Howdy, Stranger!

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

Brits blame both Biden & Trump for the Afghan turmoil – Mail poll – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited August 17 in General
imageBrits blame both Biden & Trump for the Afghan turmoil – Mail poll – politicalbetting.com

Today’s Daily Mail is running a JL Partners poll carried out yesterday on the Afghan crisis and the findings are above.

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 6,907
    Test
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 38,189
    Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan welcomed the return of the Islamic Emirate, stating that Afghans have "broken the shackles of slavery".[89][90][88] Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi stated that Pakistan would recognize a Taliban-led government in due time.[91] The Pakistani Representative to the United Nations referred to the government led by Ashraf Ghani as "a now defunct regime"[92] and criticized the participation of the Afghan representative appointed by Ghani at a meeting of the security council.[93]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Emirate_of_Afghanistan
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 34,245

    Test

    The way you always come first.

    It’s just not cricket
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 14,723
    Fourth.
    Like the rate of our intervention.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,760
    Good example, this polling is, of the public being capable of more nuanced views than we often give them credit for. Broadly speaking they are not positive about refugees, but they recognise the different situation here and are responding differently.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 723
    Reports, inconfirmed, that the US has put up fast jet aircraft above Kabul. Rather late but best guess its a sign that the decamp of people stuck in Kabul is on its way
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198
    The Telegraph reports the Scottish Government is consulting on making its emergency powers permanent.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/08/17/scottish-government-wants-make-emergency-covid-powers-permanent/ (£££)
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198
    The Telegraph says the pensions triple lock is to be ditched for a year, though as no figures are given, this looks like kite-flying.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/08/17/exclusive-pension-triple-lock-watered-government/ (£££)
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198
    Frank Luntz in the Telegraph suggests Saigon is the wrong analogy:-

    Some people are comparing the chaotic end of US involvement in Afghanistan to the final days of South Vietnam. They’ve got it wrong. What’s happening in Kabul is more akin to the Bay of Pigs under JFK or the disaster in Iran in 1979. That failure cost Jimmy Carter the presidency in 1980, and Afghanistan could cost Democrats the White House in 2024.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/08/17/afghan-debacle-will-destroy-biden-presidency/
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,643
    President Biden has repeatedly said an Afghan army numbering 300,000 men received hundreds of millions of dollars for equipment and training.

    But two well-placed sources tell us the true number of troops was actually much lower - closer to 50,000

    ------

    What's the betting the US has been paying salaries for 300k.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 38,416
    The military evacuated approximately 1,100 U.S. citizens, U.S. permanent residents and families on 13 flights today. Administration officials told lawmakers earlier they believe there are about 10-15k Americans in Afghanistan.

    https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1427790831226916867
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,439
    Trump is banned from Twitter but the Taliban aren't. Presumably they haven't "broken community guidelines" or whatever the phrase is.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 723

    The military evacuated approximately 1,100 U.S. citizens, U.S. permanent residents and families on 13 flights today. Administration officials told lawmakers earlier they believe there are about 10-15k Americans in Afghanistan.

    https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1427790831226916867

    Apparently the US government has no plans to evac US citizens outside of Kabul because they have no idea how to get to them.

  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198
    Yokes said:

    The military evacuated approximately 1,100 U.S. citizens, U.S. permanent residents and families on 13 flights today. Administration officials told lawmakers earlier they believe there are about 10-15k Americans in Afghanistan.

    https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1427790831226916867

    Apparently the US government has no plans to evac US citizens outside of Kabul because they have no idea how to get to them.

    What actually is the point of the American government? Withdrawal has been on the cards for years and yet there are no detailed plans.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198
    edited August 18
    Afghanistan will no longer be competing in the Paralympics, due to start next Tuesday.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/womens-sport/2021/08/16/afghanistans-first-female-paralympian-denied-chance-travel-tokyo/ (£££)
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 5,209
    “How well/badly have they handled the crisis?” (net)

    Boris Johnson -31

    Drip… drip… drip…
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,631
    edited August 18
    So many more people think it was wrong to go there in the first place (than think the opposite) yet the same is true (by a bigger margin) when people are asked whether UK troops will have to go back there?

    Right.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,631

    Yokes said:

    The military evacuated approximately 1,100 U.S. citizens, U.S. permanent residents and families on 13 flights today. Administration officials told lawmakers earlier they believe there are about 10-15k Americans in Afghanistan.

    https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1427790831226916867

    Apparently the US government has no plans to evac US citizens outside of Kabul because they have no idea how to get to them.

    What actually is the point of the American government? Withdrawal has been on the cards for years and yet there are no detailed plans.
    I recommend The Outpost, currently on Amazon Prime. A realistic portrayal of a battle at a US outpost in the Afghan mountains, recently released but based on events back in 2009. It’s not an anti-war film - indeed it was praised by veterans both for its realism and for rightly honouring the bravery both of the dead and those who survived and were decorated.

    Yet I defy anyone to watch the film and come away thinking there was any point to it all. Overwhelming military technology was being deployed in the middle of nowhere to no worthwhile purpose and a lot of people die.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 4,594
    edited August 18
    An important vignette on the thread topic :

    "Donald Trump’s Former Defence Secretary Mark Esper has accused Trump of having "undermined" America’s 2020 deal with the Taliban by pushing for US troops to exit Afghanistan without the Taliban meeting the conditions of the deal, setting President Biden up for failure from the start."
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198
    edited August 18
    Are we back? Cloudflare was reporting us as down.

    ETA does this mean I'm sort-of first?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198

    An important vignette on the thread topic :

    "Donald Trump’s Former Defence Secretary Mark Esper has accused Trump of having "undermined" America’s 2020 deal with the Taliban by pushing for US troops to exit Afghanistan without the Taliban meeting the conditions of the deal, setting President Biden up for failure from the start."

    All of which might be true but Biden has been President for eight months now, and still managed to take the whole world, including his allies, including Afghanistan, by surprise when *his* America cut and ran.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720
    edited August 18
    This is an excellent (short) tweet thread looking at the efficacy of Pfizer against Delta is Israel, and Simpson's paradox: https://twitter.com/CT_Bergstrom/status/1427767356600688646

    Edit to add, this is the piece that the tweet thread is based: https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/israeli-data-how-can-efficacy-vs-severe-disease-be-strong-when-60-of-hospitalized-are-vaccinated
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 4,594
    edited August 18
    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720
    edited August 18
    The German election is truly wide open:




    On the current numbers, it looks entirely possible that Linke does not make it into parliament, and that SPD + Green is tantalisingly close to a majority.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 33,226
    Treat polls with a pinch of salt. For example this option wasn’t amongst the possible answers.

    Afghanistan Is Your Fault
    The American public now has what it wanted.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/08/afghanistan-your-fault/619769/
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198
    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720
    Looks like New Zealand is going the way of Australia - Delta is out there and the whole country is in total lockdown. They are fortunate to have two islands and some very widely spread communities. But they may not be able to put the genie back in the bottle, and they are still at very low levels of vaccination.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 55,235

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    I think it's been public for a while:

    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Agreement_for_Bringing_Peace_to_Afghanistan
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,832
    ...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 33,226
    edited August 18

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 33,226
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,643
    Bit late for the Olympic gymnastics, but Boston Dynamics robot is giving it a go...

    https://youtu.be/tF4DML7FIWk

    And the judges say....4.5, 4.5, 3.5, 5.0, 4.0, 4.0....
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,832
    My bit on holidaymaking Dominic Raab, a foreign secretary unburdened by a foreign policy https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/17/dominic-raab-news-foreign-secretary-taliban-kabul
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,643
    edited August 18
    Scott_xP said:

    ...

    Thankfully Matt is back off their holidays....with belters like this

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/matt-cartoons-august-2021/matt-cartoon-august-16/
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,832
    Exclusive:

    State pensions expected to rise by 2.5% next year - below the rate of inflation - as Conservatives break triple lock pledge

    Ministers are concerned inflation - another measure it could be pegged to - will be too high by September


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pensions-triple-lock-could-be-broken-by-below-inflation-rise-m66bxs9h0
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,423
    Good morning everyone. Where on earth (literally) has summer gone to. Doesn't feel much like global warming here, and hasn't for a couple of days.13.9 degC, according to the app on my phone. Hope does it know what the temperature outside is; the window in my 'study' is closed!

    On topic, that poll shows how mixed people's emotions are. Must say I'm in the 'wasted effort' category, but if the Taliban have used the last few years to 'liberalise' a little, maybe all is not lost.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 29,568
    edited August 18

    An important vignette on the thread topic :

    "Donald Trump’s Former Defence Secretary Mark Esper has accused Trump of having "undermined" America’s 2020 deal with the Taliban by pushing for US troops to exit Afghanistan without the Taliban meeting the conditions of the deal, setting President Biden up for failure from the start."

    Shades of Nixon shagging Vietnam peace talks - an American classic!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,643
    edited August 18

    Good morning everyone. Where on earth (literally) has summer gone to. Doesn't feel much like global warming here, and hasn't for a couple of days.13.9 degC, according to the app on my phone. Hope does it know what the temperature outside is; the window in my 'study' is closed!

    On topic, that poll shows how mixed people's emotions are. Must say I'm in the 'wasted effort' category, but if the Taliban have used the last few years to 'liberalise' a little, maybe all is not lost.

    If you think the Taliban have liberalised i have a bridge to sell you.

    VICE news have a video report from areas they already held where a sheep rustler was getting tried and sentenced by a "Taliban court"* to a hand being chopped off.

    Then asked will things like stoning be back for adultery, the answer of course, that is what Sharia tells us.

    * I.e one bloke who says did you do it, while beating him with a stick, right i think you did it more than once, guilty...next....
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,423

    Good morning everyone. Where on earth (literally) has summer gone to. Doesn't feel much like global warming here, and hasn't for a couple of days.13.9 degC, according to the app on my phone. Hope does it know what the temperature outside is; the window in my 'study' is closed!

    On topic, that poll shows how mixed people's emotions are. Must say I'm in the 'wasted effort' category, but if the Taliban have used the last few years to 'liberalise' a little, maybe all is not lost.

    If you think the Taliban have liberalised i have a bridge to sell you.

    VICE news have a video report from areas they already held where a sheep rustler was getting tried and sentenced by a "Taliban court"* to a hand being chopped off.

    Then asked will things like stoning be back for adultery, the answer of course, that is what Sharia tells us.

    * I.e one bloke who says did you do it, while beating him with a stick, right i think you did it more than once, guilty...next....
    It's a fine bridge, to be sure, but sadly, not sure if it goes anywhere!
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 29,568
    Would love to think this will apply but fear normal (shit) service will resume.

    https://twitter.com/chris_herd/status/1427528882148814868?s=20
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,423

    An important vignette on the thread topic :

    "Donald Trump’s Former Defence Secretary Mark Esper has accused Trump of having "undermined" America’s 2020 deal with the Taliban by pushing for US troops to exit Afghanistan without the Taliban meeting the conditions of the deal, setting President Biden up for failure from the start."

    Shades of Nixon shagging Vietnam peace talks - an American classic!
    I suspect that, worldwide, the number of people who think the USA has handled this well can be counted on the fingers of two hands. Or, quite possibly only one!
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 21,071
    edited August 18

    Bit late for the Olympic gymnastics, but Boston Dynamics robot is giving it a go...

    https://youtu.be/tF4DML7FIWk

    And the judges say....4.5, 4.5, 3.5, 5.0, 4.0, 4.0....

    The behind the scenes video, who's link I seem to have misplace but must be on their YouTube feed, shows how painstakingly choreographed that is and how many, many takes it took.

    That isn't demonstrating general purpose obstacle traversal. That precise course terrain was programmed in.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198

    Would love to think this will apply but fear normal (shit) service will resume.

    https://twitter.com/chris_herd/status/1427528882148814868?s=20

    I'm not sure that is true. My own experience of WFH pre-covid was that it probably increased the number of remote meetings (or conference calls as they used to be known) and decreased their efficiency, both of which tend to empower the extrovert manager as social fixer.

    What the pandemic has done is increase the number of airy speculations about the future of work, city centres, high streets and so on.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,186
    Scott_xP said:

    Exclusive:

    State pensions expected to rise by 2.5% next year - below the rate of inflation - as Conservatives break triple lock pledge

    Ministers are concerned inflation - another measure it could be pegged to - will be too high by September


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pensions-triple-lock-could-be-broken-by-below-inflation-rise-m66bxs9h0

    The Telegraph are running Point on the “Give the pensioners their 8%” campaign, and have started offf with some utterly ridiculous hyperbole.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/news/retirees-lose-11000-state-pension-triple-lock-fiddle/
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,631
    edited August 18
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,832
    Sandpit said:

    The Telegraph are running Point on the “Give the pensioners their 8%” campaign, and have started offf with some utterly ridiculous hyperbole.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/news/retirees-lose-11000-state-pension-triple-lock-fiddle/

    https://twitter.com/meghamohan/status/1427744483349831689
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198

    Would love to think this will apply but fear normal (shit) service will resume.

    https://twitter.com/chris_herd/status/1427528882148814868?s=20

    I'm not sure that is true. My own experience of WFH pre-covid was that it probably increased the number of remote meetings (or conference calls as they used to be known) and decreased their efficiency, both of which tend to empower the extrovert manager as social fixer.

    What the pandemic has done is increase the number of airy speculations about the future of work, city centres, high streets and so on.
    What is interesting in that thread (about WFH empowering productive workers at the expense of "diplomats") is that the piece put up as "arguing the other way" seems actually to support the first, albeit from a funny angle. It is about some remote workers having two jobs at once.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/these-people-who-work-from-home-have-a-secret-they-have-two-jobs-11628866529

    It makes you wonder if the twitterati actually bother to read what they post, let alone think about it.

    Working two jobs at the same time is easier in the United States than here, of course, thanks to the different ways we process income tax. HMRC is likely to give the game away when it updates your tax code. I have worked with one contractor, however, who quite blatantly had another contract on the side.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 13,009
    Home Office says "up to" 5,000 afghan refugees initially. Not the 20-30k pledged by countries like Canada. Whats more we can all read what that smirking monster Patel means by "up to" - "nowhere near".

    We're about to completely wash our hands of the mess we created and let people suffer. Because the Brexit Tory vote in England thinks that man with beard is coming here to take all the jobs and the benefits and blow us up. For shame.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 8,569
    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
    Not a natural assumption, because they could and did carry out a running assessment of how much good their billions were doing and knew very well the answer was, none.

    https://thehill.com/policy/defense/540989-us-wasted-billions-of-dollars-in-afghanistan-watchdog
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,601
    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
    That’s intellectually dishonest. What was assumed by the Biden government was that the Afghan army would be good little boys and fight and die long enough for the midterms to be out the way, before then falling to the Taliban.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,423

    Would love to think this will apply but fear normal (shit) service will resume.

    https://twitter.com/chris_herd/status/1427528882148814868?s=20

    I'm not sure that is true. My own experience of WFH pre-covid was that it probably increased the number of remote meetings (or conference calls as they used to be known) and decreased their efficiency, both of which tend to empower the extrovert manager as social fixer.

    What the pandemic has done is increase the number of airy speculations about the future of work, city centres, high streets and so on.
    What is interesting in that thread (about WFH empowering productive workers at the expense of "diplomats") is that the piece put up as "arguing the other way" seems actually to support the first, albeit from a funny angle. It is about some remote workers having two jobs at once.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/these-people-who-work-from-home-have-a-secret-they-have-two-jobs-11628866529

    It makes you wonder if the twitterati actually bother to read what they post, let alone think about it.

    Working two jobs at the same time is easier in the United States than here, of course, thanks to the different ways we process income tax. HMRC is likely to give the game away when it updates your tax code. I have worked with one contractor, however, who quite blatantly had another contract on the side.
    If the work is being done at least adequately, why not? I spent some time at one stage running two or three contracts simultaneously. I allocated enough time to each, and everyone was happy. None of them, paid enough, anyway, to be considered full-time, and the 'employers' knew that.
    They shouldn't be competitive, of course.
  • rcs1000 said:

    Looks like New Zealand is going the way of Australia - Delta is out there and the whole country is in total lockdown. They are fortunate to have two islands and some very widely spread communities. But they may not be able to put the genie back in the bottle, and they are still at very low levels of vaccination.

    My brother in Auckland claims that the majority of Kiwis are happy with Ardern’s insistence that public health and safety outweigh any pleas to open the border, despite the abysmal vaccine rollout. I am just very thankful that my holiday there ended a week before lockdown last year as I suspect there is no prospect of seeing him again any time soon.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,186

    Would love to think this will apply but fear normal (shit) service will resume.

    https://twitter.com/chris_herd/status/1427528882148814868?s=20

    I'm not sure that is true. My own experience of WFH pre-covid was that it probably increased the number of remote meetings (or conference calls as they used to be known) and decreased their efficiency, both of which tend to empower the extrovert manager as social fixer.

    What the pandemic has done is increase the number of airy speculations about the future of work, city centres, high streets and so on.
    What is interesting in that thread (about WFH empowering productive workers at the expense of "diplomats") is that the piece put up as "arguing the other way" seems actually to support the first, albeit from a funny angle. It is about some remote workers having two jobs at once.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/these-people-who-work-from-home-have-a-secret-they-have-two-jobs-11628866529

    It makes you wonder if the twitterati actually bother to read what they post, let alone think about it.

    Working two jobs at the same time is easier in the United States than here, of course, thanks to the different ways we process income tax. HMRC is likely to give the game away when it updates your tax code. I have worked with one contractor, however, who quite blatantly had another contract on the side.
    Yes, good point that in the UK you’d find it difficult to be on PAYE for two British companies, without them knowing about each other.

    Definitely not unknown in contracting space though, especially if you can find companies in different time zones. I know a few people doing this, they can get away with 9 or 10 hours a day across both contracts, charging a full day rate to each.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198
    edited August 18
    Sandpit said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Exclusive:

    State pensions expected to rise by 2.5% next year - below the rate of inflation - as Conservatives break triple lock pledge

    Ministers are concerned inflation - another measure it could be pegged to - will be too high by September


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pensions-triple-lock-could-be-broken-by-below-inflation-rise-m66bxs9h0

    The Telegraph are running Point on the “Give the pensioners their 8%” campaign, and have started offf with some utterly ridiculous hyperbole.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/news/retirees-lose-11000-state-pension-triple-lock-fiddle/
    The other Telegraph piece linked to earlier in the thread, as well as this Times piece so far as I can tell, look like kite-flying. No numbers are quoted, and the Times goes further to suggest that two of the triple lock's three, erm, locks are in doubt, with inflation as well as wage increases likely to be too high for the hawks. This inflation point might be crude expectations management.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,601
    edited August 18

    rcs1000 said:

    Looks like New Zealand is going the way of Australia - Delta is out there and the whole country is in total lockdown. They are fortunate to have two islands and some very widely spread communities. But they may not be able to put the genie back in the bottle, and they are still at very low levels of vaccination.

    My brother in Auckland claims that the majority of Kiwis are happy with Ardern’s insistence that public health and safety outweigh any pleas to open the border, despite the abysmal vaccine rollout. I am just very thankful that my holiday there ended a week before lockdown last year as I suspect there is no prospect of seeing him again any time soon.
    If you don’t have family overseas or a business that relies on foreign tourists / travel, then locked borders seems a jolly good jape to lots of people in APAC. It is hence hard to see how it gets undone, unless they lose total control of delta and end up in endemic status like the rest of us.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,631
    Sandpit said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Exclusive:

    State pensions expected to rise by 2.5% next year - below the rate of inflation - as Conservatives break triple lock pledge

    Ministers are concerned inflation - another measure it could be pegged to - will be too high by September


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pensions-triple-lock-could-be-broken-by-below-inflation-rise-m66bxs9h0

    The Telegraph are running Point on the “Give the pensioners their 8%” campaign, and have started offf with some utterly ridiculous hyperbole.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/news/retirees-lose-11000-state-pension-triple-lock-fiddle/
    The 'below inflation' concern is eased by today's surprise fall to 2%
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 30,043
    IanB2 said:

    So many more people think it was wrong to go there in the first place (than think the opposite) yet the same is true (by a bigger margin) when people are asked whether UK troops will have to go back there?

    Right.

    That’s not illogical. If Afghanistan were to become a base for anti-Western terrorism, then our troops would have to return.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 30,043
    moonshine said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
    That’s intellectually dishonest. What was assumed by the Biden government was that the Afghan army would be good little boys and fight and die long enough for the midterms to be out the way, before then falling to the Taliban.
    In any event, Biden cut the legs from under the army, by ending air support, and by ending logistical support for the Air Force.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,675
    Scott_xP said:

    Exclusive:

    State pensions expected to rise by 2.5% next year - below the rate of inflation - as Conservatives break triple lock pledge

    Ministers are concerned inflation - another measure it could be pegged to - will be too high by September


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pensions-triple-lock-could-be-broken-by-below-inflation-rise-m66bxs9h0

    I presume this is a tactical leak to try and gauge the intensity of the shit storm. 1 = Cones Hotline. 10 = Poll Tax. This must be a good 7.5 because pensioners like money and voting.
  • pingping Posts: 1,287
    RPI 3.8%
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,601
    Sean_F said:

    moonshine said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
    That’s intellectually dishonest. What was assumed by the Biden government was that the Afghan army would be good little boys and fight and die long enough for the midterms to be out the way, before then falling to the Taliban.
    In any event, Biden cut the legs from under the army, by ending air support, and by ending logistical support for the Air Force.
    Just so illogical and self defeating. The NY Times seems to be standing behind Biden on this. Joe Rogan meanwhile was fairly scathing yesterday on his show. He doesn’t get the audience he once did since the move to Spotify but the relevant snippet was on his YouTube channel.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,805
    Sandpit said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Exclusive:

    State pensions expected to rise by 2.5% next year - below the rate of inflation - as Conservatives break triple lock pledge

    Ministers are concerned inflation - another measure it could be pegged to - will be too high by September


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pensions-triple-lock-could-be-broken-by-below-inflation-rise-m66bxs9h0

    The Telegraph are running Point on the “Give the pensioners their 8%” campaign, and have started offf with some utterly ridiculous hyperbole.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/news/retirees-lose-11000-state-pension-triple-lock-fiddle/
    Yes but as PB Brexiters point out, there is no need to stick to what you agreed as a government, as they "renegotiate" the triple lock.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 13,009
    Dura_Ace said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Exclusive:

    State pensions expected to rise by 2.5% next year - below the rate of inflation - as Conservatives break triple lock pledge

    Ministers are concerned inflation - another measure it could be pegged to - will be too high by September


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pensions-triple-lock-could-be-broken-by-below-inflation-rise-m66bxs9h0

    I presume this is a tactical leak to try and gauge the intensity of the shit storm. 1 = Cones Hotline. 10 = Poll Tax. This must be a good 7.5 because pensioners like money and voting.
    Comedy Gold. Breaking the Triple Lock manifesto commitment is one thing. Giving pensioners a real terms cut is quite another. Perhaps this was leaked by Number 10 to damage Sunak?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,186
    moonshine said:

    Sean_F said:

    moonshine said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
    That’s intellectually dishonest. What was assumed by the Biden government was that the Afghan army would be good little boys and fight and die long enough for the midterms to be out the way, before then falling to the Taliban.
    In any event, Biden cut the legs from under the army, by ending air support, and by ending logistical support for the Air Force.
    Just so illogical and self defeating. The NY Times seems to be standing behind Biden on this. Joe Rogan meanwhile was fairly scathing yesterday on his show. He doesn’t get the audience he once did since the move to Spotify but the relevant snippet was on his YouTube channel.
    Saw that this morning, nearly 2m views in 12 hours.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=3wc23FQZeTE

    His guest, Lex Fridman, is a fascinating character who also has a long-form interview podcast.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198
    Sean_F said:

    IanB2 said:

    So many more people think it was wrong to go there in the first place (than think the opposite) yet the same is true (by a bigger margin) when people are asked whether UK troops will have to go back there?

    Right.

    That’s not illogical. If Afghanistan were to become a base for anti-Western terrorism, then our troops would have to return.
    You mean American troops would have to return, subject to the whims of the President. Last week established that after a decade of Tory defence cuts, Britain cannot go it alone against the Taliban.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,186
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Exclusive:

    State pensions expected to rise by 2.5% next year - below the rate of inflation - as Conservatives break triple lock pledge

    Ministers are concerned inflation - another measure it could be pegged to - will be too high by September


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pensions-triple-lock-could-be-broken-by-below-inflation-rise-m66bxs9h0

    The Telegraph are running Point on the “Give the pensioners their 8%” campaign, and have started offf with some utterly ridiculous hyperbole.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/news/retirees-lose-11000-state-pension-triple-lock-fiddle/
    Yes but as PB Brexiters point out, there is no need to stick to what you agreed as a government, as they "renegotiate" the triple lock.
    So the Opposition argument is going to be about the “government breaking their promises”, in the face of a once-in-a-century pandemic, rather than a serious counter-proposal?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 30,043

    Sean_F said:

    IanB2 said:

    So many more people think it was wrong to go there in the first place (than think the opposite) yet the same is true (by a bigger margin) when people are asked whether UK troops will have to go back there?

    Right.

    That’s not illogical. If Afghanistan were to become a base for anti-Western terrorism, then our troops would have to return.
    You mean American troops would have to return, subject to the whims of the President. Last week established that after a decade of Tory defence cuts, Britain cannot go it alone against the Taliban.
    I doubt if there's any point since 1947 when we could have run a substantial military campaign in Afghanistan on our own.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,127
    Scott_xP said:

    Exclusive:

    State pensions expected to rise by 2.5% next year - below the rate of inflation - as Conservatives break triple lock pledge

    Ministers are concerned inflation - another measure it could be pegged to - will be too high by September


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pensions-triple-lock-could-be-broken-by-below-inflation-rise-m66bxs9h0

    It would help if when announcing that the chancellor could point to efforts to curb inflation. Interest rates back to 1% and an end to QE by the end of the year would be good start.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 13,009
    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Exclusive:

    State pensions expected to rise by 2.5% next year - below the rate of inflation - as Conservatives break triple lock pledge

    Ministers are concerned inflation - another measure it could be pegged to - will be too high by September


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pensions-triple-lock-could-be-broken-by-below-inflation-rise-m66bxs9h0

    The Telegraph are running Point on the “Give the pensioners their 8%” campaign, and have started offf with some utterly ridiculous hyperbole.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/news/retirees-lose-11000-state-pension-triple-lock-fiddle/
    Yes but as PB Brexiters point out, there is no need to stick to what you agreed as a government, as they "renegotiate" the triple lock.
    So the Opposition argument is going to be about the “government breaking their promises”, in the face of a once-in-a-century pandemic, rather than a serious counter-proposal?
    How about not giving pensioners a real terms cut? That does feel like properly taking the piss.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,832
    Priti Patel has just said "we can't do this on our own". Why are brexiteers so convinced of the UK's inability to stand up and function as an independent country able to chart our own course in the world?
    https://twitter.com/fatshez/status/1427893128003039238
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 33,226
    IshmaelZ said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
    Not a natural assumption, because they could and did carry out a running assessment of how much good their billions were doing and knew very well the answer was, none.

    https://thehill.com/policy/defense/540989-us-wasted-billions-of-dollars-in-afghanistan-watchdog
    The likelihood is if they didn't half that amount on the army, and redirected the rest into education and infrastructure development, Afghanistan might be in a better state.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,675
    moonshine said:

    Sean_F said:

    moonshine said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
    That’s intellectually dishonest. What was assumed by the Biden government was that the Afghan army would be good little boys and fight and die long enough for the midterms to be out the way, before then falling to the Taliban.
    In any event, Biden cut the legs from under the army, by ending air support, and by ending logistical support for the Air Force.
    Just so illogical and self defeating. The NY Times seems to be standing behind Biden on this. Joe Rogan meanwhile was fairly scathing yesterday on his show. He doesn’t get the audience he once did since the move to Spotify but the relevant snippet was on his YouTube channel.
    Why would we give a fuck what a bald far right enabler and peddler of do-nothing brain pills thinks?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 33,226
    moonshine said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
    That’s intellectually dishonest. What was assumed by the Biden government was that the Afghan army would be good little boys and fight and die long enough for the midterms to be out the way, before then falling to the Taliban.
    Our government seems to have believed much the same.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,832
    "The PM has repeatedly and consistently failed to honour what he said to become Prime Minister to Veterans in this country. I have told him this to his face repeatedly - it had no effect, and so I will now do it in public"

    @JohnnyMercerUK revealing what he hopes to say later... https://twitter.com/JohnnyMercerUK/status/1427888568945553413
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,601
    Sandpit said:

    moonshine said:

    Sean_F said:

    moonshine said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
    That’s intellectually dishonest. What was assumed by the Biden government was that the Afghan army would be good little boys and fight and die long enough for the midterms to be out the way, before then falling to the Taliban.
    In any event, Biden cut the legs from under the army, by ending air support, and by ending logistical support for the Air Force.
    Just so illogical and self defeating. The NY Times seems to be standing behind Biden on this. Joe Rogan meanwhile was fairly scathing yesterday on his show. He doesn’t get the audience he once did since the move to Spotify but the relevant snippet was on his YouTube channel.
    Saw that this morning, nearly 2m views in 12 hours.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=3wc23FQZeTE

    His guest, Lex Fridman, is a fascinating character who also has a long-form interview podcast.
    Yes Lex’s show is great. His interview with Commander David Fravor was a seminal moment.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,186

    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Exclusive:

    State pensions expected to rise by 2.5% next year - below the rate of inflation - as Conservatives break triple lock pledge

    Ministers are concerned inflation - another measure it could be pegged to - will be too high by September


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pensions-triple-lock-could-be-broken-by-below-inflation-rise-m66bxs9h0

    The Telegraph are running Point on the “Give the pensioners their 8%” campaign, and have started offf with some utterly ridiculous hyperbole.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/news/retirees-lose-11000-state-pension-triple-lock-fiddle/
    Yes but as PB Brexiters point out, there is no need to stick to what you agreed as a government, as they "renegotiate" the triple lock.
    So the Opposition argument is going to be about the “government breaking their promises”, in the face of a once-in-a-century pandemic, rather than a serious counter-proposal?
    How about not giving pensioners a real terms cut? That does feel like properly taking the piss.
    Who’s suggesting a real-terms cut? No-one, as far as I can tell.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,832
    Pushed on R4, Priti Patel appears to suggest Afghan refugees who reach the UK by boat won’t get special treatment. ‘They will claim asylum as other people claim asylum’ she says.
    https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/1427894180249055237
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,949
    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. B, in the Middle Ages, and ancient world, a general approach taken was that surrendering was best done immediately, or not at all.

    General such as the Black Prince or Alexander the Great tended to be lenient to those who gave up, but if surrender was offered later then harsh terms at best were imposed (if not slaughter).

    That being so, why would the Afghan army, apparently unable to operate its fancy US gear due to lack of support, fight an unwinnable war for the sake of the people who had just abandoned them, in exchange for certain death rather than potentially being able to keep on living?

    And why didn't the US consider this?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 4,124
    To have a poll about blame for the Taliban takeover where the ousted Afghan leadership, the Afghan army, Pakistan are not even in the list of candidates is meaningless.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 43,931
    I see the most establishment of the establishment have written to the establishment newspaper (The Times) today arguing for sizeable and ambitious resettlement programme with safe and legal routes for all who need it, and a change to reunion rules so their families can come too. They've sprinkled in a "Global Britain" for good measure.

    In truth, the Government has little political headroom to be overly generous to Afghanistan asylum seekers given the ongoing crisis in the Channel and changing public opinion, so I expect any programme to be limited in number and qualified to specific categories of Afghanis who directly aided British forces.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,601
    Dura_Ace said:

    moonshine said:

    Sean_F said:

    moonshine said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
    That’s intellectually dishonest. What was assumed by the Biden government was that the Afghan army would be good little boys and fight and die long enough for the midterms to be out the way, before then falling to the Taliban.
    In any event, Biden cut the legs from under the army, by ending air support, and by ending logistical support for the Air Force.
    Just so illogical and self defeating. The NY Times seems to be standing behind Biden on this. Joe Rogan meanwhile was fairly scathing yesterday on his show. He doesn’t get the audience he once did since the move to Spotify but the relevant snippet was on his YouTube channel.
    Why would we give a fuck what a bald far right enabler and peddler of do-nothing brain pills thinks?
    Don’t know how you get to far right enabler. He hosts all manner of guests. It’s of interest because he is an opinion former in the US, just as the NY Times and Foxnews are.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 33,226
    moonshine said:

    Sandpit said:

    moonshine said:

    Sean_F said:

    moonshine said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
    That’s intellectually dishonest. What was assumed by the Biden government was that the Afghan army would be good little boys and fight and die long enough for the midterms to be out the way, before then falling to the Taliban.
    In any event, Biden cut the legs from under the army, by ending air support, and by ending logistical support for the Air Force.
    Just so illogical and self defeating. The NY Times seems to be standing behind Biden on this. Joe Rogan meanwhile was fairly scathing yesterday on his show. He doesn’t get the audience he once did since the move to Spotify but the relevant snippet was on his YouTube channel.
    Saw that this morning, nearly 2m views in 12 hours.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=3wc23FQZeTE

    His guest, Lex Fridman, is a fascinating character who also has a long-form interview podcast.
    Yes Lex’s show is great. His interview with Commander David Fravor was a seminal moment.
    TMI
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 8,569
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Exclusive:

    State pensions expected to rise by 2.5% next year - below the rate of inflation - as Conservatives break triple lock pledge

    Ministers are concerned inflation - another measure it could be pegged to - will be too high by September


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pensions-triple-lock-could-be-broken-by-below-inflation-rise-m66bxs9h0

    The Telegraph are running Point on the “Give the pensioners their 8%” campaign, and have started offf with some utterly ridiculous hyperbole.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/news/retirees-lose-11000-state-pension-triple-lock-fiddle/
    Yes but as PB Brexiters point out, there is no need to stick to what you agreed as a government, as they "renegotiate" the triple lock.
    So the Opposition argument is going to be about the “government breaking their promises”, in the face of a once-in-a-century pandemic, rather than a serious counter-proposal?
    How about not giving pensioners a real terms cut? That does feel like properly taking the piss.
    Who’s suggesting a real-terms cut? No-one, as far as I can tell.
    "Ministers" according to the Times.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 43,597
    Frank Luntz and Mark Montgomery think Afghan crisis will sink Biden:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/08/17/afghan-debacle-will-destroy-biden-presidency/
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 43,931
    IanB2 said:

    So many more people think it was wrong to go there in the first place (than think the opposite) yet the same is true (by a bigger margin) when people are asked whether UK troops will have to go back there?

    Right.

    Being pedantic: strictly speaking that's consistent.

    You can think it was a mistake to have gone in there in the first place but, having put our hand in the mangler, now feel it's now our responsibility to stabilise the situation and not cut and run.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 21,576
    algarkirk said:

    To have a poll about blame for the Taliban takeover where the ousted Afghan leadership, the Afghan army, Pakistan are not even in the list of candidates is meaningless.

    Or the Afghan people.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,186
    edited August 18
    Scott_xP said:

    Pushed on R4, Priti Patel appears to suggest Afghan refugees who reach the UK by boat won’t get special treatment. ‘They will claim asylum as other people claim asylum’ she says.
    https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/1427894180249055237

    “By boat” being the key words there.

    Saying anything else will have the same effect as Merkel’s comments a few years ago, and lead to a mass exodus across Europe. The UK will be taking thousands of refugees from Afghanistan, but we have to do everything we can to stop the Channel boat crossings, which are costing lives and enabling smugglers.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,643
    edited August 18
    Alistair said:

    Bit late for the Olympic gymnastics, but Boston Dynamics robot is giving it a go...

    https://youtu.be/tF4DML7FIWk

    And the judges say....4.5, 4.5, 3.5, 5.0, 4.0, 4.0....

    The behind the scenes video, who's link I seem to have misplace but must be on their YouTube feed, shows how painstakingly choreographed that is and how many, many takes it took.

    That isn't demonstrating general purpose obstacle traversal. That precise course terrain was programmed in.
    I know...hence why the low scores from the judges...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 33,226

    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. B, in the Middle Ages, and ancient world, a general approach taken was that surrendering was best done immediately, or not at all.

    General such as the Black Prince or Alexander the Great tended to be lenient to those who gave up, but if surrender was offered later then harsh terms at best were imposed (if not slaughter).

    That being so, why would the Afghan army, apparently unable to operate its fancy US gear due to lack of support, fight an unwinnable war for the sake of the people who had just abandoned them, in exchange for certain death rather than potentially being able to keep on living?

    And why didn't the US consider this?

    A good question for every administration beginning with Bush.
    As I said above, the vast amount they've spent in building an army which can't operate independently was an utter waste.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,643
    edited August 18
    moonshine said:

    Sean_F said:

    moonshine said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
    That’s intellectually dishonest. What was assumed by the Biden government was that the Afghan army would be good little boys and fight and die long enough for the midterms to be out the way, before then falling to the Taliban.
    In any event, Biden cut the legs from under the army, by ending air support, and by ending logistical support for the Air Force.
    Just so illogical and self defeating. The NY Times seems to be standing behind Biden on this. Joe Rogan meanwhile was fairly scathing yesterday on his show. He doesn’t get the audience he once did since the move to Spotify but the relevant snippet was on his YouTube channel.
    The same NY Times correspondent who defended Obama big bash in face of rising covid as fine because they are sophisticated people?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 21,576

    I see the most establishment of the establishment have written to the establishment newspaper (The Times) today arguing for sizeable and ambitious resettlement programme with safe and legal routes for all who need it, and a change to reunion rules so their families can come too. They've sprinkled in a "Global Britain" for good measure.

    In truth, the Government has little political headroom to be overly generous to Afghanistan asylum seekers given the ongoing crisis in the Channel and changing public opinion, so I expect any programme to be limited in number and qualified to specific categories of Afghanis who directly aided British forces.

    Recreating the Hindu Kush in the Pennines allows them to signal their virtue.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 4,594
    edited August 18
    Sean_F said:

    moonshine said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Seems to be working ok now. Further to the below, this is another excellent thread, by a Telegraph journalist in fact I think, on the humiliating terms of Trump's original deal :

    https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764

    Blimey.
    That really is an eye-opener.
    Indeed. Although it does not absolve Biden of responsibility for its catastrophic execution, the deal looks so one-sided that I'm tempted to wait for confirmation the text of Trump's deal (or Trump/Pompeo) is as shown.
    The deal was not a secret.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51689443

    It received some criticism at the time.
    Though not from our defence secretary.
    UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace: "I welcome this small but important step towards the chance for Afghans to live in peace, free from terrorism... We remain absolutely committed to building an Afghanistan that is a strong partner for decades to come"
    The US naturally assumed that all its time and effort and $billions would leave behind a security force that could prevent the Taliban from strolling in and taking the keys. So the agreement with the Taliban wasn’t written with that latter scenario in mind.
    That’s intellectually dishonest. What was assumed by the Biden government was that the Afghan army would be good little boys and fight and die long enough for the midterms to be out the way, before then falling to the Taliban.
    In any event, Biden cut the legs from under the army, by ending air support, and by ending logistical support for the Air Force.
    As I recall, though, before Trump no one was even talking about removing the skeleton staff of contractors that made the air force possible, or removing air support. Not Clinton, Obama or Biden - or even figures like Liz Warren and Ted Cruz.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,643
    Scott_xP said:

    Pushed on R4, Priti Patel appears to suggest Afghan refugees who reach the UK by boat won’t get special treatment. ‘They will claim asylum as other people claim asylum’ she says.
    https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/1427894180249055237

    Sounds like following the very sensible Cameron policy in regards to Syrian refugees.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 18,702

    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. B, in the Middle Ages, and ancient world, a general approach taken was that surrendering was best done immediately, or not at all.

    General such as the Black Prince or Alexander the Great tended to be lenient to those who gave up, but if surrender was offered later then harsh terms at best were imposed (if not slaughter).

    That being so, why would the Afghan army, apparently unable to operate its fancy US gear due to lack of support, fight an unwinnable war for the sake of the people who had just abandoned them, in exchange for certain death rather than potentially being able to keep on living?

    And why didn't the US consider this?

    Very probably people at the front end considered this.

    But considering this would mean that the pull out/peace deal would have to be called off. The pull out was now Policy.


    The stocks were sold; the Press was squared:
    The Middle Class was quite prepared.


    There is a variant of groupthink in policy making in governments and large organisations. The "Great" come to a common belief. This may be bollocks. But it becomes "Writ".

    Information that contradicts this "Writ" becomes heresy. And so it is ignored and the bearer of the information is often suitably chastised.

    Later, after the disaster, the Leader asks "Why didn't someone tell me?"
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,832
    Sandpit said:

    “By boat” being the key words there.

    Indeed. That was the point of the question.

    She has to maintain her "no refugees by boat" stance to keep the Faragists at bay, while simultaneously 'welcoming' thousands of Afghans.

    Unless they arrive by boat...
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,832
    When MPs meet in special session of the Commons at 0930 this morning, motion before them is “That this House has considered the situation in Afghanistan.”
    Pretty much sums up Britain’s impotence in the current crisis. Maybe they should just leave it there and go back on holiday.

    https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1427896249177493504
This discussion has been closed.