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.
The game's up, isn't it?
Obama has his P45 and will be booking his new claim interview at Jobcentre Plus in January.
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.
Come on, be realistic. There isn't any world where Germans who have forced the government to shut down nuclear power plants on the basis of safety will ever allow for nuclear weapons to be made.
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.
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 defenceeally 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.
Come on, be realistic. There isn't any world where Germans who have forced the government to shut down nuclear power plants on the basis of safety will ever allow for nuclear weapons to be made.
I am being realistic. The world is changing very profoundly and very quickly. I can absolutely see Germany developing a nuclear capability. How else does it defend itself if the US withdraws?
David Martosko Anyone who believes Donald Trump (whose 3 adult kids married Jews and whose grandchildren are Jewish) would hire an anti-semite is an idiot.
Andrew Breitbart was Jewish too. I can't get over how silly some here are.
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.
They're just a bunch of Cnuts, railing impotently against natural forces.
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.
IIRC Germany is banned from having Nuclear Weapons by the international reunification treaty. Thought that was a product of it's time. If the US Nuclear umbrella went we'd need some sort of minimum Eurobomb.
David Martosko Anyone who believes Donald Trump (whose 3 adult kids married Jews and whose grandchildren are Jewish) would hire an anti-semite is an idiot.
Andrew Breitbart was Jewish too. I can't get over how silly some here are.
If they say that often enough, Trump will be part of an anti-muslim Jewish conspiracy.
Come on, be realistic. There isn't any world where Germans who have forced the government to shut down nuclear power plants on the basis of safety will ever allow for nuclear weapons to be made.
There is a world, but it probably involves Russia invading a bunch of eastern European countries.
David Martosko Anyone who believes Donald Trump (whose 3 adult kids married Jews and whose grandchildren are Jewish) would hire an anti-semite is an idiot.
Andrew Breitbart was Jewish too. I can't get over how silly some here are.
Omg. One doesn't follow the other. Saying some of my best friends are Jews doesn't mean you can excuse the hire of someone whos paper is clearly bigoted.
@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.
The German army circa 1988 would stop Russia from playing silly b$%^$^s anywhere West of the Polish border. The Poles, when their rearmament is complete, will be able to hold an attempted Russian invasion further east "at risk" until German help could get there.
Putting a bunch of tanks on a train to a friendly country doesn't require expeditionary capability.
@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.
My friend in the CDU tells me that Germany will be increasing defence spending... But I doubt it'll be 3x
David Martosko Anyone who believes Donald Trump (whose 3 adult kids married Jews and whose grandchildren are Jewish) would hire an anti-semite is an idiot.
Andrew Breitbart was Jewish too. I can't get over how silly some here are.
Omg. One doesn't follow the other. Saying some of my best friends are Jews doesn't mean you can excuse the hire of someone whos paper is clearly bigoted.
The media seem to be focusing on the antisemitism angle, when from the claims I have seen of all the proven and alleged sins, the evidence is by far the weakest on this. Seems to me there are more genuinely bad stuff they should be focusing on.
Telegraph Investigators have started exhuming the bodies of a Polish president to determine whether he was assassinated https://t.co/QqnieZwyVI
"Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the twin of the late president and leader of Law and Justice, has suggested his brother was in fact the victim of an assassination plot possibly involving Russia and Donald Tusk, who was Polish prime minister at the time of the crash."
Wonder if he's been in the US working for Hillary? I always got the impression he thought he was starring in his very own episode of The West Wing most of the time. Maybe the past three months he's been making the fantasy a reality?
If lefties like me can hate Britain and the white working class (see PB and right wing press on any number of occasions), despite being British and from the white working class, then why does having Jewish grandchildren preclude Trump from being anti-Semitic?
@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.
My friend in the CDU tells me that Germany will be increasing defence spending... But I doubt it'll be 3x
Yup. They might or might not make a commitment to increasing defense spending year on year, so that it might reach the 2% NATO commitment level. Or maybe not.
3x would be 3.6% of GDP - there would be basically no support for that in Germany at the moment.
Telegraph Investigators have started exhuming the bodies of a Polish president to determine whether he was assassinated https://t.co/QqnieZwyVI
"Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the twin of the late president and leader of Law and Justice, has suggested his brother was in fact the victim of an assassination plot possibly involving Russia and Donald Tusk, who was Polish prime minister at the time of the crash."
'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.'
Just like the growing bunch of people that know the government's negotiating plan for Brexit.
Come on, be realistic. There isn't any world where Germans who have forced the government to shut down nuclear power plants on the basis of safety will ever allow for nuclear weapons to be made.
There is a world, but it probably involves Russia invading a bunch of eastern European countries.
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.
IIRC Germany is banned from having Nuclear Weapons by the international reunification treaty. Thought that was a product of it's time. If the US Nuclear umbrella went we'd need some sort of minimum Eurobomb.
Telegraph Investigators have started exhuming the bodies of a Polish president to determine whether he was assassinated https://t.co/QqnieZwyVI
"Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the twin of the late president and leader of Law and Justice, has suggested his brother was in fact the victim of an assassination plot possibly involving Russia and Donald Tusk, who was Polish prime minister at the time of the crash."
"Donald Trump will consult Nigel Farage about any policy proposals which will affect the UK before he contacts Theresa May, according to the Ukip leader's aides."
David Martosko Anyone who believes Donald Trump (whose 3 adult kids married Jews and whose grandchildren are Jewish) would hire an anti-semite is an idiot.
Andrew Breitbart was Jewish too. I can't get over how silly some here are.
Omg. One doesn't follow the other. Saying some of my best friends are Jews doesn't mean you can excuse the hire of someone whos paper is clearly bigoted.
I wouldn't attach too much weight to testimony from nasty divorce battles.
I remember reading an article from a barrister who explained that his client was in the middle of a horid divorce. The wife phoned the police alleging that the husband had threatened to kill her with a shotgun. Police arrive and ask for the firearm cabinet to be opened. They find an empty cabinet with a receipt from the registered firearms dealer dated several weeks ago. This is apparently quite common.
Hiring anyone from Breitbart is stupid but I remain skeptical about the anti-Semitism allegations.
Telegraph Investigators have started exhuming the bodies of a Polish president to determine whether he was assassinated https://t.co/QqnieZwyVI
"Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the twin of the late president and leader of Law and Justice, has suggested his brother was in fact the victim of an assassination plot possibly involving Russia and Donald Tusk, who was Polish prime minister at the time of the crash."
Liberal, rational, centrist politicians need to take a long hard look at themselves, and ask, why are they losing?
They can say simply that the voters are stupid (the Matthew Parris approach). They don't know how lucky they are. Perhaps, the answer is to end democracy, so they can remain in power a bit longer.
Or maybe, the answer requires a bit of hard thinking. Are they doing things that are wrong?
I'm neither advocating, predicting nor opposing German remilitarisation. The various reasons critics have given for it being very unlikely are all quite correct. I'm just pointing out many of the historic presumptions which make it very unlikely are suddenly unlikely.
I was also ( probably too obtusely ) trying to troll PB's Tory Brexiters. In the space of 5 months we've gone from the EUSSR to an atlanticist populist revolt that raises the possibility of massive German rearmament being necessary to project Pax Europa.
LOL. Peak twitter? Apparently JFK also took a $1 salary.
Stalin's desk was apparently full of uncashed pay cheques. It was one of Julie Burchill's big things when she was in her Stalin worship phase (perhaps she's still in it, I stopped paying attention to her years ago).
"Donald Trump will consult Nigel Farage about any policy proposals which will affect the UK before he contacts Theresa May, according to the Ukip leader's aides."
LOL!
I think the government is going to have to give Nigel some sort of "official" role if they want to deal with Donald.
Liberal, rational, centrist politicians need to take a long hard look at themselves, and ask, why are they losing?
They can say simply that the voters are stupid (the Matthew Parris approach). They don't know how lucky they are. Perhaps, the answer is to end democracy, so they can remain in power a bit longer.
Or maybe, the answer requires a bit of hard thinking. Are they doing things that are wrong?
They are not providing easy answers to complicated problems and issues. But the centre has lost. They right is utterly dominant in the US and the UK. We'll now find out if the easy answers work.
'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.'
Just like the growing bunch of people that know the government's negotiating plan for Brexit.
Nah. Noone knows the government Brexit plan, not even the government.
Telegraph Investigators have started exhuming the bodies of a Polish president to determine whether he was assassinated https://t.co/QqnieZwyVI
"Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the twin of the late president and leader of Law and Justice, has suggested his brother was in fact the victim of an assassination plot possibly involving Russia and Donald Tusk, who was Polish prime minister at the time of the crash."
"Donald Trump will consult Nigel Farage about any policy proposals which will affect the UK before he contacts Theresa May, according to the Ukip leader's aides."
LOL!
I think the government is going to have to give Nigel some sort of "official" role if they want to deal with Donald.
Uks official representative to GOD (great orange dick)
David Martosko Anyone who believes Donald Trump (whose 3 adult kids married Jews and whose grandchildren are Jewish) would hire an anti-semite is an idiot.
Andrew Breitbart was Jewish too. I can't get over how silly some here are.
Omg. One doesn't follow the other. Saying some of my best friends are Jews doesn't mean you can excuse the hire of someone whos paper is clearly bigoted.
The media seem to be focusing on the antisemitism angle, when from the claims I have seen of all the proven and alleged sins, the evidence is by far the weakest on this. Seems to me there are more genuinely bad stuff they should be focusing on.
" can’t think of anything stupider than the charge coming from all quarters of the left–including a headline in the pathetically wretched Huffington Post–that Bannon is an anti-Semite. The source? A one sentence claim from an angry ex-wife in divorce court no less, that Bannon didn’t want their kids to go to school with Jews. I find that particularly amusing since Bannon wanted to make a film to celebrate this Jew’s life."
Lots of comments about the 'new world order'. We don't know what this means, but in all probability it means Putin achieving its long term policy objectives: a sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, an isolated and divided UK, and a weakened, neutralised EU. From any objective standpoint, the UK would be best off staying in the EU and using its influence there. But all these arguments were rejected by the people (the idiots) in the referendum and we have to respect that decision. The outcome of Brexit is that the Scots will have their own populist revolt and vote for independence (look at the odds). The Kremlin is meddling here as well, basing a number of new media outlets in Edinburgh. Corbyn and the SNP have already both proved themselves happy/foolish enough to do Putins bidding. Putins aim is to turn Scotland against England/RUK then ultimately to weaken our defensive capabilities and then remove our nuclear deterrent. We will just pretty much be an isolated island on the edge of Europe, split in to two or more countries, with no global influence. What is happening at the moment is absolutely tragic and humiliating, it is the unravelling of Britain as a diplomatic superpower and the abdication of power and influence on the world stage. And leading this is the tragic and pathetic figure of Boris Johnson. Britains tragedy is seconded by the demise of the US as a global superpower, as it abdicates any principled stance of liberal interventionalism and disintegrates in to decadence and overt self interest, perfectly represented by Donald Trump. Basically this is a nightmare, there are no positive angles, it just keeps getting worse and worse. The only consolation is that conflict with Russia may have been averted, but this is at the expense of the rule based international order that has generally held peace for seven decades.
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.
Liberal, rational, centrist politicians need to take a long hard look at themselves, and ask, why are they losing?
They can say simply that the voters are stupid (the Matthew Parris approach). They don't know how lucky they are. Perhaps, the answer is to end democracy, so they can remain in power a bit longer.
Or maybe, the answer requires a bit of hard thinking. Are they doing things that are wrong?
They are not providing easy answers to complicated problems and issues. But the centre has lost. They right is utterly dominant in the US and the UK. We'll now find out if the easy answers work.
There's nothing to stop the centre (and left) putting forward constructive ideas.
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.
@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.
My friend in the CDU tells me that Germany will be increasing defence spending... But I doubt it'll be 3x
83% by any chance? That's what they'd need to do to meet the NATO minimum. Would be a huge bonanza for the UK defence industry if Europe increased defence spending by the required €117bn.
Telegraph Investigators have started exhuming the bodies of a Polish president to determine whether he was assassinated https://t.co/QqnieZwyVI
"Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the twin of the late president and leader of Law and Justice, has suggested his brother was in fact the victim of an assassination plot possibly involving Russia and Donald Tusk, who was Polish prime minister at the time of the crash."
If lefties like me can hate Britain and the white working class (see PB and right wing press on any number of occasions), despite being British and from the white working class, then why does having Jewish grandchildren preclude Trump from being anti-Semitic?
Maybe because Trump is a rational human being. Or maybe because you have been taught that he is and are unable to face the facts, just your opinions and pre-judices.
Liberal, rational, centrist politicians need to take a long hard look at themselves, and ask, why are they losing?
They can say simply that the voters are stupid (the Matthew Parris approach). They don't know how lucky they are. Perhaps, the answer is to end democracy, so they can remain in power a bit longer.
Or maybe, the answer requires a bit of hard thinking. Are they doing things that are wrong?
They are not providing easy answers to complicated problems and issues. But the centre has lost. They right is utterly dominant in the US and the UK. We'll now find out if the easy answers work.
There's nothing to stop the centre (and left) putting forward constructive ideas.
Corbyn has it cracked .... 1970s 21st Century Socialism...
Liberal, rational, centrist politicians need to take a long hard look at themselves, and ask, why are they losing?
They can say simply that the voters are stupid (the Matthew Parris approach). They don't know how lucky they are. Perhaps, the answer is to end democracy, so they can remain in power a bit longer.
Or maybe, the answer requires a bit of hard thinking. Are they doing things that are wrong?
They are not providing easy answers to complicated problems and issues. But the centre has lost. They right is utterly dominant in the US and the UK. We'll now find out if the easy answers work.
There's nothing to stop the centre (and left) putting forward constructive ideas.
I am sure we will. But this is unequivocally the right's game now. It owns all that happens - good and bad - from here on in.
I'm neither advocating, predicting nor opposing German remilitarisation. The various reasons critics have given for it being very unlikely are all quite correct. I'm just pointing out many of the historic presumptions which make it very unlikely are suddenly unlikely.
I was also ( probably too obtusely ) trying to troll PB's Tory Brexiters. In the space of 5 months we've gone from the EUSSR to an atlanticist populist revolt that raises the possibility of massive German rearmament being necessary to project Pax Europa.
It's utterly hilarious.
Ah, the "I was trolling" excuse for not knowing the facts...
'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.'
Just like the growing bunch of people that know the government's negotiating plan for Brexit.
We all know the Brexit strategy. Don't panic, Captain Mainwaring!
"Donald Trump will consult Nigel Farage about any policy proposals which will affect the UK before he contacts Theresa May, according to the Ukip leader's aides."
LOL!
I think the government is going to have to give Nigel some sort of "official" role if they want to deal with Donald.
Uks official representative to GOD (great orange dick)
@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.
My friend in the CDU tells me that Germany will be increasing defence spending... But I doubt it'll be 3x
83% by any chance? That's what they'd need to do to meet the NATO minimum. Would be a huge bonanza for the UK defence industry if Europe increased defence spending by the required €117bn.
I think it's inevitable (and a net positive for Rolls Royce, BAe, Safran and Airbus) that there will be meaningful increases in spending. I doubt Germany will get to 2% any time soon, but the structural declines in European defence spending are over.
If lefties like me can hate Britain and the white working class (see PB and right wing press on any number of occasions), despite being British and from the white working class, then why does having Jewish grandchildren preclude Trump from being anti-Semitic?
Maybe because Trump is a rational human being. Or maybe because you have been taught that he is and are unable to face the facts, just your opinions and pre-judices.
LOL. Peak twitter? Apparently JFK also took a $1 salary.
Stalin's desk was apparently full of uncashed pay cheques. It was one of Julie Burchill's big things when she was in her Stalin worship phase (perhaps she's still in it, I stopped paying attention to her years ago).
"Trump would only be the third president to reject the salary: John F. Kennedy (D) and Herbert Hoover (R), who were both extremely wealthy, also said no. "
Corbyn and the SNP have already both proved themselves happy/foolish enough to do Putins bidding.
In what sense?
Corbyn is often on Russia today. He was calling for a demilitarised zone in Eastern Europe yesterday. The links are well known and discussed here and elsewhere.
As for the SNP, it has the characteristics of one of the disruptive fringe political movements that Russia are known to support around Europe. Salmond made positive comments about Putin in Indyref 1.
@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.
My friend in the CDU tells me that Germany will be increasing defence spending... But I doubt it'll be 3x
83% by any chance? That's what they'd need to do to meet the NATO minimum. Would be a huge bonanza for the UK defence industry if Europe increased defence spending by the required €117bn.
I think it's inevitable (and a net positive for Rolls Royce, BAe, Safran and Airbus) that there will be meaningful increases in spending. I doubt Germany will get to 2% any time soon, but the structural declines in European defence spending are over.
I don't tbink it follows.
More than likely we are looking at the end of NATO, and replacing that with an EU force without expeditionary capability, largely an effective border force.
To me that looks fine and dandy. Russia is no real threat, and who else is? The Yanks pulling out is long overdue.
Liberal, rational, centrist politicians need to take a long hard look at themselves, and ask, why are they losing?
They can say simply that the voters are stupid (the Matthew Parris approach). They don't know how lucky they are. Perhaps, the answer is to end democracy, so they can remain in power a bit longer.
Or maybe, the answer requires a bit of hard thinking. Are they doing things that are wrong?
They are not providing easy answers to complicated problems and issues. But the centre has lost. They right is utterly dominant in the US and the UK. We'll now find out if the easy answers work.
They're not attempting to provide any answers, other than assuring us that supranationalism and mass migration are somehow good for us.
Corbyn and the SNP have already both proved themselves happy/foolish enough to do Putins bidding.
In what sense?
Disarm Trident/ remove it from Scotland's shores.
The SNP has been explicitly opposed to nuclear weapons since the 60s, so presumably they've been doing Krushchev's, Brezhnev's, Andropov's, Gorbachev's and Yeltsin's bidding also. Remarkable consistency.
Liberal, rational, centrist politicians need to take a long hard look at themselves, and ask, why are they losing?
They can say simply that the voters are stupid (the Matthew Parris approach). They don't know how lucky they are. Perhaps, the answer is to end democracy, so they can remain in power a bit longer.
Or maybe, the answer requires a bit of hard thinking. Are they doing things that are wrong?
They are not providing easy answers to complicated problems and issues. But the centre has lost. They right is utterly dominant in the US and the UK. We'll now find out if the easy answers work.
There's nothing to stop the centre (and left) putting forward constructive ideas.
I am sure we will. But this is unequivocally the right's game now. It owns all that happens - good and bad - from here on in.
Bit of a predicament you're in - if it all falls apart the West is likely f'cked but if it goes well the future is Trump and Farage stamping on the centre-left's face forever.
As to new ideas from the centre-left I won't be holding my breath - the last two were "spend more money" and "British Jobs For British Workers".
Come on, be realistic. There isn't any world where Germans who have forced the government to shut down nuclear power plants on the basis of safety will ever allow for nuclear weapons to be made.
There is a world, but it probably involves Russia invading a bunch of eastern European countries.
Not very likely tbh, there is a reason Putin stopped at Crimea. Other than reabsorbing client states like Belarus I'm not sure how much effort Putin really wants to put into bothering Europe. If he tried to invade an EU nation the response militarily and economically would be devastating for Russia. The only upside might be that oil prices would go up with that kind of war. The Russian capacity to wage war with Europe is quite poor which is why they have picked off small targets like Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine. Going into Poland, for example, is a non starter.
@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.
My friend in the CDU tells me that Germany will be increasing defence spending... But I doubt it'll be 3x
83% by any chance? That's what they'd need to do to meet the NATO minimum. Would be a huge bonanza for the UK defence industry if Europe increased defence spending by the required €117bn.
I think it's inevitable (and a net positive for Rolls Royce, BAe, Safran and Airbus) that there will be meaningful increases in spending. I doubt Germany will get to 2% any time soon, but the structural declines in European defence spending are over.
I don't tbink it follows.
More than likely we are looking at the end of NATO, and replacing that with an EU force without expeditionary capability, largely an effective border force.
To me that looks fine and dandy. Russia is no real threat, and who else is? The Yanks pulling out is long overdue.
Lots of comments about the 'new world order'. We don't know what this means, but in all probability it means Putin achieving its long term policy objectives: a sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, an isolated and divided UK, and a weakened, neutralised EU. From any objective standpoint, the UK would be best off staying in the EU and using its influence there. But all these arguments were rejected by the people (the idiots) in the referendum and we have to respect that decision. The outcome of Brexit is that the Scots will have their own populist revolt and vote for independence (look at the odds). The Kremlin is meddling here as well, basing a number of new media outlets in Edinburgh. Corbyn and the SNP have already both proved themselves happy/foolish enough to do Putins bidding. Putins aim is to turn Scotland against England/RUK then ultimately to weaken our defensive capabilities and then remove our nuclear deterrent. We will just pretty much be an isolated island on the edge of Europe, split in to two or more countries, with no global influence. What is happening at the moment is absolutely tragic and humiliating, it is the unravelling of Britain as a diplomatic superpower and the abdication of power and influence on the world stage. And leading this is the tragic and pathetic figure of Boris Johnson. Britains tragedy is seconded by the demise of the US as a global superpower, as it abdicates any principled stance of liberal interventionalism and disintegrates in to decadence and overt self interest, perfectly represented by Donald Trump. Basically this is a nightmare, there are no positive angles, it just keeps getting worse and worse. The only consolation is that conflict with Russia may have been averted, but this is at the expense of the rule based international order that has generally held peace for seven decades.
There you go again "The people (the idiots)".
If people like you had actually bothered to listen to the people's views, you wouldn't be in your current predicament.
Stalin's desk was apparently full of uncashed pay cheques. It was one of Julie Burchill's big things when she was in her Stalin worship phase (perhaps she's still in it, I stopped paying attention to her years ago).
"Trump would only be the third president to reject the salary: John F. Kennedy (D) and Herbert Hoover (R), who were both extremely wealthy, also said no. "
I read a piece earlier that said George Washington only accepted a salary to demonstrate that POTUS wasn't just a wealthy man's office.
@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.
My friend in the CDU tells me that Germany will be increasing defence spending... But I doubt it'll be 3x
83% by any chance? That's what they'd need to do to meet the NATO minimum. Would be a huge bonanza for the UK defence industry if Europe increased defence spending by the required €117bn.
I think it's inevitable (and a net positive for Rolls Royce, BAe, Safran and Airbus) that there will be meaningful increases in spending. I doubt Germany will get to 2% any time soon, but the structural declines in European defence spending are over.
For the German military to be in such bad shape after all they had in 1990 suggests they really ran it down since.
@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.
My friend in the CDU tells me that Germany will be increasing defence spending... But I doubt it'll be 3x
83% by any chance? That's what they'd need to do to meet the NATO minimum. Would be a huge bonanza for the UK defence industry if Europe increased defence spending by the required €117bn.
I think it's inevitable (and a net positive for Rolls Royce, BAe, Safran and Airbus) that there will be meaningful increases in spending. I doubt Germany will get to 2% any time soon, but the structural declines in European defence spending are over.
I don't tbink it follows.
More than likely we are looking at the end of NATO, and replacing that with an EU force without expeditionary capability, largely an effective border force.
To me that looks fine and dandy. Russia is no real threat, and who else is? The Yanks pulling out is long overdue.
Pacifists. You're all clueless.
Can you please make your mind up. Is Putin our sworn enemy or our new bestie?
@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.
My friend in the CDU tells me that Germany will be increasing defence spending... But I doubt it'll be 3x
83% by any chance? That's what they'd need to do to meet the NATO minimum. Would be a huge bonanza for the UK defence industry if Europe increased defence spending by the required €117bn.
I think it's inevitable (and a net positive for Rolls Royce, BAe, Safran and Airbus) that there will be meaningful increases in spending. I doubt Germany will get to 2% any time soon, but the structural declines in European defence spending are over.
I don't tbink it follows.
More than likely we are looking at the end of NATO, and replacing that with an EU force without expeditionary capability, largely an effective border force.
To me that looks fine and dandy. Russia is no real threat, and who else is? The Yanks pulling out is long overdue.
Pacifists. You're all clueless.
Can you please make your mind up. Is Putin our sworn enemy or our new bestie?
@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.
My friend in the CDU tells me that Germany will be increasing defence spending... But I doubt it'll be 3x
83% by any chance? That's what they'd need to do to meet the NATO minimum. Would be a huge bonanza for the UK defence industry if Europe increased defence spending by the required €117bn.
I think it's inevitable (and a net positive for Rolls Royce, BAe, Safran and Airbus) that there will be meaningful increases in spending. I doubt Germany will get to 2% any time soon, but the structural declines in European defence spending are over.
I don't tbink it follows.
More than likely we are looking at the end of NATO, and replacing that with an EU force without expeditionary capability, largely an effective border force.
To me that looks fine and dandy. Russia is no real threat, and who else is? The Yanks pulling out is long overdue.
Pacifists. You're all clueless.
Can you please make your mind up. Is Putin our sworn enemy or our new bestie?
Is the world black or white? Make up your mind. Come on, it's an easy question.
Come on, be realistic. There isn't any world where Germans who have forced the government to shut down nuclear power plants on the basis of safety will ever allow for nuclear weapons to be made.
There is a world, but it probably involves Russia invading a bunch of eastern European countries.
Not very likely tbh, there is a reason Putin stopped at Crimea. Other than reabsorbing client states like Belarus I'm not sure how much effort Putin really wants to put into bothering Europe. If he tried to invade an EU nation the response militarily and economically would be devastating for Russia. The only upside might be that oil prices would go up with that kind of war. The Russian capacity to wage war with Europe is quite poor which is why they have picked off small targets like Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine. Going into Poland, for example, is a non starter.
I agree with all of that. Russia, ultimately, is a demographic disaster zone, dependent of the sale of oil and gas to the Europeans and Chinese. Unfortunately for them, new energy sources - whether LNG from Australia or the US, or solar and wind - are a long term drag on its primary industry.
In China they have a word for Russia, they call it colloquially "the dying one". The danger is that, like a dying wasp, it stings before it expires.
@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.
My friend in the CDU tells me that Germany will be increasing defence spending... But I doubt it'll be 3x
83% by any chance? That's what they'd need to do to meet the NATO minimum. Would be a huge bonanza for the UK defence industry if Europe increased defence spending by the required €117bn.
I think it's inevitable (and a net positive for Rolls Royce, BAe, Safran and Airbus) that there will be meaningful increases in spending. I doubt Germany will get to 2% any time soon, but the structural declines in European defence spending are over.
I don't tbink it follows.
More than likely we are looking at the end of NATO, and replacing that with an EU force without expeditionary capability, largely an effective border force.
To me that looks fine and dandy. Russia is no real threat, and who else is? The Yanks pulling out is long overdue.
Pacifists. You're all clueless.
Can you please make your mind up. Is Putin our sworn enemy or our new bestie?
Schrodinger's Russki. Putin perception can be adjusted to every populist situation.
@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.
My friend in the CDU tells me that Germany will be increasing defence spending... But I doubt it'll be 3x
83% by any chance? That's what they'd need to do to meet the NATO minimum. Would be a huge bonanza for the UK defence industry if Europe increased defence spending by the required €117bn.
I think it's inevitable (and a net positive for Rolls Royce, BAe, Safran and Airbus) that there will be meaningful increases in spending. I doubt Germany will get to 2% any time soon, but the structural declines in European defence spending are over.
I don't tbink it follows.
More than likely we are looking at the end of NATO, and replacing that with an EU force without expeditionary capability, largely an effective border force.
To me that looks fine and dandy. Russia is no real threat, and who else is? The Yanks pulling out is long overdue.
Pacifists. You're all clueless.
Can you please make your mind up. Is Putin our sworn enemy or our new bestie?
Neither?
Though it is probably time for the USAF to go home too.
I don't want Trumpsbombers flying from British soil.
@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.
My friend in the CDU tells me that Germany will be increasing defence spending... But I doubt it'll be 3x
83% by any chance? That's what they'd need to do to meet the NATO minimum. Would be a huge bonanza for the UK defence industry if Europe increased defence spending by the required €117bn.
I think it's inevitable (and a net positive for Rolls Royce, BAe, Safran and Airbus) that there will be meaningful increases in spending. I doubt Germany will get to 2% any time soon, but the structural declines in European defence spending are over.
For the German military to be in such bad shape after all they had in 1990 suggests they really ran it down since.
They diverted spending from the military to reviving the East. It was probably the right call.
@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.
TBF this should be a much easier thing to convince German voters of than sending money to protect Greek pensioners.
Come on, be realistic. There isn't any world where Germans who have forced the government to shut down nuclear power plants on the basis of safety will ever allow for nuclear weapons to be made.
There is a world, but it probably involves Russia invading a bunch of eastern European countries.
Not very likely tbh, there is a reason Putin stopped at Crimea. Other than reabsorbing client states like Belarus I'm not sure how much effort Putin really wants to put into bothering Europe. If he tried to invade an EU nation the response militarily and economically would be devastating for Russia. The only upside might be that oil prices would go up with that kind of war. The Russian capacity to wage war with Europe is quite poor which is why they have picked off small targets like Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine. Going into Poland, for example, is a non starter.
I agree with all of that. Russia, ultimately, is a demographic disaster zone, dependent of the sale of oil and gas to the Europeans and Chinese. Unfortunately for them, new energy sources - whether LNG from Australia or the US, or solar and wind - are a long term drag on its primary industry.
In China they have a word for Russia, they call it colloquially "the dying one". The danger is that, like a dying wasp, it stings before it expires.
Or as my friend in the Diplomatic Service called it "Upper Volta with Rockets"
Liberal, rational, centrist politicians need to take a long hard look at themselves, and ask, why are they losing?
They can say simply that the voters are stupid (the Matthew Parris approach). They don't know how lucky they are. Perhaps, the answer is to end democracy, so they can remain in power a bit longer.
Or maybe, the answer requires a bit of hard thinking. Are they doing things that are wrong?
It's an excellent question and one that exercises me as someone who thinks liberalism is a force for good.
The problem is that the liberal consensus and ascendancy that held sway in the West since the Second World War in response to that catastrophe is widely seen to have failed and is breaking down. So we are returning to the 1930's - excepting genocide by mad dictators and global war, but the other aspects of that grim decade - which saw the death of liberalism just as we are seeing again now.
Liberals need to make the case for the authority of international rules, respect for others and the state not interfering unduly in the way people live their lives - all liberal values - because these things are good.
Come on, be realistic. There isn't any world where Germans who have forced the government to shut down nuclear power plants on the basis of safety will ever allow for nuclear weapons to be made.
There is a world, but it probably involves Russia invading a bunch of eastern European countries.
Not very likely tbh, there is a reason Putin stopped at Crimea. Other than reabsorbing client states like Belarus I'm not sure how much effort Putin really wants to put into bothering Europe. If he tried to invade an EU nation the response militarily and economically would be devastating for Russia. The only upside might be that oil prices would go up with that kind of war. The Russian capacity to wage war with Europe is quite poor which is why they have picked off small targets like Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine. Going into Poland, for example, is a non starter.
Thats quite possibly true, Max. Russia hasn't got the mass armies (literally armies) that it had in before the collapse of the communists turned the country into a free for all.
What it does now have is a professional and growing army of about 250,000 and another equal amount of personnel in the in the airforce and navy. Not enough to launch any large scale offensive in Europe. What it will be in another couple of years is another matter.
Comments
Obama has his P45 and will be booking his new claim interview at Jobcentre Plus in January.
They certainly treat their Presidents better than we treat our PM's. Day after a general election here the losing party/PM is out!
We don't faff about for two months...
Anyone who believes Donald Trump (whose 3 adult kids married Jews and whose grandchildren are Jewish) would hire an anti-semite is an idiot.
Andrew Breitbart was Jewish too. I can't get over how silly some here are.
Putting a bunch of tanks on a train to a friendly country doesn't require expeditionary capability.
Investigators have started exhuming the bodies of a Polish president to determine whether he was assassinated
https://t.co/QqnieZwyVI
http://www.wsj.com/articles/rudy-giuliani-john-bolton-are-leading-candidates-for-next-secretary-of-state-1479156004
John Bolton spells BIG trouble.
Reminds me of this photoshop Guido knocked out:
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/600382612343894016
Tusk?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/13/rexit-trumpism-donald-trump-nigel-farage
Wonder if he's been in the US working for Hillary? I always got the impression he thought he was starring in his very own episode of The West Wing most of the time. Maybe the past three months he's been making the fantasy a reality?
Anyway he's not happy about Brexit. Or Trump.
3x would be 3.6% of GDP - there would be basically no support for that in Germany at the moment.
'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.'
Just like the growing bunch of people that know the government's negotiating plan for Brexit.
https://www.rt.com/news/363726-polish-plane-crash-conspiracy-tusk/
Can't be serious
"Donald Trump will consult Nigel Farage about any policy proposals which will affect the UK before he contacts Theresa May, according to the Ukip leader's aides."
I remember reading an article from a barrister who explained that his client was in the middle of a horid divorce. The wife phoned the police alleging that the husband had threatened to kill her with a shotgun. Police arrive and ask for the firearm cabinet to be opened. They find an empty cabinet with a receipt from the registered firearms dealer dated several weeks ago. This is apparently quite common.
Hiring anyone from Breitbart is stupid but I remain skeptical about the anti-Semitism allegations.
They can say simply that the voters are stupid (the Matthew Parris approach). They don't know how lucky they are. Perhaps, the answer is to end democracy, so they can remain in power a bit longer.
Or maybe, the answer requires a bit of hard thinking. Are they doing things that are wrong?
I was also ( probably too obtusely ) trying to troll PB's Tory Brexiters. In the space of 5 months we've gone from the EUSSR to an atlanticist populist revolt that raises the possibility of massive German rearmament being necessary to project Pax Europa.
It's utterly hilarious.
I think the government is going to have to give Nigel some sort of "official" role if they want to deal with Donald.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Władysław_Sikorski's_death_controversy
" can’t think of anything stupider than the charge coming from all quarters of the left–including a headline in the pathetically wretched Huffington Post–that Bannon is an anti-Semite. The source? A one sentence claim from an angry ex-wife in divorce court no less, that Bannon didn’t want their kids to go to school with Jews. I find that particularly amusing since Bannon wanted to make a film to celebrate this Jew’s life."
We don't know what this means, but in all probability it means Putin achieving its long term policy objectives: a sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, an isolated and divided UK, and a weakened, neutralised EU.
From any objective standpoint, the UK would be best off staying in the EU and using its influence there. But all these arguments were rejected by the people (the idiots) in the referendum and we have to respect that decision. The outcome of Brexit is that the Scots will have their own populist revolt and vote for independence (look at the odds).
The Kremlin is meddling here as well, basing a number of new media outlets in Edinburgh. Corbyn and the SNP have already both proved themselves happy/foolish enough to do Putins bidding.
Putins aim is to turn Scotland against England/RUK then ultimately to weaken our defensive capabilities and then remove our nuclear deterrent.
We will just pretty much be an isolated island on the edge of Europe, split in to two or more countries, with no global influence.
What is happening at the moment is absolutely tragic and humiliating, it is the unravelling of Britain as a diplomatic superpower and the abdication of power and influence on the world stage.
And leading this is the tragic and pathetic figure of Boris Johnson.
Britains tragedy is seconded by the demise of the US as a global superpower, as it abdicates any principled stance of liberal interventionalism and disintegrates in to decadence and overt self interest, perfectly represented by Donald Trump.
Basically this is a nightmare, there are no positive angles, it just keeps getting worse and worse. The only consolation is that conflict with Russia may have been averted, but this is at the expense of the rule based international order that has generally held peace for seven decades.
Also I think he wants the USA to withdraw from the UN and make it's own club or something.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_endorsements_in_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016
95% of journalists in america hate him.
But Trump knows how to play the cat and mouse game with the media since 1977.
1970s21st Century Socialism...Is Donald Trump just a mega-troll then?
Who are we aiming our missles at?, Mr Putin is our new BFF...
'Nah. Noone knows the government Brexit plan, not even the government.'
Oh dear, straight from the Lib Dems playbook,desperate times indeed.
As for the SNP, it has the characteristics of one of the disruptive fringe political movements that Russia are known to support around Europe. Salmond made positive comments about Putin in Indyref 1.
More than likely we are looking at the end of NATO, and replacing that with an EU force without expeditionary capability, largely an effective border force.
To me that looks fine and dandy. Russia is no real threat, and who else is? The Yanks pulling out is long overdue.
Edit: forgot about Chernenko.
As to new ideas from the centre-left I won't be holding my breath - the last two were "spend more money" and "British Jobs For British Workers".
If people like you had actually bothered to listen to the people's views, you wouldn't be in your current predicament.
blacka woman?In China they have a word for Russia, they call it colloquially "the dying one". The danger is that, like a dying wasp, it stings before it expires.
Putin perception can be adjusted to every populist situation.
I don't want Trumpsbombers flying from British soil.
https://twitter.com/emilyjashinsky/status/797933410215829504
https://twitter.com/DineshDSouza/status/797652849970806788
Alain Juppe around evens on Betfair.
Two men arrested on suspicion of attempted murder after soldier was stabbed in military barracks
https://t.co/0ErZ2ThJ7E https://t.co/oYA3XUju4O
" Donald Trump's new chief strategist Steve Bannon 'will call Nigel Farage before Theresa May'"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/14/exclusive-donald-trumps-new-chief-strategist-steve-bannon-will-c/
Steve&Nige go back years&years..
The problem is that the liberal consensus and ascendancy that held sway in the West since the Second World War in response to that catastrophe is widely seen to have failed and is breaking down. So we are returning to the 1930's - excepting genocide by mad dictators and global war, but the other aspects of that grim decade - which saw the death of liberalism just as we are seeing again now.
Liberals need to make the case for the authority of international rules, respect for others and the state not interfering unduly in the way people live their lives - all liberal values - because these things are good.
What it does now have is a professional and growing army of about 250,000 and another equal amount of personnel in the in the airforce and navy. Not enough to launch any large scale offensive in Europe. What it will be in another couple of years is another matter.