Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
If true Trump needs to realise he’s being dicked about and tell Putin to swivel
Since he's surrounded very largely by individuals hostile to Ukraine, from the VP down, that is extremely unlikely. Rubio, for all his faults, seems to be one of the few senior members of the administration still with some sort of commitment to European security,
I take it back about Rubio.
BREAKING: Rubio Announces Bold New Strategy, Says Ukraine Must Reach Peace Before Receiving the One Thing That Would Help Them Reach Peace
Politico reports that Marco Rubio has informed European allies that the United States wants a peace deal before offering any security guarantee to Ukraine, a plan experts describe as “giving someone a parachute after they hit the ground.”
Diplomats were left blinking in confusion as Rubio explained that Ukraine must first negotiate a peace agreement without the security guarantee that is literally the entire reason anyone signs a security guarantee... https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/1993930142993805594
Speaking under Chatham House Rule, an official said that the goal is to mimic the conops of the MiG-29, of all things, in that it should be able to use any and all base infrastructure, weapons, etc, wherever it happens to be operating from.
"We aim to make GCAP ‘the perfect parasite’. Allegedly, the MiG-29 was the most NATO compliant platform ever built. The idea being that as [the Soviets] rolled over [NATO airbases], it would use NATO ground power, would use NATO bullets, would load a Sidewinder that it found in a weapons dump rather than a [Soviet] A-11. That concept is what we want to use within GCAP so that wherever we land, we can make maximum use of what we already find, and not rely on having to wait for a C-17 or something [to resupply]."..
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
Santa is in Finland, as most people know. Me and the dog saw him there in the summer, during his rest and recuperation period, when his Santa Village is pretty much deserted
Putin appears to be giving a speech rejecting any deal with Zelensky and that no peace is possible unless Ukraine withdraws its troops from Russian territory.
Wut ?
Putin’s argument is that Russia annexed the 4 provinces (sorry forget what the Ukrainians call them) and therefore Ukrainian troops are occupying parts of Russia
Jury service is a goddam nuisance, speaking as someone who's been "called up" twice.
I've always wanted to do it but never had the chance. Shame you can't volunteer (although I fully understand why it would be a bad idea to allow volunteers who aren't me).
You seem to be a similar position to the young men who were eager to be sent to the trenches during the early years of WW1. Enthusiasm untempered by knowledge can be very dangerous.
Though the worst that can happen on jury service is running out of biscuits. And that coffee from an urn - {shudders}
Putin appears to be giving a speech rejecting any deal with Zelensky and that no peace is possible unless Ukraine withdraws its troops from Russian territory.
Wut ?
Putin’s argument is that Russia annexed the 4 provinces (sorry forget what the Ukrainians call them) and therefore Ukrainian troops are occupying parts of Russia
Which has as much validity as Ukraine annexing Moscow and St. Petersburg...
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
If true Trump needs to realise he’s being dicked about and tell Putin to swivel
Since he's surrounded very largely by individuals hostile to Ukraine, from the VP down, that is extremely unlikely. Rubio, for all his faults, seems to be one of the few senior members of the administration still with some sort of commitment to European security,
I take it back about Rubio.
BREAKING: Rubio Announces Bold New Strategy, Says Ukraine Must Reach Peace Before Receiving the One Thing That Would Help Them Reach Peace
Politico reports that Marco Rubio has informed European allies that the United States wants a peace deal before offering any security guarantee to Ukraine, a plan experts describe as “giving someone a parachute after they hit the ground.”
Diplomats were left blinking in confusion as Rubio explained that Ukraine must first negotiate a peace agreement without the security guarantee that is literally the entire reason anyone signs a security guarantee... https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/1993930142993805594
"They don't know what the f*ck they're doing!"
Unfortunately, they very much do know what they are doing.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
If you realise it's feudalism, it makes a kind of sense. Putin thinks ultimate sovereignty for Ukraine vests in Russia and him personally because of a bunch of Swedes in Kyiv in the 8thC or whenever. He's OK with someone running the place with due allegiance shown, but it's his. No more negotiatable than his name is Putin.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
If true Trump needs to realise he’s being dicked about and tell Putin to swivel
Since he's surrounded very largely by individuals hostile to Ukraine, from the VP down, that is extremely unlikely. Rubio, for all his faults, seems to be one of the few senior members of the administration still with some sort of commitment to European security,
I take it back about Rubio.
BREAKING: Rubio Announces Bold New Strategy, Says Ukraine Must Reach Peace Before Receiving the One Thing That Would Help Them Reach Peace
Politico reports that Marco Rubio has informed European allies that the United States wants a peace deal before offering any security guarantee to Ukraine, a plan experts describe as “giving someone a parachute after they hit the ground.”
Diplomats were left blinking in confusion as Rubio explained that Ukraine must first negotiate a peace agreement without the security guarantee that is literally the entire reason anyone signs a security guarantee... https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/1993930142993805594
"They don't know what the f*ck they're doing!"
Disagree. They're doing exactly (well nearly) what is required to let Putin have want he wants. After all, Trump is Putin's patsy.
(I'm not dropping anyone in it by posting that, am I?)
Putin appears to be giving a speech rejecting any deal with Zelensky and that no peace is possible unless Ukraine withdraws its troops from Russian territory.
Wut ?
Putin’s argument is that Russia annexed the 4 provinces (sorry forget what the Ukrainians call them) and therefore Ukrainian troops are occupying parts of Russia
Oblasts.
It's an insane demand, even if one takes a very cold, 'pragmatic' view that without US support Ukraine will never retake the land it has lost and must give it up for an end to further conflict.
Kherson used to have a population of 250k, and Russia withdrew after initially taking it, and one of the other capitals I don't think they even took at all.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
If you realise it's feudalism, it makes a kind of sense. Putin thinks ultimate sovereignty for Ukraine vests in Russia and him personally because of a bunch of Swedes in Kyiv in the 8thC or whenever. He's OK with someone running the place with due allegiance shown, but it's his. No more negotiatable than his name is Putin.
If you know your Scottish history we suffered from a very similar character to Putin in Edward I of England.
Santa is in Finland, as most people know. Me and the dog saw him there in the summer, during his rest and recuperation period, when his Santa Village is pretty much deserted
He looks much more tired in that picture than normal, must havef been a bit of a hike.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
If you realise it's feudalism, it makes a kind of sense. Putin thinks ultimate sovereignty for Ukraine vests in Russia and him personally because of a bunch of Swedes in Kyiv in the 8thC or whenever. He's OK with someone running the place with due allegiance shown, but it's his. No more negotiatable than his name is Putin.
If you know your Scottish history we suffered from a very similar character to Putin in Edward I of England.
Well sure, though medieval feudalist attitudes were at least a bit more in vogue back then.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
If true Trump needs to realise he’s being dicked about and tell Putin to swivel
Since he's surrounded very largely by individuals hostile to Ukraine, from the VP down, that is extremely unlikely. Rubio, for all his faults, seems to be one of the few senior members of the administration still with some sort of commitment to European security,
I take it back about Rubio.
BREAKING: Rubio Announces Bold New Strategy, Says Ukraine Must Reach Peace Before Receiving the One Thing That Would Help Them Reach Peace
Politico reports that Marco Rubio has informed European allies that the United States wants a peace deal before offering any security guarantee to Ukraine, a plan experts describe as “giving someone a parachute after they hit the ground.”
Diplomats were left blinking in confusion as Rubio explained that Ukraine must first negotiate a peace agreement without the security guarantee that is literally the entire reason anyone signs a security guarantee... https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/1993930142993805594
Ukraine's leaders may have to eat shit because of the position they find themselves in, but even with that dire position there are limits to what they could possibly accept and remain in authority, even if they felt they were given no choice.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
If true Trump needs to realise he’s being dicked about and tell Putin to swivel
Since he's surrounded very largely by individuals hostile to Ukraine, from the VP down, that is extremely unlikely. Rubio, for all his faults, seems to be one of the few senior members of the administration still with some sort of commitment to European security,
I take it back about Rubio.
BREAKING: Rubio Announces Bold New Strategy, Says Ukraine Must Reach Peace Before Receiving the One Thing That Would Help Them Reach Peace
Politico reports that Marco Rubio has informed European allies that the United States wants a peace deal before offering any security guarantee to Ukraine, a plan experts describe as “giving someone a parachute after they hit the ground.”
Diplomats were left blinking in confusion as Rubio explained that Ukraine must first negotiate a peace agreement without the security guarantee that is literally the entire reason anyone signs a security guarantee... https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/1993930142993805594
Ukraine got security guarantees when it handed over its nuclear weapons. Fat lot of use they were.
Only European guarantees will be any use. And only if we have troops in place - and no-fly zones - on ceasefire day, up to current conflict lines.
Then give the European heads of state a collective Nobel Peace Prize. So EVERYBODY has a Peace Prize except Trump.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Hopefully this will fire up Trump.
For all of 24 hours, at best.
The guy now has the attention span and memory of a gnat, so is to a large extent the plaything of the last administration member who saw him and managed to tickle the right set of baked in prejudices.
Which is why Witkoff's piece of treachery with the Russians was so effective.
Actually, he's now in Florida for Thanksgiving, so will have no memory of any of it by Monday.
Trump departed for Florida without taking questions, amid breaking news that leaked phone calls are throwing scrutiny on Witkoff’s pro-Kremlin positions. https://x.com/ralakbar/status/1993457284761223598
He can still remember Obama mocking him at that dinner in 2011 though.
Senior officials in the Trump Administration believe that the leaked call in October between U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s top foreign policy aide, Yuri Ushakov, that was published in an article yesterday by Bloomberg, was recorded and leaked to the news organization by a foreign intelligence agency - likely one based in Europe - that was targeting a phone utilized by Ushakov, according to the Wall Street Journal. https://x.com/sentdefender/status/1993898531510472921
Our intelligence services aren't useless, after all.
Absolutely. It was important to leak that information before Trump realised that it was Witkoff we were spying on…
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
That’s the thing about M&A. If you produce adjusted numbers no one can track the underlying performance accurately
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
If you realise it's feudalism, it makes a kind of sense. Putin thinks ultimate sovereignty for Ukraine vests in Russia and him personally because of a bunch of Swedes in Kyiv in the 8thC or whenever. He's OK with someone running the place with due allegiance shown, but it's his. No more negotiatable than his name is Putin.
If you know your Scottish history we suffered from a very similar character to Putin in Edward I of England.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
All this strife and bloodshed to make it approx 1% bigger.
Speaking under Chatham House Rule, an official said that the goal is to mimic the conops of the MiG-29, of all things, in that it should be able to use any and all base infrastructure, weapons, etc, wherever it happens to be operating from.
"We aim to make GCAP ‘the perfect parasite’. Allegedly, the MiG-29 was the most NATO compliant platform ever built. The idea being that as [the Soviets] rolled over [NATO airbases], it would use NATO ground power, would use NATO bullets, would load a Sidewinder that it found in a weapons dump rather than a [Soviet] A-11. That concept is what we want to use within GCAP so that wherever we land, we can make maximum use of what we already find, and not rely on having to wait for a C-17 or something [to resupply]."..
Santa is in Finland, as most people know. Me and the dog saw him there in the summer, during his rest and recuperation period, when his Santa Village is pretty much deserted
He looks much more tired in that picture than normal, must havef been a bit of a hike.
I had driven down from northern Lapland to Rovaniemi, dodging stray reindeer along the way, and pitched up at Santa Village which is right there in the photo. The line of pillars in the background marks the Arctic Circle. This is the very spot where many British and other Western Europeans pay considerable amounts to fly their children to, at this time of year, and they arrive to a truly magical atmosphere of deep snow, sleighs pulled by reindeer, and Christmas lights, music and elves.
Midsummer, it is revealed as a barren shopping mall consisting mostly of shops selling the identical range of Santa tat, and a rather bored Santa posing for photos mostly with a few tourists from Asia who have pitched up there at the wrong time of year.
I was pleased to have visited Santa Village without its clothes, so to speak, and certainly wouldn’t want to detract from the magic for anyone wanting to take their kids there during winter. But I was pleased to be quickly driving away in the car.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
It's because leaders like Putin cannot bear stasis. They always have to be trying to do something important, or what they would regard as so.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
If true Trump needs to realise he’s being dicked about and tell Putin to swivel
Since he's surrounded very largely by individuals hostile to Ukraine, from the VP down, that is extremely unlikely. Rubio, for all his faults, seems to be one of the few senior members of the administration still with some sort of commitment to European security,
I take it back about Rubio.
BREAKING: Rubio Announces Bold New Strategy, Says Ukraine Must Reach Peace Before Receiving the One Thing That Would Help Them Reach Peace
Politico reports that Marco Rubio has informed European allies that the United States wants a peace deal before offering any security guarantee to Ukraine, a plan experts describe as “giving someone a parachute after they hit the ground.”
Diplomats were left blinking in confusion as Rubio explained that Ukraine must first negotiate a peace agreement without the security guarantee that is literally the entire reason anyone signs a security guarantee... https://x.com/Microinteracti1/status/1993930142993805594
"They don't know what the f*ck they're doing!"
Disagree. They're doing exactly (well nearly) what is required to let Putin have want he wants. After all, Trump is Putin's patsy.
(I'm not dropping anyone in it by posting that, am I?)
Putin appears to be giving a speech rejecting any deal with Zelensky and that no peace is possible unless Ukraine withdraws its troops from Russian territory.
Wut ?
Putin’s argument is that Russia annexed the 4 provinces (sorry forget what the Ukrainians call them) and therefore Ukrainian troops are occupying parts of Russia
Which has as much validity as Ukraine annexing Moscow and St. Petersburg...
Why do you need to annex Moscow?
Any fule knows it’s a daughter colony of Kyiv and has always been part of Ukraine.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
If you realise it's feudalism, it makes a kind of sense. Putin thinks ultimate sovereignty for Ukraine vests in Russia and him personally because of a bunch of Swedes in Kyiv in the 8thC or whenever. He's OK with someone running the place with due allegiance shown, but it's his. No more negotiatable than his name is Putin.
If you know your Scottish history we suffered from a very similar character to Putin in Edward I of England.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
If you realise it's feudalism, it makes a kind of sense. Putin thinks ultimate sovereignty for Ukraine vests in Russia and him personally because of a bunch of Swedes in Kyiv in the 8thC or whenever. He's OK with someone running the place with due allegiance shown, but it's his. No more negotiatable than his name is Putin.
If you know your Scottish history we suffered from a very similar character to Putin in Edward I of England.
I believe we sent him homeward, to think again.
And he took it out on Wales.
Being right next to the heart of England is perhaps not the most advantageous of locations for a budding nation.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
To support Putin, Xi will trequire the return of Greater Manchuria. Shall we say everything east of the Urals, for simplicity?
Sir Keir has been trading in hypocrisy and double standards since he becam an MP. People just assumed he was an Angel because they thought Boris a devil
Why are we still debating the loss of faith in politicians. At the election Starmer said he wouldn't scrap the 2 child benefit cap, or raise taxes on working people. He's just scrapped that cap, and raised taxes on working people. And then acts with outrage when he's challenged.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
If you realise it's feudalism, it makes a kind of sense. Putin thinks ultimate sovereignty for Ukraine vests in Russia and him personally because of a bunch of Swedes in Kyiv in the 8thC or whenever. He's OK with someone running the place with due allegiance shown, but it's his. No more negotiatable than his name is Putin.
If you know your Scottish history we suffered from a very similar character to Putin in Edward I of England.
I believe we sent him homeward, to think again.
And he took it out on Wales.
Being right next to the heart of England is perhaps not the most advantageous of locations for a budding nation.
It wasn’t really a budding nation though.
Wasn’t the proximate cause a squabble between Llewellyn and his little brother?
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
If you realise it's feudalism, it makes a kind of sense. Putin thinks ultimate sovereignty for Ukraine vests in Russia and him personally because of a bunch of Swedes in Kyiv in the 8thC or whenever. He's OK with someone running the place with due allegiance shown, but it's his. No more negotiatable than his name is Putin.
If you know your Scottish history we suffered from a very similar character to Putin in Edward I of England.
I believe we sent him homeward, to think again.
And he took it out on Wales.
Being right next to the heart of England is perhaps not the most advantageous of locations for a budding nation.
It wasn’t really a budding nation though.
Wasn’t the pro I ate cause a squabble between Llewellyn and his little brother?
Nation was an anachronistic term in this context.
From what little I know of Welsh history internal conflicts were even more rife than usual. Something to do with particular inheritance rules?
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
It's because leaders like Putin cannot bear stasis. They always have to be trying to do something important, or what they would regard as so.
Well transforming Russia into a free and prosperous country would be important. And what a legacy. He's flunking it.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
It's because leaders like Putin cannot bear stasis. They always have to be trying to do something important, or what they would regard as so.
He wants stasis, that things have changed since 1980 is what seems to upset him most. Increasing borders is the next best thing for him I guess.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
If you realise it's feudalism, it makes a kind of sense. Putin thinks ultimate sovereignty for Ukraine vests in Russia and him personally because of a bunch of Swedes in Kyiv in the 8thC or whenever. He's OK with someone running the place with due allegiance shown, but it's his. No more negotiatable than his name is Putin.
If you know your Scottish history we suffered from a very similar character to Putin in Edward I of England.
I believe we sent him homeward, to think again.
And he took it out on Wales.
Being right next to the heart of England is perhaps not the most advantageous of locations for a budding nation.
It wasn’t really a budding nation though.
Wasn’t the pro I ate cause a squabble between Llewellyn and his little brother?
Nation was an anachronistic term in this context.
From what little I know of Welsh history internal conflicts were even more rife than usual. Something to do with particular inheritance rules?
I believe that all living relatives had a claim on a deceased king’s land and expected their share. Llewellyn took most for himself and his brother felt it was unfair
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
It's because leaders like Putin cannot bear stasis. They always have to be trying to do something important, or what they would regard as so.
He wants stasis, that things have changed since 1980 is what seems to upset him most. Increasing borders is the next best thing for him I guess.
He wants to turn back time. To the good times of 1983.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
It's because leaders like Putin cannot bear stasis. They always have to be trying to do something important, or what they would regard as so.
Well transforming Russia into a free and prosperous country would be important. And what a legacy. He's flunking it.
He's trying to do it via a geometric transformation.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
If you realise it's feudalism, it makes a kind of sense. Putin thinks ultimate sovereignty for Ukraine vests in Russia and him personally because of a bunch of Swedes in Kyiv in the 8thC or whenever. He's OK with someone running the place with due allegiance shown, but it's his. No more negotiatable than his name is Putin.
If you know your Scottish history we suffered from a very similar character to Putin in Edward I of England.
I believe we sent him homeward, to think again.
And he took it out on Wales.
Being right next to the heart of England is perhaps not the most advantageous of locations for a budding nation.
Theres no such thing as England, just occupied Wales.
Q: Did Labour keep their promise not to increase IT/NI/VAT?
Yes 16 No 57
Wow. Might as well have gone for the 1p on income tax then.
I saw one measure, don't recall what it was now, which would take effect in like 2028 or 2029, and it just seemed strange - unless it's so complex it cannot be done sooner than 3-4 years, what advantage is there to announcing something that will probably lose you support, and you don't even get any extra dosh for doing so?
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
If you realise it's feudalism, it makes a kind of sense. Putin thinks ultimate sovereignty for Ukraine vests in Russia and him personally because of a bunch of Swedes in Kyiv in the 8thC or whenever. He's OK with someone running the place with due allegiance shown, but it's his. No more negotiatable than his name is Putin.
If you know your Scottish history we suffered from a very similar character to Putin in Edward I of England.
It will give Australian youth more time to practise cricket. Have you thought this through?
Michael Grade, former BBC1 Controller, said that when looking around for a daytime soap among numerous American offerings, it was the scene of street cricket in the opening titles that sold him on Neighbours. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnWZDvnEnXs
The theme song was famously spoken by Labour leader John Smith during a Commons debate at a time of tension between Mrs Thatcher and Nigel Lawson, then Chancellor.
Speaking under Chatham House Rule, an official said that the goal is to mimic the conops of the MiG-29, of all things, in that it should be able to use any and all base infrastructure, weapons, etc, wherever it happens to be operating from.
"We aim to make GCAP ‘the perfect parasite’. Allegedly, the MiG-29 was the most NATO compliant platform ever built. The idea being that as [the Soviets] rolled over [NATO airbases], it would use NATO ground power, would use NATO bullets, would load a Sidewinder that it found in a weapons dump rather than a [Soviet] A-11. That concept is what we want to use within GCAP so that wherever we land, we can make maximum use of what we already find, and not rely on having to wait for a C-17 or something [to resupply]."..
GCAP is turning in to something very interesting, the usual disasters that crop up in such a complex project don't seem to be manifesting (at least, not yet).
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
What about that chunk of Iran they effectively controlled in the early '40s?
I can't really get my head around the Russian attitude. They already have literally the largest country in the world. And they can't run that with any degree of competence! Why don't they just stick to what they have, maybe try to run it a bit better so its population isn't in terminal decline, the few remaining people perpetually drunk and depressed. Once they manage that maybe we can talk about handing over chunks of other people's countries for them to fuck up.
It's because leaders like Putin cannot bear stasis. They always have to be trying to do something important, or what they would regard as so.
And the Ukraine is extremely rich in things like crops and minerals.
Q: Did Labour keep their promise not to increase IT/NI/VAT?
Yes 16 No 57
Wow. Might as well have gone for the 1p on income tax then.
Maybe it's just me, and I mean that in a non sarcastic way, but I would have more respect for someone who says "I am sorry, I know a made a promise to do X, but keeping that promise is going to make things worse than breaking it, so I am going to have to do Y" than the pathetic sleight of hand that politicians try and con us with. Everyone can see through it anyway, so they lose twice; they look like someone who breaks their promises and a coward that isn't big enough to come clean
Speaking under Chatham House Rule, an official said that the goal is to mimic the conops of the MiG-29, of all things, in that it should be able to use any and all base infrastructure, weapons, etc, wherever it happens to be operating from.
"We aim to make GCAP ‘the perfect parasite’. Allegedly, the MiG-29 was the most NATO compliant platform ever built. The idea being that as [the Soviets] rolled over [NATO airbases], it would use NATO ground power, would use NATO bullets, would load a Sidewinder that it found in a weapons dump rather than a [Soviet] A-11. That concept is what we want to use within GCAP so that wherever we land, we can make maximum use of what we already find, and not rely on having to wait for a C-17 or something [to resupply]."..
GCAP is turning in to something very interesting, the usual disasters that crop up in such a complex project don't seem to be manifesting (at least, not yet).
Possibly something to do with having Italy and Japan as partners, rather than Germany or (god help us) France.
The OBR on the Budget leak & why they’re always wrong
Tim Shipman sits down with Professor David Miles of the Office for Budget Responsibility the day after a Budget overshadowed by an extraordinary leak. David sets out what the OBR now believes about growth, headroom and productivity — and why the UK’s long-term prospects look weaker than hoped. He discusses the political choices behind back-loaded tax rises, the decision not to score the workers’ rights reforms, and why Britain is so slow to adopt its own inventions. Plus: what the OBR’s new leak investigation will look like, and how confident we should really be in those fiscal forecasts.
Q: Did Labour keep their promise not to increase IT/NI/VAT?
Yes 16 No 57
Wow. Might as well have gone for the 1p on income tax then.
Maybe it's just me, and I mean that in a non sarcastic way, but I would have more respect for someone who says "I am sorry, I know a made a promise to do X, but keeping that promise is going to make things worse than breaking it, so I am going to have to do Y" than the pathetic sleight of hand that politicians try and con us with. Everyone can see through it anyway, so they lose twice; they look like someone who breaks their promises and a coward that isn't big enough to come clean
The combination of politically courageous and sensible is a very rare one in government.
Speaking under Chatham House Rule, an official said that the goal is to mimic the conops of the MiG-29, of all things, in that it should be able to use any and all base infrastructure, weapons, etc, wherever it happens to be operating from.
"We aim to make GCAP ‘the perfect parasite’. Allegedly, the MiG-29 was the most NATO compliant platform ever built. The idea being that as [the Soviets] rolled over [NATO airbases], it would use NATO ground power, would use NATO bullets, would load a Sidewinder that it found in a weapons dump rather than a [Soviet] A-11. That concept is what we want to use within GCAP so that wherever we land, we can make maximum use of what we already find, and not rely on having to wait for a C-17 or something [to resupply]."..
GCAP is turning in to something very interesting, the usual disasters that crop up in such a complex project don't seem to be manifesting (at least, not yet).
Possibly something to do with having Italy and Japan as partners, rather than Germany or (god help us) France.
I think it's mainly that the requirements are pretty straightforward and all partner countries are in agreement. We aren't at risk of trying to make GCAP all things to all men.
The problem is running permanent budget deficits in the hundreds of billions of pounds and then acting as if all is fine as some artificial rule is being met five years from now, then panicking when anything happens in the next year that throws that off kilter.
If we were running balanced budgets, with deficits only for swings and roundabouts, countered by budget surpluses also as swings and roundabouts, then the OBR and the rest of the rules malarkey would be moot.
An under-commented aspect of the budget is that much of the pain has been postponed until 2029. Which is when the election falls due. Maybe this is a betting opportunity, since Labour really can’t afford to be going to the polls in 2029 with its current budget plans; either they intend to go earlier, or those plans will be shredded before 2029 arrives?
Yes the budget is an odd one. You basically announce a load of stuff that mostly doesn't come in until 2028 or 2029 (if at all - how many things could easily be reversed/deferred next year if the economy suddenly boomed?), and net it all off against a load of long term economic forecasts that inevitably will turn out to have been wrong.
Try that one with your mortgage provider or your credit card company - don't worry about my economic situation and missed payments/ability to repay right now, because in 4 years time I'll have had a promotion and will be paying less on my mortgage because inflation and thus interest rates will be lower, mebbes.
Putin says it’s impossible from a legal standpoint to sign any agreement with Ukraine because it doesn’t have a legitimate government. There we go again. https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1994062033684152808
Look, I'm not taking that little squirt Putin seriously unless he demands all of:
Ukraine Belarus Moldova Estonia Latvia Lithuania Georgia Armenia Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Tajikistan Kyrgyzstan Alaska (Russian till 1867) Finland (Russian till 1918) The central part Poland (Congress Poland*, Russian till 1918)
* approximating to today's Voivodeships (regions) of Mazovia, Podlachia, Lodz, almost all of Lublin, and parts of: Warmia-Masuria (tiny bit), Kuyavia_Pomerania, Great Poland, Opole (tiny part), Silesia, Little Poland, and Carpathian Foothills (tiny part).
To support Putin, Xi will trequire the return of Greater Manchuria. Shall we say everything east of the Urals, for simplicity?
That is Putin's minimal demands. He should go for everywhere a Russian boot trod. After all Czar Alexander reached Paris - and indeed London.
Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it’s costing the economy
The average American now holds onto their smartphone for 29 months, according to a recent survey by Reviews.org, and that cycle is getting longer. The average was around 22 months in 2016.
Speaking under Chatham House Rule, an official said that the goal is to mimic the conops of the MiG-29, of all things, in that it should be able to use any and all base infrastructure, weapons, etc, wherever it happens to be operating from.
"We aim to make GCAP ‘the perfect parasite’. Allegedly, the MiG-29 was the most NATO compliant platform ever built. The idea being that as [the Soviets] rolled over [NATO airbases], it would use NATO ground power, would use NATO bullets, would load a Sidewinder that it found in a weapons dump rather than a [Soviet] A-11. That concept is what we want to use within GCAP so that wherever we land, we can make maximum use of what we already find, and not rely on having to wait for a C-17 or something [to resupply]."..
GCAP is turning in to something very interesting, the usual disasters that crop up in such a complex project don't seem to be manifesting (at least, not yet).
Possibly something to do with having Italy and Japan as partners, rather than Germany or (god help us) France.
I think it's mainly that the requirements are pretty straightforward and all partner countries are in agreement. We aren't at risk of trying to make GCAP all things to all men.
We're saying the same thing in different ways, possibly ? Italy's recent defence procurement, for example, seems sensibly managed in relation to their resources. Both they and Japan don't have the desire to be project top dog, adding in their own contradictory demands that others might.
Jury service is a goddam nuisance, speaking as someone who's been "called up" twice.
I've always wanted to do it but never had the chance. Shame you can't volunteer (although I fully understand why it would be a bad idea to allow volunteers who aren't me).
You seem to be a similar position to the young men who were eager to be sent to the trenches during the early years of WW1. Enthusiasm untempered by knowledge can be very dangerous.
Though the worst that can happen on jury service is running out of biscuits. And that coffee from an urn - {shudders}
Or sitting on a jury for two days and then being dismissed on the third day (all 12 of us!) because someone was known to one of the witnesses. Happened to me at Cambridge Crown Court in 2006 (though I wasn't the one known to the witness!).
Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it’s costing the economy
The average American now holds onto their smartphone for 29 months, according to a recent survey by Reviews.org, and that cycle is getting longer. The average was around 22 months in 2016.
You mean people are not persuaded to upgrade every year at high cost because there's 10 more pixels or something?
The problem is running permanent budget deficits in the hundreds of billions of pounds and then acting as if all is fine as some artificial rule is being met five years from now, then panicking when anything happens in the next year that throws that off kilter.
If we were running balanced budgets, with deficits only for swings and roundabouts, countered by budget surpluses also as swings and roundabouts, then the OBR and the rest of the rules malarkey would be moot.
An under-commented aspect of the budget is that much of the pain has been postponed until 2029. Which is when the election falls due. Maybe this is a betting opportunity, since Labour really can’t afford to be going to the polls in 2029 with its current budget plans; either they intend to go earlier, or those plans will be shredded before 2029 arrives?
Yes the budget is an odd one. You basically announce a load of stuff that mostly doesn't come in until 2028 or 2029 (if at all - how many things could easily be reversed/deferred next year if the economy suddenly boomed?), and net it all off against a load of long term economic forecasts that inevitably will turn out to have been wrong.
Try that one with your mortgage provider or your credit card company - don't worry about my economic situation and missed payments/ability to repay right now, because in 4 years time I'll have had a promotion and will be paying less on my mortgage because inflation and thus interest rates will be lower, mebbes.
Jury service is a goddam nuisance, speaking as someone who's been "called up" twice.
I've always wanted to do it but never had the chance. Shame you can't volunteer (although I fully understand why it would be a bad idea to allow volunteers who aren't me).
You seem to be a similar position to the young men who were eager to be sent to the trenches during the early years of WW1. Enthusiasm untempered by knowledge can be very dangerous.
Though the worst that can happen on jury service is running out of biscuits. And that coffee from an urn - {shudders}
Or sitting on a jury for two days and then being dismissed on the third day (all 12 of us!) because someone was known to one of the witnesses. Happened to me at Cambridge Crown Court in 2006 (though I wasn't the one known to the witness!).
When I did jury service, we spent longer in the jury room discussing what sandwiches we would have for lunch than the verdict.
Jury service is a goddam nuisance, speaking as someone who's been "called up" twice.
I've always wanted to do it but never had the chance. Shame you can't volunteer (although I fully understand why it would be a bad idea to allow volunteers who aren't me).
You seem to be a similar position to the young men who were eager to be sent to the trenches during the early years of WW1. Enthusiasm untempered by knowledge can be very dangerous.
Though the worst that can happen on jury service is running out of biscuits. And that coffee from an urn - {shudders}
Or sitting on a jury for two days and then being dismissed on the third day (all 12 of us!) because someone was known to one of the witnesses. Happened to me at Cambridge Crown Court in 2006 (though I wasn't the one known to the witness!).
When I did jury service, we spent longer in the jury room discussing what sandwiches we would have for lunch than the verdict.
In fairness, I was pretty clearly guilty, so I didn't blame you for the swiftness.
Q: Did Labour keep their promise not to increase IT/NI/VAT?
Yes 16 No 57
When they broke the promise last year and increased employers NI, I wonder if they decided that a tax on working people is quite different from a tax on people working.
Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it’s costing the economy
The average American now holds onto their smartphone for 29 months, according to a recent survey by Reviews.org, and that cycle is getting longer. The average was around 22 months in 2016.
Law of diminishing returns.
People will keep using what they have unless replacing it is either better or cheaper or both.
12 Angry Men. There is a treatise somewhere on how the camera angle changes through the film to reflect the tension in the jury room. The first third is shot from below, then level, and finally from above (or possibly vice versa, it's been a while).
Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it’s costing the economy
The average American now holds onto their smartphone for 29 months, according to a recent survey by Reviews.org, and that cycle is getting longer. The average was around 22 months in 2016.
People will keep using what they have unless replacing it is either better or cheaper or both.
Unless it is a political party, in which case they will eventually go for something that seems different even if of uncertain quality.
Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it’s costing the economy
The average American now holds onto their smartphone for 29 months, according to a recent survey by Reviews.org, and that cycle is getting longer. The average was around 22 months in 2016.
One of the reasons why GDP, even GDP per head, isn't the be-all or end-all. A world where people have consumer durables that they are happy with for longer is a better world for people. But it sucks for all the bits of the economy that depend on making and selling stuff.
Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it’s costing the economy
The average American now holds onto their smartphone for 29 months, according to a recent survey by Reviews.org, and that cycle is getting longer. The average was around 22 months in 2016.
You mean people are not persuaded to upgrade every year at high cost because there's 10 more pixels or something?
It's either more pixels or making everything an "AI-powered appliance" whether that makes any sodding sense at all or not.
Possibly something to do with having Italy and Japan as partners, rather than Germany or (god help us) France.
I think it's mainly that the requirements are pretty straightforward and all partner countries are in agreement. We aren't at risk of trying to make GCAP all things to all men.
It helps that GCAP has an acknowledged leader in the UK. European projects like FCAS always end up in squabbling between France and Germany because they both want the run the show.
And the GCAP project leadership seem pretty set on not allowing anyone else to come onboard and start asking for modifications to the design.
12 Angry Men. There is a treatise somewhere on how the camera angle changes through the film to reflect the tension in the jury room. The first third is shot from below, then level, and finally from above (or possibly vice versa, it's been a while).
Lammy faces huge fight to scrap jury trials, warn Labour grandees
Justice Secretary ‘will definitely have a battle in the Lords’, says Sir Tony Blair’s attorney general
David Lammy faces a battle to get plans to scrap jury trials for most crimes through the House of Lords, Labour grandees have warned.
The Justice Secretary is proposing to scrap the right to a jury trial for defendants accused of offences likely to result in prison sentences of under five years.
The reforms mean defendants charged with scores of offences, including burglary, affray, fraud, some sexual crimes and criminal damage up to £10,000, will be stripped of their right to elect trial by jury.
However, Lord Goldsmith, Sir Tony Blair’s attorney general – who was thwarted in his efforts to push through similar reforms in 2003 – said Mr Lammy faced a similar fight in the face of opposition from senior peers.
The problem is running permanent budget deficits in the hundreds of billions of pounds and then acting as if all is fine as some artificial rule is being met five years from now, then panicking when anything happens in the next year that throws that off kilter.
If we were running balanced budgets, with deficits only for swings and roundabouts, countered by budget surpluses also as swings and roundabouts, then the OBR and the rest of the rules malarkey would be moot.
An under-commented aspect of the budget is that much of the pain has been postponed until 2029. Which is when the election falls due. Maybe this is a betting opportunity, since Labour really can’t afford to be going to the polls in 2029 with its current budget plans; either they intend to go earlier, or those plans will be shredded before 2029 arrives?
Yes the budget is an odd one. You basically announce a load of stuff that mostly doesn't come in until 2028 or 2029 (if at all - how many things could easily be reversed/deferred next year if the economy suddenly boomed?), and net it all off against a load of long term economic forecasts that inevitably will turn out to have been wrong.
Try that one with your mortgage provider or your credit card company - don't worry about my economic situation and missed payments/ability to repay right now, because in 4 years time I'll have had a promotion and will be paying less on my mortgage because inflation and thus interest rates will be lower, mebbes.
Isn't it the problem with the fiscal rule (and a lot of its predecessors)? It doesn't say a thing about what happens to government finances in the next few years, as long as it hits the target in 2029.
Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it’s costing the economy
The average American now holds onto their smartphone for 29 months, according to a recent survey by Reviews.org, and that cycle is getting longer. The average was around 22 months in 2016.
You mean people are not persuaded to upgrade every year at high cost because there's 10 more pixels or something?
It's either more pixels or making everything an "AI-powered appliance" whether that makes any sodding sense at all or not.
Its virtually impossible to disable all the crappy battery sapping AI features too.
The odd app is helpful, translating for example, but mostly it is AI slop bloatware.
The problem is running permanent budget deficits in the hundreds of billions of pounds and then acting as if all is fine as some artificial rule is being met five years from now, then panicking when anything happens in the next year that throws that off kilter.
If we were running balanced budgets, with deficits only for swings and roundabouts, countered by budget surpluses also as swings and roundabouts, then the OBR and the rest of the rules malarkey would be moot.
An under-commented aspect of the budget is that much of the pain has been postponed until 2029. Which is when the election falls due. Maybe this is a betting opportunity, since Labour really can’t afford to be going to the polls in 2029 with its current budget plans; either they intend to go earlier, or those plans will be shredded before 2029 arrives?
And salting the earth for whoever is chancellor after the election.
Which chancellors of the last fifty years have, either through malice, incompetence or circumstances left things worse for their successor?
I can think of a few that left things better, overall, Howe, Lawson, Clarke, Osborne, Hammond (i think, but he did release the grip on finance that Osborne had placed) i can think of a few, whilst not bad overall, left deliberate traps for their successors that deserves a demerit, Darling (under the influence of Brown) and Hunt. Javid and Sunak through circumstance and cowardice blew all the gains on finance control and welfare spending acquired during the 2010s.
We had done the weight watchers, lost six stone, and to celebrate went on a round the world cruise, gained the six back and a further two on top.
Reeves is bad, just awful bad, inherited a dreadful state of finances. Hunt left a series of political traps and the labour party rolled into them. The traps were so severe politically that theyve damaged the public finances overall, not just tarnished the reputation of his successor. Unresolved public pay agreements, NI tax cuts, budget forecasts that had been tweaked. A mess.
Brown could have gone down as one of the greats, but he was a petty, vindicative calculating monster who rapidly increased structural deficit spending that was supposed to be temporary but caused great pain unwinding.
The problem is running permanent budget deficits in the hundreds of billions of pounds and then acting as if all is fine as some artificial rule is being met five years from now, then panicking when anything happens in the next year that throws that off kilter.
If we were running balanced budgets, with deficits only for swings and roundabouts, countered by budget surpluses also as swings and roundabouts, then the OBR and the rest of the rules malarkey would be moot.
An under-commented aspect of the budget is that much of the pain has been postponed until 2029. Which is when the election falls due. Maybe this is a betting opportunity, since Labour really can’t afford to be going to the polls in 2029 with its current budget plans; either they intend to go earlier, or those plans will be shredded before 2029 arrives?
Yes the budget is an odd one. You basically announce a load of stuff that mostly doesn't come in until 2028 or 2029 (if at all - how many things could easily be reversed/deferred next year if the economy suddenly boomed?), and net it all off against a load of long term economic forecasts that inevitably will turn out to have been wrong.
Try that one with your mortgage provider or your credit card company - don't worry about my economic situation and missed payments/ability to repay right now, because in 4 years time I'll have had a promotion and will be paying less on my mortgage because inflation and thus interest rates will be lower, mebbes.
LOL.
We're pretty screwed really.
Not until the Fair Work Agency has been around to see you.
12 Angry Men. There is a treatise somewhere on how the camera angle changes through the film to reflect the tension in the jury room. The first third is shot from below, then level, and finally from above (or possibly vice versa, it's been a while).
Brilliant film. I've watched it about six times.
We all hope we'd be Henry Fonda in that situation, don't we?
Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it’s costing the economy
The average American now holds onto their smartphone for 29 months, according to a recent survey by Reviews.org, and that cycle is getting longer. The average was around 22 months in 2016.
You mean people are not persuaded to upgrade every year at high cost because there's 10 more pixels or something?
It's either more pixels or making everything an "AI-powered appliance" whether that makes any sodding sense at all or not.
Its virtually impossible to disable all the crappy battery sapping AI features too.
The odd app is helpful, translating for example, but mostly it is AI slop bloatware.
It feels like things are designed for convenience of a company, and then they try to convince us it is what we want/need afterwards, with varying levels of success. Or they can reintroduce user friendly/useful features later, only at cost, and get gratitude for no longer being as shit.
Maybe it was always that way, IDK, but it feels like it has gotten worse with all the tech bros in the world coming up with solutions to problems that don't exist, or don't need a tech solution.
Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it’s costing the economy
The average American now holds onto their smartphone for 29 months, according to a recent survey by Reviews.org, and that cycle is getting longer. The average was around 22 months in 2016.
One of the reasons why GDP, even GDP per head, isn't the be-all or end-all. A world where people have consumer durables that they are happy with for longer is a better world for people. But it sucks for all the bits of the economy that depend on making and selling stuff.
A couple of notes on device hoarding. First, it's largely irrelevant, at least here. The greater effect is the growing used or refurbished market, especially for phones but for some also laptops as knowing consumers buy second hand business models.
Second, payment by phone, now close to ubiquitous, introduces more rent-seeking – yet another player creaming off a percentage of each transaction, joining credit card companies, banks, and payment processors used at the retailers' end.
Lammy faces huge fight to scrap jury trials, warn Labour grandees
Justice Secretary ‘will definitely have a battle in the Lords’, says Sir Tony Blair’s attorney general
David Lammy faces a battle to get plans to scrap jury trials for most crimes through the House of Lords, Labour grandees have warned.
The Justice Secretary is proposing to scrap the right to a jury trial for defendants accused of offences likely to result in prison sentences of under five years.
The reforms mean defendants charged with scores of offences, including burglary, affray, fraud, some sexual crimes and criminal damage up to £10,000, will be stripped of their right to elect trial by jury.
However, Lord Goldsmith, Sir Tony Blair’s attorney general – who was thwarted in his efforts to push through similar reforms in 2003 – said Mr Lammy faced a similar fight in the face of opposition from senior peers.
Does Trump not understand that by putting lots of pressure on Zelensky he makes Putin less likely to agree a deal? With Zelensky cornered the temptation for Putin is to ask for more.
12 Angry Men. There is a treatise somewhere on how the camera angle changes through the film to reflect the tension in the jury room. The first third is shot from below, then level, and finally from above (or possibly vice versa, it's been a while).
Lenses changed to make the room seem progressively smaller is how I remember the explanation. But it's been a while too!
The problem is running permanent budget deficits in the hundreds of billions of pounds and then acting as if all is fine as some artificial rule is being met five years from now, then panicking when anything happens in the next year that throws that off kilter.
If we were running balanced budgets, with deficits only for swings and roundabouts, countered by budget surpluses also as swings and roundabouts, then the OBR and the rest of the rules malarkey would be moot.
An under-commented aspect of the budget is that much of the pain has been postponed until 2029. Which is when the election falls due. Maybe this is a betting opportunity, since Labour really can’t afford to be going to the polls in 2029 with its current budget plans; either they intend to go earlier, or those plans will be shredded before 2029 arrives?
Its just hoping that the horse will talk...
Going in 2028 may be right though, with the earth salted for the incoming government. One bad turn deserves another.
Does Trump not understand that by putting lots of pressure on Zelensky he makes Putin less likely to agree a deal? With Zelensky cornered the temptation for Putin is to ask for more.
I think Trump understands which side he can most directly punish and bully to get what he wants, so focuses on that angle above all else, that's how he operates and in his personal and political affairs it has always worked out for him.
Last Christmas I bought my pal an elephant for his room.
He thanked me profusely, but I just said “don’t mention it”.
What do you make of Popbitch giving credence to the conspiracy theory that Scouse drill artist Esdeekid is actually Timothy Chalamet? My son is a big fan of scouse drill and has been on at me about this theory for months, it would blow his mind if it were true.
This fellow James Murray is Labour’s go-to lamb to the slaughter. Surely only used to make the rest of them look good, as he uncharismatically defends the indefensible.
I can’t imagine he was ever young. Just the most boilerplate, stereotype of a public sector, “computer says no” bod
Why have you broken your manifesto pledge on National Insurance for a second time?”
“We haven’t”
“You have”
@vicderbyshire challenges James Murray MP on the Government’s decision to freeze income tax and National Insurance thresholds.
I wonder if this deputy speaker does private work. I would pay good money for her to shout at me and tell me off. If she had a pair of spectacles she could look over, I would pay double.
All she ever does is moan . Perhaps she’d like a Reform or Tory government and let’s see then what happens to workers rights .
My union's election had one candidate who despised Labour now, and one who very carefully did not mention them at all, I assume most unions face that choice - with one who would probably prefer a Reform/Tory government, as giving greater opportunity for taking stands against the government.
Comments
https://x.com/GarethJennings3/status/1994065778513977689
Going through my @DefenceIQ #IFC2025 notes ahead of the anticipated launch of the #GCAP full development and design phase, and a very interesting conops has the aircraft acting as "the perfect parasite"...
Speaking under Chatham House Rule, an official said that the goal is to mimic the conops of the MiG-29, of all things, in that it should be able to use any and all base infrastructure, weapons, etc, wherever it happens to be operating from.
"We aim to make GCAP ‘the perfect parasite’. Allegedly, the MiG-29 was the most NATO compliant platform ever built. The idea being that as [the Soviets] rolled over [NATO airbases], it would use NATO ground power, would use NATO bullets, would load a Sidewinder that it found in a weapons dump rather than a [Soviet] A-11. That concept is what we want to use within GCAP so that wherever we land, we can make maximum use of what we already find, and not rely on having to wait for a C-17 or something [to resupply]."..
We regret to inform you that you scored 0/10 on your Ultra Nationalist Maximalist Irredentism test.
We particularly note your bizarre use of logic and reality as metrics for policy decisions.
Tristan Kirk: While not perfect, the jury system is a treasured and historic commodity that fosters a level of trust in our courts"
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/jury-trials-scrapped-justic-b1259971.html
Unfair Dismissal rights will only come in after 6 months employment, not on Day 1 as planned.
Change due to Lords blocking the legislation; this is the agreed compromise.
After all, Trump is Putin's patsy.
(I'm not dropping anyone in it by posting that, am I?)
It's an insane demand, even if one takes a very cold, 'pragmatic' view that without US support Ukraine will never retake the land it has lost and must give it up for an end to further conflict.
Kherson used to have a population of 250k, and Russia withdrew after initially taking it, and one of the other capitals I don't think they even took at all.
They are making a comeback though.
Only European guarantees will be any use. And only if we have troops in place - and no-fly zones - on ceasefire day, up to current conflict lines.
Then give the European heads of state a collective Nobel Peace Prize. So EVERYBODY has a Peace Prize except Trump.
Surely a symbiote not a parasite
Midsummer, it is revealed as a barren shopping mall consisting mostly of shops selling the identical range of Santa tat, and a rather bored Santa posing for photos mostly with a few tourists from Asia who have pitched up there at the wrong time of year.
I was pleased to have visited Santa Village without its clothes, so to speak, and certainly wouldn’t want to detract from the magic for anyone wanting to take their kids there during winter. But I was pleased to be quickly driving away in the car.
Any fule knows it’s a daughter colony of Kyiv and has always been part of Ukraine.
Why are we still debating the loss of faith in politicians. At the election Starmer said he wouldn't scrap the 2 child benefit cap, or raise taxes on working people. He's just scrapped that cap, and raised taxes on working people. And then acts with outrage when he's challenged.
https://x.com/dpjhodges/status/1994082686793654465?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
Wasn’t the proximate cause a squabble between Llewellyn and his little brother?
From what little I know of Welsh history internal conflicts were even more rife than usual. Something to do with particular inheritance rules?
Russia! Stonk!
Q: Did Labour keep their promise not to increase IT/NI/VAT?
Yes 16
No 57
But realistically, do we have the money to do something else to get backlog down?
For the Skivers, not the Strivers.
Is this really what "the party of labour" is all about?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnWZDvnEnXs
The theme song was famously spoken by Labour leader John Smith during a Commons debate at a time of tension between Mrs Thatcher and Nigel Lawson, then Chancellor.
Don't forget we had a 2% income tax increase on rental income and interest...
It's for their kids you say? Yeah, right.
Tim Shipman sits down with Professor David Miles of the Office for Budget Responsibility the day after a Budget overshadowed by an extraordinary leak. David sets out what the OBR now believes about growth, headroom and productivity — and why the UK’s long-term prospects look weaker than hoped. He discusses the political choices behind back-loaded tax rises, the decision not to score the workers’ rights reforms, and why Britain is so slow to adopt its own inventions. Plus: what the OBR’s new leak investigation will look like, and how confident we should really be in those fiscal forecasts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSJHUZ-ulYI
Try that one with your mortgage provider or your credit card company - don't worry about my economic situation and missed payments/ability to repay right now, because in 4 years time I'll have had a promotion and will be paying less on my mortgage because inflation and thus interest rates will be lower, mebbes.
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/23/how-device-hoarding-by-americans-is-costing-economy.html
Americans are holding onto devices longer than ever and it’s costing the economy
The average American now holds onto their smartphone for 29 months, according to a recent survey by Reviews.org, and that cycle is getting longer. The average was around 22 months in 2016.
Italy's recent defence procurement, for example, seems sensibly managed in relation to their resources. Both they and Japan don't have the desire to be project top dog, adding in their own contradictory demands that others might.
And no US defence primes.
We're pretty screwed really.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_A6cGILoXA
Ed Balls relates how Ken Clarke's budget was leaked to the Mirror but Piers Morgan declined to print it.
George Osborne talks about his own budget being published online early by the Evening Standard.
People will keep using what they have unless replacing it is either better or cheaper or both.
And the GCAP project leadership seem pretty set on not allowing anyone else to come onboard and start asking for modifications to the design.
Lammy faces huge fight to scrap jury trials, warn Labour grandees
Justice Secretary ‘will definitely have a battle in the Lords’, says Sir Tony Blair’s attorney general
David Lammy faces a battle to get plans to scrap jury trials for most crimes through the House of Lords, Labour grandees have warned.
The Justice Secretary is proposing to scrap the right to a jury trial for defendants accused of offences likely to result in prison sentences of under five years.
The reforms mean defendants charged with scores of offences, including burglary, affray, fraud, some sexual crimes and criminal damage up to £10,000, will be stripped of their right to elect trial by jury.
However, Lord Goldsmith, Sir Tony Blair’s attorney general – who was thwarted in his efforts to push through similar reforms in 2003 – said Mr Lammy faced a similar fight in the face of opposition from senior peers.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/11/27/lammy-faces-huge-fight-to-scrap-jury-trials-labour-grandees/
The odd app is helpful, translating for example, but mostly it is AI slop bloatware.
Which chancellors of the last fifty years have, either through malice, incompetence or circumstances left things worse for their successor?
I can think of a few that left things better, overall, Howe, Lawson, Clarke, Osborne, Hammond (i think, but he did release the grip on finance that Osborne had placed) i can think of a few, whilst not bad overall, left deliberate traps for their successors that deserves a demerit, Darling (under the influence of Brown) and Hunt. Javid and Sunak through circumstance and cowardice blew all the gains on finance control and welfare spending acquired during the 2010s.
We had done the weight watchers, lost six stone, and to celebrate went on a round the world cruise, gained the six back and a further two on top.
Reeves is bad, just awful bad, inherited a dreadful state of finances. Hunt left a series of political traps and the labour party rolled into them. The traps were so severe politically that theyve damaged the public finances overall, not just tarnished the reputation of his successor. Unresolved public pay agreements, NI tax cuts, budget forecasts that had been tweaked. A mess.
Brown could have gone down as one of the greats, but he was a petty, vindicative calculating monster who rapidly increased structural deficit spending that was supposed to be temporary but caused great pain unwinding.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/67e3d1cedcd2d93561195bdf/fair-work-agency.pdf
Maybe it was always that way, IDK, but it feels like it has gotten worse with all the tech bros in the world coming up with solutions to problems that don't exist, or don't need a tech solution.
Second, payment by phone, now close to ubiquitous, introduces more rent-seeking – yet another player creaming off a percentage of each transaction, joining credit card companies, banks, and payment processors used at the retailers' end.
He thanked me profusely, but I just said “don’t mention it”.
Going in 2028 may be right though, with the earth salted for the incoming government. One bad turn deserves another.
All she ever does is moan . Perhaps she’d like a Reform or Tory government and let’s see then what happens to workers rights .
The compromise of 6 months is sensible .
I can’t imagine he was ever young. Just the most boilerplate, stereotype of a public sector, “computer says no” bod
Why have you broken your manifesto pledge on National Insurance for a second time?”
“We haven’t”
“You have”
@vicderbyshire challenges James Murray MP on the Government’s decision to freeze income tax and National Insurance thresholds.
#Newsnight
https://x.com/bbcnewsnight/status/1993824685273043221?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
@Nus_Ghani
👓 🤫
@SartorialThug
https://x.com/Nus_Ghani/status/1993986869793611870
She got this reply
@Scots_Woe_Hey
"Talk Tory to me...."
https://x.com/Scots_Woe_Hey/status/1994026961929171100
And came back with
@Nus_Ghani
Ok- If you can handle it, send me coordinates 🗺️
https://x.com/Nus_Ghani/status/1994030676132417779