Howdy, Stranger!

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

By-election betting – politicalbetting.com

2456

Comments

  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,738
    edited February 24
    carnforth said:

    It ought to be bigger news, I think, that a senior Reform and ex-Brexit MP has been charged with effectively being an agent of Russia’s.

    Bit hard to get traction if no-one's heard his name before, even if he was technically "senior".
    Nor when it's entirely expected. Reform MP is Russian agent? Makes perfect sense.

    Next.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,080
    What would an agent do differently?

    @saraecook

    President Trump says he is in "serious discussions" with Putin about ending the war in Ukraine, as well as "major economic development transactions" between the US & Russia. This would be a huge reversal from previous US policy of sanctioning and isolating Russia.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,769

    nico67 said:

    If China invades Taiwan we should take the US attitude , thousands of miles away , not our war …..

    AUKUS ?????
    AUKUS commits UK to station attack subs in the Pacific. I think it's the most we can do and I assume (but do not know) that Diego Garcia is not necessary to do that. So that's not a problem. I would be concerned however if the US expected us to station the carriers or other surface ships, because I don't think we can do it and (given that the US have broken NATO in two) I don't think we should do it.

    The Pacific is not our problem and not realistically in our sphere of action. India, Japan, US, AUS and NZ should be able to counter China, and all our strategic interests are in the Atlantic or Europe. The exception is our reliance on China for (checks notes) every bloody thing, and I don't know how to handle that. I'd be happy to deploy the carriers to defend Australia and New Zealand (family is family), but not further than that and the Pacific is a big-ass ocean.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,902

    IanB2 said:

    Radio 4 has lost the six o’clock news - has the bomb dropped?

    What do you.mean?
    It wasn't available for about 5 mins.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live/bbc_radio_fourfm
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,902
    algarkirk said:

    Fabulously interesting by-election potentially. In particular because no-one in politics apart from anoraks/PB types will want it to be held. If you are Labour but want to get rid of the erring MP (harshly treated IMHO) you take a great risk of disaster; SFAICS LDs and Greens can forget it; Tories need to do really well and won't; suddenly Reform are tainted goods, and a loud simple populist case can be made against them - they link with Trumpist fascists and Russians and so far dare not denounce them. There remains no love of Russia's fellow travellers among the voters.

    If there is value, it's with Labour.

    Why are Reform tainted good? Farage has backed Zelensky.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,712
    MPs must get sick and tired of members of the public having a (verbal) go at them when they're out and about. But it goes with the job and they just have to suck it up. I'm sure Amesbury usually does.
    But on the night in question, he was clearly pissed, and so lost it completely, like many a macho man is inclined to do when they've had too many pints.
    So I've no sympathy with him at all. And I can't quite see the point of an appeal.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,109
    viewcode said:

    nico67 said:

    If China invades Taiwan we should take the US attitude , thousands of miles away , not our war …..

    AUKUS ?????
    AUKUS commits UK to station attack subs in the Pacific. I think it's the most we can do and I assume (but do not know) that Diego Garcia is not necessary to do that. So that's not a problem. I would be concerned however if the US expected us to station the carriers or other surface ships, because I don't think we can do it and (given that the US have broken NATO in two) I don't think we should do it.

    The Pacific is not our problem and not realistically in our sphere of action. India, Japan, US, AUS and NZ should be able to counter China, and all our strategic interests are in the Atlantic or Europe. The exception is our reliance on China for (checks notes) every bloody thing, and I don't know how to handle that. I'd be happy to deploy the carriers to defend Australia and New Zealand (family is family), but not further than that and the Pacific is a big-ass ocean.
    It doesn’t get any “further” than New Zealand.
  • carnforth said:

    It ought to be bigger news, I think, that a senior Reform and ex-Brexit MP has been charged with effectively being an agent of Russia’s.

    Bit hard to get traction if no-one's heard his name before, even if he was technically "senior".
    Have they heard of him in Wales?
    Aren’t Reform now ahead in Welsh polling?

    Maybe not any more.
    I have heard of him and he has been on the news but he is not doing either himself or Reform any favours, though in a small local Llandudno election last week Reform won the seat
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 7,245
    edited February 24

    MPs must get sick and tired of members of the public having a (verbal) go at them when they're out and about. But it goes with the job and they just have to suck it up. I'm sure Amesbury usually does.
    But on the night in question, he was clearly pissed, and so lost it completely, like many a macho man is inclined to do when they've had too many pints.
    So I've no sympathy with him at all. And I can't quite see the point of an appeal.

    An appeal buys him time while he's still earning an MP's salary. There must also be an outside chance of it being reduced to a community sentence, which would take him outside the recall rules. Unlikely, I'd have thought, but worth a roll of the dice.
  • MightyAlexMightyAlex Posts: 1,743
    viewcode said:

    nico67 said:

    If China invades Taiwan we should take the US attitude , thousands of miles away , not our war …..

    AUKUS ?????
    AUKUS commits UK to station attack subs in the Pacific. I think it's the most we can do and I assume (but do not know) that Diego Garcia is not necessary to do that. So that's not a problem. I would be concerned however if the US expected us to station the carriers or other surface ships, because I don't think we can do it and (given that the US have broken NATO in two) I don't think we should do it.

    The Pacific is not our problem and not realistically in our sphere of action. India, Japan, US, AUS and NZ should be able to counter China, and all our strategic interests are in the Atlantic or Europe. The exception is our reliance on China for (checks notes) every bloody thing, and I don't know how to handle that. I'd be happy to deploy the carriers to defend Australia and New Zealand (family is family), but not further than that and the Pacific is a big-ass ocean.
    Always fun to wonder how many bits of Chinese stuff are in these military systems. Modern supply chains are long with many terrors.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,189
    Eabhal said:

    carnforth said:

    It ought to be bigger news, I think, that a senior Reform and ex-Brexit MP has been charged with effectively being an agent of Russia’s.

    Bit hard to get traction if no-one's heard his name before, even if he was technically "senior".
    Nor when it's entirely expected. Reform MP is Russian agent? Makes perfect sense.

    Next.
    Is he a Reform MP?
  • viewcode said:

    nico67 said:

    If China invades Taiwan we should take the US attitude , thousands of miles away , not our war …..

    AUKUS ?????
    AUKUS commits UK to station attack subs in the Pacific. I think it's the most we can do and I assume (but do not know) that Diego Garcia is not necessary to do that. So that's not a problem. I would be concerned however if the US expected us to station the carriers or other surface ships, because I don't think we can do it and (given that the US have broken NATO in two) I don't think we should do it.

    The Pacific is not our problem and not realistically in our sphere of action. India, Japan, US, AUS and NZ should be able to counter China, and all our strategic interests are in the Atlantic or Europe. The exception is our reliance on China for (checks notes) every bloody thing, and I don't know how to handle that. I'd be happy to deploy the carriers to defend Australia and New Zealand (family is family), but not further than that and the Pacific is a big-ass ocean.
    Logical but is anything that anymore

    My daughter who is totally disinterested in politics asked me out of the blue today about Trump wanting Ukraine's minerals

    This chaos is cutting through
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835
    kinabalu said:

    On topic, Dehenna Davison's father was killed by a punch to the head.

    It's only blind luck than means he's got 10 weeks rather than 10 years.

    If you speed or drive under the influence, it's only blind luck that you don't hit someone, but we still give out lighter sentences.
    Or usually no sentences since few DUIs are caught.
    Be grateful you don't live in the US. Drinking and driving is still (sadly) considered completely acceptable here.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835
    It is, of course, worth remembering that Belgium's exports are about the same size as Russia's.

  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,439
    viewcode said:

    nico67 said:

    If China invades Taiwan we should take the US attitude , thousands of miles away , not our war …..

    AUKUS ?????
    AUKUS commits UK to station attack subs in the Pacific. I think it's the most we can do and I assume (but do not know) that Diego Garcia is not necessary to do that. So that's not a problem. I would be concerned however if the US expected us to station the carriers or other surface ships, because I don't think we can do it and (given that the US have broken NATO in two) I don't think we should do it.

    The Pacific is not our problem and not realistically in our sphere of action. India, Japan, US, AUS and NZ should be able to counter China, and all our strategic interests are in the Atlantic or Europe. The exception is our reliance on China for (checks notes) every bloody thing, and I don't know how to handle that. I'd be happy to deploy the carriers to defend Australia and New Zealand (family is family), but not further than that and the Pacific is a big-ass ocean.
    Perhaps when China invades we could vote against any US sponsored UN resolutions and enter into talks with China over “important economic development transactions”. See how the US like that?
  • Eabhal said:

    carnforth said:

    It ought to be bigger news, I think, that a senior Reform and ex-Brexit MP has been charged with effectively being an agent of Russia’s.

    Bit hard to get traction if no-one's heard his name before, even if he was technically "senior".
    Nor when it's entirely expected. Reform MP is Russian agent? Makes perfect sense.

    Next.
    Is he a Reform MP?
    He led Reform UKs 2021 Welsh Parliament election campaign but apparently is no longer a member of the party
  • Scott_xP said:

    A few people have commented that Zelensky is wasting his time dealing with Trump, he should deal directly with Putin instead.

    Deal with the organ grinder, not the monkey...

    It is Putin who refuses to talk to Zelensky as an equal.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,935
    rcs1000 said:

    It is, of course, worth remembering that Belgium's exports are about the same size as Russia's.

    Chocolate and beer vs bombs and novichok.
  • nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    The world has changed and in view of everything Trump has said voting with Russia is not a surprise
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,902
    40.3% of votes in the German election were cast by electors aged 60+.
  • Carnyx said:

    I wonder if the Recall Petiton will get enough votes? OK, he shouldn't have lamped the constituent, but the sentence seems a bit harsh and I wonder if quite a few voters might have a bit of support for him. There's a bit of a rising swell of opinion against people having a go at authority figures, be they police, NHS workers, even MPs.

    Er, there was no suggestion in the report that the constituent "had a go". Or am I missing something?

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jan/16/suspended-labour-mp-mike-amesbury-pleads-guilty-to-assault
    From the sentencing remarks, the victim, "who himself had been drinking, embarked on a discussion about a bridge closure in Frodsham". It seems that didn't rise to the level of provocation, and the response was entirely disproportionate. But, realistically, I think it's hard to see this as a wholly polite enquiry from a concerned constituent.

    I'm not in any way justifying it, and think the sentence is about right. But I think most people picturing the circumstances would see a drunken argument where the MP wrongly failed to keep his cool but nobody comes out entirely smelling of roses. And they'd probably be broadly right.
    Let anyone who has not felt the red mist rise at the mention of a bridge closure in Frodsham throw the first punch.
    And Jesus sayeth unto them, "If a man doth complain about closure of the bridge to Frodsham, turn to him and ask if he would like to complain about the Sutton Weaver underpass also".
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,439

    Scott_xP said:

    A few people have commented that Zelensky is wasting his time dealing with Trump, he should deal directly with Putin instead.

    Deal with the organ grinder, not the monkey...

    It is Putin who refuses to talk to Zelensky as an equal.
    He sees Zelenskyy how Trump sees Trudeau.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,935
    TOPPING said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Robert Kagan:

    Switching sides to support Russia against Ukraine is "a real indication of what it means to have a King [not a president], the whims of the king become policy immediately and then have to be defended by all the courtiers...they have to sound like what the king wants."

    It wasn't that long ago that certain posters were of the view that Trump becoming President would change nothing for Ukraine.
    They will quickly reconcile themselves with this actually being good for Ukrainians. Owning the Libs is the main goal and that makes Trump a permanent ally.
    Owning the libs is just a pleasant by product.

    People on here are commenting with their hearts not their heads. Similar to the days of "Ukraine will win because they have to win".

    Look at the voting blocs that we are seeing right now. That's the reality, not what we want or don't want.

    I would very much like to be a part of a Europe which is self-sufficient in any number of ways and we will have to wait to see if that will transpire. More likely is we will relapse back into our reliance on other states (ie the United ones) but we shall see.

    What is disappointing on PB, that said, is that precious few people are bringing cold, hard analysis to the situation. Why, upthread there was someone bemoaning our presumed (ie 100% certain) lack of action if China invades Taiwan ffs.

    Too many people on PB are living in, perhaps hark fondly back to the times when the map was coloured pink.
    The cold hard analysis is we are being royally f****d by an overgrown toddler and have no good strategic options available. In such circumstances harking back fondly is not a bad initial response.
  • It ought to be bigger news, I think, that a senior Reform and ex-Brexit MP has been charged with effectively being an agent of Russia’s.

    It shows how far Russia has fallen, normally they target the truly the best of the best, but now they are scarping the barrel with Nathan Gill.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,822
    Andy_JS said:

    40.3% of votes in the German election were cast by electors aged 60+.

    EU countries tend to see a reverse of what we see here.

    The highest pro EU and most anti hard right tend to be older people.

  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,080
    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    This vote seemed … horrifying in terms of how the world has changed. What on earth is happening?
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,080
    Scott_xP said:

    What would an agent do differently?

    @saraecook

    President Trump says he is in "serious discussions" with Putin about ending the war in Ukraine, as well as "major economic development transactions" between the US & Russia. This would be a huge reversal from previous US policy of sanctioning and isolating Russia.

    How compromised is Trump?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,902

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    This vote seemed … horrifying in terms of how the world has changed. What on earth is happening?
    What happened was that the American electorate didn't have a centrist party to vote for, as defined by them, not by elites or experts.
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,907
    Roberta Flack is sadly no more.

    RIP
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,975
    Off thread
    Techie advice svp
    Is Samsumg Tab a9+ good for those of a certain age who won't be gaming or doing complex tasks?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,935
    Andy_JS said:

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    This vote seemed … horrifying in terms of how the world has changed. What on earth is happening?
    What happened was that the American electorate didn't have a centrist party to vote for, as defined by them, not by elites or experts.
    The people who wrote project 2025 are the multi millionaire hangers on to the multi billionaires. In what sense are they not elite themselves?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,777
    edited February 24

    Off thread
    Techie advice svp
    Is Samsumg Tab a9+ good for those of a certain age who won't be gaming or doing complex tasks?

    I have the Samsung a9+ and it is excellent for me, though I do not game but I do have the complex task of contributing to PB !!

    And I am 81
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835
    Andy_JS said:

    40.3% of votes in the German election were cast by electors aged 60+.

    I suspect the media voter age in the UK will also be surprisingly high - the median age of adults is 48 in the UK, and as the older you are the more likely you are to vote, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the UK had an even higher proportion of oldies voting,
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,555

    TOPPING said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Robert Kagan:

    Switching sides to support Russia against Ukraine is "a real indication of what it means to have a King [not a president], the whims of the king become policy immediately and then have to be defended by all the courtiers...they have to sound like what the king wants."

    It wasn't that long ago that certain posters were of the view that Trump becoming President would change nothing for Ukraine.
    They will quickly reconcile themselves with this actually being good for Ukrainians. Owning the Libs is the main goal and that makes Trump a permanent ally.
    Owning the libs is just a pleasant by product.

    People on here are commenting with their hearts not their heads. Similar to the days of "Ukraine will win because they have to win".

    Look at the voting blocs that we are seeing right now. That's the reality, not what we want or don't want.

    I would very much like to be a part of a Europe which is self-sufficient in any number of ways and we will have to wait to see if that will transpire. More likely is we will relapse back into our reliance on other states (ie the United ones) but we shall see.

    What is disappointing on PB, that said, is that precious few people are bringing cold, hard analysis to the situation. Why, upthread there was someone bemoaning our presumed (ie 100% certain) lack of action if China invades Taiwan ffs.

    Too many people on PB are living in, perhaps hark fondly back to the times when the map was coloured pink.
    The cold hard analysis is we are being royally f****d by an overgrown toddler and have no good strategic options available. In such circumstances harking back fondly is not a bad initial response.
    Fair enough. But searing political analysis it is not.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,015
    Scott_xP said:

    What would an agent do differently?

    @saraecook

    President Trump says he is in "serious discussions" with Putin about ending the war in Ukraine, as well as "major economic development transactions" between the US & Russia. This would be a huge reversal from previous US policy of sanctioning and isolating Russia.

    Act more covertly?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,141
    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    It was meant to send a signal that the vote was meaningless.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    It was meant to send a signal that the vote was meaningless.
    Sure sure.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,015
    edited February 24

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    It was meant to send a signal that the vote was meaningless.
    Keep telling yourself that.

    How many other meaningless votes happen?

    There's not always a need to look for subtext when the text is plenty clear.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,141
    kle4 said:

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    It was meant to send a signal that the vote was meaningless.
    Keep telling yourself that.

    How many other meaningless votes happen?

    There's not always a need to look for subtext when the text is plenty clear.
    The text that matters is the one being negotiated at the moment, not UN parlour games.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,655
    Andy_JS said:

    algarkirk said:

    Fabulously interesting by-election potentially. In particular because no-one in politics apart from anoraks/PB types will want it to be held. If you are Labour but want to get rid of the erring MP (harshly treated IMHO) you take a great risk of disaster; SFAICS LDs and Greens can forget it; Tories need to do really well and won't; suddenly Reform are tainted goods, and a loud simple populist case can be made against them - they link with Trumpist fascists and Russians and so far dare not denounce them. There remains no love of Russia's fellow travellers among the voters.

    If there is value, it's with Labour.

    Why are Reform tainted good? Farage has backed Zelensky.
    SFAICS Farage has evaded the issue of whether Trump was wrong when he said that Ukraine started the war. If you look at his GBNews interview (found at Farage's Twitter on 20 Feb) you will see that he is asked about that suggestion and fails to answer.

    Farage's record on criticism of Putin is remarkably thin. His record on criticising Trump is thin too.
  • nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    It was meant to send a signal that the vote was meaningless.
    Wouldn't it have been simpler to say out loud "this vote is meaningless"? Or to abstain, as China did?

    After all voting alongside Russia risks confusing a lot of normal people into thinking the USA backs Russia on this issue.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,141

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    It was meant to send a signal that the vote was meaningless.
    Wouldn't it have been simpler to say out loud "this vote is meaningless"? Or to abstain, as China did?

    After all voting alongside Russia risks confusing a lot of normal people into thinking the USA backs Russia on this issue.
    You may as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb.
  • scampi25scampi25 Posts: 40
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Radio 4 has lost the six o’clock news - has the bomb dropped?

    What do you.mean?
    There was silence, then they said they were looking for the news and played a trailer, then they said they’d found the news but there was an even longer silence. Now lots more trailers. Now they’re apologising for having completely lost the news.

    Breaking - the news is found!
    By now it's more like the ,"olds"!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,015

    kle4 said:

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    It was meant to send a signal that the vote was meaningless.
    Keep telling yourself that.

    How many other meaningless votes happen?

    There's not always a need to look for subtext when the text is plenty clear.
    The text that matters is the one being negotiated at the moment, not UN parlour games.
    And yet you've applauded the US playing a parlour game - voting purely to send a signal is treating it more like a game than doing otherwise. So by your own terms they are participating in the game.

    You need to select which things to troll about a bit more, select everything and it loses impact.
  • viewcode said:

    The Pacific is not our problem and not realistically in our sphere of action. India, Japan, US, AUS and NZ should be able to counter China, and all our strategic interests are in the Atlantic or Europe. The exception is our reliance on China for (checks notes) every bloody thing, and I don't know how to handle that. I'd be happy to deploy the carriers to defend Australia and New Zealand (family is family), but not further than that and the Pacific is a big-ass ocean.

    Indeed. The truth is we can't do anything substantive in the Pacific anyway, beyond what's already planned with AUKUS. The RN is simply not capable of projecting any real force to the other side of the world beyond the odd SSN visit or pre-planned CV deployment, both of which are merely performative.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,015
    edited February 24

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    It was meant to send a signal that the vote was meaningless.
    Wouldn't it have been simpler to say out loud "this vote is meaningless"? Or to abstain, as China did?

    After all voting alongside Russia risks confusing a lot of normal people into thinking the USA backs Russia on this issue.
    You may as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb.
    So basically the vote did matter after all, and you realise you made no sense by claiming that it didn't (since the USA could have done other things to show it didn't, making what they did choose to do still a meaningful choice).

    This is kind of funny really, I rarely see a point collapse and reverse in real time.

    It was both meaningless and yet had meaning it seems!
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,632
    This feels to me not unlike the Germans and the Soviets partitioning Poland between them.
  • Cookie said:

    This feels to me not unlike the Germans and the Soviets partitioning Poland between them.

    I'd say it was time to update that David Low cartoon, but it would require someone finding a time when Trump said something mean about Putin.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,141
    kle4 said:

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    It was meant to send a signal that the vote was meaningless.
    Wouldn't it have been simpler to say out loud "this vote is meaningless"? Or to abstain, as China did?

    After all voting alongside Russia risks confusing a lot of normal people into thinking the USA backs Russia on this issue.
    You may as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb.
    So basically the vote did matter after all, and you realise you made no sense by claiming that it didn't (since the USA could have done other things to show it didn't, making what they did choose to do still a meaningful choice).

    This is kind of funny really, I rarely see a point collapse and reverse in real time.

    It was both meaningless and yet had meaning it seems!
    The vote had no bearing on anything directly affecting the war so it was just a chance to grandstand in the middle of difficult negotiations, or possibly to sabotage them, so showing contempt for it by voting against it rather than abstaining has some logic. It's sends the message not to bother playing games like that again.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,439
    kle4 said:

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    It was meant to send a signal that the vote was meaningless.
    Wouldn't it have been simpler to say out loud "this vote is meaningless"? Or to abstain, as China did?

    After all voting alongside Russia risks confusing a lot of normal people into thinking the USA backs Russia on this issue.
    You may as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb.
    So basically the vote did matter after all, and you realise you made no sense by claiming that it didn't (since the USA could have done other things to show it didn't, making what they did choose to do still a meaningful choice).

    This is kind of funny really, I rarely see a point collapse and reverse in real time.

    It was both meaningless and yet had meaning it seems!
    I expect the vote was very deliberate and part of the US pressure on Ukraine to accede to Russia’s wish list and sign the minerals deal. Or else. So, somewhat more than a parlour game.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,397

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    It was meant to send a signal that the vote was meaningless.
    Abstaining would say you thought the vote was meaningless - voting against the motion says you are happy with the fact Russia invaded Ukraine and don’t have a problem with that reality / fact.

    Got to ask how much is Moscow paying you to post this bullshit?

  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,439

    kle4 said:

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    It was meant to send a signal that the vote was meaningless.
    Wouldn't it have been simpler to say out loud "this vote is meaningless"? Or to abstain, as China did?

    After all voting alongside Russia risks confusing a lot of normal people into thinking the USA backs Russia on this issue.
    You may as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb.
    So basically the vote did matter after all, and you realise you made no sense by claiming that it didn't (since the USA could have done other things to show it didn't, making what they did choose to do still a meaningful choice).

    This is kind of funny really, I rarely see a point collapse and reverse in real time.

    It was both meaningless and yet had meaning it seems!
    The vote had no bearing on anything directly affecting the war so it was just a chance to grandstand in the middle of difficult negotiations, or possibly to sabotage them, so showing contempt for it by voting against it rather than abstaining has some logic. It's sends the message not to bother playing games like that again.
    The majority of the UN appears not to agree with you. If there’s a silver lining hopefully it’s that the global South might look at the US siding with Russia and rethink their reflexive assumptions about the conflict.

    But thank heavens the world has those grown ups in the US administration who would never lower themselves to grandstanding or playing
    games.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,461
    TimS said:

    viewcode said:

    nico67 said:

    If China invades Taiwan we should take the US attitude , thousands of miles away , not our war …..

    AUKUS ?????
    AUKUS commits UK to station attack subs in the Pacific. I think it's the most we can do and I assume (but do not know) that Diego Garcia is not necessary to do that. So that's not a problem. I would be concerned however if the US expected us to station the carriers or other surface ships, because I don't think we can do it and (given that the US have broken NATO in two) I don't think we should do it.

    The Pacific is not our problem and not realistically in our sphere of action. India, Japan, US, AUS and NZ should be able to counter China, and all our strategic interests are in the Atlantic or Europe. The exception is our reliance on China for (checks notes) every bloody thing, and I don't know how to handle that. I'd be happy to deploy the carriers to defend Australia and New Zealand (family is family), but not further than that and the Pacific is a big-ass ocean.
    Perhaps when China invades we could vote against any US sponsored UN resolutions and enter into talks with China over “important economic development transactions”. See how the US like that?
    Stupid idea.

    If you want to go that way - “£25 Billion per month for our Security Council vote. Cash in advance.”
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,707
    A really interesting treasure hunt of a programme I picked up on the World Service programme Outlook, whilst R4 was AWOL.

    My hunt for the Gutenberg – the rare book that solved a family mystery

    Michael Visontay thought he knew everything about his family’s past – but there was one shadowy character he was aching to know more about: his grandfather’s second wife, Olga. As Michael went through old papers, he uncovered a trail to the world’s most coveted book, the Gutenberg Bible – a rare antique printed in the 1450s – and the scandalous scheme to break it up.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3ct5nrg
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,461

    Andy_JS said:

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    This vote seemed … horrifying in terms of how the world has changed. What on earth is happening?
    What happened was that the American electorate didn't have a centrist party to vote for, as defined by them, not by elites or experts.
    The people who wrote project 2025 are the multi millionaire hangers on to the multi billionaires. In what sense are they not elite themselves?
    The Gracchi, Marius, Clodius, Caesar etc were of the elite.

    The Head Count never get to choose one of their own. They know this.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,234
    edited February 24
    The Runcorn by election should certainly offer a good shot for Reform. Held by Labour whose government is unpopular and where Reform were second last time, not the by election specialists the LDs who were miles behind in fifth, while also being a strong Leave area.

    Much will depend on whether they can squeeze the Tory vote enough to beat Labour
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,003
    Technicolor gone pop
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,295
    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nico67 said:

    The US could have abstained on that UN vote . The fact they voted against and sided with Russia is disgusting. Absolutely despicable .

    It was meant to send a signal that the vote was meaningless.
    Sure sure.
    Set aside the immorality of it, and just consider the *sheer stupidity* of ditching long-standing alliances in favour of Russia.
    You have to hope his ratings at home plummet. That's the only thing I can see having an impact.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,254
    Cookie said:

    This feels to me not unlike the Germans and the Soviets partitioning Poland between them.

    Except it's not just one country. Russia and the US want to partition much of the World and the Arctic in particular, which is why controlling Canada and Greenland is important to Trump.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,707
    BBC has quite clear video of the Mike Amesbury incident:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjd3nr4rr5lo
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,927
    "The United States, Russia, Belarus and North Korea all voted against the EU-Ukrainian resolution underlining an extraordinary shift in US policy since the US president’s election that has largely absolved the Russian president of responsibility for the invasion."

    Where is that guy from the grassy knoll when you need him?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835
    glw said:

    Cookie said:

    This feels to me not unlike the Germans and the Soviets partitioning Poland between them.

    Except it's not just one country. Russia and the US want to partition much of the World and the Arctic in particular, which is why controlling Canada and Greenland is important to Trump.
    The great irony is that he's doing this for oil, just as oil is ceasing to be important.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,313
    America voted at the UN with Sudan, N Korea, Russia and Belarus. How embarrassing is that?
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,822
    kjh said:

    America voted at the UN with Sudan, N Korea, Russia and Belarus. How embarrassing is that?

    They don’t care. They have no shame and have decided to piss on the graves of those Ukrainians who have died trying to protect their country .

  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 849
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    40.3% of votes in the German election were cast by electors aged 60+.

    I suspect the media voter age in the UK will also be surprisingly high - the median age of adults is 48 in the UK, and as the older you are the more likely you are to vote, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the UK had an even higher proportion of oldies voting,
    Well for starters no one under 18 bothered to vote ;)
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,318
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    40.3% of votes in the German election were cast by electors aged 60+.

    I suspect the media voter age in the UK will also be surprisingly high - the median age of adults is 48 in the UK, and as the older you are the more likely you are to vote, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the UK had an even higher proportion of oldies voting,
    Is that a surprising number? What is the voting age in the US? Even if its18, then there are 42 years before 60+ and possibly 40 thereafter, albeit numbers will be dropping away after 70+ etc.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,816
    But not third.

    Scott_xP said:

    What would an agent do differently?

    @saraecook

    President Trump says he is in "serious discussions" with Putin about ending the war in Ukraine, as well as "major economic development transactions" between the US & Russia. This would be a huge reversal from previous US policy of sanctioning and isolating Russia.

    How compromised is Trump?
    He isn't compromised.
    He effusively and repeatedly promotes an anti-democratic agenda.
    Because it is of benefit to him and his mates.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,318
    rcs1000 said:

    glw said:

    Cookie said:

    This feels to me not unlike the Germans and the Soviets partitioning Poland between them.

    Except it's not just one country. Russia and the US want to partition much of the World and the Arctic in particular, which is why controlling Canada and Greenland is important to Trump.
    The great irony is that he's doing this for oil, just as oil is ceasing to be important.
    Is that true just yet? And oil as a feedstock to other chemicals is still important.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,663
    rcs1000 said:

    glw said:

    Cookie said:

    This feels to me not unlike the Germans and the Soviets partitioning Poland between them.

    Except it's not just one country. Russia and the US want to partition much of the World and the Arctic in particular, which is why controlling Canada and Greenland is important to Trump.
    The great irony is that he's doing this for oil, just as oil is ceasing to be important.
    Because he's an idiot surrounded by small men.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,211
    Cookie said:

    This feels to me not unlike the Germans and the Soviets partitioning Poland between them.

    And we all know how well that one worked out…
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,439

    rcs1000 said:

    glw said:

    Cookie said:

    This feels to me not unlike the Germans and the Soviets partitioning Poland between them.

    Except it's not just one country. Russia and the US want to partition much of the World and the Arctic in particular, which is why controlling Canada and Greenland is important to Trump.
    The great irony is that he's doing this for oil, just as oil is ceasing to be important.
    Is that true just yet? And oil as a feedstock to other chemicals is still important.
    Actually quite a linear trend, rather than a sudden cliff edge (though that may change). Interesting study here

    https://www.crystolenergy.com/oil-intensity-the-curious-relationship-between-oil-and-gdp/
  • James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,234
    edited February 24
    kjh said:

    America voted at the UN with Sudan, N Korea, Russia and Belarus. How embarrassing is that?

    93 nations voted in the UN General Assembly voted for the resolution, which still referred to the Russian invasion unlike a rival US resolution which did not call Russia the aggressor.

    18 nations voted against, yes including the US and Russia and the 3 you name and also Israel, Hungary and Nicaragua. 65 abstained including China, Argentina, Brazil, Pakistan, Iran, India, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and the UAE.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/israel-joins-us-north-korea-russia-to-vote-against-un-resolution-reaffirming-ukraines-territorial-integrity/
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,663
    I guess Trump will be in Moscow for the May Day celebrations and to get further instructions.

  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,313
    edited February 24
    rcs1000 said:

    glw said:

    Cookie said:

    This feels to me not unlike the Germans and the Soviets partitioning Poland between them.

    Except it's not just one country. Russia and the US want to partition much of the World and the Arctic in particular, which is why controlling Canada and Greenland is important to Trump.
    The great irony is that he's doing this for oil, just as oil is ceasing to be important.
    He's doing this for his ego. Musk is going to rework the face of the moon so that it's a representation of the clown.

    Edit: Elon was the only that said it could be done. He said Trump needed to screw the world for it to happen. Trump simply asked him when he could start.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,439

    James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend

    When faced with rapid change that is bad - and Trump pulling support from Ukraine, threatening to annex Greenland and Panama and throwing around the threat of blanket tariffs are indeed bad - you can either go with it, or you can resist and fight back. Or you stand like a rabbit in the headlights.

    Quite a lot of people seem to think that the only option is to get with the programme. If they don’t, they are either in denial or have TDS. No. Standing like a rabbit in the headlights isn’t a good idea, but fighting back absolutely is.
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,546
    TOPPING said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Robert Kagan:

    Switching sides to support Russia against Ukraine is "a real indication of what it means to have a King [not a president], the whims of the king become policy immediately and then have to be defended by all the courtiers...they have to sound like what the king wants."

    It wasn't that long ago that certain posters were of the view that Trump becoming President would change nothing for Ukraine.
    They will quickly reconcile themselves with this actually being good for Ukrainians. Owning the Libs is the main goal and that makes Trump a permanent ally.
    Owning the libs is just a pleasant by product.

    People on here are commenting with their hearts not their heads. Similar to the days of "Ukraine will win because they have to win".

    Look at the voting blocs that we are seeing right now. That's the reality, not what we want or don't want.

    I would very much like to be a part of a Europe which is self-sufficient in any number of ways and we will have to wait to see if that will transpire. More likely is we will relapse back into our reliance on other states (ie the United ones) but we shall see.

    What is disappointing on PB, that said, is that precious few people are bringing cold, hard analysis to the situation. Why, upthread there was someone bemoaning our presumed (ie 100% certain) lack of action if China invades Taiwan ffs.

    Too many people on PB are living in, perhaps hark fondly back to the times when the map was coloured pink.
    Topping, dear, you are a delightful chap, but what the actual fuck are you going on about?

    I genuinely can't work out whether your comment is saying that august posters on PB should
    - all be more like the glennster, welcoming our new Russo-american overlords as we adapt to the new realities of having ever larger blunt instruments fed into our rectal passages; or
    - accept that we are all vanishingly insignificant specks of filigree on this small rock of ours, and stop worrying about such insignificant trifles as a fruitloop running the USA; or,
    - run screaming into the arms of Merz, desperately pleading to be allowed to serve our country up as an hors d'oeuvre at the tables of European federalism.

    Could you enlighten a poor untermensch, please?
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,211
    TimS said:

    James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend

    When faced with rapid change that is bad - and Trump pulling support from Ukraine, threatening to annex Greenland and Panama and throwing around the threat of blanket tariffs are indeed bad - you can either go with it, or you can resist and fight back. Or you stand like a rabbit in the headlights.

    Quite a lot of people seem to think that the only option is to get with the programme. If they don’t, they are either in denial or have TDS. No. Standing like a rabbit in the headlights isn’t a good idea, but fighting back absolutely is.
    Merz, Starmer and Macron need to get in a room and start working out the plan, because we need one.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,234
    edited February 24

    This is surely unique

    US - Russia - China line up together v UK and France as permanent members of the UN security council !!!!

    Though in the actual vote, China abstained.

    https://bsky.app/profile/pippacrerar.bsky.social/post/3liwufp4hxk27
    Yes, on Ukraine China is now less pro Putin than Trump's US as it at least maintains effective neutrality and that Ukraine should be involved in peace talks with Russia
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,902
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    40.3% of votes in the German election were cast by electors aged 60+.

    I suspect the media voter age in the UK will also be surprisingly high - the median age of adults is 48 in the UK, and as the older you are the more likely you are to vote, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the UK had an even higher proportion of oldies voting,
    Maybe, but I'd guess voters are slightly younger in the UK, even accounting for the lower turnout amongst younger voters.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,822
    edited February 24

    James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend

    He’s really got to the heart of the matter and is always excellent with his reports .
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,234
    nico67 said:

    If China invades Taiwan we should take the US attitude , thousands of miles away , not our war …..

    On Taiwan Trump's US is moving towards formally recognising their independence, infuriating Beijing.

    So I suggest we leave the US to fight it out with China economically via tariffs and potentially over Taiwan while we focus on containing Russia and supporting Ukraine who Trump does not care about supporting now

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/trumps-support-for-taiwan-has-infuriated-beijing/
  • TimS said:

    James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend

    When faced with rapid change that is bad - and Trump pulling support from Ukraine, threatening to annex Greenland and Panama and throwing around the threat of blanket tariffs are indeed bad - you can either go with it, or you can resist and fight back. Or you stand like a rabbit in the headlights.

    Quite a lot of people seem to think that the only option is to get with the programme. If they don’t, they are either in denial or have TDS. No. Standing like a rabbit in the headlights isn’t a good idea, but fighting back absolutely is.
    You can only fight back if you have strength and at present Europe has never looked weaker and that is worrying

    Indeed Trump affirmed his so called reciprocal tariffs on Europe with Macron beside him

    A lot of hard thinking is needed across Europe and the ROW, but it really does look as if Trump is welcoming Putin back into the world through the lens of his business interests and not geo political stability with untold consequences

    We are in a very scary place and it is not going to become less scary anytime soon
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,313

    TimS said:

    James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend

    When faced with rapid change that is bad - and Trump pulling support from Ukraine, threatening to annex Greenland and Panama and throwing around the threat of blanket tariffs are indeed bad - you can either go with it, or you can resist and fight back. Or you stand like a rabbit in the headlights.

    Quite a lot of people seem to think that the only option is to get with the programme. If they don’t, they are either in denial or have TDS. No. Standing like a rabbit in the headlights isn’t a good idea, but fighting back absolutely is.
    You can only fight back if you have strength and at present Europe has never looked weaker and that is worrying

    Indeed Trump affirmed his so called reciprocal tariffs on Europe with Macron beside him

    A lot of hard thinking is needed across Europe and the ROW, but it really does look as if Trump is welcoming Putin back into the world through the lens of his business interests and not geo political stability with untold consequences

    We are in a very scary place and it is not going to become less scary anytime soon
    The UK has been hopeless at the start of pretty much all of our wars. Back to the Seven Year's war, if not before. We win through in the end, and I'm pretty sure that the USA will regret their aggression.
  • nico67 said:

    James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend

    He’s really got to the heart of the matter and is always excellent with his reports .
    He has and is excellent in telling it as it is even when it is very uncomfortable
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,234

    rcs1000 said:

    1/2 are good odds on Reform: I'd take that.

    My gut is that the Labour vote craters (from 22k to 7k), the Tory vote drops a little (7k to 5k) and Reform is up but not massively (7k to 9-10k).

    This gives Reform a fairly comfortable win on low turnout.

    I don't think 1/2 is good odds. They are probably favourites, but not heavy ones.

    Reasons:
    1. Just under 35% is not an easy majority to overturn.
    2. Badenoch's Tories need to fight hard as a RefUK win is, if anything, worse news for her than for Starmer.
    3. There is a non-trivial chance of the RefUK candidate being a dud or worse.

    Evens is good odds. 1/2 isn't.
    2 I don't think so, the Tories were third in Runcorn at the general election, despite being second nationally still.

    Labour won it comfortably with over 50% ie abut 20% more than their winning 24% national voteshare so if they lost it to second placed Reform it would suggest not only redwall seats Boris won but even solid Leave seats Corbyn held in 2019 could now go Reform
  • kjh said:

    America voted at the UN with Sudan, N Korea, Russia and Belarus. How embarrassing is that?

    "Sergeant, we have crossed some strange boundary here. The world has taken a turn for the surreal."
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,822
    HYUFD said:

    nico67 said:

    If China invades Taiwan we should take the US attitude , thousands of miles away , not our war …..

    On Taiwan Trump's US is moving towards formally recognising their independence, infuriating Beijing.

    So I suggest we leave the US to fight it out with China economically via tariffs and potentially over Taiwan while we focus on containing Russia and supporting Ukraine who Trump does not care about supporting now

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/trumps-support-for-taiwan-has-infuriated-beijing/
    Agreed we need to look after our interests and not get involved with Trumps China obsession . Certainly we might need to become closer to China economically. I know morally it might seem unpalatable but given the US is now descending into all out Putin love and has become morally bankrupt our options are limited .
  • HYUFD said:

    nico67 said:

    If China invades Taiwan we should take the US attitude , thousands of miles away , not our war …..

    On Taiwan Trump's US is moving towards formally recognising their independence, infuriating Beijing.

    So I suggest we leave the US to fight it out with China economically via tariffs and potentially over Taiwan while we focus on containing Russia and supporting Ukraine who Trump does not care about supporting now

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/trumps-support-for-taiwan-has-infuriated-beijing/
    Trump is about to welcome Putin in from the cold and do a deal for Ukraine's minerals

    I expect to see Putin attending the G7 this year
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,234
    At Reform conference Farage confirms Reform will withdraw the UK from the ECHR if it wins the next GE, in contrast to Labour, the LDs and Badenoch's Tories.

    Reform will also bring a private prosecution against Reynolds over his CV 'lies'
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,189
    edited February 24
    MattW said:

    BBC has quite clear video of the Mike Amesbury incident:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjd3nr4rr5lo

    Lovely man.

    And for the poor victim sitting shocked in the gutter, read the British taxpayer having elected Sir Keir Starmer's Government. I don't see how Labour are value here. Perhaps their vote may hold up in parts of London, but I just don't see it doing so anywhere else.

    I could be very wrong, and I'll accept the egg on my face as I frequently do, but Reform have to be clear favourite.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835
    Andy_JS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    40.3% of votes in the German election were cast by electors aged 60+.

    I suspect the media voter age in the UK will also be surprisingly high - the median age of adults is 48 in the UK, and as the older you are the more likely you are to vote, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the UK had an even higher proportion of oldies voting,
    Maybe, but I'd guess voters are slightly younger in the UK, even accounting for the lower turnout amongst younger voters.
    I very much doubt there's a big difference, you know. I would surprised if we're more than a couple of percent difference, and it could well be less.
  • HYUFD said:

    At Reform conference Farage confirms Reform will withdraw the UK from the ECHR if it wins the next GE, in contrast to Labour, the LDs and Badenoch's Tories.

    Reform will also bring a private prosecution against Reynolds over his CV 'lies'

    I think there are far more important issues at present
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,822

    HYUFD said:

    nico67 said:

    If China invades Taiwan we should take the US attitude , thousands of miles away , not our war …..

    On Taiwan Trump's US is moving towards formally recognising their independence, infuriating Beijing.

    So I suggest we leave the US to fight it out with China economically via tariffs and potentially over Taiwan while we focus on containing Russia and supporting Ukraine who Trump does not care about supporting now

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/trumps-support-for-taiwan-has-infuriated-beijing/
    Trump is about to welcome Putin in from the cold and do a deal for Ukraine's minerals

    I expect to see Putin attending the G7 this year
    It’s being held in Canada and I would have thought they wouldn’t be in a hurry to invite Putin or for that matter Trump .
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,234
    edited February 24

    TimS said:

    James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend

    When faced with rapid change that is bad - and Trump pulling support from Ukraine, threatening to annex Greenland and Panama and throwing around the threat of blanket tariffs are indeed bad - you can either go with it, or you can resist and fight back. Or you stand like a rabbit in the headlights.

    Quite a lot of people seem to think that the only option is to get with the programme. If they don’t, they are either in denial or have TDS. No. Standing like a rabbit in the headlights isn’t a good idea, but fighting back absolutely is.
    You can only fight back if you have strength and at present Europe has never looked weaker and that is worrying

    Indeed Trump affirmed his so called reciprocal tariffs on Europe with Macron beside him

    A lot of hard thinking is needed across Europe and the ROW, but it really does look as if Trump is welcoming Putin back into the world through the lens of his business interests and not geo political stability with untold consequences

    We are in a very scary place and it is not going to become less scary anytime soon
    Merz actually looked strong with his win last night, certainly more so than Scholz has, as does Macron who rang rings around Trump at their interview today. Both focused on developing European military forces and continuing to fund Ukraine. Starmer is a wet blanket but then Trump just treats the UK as a pet now, his main rivals are the EU and China, his main allies Israel, Russia and Argentina.

    Trump's US is therefore heading for a tariff war with China as well as the EU, it might be able to win a trade war against one of the other top 3 global economies but both?
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,439

    TimS said:

    James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend

    When faced with rapid change that is bad - and Trump pulling support from Ukraine, threatening to annex Greenland and Panama and throwing around the threat of blanket tariffs are indeed bad - you can either go with it, or you can resist and fight back. Or you stand like a rabbit in the headlights.

    Quite a lot of people seem to think that the only option is to get with the programme. If they don’t, they are either in denial or have TDS. No. Standing like a rabbit in the headlights isn’t a good idea, but fighting back absolutely is.
    You can only fight back if you have strength and at present Europe has never looked weaker and that is worrying

    Indeed Trump affirmed his so called reciprocal tariffs on Europe with Macron beside him

    A lot of hard thinking is needed across Europe and the ROW, but it really does look as if Trump is welcoming Putin back into the world through the lens of his business interests and not geo political stability with untold consequences

    We are in a very scary place and it is not going to become less scary anytime soon
    We should look to Canada for an object lesson in how to tell Trump where to go. He caved on tariffs within hours.
This discussion has been closed.