@Mike_Pence Mr. President, Ukraine did not “start” this war. Russia launched an unprovoked and brutal invasion claiming hundreds of thousands of lives. The Road to Peace must be built on the Truth.🇺🇸🇺🇦
“Russia Invades Ukraine in Largest European Attack Since WWII”
@Mike_Pence Mr. President, Ukraine did not “start” this war. Russia launched an unprovoked and brutal invasion claiming hundreds of thousands of lives. The Road to Peace must be built on the Truth.🇺🇸🇺🇦
“Russia Invades Ukraine in Largest European Attack Since WWII”
People should at the very least give him credit for doing the right thing on Jan 6th 2021. He might have wavered, and maybe not acted as promptly as we like, but he did ultimately choose the right path and saw to it that the election was certified. That alone makes him more fit for office than essentially the entire US Cabinet now.
... and credit should also go to Dan 'potato' Quayle for advising Pence that he had absolutely no wiggle room.
Zelenskyy may not have singlehandedly have canceled elections, but he definitely banned opposition parties, jailed critics, and shut down media he didn’t like but sure, let’s pretend he’s a beacon of democracy.
Wait until you find out what Churchill and Chamberlain did in WW2…
BJO would have preferred mass-murderer Stalin's approach to elections. Because his politics were solid. And there were 'elections'
"Candidates had to be nominated by the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) (CPSU) or by a public organisation.[2] However, all public organisations were controlled by the party and were subservient to a 1931 law that required them to accept party rule.[2] The CPSU itself remained the only legal party in the country.[3]
Voters could in theory vote against the CPSU candidate, but could only do so by using polling booths, whereas votes for the party could be cast simply by submitting a blank ballot"
Just to add to the depression what happens next week if Germany elect a right leadership with AFD support ?
Just extraordinary times we are living through
The AFD are likely to come second but there’s no way the likely winners the CDU will do any deal with them to form a government.
Political stalemate when Germany needs leadership?
Unlikely as the probable next govt will be the reformation of the CDU/CSU and SPD coalition, but with Merz, the rightish CDU leader becoming Chancellor. Better for Ukraine.
Zelenskyy may not have singlehandedly have canceled elections, but he definitely banned opposition parties, jailed critics, and shut down media he didn’t like but sure, let’s pretend he’s a beacon of democracy.
Do you not think -just maybe- that countries that get invaded should get given a little bit of slack?
(Also, Russia - which has not been invaded - has in fact done all those things.)
Just to add to the depression what happens next week if Germany elect a right leadership with AFD support ?
Just extraordinary times we are living through
The AFD are likely to come second but there’s no way the likely winners the CDU will do any deal with them to form a government.
Also a fair chance their vote gets squeezed now.
They’re polling at around 20% and I doubt current events will effect them given they were already Putin fans so it would be a big surprise if they don’t get that second place.
Zelenskyy may not have singlehandedly have canceled elections, but he definitely banned opposition parties, jailed critics, and shut down media he didn’t like but sure, let’s pretend he’s a beacon of democracy.
Do you not think -just maybe- that countries that get invaded should get given a little bit of slack?
(Also, Russia - which has not been invaded - has in fact done all those things.)
Don't you know there's a war special military operation on?
I do think the PM needs to say something, tonight, on the record. A pool clip at least.
I disagree, strongly. We need actions, not words. Preferably actions that put us on a path to reduce or eliminate our dependence on USA, whilst at the same time not triggering Trump's narcissistic petulance. We should continue to do the empty gestures (state visit or whatever) until we can confidently tell USA we no longer need them as an ally. That may take years.
ETA: I may be being hasty, of course, depending on what you are wanting Starmer to say on the record. A defense of Zelenskyy, I agree with. But it needs to be carefully worded imo.
@KemiBadenoch President Zelenskyy is not a dictator. He is the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who bravely stood up to Putin’s illegal invasion. Under my leadership, and under successive Conservative Prime Ministers, we have and always will stand with Ukraine.
President Trump is right that Europe needs to pull its weight - and that includes the UK. We need to get serious. The PM will have my support to increase defence spending - there is a fully funded plan to get to 2.5% sitting on his desk. That should be the bare minimum. Starmer should get on with it, get on a plane to Washington and show some leadership. We cannot afford to get this wrong.
That's something.
Good to see Kemi confirming conservatives support for Ukraine in view of Trumps incendiary comments this pm , and seeking increased defence spending
She has given unconditional backing to increased defence spending. Politically, that could turn out to matter a lot. Could the Tories now vote against a tax rise to fund it, for example?
The problem with any tax rise is it is rare to be hypotecated and of course there are many different taxes, but we are approaching the time to address the tax and ni unfairness on the workers and increase taxes for those on unearned incomes
But then, everyone is happy for tax rises as long as it is not them
I have just noticed to add to the problems gilts seem to be rising
Gilts are rising across Europe in anticipation of defence bonds. They do look like the best option as things stand. If we are serious about our defence, if we really do believe in the Blitz spirit stuff, we are all going to have accept a hit. Our grandparents sacrificed a hell of a lot more than it will cost us.
I still don't understand this. What's the point in increase defence spending when there is no appetite to ever use it? We've had Salisbury, Ukraine, MH17, cables in the Baltic and we've done nothing at all.
I think this sudden interest in increasing spending is a displacement activity, designed to make people feel good while having zero effect on Russia (but costing us billions).
Our defence is about defence. Of course, we have no appetite to fight any kind of war of aggression. But we have to demonstrate to Putin we would reluctantly fight a war to preserve Europe's current borders and that if we did we would win it because we have overwhelming superiority in kit and personnel. This has been the case up to now but it's been thanks to an American backstop. That is going, so we have to do what we should have done before and take up the slack. It will cost us, we will have to make (relatively small) sacrifices but it will be good for Europe over the medium to long term if this gets done. Here's hoping.
@KemiBadenoch President Zelenskyy is not a dictator. He is the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who bravely stood up to Putin’s illegal invasion. Under my leadership, and under successive Conservative Prime Ministers, we have and always will stand with Ukraine.
President Trump is right that Europe needs to pull its weight - and that includes the UK. We need to get serious. The PM will have my support to increase defence spending - there is a fully funded plan to get to 2.5% sitting on his desk. That should be the bare minimum. Starmer should get on with it, get on a plane to Washington and show some leadership. We cannot afford to get this wrong.
That's something.
Good to see Kemi confirming conservatives support for Ukraine in view of Trumps incendiary comments this pm , and seeking increased defence spending
She has given unconditional backing to increased defence spending. Politically, that could turn out to matter a lot. Could the Tories now vote against a tax rise to fund it, for example?
The problem with any tax rise is it is rare to be hypotecated and of course there are many different taxes, but we are approaching the time to address the tax and ni unfairness on the workers and increase taxes for those on unearned incomes
But then, everyone is happy for tax rises as long as it is not them
I have just noticed to add to the problems gilts seem to be rising
Gilts are rising across Europe in anticipation of defence bonds. They do look like the best option as things stand. If we are serious about our defence, if we really do believe in the Blitz spirit stuff, we are all going to have accept a hit. Our grandparents sacrificed a hell of a lot more than it will cost us.
I still don't understand this. What's the point in increase defence spending when there is no appetite to ever use it? We've had Salisbury, Ukraine, MH17, cables in the Baltic and we've done nothing at all.
I think this sudden interest in increasing spending is a displacement activity, designed to make people feel good while having zero effect on Russia (but costing us billions).
The point of strong conventional deterrence is to avoid a situation in which an emboldened Russia decides to grab territory directly off a NATO state, in the hope that the alliance folds and it can then expand its empire - either through annexation, or creating puppets through the mere threat of invasion.
Countering Russia, which is an economic minnow with a huge cannon fodder army, not entirely unlike North Korea, is readily doable, but only with a lot of investment in advanced weaponry that will minimise airborne threats, and enable as many Russians as possible to be slaughtered at range rather than getting into close combat with our own troops, which would then sustain a lot more losses - and it is very much easier for a dictatorship to treat it's people as expendable than it is for a democracy. If the investment isn't there then the risk is that any forces we can deploy get rolled over and wiped out, or fought to a bloody stalemate as seen in Ukraine.
That would create an extremely dangerous situation in which Britain becomes entirely reliant for protection on the threat of nuclear weapons. We either have to threaten Russia with destruction if it doesn't back off, or accept the collapse of all our friends and life under economic and political siege, or possibly as an American puppet to avoid becoming a Russian one.
Russians only understand brutality. They need to be convinced that we can beat them to a pulp if they indulge in any further adventurism against us and our allies. There can be no real peace with Russia because Russia is incapable of being anything other than the vicious despotism that it is, but it can be intimidated into leaving us alone if we have the will to do so. Tragically, I think the will is probably lacking.
An Eastern European Official has told the German Newspaper, BILD, that discussions are ongoing in regards to the withdrawal of U.S. Troops from all Countries in Europe that joined the NATO Alliance after 1990, which is reported to have been one of the Goals of recent Negotiations between Russia and the United States. This would include Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Sweden. Additionally, preparations are said to be ongoing in Italy, for the possible withdrawal of U.S. Forces from Kosovo
I do think the PM needs to say something, tonight, on the record. A pool clip at least.
There's not much more he can say that he hasn't already said. The time for further speeches will be after the trip to the US. Trump is likely to try to humiliate him. How he reacts to that will matter hugely
Vance warns Zelensky he will regret "badmouthing" Trump and condemns his "atrocious" response to peace talks — DailyMail
Tell Trump to read up on his history: Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 AND 2022, not the other way round.
Methinks The cokehead from Kiev is history.
Perhaps SKS can change Trumps mind LOL
Celebrating the fall of Zelenskyy is shameful.
Not my fault its his.
A scumbag when backing Corbyn's antisemitism then, a scumbag backing Putin now.
Corbyn is not Antisemitic. It was a Scam by Centrists who preferred a Tory win to a Corbyn one and now we will inevitably end up with an extreme right win in GE2029
Putin was always going to win and BTW I have been critical of him even when Centrists were cosying up to him
PB Zelensky fans are sore losers, I cant see a way back from here for him and we should rejoice that the killing is about to end.
Zelenskyy may not have singlehandedly have canceled elections, but he definitely banned opposition parties, jailed critics, and shut down media he didn’t like but sure, let’s pretend he’s a beacon of democracy.
Do you not think -just maybe- that countries that get invaded should get given a little bit of slack?
(Also, Russia - which has not been invaded - has in fact done all those things.)
What are you on about, Russia only invaded Ukraine, jailed critics, banned opposition parties and shut down unfriendly media because Ukraine invaded the Kursk region.
And don’t give me any of that “but that happened after Russia invaded Ukraine stuff” - you forget Putin is a master strategist so foresaw the Kursk invasion and invaded first to ensure they had a bargaining chip once they had persuaded Ukraine to engage in peace talks and end Zelensky’s warmongering.
Of course if we really wanted to troll Russia, European leaders could start to talk about its western provinces falling into our “sphere of influence” and propose that we discuss it with the Chinese, whose “sphere of influence” covers the rest.
@KemiBadenoch President Zelenskyy is not a dictator. He is the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who bravely stood up to Putin’s illegal invasion. Under my leadership, and under successive Conservative Prime Ministers, we have and always will stand with Ukraine.
President Trump is right that Europe needs to pull its weight - and that includes the UK. We need to get serious. The PM will have my support to increase defence spending - there is a fully funded plan to get to 2.5% sitting on his desk. That should be the bare minimum. Starmer should get on with it, get on a plane to Washington and show some leadership. We cannot afford to get this wrong.
That's something.
Good to see Kemi confirming conservatives support for Ukraine in view of Trumps incendiary comments this pm , and seeking increased defence spending
She has given unconditional backing to increased defence spending. Politically, that could turn out to matter a lot. Could the Tories now vote against a tax rise to fund it, for example?
The problem with any tax rise is it is rare to be hypotecated and of course there are many different taxes, but we are approaching the time to address the tax and ni unfairness on the workers and increase taxes for those on unearned incomes
But then, everyone is happy for tax rises as long as it is not them
I have just noticed to add to the problems gilts seem to be rising
Gilts are rising across Europe in anticipation of defence bonds. They do look like the best option as things stand. If we are serious about our defence, if we really do believe in the Blitz spirit stuff, we are all going to have accept a hit. Our grandparents sacrificed a hell of a lot more than it will cost us.
I still don't understand this. What's the point in increase defence spending when there is no appetite to ever use it? We've had Salisbury, Ukraine, MH17, cables in the Baltic and we've done nothing at all.
I think this sudden interest in increasing spending is a displacement activity, designed to make people feel good while having zero effect on Russia (but costing us billions).
The reaspn is twofold. Firstly we will have to use it to some extent. If the US is abandoning Ukraine then we will have to provide either a peacekeeping force, weapons to Ukraine, and/or beef up defences on its borders should a pro-Russian regime be installed. Plus in doing that maintain our current forces if not increase them elsewhere. Quite possibly without American troops currently stationed in Eastern Europe. For example one reason Poland is reluctant to provide boots on the ground in Ukraine is it has its own border defences with Russia and Belarus and the Polish corridor to think about.
Secondly, it's about deterrence and vital defensive capabilities. The bulk of our new spending would likely be on air defence systems that can replace what the US did effectively provide as a guarantor. In general our defence is also currently integrated with the US and can't function fully without American help. That's how it's been designed as in theory it worked well for both as a way of extending American combat power while reducing the cost to us. So just to stand still and maintain our capabilities we had when NATO functioned fully we'll have to spend more. And more still if we believe the threat from Russia has increased.
Also why a peace deal favouring Russia is very much not on our interest. The potential costs far outweigh any short term benefits.
Vance warns Zelensky he will regret "badmouthing" Trump and condemns his "atrocious" response to peace talks — DailyMail
Tell Trump to read up on his history: Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 AND 2022, not the other way round.
Methinks The cokehead from Kiev is history.
Perhaps SKS can change Trumps mind LOL
Celebrating the fall of Zelenskyy is shameful.
Not my fault its his.
A scumbag when backing Corbyn's antisemitism then, a scumbag backing Putin now.
Corbyn is not Antisemitic. It was a Scam by Centrists who preferred a Tory win to a Corbyn one and now we will inevitably end up with an extreme right win in GE2029
Putin was always going to win and BTW I have been critical of him even when Centrists were cosying up to him
PB Zelensky fans are sore losers, I cant see a way back from here for him and we should rejoice that the killing is about to end.
Your posts make less sense and yet are more pro Putin than our weekly Russian visitors.
I do think the PM needs to say something, tonight, on the record. A pool clip at least.
There's not much more he can say that he hasn't already said. The time for further speeches will be after the trip to the US. Trump is likely to try to humiliate him. How he reacts to that will matter hugely
The 'special relationship' is dead, NATO is dead, the 'west' is dead.
I do think the PM needs to say something, tonight, on the record. A pool clip at least.
There's not much more he can say that he hasn't already said. The time for further speeches will be after the trip to the US. Trump is likely to try to humiliate him. How he reacts to that will matter hugely
I agree. Perhaps he should fly back to Paris or Berlin and be welcomed by friendly nations. Or Ottawa.
Of course if we really wanted to troll Russia, European leaders could start to talk about its western provinces falling into our “sphere of influence” and propose that we discuss it with the Chinese, whose “sphere of influence” covers the rest.
We need to take back Königsberg which is clearly German.
An Eastern European Official has told the German Newspaper, BILD, that discussions are ongoing in regards to the withdrawal of U.S. Troops from all Countries in Europe that joined the NATO Alliance after 1990, which is reported to have been one of the Goals of recent Negotiations between Russia and the United States. This would include Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Sweden. Additionally, preparations are said to be ongoing in Italy, for the possible withdrawal of U.S. Forces from Kosovo
I didn't post that because I can't see any Bild article saying as much..
And I've seen an awful lot of articles that claim Bild has seen / been told X that never appear in the paper..
I do think the PM needs to say something, tonight, on the record. A pool clip at least.
There's not much more he can say that he hasn't already said. The time for further speeches will be after the trip to the US. Trump is likely to try to humiliate him. How he reacts to that will matter hugely
The 'special relationship' is dead, NATO is dead, the 'west' is dead.
Vance warns Zelensky he will regret "badmouthing" Trump and condemns his "atrocious" response to peace talks — DailyMail
Tell Trump to read up on his history: Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 AND 2022, not the other way round.
Methinks The cokehead from Kiev is history.
Perhaps SKS can change Trumps mind LOL
Celebrating the fall of Zelenskyy is shameful.
Not my fault its his.
A scumbag when backing Corbyn's antisemitism then, a scumbag backing Putin now.
It's an interesting feature of the far-right and far-left that they will back their country's enemies against what they perceive as their domestic enemies. The absolutely bizarre thing in this case is that they're both backing the same country! Horseshoe theory in action.
Zelenskyy may not have singlehandedly have canceled elections, but he definitely banned opposition parties, jailed critics, and shut down media he didn’t like but sure, let’s pretend he’s a beacon of democracy.
Do you not think -just maybe- that countries that get invaded should get given a little bit of slack?
(Also, Russia - which has not been invaded - has in fact done all those things.)
Putin is obviously a monster. I'm increasingly of the view that we should, as a nation, stop messing about and sunning ourselves on foreign beaches. It's time once again to have a Royal Navy worthy of it's heritage, to have an Army worthy of the actual fighting that the army did, and an Air Force that can look the Poles in the eye.
I've no idea how we manage that. All political parties are simply hopeless. Reform have the right idea in that change is needed, but their thoughts as to how one goes about it put them in with the Greens.
@Mike_Pence Mr. President, Ukraine did not “start” this war. Russia launched an unprovoked and brutal invasion claiming hundreds of thousands of lives. The Road to Peace must be built on the Truth.🇺🇸🇺🇦
“Russia Invades Ukraine in Largest European Attack Since WWII”
Interesting approach to the Cult but then he has inside knowledge. One politician to watch.
Pence had a line he could not cross, which ruined his future career and made him loathed by most of the GOP, but at least means he has some freedom of opinion he can express.
How many more might agree and in future say so? Not as many as some may think.
Today has been a very sobering and worrying day when Trump showed his true colours, and finally lost any support a fair minded person may have been wanting to give him
His words today about Zelensky and Ukraine were abhorrent, and Zelensky is a million times more a leader than the tragic and dangerous figure of Trump
It seems political parties are united in their criticism of Trump apart from the abject Farage and Reform
Remember a vote for Reform is a now a vote for Trump
I think Mr Zelensky will be being very cautious about his own safety at this time, even now so that he has two sets of world power opponents.
I do think the PM needs to say something, tonight, on the record. A pool clip at least.
There's not much more he can say that he hasn't already said. The time for further speeches will be after the trip to the US. Trump is likely to try to humiliate him. How he reacts to that will matter hugely
The 'special relationship' is dead, NATO is dead, the 'west' is dead.
America is no longer an ally.
We need to react accordingly - and fast.
UK and Canada should join EU
Quite the opposite.
Anyone proposing a single European army is making the same mistake as those proposing we rely on Washington.
Why the hell should we replace a single point of failure in Washington with a single point of failure in Brussels.
Yes we need to invest, but we need to invest as nations separately that can work together when willing to do so and never again be reliant upon the benevolence or malevolence of a single individual who has too much power.
Swiss cheese security works better than unified single point of failure security. What's happened in America is a big red flashing warning light on the dangers of single points of failure.
@Mike_Pence Mr. President, Ukraine did not “start” this war. Russia launched an unprovoked and brutal invasion claiming hundreds of thousands of lives. The Road to Peace must be built on the Truth.🇺🇸🇺🇦
“Russia Invades Ukraine in Largest European Attack Since WWII”
Interesting approach to the Cult but then he has inside knowledge. One politician to watch.
Pence had a line he could not cross, which ruined his future career and made him loathed by most of the GOP, but at least means he has some freedom of opinion he can express.
How many more might agree and in future say so? Not as many as some may think.
At some point soon, surely Bush has a job to do for his country? And Obama must mobilise the English (well, American) language.
Zelenskyy may not have singlehandedly have canceled elections, but he definitely banned opposition parties, jailed critics, and shut down media he didn’t like but sure, let’s pretend he’s a beacon of democracy.
Do you not think -just maybe- that countries that get invaded should get given a little bit of slack?
(Also, Russia - which has not been invaded - has in fact done all those things.)
Putin is obviously a monster. I'm increasingly of the view that we should, as a nation, stop messing about and sunning ourselves on foreign beaches. It's time once again to have a Royal Navy worthy of it's heritage, to have an Army worthy of the actual fighting that the army did, and an Air Force that can look the Poles in the eye.
I've no idea how we manage that. All political parties are simply hopeless. Reform have the right idea in that change is needed, but their thoughts as to how one goes about it put them in with the Greens.
All political parties have been espousing rather luxury beliefs for some time now (on both right and left). There is a need to get serious, but like you I’m not quite sure how that happens.
Starmer quite possibly has the right tone for the messaging, but I’m not convinced he has the necessary strength to deliver.
Vance warns Zelensky he will regret "badmouthing" Trump and condemns his "atrocious" response to peace talks — DailyMail
Tell Trump to read up on his history: Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 AND 2022, not the other way round.
Methinks The cokehead from Kiev is history.
Perhaps SKS can change Trumps mind LOL
Celebrating the fall of Zelenskyy is shameful.
Not my fault its his.
A scumbag when backing Corbyn's antisemitism then, a scumbag backing Putin now.
Corbyn is not Antisemitic. It was a Scam by Centrists who preferred a Tory win to a Corbyn one and now we will inevitably end up with an extreme right win in GE2029
Putin was always going to win and BTW I have been critical of him even when Centrists were cosying up to him
PB Zelensky fans are sore losers, I cant see a way back from here for him and we should rejoice that the killing is about to end.
Your posts make less sense and yet are more pro Putin than our weekly Russian visitors.
The pretence that supporting everything Putin wants in Ukraine does not equal support for Putin is just silly, whether its BJO or Corbyn himself.
There's long been a strand of Putin supporters who like to pretend everyone thinks Zelensky walks on water or something, and delight in pointing out his faults, when the simple fact is even if he is not Jesus reincarnated he was the elected President who found his country invaded and has been trying to resist that.
Mocking him for that and putting deaths on his shoulders is morally repugnant.
How have America absolutely trashed their reputation in a matter of days? The MAGA lot are utterly deranged. Are we certain Trump isn’t compromised somehow?
This is a real moment in history, isn't it? None of Europe's leaders got into politics for a time such as now but how they react to current events will shape the decades to come. I hope to God they are up to it. There is a part of me, that I am trying to suppress, which fears they are not. The bigger part, though, says they are going to surprise on the up side because they really don't have any other choice.
Zelensky should visit the new German Chancellor, likely the more hardline anti Putin Merz, after the German elections next week then follow that with a visit to Beijing and Xi.
He needs to show Trump cannot dictate peace terms to Ukraine with Putin but he has world powers also demanding he be involved
This is a real moment in history, isn't it? None of Europe's leaders got into politics for a time such as now but how they react to current events will shape the decades to come. I hope to God they are up to it. There is a part of me, that I am trying to suppress, which fears they are not. The bigger part, though, says they are going to surprise on the up side because they really don't have any other choice.
According to Bild, Macron and Starmer are going to Washington next week.
Vance warns Zelensky he will regret "badmouthing" Trump and condemns his "atrocious" response to peace talks — DailyMail
Tell Trump to read up on his history: Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 AND 2022, not the other way round.
Methinks The cokehead from Kiev is history.
Perhaps SKS can change Trumps mind LOL
Celebrating the fall of Zelenskyy is shameful.
Not my fault its his.
A scumbag when backing Corbyn's antisemitism then, a scumbag backing Putin now.
It's an interesting feature of the far-right and far-left that they will back their country's enemies against what they perceive as their domestic enemies. The absolutely bizarre thing in this case is that they're both backing the same country! Horseshoe theory in action.
Indeed. Their own countries always disappoint them by not voting for their mad ideas. So they back our enemies.
Zelenskyy may not have singlehandedly have canceled elections, but he definitely banned opposition parties, jailed critics, and shut down media he didn’t like but sure, let’s pretend he’s a beacon of democracy.
Do you not think -just maybe- that countries that get invaded should get given a little bit of slack?
(Also, Russia - which has not been invaded - has in fact done all those things.)
Putin is obviously a monster. I'm increasingly of the view that we should, as a nation, stop messing about and sunning ourselves on foreign beaches. It's time once again to have a Royal Navy worthy of it's heritage, to have an Army worthy of the actual fighting that the army did, and an Air Force that can look the Poles in the eye.
I've no idea how we manage that. All political parties are simply hopeless. Reform have the right idea in that change is needed, but their thoughts as to how one goes about it put them in with the Greens.
We prefer to live in clover and moan about how our entitlements aren't enough.
However, I hold out a sliver of hope the tide may just be turning.
This is a real moment in history, isn't it? None of Europe's leaders got into politics for a time such as now but how they react to current events will shape the decades to come. I hope to God they are up to it. There is a part of me, that I am trying to suppress, which fears they are not. The bigger part, though, says they are going to surprise on the up side because they really don't have any other choice.
How have America absolutely trashed their reputation in a matter of days? The MAGA lot are utterly deranged. Are we certain Trump isn’t compromised somehow?
I don't think he needs to be compromised. He wants to use his power to advance his interests (and presumably what he sees as America's interests too, if he sees a difference), and when he sets his mind on something no prior relationship or fact will deter him. Add to that he takes everything personally and will wield the power as a result, and it is a terrible mess.
How have America absolutely trashed their reputation in a matter of days? The MAGA lot are utterly deranged. Are we certain Trump isn’t compromised somehow?
It's insanity. The US is a huge and immensely wealthy market but it is not one that can sustain the demands of US business, finance and consumers. They need the world. And the world - especially the most affluent and fastest growing parts of it - is going to become a lot more hostile to US interests as a result of what Trump has let loose.
Zelenskyy may not have singlehandedly have canceled elections, but he definitely banned opposition parties, jailed critics, and shut down media he didn’t like but sure, let’s pretend he’s a beacon of democracy.
Do you not think -just maybe- that countries that get invaded should get given a little bit of slack?
(Also, Russia - which has not been invaded - has in fact done all those things.)
Putin is obviously a monster. I'm increasingly of the view that we should, as a nation, stop messing about and sunning ourselves on foreign beaches. It's time once again to have a Royal Navy worthy of it's heritage, to have an Army worthy of the actual fighting that the army did, and an Air Force that can look the Poles in the eye.
I've no idea how we manage that. All political parties are simply hopeless. Reform have the right idea in that change is needed, but their thoughts as to how one goes about it put them in with the Greens.
All political parties have been espousing rather luxury beliefs for some time now (on both right and left). There is a need to get serious, but like you I’m not quite sure how that happens.
Starmer quite possibly has the right tone for the messaging, but I’m not convinced he has the necessary strength to deliver.
I have hopes of the man. But I'd have had similar hopes of Boris or May. Being the PM has to count for something in your character.
This is a real moment in history, isn't it? None of Europe's leaders got into politics for a time such as now but how they react to current events will shape the decades to come. I hope to God they are up to it. There is a part of me, that I am trying to suppress, which fears they are not. The bigger part, though, says they are going to surprise on the up side because they really don't have any other choice.
According to Bild, Macron and Starmer are going to Washington next week.
Best bring the kneepads, they're going to need them to get anything out of him.
Today has been a very sobering and worrying day when Trump showed his true colours, and finally lost any support a fair minded person may have been wanting to give him
His words today about Zelensky and Ukraine were abhorrent, and Zelensky is a million times more a leader than the tragic and dangerous figure of Trump
It seems political parties are united in their criticism of Trump apart from the abject Farage and Reform
Remember a vote for Reform is a now a vote for Trump
A vote for Reform is a vote for Trump which is a vote for Putin.
This is a huge political opportunity for the Tories. They should be laser-like on this.
Sometimes politics moves fast and this is one such moment.
Putin and Trump and the US are now aligned. There is no point even debating this.
Why has the Conservative Party remained mute on this unfolding nightmare?
Why has it not expressed 100% support for Zelenskyy and Ukraine?
(My email is bombarded daily with CCHQ crap, but nothing so far on something so existential. But maybe I’ve missed it).
For some of us, it’s now make or break time with the party.
Yes, quite.
Why aren't they taking a hard line and putting pressure on Starmer over this? Are they seriously worried about the 37% of Reform voters who have an unfavourable view of Zelensky? Everyone else is massively in favour.
Politically it would be the sensible thing to do and would be the kind of issue that could help them steal votes from Labour and the Lib Dems.
That is correct.
Condemning Trump over Ukraine ought to be a no-brainer.
I’d imagine the government has asked all the main parties to keep stumm to avoid inflaming Trump
Today has been a very sobering and worrying day when Trump showed his true colours, and finally lost any support a fair minded person may have been wanting to give him
His words today about Zelensky and Ukraine were abhorrent, and Zelensky is a million times more a leader than the tragic and dangerous figure of Trump
It seems political parties are united in their criticism of Trump apart from the abject Farage and Reform
Remember a vote for Reform is a now a vote for Trump
A vote for Reform is a vote for Trump which is a vote for Putin.
This is a huge political opportunity for the Tories. They should be laser-like on this.
Sometimes politics moves fast and this is one such moment.
Putin and Trump and the US are now aligned. There is no point even debating this.
How everyone responses now is crucial.
Quite so. There is a new order now, and I fear no one expected it to be quite so deep or quick and will be unable to disentangle fast enough. Putin is counting on it.
This is a real moment in history, isn't it? None of Europe's leaders got into politics for a time such as now but how they react to current events will shape the decades to come. I hope to God they are up to it. There is a part of me, that I am trying to suppress, which fears they are not. The bigger part, though, says they are going to surprise on the up side because they really don't have any other choice.
I hope that with a change in government in Germany as well, and Macron’s back against the wall in France, we might finally see a real drive towards meaningful treaty change for the EU. A refocusing of its goals, possible multi-speed options, a real defence/security element, and a more flexible approach.
It might be pie in the sky, but I can hope.
I honestly believe that if the EU became more restrictive on total FOM, and more aggressive on immigration policies, a lot of the right wing populist appeal would wane pretty quickly - as would the reason for many in the UK to be “out.”
@Mike_Pence Mr. President, Ukraine did not “start” this war. Russia launched an unprovoked and brutal invasion claiming hundreds of thousands of lives. The Road to Peace must be built on the Truth.🇺🇸🇺🇦
“Russia Invades Ukraine in Largest European Attack Since WWII”
Interesting approach to the Cult but then he has inside knowledge. One politician to watch.
Pence had a line he could not cross, which ruined his future career and made him loathed by most of the GOP, but at least means he has some freedom of opinion he can express.
How many more might agree and in future say so? Not as many as some may think.
At some point soon, surely Bush has a job to do for his country? And Obama must mobilise the English (well, American) language.
@KemiBadenoch President Zelenskyy is not a dictator. He is the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who bravely stood up to Putin’s illegal invasion. Under my leadership, and under successive Conservative Prime Ministers, we have and always will stand with Ukraine.
President Trump is right that Europe needs to pull its weight - and that includes the UK. We need to get serious. The PM will have my support to increase defence spending - there is a fully funded plan to get to 2.5% sitting on his desk. That should be the bare minimum. Starmer should get on with it, get on a plane to Washington and show some leadership. We cannot afford to get this wrong.
That's something.
Good to see Kemi confirming conservatives support for Ukraine in view of Trumps incendiary comments this pm , and seeking increased defence spending
She has given unconditional backing to increased defence spending. Politically, that could turn out to matter a lot. Could the Tories now vote against a tax rise to fund it, for example?
The problem with any tax rise is it is rare to be hypotecated and of course there are many different taxes, but we are approaching the time to address the tax and ni unfairness on the workers and increase taxes for those on unearned incomes
But then, everyone is happy for tax rises as long as it is not them
I have just noticed to add to the problems gilts seem to be rising
Gilts are rising across Europe in anticipation of defence bonds. They do look like the best option as things stand. If we are serious about our defence, if we really do believe in the Blitz spirit stuff, we are all going to have accept a hit. Our grandparents sacrificed a hell of a lot more than it will cost us.
I still don't understand this. What's the point in increase defence spending when there is no appetite to ever use it? We've had Salisbury, Ukraine, MH17, cables in the Baltic and we've done nothing at all.
I think this sudden interest in increasing spending is a displacement activity, designed to make people feel good while having zero effect on Russia (but costing us billions).
The reaspn is twofold. Firstly we will have to use it to some extent. If the US is abandoning Ukraine then we will have to provide either a peacekeeping force, weapons to Ukraine, and/or beef up defences on its borders should a pro-Russian regime be installed. Plus in doing that maintain our current forces if not increase them elsewhere. Quite possibly without American troops currently stationed in Eastern Europe. For example one reason Poland is reluctant to provide boots on the ground in Ukraine is it has its own border defences with Russia and Belarus and the Polish corridor to think about.
Secondly, it's about deterrence and vital defensive capabilities. The bulk of our new spending would likely be on air defence systems that can replace what the US did effectively provide as a guarantor. In general our defence is also currently integrated with the US and can't function fully without American help. That's how it's been designed as in theory it worked well for both as a way of extending American combat power while reducing the cost to us. So just to stand still and maintain our capabilities we had when NATO functioned fully we'll have to spend more. And more still if we believe the threat from Russia has increased.
Also why a peace deal favouring Russia is very much not on our interest. The potential costs far outweigh any short term benefits.
Thanks all for your answers. I remain of the view that European military spending is probably sufficient at the moment, taking into account our technological advantage, the fact Ukraine has managed to f*ck the Russians up big time, and our unwillingness to ever do an Erdogan.
I'd support a highly targeted reform of our defence spending, particularly around drones, stocks of ammo and cables, and the associated expense of that, if we accompany it with a new pro-active doctrine. That might mean sinking dodgy ships in the Baltic, RAF sorties over Ukraine, and a rotated garrison in Kyiv.
I am not sold on an arbitrary increase to 3/4% without an explanation of what it's actually for.
Why has the Conservative Party remained mute on this unfolding nightmare?
Why has it not expressed 100% support for Zelenskyy and Ukraine?
(My email is bombarded daily with CCHQ crap, but nothing so far on something so existential. But maybe I’ve missed it).
For some of us, it’s now make or break time with the party.
Yes, quite.
Why aren't they taking a hard line and putting pressure on Starmer over this? Are they seriously worried about the 37% of Reform voters who have an unfavourable view of Zelensky? Everyone else is massively in favour.
Politically it would be the sensible thing to do and would be the kind of issue that could help them steal votes from Labour and the Lib Dems.
That is correct.
Condemning Trump over Ukraine ought to be a no-brainer.
I’d imagine the government has asked all the main parties to keep stumm to avoid inflaming Trump
At what point will it be impossible to keep quiet ?
How have America absolutely trashed their reputation in a matter of days? The MAGA lot are utterly deranged. Are we certain Trump isn’t compromised somehow?
He already had a tendentious relationship with the truth and sanity, but I think that near-miss bullet changed him.
As predicted by anyone following any level of this.
US headed towards a terrible conflagration over whether they want to remain a democracy.
Is he? But it's phony to suggest this 78 year old is not sharp or stable.
And it's pretty clear they won't want to remain a democracy frankly - their top judges think the President should be immune from all crimes, and at least half of their voters think you shouldn't accept democratic defeats (probably more since I assume some Democrats and a majority of Republicans do).
This is a real moment in history, isn't it? None of Europe's leaders got into politics for a time such as now but how they react to current events will shape the decades to come. I hope to God they are up to it. There is a part of me, that I am trying to suppress, which fears they are not. The bigger part, though, says they are going to surprise on the up side because they really don't have any other choice.
And in some ways, the persuasion job is easier.
Net zero sounds expensive and abstract and hypothetical.
Balancing the books, big numbers, yawn.
Supporting an invaded country (and only fringe loonies seem to be buying the alternative not-fact narrative), that's so obviously a matter of right and wrong.
And once the question is that stark, it's surprising how strong otherwise meek people can become.
Vance warns Zelensky he will regret "badmouthing" Trump and condemns his "atrocious" response to peace talks — DailyMail
Tell Trump to read up on his history: Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 AND 2022, not the other way round.
Methinks The cokehead from Kiev is history.
Perhaps SKS can change Trumps mind LOL
Celebrating the fall of Zelenskyy is shameful.
Not my fault its his.
A scumbag when backing Corbyn's antisemitism then, a scumbag backing Putin now.
Corbyn is not Antisemitic. It was a Scam by Centrists who preferred a Tory win to a Corbyn one and now we will inevitably end up with an extreme right win in GE2029
Putin was always going to win and BTW I have been critical of him even when Centrists were cosying up to him
PB Zelensky fans are sore losers, I cant see a way back from here for him and we should rejoice that the killing is about to end.
"Corbyn is not Antisemitic"
Can you see why people might consider him an anti-Semite, even if you disagree?
"Putin was always going to win"
It's been an odd definition of 'win' over the last three years. I'm sure the hundreds of thousands of Russians maimed and killed will see a *potential* Russian win as worthwhile.
"Centrists were cosying up to him"
So you see Corbyn as a centrist when he prevaricated over Russia's guilt over the Salisbury attack?
@KemiBadenoch President Zelenskyy is not a dictator. He is the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who bravely stood up to Putin’s illegal invasion. Under my leadership, and under successive Conservative Prime Ministers, we have and always will stand with Ukraine.
President Trump is right that Europe needs to pull its weight - and that includes the UK. We need to get serious. The PM will have my support to increase defence spending - there is a fully funded plan to get to 2.5% sitting on his desk. That should be the bare minimum. Starmer should get on with it, get on a plane to Washington and show some leadership. We cannot afford to get this wrong.
That's something.
Good to see Kemi confirming conservatives support for Ukraine in view of Trumps incendiary comments this pm , and seeking increased defence spending
She has given unconditional backing to increased defence spending. Politically, that could turn out to matter a lot. Could the Tories now vote against a tax rise to fund it, for example?
The problem with any tax rise is it is rare to be hypotecated and of course there are many different taxes, but we are approaching the time to address the tax and ni unfairness on the workers and increase taxes for those on unearned incomes
But then, everyone is happy for tax rises as long as it is not them
I have just noticed to add to the problems gilts seem to be rising
Gilts are rising across Europe in anticipation of defence bonds. They do look like the best option as things stand. If we are serious about our defence, if we really do believe in the Blitz spirit stuff, we are all going to have accept a hit. Our grandparents sacrificed a hell of a lot more than it will cost us.
I still don't understand this. What's the point in increase defence spending when there is no appetite to ever use it? We've had Salisbury, Ukraine, MH17, cables in the Baltic and we've done nothing at all.
I think this sudden interest in increasing spending is a displacement activity, designed to make people feel good while having zero effect on Russia (but costing us billions).
The reaspn is twofold. Firstly we will have to use it to some extent. If the US is abandoning Ukraine then we will have to provide either a peacekeeping force, weapons to Ukraine, and/or beef up defences on its borders should a pro-Russian regime be installed. Plus in doing that maintain our current forces if not increase them elsewhere. Quite possibly without American troops currently stationed in Eastern Europe. For example one reason Poland is reluctant to provide boots on the ground in Ukraine is it has its own border defences with Russia and Belarus and the Polish corridor to think about.
Secondly, it's about deterrence and vital defensive capabilities. The bulk of our new spending would likely be on air defence systems that can replace what the US did effectively provide as a guarantor. In general our defence is also currently integrated with the US and can't function fully without American help. That's how it's been designed as in theory it worked well for both as a way of extending American combat power while reducing the cost to us. So just to stand still and maintain our capabilities we had when NATO functioned fully we'll have to spend more. And more still if we believe the threat from Russia has increased.
Also why a peace deal favouring Russia is very much not on our interest. The potential costs far outweigh any short term benefits.
Thanks all for your answers. I remain of the view that European military spending is probably sufficient at the moment, taking into account our technological advantage, the fact Ukraine has managed to f*ck the Russians up big time, and our unwillingness to ever do an Erdogan.
I'd support a highly targeted reform of our defence spending, particularly around drones, stocks of ammo and cables, and the associated expense of that, if we accompany it with a new pro-active doctrine. That might mean sinking dodgy ships in the Baltic, RAF sorties over Ukraine, and a rotated garrison in Kyiv.
I am not sold on an arbitrary increase to 3/4% without an explanation of what it's actually for.
Increase it to 3% tomorrow, give the increase directly buying or making munitions for Ukraine. Work out an efficient long-term use it later.
Why has the Conservative Party remained mute on this unfolding nightmare?
Why has it not expressed 100% support for Zelenskyy and Ukraine?
(My email is bombarded daily with CCHQ crap, but nothing so far on something so existential. But maybe I’ve missed it).
For some of us, it’s now make or break time with the party.
Trying to tread an untreadable line?
Fuck that. Get behind Ukraine. Crush Farage.
I don't think the Reform bubble is imminently about to pop. The other parties are too unpopular with too many, a hard core like the Trumpism, and many of the rest will be dispirited by the abandonment of Ukraine but see it as something no one can do anything about now, and use that to buy Farage's inevitable equivocation and dodge on the subject at some point (when even some Reformites thought he'd stepped too far during the GE on Russia).
How have America absolutely trashed their reputation in a matter of days? The MAGA lot are utterly deranged. Are we certain Trump isn’t compromised somehow?
It's insanity. The US is a huge and immensely wealthy market but it is not one that can sustain the demands of US business, finance and consumers. They need the world. And the world - especially the most affluent and fastest growing parts of it - is going to become a lot more hostile to US interests as a result of what Trump has let loose.
Trump promised to run America as a businessesman.
He's a terrible businessesman.
(And whatever Musk's talents, which are substantial, they're not in the "keeping an existing business going well for the decades to come" area, which is what governments need.)
How have America absolutely trashed their reputation in a matter of days? The MAGA lot are utterly deranged. Are we certain Trump isn’t compromised somehow?
He already had a tendentious relationship with the truth and sanity, but I think that near-miss bullet changed him.
He told us it had. God has saved The King so that he can save America by joining forces with Putin.
I do think the PM needs to say something, tonight, on the record. A pool clip at least.
There's not much more he can say that he hasn't already said. The time for further speeches will be after the trip to the US. Trump is likely to try to humiliate him. How he reacts to that will matter hugely
The 'special relationship' is dead, NATO is dead, the 'west' is dead.
America is no longer an ally.
We need to react accordingly - and fast.
UK and Canada should join EU
Quite the opposite.
Anyone proposing a single European army is making the same mistake as those proposing we rely on Washington.
Why the hell should we replace a single point of failure in Washington with a single point of failure in Brussels.
Yes we need to invest, but we need to invest as nations separately that can work together when willing to do so and never again be reliant upon the benevolence or malevolence of a single individual who has too much power.
Swiss cheese security works better than unified single point of failure security. What's happened in America is a big red flashing warning light on the dangers of single points of failure.
If Britain invested as heavily in defence as Poland has, and the Scandis are either doing or are likely to do, then we could create a coalition with almost the population of Russia and vastly superior economic resources. If push came to shove we could defeat them conventionally without having to fret on the support of flakier friends with stronger Putinist leanings, and a greater willingness to sell out if it means they can have their cheap gas back.
Anything resembling an EU capability would simply be derailed by the effing about of various Kremlin shills and the remaining holier-than-thou neutrals.
I have no idea which. My wife offered, and I said, yes.
I am having an infinitely more luxurious time. We decided about 10 minutes ago that instead of getting our hire car at Lyon airport and arriving at our house around 1am, we would book a room at the airport NH hotel.
I am now therefore in the Gatwick North terminal Wetherspoons drinking a Concha y Toro Chardonnay. It’s a bit like that Sean Thomas Speccy article posted earlier. Similar vibe. But with added tutting and sighing about Trump from my wife.
@KemiBadenoch President Zelenskyy is not a dictator. He is the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who bravely stood up to Putin’s illegal invasion. Under my leadership, and under successive Conservative Prime Ministers, we have and always will stand with Ukraine.
President Trump is right that Europe needs to pull its weight - and that includes the UK. We need to get serious. The PM will have my support to increase defence spending - there is a fully funded plan to get to 2.5% sitting on his desk. That should be the bare minimum. Starmer should get on with it, get on a plane to Washington and show some leadership. We cannot afford to get this wrong.
That's something.
Good to see Kemi confirming conservatives support for Ukraine in view of Trumps incendiary comments this pm , and seeking increased defence spending
She has given unconditional backing to increased defence spending. Politically, that could turn out to matter a lot. Could the Tories now vote against a tax rise to fund it, for example?
The problem with any tax rise is it is rare to be hypotecated and of course there are many different taxes, but we are approaching the time to address the tax and ni unfairness on the workers and increase taxes for those on unearned incomes
But then, everyone is happy for tax rises as long as it is not them
I have just noticed to add to the problems gilts seem to be rising
Gilts are rising across Europe in anticipation of defence bonds. They do look like the best option as things stand. If we are serious about our defence, if we really do believe in the Blitz spirit stuff, we are all going to have accept a hit. Our grandparents sacrificed a hell of a lot more than it will cost us.
I still don't understand this. What's the point in increase defence spending when there is no appetite to ever use it? We've had Salisbury, Ukraine, MH17, cables in the Baltic and we've done nothing at all.
I think this sudden interest in increasing spending is a displacement activity, designed to make people feel good while having zero effect on Russia (but costing us billions).
The reaspn is twofold. Firstly we will have to use it to some extent. If the US is abandoning Ukraine then we will have to provide either a peacekeeping force, weapons to Ukraine, and/or beef up defences on its borders should a pro-Russian regime be installed. Plus in doing that maintain our current forces if not increase them elsewhere. Quite possibly without American troops currently stationed in Eastern Europe. For example one reason Poland is reluctant to provide boots on the ground in Ukraine is it has its own border defences with Russia and Belarus and the Polish corridor to think about.
Secondly, it's about deterrence and vital defensive capabilities. The bulk of our new spending would likely be on air defence systems that can replace what the US did effectively provide as a guarantor. In general our defence is also currently integrated with the US and can't function fully without American help. That's how it's been designed as in theory it worked well for both as a way of extending American combat power while reducing the cost to us. So just to stand still and maintain our capabilities we had when NATO functioned fully we'll have to spend more. And more still if we believe the threat from Russia has increased.
Also why a peace deal favouring Russia is very much not on our interest. The potential costs far outweigh any short term benefits.
Thanks all for your answers. I remain of the view that European military spending is probably sufficient at the moment, taking into account our technological advantage, the fact Ukraine has managed to f*ck the Russians up big time, and our unwillingness to ever do an Erdogan.
I'd support a highly targeted reform of our defence spending, particularly around drones, stocks of ammo and cables, and the associated expense of that, if we accompany it with a new pro-active doctrine. That might mean sinking dodgy ships in the Baltic, RAF sorties over Ukraine, and a rotated garrison in Kyiv.
I am not sold on an arbitrary increase to 3/4% without an explanation of what it's actually for.
Increase it to 3% tomorrow, give the increase directly buying or making munitions for Ukraine. Work out an efficient long-term use it later.
The key thing we need to ensure we have is the means of production of vast numbers of drones and ammunition.
We don't need those going into storage, going to the frontline works, it helps Ukraine but it also helps our domestic security in ensuring we have that throughput.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Still waiting on Nigel Farage, Richard Tice, Suella Braverman and Liz Truss. All of whom are usually straight out of the blocks to give us their considered views on Donald Trump.
Vance warns Zelensky he will regret "badmouthing" Trump and condemns his "atrocious" response to peace talks — DailyMail
Tell Trump to read up on his history: Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 AND 2022, not the other way round.
Methinks The cokehead from Kiev is history.
Perhaps SKS can change Trumps mind LOL
Celebrating the fall of Zelenskyy is shameful.
Not my fault its his.
A scumbag when backing Corbyn's antisemitism then, a scumbag backing Putin now.
Corbyn is not Antisemitic. It was a Scam by Centrists who preferred a Tory win to a Corbyn one and now we will inevitably end up with an extreme right win in GE2029
Putin was always going to win and BTW I have been critical of him even when Centrists were cosying up to him
PB Zelensky fans are sore losers, I cant see a way back from here for him and we should rejoice that the killing is about to end.
"Corbyn is not Antisemitic"
Can you see why people might consider him an anti-Semite, even if you disagree?
"Putin was always going to win"
It's been an odd definition of 'win' over the last three years. I'm sure the hundreds of thousands of Russians maimed and killed will see a *potential* Russian win as worthwhile.
"Centrists were cosying up to him"
So you see Corbyn as a centrist when he prevaricated over Russia's guilt over the Salisbury attack?
"Centrists were wrong to cosy up to Putin...so we should support Putin now" is a hell of a position people somehow manage to take (yes that's a paraphrase, but come on).
Funny thing is it is possible to support what is happening without inconsistency at least by portraying it (wrongly in my view) as cold hard calculation of national and international interest. But to support it and try to take the moralistic, preaching high road (eg because 'killing is wrong, Ukraine should have just surrendered' etc) is something else entirely.
@KemiBadenoch President Zelenskyy is not a dictator. He is the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who bravely stood up to Putin’s illegal invasion. Under my leadership, and under successive Conservative Prime Ministers, we have and always will stand with Ukraine.
President Trump is right that Europe needs to pull its weight - and that includes the UK. We need to get serious. The PM will have my support to increase defence spending - there is a fully funded plan to get to 2.5% sitting on his desk. That should be the bare minimum. Starmer should get on with it, get on a plane to Washington and show some leadership. We cannot afford to get this wrong.
That's something.
Good to see Kemi confirming conservatives support for Ukraine in view of Trumps incendiary comments this pm , and seeking increased defence spending
She has given unconditional backing to increased defence spending. Politically, that could turn out to matter a lot. Could the Tories now vote against a tax rise to fund it, for example?
The problem with any tax rise is it is rare to be hypotecated and of course there are many different taxes, but we are approaching the time to address the tax and ni unfairness on the workers and increase taxes for those on unearned incomes
But then, everyone is happy for tax rises as long as it is not them
I have just noticed to add to the problems gilts seem to be rising
Gilts are rising across Europe in anticipation of defence bonds. They do look like the best option as things stand. If we are serious about our defence, if we really do believe in the Blitz spirit stuff, we are all going to have accept a hit. Our grandparents sacrificed a hell of a lot more than it will cost us.
I still don't understand this. What's the point in increase defence spending when there is no appetite to ever use it? We've had Salisbury, Ukraine, MH17, cables in the Baltic and we've done nothing at all.
I think this sudden interest in increasing spending is a displacement activity, designed to make people feel good while having zero effect on Russia (but costing us billions).
The reaspn is twofold. Firstly we will have to use it to some extent. If the US is abandoning Ukraine then we will have to provide either a peacekeeping force, weapons to Ukraine, and/or beef up defences on its borders should a pro-Russian regime be installed. Plus in doing that maintain our current forces if not increase them elsewhere. Quite possibly without American troops currently stationed in Eastern Europe. For example one reason Poland is reluctant to provide boots on the ground in Ukraine is it has its own border defences with Russia and Belarus and the Polish corridor to think about.
Secondly, it's about deterrence and vital defensive capabilities. The bulk of our new spending would likely be on air defence systems that can replace what the US did effectively provide as a guarantor. In general our defence is also currently integrated with the US and can't function fully without American help. That's how it's been designed as in theory it worked well for both as a way of extending American combat power while reducing the cost to us. So just to stand still and maintain our capabilities we had when NATO functioned fully we'll have to spend more. And more still if we believe the threat from Russia has increased.
Also why a peace deal favouring Russia is very much not on our interest. The potential costs far outweigh any short term benefits.
Thanks all for your answers. I remain of the view that European military spending is probably sufficient at the moment, taking into account our technological advantage, the fact Ukraine has managed to f*ck the Russians up big time, and our unwillingness to ever do an Erdogan.
I'd support a highly targeted reform of our defence spending, particularly around drones, stocks of ammo and cables, and the associated expense of that, if we accompany it with a new pro-active doctrine. That might mean sinking dodgy ships in the Baltic, RAF sorties over Ukraine, and a rotated garrison in Kyiv.
I am not sold on an arbitrary increase to 3/4% without an explanation of what it's actually for.
Increase it to 3% tomorrow, give the increase directly buying or making munitions for Ukraine. Work out an efficient long-term use it later.
Increase it to 5%. Spend 2.5% on defence, 1% on “hospitals and GPs for our brave boys”, 1% on “rapid military rail logistics to get our forces from Euston to Manchester and Leeds at high speed”, and 0.5% on “bolstering our home guard and civil defence at local authority level”.
In international relations, what matters are agreed and signed agreements and treaties; not what is said between people decades ago. Because signed agreements tend to be more rigorously examined and understood than what people say in backrooms.
Besides that, that was three decades ago. The world has moved on since then, and so has Russia's actions.
Also; if you are really interested in agreements, then what are your views on the Budapest Memorandum?
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 1h Still waiting on Nigel Farage, Richard Tice, Suella Braverman and Liz Truss. All of whom are usually straight out of the blocks to give us their considered views on Donald Trump.
Problem is even if they don't agree with him (I expect they do) there's been a bit of a reaction since the election to act as though no-one should argue with Trump, either because his win shows he was right about everything, or because everyone needs to be nice to him because he won.
Arguing with him has consequences. Mild criticism of him has consequences. No one wants the USA to use its considerable power to harm its allies (apart from Putin/Xi/Modi etc). But the world cannot spend 4 years or more stepping on eggshells around the whims of a man who will pivot to some new obsession or grievance in an instant, it just isn't possible even if we wanted to.
I do think the PM needs to say something, tonight, on the record. A pool clip at least.
There's not much more he can say that he hasn't already said. The time for further speeches will be after the trip to the US. Trump is likely to try to humiliate him. How he reacts to that will matter hugely
The 'special relationship' is dead, NATO is dead, the 'west' is dead.
America is no longer an ally.
We need to react accordingly - and fast.
UK and Canada should join EU
Quite the opposite.
Anyone proposing a single European army is making the same mistake as those proposing we rely on Washington.
Why the hell should we replace a single point of failure in Washington with a single point of failure in Brussels.
Yes we need to invest, but we need to invest as nations separately that can work together when willing to do so and never again be reliant upon the benevolence or malevolence of a single individual who has too much power.
Swiss cheese security works better than unified single point of failure security. What's happened in America is a big red flashing warning light on the dangers of single points of failure.
If Britain invested as heavily in defence as Poland has, and the Scandis are either doing or are likely to do, then we could create a coalition with almost the population of Russia and vastly superior economic resources. If push came to shove we could defeat them conventionally without having to fret on the support of flakier friends with stronger Putinist leanings, and a greater willingness to sell out if it means they can have their cheap gas back.
Anything resembling an EU capability would simply be derailed by the effing about of various Kremlin shills and the remaining holier-than-thou neutrals.
Russia can never actually win in some big game. Any real expansion will just cause them to collapse as the Soviet Union did. It might take some years of course.
I think Turkey and China will eventually carve up Russia (with lots of the nuttier places in the middle left to sort their own fate), and I won't cry a single tear.
@KemiBadenoch President Zelenskyy is not a dictator. He is the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who bravely stood up to Putin’s illegal invasion. Under my leadership, and under successive Conservative Prime Ministers, we have and always will stand with Ukraine.
President Trump is right that Europe needs to pull its weight - and that includes the UK. We need to get serious. The PM will have my support to increase defence spending - there is a fully funded plan to get to 2.5% sitting on his desk. That should be the bare minimum. Starmer should get on with it, get on a plane to Washington and show some leadership. We cannot afford to get this wrong.
That's something.
Good to see Kemi confirming conservatives support for Ukraine in view of Trumps incendiary comments this pm , and seeking increased defence spending
She has given unconditional backing to increased defence spending. Politically, that could turn out to matter a lot. Could the Tories now vote against a tax rise to fund it, for example?
The problem with any tax rise is it is rare to be hypotecated and of course there are many different taxes, but we are approaching the time to address the tax and ni unfairness on the workers and increase taxes for those on unearned incomes
But then, everyone is happy for tax rises as long as it is not them
I have just noticed to add to the problems gilts seem to be rising
Gilts are rising across Europe in anticipation of defence bonds. They do look like the best option as things stand. If we are serious about our defence, if we really do believe in the Blitz spirit stuff, we are all going to have accept a hit. Our grandparents sacrificed a hell of a lot more than it will cost us.
I still don't understand this. What's the point in increase defence spending when there is no appetite to ever use it? We've had Salisbury, Ukraine, MH17, cables in the Baltic and we've done nothing at all.
I think this sudden interest in increasing spending is a displacement activity, designed to make people feel good while having zero effect on Russia (but costing us billions).
The reaspn is twofold. Firstly we will have to use it to some extent. If the US is abandoning Ukraine then we will have to provide either a peacekeeping force, weapons to Ukraine, and/or beef up defences on its borders should a pro-Russian regime be installed. Plus in doing that maintain our current forces if not increase them elsewhere. Quite possibly without American troops currently stationed in Eastern Europe. For example one reason Poland is reluctant to provide boots on the ground in Ukraine is it has its own border defences with Russia and Belarus and the Polish corridor to think about.
Secondly, it's about deterrence and vital defensive capabilities. The bulk of our new spending would likely be on air defence systems that can replace what the US did effectively provide as a guarantor. In general our defence is also currently integrated with the US and can't function fully without American help. That's how it's been designed as in theory it worked well for both as a way of extending American combat power while reducing the cost to us. So just to stand still and maintain our capabilities we had when NATO functioned fully we'll have to spend more. And more still if we believe the threat from Russia has increased.
Also why a peace deal favouring Russia is very much not on our interest. The potential costs far outweigh any short term benefits.
Thanks all for your answers. I remain of the view that European military spending is probably sufficient at the moment, taking into account our technological advantage, the fact Ukraine has managed to f*ck the Russians up big time, and our unwillingness to ever do an Erdogan.
I'd support a highly targeted reform of our defence spending, particularly around drones, stocks of ammo and cables, and the associated expense of that, if we accompany it with a new pro-active doctrine. That might mean sinking dodgy ships in the Baltic, RAF sorties over Ukraine, and a rotated garrison in Kyiv.
I am not sold on an arbitrary increase to 3/4% without an explanation of what it's actually for.
My guess is:
(1) British Army - we need to sustain a warfighting division in the field in the medium-long term. That's 10,000+ troops with rotations every 6 months, fully equipped and armed with artillery, tanks, light vehicles, ammo and engineers/logistics. Probably requires army back up at 110,000 men given we struggled with Telic/Herrick with just 100k. (2) Royal Navy - woefully short of escorts and men. Probably 10 x destroyers, 2 x cruisers and 16-18 frigates needed. 12 x attack subs. Full nuclear deterrent for Dreadnought of 4 x bomber subs. High availability. Fully fuelled. RFA to match. Royal Marines and landing ships on top. (3) RAF - complete Tempest/get all necessary F35 squadrons, upgrade maritime patrol aircraft, ensure hypersonic missile defences. Several addition squadrons. Chinook/Wessex helicopter fleet upgrades. Lots more cruise missiles and tactical missiles. Maybe some tactical nuclear warheads on top.
Then you need electronic warfare and cyber/hybrid warfare defences, proper funding of the security services, and special forces on top.
All of that would make us very credible in defence. But you couldn't do it all with 2.5%.
@KemiBadenoch President Zelenskyy is not a dictator. He is the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who bravely stood up to Putin’s illegal invasion. Under my leadership, and under successive Conservative Prime Ministers, we have and always will stand with Ukraine.
President Trump is right that Europe needs to pull its weight - and that includes the UK. We need to get serious. The PM will have my support to increase defence spending - there is a fully funded plan to get to 2.5% sitting on his desk. That should be the bare minimum. Starmer should get on with it, get on a plane to Washington and show some leadership. We cannot afford to get this wrong.
That's something.
Good to see Kemi confirming conservatives support for Ukraine in view of Trumps incendiary comments this pm , and seeking increased defence spending
Except she claims there is a fully funded plan to raise Defence spending to 2.5% - if you believe that I have a bridge to sell you.
Why does it matter? She’s just making a little political dig. She has committed to support Starmer on getting to 2.5% which is important
I do think the PM needs to say something, tonight, on the record. A pool clip at least.
There's not much more he can say that he hasn't already said. The time for further speeches will be after the trip to the US. Trump is likely to try to humiliate him. How he reacts to that will matter hugely
The 'special relationship' is dead, NATO is dead, the 'west' is dead.
America is no longer an ally.
We need to react accordingly - and fast.
UK and Canada should join EU
Quite the opposite.
Anyone proposing a single European army is making the same mistake as those proposing we rely on Washington.
Why the hell should we replace a single point of failure in Washington with a single point of failure in Brussels.
Yes we need to invest, but we need to invest as nations separately that can work together when willing to do so and never again be reliant upon the benevolence or malevolence of a single individual who has too much power.
Swiss cheese security works better than unified single point of failure security. What's happened in America is a big red flashing warning light on the dangers of single points of failure.
Depends what one means by a European army, no? Any effective force to deter Russia and police borders will require a unified command and control structure. Defence is also far for effective with forces that can work together and focus on specific strengths. We can't be in a situation as with Ukraine where support has often been slow, piecemeal and subject to domestic wranglings rather than decided in advance.
So a situation where like NATO each country contributes some of its forces towards a 'European Army' with specific strategic goals we all share would make sense, while maintaining an ability to act independently too.
Shouldn't have its command as Brussels though given non-EU countries would be involved and its would serve a broader collection of countries than the EU.
When do we expect Trump to announce that any bank who continues to freeze Russian assets and/or hands over funds to the Ukrainians will be breaking the law that he’s just made and will also be frozen out of the banking system?
And their assets in the US will be seized and placed in Trust under the control of the Chair of the Kennedy Centre.
As predicted by anyone following any level of this.
US headed towards a terrible conflagration over whether they want to remain a democracy.
Is he? But it's phony to suggest this 78 year old is not sharp or stable.
And it's pretty clear they won't want to remain a democracy frankly - their top judges think the President should be immune from all crimes, and at least half of their voters think you shouldn't accept democratic defeats (probably more since I assume some Democrats and a majority of Republicans do).
Biden was just a doddery old fool.
Dodgy Donald is a DANGEROUSLY UNHINGED doddery old fool!
@KemiBadenoch President Zelenskyy is not a dictator. He is the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who bravely stood up to Putin’s illegal invasion. Under my leadership, and under successive Conservative Prime Ministers, we have and always will stand with Ukraine.
President Trump is right that Europe needs to pull its weight - and that includes the UK. We need to get serious. The PM will have my support to increase defence spending - there is a fully funded plan to get to 2.5% sitting on his desk. That should be the bare minimum. Starmer should get on with it, get on a plane to Washington and show some leadership. We cannot afford to get this wrong.
That's something.
Good to see Kemi confirming conservatives support for Ukraine in view of Trumps incendiary comments this pm , and seeking increased defence spending
Except she claims there is a fully funded plan to raise Defence spending to 2.5% - if you believe that I have a bridge to sell you.
Why does it matter? She’s just making a little political dig. She has committed to support Starmer on getting to 2.5% which is important
I have no idea which. My wife offered, and I said, yes.
I am having an infinitely more luxurious time. We decided about 10 minutes ago that instead of getting our hire car at Lyon airport and arriving at our house around 1am, we would book a room at the airport NH hotel.
I am now therefore in the Gatwick North terminal Wetherspoons drinking a Concha y Toro Chardonnay. It’s a bit like that Sean Thomas Speccy article posted earlier. Similar vibe. But with added tutting and sighing about Trump from my wife.
I am tucking into a tin of Ambrosia Rice Pudding after surveying my covid/ukraine/zombie invasion/robot war cupboard.
Is it time to panic buy beans and toilet rolls yet?
An Eastern European Official has told the German Newspaper, BILD, that discussions are ongoing in regards to the withdrawal of U.S. Troops from all Countries in Europe that joined the NATO Alliance after 1990, which is reported to have been one of the Goals of recent Negotiations between Russia and the United States. This would include Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Sweden. Additionally, preparations are said to be ongoing in Italy, for the possible withdrawal of U.S. Forces from Kosovo
I hope the many Republicans who laud Ronald Reagan will speak out against this.
I have no idea which. My wife offered, and I said, yes.
I am having an infinitely more luxurious time. We decided about 10 minutes ago that instead of getting our hire car at Lyon airport and arriving at our house around 1am, we would book a room at the airport NH hotel.
I am now therefore in the Gatwick North terminal Wetherspoons drinking a Concha y Toro Chardonnay. It’s a bit like that Sean Thomas Speccy article posted earlier. Similar vibe. But with added tutting and sighing about Trump from my wife.
I am tucking into a tin of Ambrosia Rice Pudding after surveying my covid/ukraine/zombie invasion/robot war cupboard.
Is it time to panic buy beans and toilet rolls yet?
Stock up on can openers. Everyone remembers the cans, but not all come with ring pulls (or those can snap off), and what use is a can you cannot open?
@KemiBadenoch President Zelenskyy is not a dictator. He is the democratically elected leader of Ukraine who bravely stood up to Putin’s illegal invasion. Under my leadership, and under successive Conservative Prime Ministers, we have and always will stand with Ukraine.
President Trump is right that Europe needs to pull its weight - and that includes the UK. We need to get serious. The PM will have my support to increase defence spending - there is a fully funded plan to get to 2.5% sitting on his desk. That should be the bare minimum. Starmer should get on with it, get on a plane to Washington and show some leadership. We cannot afford to get this wrong.
That's something.
Good to see Kemi confirming conservatives support for Ukraine in view of Trumps incendiary comments this pm , and seeking increased defence spending
She has given unconditional backing to increased defence spending. Politically, that could turn out to matter a lot. Could the Tories now vote against a tax rise to fund it, for example?
The problem with any tax rise is it is rare to be hypotecated and of course there are many different taxes, but we are approaching the time to address the tax and ni unfairness on the workers and increase taxes for those on unearned incomes
But then, everyone is happy for tax rises as long as it is not them
I have just noticed to add to the problems gilts seem to be rising
Gilts are rising across Europe in anticipation of defence bonds. They do look like the best option as things stand. If we are serious about our defence, if we really do believe in the Blitz spirit stuff, we are all going to have accept a hit. Our grandparents sacrificed a hell of a lot more than it will cost us.
I still don't understand this. What's the point in increase defence spending when there is no appetite to ever use it? We've had Salisbury, Ukraine, MH17, cables in the Baltic and we've done nothing at all.
I think this sudden interest in increasing spending is a displacement activity, designed to make people feel good while having zero effect on Russia (but costing us billions).
The reaspn is twofold. Firstly we will have to use it to some extent. If the US is abandoning Ukraine then we will have to provide either a peacekeeping force, weapons to Ukraine, and/or beef up defences on its borders should a pro-Russian regime be installed. Plus in doing that maintain our current forces if not increase them elsewhere. Quite possibly without American troops currently stationed in Eastern Europe. For example one reason Poland is reluctant to provide boots on the ground in Ukraine is it has its own border defences with Russia and Belarus and the Polish corridor to think about.
Secondly, it's about deterrence and vital defensive capabilities. The bulk of our new spending would likely be on air defence systems that can replace what the US did effectively provide as a guarantor. In general our defence is also currently integrated with the US and can't function fully without American help. That's how it's been designed as in theory it worked well for both as a way of extending American combat power while reducing the cost to us. So just to stand still and maintain our capabilities we had when NATO functioned fully we'll have to spend more. And more still if we believe the threat from Russia has increased.
Also why a peace deal favouring Russia is very much not on our interest. The potential costs far outweigh any short term benefits.
Thanks all for your answers. I remain of the view that European military spending is probably sufficient at the moment, taking into account our technological advantage, the fact Ukraine has managed to f*ck the Russians up big time, and our unwillingness to ever do an Erdogan.
I'd support a highly targeted reform of our defence spending, particularly around drones, stocks of ammo and cables, and the associated expense of that, if we accompany it with a new pro-active doctrine. That might mean sinking dodgy ships in the Baltic, RAF sorties over Ukraine, and a rotated garrison in Kyiv.
I am not sold on an arbitrary increase to 3/4% without an explanation of what it's actually for.
Increase it to 3% tomorrow, give the increase directly buying or making munitions for Ukraine. Work out an efficient long-term use it later.
The key thing we need to ensure we have is the means of production of vast numbers of drones and ammunition.
We don't need those going into storage, going to the frontline works, it helps Ukraine but it also helps our domestic security in ensuring we have that throughput.
What we need is a declaration this week of a large commitment by the major European powers of resources sufficient for Ukraine to carry on this war of self defence without US assistance if it comes to it. In short, to remove Trump's whip hand over Ukraine. If we allow him to use that whip hand to bully Ukraine into submission we will not only be profoundly ashamed of ourselves, we will have given up our future security. Carpe diem.
Comments
"Candidates had to be nominated by the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) (CPSU) or by a public organisation.[2] However, all public organisations were controlled by the party and were subservient to a 1931 law that required them to accept party rule.[2] The CPSU itself remained the only legal party in the country.[3]
Voters could in theory vote against the CPSU candidate, but could only do so by using polling booths, whereas votes for the party could be cast simply by submitting a blank ballot"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1950_Soviet_Union_legislative_election
(though perhaps BJO would not like Stalin, if he knew Stalin's responsibility for the creation of the Israeli state in 1947...)
AfD are a nasty bunch, but they are on 20% in the polls. That’s lower than Reform here and way lower than RN in France.
(Also, Russia - which has not been invaded - has in fact done all those things.)
My daughter has far better developed morals and principles and integrity than that Vance tweet.
We need actions, not words. Preferably actions that put us on a path to reduce or eliminate our dependence on USA, whilst at the same time not triggering Trump's narcissistic petulance.
We should continue to do the empty gestures (state visit or whatever) until we can confidently tell USA we no longer need them as an ally. That may take years.
ETA: I may be being hasty, of course, depending on what you are wanting Starmer to say on the record. A defense of Zelenskyy, I agree with. But it needs to be carefully worded imo.
Countering Russia, which is an economic minnow with a huge cannon fodder army, not entirely unlike North Korea, is readily doable, but only with a lot of investment in advanced weaponry that will minimise airborne threats, and enable as many Russians as possible to be slaughtered at range rather than getting into close combat with our own troops, which would then sustain a lot more losses - and it is very much easier for a dictatorship to treat it's people as expendable than it is for a democracy. If the investment isn't there then the risk is that any forces we can deploy get rolled over and wiped out, or fought to a bloody stalemate as seen in Ukraine.
That would create an extremely dangerous situation in which Britain becomes entirely reliant for protection on the threat of nuclear weapons. We either have to threaten Russia with destruction if it doesn't back off, or accept the collapse of all our friends and life under economic and political siege, or possibly as an American puppet to avoid becoming a Russian one.
Russians only understand brutality. They need to be convinced that we can beat them to a pulp if they indulge in any further adventurism against us and our allies. There can be no real peace with Russia because Russia is incapable of being anything other than the vicious despotism that it is, but it can be intimidated into leaving us alone if we have the will to do so. Tragically, I think the will is probably lacking.
An Eastern European Official has told the German Newspaper, BILD, that discussions are ongoing in regards to the withdrawal of U.S. Troops from all Countries in Europe that joined the NATO Alliance after 1990, which is reported to have been one of the Goals of recent Negotiations between Russia and the United States. This would include Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Sweden. Additionally, preparations are said to be ongoing in Italy, for the possible withdrawal of U.S. Forces from Kosovo
Putin was always going to win and BTW I have been critical of him even when Centrists were cosying up to him
PB Zelensky fans are sore losers, I cant see a way back from here for him and we should rejoice that the killing is about to end.
And don’t give me any of that “but that happened after Russia invaded Ukraine stuff” - you forget Putin is a master strategist so foresaw the Kursk invasion and invaded first to ensure they had a bargaining chip once they had persuaded Ukraine to engage in peace talks and end Zelensky’s warmongering.
Secondly, it's about deterrence and vital defensive capabilities. The bulk of our new spending would likely be on air defence systems that can replace what the US did effectively provide as a guarantor. In general our defence is also currently integrated with the US and can't function fully without American help. That's how it's been designed as in theory it worked well for both as a way of extending American combat power while reducing the cost to us. So just to stand still and maintain our capabilities we had when NATO functioned fully we'll have to spend more. And more still if we believe the threat from Russia has increased.
Also why a peace deal favouring Russia is very much not on our interest. The potential costs far outweigh any short term benefits.
America is no longer an ally.
We need to react accordingly - and fast.
Maybe the media could ask Farage what he thinks of his pal Trumps latest unhinged rant ?
And I've seen an awful lot of articles that claim Bild has seen / been told X that never appear in the paper..
That Liberal Democrat PPB has eased my concern about the Earth.
I've no idea how we manage that. All political parties are simply hopeless. Reform have the right idea in that change is needed, but their thoughts as to how one goes about it put them in with the Greens.
How many more might agree and in future say so? Not as many as some may think.
Anyone proposing a single European army is making the same mistake as those proposing we rely on Washington.
Why the hell should we replace a single point of failure in Washington with a single point of failure in Brussels.
Yes we need to invest, but we need to invest as nations separately that can work together when willing to do so and never again be reliant upon the benevolence or malevolence of a single individual who has too much power.
Swiss cheese security works better than unified single point of failure security. What's happened in America is a big red flashing warning light on the dangers of single points of failure.
Starmer quite possibly has the right tone for the messaging, but I’m not convinced he has the necessary strength to deliver.
There's long been a strand of Putin supporters who like to pretend everyone thinks Zelensky walks on water or something, and delight in pointing out his faults, when the simple fact is even if he is not Jesus reincarnated he was the elected President who found his country invaded and has been trying to resist that.
Mocking him for that and putting deaths on his shoulders is morally repugnant.
Yesterdays US support for Zelensky is todays "fake news"
As for disinformation i find this relevant
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early
However, I hold out a sliver of hope the tide may just be turning.
I have no idea which. My wife offered, and I said, yes.
Putin and Trump and the US are now aligned. There is no point even debating this.
How everyone responses now is crucial.
Would you chop the head off a man who stepped on your toe and feel morally righteous about it?
You know what, don't answer, I know you would - if Corbyn said it was ok.
It might be pie in the sky, but I can hope.
I honestly believe that if the EU became more restrictive on total FOM, and more aggressive on immigration policies, a lot of the right wing populist appeal would wane pretty quickly - as would the reason for many in the UK to be “out.”
Totally out of control.
As predicted by anyone following any level of this.
US headed towards a terrible conflagration over whether they want to remain a democracy.
I'd support a highly targeted reform of our defence spending, particularly around drones, stocks of ammo and cables, and the associated expense of that, if we accompany it with a new pro-active doctrine. That might mean sinking dodgy ships in the Baltic, RAF sorties over Ukraine, and a rotated garrison in Kyiv.
I am not sold on an arbitrary increase to 3/4% without an explanation of what it's actually for.
And it's pretty clear they won't want to remain a democracy frankly - their top judges think the President should be immune from all crimes, and at least half of their voters think you shouldn't accept democratic defeats (probably more since I assume some Democrats and a majority of Republicans do).
Net zero sounds expensive and abstract and hypothetical.
Balancing the books, big numbers, yawn.
Supporting an invaded country (and only fringe loonies seem to be buying the alternative not-fact narrative), that's so obviously a matter of right and wrong.
And once the question is that stark, it's surprising how strong otherwise meek people can become.
Can you see why people might consider him an anti-Semite, even if you disagree?
"Putin was always going to win"
It's been an odd definition of 'win' over the last three years. I'm sure the hundreds of thousands of Russians maimed and killed will see a *potential* Russian win as worthwhile.
"Centrists were cosying up to him"
So you see Corbyn as a centrist when he prevaricated over Russia's guilt over the Salisbury attack?
He's a terrible businessesman.
(And whatever Musk's talents, which are substantial, they're not in the "keeping an existing business going well for the decades to come" area, which is what governments need.)
Anything resembling an EU capability would simply be derailed by the effing about of various Kremlin shills and the remaining holier-than-thou neutrals.
I am now therefore in the Gatwick North terminal Wetherspoons drinking a Concha y Toro Chardonnay. It’s a bit like that Sean Thomas Speccy article posted earlier. Similar vibe. But with added tutting and sighing about Trump from my wife.
We don't need those going into storage, going to the frontline works, it helps Ukraine but it also helps our domestic security in ensuring we have that throughput.
https://x.com/heidi_labour/status/1891811955335110760?s=61
(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
1h
Still waiting on Nigel Farage, Richard Tice, Suella Braverman and Liz Truss. All of whom are usually straight out of the blocks to give us their considered views on Donald Trump.
Funny thing is it is possible to support what is happening without inconsistency at least by portraying it (wrongly in my view) as cold hard calculation of national and international interest. But to support it and try to take the moralistic, preaching high road (eg because 'killing is wrong, Ukraine should have just surrendered' etc) is something else entirely.
Besides that, that was three decades ago. The world has moved on since then, and so has Russia's actions.
Also; if you are really interested in agreements, then what are your views on the Budapest Memorandum?
Confessions of a luxury travel writer
Is it possible to have champagne poisoning?" (£)
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/confessions-of-a-luxury-travel-writer/
Down with this sort of thing.
Arguing with him has consequences. Mild criticism of him has consequences. No one wants the USA to use its considerable power to harm its allies (apart from Putin/Xi/Modi etc). But the world cannot spend 4 years or more stepping on eggshells around the whims of a man who will pivot to some new obsession or grievance in an instant, it just isn't possible even if we wanted to.
I think Turkey and China will eventually carve up Russia (with lots of the nuttier places in the middle left to sort their own fate), and I won't cry a single tear.
(1) British Army - we need to sustain a warfighting division in the field in the medium-long term. That's 10,000+ troops with rotations every 6 months, fully equipped and armed with artillery, tanks, light vehicles, ammo and engineers/logistics. Probably requires army back up at 110,000 men given we struggled with Telic/Herrick with just 100k.
(2) Royal Navy - woefully short of escorts and men. Probably 10 x destroyers, 2 x cruisers and 16-18 frigates needed. 12 x attack subs. Full nuclear deterrent for Dreadnought of 4 x bomber subs. High availability. Fully fuelled. RFA to match. Royal Marines and landing ships on top.
(3) RAF - complete Tempest/get all necessary F35 squadrons, upgrade maritime patrol aircraft, ensure hypersonic missile defences. Several addition squadrons. Chinook/Wessex helicopter fleet upgrades. Lots more cruise missiles and tactical missiles. Maybe some tactical nuclear warheads on top.
Then you need electronic warfare and cyber/hybrid warfare defences, proper funding of the security services, and special forces on top.
All of that would make us very credible in defence. But you couldn't do it all with 2.5%.
I am available anytime, and I serve at my country's pleasure.
God Save The King.
So a situation where like NATO each country contributes some of its forces towards a 'European Army' with specific strategic goals we all share would make sense, while maintaining an ability to act independently too.
Shouldn't have its command as Brussels though given non-EU countries would be involved and its would serve a broader collection of countries than the EU.
And their assets in the US will be seized and placed in Trust under the control of the Chair of the Kennedy Centre.
Dodgy Donald is a DANGEROUSLY UNHINGED doddery old fool!
Is it time to panic buy beans and toilet rolls yet?