Al Carns get a lot of people saying he is the future Labour leader. I have noticed has the Starmer tick of unable to do an interview, without as son of a toolmaker "when I was in the military" every other answer.
The single biggest failures of Starmer/Reeves has been lack of vision and lack of comms. Literally anyone who is able to articulate what they actually want to achieve in politics and how to tackle some of the problems in our system would be better than the current lot.
I heard Starmer at PMQs and he is rubbish at speaking at the despatch box and answering the questions. Starmer shows no wit, no deftness, drones on, and his blaming the previous government is wearing very thin.
The thing is I can't honestly think of anyone else in the party who would be better than Starmer, his failings are on the politics side of things, there might be better speakers, who would drum up enthusiasm, but their instincts and abilities to govern may well be worse.
Maybe he should have a drink or two before appearing in public?
Starmer had what I think is a new tactic today. He hijacked one of Kemi's questions to make the government announcement on evacuations that would normally have been a separate statement.
6 0 starmer today
She didn't deserve 0
Worst Pmq performance I've ever seen.
Made
Truss Corbyn IDS
Look decent
A score draw then, after accounting for bias
Tempting to split the difference but Badenoch was genuinely dire at PMQs:
1. She got the tone wrong. Badenoch only has one mode - condescending smirk. When discussing the country going to war isn't the time to use it. 2. Her interventions didn't make sense. Badenoch could take her cues from Baroness Neville-Jones in her own party if she wanted to challenge Stamer on his handling of the Iran War crisis. Incidentally worth a watch: https://youtu.be/ODF0J9_3DYM?si=cY3yBtuwvL3yDOf5 3. PMQs is a gift to the Leader of the Opposition as they can showcase themselves as the alternative to the current PM. No-one would visualise Badenoch as the best alternative to Starmer, in the same circumstances, based on her performance at PMQs today. James Cleverly on the other hand ... water under the bridge I suppose
You're not exactly an unbiased source yourself though are you?
But, the fact is, everything has changed and been turned on it's head, now. Petty squabbles about who "won" PMQ's this week, seems kinda pointless.
If we are at the start of WW3 we may need to bring back Boris (and yes, I'm serious!)
The single biggest failures of Starmer/Reeves has been lack of vision and lack of comms. Literally anyone who is able to articulate what they actually want to achieve in politics and how to tackle some of the problems in our system would be better than the current lot.
I heard Starmer at PMQs and he is rubbish at speaking at the despatch box and answering the questions. Starmer shows no wit, no deftness, drones on, and his blaming the previous government is wearing very thin.
The thing is I can't honestly think of anyone else in the party who would be better than Starmer, his failings are on the politics side of things, there might be better speakers, who would drum up enthusiasm, but their instincts and abilities to govern may well be worse.
Maybe he should have a drink or two before appearing in public?
Starmer had what I think is a new tactic today. He hijacked one of Kemi's questions to make the government announcement on evacuations that would normally have been a separate statement.
6 0 starmer today
She didn't deserve 0
Worst Pmq performance I've ever seen.
Made
Truss Corbyn IDS
Look decent
A score draw then, after accounting for bias
Tempting to split the difference but Badenoch was genuinely dire at PMQs:
1. She got the tone wrong. Badenoch only has one mode - condescending smirk. When discussing the country going to war isn't the time to use it. 2. Her interventions didn't make sense. Badenoch could take her cues from Baroness Neville-Jones in her own party if she wanted to challenge Stamer on his handling of the Iran War crisis. Incidentally worth a watch: https://youtu.be/ODF0J9_3DYM?si=cY3yBtuwvL3yDOf5 3. PMQs is a gift to the Leader of the Opposition as they can showcase themselves as the alternative to the current PM. No-one would visualise Badenoch as the best alternative to Starmer, in the same circumstances, based on her performance at PMQs today. James Cleverly on the other hand ... water under the bridge I suppose
Yes, it wasn't one of her best performances today.
Katie Lam was angered by Sir Keir today. She has had a bit of a glow up. I was surprised to see Leon say she wasn't all that attractive. I think she is one of the most attractive female MPs
Summarising the Israeli government's position, Citrinowicz said: "If we can have a coup, great. If we can have people on the streets, great. If we can have a civil war, great. Israel couldn't care less about the future ... [or] the stability of Iran."
Stability is stagnation, it is not a good thing, especially when the stability is a dictatorship.
Instability enables progress.
Chaos over order? Well, it's a view and certainly valid to argue chaos means change of whatever nature.
Two World Wars last century and millions dead certainly piled on the change but people tire of unending chaos and want order of whatever form.
How often do we see revolutions which topple autarchies or dictatorships themselves lead to dictatorship and repression in the name of ending chaos and restoring order?
It may be simple for you but for many people the certainty of order (with all the restrictions) seems more attractive than the uncertainty of anarchy (what price "freedom" if there is no work, no money, no food and no law?).
'Give me liberty or give me death'.
Yes some may choose to turn to authoritarians to prefer order over instability. I never have and never will.
You might miss the Rule of Law though.
Law should always be pragmatic and flexible. That was always the English way, to have a flexible and amendable law, changeable by Parliament, not a hard and fast codified one.
The rigid dogmatic institutionalisation of "The Law" (TM) over and above flexibility and politics is a rather modern and not a positive invention.
Good news on that front - a little bird tells me the government is going to trial cyclists/horse riders being allowed to pass through red lights, as long as they give way to pedestrians (like a zebra crossing).
Exactly the kind of flexibility we need - red lights for pedal cycles was always a dreadful constriction on #freedom #magnacarta
Thought most cyclists already did that anyway...
I think that's the best argument for it. If you think cyclists are always going through red lights, the lack of fatalities as a result would suggest it's an unnecessary restriction.
I can't see how you could argue against 20mph limits (which do gave a significant impact on pedestrians) while opposing this.
If a cyclist goes through a red light and is hit and killed by a driver who did nothing wrong and went through a green light, then a couple of questions.
1: Should that driver be incarcerated? I have seen some here (can't remember if you're one) demand mandatory incarceration of all drivers involved in fatalities regardless of cause.
2: Should that driver be offered counselling for the trauma and who should fund it?
Our system has more flexibility than that.
1 - On driver incarceration, i don't think anyone argues hat
2 - I think a more appropriate route for trauma counselling would be from the insurance company of the "at fault" party as is currently obtainable via the settlement process or civil action. That is already in place.
Of course there is also the NHS. All parties in any situation usually get NHS services (are there exceptions - can costs be recovered from insurance companies?) so I see no particular difference.
Even in cases where there is presumed civil liability for the more vulnerable party further up the hierarchy in civil legal action around collisions - as is the case in approximately 35 of 40 European countries * - it is a rebuttable presumption, so just a starting point and a shifting of the burden of proof.
* UK, Ireland, Romania, Cyprus, and Malta are the exceptions.
1. Some here have argued it. If not you, then fair enough, would you oppose that?
2. If the at-fault party is a deceased cyclist, then what exactly is to be done about it? Hard to take a civil action against the deceased, and a bit morbid to try.
We've finally found a reason for you to support 20mph limits. After you've mown down the 90 year old who didn't look properly before stepping out, you do tend to get some grief from the family when you sue the estate. 60kg at 30mph is going to take out the radiator at least.
Given roads are safer than they've ever been, we should be putting the speed limit up to 40 in most places, not cutting it.
40 today is as safe as 30 was in the past, given improvements in safety technologies.
That is not true. SUV style cars with their higher bumpers are more likely to be fatal to pedestrians.
Al Carns get a lot of people saying he is the future Labour leader. I have noticed has the Starmer tick of unable to do an interview, without "when I was in the military" every other answer.
It's like first term at university with the "well, on my gap year" crowd.
BREAKING: Thousands of Iraqi Kurds have launched a ground offensive in Iran, U.S. official says. - FOX
Could end very well.
You were complaining there were no boots on the ground. Now there are.
Onwards to victory! 💪
To quote Wikipedia: "Iran's military forces are made up of approximately 610,000 active-duty personnel plus 350,000 reserve and trained personnel that can be mobilized when needed, bringing the country's military manpower to about 960,000 total personnel.[6] These numbers do not include the Police Command or Basij." Thousands of Iraqi Kurds may not be enough.
Numbers alone are not the entire story.
I am curious how many of those military forces want to fight and die for the Islamic regime, against heavy aerial bombardment and a passionate ground force that desires to be there?
And how many are conscripts who would melt away given the chance?
And once a dictatorship starts to lose its grip on the military, it is very close to the end.
Al Carns get a lot of people saying he is the future Labour leader. I have noticed has the Starmer tick of unable to do an interview, without "when I was in the military" every other answer.
It's like first term at university with the "well, on my gap year" crowd.
I mean to give him some credit he does do a lot better than most of the morons, but it gets tiring to listen to. Its one thing when talking about Iran, but it does it in every setting regardless of the question.
Delcy Rodriguez, who is the President of Venezuela, is doing a great job, and working with U.S. Representatives very well. The Oil is beginning to flow, and the professionalism and dedication between both Countries is a very nice thing to see. President DONALD J. TRUMP
Delcy Rodriguez, who is the President of Venezuela, is doing a great job, and working with U.S. Representatives very well. The Oil is beginning to flow, and the professionalism and dedication between both Countries is a very nice thing to see. President DONALD J. TRUMP
Ice cream for her, straight to bed for the Spanish again (as it seems the US think they have got them to change their mind and they have said no).
Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling @skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present'
They didn’t ask us for help. They are playing anti UK politics. Stop helping them get rid of our basis Willy, you traitor.
So you don’t think the Cypriots have a right to be pissed off ?
They’re stuck with bases which end up targets anytime GB is involved in ME action . This screws their tourism industry and puts the local population at risk . Starmer took too long to clarify that the US wouldn’t be using the bases there and the UK should have had its assets there already .
Thank heavens the Greeks and French have come to help .
That’s a clueless post. It’s the other way around.
We are not sending Dragon to help Cyprus, they didn’t ask us for it, they went straight to their friends. Even before Dragon gets there, it’s the most defended bases in the entire war.
Greece and Cyprus exercise with Israel, that invited the drone both Hezbollah and Hamas have been promising them for years.
This is the same game what lost us the Chagos. Cyprus and their friends are making mugs of the lot of you.
Apologies for saying clueless post Nico. None of us are clueless, we just got different bits of knowledge giving different perspectives to add and discuss.
I’ve done tons of reading up on what’s going on with Cyprus this week, and all the sneaky politics involved, and it ties in identically with my reading up on Chagos. It’s a changed world out there, here in UK we need to wake up to it. The technical reality is Cyprus doesn’t need protection from UK warships. Nor does it want it. Dragon is late? It shouldn’t be going there for that reason. it’s not needed in med for that reason.
Greece and Cyprus have developed deep strategic partnerships with Israel, including joint military drills. Perhaps as consequence, Hezbollah and Hamas have for years been threatening Cyprus and Greece, so maybe no surprise drones have come from Hezbollah towards Cyprus, taking opportunity of fog of war to fire them, and not simply down to presence of UK military bases. The US Treasury has sanctioned Turkish-registered companies for helping Hezbollah evade sanctions and move Iranian funds and goods - Turkey normally favour Hamas not Shia Hezbollah, but working together now due to sharing common enemies.
Following the drone strike - according to Cyprus PM and President it is Starmer’s fault dragging Cyprus into this war - Greece reached out to Germany, Italy, France and Greece to help them. Greece and France quickly deployed anti-drone systems to the island, Greece has deployed warships and fighter jets. France frigates and aircraft carrier. ‘furious” Cyprus may seek to negotiate the British Sovereign Base Areas (SBAs) to only be used for humanitarian purposes in future, not as launchpads for any offensive strikes ever again. It’s anti UK politics - PBers and UK press and UK politicians should not assist Cyprus and their friends in this, it’s treason to do so.
Cyprus don’t want UK to have military bases in Cyprus, and nor does any of their friends. They want to move on from UK with other friends like Israel and EU allies. UK outside EU has to stop living in the past and 20th century mindset.
Delcy Rodriguez, who is the President of Venezuela, is doing a great job, and working with U.S. Representatives very well. The Oil is beginning to flow, and the professionalism and dedication between both Countries is a very nice thing to see. President DONALD J. TRUMP
Ice cream for her, straight to bed for the Spanish again (as it seems the US think they have got them to change their mind and they have said no).
Sanchez is arranging a meeting with Lula of Brazil
Two minutes of Tony Benn speaking in the Commons before the Iraq war.
I would struggle to agree with Tony Benn on any political matter but that was a great speech and highly apposite for these times. His articulacy puts the current House of Commons to shame, it really does.
This would be the Tony Benn who met and interviewed Saddam Hussein in 2003 as part of his attempt to stop the war and utterly failed to ask him the 5 questions he famously said all leaders should be asked -
What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? And how can Iraqis get rid of you?
Two officers were suspended on full pay for *four years* over racist, misogynistic, homophobic messages
They resigned just before this week's gross misconduct hearing
This was a really simple case. When I asked the chief constable why...
... it took so long, he could only point to difficulties in finding people to fill the misconduct panel.
He said: "We share the same struggles as other police forces across the UK in getting a limited number of people who've got the ability to undertake these functions"..
He clearly didn't try very hard or look very far.
That's one explanation.
The other is that delaying until the person resigns saves face for everyone and avoids making any decisions, which is pretty much the standard modus operandi for the British state these days.
Or they just couldn't find any non bent coppers ?
It's utterly ridiculous as an excuse for what seems to have been standard practice since forever.
They would need to find senior non-bent coppers who don’t mind flushing their careers down the toilet.
In the world of the #NU10K passing judgement, in public, like that, is Poor Form. It suggests someone who isn’t a Safe Pair of Hands, Not A Team Player.
Letting the guilty do a runner via early retirement is better all round, for such people.
Al Carns get a lot of people saying he is the future Labour leader. I have noticed has the Starmer tick of unable to do an interview, without as son of a toolmaker "when I was in the military" every other answer.
I noticed he got all huffy on Monday cos the interviewer suggested he was being a bit scaredy by not stating an opinion on subject X (US actions in Iran I think).
1 - They run a $5bn goods surplus with Spain. I can't find services figures. 2 - Spanish trade policy is run by the EU more than Spain. 3 - Their base near Gibraltar is a key location for US carrier strike groups. It's not a good one to lose access for the USN.
1 - They run a $5bn goods surplus with Spain. I can't find services figures. 2 - Spanish trade policy is run by the EU more than Spain. 3 - Their base near Gibraltar is a key location for US carrier strike groups. It's not a good one to lose access for the USN.
It could end up blowing up the EU if some member states go in a seriously anti-American direction.
With all this ground invasion talk, let's try to remember that Iran is really quite big.
Compared to other conflict zones (or us), Iran is: - Iraq: 3.8x larger and 1.9x more people - Syria: 8.9x larger and 3.5x more people - Afghanistan: 2.5x larger and 2.1x more people - UK: 6.8x larger and 1.3x more people
My point being we can keep destroying shit from the air easily. But a few thousand Kurds with guns aren't going to take control of Iran.
Summarising the Israeli government's position, Citrinowicz said: "If we can have a coup, great. If we can have people on the streets, great. If we can have a civil war, great. Israel couldn't care less about the future ... [or] the stability of Iran."
Stability is stagnation, it is not a good thing, especially when the stability is a dictatorship.
Instability enables progress.
Chaos over order? Well, it's a view and certainly valid to argue chaos means change of whatever nature.
Two World Wars last century and millions dead certainly piled on the change but people tire of unending chaos and want order of whatever form.
How often do we see revolutions which topple autarchies or dictatorships themselves lead to dictatorship and repression in the name of ending chaos and restoring order?
It may be simple for you but for many people the certainty of order (with all the restrictions) seems more attractive than the uncertainty of anarchy (what price "freedom" if there is no work, no money, no food and no law?).
'Give me liberty or give me death'.
Yes some may choose to turn to authoritarians to prefer order over instability. I never have and never will.
You might miss the Rule of Law though.
Law should always be pragmatic and flexible. That was always the English way, to have a flexible and amendable law, changeable by Parliament, not a hard and fast codified one.
The rigid dogmatic institutionalisation of "The Law" (TM) over and above flexibility and politics is a rather modern and not a positive invention.
Good news on that front - a little bird tells me the government is going to trial cyclists/horse riders being allowed to pass through red lights, as long as they give way to pedestrians (like a zebra crossing).
Exactly the kind of flexibility we need - red lights for pedal cycles was always a dreadful constriction on #freedom #magnacarta
Thought most cyclists already did that anyway...
I think that's the best argument for it. If you think cyclists are always going through red lights, the lack of fatalities as a result would suggest it's an unnecessary restriction.
I can't see how you could argue against 20mph limits (which do gave a significant impact on pedestrians) while opposing this.
If a cyclist goes through a red light and is hit and killed by a driver who did nothing wrong and went through a green light, then a couple of questions.
1: Should that driver be incarcerated? I have seen some here (can't remember if you're one) demand mandatory incarceration of all drivers involved in fatalities regardless of cause.
2: Should that driver be offered counselling for the trauma and who should fund it?
If a pedestrian jaywalks...
The same questions apply. My main concern would be any impact on pedestrians taking advantage of the red light (cyclists should of course give way)
(I'm not sure whether I'm in favour of this move - depending how applied. Being able to turn left on a red would make sense - applies in other countries and works well)
They tried the left-turn on red just down the road from here but changed back after a while, I suspect because of near-misses with pedestrians. It works well in America (right turn there, of course) because they do not need to worry about people crossing the road.
With all this ground invasion talk, let's try to remember that Iran is really quite big.
Compared to other conflict zones (or us), Iran is: - Iraq: 3.8x larger and 1.9x more people - Syria: 8.9x larger and 3.5x more people - Afghanistan: 2.5x larger and 2.1x more people - UK: 6.8x larger and 1.3x more people
My point being we can keep destroying shit from the air easily. But a few thousand Kurds with guns aren't going to take control of Iran.
Its worth bearing in mind the estimated numbers of troops at the start of 2011 in Libya.
Loyalist forces numbers ~50,000 while rebels numbered a few thousand.
The loyalists should have had overwhelming numerical advantage, except two things happened. The aerial bombardment from NATO and tens of thousands of loyalists switched sides.
Iran being bigger and more numerous is both a blessing and a curse for the regime. Yes it has forces, but most of those forces will be in the wrong place for any engagement. And when an engagement happens, if one does, then three very different scenarios can play out for the troops.
1: do their troops fight to the death? 2: or do they switch sides? 3: or do they abandon their posts and run?
If the latter happens, as happened recently in Syria, then that can rapidly snowball.
With all this ground invasion talk, let's try to remember that Iran is really quite big.
Compared to other conflict zones (or us), Iran is: - Iraq: 3.8x larger and 1.9x more people - Syria: 8.9x larger and 3.5x more people - Afghanistan: 2.5x larger and 2.1x more people - UK: 6.8x larger and 1.3x more people
My point being we can keep destroying shit from the air easily. But a few thousand Kurds with guns aren't going to take control of Iran.
But they can strip out the regime and allow the citizenry to take control of areas as they push on.
The Kurds may only be thousands. But any centre of resistance to them will be brutally destroyed from the air. They press forward, while the area behind them is cleansed. Repeat continuously to Tehran.
With all this ground invasion talk, let's try to remember that Iran is really quite big.
Compared to other conflict zones (or us), Iran is: - Iraq: 3.8x larger and 1.9x more people - Syria: 8.9x larger and 3.5x more people - Afghanistan: 2.5x larger and 2.1x more people - UK: 6.8x larger and 1.3x more people
My point being we can keep destroying shit from the air easily. But a few thousand Kurds with guns aren't going to take control of Iran.
The single biggest failures of Starmer/Reeves has been lack of vision and lack of comms. Literally anyone who is able to articulate what they actually want to achieve in politics and how to tackle some of the problems in our system would be better than the current lot.
I heard Starmer at PMQs and he is rubbish at speaking at the despatch box and answering the questions. Starmer shows no wit, no deftness, drones on, and his blaming the previous government is wearing very thin.
The thing is I can't honestly think of anyone else in the party who would be better than Starmer, his failings are on the politics side of things, there might be better speakers, who would drum up enthusiasm, but their instincts and abilities to govern may well be worse.
Maybe he should have a drink or two before appearing in public?
Starmer had what I think is a new tactic today. He hijacked one of Kemi's questions to make the government announcement on evacuations that would normally have been a separate statement.
6 0 starmer today
She didn't deserve 0
Worst Pmq performance I've ever seen.
Made
Truss Corbyn IDS
Look decent
A score draw then, after accounting for bias
Tempting to split the difference but Badenoch was genuinely dire at PMQs:
1. She got the tone wrong. Badenoch only has one mode - condescending smirk. When discussing the country going to war isn't the time to use it. 2. Her interventions didn't make sense. Badenoch could take her cues from Baroness Neville-Jones in her own party if she wanted to challenge Stamer on his handling of the Iran War crisis. Incidentally worth a watch: https://youtu.be/ODF0J9_3DYM?si=cY3yBtuwvL3yDOf5 3. PMQs is a gift to the Leader of the Opposition as they can showcase themselves as the alternative to the current PM. No-one would visualise Badenoch as the best alternative to Starmer, in the same circumstances, based on her performance at PMQs today. James Cleverly on the other hand ... water under the bridge I suppose
Yes, it wasn't one of her best performances today.
Katie Lam was angered by Sir Keir today. She has had a bit of a glow up. I was surprised to see Leon say she wasn't all that attractive. I think she is one of the most attractive female MPs
Starmer suggested Katie Lam is on defection watch. Lam later raised a point of order that the PM had misquoted her.
With all this ground invasion talk, let's try to remember that Iran is really quite big.
Compared to other conflict zones (or us), Iran is: - Iraq: 3.8x larger and 1.9x more people - Syria: 8.9x larger and 3.5x more people - Afghanistan: 2.5x larger and 2.1x more people - UK: 6.8x larger and 1.3x more people
My point being we can keep destroying shit from the air easily. But a few thousand Kurds with guns aren't going to take control of Iran.
But they can strip out the regime and allow the citizenry to take control of areas as they push on.
The Kurds may only be thousands. But any centre of resistance to them will be brutally destroyed from the air. They press forward, while the area behind them is cleansed. Repeat continuously to Tehran.
When Assad fell the rebels just basically marched to Damascus and nobody engaged them. The 'loyal' troops just melted away and once the first did that, the rest just followed until Assad was seen flying to Russia.
Are Iranian conscripts going to want to engage the Kurds backed by American and Israeli aerial bombardment? Or do they save their own lives and run as the Syrians did?
1 - They run a $5bn goods surplus with Spain. I can't find services figures. 2 - Spanish trade policy is run by the EU more than Spain. 3 - Their base near Gibraltar is a key location for US carrier strike groups. It's not a good one to lose access for the USN.
It could end up blowing up the EU if some member states go in a seriously anti-American direction.
more likely to blow up the USA, people are sick of their machinations, time they had a poke in teh eye with a big stick
With all this ground invasion talk, let's try to remember that Iran is really quite big.
Compared to other conflict zones (or us), Iran is: - Iraq: 3.8x larger and 1.9x more people - Syria: 8.9x larger and 3.5x more people - Afghanistan: 2.5x larger and 2.1x more people - UK: 6.8x larger and 1.3x more people
My point being we can keep destroying shit from the air easily. But a few thousand Kurds with guns aren't going to take control of Iran.
But they can strip out the regime and allow the citizenry to take control of areas as they push on.
The Kurds may only be thousands. But any centre of resistance to them will be brutally destroyed from the air. They press forward, while the area behind them is cleansed. Repeat continuously to Tehran.
Is that the plan? And if it is, have you looked at Iran on a map? It is a big place.
That frigate was at the international fleet review in India BTW, along with US forces. This amounts to sinking a ship under a flag of truce so it's even worse than it seems
That's the reason the Sri lankan coast guard was all right there to rescue people from the water
Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling @skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present'
They didn’t ask us for help. They are playing anti UK politics. Stop helping them get rid of our basis Willy, you traitor.
So you don’t think the Cypriots have a right to be pissed off ?
They’re stuck with bases which end up targets anytime GB is involved in ME action . This screws their tourism industry and puts the local population at risk . Starmer took too long to clarify that the US wouldn’t be using the bases there and the UK should have had its assets there already .
Thank heavens the Greeks and French have come to help .
That’s a clueless post. It’s the other way around.
We are not sending Dragon to help Cyprus, they didn’t ask us for it, they went straight to their friends. Even before Dragon gets there, it’s the most defended bases in the entire war.
Greece and Cyprus exercise with Israel, that invited the drone both Hezbollah and Hamas have been promising them for years.
This is the same game what lost us the Chagos. Cyprus and their friends are making mugs of the lot of you.
Apologies for saying clueless post Nico. None of us are clueless, we just got different bits of knowledge giving different perspectives to add and discuss.
I’ve done tons of reading up on what’s going on with Cyprus this week, and all the sneaky politics involved, and it ties in identically with my reading up on Chagos. It’s a changed world out there, here in UK we need to wake up to it. The technical reality is Cyprus doesn’t need protection from UK warships. Nor does it want it. Dragon is late? It shouldn’t be going there for that reason. it’s not needed in med for that reason.
Greece and Cyprus have developed deep strategic partnerships with Israel, including joint military drills. Perhaps as consequence, Hezbollah and Hamas have for years been threatening Cyprus and Greece, so maybe no surprise drones have come from Hezbollah towards Cyprus, taking opportunity of fog of war to fire them, and not simply down to presence of UK military bases. The US Treasury has sanctioned Turkish-registered companies for helping Hezbollah evade sanctions and move Iranian funds and goods - Turkey normally favour Hamas not Shia Hezbollah, but working together now due to sharing common enemies.
Following the drone strike - according to Cyprus PM and President it is Starmer’s fault dragging Cyprus into this war - Greece reached out to Germany, Italy, France and Greece to help them. Greece and France quickly deployed anti-drone systems to the island, Greece has deployed warships and fighter jets. France frigates and aircraft carrier. ‘furious” Cyprus may seek to negotiate the British Sovereign Base Areas (SBAs) to only be used for humanitarian purposes in future, not as launchpads for any offensive strikes ever again. It’s anti UK politics - PBers and UK press and UK politicians should not assist Cyprus and their friends in this, it’s treason to do so.
Cyprus don’t want UK to have military bases in Cyprus, and nor does any of their friends. They want to move on from UK with other friends like Israel and EU allies. UK outside EU has to stop living in the past and 20th century mindset.
The reason Dragon is late is she has had the builders in and is being rushed back out of maintenance. We don't have the ships anymore after four decades of Tory cuts, and one decade of Labour ordering new ships but the wrong sort.
With all this ground invasion talk, let's try to remember that Iran is really quite big.
Compared to other conflict zones (or us), Iran is: - Iraq: 3.8x larger and 1.9x more people - Syria: 8.9x larger and 3.5x more people - Afghanistan: 2.5x larger and 2.1x more people - UK: 6.8x larger and 1.3x more people
My point being we can keep destroying shit from the air easily. But a few thousand Kurds with guns aren't going to take control of Iran.
But they can strip out the regime and allow the citizenry to take control of areas as they push on.
The Kurds may only be thousands. But any centre of resistance to them will be brutally destroyed from the air. They press forward, while the area behind them is cleansed. Repeat continuously to Tehran.
When Assad fell the rebels just basically marched to Damascus and nobody engaged them. The 'loyal' troops just melted away and once the first did that, the rest just followed until Assad was seen flying to Russia.
Are Iranian conscripts going to want to engage the Kurds backed by American and Israeli aerial bombardment? Or do they save their own lives and run as the Syrians did?
And those rebels didn't have the world's finest warplanes flown by the world's finest pilots above them.
Pilots who will bomb schools or hospitals or mosques - wherever you might think to hide.
A spearhead that could destroy everything ahead of it. Word will spread. Social media will show the futility of engagement. The lethality of engagement.
Melting away will be the only outcome compatible with life.
With all this ground invasion talk, let's try to remember that Iran is really quite big.
Compared to other conflict zones (or us), Iran is: - Iraq: 3.8x larger and 1.9x more people - Syria: 8.9x larger and 3.5x more people - Afghanistan: 2.5x larger and 2.1x more people - UK: 6.8x larger and 1.3x more people
My point being we can keep destroying shit from the air easily. But a few thousand Kurds with guns aren't going to take control of Iran.
But they can strip out the regime and allow the citizenry to take control of areas as they push on.
The Kurds may only be thousands. But any centre of resistance to them will be brutally destroyed from the air. They press forward, while the area behind them is cleansed. Repeat continuously to Tehran.
Is that the plan? And if it is, have you looked at Iran on a map? It is a big place.
It being a big place means most Iranian forces will be at the wrong place for any engagement though.
And the Kurds don't need to take Tehran, or all of Iran, to be a nuisance. Even getting a foothold inside Iran, or liberating the Kurdish-majority region of Iran alone would do immense structural damage to the Iranian regime, which had previously looked invulnerable despite how unpopular it is.
Given how unpopular the regime is, given the aerial bombardments, given loss of land to the Kurds (even if its just some of it), given the Supreme Leader has shuffled off this mortal coil, do the rest of the armed forces at some point decide 'enough is enough' and change the flow of the war and oust the Mullahs?
There are many plausible routes from here to regime change, so long as the Americans and Israelis don't pull out prematurely - and I don't think the Israelis desire to pull out.
With all this ground invasion talk, let's try to remember that Iran is really quite big.
Compared to other conflict zones (or us), Iran is: - Iraq: 3.8x larger and 1.9x more people - Syria: 8.9x larger and 3.5x more people - Afghanistan: 2.5x larger and 2.1x more people - UK: 6.8x larger and 1.3x more people
My point being we can keep destroying shit from the air easily. But a few thousand Kurds with guns aren't going to take control of Iran.
But they can strip out the regime and allow the citizenry to take control of areas as they push on.
The Kurds may only be thousands. But any centre of resistance to them will be brutally destroyed from the air. They press forward, while the area behind them is cleansed. Repeat continuously to Tehran.
Is that the plan? And if it is, have you looked at Iran on a map? It is a big place.
It being a big place means most Iranian forces will be at the wrong place for any engagement though.
And the Kurds don't need to take Tehran, or all of Iran, to be a nuisance. Even getting a foothold inside Iran, or liberating the Kurdish-majority region of Iran alone would do immense structural damage to the Iranian regime, which had previously looked invulnerable despite how unpopular it is.
Given how unpopular the regime is, given the aerial bombardments, given loss of land to the Kurds (even if its just some of it), given the Supreme Leader has shuffled off this mortal coil, do the rest of the armed forces at some point decide 'enough is enough' and change the flow of the war and oust the Mullahs?
There are many plausible routes from here to regime change, so long as the Americans and Israelis don't pull out prematurely - and I don't think the Israelis desire to pull out.
I hate to point out the bleeding obvious here but even if some military strongman decides to oust the Mullahs he may still want to kill the Kurds to stop them threatening the new regime.
Anyone who thinks you can start a civil war and get the ideal outcome you want must have been asleep for the last 25 years.
Cyprus High Commissioner Kyriacos Kouros sounding furious about the lack of British action to defend RAF Akrotiri, telling @skynews: 'Greek forces are present on the island, the French are coming - the least we expect is the British are present'
They didn’t ask us for help. They are playing anti UK politics. Stop helping them get rid of our basis Willy, you traitor.
So you don’t think the Cypriots have a right to be pissed off ?
They’re stuck with bases which end up targets anytime GB is involved in ME action . This screws their tourism industry and puts the local population at risk . Starmer took too long to clarify that the US wouldn’t be using the bases there and the UK should have had its assets there already .
Thank heavens the Greeks and French have come to help .
That’s a clueless post. It’s the other way around.
We are not sending Dragon to help Cyprus, they didn’t ask us for it, they went straight to their friends. Even before Dragon gets there, it’s the most defended bases in the entire war.
Greece and Cyprus exercise with Israel, that invited the drone both Hezbollah and Hamas have been promising them for years.
This is the same game what lost us the Chagos. Cyprus and their friends are making mugs of the lot of you.
Apologies for saying clueless post Nico. None of us are clueless, we just got different bits of knowledge giving different perspectives to add and discuss.
I’ve done tons of reading up on what’s going on with Cyprus this week, and all the sneaky politics involved, and it ties in identically with my reading up on Chagos. It’s a changed world out there, here in UK we need to wake up to it. The technical reality is Cyprus doesn’t need protection from UK warships. Nor does it want it. Dragon is late? It shouldn’t be going there for that reason. it’s not needed in med for that reason.
Greece and Cyprus have developed deep strategic partnerships with Israel, including joint military drills. Perhaps as consequence, Hezbollah and Hamas have for years been threatening Cyprus and Greece, so maybe no surprise drones have come from Hezbollah towards Cyprus, taking opportunity of fog of war to fire them, and not simply down to presence of UK military bases. The US Treasury has sanctioned Turkish-registered companies for helping Hezbollah evade sanctions and move Iranian funds and goods - Turkey normally favour Hamas not Shia Hezbollah, but working together now due to sharing common enemies.
Following the drone strike - according to Cyprus PM and President it is Starmer’s fault dragging Cyprus into this war - Greece reached out to Germany, Italy, France and Greece to help them. Greece and France quickly deployed anti-drone systems to the island, Greece has deployed warships and fighter jets. France frigates and aircraft carrier. ‘furious” Cyprus may seek to negotiate the British Sovereign Base Areas (SBAs) to only be used for humanitarian purposes in future, not as launchpads for any offensive strikes ever again. It’s anti UK politics - PBers and UK press and UK politicians should not assist Cyprus and their friends in this, it’s treason to do so.
Cyprus don’t want UK to have military bases in Cyprus, and nor does any of their friends. They want to move on from UK with other friends like Israel and EU allies. UK outside EU has to stop living in the past and 20th century mindset.
It's quite a leap from establishing that countries like Cyorus, Greece, France and Isrsel.hsve lomg-established co-operation now, under the "EU-Med" + Israel, to suggesting that it's "treason" to help Cyprus.
The other day, MoonRabbit, you also suggested that Greece shouldn't help Cyprus because it was in Turkey's "headspace", which is quite a different view. That's such s divergent argument rom the above that I have to say it does appear as if you have a personal beef against Greek Cyprus.
Newsnight with a discussion on Iran between a soft-left winger in Rosena Allin-Khan and a more left-wing left-winger in the shape of Sam Kiley of the Independent. Not very balanced is it.
The single biggest failures of Starmer/Reeves has been lack of vision and lack of comms. Literally anyone who is able to articulate what they actually want to achieve in politics and how to tackle some of the problems in our system would be better than the current lot.
I heard Starmer at PMQs and he is rubbish at speaking at the despatch box and answering the questions. Starmer shows no wit, no deftness, drones on, and his blaming the previous government is wearing very thin.
The thing is I can't honestly think of anyone else in the party who would be better than Starmer, his failings are on the politics side of things, there might be better speakers, who would drum up enthusiasm, but their instincts and abilities to govern may well be worse.
Maybe he should have a drink or two before appearing in public?
Starmer had what I think is a new tactic today. He hijacked one of Kemi's questions to make the government announcement on evacuations that would normally have been a separate statement.
6 0 starmer today
She didn't deserve 0
Worst Pmq performance I've ever seen.
Made
Truss Corbyn IDS
Look decent
A score draw then, after accounting for bias
Tempting to split the difference but Badenoch was genuinely dire at PMQs:
1. She got the tone wrong. Badenoch only has one mode - condescending smirk. When discussing the country going to war isn't the time to use it. 2. Her interventions didn't make sense. Badenoch could take her cues from Baroness Neville-Jones in her own party if she wanted to challenge Stamer on his handling of the Iran War crisis. Incidentally worth a watch: https://youtu.be/ODF0J9_3DYM?si=cY3yBtuwvL3yDOf5 3. PMQs is a gift to the Leader of the Opposition as they can showcase themselves as the alternative to the current PM. No-one would visualise Badenoch as the best alternative to Starmer, in the same circumstances, based on her performance at PMQs today. James Cleverly on the other hand ... water under the bridge I suppose
Yes, it wasn't one of her best performances today.
Katie Lam was angered by Sir Keir today. She has had a bit of a glow up. I was surprised to see Leon say she wasn't all that attractive. I think she is one of the most attractive female MPs
Starmer suggested Katie Lam is on defection watch. Lam later raised a point of order that the PM had misquoted her.
Oh , I thought she was angry about his accusation of racism
"But forgive me if I don't take suggestions from the honorable member who said people legally and settled here should go home to ensure that the UK is culturally coherent.
"That is a grotesque way to talk about our friends and neighbours, and I rather suspect that her next question will come from her sitting up there." He then gestures to the Reform benches.
Newsnight with a discussion on Iran between a soft-left winger in Rosena Allin-Khan and a more left-wing left-winger in the shape of Sam Kiley of the Independent. Not very balanced is it.
I don't remember Sam Kiley being a super lefty when he was on Sky News (in the days when Sky News leant more right of centre, and massively more right than now). He was very good reporting from foreign conflicts in a straight down the line way i.e. not like that bloke on Ch4 who is like a student on Free Palestine / Stop the War demo.
War educates the senses, calls into action the will, perfects the physical constitution, brings PBers into such swift and close collision in critical moments that PBer measures PBer.
Comments
as son of a toolmaker"when I was in the military" every other answer.You're not exactly an unbiased source yourself though are you?
But, the fact is, everything has changed and been turned on it's head, now. Petty squabbles about who "won" PMQ's this week, seems kinda pointless.
If we are at the start of WW3 we may need to bring back Boris (and yes, I'm serious!)
Katie Lam was angered by Sir Keir today. She has had a bit of a glow up. I was surprised to see Leon say she wasn't all that attractive. I think she is one of the most attractive female MPs
I am curious how many of those military forces want to fight and die for the Islamic regime, against heavy aerial bombardment and a passionate ground force that desires to be there?
And how many are conscripts who would melt away given the chance?
And once a dictatorship starts to lose its grip on the military, it is very close to the end.
Kemi used to do the "as an engineer"...
The UK and USA should be backing the Kurds to victory and not abandoning them again, agreed?
https://x.com/delcyrodriguezv/status/2029303103980245356
Delcy Rodriguez, who is the President of Venezuela, is doing a great job, and working with U.S. Representatives very well. The Oil is beginning to flow, and the professionalism and dedication between both Countries is a very nice thing to see. President DONALD J. TRUMP
I’ve done tons of reading up on what’s going on with Cyprus this week, and all the sneaky politics involved, and it ties in identically with my reading up on Chagos. It’s a changed world out there, here in UK we need to wake up to it. The technical reality is Cyprus doesn’t need protection from UK warships. Nor does it want it. Dragon is late? It shouldn’t be going there for that reason. it’s not needed in med for that reason.
Greece and Cyprus have developed deep strategic partnerships with Israel, including joint military drills. Perhaps as consequence, Hezbollah and Hamas have for years been threatening Cyprus and Greece, so maybe no surprise drones have come from Hezbollah towards Cyprus, taking opportunity of fog of war to fire them, and not simply down to presence of UK military bases. The US Treasury has sanctioned Turkish-registered companies for helping Hezbollah evade sanctions and move Iranian funds and goods - Turkey normally favour Hamas not Shia Hezbollah, but working together now due to sharing common enemies.
Following the drone strike - according to Cyprus PM and President it is Starmer’s fault dragging Cyprus into this war - Greece reached out to Germany, Italy, France and Greece to help them. Greece and France quickly deployed anti-drone systems to the island, Greece has deployed warships and fighter jets. France frigates and aircraft carrier. ‘furious” Cyprus may seek to negotiate the British Sovereign Base Areas (SBAs) to only be used for humanitarian purposes in future, not as launchpads for any offensive strikes ever again. It’s anti UK politics - PBers and UK press and UK politicians should not assist Cyprus and their friends in this, it’s treason to do so.
https://www.politico.eu/article/cyprus-slams-uk-after-akrotiri-drone-strike-forced-locals-to-flee/
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/cyprus-hits-uk-drone-attack-105204130.html?guccounter=1
Cyprus don’t want UK to have military bases in Cyprus, and nor does any of their friends. They want to move on from UK with other friends like Israel and EU allies. UK outside EU has to stop living in the past and 20th century mindset.
https://x.com/sanchezcastejon/status/2029304026722886017
In the world of the #NU10K passing judgement, in public, like that, is Poor Form. It suggests someone who isn’t a Safe Pair of Hands, Not A Team Player.
Letting the guilty do a runner via early retirement is better all round, for such people.
‘No one’s ever accused me of lacking courage.’
Fark off you pompous twat.
1 - They run a $5bn goods surplus with Spain. I can't find services figures.
2 - Spanish trade policy is run by the EU more than Spain.
3 - Their base near Gibraltar is a key location for US carrier strike groups. It's not a good one to lose access for the USN.
Right on brother!
What about the Americans? Should the Americans abandon the Kurds again, or follow through with them this time?
https://youtu.be/un1mdRPZln0
Compared to other conflict zones (or us), Iran is:
- Iraq: 3.8x larger and 1.9x more people
- Syria: 8.9x larger and 3.5x more people
- Afghanistan: 2.5x larger and 2.1x more people
- UK: 6.8x larger and 1.3x more people
My point being we can keep destroying shit from the air easily. But a few thousand Kurds with guns aren't going to take control of Iran.
Loyalist forces numbers ~50,000 while rebels numbered a few thousand.
The loyalists should have had overwhelming numerical advantage, except two things happened. The aerial bombardment from NATO and tens of thousands of loyalists switched sides.
Iran being bigger and more numerous is both a blessing and a curse for the regime. Yes it has forces, but most of those forces will be in the wrong place for any engagement. And when an engagement happens, if one does, then three very different scenarios can play out for the troops.
1: do their troops fight to the death?
2: or do they switch sides?
3: or do they abandon their posts and run?
If the latter happens, as happened recently in Syria, then that can rapidly snowball.
The Kurds may only be thousands. But any centre of resistance to them will be brutally destroyed from the air. They press forward, while the area behind them is cleansed. Repeat continuously to Tehran.
Are Iranian conscripts going to want to engage the Kurds backed by American and Israeli aerial bombardment? Or do they save their own lives and run as the Syrians did?
@sappo7.bsky.social
That frigate was at the international fleet review in India BTW, along with US forces. This amounts to sinking a ship under a flag of truce so it's even worse than it seems
That's the reason the Sri lankan coast guard was all right there to rescue people from the water
https://bsky.app/profile/sappo7.bsky.social/post/3mgawsotv4c2v
Pilots who will bomb schools or hospitals or mosques - wherever you might think to hide.
A spearhead that could destroy everything ahead of it. Word will spread. Social media will show the futility of engagement. The lethality of engagement.
Melting away will be the only outcome compatible with life.
And the Kurds don't need to take Tehran, or all of Iran, to be a nuisance. Even getting a foothold inside Iran, or liberating the Kurdish-majority region of Iran alone would do immense structural damage to the Iranian regime, which had previously looked invulnerable despite how unpopular it is.
Given how unpopular the regime is, given the aerial bombardments, given loss of land to the Kurds (even if its just some of it), given the Supreme Leader has shuffled off this mortal coil, do the rest of the armed forces at some point decide 'enough is enough' and change the flow of the war and oust the Mullahs?
There are many plausible routes from here to regime change, so long as the Americans and Israelis don't pull out prematurely - and I don't think the Israelis desire to pull out.
Anyone who thinks you can start a civil war and get the ideal outcome you want must have been asleep for the last 25 years.
The other day, MoonRabbit, you also suggested that Greece shouldn't help Cyprus because it was in Turkey's "headspace", which is quite a different view. That's such s divergent argument rom the above that I have to say it does appear as if you have a personal beef against Greek Cyprus.
"But forgive me if I don't take suggestions from the honorable member who said people legally and settled here should go home to ensure that the UK is culturally coherent.
"That is a grotesque way to talk about our friends and neighbours, and I rather suspect that her next question will come from her sitting up there." He then gestures to the Reform benches.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/pmqs-live-keir-starmer-faces-36813527
If the choice is between a new disaster or the old one, I say lets roll the die.