Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Undefined discussion subject.

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited January 17 in General
Undefined discussion subject.

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    edited January 17
    Good morning and a good thread: short and to the point! And about betting too :smile:

    I think it's a shoo-in that he'll be in Florida, isn't it? He has already booked Air Force One to take him down that morning. If he waited until after the inauguration he would have to request permission from Joe Biden to use the presidential plane for the final time and that stuck in Trump's throat.

    So unless he's in jail Florida is a racing certainty.

    https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/south-florida-city-mar-a-lago-set-for-president-trumps-arrival-on-inauguration-day/2364305/
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 38,788
    North Korea?

    I'll admit, I did not see that one coming.

    Nor his persuading them to launch their new submarine-based nukes on Washington DC. He really was a Bad Loser, huh?

    And the head of SPECTRE.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 5,930
    edited January 17
    Third.

    Nice thread. In which of those is he allowed to play golf?

    I wonder if he will pardon all the rioters before he goes, if possible.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,455
    Good morning. Good comeback from Sri Lanka; a Test that looked like England's now looks more like a draw.

    Which emphasises the twists and turns that life can take, and I suspect, strongly suspect, that Trump has more for us yet. I know what Nicola S has said about him coming to Scotland but I can still see him coming .... fleeing ..... to UK?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 29,998
    edited January 17
    Interesting bet. I’d take the other side of that 1/10 if it was offered, there’s got to be a reasonable chance he’ll leave the country as President, at least until he sees which way the winds are blowing.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 29,998
    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,455
    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Putin's term (theoretically) finishes in 2024 when he will be 72. He'll be increasingly looking to the succession, surely, over the last couple of years of his term, which could mean a difference of emphasis. He's fit, of course, as far as we know, so there are unlikely to be upheavals in Russia.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,294

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Putin's term (theoretically) finishes in 2024 when he will be 72. He'll be increasingly looking to the succession, surely, over the last couple of years of his term, which could mean a difference of emphasis. He's fit, of course, as far as we know, so there are unlikely to be upheavals in Russia.
    Following the 2020 constitutional referendum Putin can get another two 6 years terms so he could be there until 2036 when climate change has turned Magadan into a tropical beach resort.

    Mishustin was the plan but Putin has the habit of dropping potential successors into jobs where they get shit on and tarnished (see also Shoigu). Mishustin was Putin's loyal porte-drapeau for years faithfully running the tax service as a protection racket and instrument of repression. Now he's been give the PM job which is somewhat of a lightning rod for domestic discontent and could be the end for him if things get (more) difficult.
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 640
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Putin's term (theoretically) finishes in 2024 when he will be 72. He'll be increasingly looking to the succession, surely, over the last couple of years of his term, which could mean a difference of emphasis. He's fit, of course, as far as we know, so there are unlikely to be upheavals in Russia.
    Following the 2020 constitutional referendum Putin can get another two 6 years terms so he could be there until 2036 when climate change has turned Magadan into a tropical beach resort.

    Mishustin was the plan but Putin has the habit of dropping potential successors into jobs where they get shit on and tarnished (see also Shoigu). Mishustin was Putin's loyal porte-drapeau for years faithfully running the tax service as a protection racket and instrument of repression. Now he's been give the PM job which is somewhat of a lightning rod for domestic discontent and could be the end for him if things get (more) difficult.
    The return of Navalny could really put the cat amongst the pigeons. There are some big changes coming in Russia, the only questions are timing and direction. The political scene in Moscow looks stable, but it really isn´t. There are a lot of powerful forces under the surface and they have noted Putin´s ever more listless performances.

  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,294
    Cicero said:

    There are a lot of powerful forces under the surface and they have noted Putin´s ever more listless performances.

    People in the West often assume Putin is at the top of the Russian "vertical of power" but in reality he is the gnomish henchman of the oligarchs propelled from relative obscurity to the presidency to be the Russian Pinochet.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 21,840
    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099
    ‘Who would have thought Donald Trump, a man in his 70s, could maintain an election for over two months’

    That’s a hard one to beat, but I suppose his constant very high blood pressure may help?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099

    Good morning. Good comeback from Sri Lanka; a Test that looked like England's now looks more like a draw.

    Which emphasises the twists and turns that life can take, and I suspect, strongly suspect, that Trump has more for us yet. I know what Nicola S has said about him coming to Scotland but I can still see him coming .... fleeing ..... to UK?

    Sri Lanka are still 20 behind on economic innings with just five wickets and a day and a half left.

    I would say that they would be very, very happy if they can get a draw from there, but I don’t think they’ll be counting on it just yet.

    The Gabba is the one that looks like a draw - Oz 54 ahead with two days left but a monsoon in prospect.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 64,277
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099
    MattW said:

    Third.

    Nice thread. In which of those is he allowed to play golf?

    I wonder if he will pardon all the rioters before he goes, if possible.

    I think he probably could. D.C. isn’t a state so I believe theoretically any crime committed there is a Federal crime, which is what he’s able to pardon.

    Whether he’s stupid enough to try it and leave himself as the only person Federal authorities could go after for sedition, however, is another question. He’s good at blaming others and misdirection, as seen from the way he treated his tax lawyers. I think he’ll leave his supporters to swing in the wind in the hope that will leave him in he clear.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 64,277
    Dura_Ace said:

    Cicero said:

    There are a lot of powerful forces under the surface and they have noted Putin´s ever more listless performances.

    People in the West often assume Putin is at the top of the Russian "vertical of power" but in reality he is the gnomish henchman of the oligarchs propelled from relative obscurity to the presidency to be the Russian Pinochet.
    @Dura_Ace What do you think our military is for these days ?
  • eekeek Posts: 11,035
    MattW said:

    Third.

    Nice thread. In which of those is he allowed to play golf?

    I wonder if he will pardon all the rioters before he goes, if possible.

    No because what kickback or advantage would Trump get from pardoning them?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,294
    Pulpstar said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Cicero said:

    There are a lot of powerful forces under the surface and they have noted Putin´s ever more listless performances.

    People in the West often assume Putin is at the top of the Russian "vertical of power" but in reality he is the gnomish henchman of the oligarchs propelled from relative obscurity to the presidency to be the Russian Pinochet.
    @Dura_Ace What do you think our military is for these days ?
    a) Salving of national vanity
    b) Industrial welfare for the usual suspects
    c) Defence of the realm

    In that order.
  • eekeek Posts: 11,035
    edited January 17
    Sandpit said:

    Interesting bet. I’d take the other side of that 1/10 if it was offered, there’s got to be a reasonable chance he’ll leave the country as President, at least until he sees which way the winds are blowing.

    I think he would prefer to but the new Covid restrictions around the world make that completely impossible
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099
    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
    Holland has invaded several times, most recently a rather halfarsed affair in 1688 which, to everyone’s astonishment, worked. Norway also invaded England in 1066 and Scotland several times, notably Hakon’s catastrophe in 1263. Spain made several less than efficient attempts in the sixteenth century, including one landing in Cornwall in 1595 and an even more inept one the following year.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,294
    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    The new generation of wars will be fought in cyberspace, as much as by conventional militaries with guns, tanks and planes.

    The Israelis, unsurprisingly, get this. They have just subjected their entire defence capability to what was described as 'an MRI with painful consequences'. They are rapidly jettisoning a lot (but not all) legacy platforms such as aircraft and tanks to focus on cyber, EW and precision strike.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 3,150
    edited January 17

    North Korea?

    I'll admit, I did not see that one coming.

    Nor his persuading them to launch their new submarine-based nukes on Washington DC. He really was a Bad Loser, huh?

    And the head of SPECTRE.

    His support among Republicans would fall another nine points following the strike. Lauren and Marjorie still on board.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,455
    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
    Holland has invaded several times, most recently a rather halfarsed affair in 1688 which, to everyone’s astonishment, worked. Norway also invaded England in 1066 and Scotland several times, notably Hakon’s catastrophe in 1263. Spain made several less than efficient attempts in the sixteenth century, including one landing in Cornwall in 1595 and an even more inept one the following year.
    Couldn't the 1688 affair be reasonably described as 'in support of treasonous activity'?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,294
    edited January 17
    On topic: this looks like a great value bet as Trump will obviously foute le camp to Maga Lardo but I think there is a chance the VC-25 will actually be in transit when Biden is actually being inaugurated.

    Trump won't want to leave until the last minute and Biden won't turn the aircraft round in transit.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
    Holland has invaded several times, most recently a rather halfarsed affair in 1688 which, to everyone’s astonishment, worked. Norway also invaded England in 1066 and Scotland several times, notably Hakon’s catastrophe in 1263. Spain made several less than efficient attempts in the sixteenth century, including one landing in Cornwall in 1595 and an even more inept one the following year.
    Couldn't the 1688 affair be reasonably described as 'in support of treasonous activity'?
    Parliament would argue the treason was committed by the king...

    So yes, you’re probably right. :smile:
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099
    Dura_Ace said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Cicero said:

    There are a lot of powerful forces under the surface and they have noted Putin´s ever more listless performances.

    People in the West often assume Putin is at the top of the Russian "vertical of power" but in reality he is the gnomish henchman of the oligarchs propelled from relative obscurity to the presidency to be the Russian Pinochet.
    @Dura_Ace What do you think our military is for these days ?
    a) Salving of national vanity
    b) Industrial welfare for the usual suspects
    c) Defence of the realm

    In that order.
    Defence of the realm is as high as (c)? I’d say that’s good news.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,455
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
    Holland has invaded several times, most recently a rather halfarsed affair in 1688 which, to everyone’s astonishment, worked. Norway also invaded England in 1066 and Scotland several times, notably Hakon’s catastrophe in 1263. Spain made several less than efficient attempts in the sixteenth century, including one landing in Cornwall in 1595 and an even more inept one the following year.
    Couldn't the 1688 affair be reasonably described as 'in support of treasonous activity'?
    Parliament would argue the treason was committed by the king...

    So yes, you’re probably right. :smile:
    Sort of on topic. Grandson Two is, we hope, going to Uni (probably Exeter) to read History in September. I'm looking forward to hearing something about his studies.
    I don't suppose I'll hear much about his extra-curricular activities.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 5,576
    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
    The Romans?

    William wasn't France.

    Geography doesn't change and it doesn't matter whether we have a feud with France, it's about feuds with anyone capable of invading and conquering France. And if you want to go by historical example, the last - highly successful - cross channel invasion was in 1944. Other direction, but so what?
  • isamisam Posts: 34,994
    edited January 17
    I am not picking on TSE, just an observation, please don't ban me - the word "Trump" seems to me to be used too many times in the header for it to be pleasant to read.

    That said, a friend of mine used to hate it when a player was described in several different ways in a football round up, ie "The veteran opened the scoring", "the Dutchman went on to set up the winner", "Arsenal's number ten won the man of the match award" "the thirty-four year old will be happy with his days work" to describe a mid 2000's Dennis Bergkamp performance, when saying "Bergkamp" four times would have done the job, so maybe it is just personal preference rather than crimes against writing. Does it matter anyway?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
    Holland has invaded several times, most recently a rather halfarsed affair in 1688 which, to everyone’s astonishment, worked. Norway also invaded England in 1066 and Scotland several times, notably Hakon’s catastrophe in 1263. Spain made several less than efficient attempts in the sixteenth century, including one landing in Cornwall in 1595 and an even more inept one the following year.
    Couldn't the 1688 affair be reasonably described as 'in support of treasonous activity'?
    Parliament would argue the treason was committed by the king...

    So yes, you’re probably right. :smile:
    Sort of on topic. Grandson Two is, we hope, going to Uni (probably Exeter) to read History in September. I'm looking forward to hearing something about his studies.
    I don't suppose I'll hear much about his extra-curricular activities.
    Well, if you will tell him the uni’s full of ‘posh totty,’ what do you expect?

    Not at all a bad history department though. Richard Toye on his own is an ornament to any department, while Jon Lawrence, Levi Roach and Laura Sangha are all big names in their fields.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 3,150
    edited January 17
    isam said:

    I am not picking on TSE, just an observation, please don't ban me - the word "Trump" seems to me to be used too many times in the header for it to be pleasant to read.

    That said, a friend of mine used to hate it when a player was described in several different ways in a football round up, ie "The veteran opened the scoring", "the Dutchman went on to set up the winner", "Arsenal's number ten won the man of the match award" "the thirty-four year old will be happy with his days work" to describe a mid 2000's Dennis Bergkamp performance, when saying "Bergkamp" four times would have done the job, so maybe it is just personal preference rather than crimes against writing. Does it matter anyway?

    The answer is to drop the pronoun in when it’s clear you’re referring to the subject. The example you give is an abomination. Similarly, Daily Mail articles about Lana Del Rey that refer to ‘the Video Games singer’ etc.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688

    Good morning. Good comeback from Sri Lanka; a Test that looked like England's now looks more like a draw.

    The other test match is a cracker. Great fightback by India. If they had taken their chances in the Aussie first innings it would probably be their series.

    As for New Zealand and Kane Williamson ... wow. The No. 1 test team in the world.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 54,989
    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: mildly surprised a Hamilton-Mercedes deal hasn't been concluded yet.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 3,150
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
    Holland has invaded several times, most recently a rather halfarsed affair in 1688 which, to everyone’s astonishment, worked. Norway also invaded England in 1066 and Scotland several times, notably Hakon’s catastrophe in 1263. Spain made several less than efficient attempts in the sixteenth century, including one landing in Cornwall in 1595 and an even more inept one the following year.
    Couldn't the 1688 affair be reasonably described as 'in support of treasonous activity'?
    Parliament would argue the treason was committed by the king...

    So yes, you’re probably right. :smile:
    Sort of on topic. Grandson Two is, we hope, going to Uni (probably Exeter) to read History in September. I'm looking forward to hearing something about his studies.
    I don't suppose I'll hear much about his extra-curricular activities.
    Well, if you will tell him the uni’s full of ‘posh totty,’ what do you expect?

    Not at all a bad history department though. Richard Toye on his own is an ornament to any department, while Jon Lawrence, Levi Roach and Laura Sangha are all big names in their fields.
    I recall in my day Exeter students used to be described as being like Devon cream: thick and rich.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 5,576
    isam said:

    I am not picking on TSE, just an observation, please don't ban me - the word "Trump" seems to me to be used too many times in the header for it to be pleasant to read.

    That said, a friend of mine used to hate it when a player was described in several different ways in a football round up, ie "The veteran opened the scoring", "the Dutchman went on to set up the winner", "Arsenal's number ten won the man of the match award" "the thirty-four year old will be happy with his days work" to describe a mid 2000's Dennis Bergkamp performance, when saying "Bergkamp" four times would have done the job, so maybe it is just personal preference rather than crimes against writing. Does it matter anyway?

    The veteran pb commenter takes issue with the designer-trainer-sporting deputy editor's style. Called "elegant variation" in the trade
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 54,989
    Mr. Z, it can also be irritating to repeat the same damned name/term over and over again.

    It's why, in my enormo-haddock blog, I often refer to drivers by nationality or team as well as by name.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 25,866
    edited January 17
    Biden set to make the UK his first overseas trip. I'm looking forwards to the articles from the usual suspects about how the US us no longer a real superpower.

    That EU-China deal is going to cause a huge rupture in western unity, all so that Siemens can get access to Chinese slave labour camps to make dishwashers.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 3,506
    isam said:

    I am not picking on TSE, just an observation, please don't ban me - the word "Trump" seems to me to be used too many times in the header for it to be pleasant to read.

    That said, a friend of mine used to hate it when a player was described in several different ways in a football round up, ie "The veteran opened the scoring", "the Dutchman went on to set up the winner", "Arsenal's number ten won the man of the match award" "the thirty-four year old will be happy with his days work" to describe a mid 2000's Dennis Bergkamp performance, when saying "Bergkamp" four times would have done the job, so maybe it is just personal preference rather than crimes against writing. Does it matter anyway?

    I would be quite content if there were a convention to refer to the pussy grabbing misogynist without using either his name or pronouns.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099

    Good morning. Good comeback from Sri Lanka; a Test that looked like England's now looks more like a draw.

    The other test match is a cracker. Great fightback by India. If they had taken their chances in the Aussie first innings it would probably be their series.

    As for New Zealand and Kane Williamson ... wow. The No. 1 test team in the world.
    Several years ago, John Bracewell signed a 20 year old who had just made a pretty decent start to his Test career as Glos’ overseas player.

    Then Alex Gidman got injured and this novice was named stand in captain.

    At the time, I thought Bracewell was mad when former captains Lewis and Taylor were available.

    His name was Kane Williamson, and he held Middlesex, one of the strongest sides in the division and led by Andrew Strauss, to a draw with a fighting 73.

    I no longer think Bracewell was mad...
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    edited January 17
    Dura_Ace said:

    On topic: this looks like a great value bet as Trump will obviously foute le camp to Maga Lardo but I think there is a chance the VC-25 will actually be in transit when Biden is actually being inaugurated.

    Trump won't want to leave until the last minute

    Guesswork and incorrect.

    US media outlets, quoting sources close to the President, report that it is all scheduled and Trump has to land in Florida on Air Force One well before the inauguration. Indeed, the plane has to be back in Washington (or rather, Air Force Andrews Base) for the new President.

    They have also had to generate two sets of "biscuit cards" which are the nuclear codes. The one which Trump will carry on board to Florida as President will be switched off just as Biden is inaugurated and given the other set.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099
    So the new leader of Germany is likely to be a Qanon admiring loon?

    God help us.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 15,609
    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
    Yes, having enemies and being invaded are two different things, and classic country X invades country Y as per WW2 has become extremely rare across the globe, virtually the only examples being disputed borders and the aftermath of state collapse (Ukraine being the obvious example). Conversely, society is now much more vulnerable to direct cyberattack and more insidious efforts like fake news. I don't see much point in retaining significant tank forces but we should certainly invest in expanding places like GCHQ.

    An interesitng question is *why* international invasion has become rare. Has the human race grown up a bit?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 25,866

    Interesting couple of posts on new CDU lead.
    https:/twitter.com/b_judah/status/1350626266010021892?s=21
    https:/twitter.com/b_judah/status/1350628254802182145?s=21
    https:/twitter.com/b_judah/status/1350629915494936577?s=21

    Oh dear. Europe becomes an even less reliable ally.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099
    edited January 17
    Dickwella didn’t so much throw his wicket away lightly there as hurl it with great force. What a silly shot.

    Edit - England now into Sri Lanka’s rather long tail.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,294

    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: mildly surprised a Hamilton-Mercedes deal hasn't been concluded yet.

    MB have just committed 70 billion € to building six factories for their electrification drive so the Daimler AG board isn't totally jazzed on paying for another platinum and ruby ampalang for Sir Lew.

    Particularly as F1 isn't going to be relevant to any mass market product in 10 years.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 54,989
    Mr. Ace, Russell's odds have shortened quite a bit on Ladbrokes. Was around 26 or so for a long while (maybe a tiny bit shorter) now down to 17.

    Bottas is 13 on Betfair.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099
    Not getting better for Lanka here. Good ball from Leach though.

    This match has been hard on him. He bowls well, and gets three wickets for a lot. Bess bowls filth and gets 8-100.

    That said, Bess went the whole summer with no luck at all.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,294

    Mr. Ace, Russell's odds have shortened quite a bit on Ladbrokes. Was around 26 or so for a long while (maybe a tiny bit shorter) now down to 17.

    Bottas is 13 on Betfair.

    That's Cdr Ace to you.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099
    That would be sensible, but hard to see how it can be revenue neutral with every LA in England in roughly the financial position of RBS under Fred the Shred.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099
    Dura_Ace said:

    Mr. Ace, Russell's odds have shortened quite a bit on Ladbrokes. Was around 26 or so for a long while (maybe a tiny bit shorter) now down to 17.

    Bottas is 13 on Betfair.

    That's Cdr Ace to you.
    Insisting on rank is en sign of insecurity.

    Sincerely yours, the poster whose handle means ‘The Doctor.’
  • eekeek Posts: 11,035
    Dura_Ace said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: mildly surprised a Hamilton-Mercedes deal hasn't been concluded yet.

    MB have just committed 70 billion € to building six factories for their electrification drive so the Daimler AG board isn't totally jazzed on paying for another platinum and ruby ampalang for Sir Lew.

    Particularly as F1 isn't going to be relevant to any mass market product in 10 years.
    That will be the Daimler AG board that only owns a 1/3 of the team. I'm not surprised no deal has been agreed but equally I don't think the board cars 1 bit at the moment.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 985
    MaxPB said:

    Biden set to make the UK his first overseas trip. I'm looking forwards to the articles from the usual suspects about how the US us no longer a real superpower.

    That EU-China deal is going to cause a huge rupture in western unity, all so that Siemens can get access to Chinese slave labour camps to make dishwashers.

    I agree - I can’t help but think that China deal was a huge strategic blunder by the EU.

    Will be interesting to see Bidens approach to a China, and how he’ll work with the five eyes country’s.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,099
    eek said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: mildly surprised a Hamilton-Mercedes deal hasn't been concluded yet.

    MB have just committed 70 billion € to building six factories for their electrification drive so the Daimler AG board isn't totally jazzed on paying for another platinum and ruby ampalang for Sir Lew.

    Particularly as F1 isn't going to be relevant to any mass market product in 10 years.
    That will be the Daimler AG board that only owns a 1/3 of the team. I'm not surprised no deal has been agreed but equally I don't think the board cars 1 bit at the moment.
    Genius!
  • ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
    Holland has invaded several times, most recently a rather halfarsed affair in 1688 which, to everyone’s astonishment, worked. Norway also invaded England in 1066 and Scotland several times, notably Hakon’s catastrophe in 1263. Spain made several less than efficient attempts in the sixteenth century, including one landing in Cornwall in 1595 and an even more inept one the following year.
    Couldn't the 1688 affair be reasonably described as 'in support of treasonous activity'?
    Parliament would argue the treason was committed by the king...

    So yes, you’re probably right. :smile:
    Sort of on topic. Grandson Two is, we hope, going to Uni (probably Exeter) to read History in September. I'm looking forward to hearing something about his studies.
    I don't suppose I'll hear much about his extra-curricular activities.
    singing sea shanties?

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,455
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
    Holland has invaded several times, most recently a rather halfarsed affair in 1688 which, to everyone’s astonishment, worked. Norway also invaded England in 1066 and Scotland several times, notably Hakon’s catastrophe in 1263. Spain made several less than efficient attempts in the sixteenth century, including one landing in Cornwall in 1595 and an even more inept one the following year.
    Couldn't the 1688 affair be reasonably described as 'in support of treasonous activity'?
    Parliament would argue the treason was committed by the king...

    So yes, you’re probably right. :smile:
    Sort of on topic. Grandson Two is, we hope, going to Uni (probably Exeter) to read History in September. I'm looking forward to hearing something about his studies.
    I don't suppose I'll hear much about his extra-curricular activities.
    Well, if you will tell him the uni’s full of ‘posh totty,’ what do you expect?

    Not at all a bad history department though. Richard Toye on his own is an ornament to any department, while Jon Lawrence, Levi Roach and Laura Sangha are all big names in their fields.
    Thanks for the comment about the department; it'll make his father happier.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,455
    Dura_Ace said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: mildly surprised a Hamilton-Mercedes deal hasn't been concluded yet.

    MB have just committed 70 billion € to building six factories for their electrification drive so the Daimler AG board isn't totally jazzed on paying for another platinum and ruby ampalang for Sir Lew.

    Particularly as F1 isn't going to be relevant to any mass market product in 10 years.
    Don't you think F1 will be electric before too long?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 35,679
    It always struck me as a bit overstated. Yes, families were going to be mixing a bit more, particularly inter generationally, but Christmas means that work stops these days so no one going to the office, travelling on public transport (if there is any), going to shops, etc. One probably cancelled the other out to a large extent.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,455

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
    Holland has invaded several times, most recently a rather halfarsed affair in 1688 which, to everyone’s astonishment, worked. Norway also invaded England in 1066 and Scotland several times, notably Hakon’s catastrophe in 1263. Spain made several less than efficient attempts in the sixteenth century, including one landing in Cornwall in 1595 and an even more inept one the following year.
    Couldn't the 1688 affair be reasonably described as 'in support of treasonous activity'?
    Parliament would argue the treason was committed by the king...

    So yes, you’re probably right. :smile:
    Sort of on topic. Grandson Two is, we hope, going to Uni (probably Exeter) to read History in September. I'm looking forward to hearing something about his studies.
    I don't suppose I'll hear much about his extra-curricular activities.
    singing sea shanties?

    He plays guitar, so probably accompanying.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 1,732
    edited January 17

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
    Holland has invaded several times, most recently a rather halfarsed affair in 1688 which, to everyone’s astonishment, worked. Norway also invaded England in 1066 and Scotland several times, notably Hakon’s catastrophe in 1263. Spain made several less than efficient attempts in the sixteenth century, including one landing in Cornwall in 1595 and an even more inept one the following year.
    Couldn't the 1688 affair be reasonably described as 'in support of treasonous activity'?
    Yes, though whether the treason was that of James II, who was selling the country to France and the Pope, or the immortal seven, who invited William over, is arguable.

    Talking of traitors, the Americans briefly controlled an acre or so of British soil during their raid on Whitehaven in 1778.

    https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/john-paul-jones-leads-american-raid-on-whitehaven-england
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 40,118
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us.
    You missed the Salisbury poisonings then?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,294

    Dura_Ace said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: mildly surprised a Hamilton-Mercedes deal hasn't been concluded yet.

    MB have just committed 70 billion € to building six factories for their electrification drive so the Daimler AG board isn't totally jazzed on paying for another platinum and ruby ampalang for Sir Lew.

    Particularly as F1 isn't going to be relevant to any mass market product in 10 years.
    Don't you think F1 will be electric before too long?
    Dunno, I don't really like or follow it closely. I don't think manufacturers will be in it for the long haul though.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,294

    I'm growing a little weary of US channels, especially CNN, bashing Britain. There have been a whole series of articles focused on what a cock-up the country now is. Brexit has been a particular source of derision. Here's CNN's latest:

    https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/uk-travel-2021-crisis/index.html

    And here was a real pre-Christmas piece of savage attack:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/21/uk/boris-johnson-covid-analysis-intl-gbr/index.html

    I'm a left-leaner who voted Labour and campaigned vigorously for Remain. Even I'm getting irritated by this constant negativity. It's not only that it's a case of 'pot, kettle, black'. It's two other things which I am increasingly feeling.

    1. Brexit has not (yet) been the disaster some were excitedly predicting. Yes there are teething issues but, frankly, it has gone quite smoothly so far. We have a trade deal and our vaccine rollout is undeniably faster thanks to shaking off the EU shackles.

    2. The vaccine rollout is a STELLAR success so far. The UK is on course to be the global leader on mass vaccination of its citizens (Israel, UAE, Bahrain are doing well too with smaller populations). In a handful of months we will have the vast majority of the country vaccinated, the virus all but eliminated and our citizens able to travel the world as a result. It is absolutely clear that airlines in conjunction with the WHO are going to make vaccination the prerequisite for travel.

    Yes there have been cock-ups and u-turns but Boris Johnson and Britain are doing alright.

    Maybe don't watch CNN if you don't like it?
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 60
    edited January 17


    An interesitng question is *why* international invasion has become rare. Has the human race grown up a bit?

    My gut feeling would be 'no' -- I'd be inclined to suspect a combination of "the balance of incentives for potential invaders has changed" and "we just got lucky for a few decades".
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 90,129
    edited January 17

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us.
    You missed the Salisbury poisonings then?
    The Russians aren't as much of a threat to the UK as the National Trust.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 40,118
    Even though I've come round to the idea of a low and proportionate asset tax that would be a very "brave" decision.

    The losers will be very vocal, and it could easily be a political disaster. May and Thatcher say hello.

    I'd be surprised if it goes ahead.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 39,357

    Even though I've come round to the idea of a low and proportionate asset tax that would be a very "brave" decision.

    The losers will be very vocal, and it could easily be a political disaster. May and Thatcher say hello.

    I'd be surprised if it goes ahead.
    File in the box in the corner labelled: Not going to happen.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 1,732
    ydoethur said:

    That would be sensible, but hard to see how it can be revenue neutral with every LA in England in roughly the financial position of RBS under Fred the Shred.
    It may be revenue neutral overall, but there will be huge disparities between the winners and losers. The losers will cry bloody murder and the winners will hardly notice.

    So overall I can see this being a 21st century version of the Poll Tax.
  • eekeek Posts: 11,035

    Even though I've come round to the idea of a low and proportionate asset tax that would be a very "brave" decision.

    The losers will be very vocal, and it could easily be a political disaster. May and Thatcher say hello.

    I'd be surprised if it goes ahead.
    File in the box in the corner labelled: Not going to happen.
    I suspect it's going to happen as the other option is a revaluation for council tax purposes and that would be worse.

    The fact that stamp duty is being thrown into the mix tells me that some thought has been given on how to actually sell it.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 40,118
    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    The new generation of wars will be fought in cyberspace, as much as by conventional militaries with guns, tanks and planes.

    Russia has been trying to destabilise the West for a while now. Key to how we win the war is to reduce European dependence on the Russian oil and gas which is pretty much their only source of hand currency.
    Indeed. Just because Russia doesn't have tanks on our doorstep threatening immediate physical invasion doesn't mean it's not a threat to us.

    It regularly tests British air defences, launches submarine incursions into our waters, hacks our networks and intelligence and carries out acts of state-sanctioned murder on our soil. Not to mention invading its neighbours and trying to destabilise NATO, which keeps us safe overall.

    Those who doubt the veracity of this should read the recent cross-party parliamentary report on Russia.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 15,609
    ydoethur said:

    That would be sensible, but hard to see how it can be revenue neutral with every LA in England in roughly the financial position of RBS under Fred the Shred.
    Not against that in principle, but the article suggests that it's unnamed people in the Treausry having a look and Sunak yet to be persuaded and in general sceptical about property taxation. It reads like a kite-flying exercise.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 39,357
    DavidL said:

    It always struck me as a bit overstated. Yes, families were going to be mixing a bit more, particularly inter generationally, but Christmas means that work stops these days so no one going to the office, travelling on public transport (if there is any), going to shops, etc. One probably cancelled the other out to a large extent.
    What we have seen is a spike in 80+ year olds iirc. I'm pretty sure that's a xmas mixing effect. Indeed, there was a case outlined in this week's New Statesman by a working GP of exactly that.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Dura_Ace said:

    I'm growing a little weary of US channels, especially CNN, bashing Britain. There have been a whole series of articles focused on what a cock-up the country now is. Brexit has been a particular source of derision. Here's CNN's latest:

    https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/uk-travel-2021-crisis/index.html

    And here was a real pre-Christmas piece of savage attack:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/21/uk/boris-johnson-covid-analysis-intl-gbr/index.html

    I'm a left-leaner who voted Labour and campaigned vigorously for Remain. Even I'm getting irritated by this constant negativity. It's not only that it's a case of 'pot, kettle, black'. It's two other things which I am increasingly feeling.

    1. Brexit has not (yet) been the disaster some were excitedly predicting. Yes there are teething issues but, frankly, it has gone quite smoothly so far. We have a trade deal and our vaccine rollout is undeniably faster thanks to shaking off the EU shackles.

    2. The vaccine rollout is a STELLAR success so far. The UK is on course to be the global leader on mass vaccination of its citizens (Israel, UAE, Bahrain are doing well too with smaller populations). In a handful of months we will have the vast majority of the country vaccinated, the virus all but eliminated and our citizens able to travel the world as a result. It is absolutely clear that airlines in conjunction with the WHO are going to make vaccination the prerequisite for travel.

    Yes there have been cock-ups and u-turns but Boris Johnson and Britain are doing alright.

    Maybe don't watch CNN if you don't like it?
    What a silly comment.

    I like CNN very much and I don't tend to 'watch' it. I use their website a lot for US news, along with NBC, ABC, NYT and Washington Post with occasional forays into FoxNews when I'm feeling robust enough to handle it.

    I am merely pointing out about their current undue negativity towards Britain.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Oh and I read the Saturday Daily Telegraph. Do I like all of their perspectives? No of course not but the journalism is good.
  • eekeek Posts: 11,035

    Oh and I read the Saturday Daily Telegraph. Do I like all of their perspectives? No of course not but the journalism is good.

    Really - it's a posh Daily Express for those with slightly better comprehension skills.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 21,840

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    Russia has never controlled an acre of British soil so far as I'm aware, they were an adversary through the cold war due to our position in the globe, nuclear firepower and alliance with the USA via NATO.
    France and Denmark are the only nations that have properly invaded us iirc, and those feuds in terms of military threats are long gone. Other historical threats have been when we stood up for what we believed (And certainly was in the case of the Nazis) was right in the world, and our own empire building a bit further back.
    So far as I can see for the forseeable future there won't be a military threat to the UK, it'll be via disinformation/terrorism and so forth that Russia/Iran sponsor and engage in. But that isn't obviously countered with the military.
    Holland has invaded several times, most recently a rather halfarsed affair in 1688 which, to everyone’s astonishment, worked. Norway also invaded England in 1066 and Scotland several times, notably Hakon’s catastrophe in 1263. Spain made several less than efficient attempts in the sixteenth century, including one landing in Cornwall in 1595 and an even more inept one the following year.
    Couldn't the 1688 affair be reasonably described as 'in support of treasonous activity'?
    Parliament would argue the treason was committed by the king...

    So yes, you’re probably right. :smile:
    Sort of on topic. Grandson Two is, we hope, going to Uni (probably Exeter) to read History in September. I'm looking forward to hearing something about his studies.
    I don't suppose I'll hear much about his extra-curricular activities.
    singing sea shanties?

    Strange as it may seem, that is the current trend...

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2021/jan/16/how-a-scottish-posties-simple-sea-shanty-struck-a-global-chord
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 62,950
    Saw the first sentence and thought 'this is a TSE header, isn't it?'

    I like silly little markets like this.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 82,645
    Trump will be at Mar a Lago, Florida on inaugration day where I understand he is planning a rival even to Biden's inaugration.
  • eekeek Posts: 11,035
    edited January 17

    ydoethur said:

    That would be sensible, but hard to see how it can be revenue neutral with every LA in England in roughly the financial position of RBS under Fred the Shred.
    Not against that in principle, but the article suggests that it's unnamed people in the Treausry having a look and Sunak yet to be persuaded and in general sceptical about property taxation. It reads like a kite-flying exercise.
    But as I said offer a land value tax against a council tax revaluation exercise and suddenly it becomes so much less politically scary - as the London, South and the Home Counties will need an entirely separate set of bands to reflect property values to the North.

  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 4,820
    Sensible proposition. Stamp duty is a daft tax on moving house and council tax's cap at the upper end cuts off a perfectly reasonable source of revenue while also being highly regressive. Probably too sensible to happen.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 62,950
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Putin's term (theoretically) finishes in 2024 when he will be 72. He'll be increasingly looking to the succession, surely, over the last couple of years of his term, which could mean a difference of emphasis. He's fit, of course, as far as we know, so there are unlikely to be upheavals in Russia.
    Following the 2020 constitutional referendum Putin can get another two 6 years terms so he could be there until 2036 when climate change has turned Magadan into a tropical beach resort.

    Mishustin was the plan but Putin has the habit of dropping potential successors into jobs where they get shit on and tarnished (see also Shoigu). Mishustin was Putin's loyal porte-drapeau for years faithfully running the tax service as a protection racket and instrument of repression. Now he's been give the PM job which is somewhat of a lightning rod for domestic discontent and could be the end for him if things get (more) difficult.
    What's happened to Medvedev?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,455
    pm215 said:


    An interesitng question is *why* international invasion has become rare. Has the human race grown up a bit?

    My gut feeling would be 'no' -- I'd be inclined to suspect a combination of "the balance of incentives for potential invaders has changed" and "we just got lucky for a few decades".
    The wars in the Caucasus? Iraq/Iran? Nothing in Europe, I'll admit.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 6,289
    DavidL said:

    I'm growing a little weary of US channels, especially CNN, bashing Britain. There have been a whole series of articles focused on what a cock-up the country now is. Brexit has been a particular source of derision. Here's CNN's latest:

    https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/uk-travel-2021-crisis/index.html

    And here was a real pre-Christmas piece of savage attack:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/21/uk/boris-johnson-covid-analysis-intl-gbr/index.html

    I'm a left-leaner who voted Labour and campaigned vigorously for Remain. Even I'm getting irritated by this constant negativity. It's not only that it's a case of 'pot, kettle, black'. It's two other things which I am increasingly feeling.

    1. Brexit has not (yet) been the disaster some were excitedly predicting. Yes there are teething issues but, frankly, it has gone quite smoothly so far. We have a trade deal and our vaccine rollout is undeniably faster thanks to shaking off the EU shackles.

    2. The vaccine rollout is a STELLAR success so far. The UK is on course to be the global leader on mass vaccination of its citizens (Israel, UAE, Bahrain are doing well too with smaller populations). In a handful of months we will have the vast majority of the country vaccinated, the virus all but eliminated and our citizens able to travel the world as a result. It is absolutely clear that airlines in conjunction with the WHO are going to make vaccination the prerequisite for travel.

    Yes there have been cock-ups and u-turns but Boris Johnson and Britain are doing alright.

    I thought @MaxPB's comment of get back to us when we need 20k troops for the opening of Parliament made the point pretty well.
    The general narrative from overseas - not just CNN - is that Britain is fucked.

    That is because we have spent 4 or 5 years fucking ourselves.

    That the US is also - albeit differently - fucked, is irrelevant. It’s not as if CNN did not report on the Capitol coup.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 35,254

    Sensible proposition. Stamp duty is a daft tax on moving house and council tax's cap at the upper end cuts off a perfectly reasonable source of revenue while also being highly regressive. Probably too sensible to happen.

    It would hit prime Tory voting areas in the SE far too hard for it ever to happen.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 82,645
    ydoethur said:

    So the new leader of Germany is likely to be a Qanon admiring loon?

    God help us.
    He may not even be the CDU/CSU chancellor candidate, I think the Bavarian Minister President and CSU leader Markus Soder will challenge him for that position
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 21,840

    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Just catching up, a very good and insightful piece from @david_herdson yesterday.

    As the USA increasingly looks towards China for its foreign policy issues, European nations are going to have to do much more themselves in the future, to defend against the threats from Russia.

    Nah, Russia is no longer a military threat to us. It will concentrate on harassing its neighbours, and bumping off the odd dissident at home and abroad while sowing alt.right trolls across the west.

    We have no significant military enemies any more. Indeed need to rethink what our armed forces are for besides bussing vaccines around old folks homes.
    The new generation of wars will be fought in cyberspace, as much as by conventional militaries with guns, tanks and planes.

    Russia has been trying to destabilise the West for a while now. Key to how we win the war is to reduce European dependence on the Russian oil and gas which is pretty much their only source of hand currency.
    Indeed. Just because Russia doesn't have tanks on our doorstep threatening immediate physical invasion doesn't mean it's not a threat to us.

    It regularly tests British air defences, launches submarine incursions into our waters, hacks our networks and intelligence and carries out acts of state-sanctioned murder on our soil. Not to mention invading its neighbours and trying to destabilise NATO, which keeps us safe overall.

    Those who doubt the veracity of this should read the recent cross-party parliamentary report on Russia.
    And notably its biggest threat is troll farms stirring up alt.right culture wars amongst useful idiots.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 62,950
    ydoethur said:

    MattW said:

    Third.

    Nice thread. In which of those is he allowed to play golf?

    I wonder if he will pardon all the rioters before he goes, if possible.

    I think he probably could. D.C. isn’t a state so I believe theoretically any crime committed there is a Federal crime, which is what he’s able to pardon.

    Whether he’s stupid enough to try it and leave himself as the only person Federal authorities could go after for sedition, however, is another question. He’s good at blaming others and misdirection, as seen from the way he treated his tax lawyers. I think he’ll leave his supporters to swing in the wind in the hope that will leave him in he clear.
    Pardoning those involved seems like it might convince some senators to convict him. Given hes probably free and clear at the moment hed do well to leave it alone.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 6,289

    Sensible proposition. Stamp duty is a daft tax on moving house and council tax's cap at the upper end cuts off a perfectly reasonable source of revenue while also being highly regressive. Probably too sensible to happen.
    Having paid a shed load on stamp duty I would feel highly aggrieved if I had to pay for it again in an ongoing property tax.

    Even though I think property taxes in principle makes sense.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 82,645
    Tories take a 2% lead with Survation

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 35,679

    DavidL said:

    It always struck me as a bit overstated. Yes, families were going to be mixing a bit more, particularly inter generationally, but Christmas means that work stops these days so no one going to the office, travelling on public transport (if there is any), going to shops, etc. One probably cancelled the other out to a large extent.
    What we have seen is a spike in 80+ year olds iirc. I'm pretty sure that's a xmas mixing effect. Indeed, there was a case outlined in this week's New Statesman by a working GP of exactly that.
    Yes, that would be the intergenerational effect and given that many of those invited for Christmas lunch had been shielding for good reasons that will have an effect but the overall infection rate was not likely to be materially different.

    One of the great frustrations for me of this virus is that we have not focused on how you actually catch it. So, for example, we have been focusing on hand washing for over a year. Does it make any difference at all? I would suggest the evidence is no, that it is very difficult to pick up a sufficient load of the virus from a surface. We didn't get on to masks nearly early enough, possibly because there was a shortage of PPE for front line workers. Is it really dangerous to go within 1m of someone for a few seconds in a shop or other indoor setting? Is it dangerous to do that outdoors?

    I wish we had a clearer picture of when and how we catch this. Inside for extended periods breathing poorly circulating air seems much more of an issue than social distancing.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 40,118

    I'm growing a little weary of US channels, especially CNN, bashing Britain. There have been a whole series of articles focused on what a cock-up the country now is. Brexit has been a particular source of derision. Here's CNN's latest:

    https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/uk-travel-2021-crisis/index.html

    And here was a real pre-Christmas piece of savage attack:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/21/uk/boris-johnson-covid-analysis-intl-gbr/index.html

    I'm a left-leaner who voted Labour and campaigned vigorously for Remain. Even I'm getting irritated by this constant negativity. It's not only that it's a case of 'pot, kettle, black'. It's two other things which I am increasingly feeling.

    1. Brexit has not (yet) been the disaster some were excitedly predicting. Yes there are teething issues but, frankly, it has gone quite smoothly so far. We have a trade deal and our vaccine rollout is undeniably faster thanks to shaking off the EU shackles.

    2. The vaccine rollout is a STELLAR success so far. The UK is on course to be the global leader on mass vaccination of its citizens (Israel, UAE, Bahrain are doing well too with smaller populations). In a handful of months we will have the vast majority of the country vaccinated, the virus all but eliminated and our citizens able to travel the world as a result. It is absolutely clear that airlines in conjunction with the WHO are going to make vaccination the prerequisite for travel.

    Yes there have been cock-ups and u-turns but Boris Johnson and Britain are doing alright.

    Good for you mate.
This discussion has been closed.