, going to war was seen as the least worst option.
Neither France and certainly not Russia were Britain's allies prior to the outbreak of the first world war.
Well that’s one view of the Triple Entente. Not a formal alliance, for sure, but definitely on the same side. What is your point?
By the way did you know that there was no formal alliance of Britain and the USA in WW2? Oddly they get called allies armies all the time though.
The US has really fucked it today. Accepting Russian terms in total is a capitulation. Europe needs to tool up and tell the US to go jump off a bridge and we need to protect our own borders properly. UK + France + Poland in an ExCo with associate members. The three ExCo countries need to have a minimum of 4% defence spending and associate members at 2.5%, time to show Russia what we're made of.
It’s interesting as it’s totally flipped my view on Europe. Was a euro sceptic, but absolutely need to be closer to Europe now. America are not our friends
Europe yes, but not the EU. A defence pact needs to happen outside of the EU or anywhere near it because needing unanimity of 28 countries (27 in the EU plus the UK) would be impossible and Russia would use its acolytes like Orban to block any action and manipulate election results in Eastern Bloc nations to put Putin placemen into government. The EU is most susceptible to Russian manipulation because it requires unanimity in decision making for foreign policy.
We need to bilateral and multilateral treaties outside of the scope of the EU or a defence pact to replace NATO won't work.
But your fundamental basis for this argument is that we need to control what happens on the continent of Europe. Put simply, we don't. We are blessed to be separated from the continent by 'a silver sea' that makes us independent. That goes for military as well as political entanglements. We consistently fail to take advantage of the situation that fate has given us.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
And we know what you'd have been saying in September 1939.
It's definitely what I'd have been saying in 1914, when foolish warmongers thought a jolly war on the continent would blow the cobwebs away and toughen us up a bit. Followed by The Somme, mustard gas, and the end of Britain's remarkable and peace-promoting leadership of the world economy. And without which there would have been no Hitler.
You might want to think what German war aims were in 1914. And consider how they treated occupied countries. And what they extracted from Russia in 1918. Nazi Germany didn’t spring out of nothing. The Germany of WW1 was not some cuddly set of chaps, just on the wrong side.
And? It didn't do the USA any harm to stand on the sidelines and get rich supplying munitions, joining later to deliver the decisive blow. It didn't do them any harm as far as posterity is concerned either. Those who suggest that I'm a would-be Nazi appeaser seem to have very little cricitism of the US war records.
Revealing that you wouldn’t have given a shit for the Belgians, or the French, the Poles, the Russians either in 1914 or presumably 1939. Good clarification, thanks.
I think LuckyGuy has been clear all along that he is talking about what is in Britain's interest rather than what might help 1914 Russians (not sure Britain declaring war did anything to help them anyway)
Do you think it was in Britain's interest to fight WW1?
Comments
Note to self: find out the Jesuit position on AI.
"The British Government stopped providing traditional development aid to India in 2015. Most UK funding to India is in the form of investments in priority areas like climate change. These investments have the dual aims of supporting development and backing private enterprises with the potential to be commercially viable, creating new partners, markets and jobs for the UK as well as India. They also generate returns which the British Government can reinvest in India or elsewhere. To date we have invested £330 million and over £100 million has been returned. We expect to get all our investments back over time."
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2023-12-18.7344.h#:~:text=The British Government stopped providing,priority areas like climate change.
I really don't hold out much hope for any sort of allyship from it. The old time they would is to check Chinese expansion if it directly impinged their interests or borders.
https://bsky.app/profile/bcmerchant.bsky.social/post/3lihq2tc2wk2a
There's a huge amount of intelligence sharing that goes on, particularly between us and the US, and the other nations give great satellite and telecommunications coverage. It's also one where the UK really does bring something to the table with GCHQ, MI6, its interception stations and special forces.
It will just have to be more carefully managed under this administration.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14759574/
"Sister Simone partners with her ex-boyfriend Wiley on a globe-spanning journey to destroy Mrs. Davis, a powerful artificial intelligence."
It's really rather well written and acted. Rather won me over as it went on.
We also need more restrictive military buying policies and start excluding Germany and other unreliable nations from supply chains if they want final say over the use of purchased armaments. I also think a policy change to prefer domestic suppliers and rebuilding supply chains within the UK and specific allies (maybe including the US) is necessary.
There is a lot of hard work to be done and not a lot of time to do it but we need to start now.
We have been here before when Britain spent its blood and a fortune fighting in the wars of the Spanish succession. The same people would have been around then, demanding that it was the only patriotic option to fight, and that those against it were allowing the hated French to control the continent. It was only when we stopped that nonsense and instead invested in naval force that we became a great power. Incidentally, Europe then also sorted itself out (for a while at least).
I've long thought the Conservative Party should deploy the grey/white smoke trick for their seemingly never ending, insufferable leadership contests... 😂
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/feb/18/devon-man-jailed-for-sending-utterly-deplorable-email-to-jess-phillips-mp
"The Crown Prosecution Service said the email to Phillips was sent on 2 January, one day after Musk said the MP “deserves to be in prison” for denying requests to the Home Office for a public inquiry into child sexual exploitation in Oldham. The X owner also later called her a “rape genocide apologist”.
The prime minister suggested that a line has been crossed and that Musk’s comments had led to threats against the minister."
The case reached its conclusion very quickly, even if the chap did hold his hands up and the action took place in a magistrates' court. One of the emails was sent as recently as 2 January.
Gotta wonder whether the government would okay a Musk visit to this country.
🇺🇸👀 CNN poll:
▪️8% of Americans view Russia positively;
▪️61% see Russia as an enemy;
▪️4% Russia as a partner.
▪️ only 9% like Putin!
▪️ 52% support Ukraine using U.S. weapons in Russia.
https://bsky.app/profile/maks23.bsky.social/post/3lii4o3snik2u
I can't believe they are happy at all.
How times change.
P.s. i will bet you the next statista poll has stay out at well below 30% due to the new world order that has appeared since Jan 20.
https://www.cityam.com/america-first-means-britain-needs-a-customs-union-with-europe/
Do you ever tire of being wrong?
An uneasy love triangle between Modi, Xi and Putin.
We just don't know how long it will last, or where we'll be when it finishes. Which is why we must act now.
The tone of some of the comments takes hyperbole to whole new depths.
Plain speaking - America has always acted in America’s best interests and if that means screwing over allies, so be it. How soon we have forgotten how they utilized economic pressure against us over Suez and in the immediate post war period. Had it been someone other than Reagan in the WH, we’d have been forced to do a deal over the Falklands.
NATO’s purpose effectively ended in 1989 and for the past 35 years, we’ve coasted on inertia in terms of strategic thinking. The collapse of Yugoslavia laid bare the weaknesses in European military thinking and capability.
I always imagined the Americans would become increasingly Pacific focused with China the new enemy and Europe would be a backwater on the other side of the planet. It’s interesting one of Trump’s smoothest early meetings has been with Japan - the Japanese worked out how to “play” Trump and got everything they wanted.
None of that helps us or Ukraine much.
It must be very embarrassing being you on PB. It's like watching someone banging their head on a table reading your posts at times. For what it's worth, I do genuinely like you, but barely seem to have got past one crashing error of judgement before you're racing for another one like a rat up a drainpipe. The latest being this re-heated entente-cordiale. Just stop and think sometimes for goodness sake.
We all wish (and now largely want) to believe it could have been different given the horrendous casualties we suffered but France would have collapsed by 1916 without us, possibly earlier, and the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk- shows the terms that a vindictive Kaiser Wilhelm II would have imposed on his defeated enemies.
We'd have risked an entirely German dominated Europe, including across the French side of the Channel and the low countries, with a large and hostile naval fleet in being, pointed right at our necks, and having dodged our commitments to several bilateral treaties to save us the trouble. They could have dictated trading conditions to us and minor powers would have turned to them, not us, for buttressing and protection. We could not have continued as a free and independent power under those conditions.
Sadly, we had to fight. And it was a tragedy.
However, this situation will engender good will in the EU and U.K., and we’ll end up with narrow equivalence deals and some dynamic alignment. I doubt we’ll argue too strongly over things like fishing either, as we turn our collective minds to something more like a boosted European community beyond the EU, and structures growing out of NATO without the U.S.
I agree with that.
But that is not what we're seeing. We're currently seeing America's leadership acting in the best interests of a few, very rich, people. Not all of whom are American. That is rather different.
Billy Glenn is just trolling us for shits and giggles I think. Not 100% sure, but I think so at least.
Momentum Chaser
@electricfutures
·
4h
So we're down to $6.5B in savings, and an alarming trend emerges:
@DOGE
does not seem to understand how the government contracts they are canceling work. The savings they are claiming are not annual savings, but rather hypothetical savings if we spent every unobligated penny.
https://x.com/electricfutures/status/1891898345028808761
Prime Minister defends comment that branded immigration decision as ‘wrong’"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/02/18/top-judge-extraordinary-attack-starmer-migrant-remarks/
I'm not sure how we bridge that gap.
I suppose it's the last vestige of British exceptionalism that so many people on here and beyond find comfort in.
Edit: and I see we plan to enlist Iceland and the Faroe Islands in a military pact.
At the time of the possible collision, the object approaches travelling in the same direction as earth from behind.
We pretty much know its orbit North
to South - any collision with the earth
would be slightly into the northern
hemisphere, at a time of day when off the African coast around Ghana would be a direct bullseye hit*, and glancing blows* could occur anywhere from the Pacific off Central America to Bangladesh.
It is the left-right path of approach we don't know to within a couple of hundred thousand miles. It could pass inside the earth's orbit, it could pass outside, it could hit. But as we narrow this error, it's the bits on either side get shaved off first and the earth stays in target up until an inside pass or an outside pass is ruled out, and then the earth is shaved off.
So, the probability of an earth strike initially goes up and then, we hope, is ruled out quickly.
If you set your frame of reference such that this object were making a straight line approach, it would loom larger and larger until the point the parallax makes it obvious it is going to one side. We are just at the larger and larger phase now.
* hit and blow perhaps inaccurate here, as the object's size suggests air burst.
There's certainly a moral case for containing them, but you have not successfully made a national interest argument.
I wasn't happy with The Patriot but I became a hard-liner when I saw the YouTube videos of how they recommend making a cup of tea.
Have you seen the rhetoric they spout about perfidious Albion? Tsunami nukes and all that rubbish?
It's not much commented on now but Baldwin/Chamberlain's decision to leave re-armament so late (effectively just 18 months for the army before the outbreak of WWII) had a material impact on the fighting efficacy of the BEF in France in 1940.
The RAF, that had been better funded for years before, did not.
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/dreams-of-independence-in-europes-far-north/
https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/08/12/why-the-faroe-islands-want-independence-from-denmark
Do you really think that Eastern Europe run by Putin acolytes would trade with us or buy British goods and services? There's a huge economic downside to allowing Putin to invade and subvert Eastern European countries, it is in out national interest to defend them.
You keep talking peace and yet your idea of peace is millions of people being subjugated and our own security and economy being put at risk. You're as bad as Corbyn.
Remember “the Peace Dividend”? The money saved on defence was going to go on schools, hospitals, tax cuts or whatever your ideological preference.
As with so much else, it seemed like a good idea at the time.
Much as I don't like it, perhaps we need to keep Trump relatively onside for a few years until we can tell him to fuck off from a position of strength?
Which, to his credit, Starmer appears to be doing at the moment.
"Only" $6,500,000,000 saved? Oh no, how terrible!
https://www.thefp.com/p/kemi-badenoch-i-dont-think-doge-is
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
·
2h
Replying to @RealAlexJones
SSRIs are dangerous
By the way did you know that there was no formal alliance of Britain and the USA in WW2? Oddly they get called allies armies all the time though.
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2022/jul/no-evidence-depression-caused-low-serotonin-levels-finds-comprehensive-review