Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A 7-sided TV debate as proposed by Cameron could go ahead:

SystemSystem Posts: 11,705
edited March 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A 7-sided TV debate as proposed by Cameron could go ahead: ITV reported to be considering “breaking ranks” with BBC/Sky


ITV promotion for 1st debate in 2010

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    Gordon, Dave and Frankenstein's monster.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    I get the feeling that maybe, just maybe Mr Newton Dunn enjoys stirring the pot on the odd occasion ;)
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    It's an unusual version of the prisoner's dilemma.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    BBC seem very uninterested by this story...probably because not Chelsea fans?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2964984/Fight-Jewish-scum-Shocking-anti-Semitism-streets-BRITAIN-Jewish-journalist-spat-abused-stalked-happens-Copenhagen.html

    Adrian "Golly" Chiles will be along soon to tell us all they hey it was only the odd insult and that he would get some abuse if he walked around the streets of Manchester because he is a celeb.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,631
    Pulpstar said:

    I get the feeling that maybe, just maybe Mr Newton Dunn enjoys stirring the pot on the odd occasion ;)

    Guido has more details:

    http://order-order.com/2015/03/06/itv-hosting-a-secret-leaders-debate-next-friday/

    Another massive victory for team Dave if it happens.
  • Options
    hucks67hucks67 Posts: 758
    All the broadcasters should just go ahead with the debates as planned and empty chair anyone who does not want to take part. It should not be up to DC to decide on debates.
  • Options
    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.
  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Dair said:

    Dair said:

    Indigo said:

    Roger said:


    I heard the other day that Manchester was the first nuclear free zone in the UK. If only they had realised what a style icon they were turning down

    London was expected to be devastated by two to four bombs of up to five megatons each exploding over the city. Glasgow, Birmingham and Manchester were each said to be in line for one or two "airbursts" of up to five megatons.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/05/uk-government-top-secret-list-probable-nuclear-targets-1970s
    Have a play with

    http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

    and scare yourself about how big the blast radius is, 5mt on Big Ben for example would reach Watford with the thermal radiation flash.
    More important, go to Moscow and see how little damage a 100kt W76 actually does to a country the size of Russia. We have 32 available and 64 max even with extra missiles we only have around 120 warheads.

    That's not a lot of damage. It is not even viable as a "deterent".
    One dropped on the centre of Moscow appears to kill a quarter of a million people. Might put me off a bit.
    That would not be in line with Russian military history. The phrase "Acceptable Casualties" could have been invented there.
    40 warheads+, upwards of 10 million dead, and 30-40 million injured or dying. Not even Russia would consider that acceptable.
    The UK has the ability to launch a maximum of 32 missiles at any enemy. There is a fair chance some of those would be intercepted.

    The whole argument in favour of a Nuclear Deterrent is based on MAD. There is no MAD when you can only blood the nose of an enemy. Russia is a country of 17 million square kilometres with military infrastructure generally separate from major population centres.

    Even if the entire UK arsenal was deployed solely on population centres, it's still only a bloody nose. Russia survives, the UK is obliterated. MAD is not achieved.
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,727
    UKIP seem to find it hard to hold on to seats.
    "UKIP slumped to third place in Bocking ward in Essex (CC) in their attempt to defend the seat as the Conservatives polled 34.3% to win the seat back having lost it by 20 votes two years ago. In addition, UKIP suffered a 5.3% drop in their vote share from 2013 as they finished 119 votes adrift of Labour to finish third."
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    dr_spyn said:
    Their policies poll quite well though (for a minority party):

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_a4Yi_WcAAxECV.png
  • Options
    john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    A mother that tortures and kills her 8 years old daughter only gets 13 years in prison, is that some kind of sick joke?

    Mother who tortured her daughter to death is jailed for 13 ...
    www.dailymail.co.uk/.../Twisted-mother-tortured-daughter-eight-death-jail...

    3 hours ago - A 'manipulative and wicked' lesbian and the Muslim lover she brainwashed into torturing her eight-year-old daughter to death were jailed for a ...
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    FPT

    Mr TykoJohno

    Posting less is nothing to do with the site, which remains admirable. I just felt that I was posting for the sake of it and not adding anything to the debate.

    At such times, less is more.
  • Options
    BenMBenM Posts: 1,795

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Er, right.

    I think this is an avoidable disaster for Cameron.

    He's acting as if the Tories are leading in the polls. But they're still behind and this arrogance reminds voters why they put the Tories behind Labour.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @TheScreamingEagles
    What are the odds on ITV going it alone with the debates?
  • Options
    BenM said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Er, right.

    I think this is an avoidable disaster for Cameron.

    He's acting as if the Tories are leading in the polls. But they're still behind and this arrogance reminds voters why they put the Tories behind Labour.
    They lead with a few pollsters.
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    BBC seem very uninterested by this story...probably because not Chelsea fans?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2964984/Fight-Jewish-scum-Shocking-anti-Semitism-streets-BRITAIN-Jewish-journalist-spat-abused-stalked-happens-Copenhagen.html

    Adrian "Golly" Chiles will be along soon to tell us all they hey it was only the odd insult and that he would get some abuse if he walked around the streets of Manchester because he is a celeb.

    Just watched the video of him walking in Bradford,part of the city he walks,I live near by .
  • Options
    john_zims said:

    A mother that tortures and kills her 8 years old daughter only gets 13 years in prison, is that some kind of sick joke?

    Mother who tortured her daughter to death is jailed for 13 ...
    www.dailymail.co.uk/.../Twisted-mother-tortured-daughter-eight-death-jail...

    3 hours ago - A 'manipulative and wicked' lesbian and the Muslim lover she brainwashed into torturing her eight-year-old daughter to death were jailed for a ...

    I'd say it's about par. Women always get lesser sentences for the same crimes as men.

  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    edited March 2015
    Dair said:

    Dair said:

    Dair said:

    Indigo said:

    Roger said:


    I heard the other day that Manchester was the first nuclear free zone in the UK. If only they had realised what a style icon they were turning down

    London was expected to be devastated by two to four bombs of up to five megatons each exploding over the city. Glasgow, Birmingham and Manchester were each said to be in line for one or two "airbursts" of up to five megatons.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/05/uk-government-top-secret-list-probable-nuclear-targets-1970s
    Have a play with

    http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

    and scare yourself about how big the blast radius is, 5mt on Big Ben for example would reach Watford with the thermal radiation flash.
    More important, go to Moscow and see how little damage a 100kt W76 actually does to a country the size of Russia. We have 32 available and 64 max even with extra missiles we only have around 120 warheads.

    That's not a lot of damage. It is not even viable as a "deterent".
    One dropped on the centre of Moscow appears to kill a quarter of a million people. Might put me off a bit.
    That would not be in line with Russian military history. The phrase "Acceptable Casualties" could have been invented there.
    40 warheads+, upwards of 10 million dead, and 30-40 million injured or dying. Not even Russia would consider that acceptable.
    The UK has the ability to launch a maximum of 32 missiles at any enemy. There is a fair chance some of those would be intercepted.

    The whole argument in favour of a Nuclear Deterrent is based on MAD. There is no MAD when you can only blood the nose of an enemy. Russia is a country of 17 million square kilometres with military infrastructure generally separate from major population centres.

    Even if the entire UK arsenal was deployed solely on population centres, it's still only a bloody nose. Russia survives, the UK is obliterated. MAD is not achieved.

    The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

    NATO - Article 5
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,895

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

  • Options
    richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Hch67 It is up to the PM to decide whether or not he takes part..that is democracy..
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,005
    Do people really believe that if ITV go ahead with the 7 leader debate first, the other channels wont do some kind of debate as well?
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,144
    It does rather look as though Dave has known for a little while that this one-off 7-header was a possibility. Hur hur hur.

    Time for Ed to run along for another meeting with the head of the BBC. Ed Miliband, the Violet Elizabeth Bott for our times.....

    "I'll thcream and thcream 'till I'm thick"
  • Options
    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    It does rather look as though Dave has known for a little while that this one-off 7-header was a possibility. Hur hur hur.

    Time for Ed to run along for another meeting with the head of the BBC. Ed Miliband, the Violet Elizabeth Bott for our times.....

    "I'll thcream and thcream 'till I'm thick"

    Ed and his BBC mate Tony 'weaponising' the debates. (The latter can swivel if he wants a TV tax on computers).
  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108


    The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

    NATO - Article 5

    Indeed.

    So no need for Trident 2 at all and no need to retain Trident 1.
  • Options
    richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Dair.. Russia is not the prime Nuclear concern..nutters in the new caliphate are the ones to watch. And they really do not have any concern about how many innocents,on either side, go down
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002

    Dair said:

    Dair said:

    Dair said:

    Indigo said:

    Roger said:


    I heard the other day that Manchester was the first nuclear free zone in the UK. If only they had realised what a style icon they were turning down

    London was expected to be devastated by two to four bombs of up to five megatons each exploding over the city. Glasgow, Birmingham and Manchester were each said to be in line for one or two "airbursts" of up to five megatons.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/05/uk-government-top-secret-list-probable-nuclear-targets-1970s
    Have a play with

    http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

    and scare yourself about how big the blast radius is, 5mt on Big Ben for example would reach Watford with the thermal radiation flash.
    More important, go to Moscow and see how little damage a 100kt W76 actually does to a country the size of Russia. We have 32 available and 64 max even with extra missiles we only have around 120 warheads.

    That's not a lot of damage. It is not even viable as a "deterent".
    One dropped on the centre of Moscow appears to kill a quarter of a million people. Might put me off a bit.
    That would not be in line with Russian military history. The phrase "Acceptable Casualties" could have been invented there.
    40 warheads+, upwards of 10 million dead, and 30-40 million injured or dying. Not even Russia would consider that acceptable.
    The UK has the ability to launch a maximum of 32 missiles at any enemy. There is a fair chance some of those would be intercepted.

    The whole argument in favour of a Nuclear Deterrent is based on MAD. There is no MAD when you can only blood the nose of an enemy. Russia is a country of 17 million square kilometres with military infrastructure generally separate from major population centres.

    Even if the entire UK arsenal was deployed solely on population centres, it's still only a bloody nose. Russia survives, the UK is obliterated. MAD is not achieved.

    The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence.

    NATO - Article 5
    Non nuclear members of NATO should pay towards the costs of the Nuclear arsenals of the Nuclear member states I reckon.

    In practice NATO is essentially the USA Nuclear deterrent when push comes to shove.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @stodge
    For all their reported certainty of victory. our blue friends tend to wet them selves with excitement at the smallest twitter rumour by their tame press.
    Relax and enjoy. (or brick yourself if you wish)
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,763

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    SeanT said:

    Dair said:

    Dair said:

    Dair said:

    Indigo said:

    Roger said:


    I heard the other day that Manchester was the first nuclear free zone in the UK. If only they had realised what a style icon they were turning down

    London was expected to be devastated by two to four bombs of up to five megatons each exploding over the city. Glasgow, Birmingham and Manchester were each said to be in line for one or two "airbursts" of up to five megatons.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/05/uk-government-top-secret-list-probable-nuclear-targets-1970s
    Have a play with

    http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

    and scare yourself about how big the blast radius is, 5mt on Big Ben for example would reach Watford with the thermal radiation flash.
    More important, go to Moscow and see how little damage a 100kt W76 actually does to a country the size of Russia. We have 32 available and 64 max even with extra missiles we only have around 120 warheads.

    That's not a lot of damage. It is not even viable as a "deterent".
    One dropped on the centre of Moscow appears to kill a quarter of a million people. Might put me off a bit.
    That would not be in line with Russian military history. The phrase "Acceptable Casualties" could have been invented there.
    40 warheads+, upwards of 10 million dead, and 30-40 million injured or dying. Not even Russia would consider that acceptable.
    The UK has the ability to launch a maximum of 32 missiles at any enemy. There is a fair chance some of those would be intercepted.

    The whole argument in favour of a Nuclear Deterrent is based on MAD. There is no MAD when you can only blood the nose of an enemy. Russia is a country of 17 million square kilometres with military infrastructure generally separate from major population centres.

    Even if the entire UK arsenal was deployed solely on population centres, it's still only a bloody nose. Russia survives, the UK is obliterated. MAD is not achieved.
    I don't think we are trying to deter Russia specifically (though we could certainly make them think twice - your major historic cities all destroyed is an unpleasant thought, even if your country would "survive").

    An awful lot of the 'country' is largely inhospitable. Inhabited cities tend to be sited in the more liveable parts.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    SeanT said:

    Dair said:

    Dair said:

    Dair said:

    Indigo said:

    Roger said:


    I heard the other day that Manchester was the first nuclear free zone in the UK. If only they had realised what a style icon they were turning down

    London was expected to be devastated by two to four bombs of up to five megatons each exploding over the city. Glasgow, Birmingham and Manchester were each said to be in line for one or two "airbursts" of up to five megatons.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/05/uk-government-top-secret-list-probable-nuclear-targets-1970s
    Have a play with

    http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

    and scare yourself about how big the blast radius is, 5mt on Big Ben for example would reach Watford with the thermal radiation flash.
    More important, go to Moscow and see how little damage a 100kt W76 actually does to a country the size of Russia. We have 32 available and 64 max even with extra missiles we only have around 120 warheads.

    That's not a lot of damage. It is not even viable as a "deterent".
    One dropped on the centre of Moscow appears to kill a quarter of a million people. Might put me off a bit.
    That would not be in line with Russian military history. The phrase "Acceptable Casualties" could have been invented there.
    40 warheads+, upwards of 10 million dead, and 30-40 million injured or dying. Not even Russia would consider that acceptable.
    The UK has the ability to launch a maximum of 32 missiles at any enemy. There is a fair chance some of those would be intercepted.

    The whole argument in favour of a Nuclear Deterrent is based on MAD. There is no MAD when you can only blood the nose of an enemy. Russia is a country of 17 million square kilometres with military infrastructure generally separate from major population centres.

    Even if the entire UK arsenal was deployed solely on population centres, it's still only a bloody nose. Russia survives, the UK is obliterated. MAD is not achieved.
    I don't think we are trying to deter Russia specifically (though we could certainly make them think twice - your major historic cities all destroyed is an unpleasant thought, even if your country would "survive").

    Middle eastern countries are more likely opponents.
    I'm not convinced ISIS give two hoots about any sort of deterrent to be perfectly honest. Have they gained Tripoli yet ?

    I went on Holiday to Tunisia a few years ago, could be next on the menu for the nutjobs.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @SeanT
    At the moment that would mean "nuking" Israel as there is a convention against nuking those without the power to respond.
  • Options

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
    But we know why that is.

    History shows blokes named Alanbrooke think they can do better than Tory PMs.
  • Options
    frpenkridgefrpenkridge Posts: 670
    Its unfair that all these shenanigans are messing with the careful timetable that the Labour Party, the BBC and the police have for the run up to the election.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002

    Its unfair that all these shenanigans are messing with the careful timetable that the Labour Party, the BBC and the police have for the run up to the election.

    If only the Scottish legal system was so thoughtful ;)
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,005
    Michael Crick (@MichaelLCrick)
    06/03/2015 14:10
    ITV, I'm told, NOT thinking of going it alone & accepting Downing St proposal for 7-person debate. TV cos to unveil united plans very soon
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,763

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
    But we know why that is.

    History shows blokes named Alanbrooke think they can do better than Tory PMs.
    Only because they do.

    After 5 years of denying the bleeding obvious, Tory HQ stares reality in the face.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11453572/George-Osborne-I-regret-not-overhauling-RBS.html

    And still draw the wrong conclusions.
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited March 2015

    Its unfair that all these shenanigans are messing with the careful timetable that the Labour Party, the BBC and the police have for the run up to the election.

    Weaponising the unfortunate Harvey Proctor?
  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Dair.. Russia is not the prime Nuclear concern..nutters in the new caliphate are the ones to watch. And they really do not have any concern about how many innocents,on either side, go down

    So if Islamist nutters detonate a dirty bomb or suitcase nuke in London, where do you target the response?
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,977
    The Pound/Euro rate is stunning.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @isam
    Does "told" have a higher certainty than "heard" I wonder?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Libyan_Civil_War_(2014–present)

    State of play in the Libyan civil war at the moment, like Labour seats the coastal areas have alot of people in a small area.
  • Options

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
    But we know why that is.

    History shows blokes named Alanbrooke think they can do better than Tory PMs.
    Only because they do.

    After 5 years of denying the bleeding obvious, Tory HQ stares reality in the face.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11453572/George-Osborne-I-regret-not-overhauling-RBS.html

    And still draw the wrong conclusions.
    A minor blot on an otherwise perfect copy book.

    You'll miss them when they are gone.
  • Options
    richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Dair You might wish to put yur question to someone in the military who is monitoring them. Unfortunately I am not privy to their info.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,763

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
    But we know why that is.

    History shows blokes named Alanbrooke think they can do better than Tory PMs.
    Only because they do.

    After 5 years of denying the bleeding obvious, Tory HQ stares reality in the face.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11453572/George-Osborne-I-regret-not-overhauling-RBS.html

    And still draw the wrong conclusions.
    A minor blot on an otherwise perfect copy book.

    You'll miss them when they are gone.
    Only 8 weeks to go.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,895
    Smarmeron said:

    @stodge
    For all their reported certainty of victory. our blue friends tend to wet them selves with excitement at the smallest twitter rumour by their tame press.
    Relax and enjoy. (or brick yourself if you wish)

    The mood on here nine weeks today were Ed and Justine to be on the way to the Palace would be hilarious.
  • Options

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
    But we know why that is.

    History shows blokes named Alanbrooke think they can do better than Tory PMs.
    Only because they do.

    After 5 years of denying the bleeding obvious, Tory HQ stares reality in the face.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11453572/George-Osborne-I-regret-not-overhauling-RBS.html

    And still draw the wrong conclusions.
    A minor blot on an otherwise perfect copy book.

    You'll miss them when they are gone.
    Only 8 weeks to go.
    9 weeks.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,763

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
    But we know why that is.

    History shows blokes named Alanbrooke think they can do better than Tory PMs.
    Only because they do.

    After 5 years of denying the bleeding obvious, Tory HQ stares reality in the face.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11453572/George-Osborne-I-regret-not-overhauling-RBS.html

    And still draw the wrong conclusions.
    A minor blot on an otherwise perfect copy book.

    You'll miss them when they are gone.
    Only 8 weeks to go.
    9 weeks.
    Why don't we compromise of Nine and a half weeks and I'll give to a link to Kim Basinger ?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    stodge said:

    Smarmeron said:

    @stodge
    For all their reported certainty of victory. our blue friends tend to wet them selves with excitement at the smallest twitter rumour by their tame press.
    Relax and enjoy. (or brick yourself if you wish)

    The mood on here nine weeks today were Ed and Justine to be on the way to the Palace would be hilarious.
    Some may think it would be a disaster for Dan Hodges, but he'll get possibly 5 more years worth of writing the same article.
  • Options
    Hengists_GiftHengists_Gift Posts: 628
    edited March 2015
    It took 3 x 90 minute debates involving three parties to cover the breadth of key UK Government business. Now ITV expect to cover all of it in 90 minutes with 7 parties? Whatever issues are overlooked (or is Dave going to dictate that as well?) it will overshadow anything that is discussed. Parties will be calling foul left right and centre. It would be a joke.

    Given it would seem to be against Ofcom rules (DUP, SF and BNP should by rights also be invited) on such matters surely Ofcom must step in a end this farce once and for all? If ITV attempt to do this they should be hauled across the coals for doing so. We cannot have politicians and TV companies conspiring to influence the general election in what at best is a highly questionable manner.

    PS Little surprise that it is ITV that are rumoured to break ranks when its run by that Westminster stooge Crozier.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,458

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
    But we know why that is.

    History shows blokes named Alanbrooke think they can do better than Tory PMs.
    Only because they do.

    After 5 years of denying the bleeding obvious, Tory HQ stares reality in the face.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11453572/George-Osborne-I-regret-not-overhauling-RBS.html

    And still draw the wrong conclusions.
    A minor blot on an otherwise perfect copy book.

    You'll miss them when they are gone.
    Only 8 weeks to go.
    9 weeks.
    8 weeks, 6 days, actually :lol:
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Smarmeron said:

    @isam
    Does "told" have a higher certainty than "heard" I wonder?

    Ooooh, we've all heard (as Kenneth Williams would say).
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,062

    The Pound/Euro rate is stunning.

    It's just extraordinary how the world fails to cotton on to all our problems. A massive overhang of debt, twin fiscal and trade deficits and us heading towards a complete mess come the election. Yet the capital keeps flowing in.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,458
    :lol::lol::lol::lol:

    Part-ELBOW for the week's polls so far, inc. last night's YG and Populus:

    Lab 33.5
    Con 33.1
    UKIP 14.5
    LD 7.1
    Green 5.9

    Lab lead 0.4%
    also, Greens sub-6%

    Where's yer Crossover now?

    :lol::lol::lol::lol:
  • Options
    frpenkridgefrpenkridge Posts: 670
    stodge said:

    Smarmeron said:

    @stodge
    For all their reported certainty of victory. our blue friends tend to wet them selves with excitement at the smallest twitter rumour by their tame press.
    Relax and enjoy. (or brick yourself if you wish)

    The mood on here nine weeks today were Ed and Justine to be on the way to the Palace would be hilarious.
    Tories who fill their days on pb would probably be humming "Happy Days are here again" if such a scenario were to occur.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    "We cannot have politicians and TV companies conspiring to influence the general election"

    Damn, and there I was thinking this was all as innocent as the pure white snow.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,763

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
    But we know why that is.

    History shows blokes named Alanbrooke think they can do better than Tory PMs.
    Only because they do.

    After 5 years of denying the bleeding obvious, Tory HQ stares reality in the face.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11453572/George-Osborne-I-regret-not-overhauling-RBS.html

    And still draw the wrong conclusions.
    A minor blot on an otherwise perfect copy book.

    You'll miss them when they are gone.
    Only 8 weeks to go.
    9 weeks.
    8 weeks, 6 days, actually :lol:
    You probably need to add another fortnight as the politcos play musical chairs to see who's in government.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Good Tory solution, get some competition going amongst the broadcasters.
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Re ITV & Mr. Cameron. Before becoming an MP 2001 he used to be head of communications for Carlton - now part of ITV.

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
    But we know why that is.

    History shows blokes named Alanbrooke think they can do better than Tory PMs.
    Only because they do.

    After 5 years of denying the bleeding obvious, Tory HQ stares reality in the face.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11453572/George-Osborne-I-regret-not-overhauling-RBS.html

    And still draw the wrong conclusions.
    A minor blot on an otherwise perfect copy book.

    You'll miss them when they are gone.
    Only 8 weeks to go.
    9 weeks.
    Actually six and a half weeks till I vote by post.

  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited March 2015
    Dair said:

    Dair.. Russia is not the prime Nuclear concern..nutters in the new caliphate are the ones to watch. And they really do not have any concern about how many innocents,on either side, go down

    So if Islamist nutters detonate a dirty bomb or suitcase nuke in London, where do you target the response?
    Nuclear materials have a specific 'signature' which would enable the original source of manufacture to be determined. After that who knows...
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Alanbrooke
    And subtract a week while the GB public take a break to get drunk and do some gardening while the kids paint Easter eggs?
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,977

    The Pound/Euro rate is stunning.

    It's just extraordinary how the world fails to cotton on to all our problems. A massive overhang of debt, twin fiscal and trade deficits and us heading towards a complete mess come the election. Yet the capital keeps flowing in.

    We have our own currency. Look at the £/$ rate for some perspective. The Euro rate is more about the state of the Eurozone (or parts of it) than the UK.

  • Options

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
    But we know why that is.

    History shows blokes named Alanbrooke think they can do better than Tory PMs.
    Only because they do.

    After 5 years of denying the bleeding obvious, Tory HQ stares reality in the face.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11453572/George-Osborne-I-regret-not-overhauling-RBS.html

    And still draw the wrong conclusions.
    A minor blot on an otherwise perfect copy book.

    You'll miss them when they are gone.
    Only 8 weeks to go.
    9 weeks.
    8 weeks, 6 days, actually :lol:
    Nah 9 weeks. Dave would quit 9 weeks today were he to lose.
  • Options
    Hengists_GiftHengists_Gift Posts: 628
    edited March 2015
    Pulpstar said:

    "We cannot have politicians and TV companies conspiring to influence the general election"

    Damn, and there I was thinking this was all as innocent as the pure white snow.

    Well it needed to be said and another thing now we have the FPTA and know well in advance when the election will be Ofcom need to extend the campaign period in terms of broadcasting (only) back to the 1st of January of the year of the election. There has been far too much government advertising in recent months (far more than previously) and far too many politically biased productions in recent weeks neither of which lend to fair elections.
  • Options
    madasafishmadasafish Posts: 659
    Smarmeron said:

    @SeanT
    At the moment that would mean "nuking" Israel as there is a convention against nuking those without the power to respond.

    Like as when the US nuked Japan?
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Good Tory solution, get some competition going amongst the broadcasters.

    No doubt it will be exclusively live on Sky with the BBC showing highlights later*


    *except in Scotland


  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Richard_Nabavi
    One broadcaster and Dave come to an arrangement, and all the other parties quietly acquiesce and don't boycott it in favour of an offer by the other broadcasters.
    As my father used to say, you seldom see a poor bookie, but bankrupt punters are ten a penny.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    edited March 2015
    @SeanT

    ISIS are playing a clever game, I think if they aren't stopped they'll go for Istanbul and Rome. But probably not before 2040 or so.

    Odds on Lampedusa becoming part of the caliphate before 2025 ?
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,763

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
    But we know why that is.

    History shows blokes named Alanbrooke think they can do better than Tory PMs.
    Only because they do.

    After 5 years of denying the bleeding obvious, Tory HQ stares reality in the face.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11453572/George-Osborne-I-regret-not-overhauling-RBS.html

    And still draw the wrong conclusions.
    A minor blot on an otherwise perfect copy book.

    You'll miss them when they are gone.
    Only 8 weeks to go.
    9 weeks.
    8 weeks, 6 days, actually :lol:
    Nah 9 weeks. Dave would quit 9 weeks today were he to lose.
    Things are looking bad for Dave. My lazy bastard MP actually stuck a leaflet through the door today for the first time I can remember. Despite his 11,000 majority I'm hoping I'm now in a marginal, he's panicking :-)
  • Options

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
    But we know why that is.

    History shows blokes named Alanbrooke think they can do better than Tory PMs.
    Only because they do.

    After 5 years of denying the bleeding obvious, Tory HQ stares reality in the face.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11453572/George-Osborne-I-regret-not-overhauling-RBS.html

    And still draw the wrong conclusions.
    A minor blot on an otherwise perfect copy book.

    You'll miss them when they are gone.
    Only 8 weeks to go.
    9 weeks.
    8 weeks, 6 days, actually :lol:
    Nah 9 weeks. Dave would quit 9 weeks today were he to lose.
    Things are looking bad for Dave. My lazy bastard MP actually stuck a leaflet through the door today for the first time I can remember. Despite his 11,000 majority I'm hoping I'm now in a marginal, he's panicking :-)
    SNP surging there too?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    Also a question I've previously put - Is Assad the modern day Joseph Stalin of the middle east ?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,458
    8 weeks, 6 days to save the NHS Crossover!
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Smarmeron said:

    As my father used to say, you seldom see a poor bookie, but bankrupt punters are ten a penny.

    Yes, but your father hadn't seen Shadsy's Scottish book
  • Options
    MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    Interesting about ITV - their Chairman is Archie Norman, the ex-Chairman of the Conservative Party.

    There is also an intense debate going on about the introduction of retransmission fees in the UK market (i.e. where a broadcaster charges the pay-tv operator for their channel). The current government has just launched a review, which will report post-election. ITV and Channel 4 want it, Sky is vehemently opposed (the BBC just wants to keep its licence fee). So, by doing this, ITV would thus put itself in the government's good book.

    For that reason, I don't believe any of Sky, ITV or Channel 4 would go against the government, given what could happen if the Conservatives formed the next government.

    Obviously the BBC is concerned re the licence fee.
  • Options
    richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Pulpstar..Lampedusa is and will remain part of ITALY
  • Options
    frpenkridgefrpenkridge Posts: 670
    Everybody on pb should post a comment when they get a leaflet through their letter box.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,602
    edited March 2015
    Pulpstar said:

    Also a question I've previously put - Is Assad the modern day Joseph Stalin of the middle east ?

    Yes. He's like Stalin.

    He has appalling music taste for starters as John Oliver explained.

    http://youtu.be/3lKYPp2Kp6s
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,763

    stodge said:

    Labour must be bricking it.

    If Dave can play the broadcasters so brilliantly just imagine the world of hurt he's going to inflict on Ed in this debate.

    Please, Eagles, hapless Tory spinning of the first order!

    At the moment, nothing has been decided and I'm far from convinced the seven-sided debate would be a "win" for Cameron as he will have to face some hostile questionning on immigration from Farage and perhaps the audience that isn't going to be easy for him.

    Where I would agree is that Cameron's biggest problem in the head-to-Head with Ed M wouldn't be Ed M but questions from the audience.

    When I said Dave got it wrong I said so, like yesterday's thread header.

    When Dave has played it well I say so.
    When Dave has played it well I say so

    I'm the same with George.

    Though I haven't had much to do in the last 5 years.
    But we know why that is.

    History shows blokes named Alanbrooke think they can do better than Tory PMs.
    Only because they do.

    After 5 years of denying the bleeding obvious, Tory HQ stares reality in the face.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11453572/George-Osborne-I-regret-not-overhauling-RBS.html

    And still draw the wrong conclusions.
    A minor blot on an otherwise perfect copy book.

    You'll miss them when they are gone.
    Only 8 weeks to go.
    9 weeks.
    8 weeks, 6 days, actually :lol:
    Nah 9 weeks. Dave would quit 9 weeks today were he to lose.
    Things are looking bad for Dave. My lazy bastard MP actually stuck a leaflet through the door today for the first time I can remember. Despite his 11,000 majority I'm hoping I'm now in a marginal, he's panicking :-)
    SNP surging there too?
    There are 6 Scots live in my village of 700 ish people, that's a clearcut majority by Nat standards.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    SeanT said:

    Actually I reckon ISIS DO give a hoot about deterrence. They are seriously trying to establish a caliphate in the Middle East. If we nuked all their major cities (Raqqa, Mosul, etc) that would become impossible, as the places would be irradiated for centuries. ISIS would be effectively wiped out.

    The fact that they attract lots of nutters, and do apparently crazy things, does not mean the entire organisation of ISIS is insane. The ISIS leaders want ISIS to survive and prosper.

    Note how they have carefully avoided attacking any serious players in their region - i.e. those certain to respond with overwhelming force, such as Turkey and Israel.



    It is a bit depressing that segments of the western world seem to care more about 5,000 year old ruins than they care about 21st century people being raped, enslaved, tortured and killed in the most vile ways imaginable.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @madasafish
    Our American cousins had more or less authorized a tactical strike on Vietnam if Khe Sanh was about to fall.
    There seemed to be some discussion about the possible "fall out"* should they have done so, and it was decided that it probably wasn't one of the better military strategies.
    MAD only works as long as no one else starts it.

    *pun intended
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    SeanT said:



    Actually I reckon ISIS DO give a hoot about deterrence. They are seriously trying to establish a caliphate in the Middle East. If we nuked all their major cities (Raqqa, Mosul, etc) that would become impossible, as the places would be irradiated for centuries. ISIS would be effectively wiped out.

    The fact that they attract lots of nutters, and do apparently crazy things, does not mean the entire organisation of ISIS is insane. The ISIS leaders want ISIS to survive and prosper.

    Note how they have carefully avoided attacking any serious players in their region - i.e. those certain to respond with overwhelming force, such as Turkey and Israel.



    There was a very good article that somebody on here posted a link to a few days ago. Basically, you have to think ISIS are following the most literal interruption of the Koran and to form state that observes all of it. Unlike AQ, ISIS have to have their state, otherwise a lot of what they are driving for is lost.

    That isn't to say the nutters wont then go onto try and blow up western stuff etc, but the thing that drives ISIS in the way it does at the moment is having his calilphate, where in their eyes everything is perfectly Islamic.
  • Options
    PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited March 2015
    Smarmeron said:

    As my father used to say, you seldom see a poor bookie, but bankrupt punters are ten a penny.

    That may have been true in the age of 120% overrounds, but these days pretty much all of the independent bookies have either gone bust or given up. It's betfair wot done 'em in.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @FrancisUrquhart
    ISIS have at their heart a belief in a forth coming apocalypse, granted, a few of them might not have the same degree of certainty about "when and if" but it does give you an insight about what you are dealing with.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,005
    Pong said:

    Smarmeron said:

    As my father used to say, you seldom see a poor bookie, but bankrupt punters are ten a penny.

    That may have been true in the age of 120% overrounds, but these days pretty much all of the independent bookies have either gone bust or given up. It's betfair wot done 'em in.
    ..and only the FOBT's saving a lot of the others
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,068
    Smarmeron said:

    @FrancisUrquhart
    ISIS have at their heart a belief in a forth coming apocalypse, granted, a few of them might not have the same degree of certainty about "when and if" but it does give you an insight about what you are dealing with.

    If we did nuke (say) a Syrian town and kill hundreds of ISIS fighters at one presumably they'd all be martyrs. Will there be enough virgins waiting for them on the other side?
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Pong
    Not if you go into almost any pub.
    You will meet several people who claim they never lose on the fruit machines, and oddly, you meet very few gamblers who tell you about the losses they have made over the years.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    Smarmeron said:

    @Pong
    Not if you go into almost any pub.
    You will meet several people who claim they never lose on the fruit machines, and oddly, you meet very few gamblers who tell you about the losses they have made over the years.

    Fruit machines with their 78% RTP :)
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @OldKingCole
    The number of virgins needed is somewhat reduced by the fact that it was Allah's will that they should die, therefore he will have accounted for those who deserve paradise, and the rest who will have eternal damnation.
    (Other religions have a similar way of seeing things.)
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Does anyone know where the polls behind these bar charts are from?

    James Dennison ‏@JamesRDennison · 20m20 minutes ago
    Latest polls in 3 Green targets - GP to put all resources in Brstol W - odds against them bt momentum w them #gpconf

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_bC9_TWcAAydrG.png
  • Options
    antifrank said:

    Does anyone know where the polls behind these bar charts are from?

    James Dennison ‏@JamesRDennison · 20m20 minutes ago
    Latest polls in 3 Green targets - GP to put all resources in Brstol W - odds against them bt momentum w them #gpconf

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_bC9_TWcAAydrG.png

    I've asked James for the source.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    antifrank said:

    Does anyone know where the polls behind these bar charts are from?

    James Dennison ‏@JamesRDennison · 20m20 minutes ago
    Latest polls in 3 Green targets - GP to put all resources in Brstol W - odds against them bt momentum w them #gpconf

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_bC9_TWcAAydrG.png

    Dunno, but Labour are 12-5 in Bristol West.

    I'm already on the Greens at 7-2 here. Lib Dems could well get squeezed

    £10 Bristol West, Labour.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,005
    edited March 2015
    Smarmeron said:

    @Pong
    Not if you go into almost any pub.
    You will meet several people who claim they never lose on the fruit machines, and oddly, you meet very few gamblers who tell you about the losses they have made over the years.

    Strangely enough, when you work in the industry you find most people only talk about the losers and near misses they've had.. its a bit muggy to talk about your winners, as everyones a winner

    Walked to the pub years ago after work one evening with a Horse Racing trader who told me about six pieces of incredible bad luck he had that months punting that made me think he might have gone skint until he finished of with "record month mind..."
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    Election forecast:

    Con Lab LD Green
    16 32 25 0 0 24
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    SeanT said:

    antifrank said:

    SeanT said:

    Actually I reckon ISIS DO give a hoot about deterrence. They are seriously trying to establish a caliphate in the Middle East. If we nuked all their major cities (Raqqa, Mosul, etc) that would become impossible, as the places would be irradiated for centuries. ISIS would be effectively wiped out.

    The fact that they attract lots of nutters, and do apparently crazy things, does not mean the entire organisation of ISIS is insane. The ISIS leaders want ISIS to survive and prosper.

    Note how they have carefully avoided attacking any serious players in their region - i.e. those certain to respond with overwhelming force, such as Turkey and Israel.



    It is a bit depressing that segments of the western world seem to care more about 5,000 year old ruins than they care about 21st century people being raped, enslaved, tortured and killed in the most vile ways imaginable.
    It is possible - indeed proper - to care about BOTH, quite passionately. What you airily dismiss as "5,000 year old ruins" is the cultural memory of an entire people: the Assyrians.


    How would British people feel if ISIS destroyed all our cathedrals, stone circles, palaces, and museums, and then torched the British Library with all its contents?

    Homicidal rage would be a common reaction.
    Don't get me wrong - it's an act of barbarous vandalism. But we have to care about what is being done to the living far more than the remains of the long-dead.

    After the Civil War, every church was whitewashed to remove the pictures and as many statues to saints were destroyed as possible. We can only guess at what cultural treasures we lost then from the odd chance find when the whitewash is peeled off. The story goes that the Chinese Ambassador visited Peterborough, saw the front of the cathedral with all the decapitated statues and said "ah, you too have had a Cultural Revolution". So this experience is not completely unknown in Britain.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    Lay the Lib Dems in Bristol West methinks.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,005
    Pulpstar said:

    Election forecast:

    Con Lab LD Green
    16 32 25 0 0 24

    Ha slightly misleading!! They've got the Tories ahead in Thurrock
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,602
    edited March 2015
    Antifrank re those Green polls

    @JamesRDennison: @TSEofPB http://t.co/xUgn70j0tG

    And

    @JamesRDennison: @TSEofPB actually they've changed since i put the graphs together a few days ago, will put up a new version
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,279



    There are 6 Scots live in my village of 700 ish people, that's a clearcut majority by Nat standards.

    Lol, you keep a close eye!
    I hope you're writing in purple ink to MI5 about the enemy within.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    Dair said:

    Dair.. Russia is not the prime Nuclear concern..nutters in the new caliphate are the ones to watch. And they really do not have any concern about how many innocents,on either side, go down

    So if Islamist nutters detonate a dirty bomb or suitcase nuke in London, where do you target the response?
    Nuclear materials have a specific 'signature' which would enable the original source of manufacture to be determined. After that who knows...
    All that would tell is is where they bought or stole their nuclear materials from, which would probably something spirited away from the border regions of the former soviet union, or something that got lost, apparently the US has managed to lose 8 or so nuclear weapons since it started making them.
This discussion has been closed.