One only has to read the comments to know this is coming straight from the right wing lunatic fringe.
Meanwhile in the real world - you know, the homely little ball of rock we all live on, we're experiencing the highest temperatures in recorded history.
Panorama allowing falsehoods to be presented unchallenged, such as us born citizens will be deported & the border will be totally closed.
TBH - are you surprised? The BBC is still in the Denial Stage.
For journalists from the broadly left wing, liberal, metropolitan media the last 18 months has had three inexplicable events. A Conservative majority, Leave winning, and Trump winning. They have been blindsided by these events that "should not have happened". You do have to wonder how many more unlikely things will occur before they realise that maybe they haven't been doing a very good job of reporting.
My wife and I were just saying today that everyone in the broadcast media are in complete denial and desperately trying to hang on to their lefty elite views with generally cynical reporting. We cannot name one presenter or reporter who seems to be trying to adapt to the new world order
You have to wonder at what point some of them break ranks and start attacking the old order and move with the changing order as many viewers will just switch off and get their news on line
With Putin phoning Trump tonight the changing world order is coming so fast only those able to quickly adapt to this change will reap the enormous benefits.
I do think Theresa May will be in the vanguard of this new order and the UK should be so grateful that we have a leader that is serious and competent. I cannot name one other UK politician that could take this Country forward in these complicated days
Anyway since the Democrats actually staged protests in the primaries against Trump in order to help him politically, I do believe those protests might be staged too, just not from Soros.
Fleets of coaches have been filmed bussing in protestors - CraigsList has dozens of adverts for paid protesters in big cities - they've got to be busy for 10hrs approx per day for the full rate and 95% of the placards are handed out. There's shed loads of footage of this stuff on Twitter.
IIRC Soros funds MoveOn or a similar set of groups - his money was behind the bird dogging at Trump rallies. I find it WTF - but it's all there. Twitter left up trending hashtags calling for #AssassinateTrump and #RapeMelania all day - but took down every Wikileaks one within a couple of hours.
You need to look at the world a bit more if that's what you think
It is amusing that the EU (Well Germany) thinks that Britain, America and Russia is the new Axis of Evil.
I think the more appropriate name would be the Allies, if this goes on we have gone a complete circle only to return geopolitically to WW2, if such then we are on the winning side.
Not that I want to get all Godwin's law, but it didn't end particularly well the last time Germany tried to go up against all three of those.
FWIW, I think Merkel needs to retire and Germany needs new leadership.
She's had her time.
It only illustrates how lucky Britain is.
We where going into a nasty fight with the EU over the terms of exit completely isolated, now we can have the USA on our side and the EU is the one that's isolated.
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
Obama at White House just now showing where his loyalty lies in Europe saying Chancellor Merkel my closest International ally over the last eight years'. Hence UK at the back of the queue
I find the ocean temperature data hard to argue with. Why do you dismiss it?
Because I saw the chart on the ocean warming and saw the blip upwards for the decade 1940 -1950. I lived those years and they were among the coldest years of the 20th century, so I don't take much notice the current data from a dubious scientific premise.
Obama at White House just now showing where his loyalty lies in Europe saying Chancellor Merkel my closest International ally over the last eight years'. Hence UK at the back of the queue
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
For all the talk about how unlikely it was that Trump won, there is more unlikely stuff happening:
America's Team has won 8 straight for the first time since 1977 when Roger Staubach was throwing to rookie Tony Dorsett.
Plus the Pats lost to Seattle last night.
America's Team are 8-1, best record in the league.
If I was a fan I'd be really pumped... Tony Who?
I thought PB was a safe space for people like me who have to go to bed after the first game on a Sunday night and catch the later games on a Monday....
There's Monday Night Football too so you'd never catch up
To be honest I normally only watch the highlights, but I'm watching the full games tonight as it's international week. What were Pittsburgh playing at by not taking the extra points?
You need to look at the world a bit more if that's what you think
It is amusing that the EU (Well Germany) thinks that Britain, America and Russia is the new Axis of Evil.
I think the more appropriate name would be the Allies, if this goes on we have gone a complete circle only to return geopolitically to WW2, if such then we are on the winning side.
Not that I want to get all Godwin's law, but it didn't end particularly well the last time Germany tried to go up against all three of those.
FWIW, I think Merkel needs to retire and Germany needs new leadership.
She's had her time.
It only illustrates how lucky Britain is.
We where going into a nasty fight with the EU over the terms of exit completely isolated, now we can have the USA on our side and the EU is the one that's isolated.
I think it's an EU fantasy that we'll be completely isolated, and left begging to come back.
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
:
You seem to like saying this. But the UK, France and the US have been trying to reverse the German military cuts since the mid 1990s.
During the later part of the cold war, West Germany had an army that was bigger than the army the UK could field - it was not very portable, though. Essentially they spent all their money on an army that could fight in West Germany - no long range logistical chain.
They are trying, rather desperately, to revive lost capabilities at the moment.
I find the ocean temperature data hard to argue with. Why do you dismiss it?
Because I saw the chart on the ocean warming and saw the blip upwards for the decade 1940 -1950. I lived those years and they were among the coldest years of the 20th century, so I don't take much notice the current data from a dubious scientific premise.
Obama at White House just now showing where his loyalty lies in Europe saying Chancellor Merkel my closest International ally over the last eight years'. Hence UK at the back of the queue
Obama is a disgrace. Good riddance.
Or is he just saying that because Merkel is still smarting from all the NSA disclosures?
Why are 'Kippers suddenly frothing about Climate Change Denial again just now ? Because the single consistent policy message coming from the Transition is that Trump is going to go all out for a Carbon boom. This is going to trigger the first global political campaign in history. Much of big business, the global scientific consensus, the EU, China, The Pope, the world's environmental movement and half of the US against the Trump Presidency. A Global Kulturkampf enormously corrosive of the USA's soft power.
Panorama allowing falsehoods to be presented unchallenged, such as us born citizens will be deported & the border will be totally closed.
TBH - are you surprised? The BBC is still in the Denial Stage.
For journalists from the broadly left wing, liberal, metropolitan media the last 18 months has had three inexplicable events. A Conservative majority, Leave winning, and Trump winning. They have been blindsided by these events that "should not have happened". You do have to wonder how many more unlikely things will occur before they realise that maybe they haven't been doing a very good job of reporting.
My wife and I were just saying today that everyone in the broadcast media are in complete denial and desperately trying to hang on to their lefty elite views with generally cynical reporting. We cannot name one presenter or reporter who seems to be trying to adapt to the new world order
You have to wonder at what point some of them break ranks and start attacking the old order and move with the changing order as many viewers will just switch off and get their news on line
With Putin phoning Trump tonight the changing world order is coming so fast only those able to quickly adapt to this change will reap the enormous benefits.
I do think Theresa May will be in the vanguard of this new order and the UK should be so grateful that we have a leader that is serious and competent. I cannot name one other UK politician that could take this Country forward in these complicated days
Sky has become just as unwatchable as the BBC or CNN. Trump winning has just caused them to double down on their Brexit nervous breakdown. I can only come to the conclusion that they've no idea how to cope and are doing a Junker.
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
On a general point, I remain to be convinced the British public will delight in a settlement that essentially sees the UK throwing its lot in with Trump's America.
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
I'm comfortable with it.
Seriously, West Germany had hundreds of thousands of soldiers under arms on the West German border for almost 40 years. The only difference was that the UK and US were in stronger positions of political leadership.
Panorama allowing falsehoods to be presented unchallenged, such as us born citizens will be deported & the border will be totally closed.
TBH - are you surprised? The BBC is still in the Denial Stage.
For journalists from the broadly left wing, liberal, metropolitan media the last 18 months has had three inexplicable events. A Conservative majority, Leave winning, and Trump winning. They have been blindsided by these events that "should not have happened". You do have to wonder how many more unlikely things will occur before they realise that maybe they haven't been doing a very good job of reporting.
My wife and I were just saying today that everyone in the broadcast media are in complete denial and desperately trying to hang on to their lefty elite views with generally cynical reporting. We cannot name one presenter or reporter who seems to be trying to adapt to the new world order
You have to wonder at what point some of them break ranks and start attacking the old order and move with the changing order as many viewers will just switch off and get their news on line
With Putin phoning Trump tonight the changing world order is coming so fast only those able to quickly adapt to this change will reap the enormous benefits.
I do think Theresa May will be in the vanguard of this new order and the UK should be so grateful that we have a leader that is serious and competent. I cannot name one other UK politician that could take this Country forward in these complicated days
Sky has become just as unwatchable as the BBC or CNN. Trump winning has just caused them to double down on their Brexit nervous breakdown. I can only come to the conclusion that they've no idea how to cope and are doing a Junker.
Sky seem to be the worst culprit whether it is their UK correspondents or their European and US ones. They simply have not taken in how out of touch they have become. Their newspaper reviews border on the ridiculous for balance
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
for most of the cold war Germany's armed forces were significantly larger than ours.
You need to look at the world a bit more if that's what you think
It is amusing that the EU (Well Germany) thinks that Britain, America and Russia is the new Axis of Evil.
I think the more appropriate name would be the Allies, if this goes on we have gone a complete circle only to return geopolitically to WW2, if such then we are on the winning side.
Not that I want to get all Godwin's law, but it didn't end particularly well the last time Germany tried to go up against all three of those.
FWIW, I think Merkel needs to retire and Germany needs new leadership.
She's had her time.
It only illustrates how lucky Britain is.
We where going into a nasty fight with the EU over the terms of exit completely isolated, now we can have the USA on our side and the EU is the one that's isolated.
Is it luck or are we just a little ahead of the curve?
As I said the other day, there's an argument to say that Tsipras and the Greeks were first to challenge the folly but too weak to impact. We are of a different magnitude, and the Yanks even more so.
Obama at White House just now showing where his loyalty lies in Europe saying Chancellor Merkel my closest International ally over the last eight years'. Hence UK at the back of the queue
UK efforts in Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Iraq, .....back of the f##king queue...
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
I'm comfortable with it.
Seriously, West Germany had hundreds of thousands of soldiers under arms on the West German border for almost 40 years. The only difference was that the UK and US were in stronger positions of political leadership.
Big. Deal. Not.
Not sure it will be seen the same way in Eastern Europe and Russia. Likewise, an expanded Japanese army will be very badly received in Asia.
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
Dwarf? They aren't that much bigger!
They are by both GDP and population.
Dwarf implies a huge disparity. Also I suspect current spending arrangements are somewhat entrenched, and it would be difficult to immediately increase it to 2% of GDP.
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
West germany had a half million man army during the cold war. *Thousands* of panzers. Hundreds of combat aircraft.
A story from the late 50s - the Amricans were providing nukes to the Germans. On the basis that the nukes stayed in American control until "released" to German control for immediate use. This took the form of hanging American nukes on German fighter aircraft on ground alert. American "owners" of the nukes stayed next to them while they sat on the flight line....
Anyway, one American colonel started chatting with a German pilot. Turned out the German pilot had got his tin tie (which he was wearing) for making ace in WWII. Which it turned out had included shooting down the American colonel....
Obama at White House just now showing where his loyalty lies in Europe saying Chancellor Merkel my closest International ally over the last eight years'. Hence UK at the back of the queue
No other major allied country has had the same head of government for Obama's 8 years. It sounds like a huge compliment but actually she's the onky candidate for the accolade for the title he's giving her. It's called diplomacy. I don't know whether you are being deliberately obtuse or you're just a bit dim.
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
for most of the cold war Germany's armed forces were significantly larger than ours.
people were quite happy with that
Because they were under the control of an integrated command. No NATO means that goes.
Panorama allowing falsehoods to be presented unchallenged, such as us born citizens will be deported & the border will be totally closed.
TBH - are you surprised? The BBC is still in the Denial Stage.
For journalists from the broadly left wing, liberal, metropolitan media the last 18 months has had three inexplicable events. A Conservative majority, Leave winning, and Trump winning. They have been blindsided by these events that "should not have happened". You do have to wonder how many more unlikely things will occur before they realise that maybe they haven't been doing a very good job of reporting.
My wife and I were just saying today that everyone in the broadcast media are in complete denial and desperately trying to hang on to their lefty elite views with generally cynical reporting. We cannot name one presenter or reporter who seems to be trying to adapt to the new world order
You have to wonder at what point some of them break ranks and start attacking the old order and move with the changing order as many viewers will just switch off and get their news on line
With Putin phoning Trump tonight the changing world order is coming so fast only those able to quickly adapt to this change will reap the enormous benefits.
I do think Theresa May will be in the vanguard of this new order and the UK should be so grateful that we have a leader that is serious and competent. I cannot name one other UK politician that could take this Country forward in these complicated days
Sky has become just as unwatchable as the BBC or CNN. Trump winning has just caused them to double down on their Brexit nervous breakdown. I can only come to the conclusion that they've no idea how to cope and are doing a Junker.
Sky seem to be the worst culprit whether it is their UK correspondents or their European and US ones. They simply have not taken in how out of touch they have become. Their newspaper reviews border on the ridiculous for balance
There seems to be a growing bunch of people who know the truth before they watch the news and see anything that disagrees with their world view as a conspiracy.
Obama at White House just now showing where his loyalty lies in Europe saying Chancellor Merkel my closest International ally over the last eight years'. Hence UK at the back of the queue
No other major allied country has had the same head of government for Obama's 8 years. It sounds like a huge compliment but actually she's the onky candidate for the accolade for the title he's giving her. It's called diplomacy. I don't know whether you are being deliberately obtuse or you're just a bit dim.
More pedantry, but wouldn't have have had to say "closest international ally for the last eight years" for that to be the case?
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
Panorama allowing falsehoods to be presented unchallenged, such as us born citizens will be deported & the border will be totally closed.
TBH - are you surprised? The BBC is still in the Denial Stage.
For journalists from the broadly left wing, liberal, metropolitan media the last 18 months has had three inexplicable events. A Conservative majority, Leave winning, and Trump winning. They have been blindsided by these events that "should not have happened". You do have to wonder how many more unlikely things will occur before they realise that maybe they haven't been doing a very good job of reporting.
My wife and I were just saying today that everyone in the broadcast media are in complete denial and desperately trying to hang on to their lefty elite views with generally cynical reporting. We cannot name one presenter or reporter who seems to be trying to adapt to the new world order
You have to wonder at what point some of them break ranks and start attacking the old order and move with the changing order as many viewers will just switch off and get their news on line
With Putin phoning Trump tonight the changing world order is coming so fast only those able to quickly adapt to this change will reap the enormous benefits.
I do think Theresa May will be in the vanguard of this new order and the UK should be so grateful that we have a leader that is serious and competent. I cannot name one other UK politician that could take this Country forward in these complicated days
Sky has become just as unwatchable as the BBC or CNN. Trump winning has just caused them to double down on their Brexit nervous breakdown. I can only come to the conclusion that they've no idea how to cope and are doing a Junker.
Sky seem to be the worst culprit whether it is their UK correspondents or their European and US ones. They simply have not taken in how out of touch they have become. Their newspaper reviews border on the ridiculous for balance
There seems to be a growing bunch of people who know the truth before they watch the news and see anything that disagrees with their world view as a conspiracy.
Yep - bias = news reported in a way I dislike. We see it on both the left and right. Both want to "democratise" the courts too.
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
From a european point of view, why is there any reason to trust the Germans more with arms than there is the Russians?
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
for most of the cold war Germany's armed forces were significantly larger than ours.
people were quite happy with that
Because they were under the control of an integrated command. No NATO means that goes.
so you dont trust those EU bastards to control their army ?
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
No nukes, no UNSC seat. Simple.
Not a major world power in 1945 and a victor of WWII, no UNSC seat.
Obama at White House just now showing where his loyalty lies in Europe saying Chancellor Merkel my closest International ally over the last eight years'. Hence UK at the back of the queue
UK efforts in Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Iraq, .....back of the f##king queue...
But the Germans took in thousands of Muslims - that's worth a lot more (TIC).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
D
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
I'm comfortable with it.
Seriously, West Germany had hundreds of thousands of soldiers under arms on the West German border for almost 40 years. The only difference was that the UK and US were in stronger positions of political leadership.
Big. Deal. Not.
Not sure it will be seen the same way in Eastern Europe and Russia. Likewise, an expanded Japanese army will be very badly received in Asia.
Obama at White House just now showing where his loyalty lies in Europe saying Chancellor Merkel my closest International ally over the last eight years'. Hence UK at the back of the queue
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
No nukes, no UNSC seat. Simple.
Why no nukes for Germany in a post NATO world? Trump has no problems with friendly countries developing them.
Sky has become just as unwatchable as the BBC or CNN. Trump winning has just caused them to double down on their Brexit nervous breakdown. I can only come to the conclusion that they've no idea how to cope and are doing a Junker.
Radio 5 this morning was basically sniggering at Trump, I realise it's not easy for them to judge what is going on in the US from Salford, but it really was a poor show. It's not only the BBC of course, the media in this country suffers from groupthink in a big way. Journalists are drawn from too small and narrow a pool to adequately represent and understand our own population, so I'm not surprised that events in the US leave them dumbfounded and left to resort to joking.
On a general point, I remain to be convinced the British public will delight in a settlement that essentially sees the UK throwing its lot in with Trump's America.
Of course they won't. It's why the clever Brexiters on here have been so rattled by the Golden Lift photo.
Panorama allowing falsehoods to be presented unchallenged, such as us born citizens will be deported & the border will be totally closed.
TBH - are you surprised? The BBC is still in the Denial Stage.
For journalists from the broadly left wing, liberal, metropolitan media the last 18 months has had three inexplicable events. A Conservative majority, Leave winning, and Trump winning. They have been blindsided by these events that "should not have happened". You do have to wonder how many more unlikely things will occur before they realise that maybe they haven't been doing a very good job of reporting.
The left wing media that includes the Mail, Express, Sun and Telegraph?
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
D
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
I'm comfortable with it.
Seriously, West Germany had hundreds of thousands of soldiers under arms on the West German border for almost 40 years. The only difference was that the UK and US were in stronger positions of political leadership.
Big. Deal. Not.
Not sure it will be seen the same way in Eastern Europe and Russia. Likewise, an expanded Japanese army will be very badly received in Asia.
I've moved on.
I'm not sure your views are broadly representative of Eastern European and Russian opinion.
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
D
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
I'm comfortable with it.
Seriously, West Germany had hundreds of thousands of soldiers under arms on the West German border for almost 40 years. The only difference was that the UK and US were in stronger positions of political leadership.
Big. Deal. Not.
Not sure it will be seen the same way in Eastern Europe and Russia. Likewise, an expanded Japanese army will be very badly received in Asia.
I've moved on.
A large German army wouldn't upset anyone. The Russians might get upset if they stationed it in Eastern Poland, but the Germans won't do that.....
The reason why is that the Germans have spent 3/4 of century very carefully *not* being the xth Reich.
The Japanese has spent their time complaining it wasn't fair, it wasn't them and they were really trying to be nice at Nanjing.
On a general point, I remain to be convinced the British public will delight in a settlement that essentially sees the UK throwing its lot in with Trump's America.
Of course they won't. It's why the clever Brexiters on here have been so rattled by the Golden Lift photo.
They will be at best relieved, and at worst ambivalent, if the alternative is submitting to an EU seeking to bully us.
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
No nukes, no UNSC seat. Simple.
That is critical, if Le Pen wins in France next year there will be 4 right wing/reactionaries/populists and 1 communist on the UNSC.
Tomorrow, I have heard, but don't blame me if it doesn't happen.
I thought CA still had a ton of counting to do?
I'm talking about Michigan and New Hampshire only.
Michigan will be in tommorow I think.
Does it still look like MI = Trump, NH = Clinton?
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/michigan (if this is still being updated). I THINK Trump's lead has dropped from 13000 to 11,900 after the Election Night. (The NYT still only gives him a 92% chance of winning - and they give Clinton an 86% chance of winning NH)
Panorama allowing falsehoods to be presented unchallenged, such as us born citizens will be deported & the border will be totally closed.
TBH - are you surprised? The BBC is still in the Denial Stage.
For journalists from the broadly left wing, liberal, metropolitan media the last 18 months has had three inexplicable events. A Conservative majority, Leave winning, and Trump winning. They have been blindsided by these events that "should not have happened". You do have to wonder how many more unlikely things will occur before they realise that maybe they haven't been doing a very good job of reporting.
My wife and I were just saying today that everyone in the broadcast media are in complete denial and desperately trying to hang on to their lefty elite views with generally cynical reporting. We cannot name one presenter or reporter who seems to be trying to adapt to the new world order
You have to wonder at what point some of them break ranks and start attacking the old order and move with the changing order as many viewers will just switch off and get their news on line
With Putin phoning Trump tonight the changing world order is coming so fast only those able to quickly adapt to this change will reap the enormous benefits.
I do think Theresa May will be in the vanguard of this new order and the UK should be so grateful that we have a leader that is serious and competent. I cannot name one other UK politician that could take this Country forward in these complicated days
You've gone from voting Remain to spouting 'Kipper type anti European bile and predictions of the EU's impending collapse. Why is a europhile media being bewildered by being wrong worse than your appalling flip flopping ?
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
I'm comfortable with it.
Seriously, West Germany had hundreds of thousands of soldiers under arms on the West German border for almost 40 years. The only difference was that the UK and US were in stronger positions of political leadership.
Big. Deal. Not.
Not sure it will be seen the same way in Eastern Europe and Russia. Likewise, an expanded Japanese army will be very badly received in Asia.
The whole point would be to irritate Russia and ensure the eastern border of Europe is protected from any Russian aggression. A larger domestic military force in Germany would ensure that the Russians would think twice about invading eastern Europe.
As for Japan, SK might be worried but overall it will be seen as a counter balance to China. Especially if the US are looking to withdraw. The worry is that Japan pursues nuclear arms in order to ensure they have the ultimate independent deterrent against China and North Korea.
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
D
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
I'm comfortable with it.
Seriously, West Germany had hundreds of thousands of soldiers under arms on the West German border for almost 40 years. The only difference was that the UK and US were in stronger positions of political leadership.
Big. Deal. Not.
Not sure it will be seen the same way in Eastern Europe and Russia. Likewise, an expanded Japanese army will be very badly received in Asia.
I've moved on.
I'm not sure your views are broadly representative of Eastern European and Russian opinion.
The Germans are selling Leopard 2 tanks to the Poles. The first ones arrived with Germany army markings still on them... So German instructors were driving panzers with Iron Crosses on them in Poland. Eastward. :-)
Panorama allowing falsehoods to be presented unchallenged, such as us born citizens will be deported & the border will be totally closed.
TBH - are you surprised? The BBC is still in the Denial Stage.
For journalists from the broadly left wing, liberal, metropolitan media the last 18 months has had three inexplicable events. A Conservative majority, Leave winning, and Trump winning. They have been blindsided by these events that "should not have happened". You do have to wonder how many more unlikely things will occur before they realise that maybe they haven't been doing a very good job of reporting.
The left wing media that includes the Mail, Express, Sun and Telegraph?
The left wing media that includes the BBC, ITV, Sky and Channel 4 and which provides 90%+ of our broadcast news.
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
No nukes, no UNSC seat. Simple.
Why no nukes for Germany in a post NATO world? Trump has no problems with friendly countries developing them.
Hmm, ermm. I can't think of any historical relationships between those two apart from hostilities with a brief exception in the first year of the Bush W. administration.
The left wing media that includes the Mail, Express, Sun and Telegraph?
Yes to be fair the right wing media is uncomprehending too — generally they are also liberal with a small l and metropolitan like their left wing counterparts — the only real difference is that right wing media is less hysterical about "surprising" right wing success. If Corbyn ever makes it to No. 10 they will be full on with "end of days" nonsense.
Theresa May just delivered a speech forensically identifying why we are where we are and how we must manage the forces of globalisation to work for all
If she manages to guide our Country through this minefield and stands right in the centre ground of politics vacated by labour, she will not only demolish labour for good but could actually be the worthy successor to Maggie
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
No nukes, no UNSC seat. Simple.
Why no nukes for Germany in a post NATO world? Trump has no problems with friendly countries developing them.
Whichever party tries to develop Nukes in Germany might find winning tough! They want to shut down the civilian programme over safety fears, a military programme seems like a non-starter. Especially given the €70-80bn in development costs and €3-4bn in running costs plus importation of weapons grade plutonium from France or the UK.
Panorama allowing falsehoods to be presented unchallenged, such as us born citizens will be deported & the border will be totally closed.
TBH - are you surprised? The BBC is still in the Denial Stage.
For journalists from the broadly left wing, liberal, metropolitan media the last 18 months has had three inexplicable events. A Conservative majority, Leave winning, and Trump winning. They have been blindsided by these events that "should not have happened". You do have to wonder how many more unlikely things will occur before they realise that maybe they haven't been doing a very good job of reporting.
The left wing media that includes the Mail, Express, Sun and Telegraph?
The left wing media that includes the BBC, ITV, Sky and Channel 4 and which provides 90%+ of our broadcast news.
Sky, left wing? Okaaaay.
And you'll see plenty of Corbynistas accuse the BBC of right wing bias. Which implies to me that, on the whole, they do a pretty job of not being biased. Far too many people these days equate bias with having their world view challenged.
@Malmesbury Are we taking at cross purposes ? Or are you really comparing West Germany's defensive contribution to NATO with what I'm talking about ? A military capable of sustaining a Pax Europa ? Of defending the Baltics, Poland, Romania, Finland from the Russians ? It would be utterly unlike any military they've had since WW2.
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
No nukes, no UNSC seat. Simple.
Why no nukes for Germany in a post NATO world? Trump has no problems with friendly countries developing them.
Whichever party tries to develop Nukes in Germany might find winning tough! They want to shut down the civilian programme over safety fears, a military programme seems like a non-starter. Especially given the €70-80bn in development costs and €3-4bn in running costs plus importation of weapons grade plutonium from France or the UK.
A post-NATO world with Russia on the doorstep changes everything. If Iran and North Korea can do it, so can Germany.
Panorama allowing falsehoods to be presented unchallenged, such as us born citizens will be deported & the border will be totally closed.
TBH - are you surprised? The BBC is still in the Denial Stage.
For journalists from the broadly left wing, liberal, metropolitan media the last 18 months has had three inexplicable events. A Conservative majority, Leave winning, and Trump winning. They have been blindsided by these events that "should not have happened". You do have to wonder how many more unlikely things will occur before they realise that maybe they haven't been doing a very good job of reporting.
The left wing media that includes the Mail, Express, Sun and Telegraph?
The left wing media that includes the BBC, ITV, Sky and Channel 4 and which provides 90%+ of our broadcast news.
Sky, left wing? Okaaaay.
And you'll see plenty of Corbynistas accuse the BBC of right wing bias. Which implies to me that, on the whole, they do a pretty job of not being biased. Far too many people these days equate bias with having their world view challenged.
BBC / Guardian are bias against Corbyn...just like they went mentalist on Postman Pat when he sacked Professor Nutt for being too pro-drug.
As so many of their ex and current employees state, it isn't a pro-Labour, it is a pro liberal left of centre, pro immigration, pro EU, metropolitan world view.
If Pax Americana ends then we'll need a Pax Europa. Which in practical terms means a Pax Germanica. We aren't a million miles away from actually asking the Germans to rearm. They've the wealth, population and industrial mass to lead the EU's defence of it's eastern borders. But it would be a hell of a psychological and political switch ( as well as taking time ).
Nah. We asked the Germans to rearm in 1949, and they did.
West German forces formed the backbone of NATO forces on the Rhine for almost 40 years.
Don't be silly. Germany is deliberately and rightly a military pigmy relative to it's size and wealth. But that is/was part of the deal with Pax Americana. If Pax American ends then all is in flux. And as you are well aware free Europe's front line is now much further west than the Rhine. There is simply more Europe to defend these days.
I'm not being silly. I'm simply challenging your assertion that asking the Germans to rearm is a big deal, and a huge psychological/political switch.
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
Hmm - Germany created a defence force. It spends comparatively nothing on defence. As Europe's richest, most populous country it should by rights have its biggest and most powerful military, as a permanent seat on the Security Council. A German military capability in line with its financial might and number of inhabitants would dwarf what we have. Are we really comfortable with that? What would Germany's neighbours think?
No nukes, no UNSC seat. Simple.
Why no nukes for Germany in a post NATO world? Trump has no problems with friendly countries developing them.
Whichever party tries to develop Nukes in Germany might find winning tough! They want to shut down the civilian programme over safety fears, a military programme seems like a non-starter. Especially given the €70-80bn in development costs and €3-4bn in running costs plus importation of weapons grade plutonium from France or the UK.
Personally I think being a nuclear power is a terrible burden. I wouldn't develop if I was Germany either. BUT they should have more conventional forces.
Panorama allowing falsehoods to be presented unchallenged, such as us born citizens will be deported & the border will be totally closed.
TBH - are you surprised? The BBC is still in the Denial Stage.
For journalists from the broadly left wing, liberal, metropolitan media the last 18 months has had three inexplicable events. A Conservative majority, Leave winning, and Trump winning. They have been blindsided by these events that "should not have happened". You do have to wonder how many more unlikely things will occur before they realise that maybe they haven't been doing a very good job of reporting.
The left wing media that includes the Mail, Express, Sun and Telegraph?
The left wing media that includes the BBC, ITV, Sky and Channel 4 and which provides 90%+ of our broadcast news.
Sky, left wing? Okaaaay.
And you'll see plenty of Corbynistas accuse the BBC of right wing bias. Which implies to me that, on the whole, they do a pretty job of not being biased. Far too many people these days equate bias with having their world view challenged.
Obama at White House just now showing where his loyalty lies in Europe saying Chancellor Merkel my closest International ally over the last eight years'. Hence UK at the back of the queue
No other major allied country has had the same head of government for Obama's 8 years. It sounds like a huge compliment but actually she's the onky candidate for the accolade for the title he's giving her. It's called diplomacy. I don't know whether you are being deliberately obtuse or you're just a bit dim.
IIRC Hitler didn't take a salary, but then got the government to pay royalties on the state purchased copies of Mein Kampf and on using his image on postage stamps and the like. He made far more of that then the Chancellor's salary would have been...
Panorama allowing falsehoods to be presented unchallenged, such as us born citizens will be deported & the border will be totally closed.
TBH - are you surprised? The BBC is still in the Denial Stage.
For journalists from the broadly left wing, liberal, metropolitan media the last 18 months has had three inexplicable events. A Conservative majority, Leave winning, and Trump winning. They have been blindsided by these events that "should not have happened". You do have to wonder how many more unlikely things will occur before they realise that maybe they haven't been doing a very good job of reporting.
The left wing media that includes the Mail, Express, Sun and Telegraph?
The left wing media that includes the BBC, ITV, Sky and Channel 4 and which provides 90%+ of our broadcast news.
Sky, left wing? Okaaaay.
And you'll see plenty of Corbynistas accuse the BBC of right wing bias. Which implies to me that, on the whole, they do a pretty job of not being biased. Far too many people these days equate bias with having their world view challenged.
@Malmesbury Are we taking at cross purposes ? Or are you really comparing West Germany's defensive contribution to NATO with what I'm talking about ? A military capable of sustaining a Pax Europa ? Of defending the Baltics, Poland, Romania, Finland from the Russians ? It would be utterly unlike any military they've had since WW2.
Try to convince the German finance minister to triple defence expenditure to protect Greece ect.
Hmm, ermm. I can't think of any historical relationships between those two apart from hostilities with a brief exception in the first year of the Bush W. administration.
Panorama allowing falsehoods to be presented unchallenged, such as us born citizens will be deported & the border will be totally closed.
TBH - are you surprised? The BBC is still in the Denial Stage.
For journalists from the broadly left wing, liberal, metropolitan media the last 18 months has had three inexplicable events. A Conservative majority, Leave winning, and Trump winning. They have been blindsided by these events that "should not have happened". You do have to wonder how many more unlikely things will occur before they realise that maybe they haven't been doing a very good job of reporting.
The left wing media that includes the Mail, Express, Sun and Telegraph?
The left wing media that includes the BBC, ITV, Sky and Channel 4 and which provides 90%+ of our broadcast news.
Sky, left wing? Okaaaay.
And you'll see plenty of Corbynistas accuse the BBC of right wing bias. Which implies to me that, on the whole, they do a pretty job of not being biased. Far too many people these days equate bias with having their world view challenged.
BBC / Guardian are bias against Corbyn...just like they went mentalist on Postman Pat when he sacked Professor Nutt for being too pro-drug.
As so many of their ex and current employees state, it isn't a pro-Labour, it is a pro liberal left of centre, pro immigration, pro EU, metropolitan world view.
They are against Corbyn purely because they don't think Labour will ever win power under his leadership. A sound political opinion IMHO.
Obama at White House just now showing where his loyalty lies in Europe saying Chancellor Merkel my closest International ally over the last eight years'. Hence UK at the back of the queue
No other major allied country has had the same head of government for Obama's 8 years. It sounds like a huge compliment but actually she's the onky candidate for the accolade for the title he's giving her. It's called diplomacy. I don't know whether you are being deliberately obtuse or you're just a bit dim.
You just win no arguments by being insulting
Yes you do. You just don't win friends. YS is absolutely right, of course. But the right wing press will be all over him tomorrow.
Comments
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/
(This could of course be the tail effect of the current/ last year's el Nino)
You have to wonder at what point some of them break ranks and start attacking the old order and move with the changing order as many viewers will just switch off and get their news on line
With Putin phoning Trump tonight the changing world order is coming so fast only those able to quickly adapt to this change will reap the enormous benefits.
I do think Theresa May will be in the vanguard of this new order and the UK should be so grateful that we have a leader that is serious and competent. I cannot name one other UK politician that could take this Country forward in these complicated days
IIRC Soros funds MoveOn or a similar set of groups - his money was behind the bird dogging at Trump rallies. I find it WTF - but it's all there. Twitter left up trending hashtags calling for #AssassinateTrump and #RapeMelania all day - but took down every Wikileaks one within a couple of hours.
This is a massive culture/new media war.
https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/798244320553730048
See https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/General/temperature.html
We asked them to do it within 4 years of Hitler's death. They did, and it wasn't a big deal.
But, at the same time, leaving will be no picnic.
During the later part of the cold war, West Germany had an army that was bigger than the army the UK could field - it was not very portable, though. Essentially they spent all their money on an army that could fight in West Germany - no long range logistical chain.
They are trying, rather desperately, to revive lost capabilities at the moment.
But I suspect that he doesn't mean this for bettors.
£13k?!
That's an astonishing performance. All the more so, because I understand you're not swimming in personal wealth to play with in the first place!
I wish the profit was 13k !
I'm not sure I understand it, and I'm certainly disturbed by it.
Seriously, West Germany had hundreds of thousands of soldiers under arms on the West German border for almost 40 years. The only difference was that the UK and US were in stronger positions of political leadership.
Big. Deal. Not.
If you don't mind me asking, you got a solid 4-figure profit, I hope?
people were quite happy with that
As I said the other day, there's an argument to say that Tsipras and the Greeks were first to challenge the folly but too weak to impact. We are of a different magnitude, and the Yanks even more so.
A story from the late 50s - the Amricans were providing nukes to the Germans. On the basis that the nukes stayed in American control until "released" to German control for immediate use. This took the form of hanging American nukes on German fighter aircraft on ground alert. American "owners" of the nukes stayed next to them while they sat on the flight line....
Anyway, one American colonel started chatting with a German pilot. Turned out the German pilot had got his tin tie (which he was wearing) for making ace in WWII. Which it turned out had included shooting down the American colonel....
fair point
https://twitter.com/MossadNews/status/798257544858771457
Simple ;-)
Almost enough to join MaxPB on his honeymoon.
Good riddance!
The reason why is that the Germans have spent 3/4 of century very carefully *not* being the xth Reich.
The Japanese has spent their time complaining it wasn't fair, it wasn't them and they were really trying to be nice at Nanjing.
Not a single Liberal or centrist.
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/798270508546392064
As for Japan, SK might be worried but overall it will be seen as a counter balance to China. Especially if the US are looking to withdraw. The worry is that Japan pursues nuclear arms in order to ensure they have the ultimate independent deterrent against China and North Korea.
Please don't come to Fiji, Pulpstar. It might be a bit awkward.
Hmm, ermm.
I can't think of any historical relationships between those two apart from hostilities with a brief exception in the first year of the Bush W. administration.
Parker Molloy
This is literally out of Hitler's playbook. https://t.co/RqdoinRzN8 @anamariecox https://t.co/ntW9aM2LtN
So is New Hampshire. Though they have removed the final result pdf which was up on their site.
May's speech sounding quite hard brexity to me, also sounds like the sort of rhetoric that should give her a landslide win.
If she manages to guide our Country through this minefield and stands right in the centre ground of politics vacated by labour, she will not only demolish labour for good but could actually be the worthy successor to Maggie
And you'll see plenty of Corbynistas accuse the BBC of right wing bias. Which implies to me that, on the whole, they do a pretty job of not being biased. Far too many people these days equate bias with having their world view challenged.
As so many of their ex and current employees state, it isn't a pro-Labour, it is a pro liberal left of centre, pro immigration, pro EU, metropolitan world view.
https://twitter.com/politico/status/798270559935033344
Hence the panic stricken "maneuverings" of REMAIN to try and stop her ever since...
As is TSE.
Now have you managed to see the difference between Caracas and Los Angeles yet ?