The next Tory leadership election and the next general election will not have much to do with Brexit. I’d have Tugenhat in tomorrow because he sees the world as it really it is and isn’t afraid to say what he sees. But I expect his time might only come when China takes Taiwan. We’ll continue with a self defeating transactional view of China and the world until that moment I think.
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Like what happened to the Glosters in Korea: many conscripts there.
But the disadvantage is the disproportionate impact on the poor and non-criminal of society (the powerful can evade, or get cushy numbers, and the criminals get rejected).
My dad was a lieutenant>captain (volunteered) in the Glosters for Korea. I never asked him but I assume that the Glosters was the catch all unit for anyone wanting to sign up for that conflict?
I don't know much about the Glosters (apart from the 2x cap badges) but that engagement has become military folklore. Your dad will have experienced extraordinary things.
My dad was a voluble chap but (not unusual among sodjers I gather) pretty quiet on that part of his service. The one thing I remember him saying was that Korean civilians took a hell of a pounding from all sides.
Talked more about his post-Korea stint in Suez where he got up to all sorts of high jinks including smashing up a not legally signed out jeep while pished and barely avoiding a dishonourable discharge.
To lighten the mood a little, apparently our favourite student *anker on “holiday” in the ‘Stan, is upset that the British government have transported him to the nearest safe country and told him he’s on his own, that the charter flights onward to the UK are for diplomats and refugees.
The next Tory leadership election and the next general election will not have much to do with Brexit. I’d have Tugenhat in tomorrow because he sees the world as it really it is and isn’t afraid to say what he sees. But I expect his time might only come when China takes Taiwan. We’ll continue with a self defeating transactional view of China and the world until that moment I think.
If China did take Taiwan (and as I have said before I would not rule out Taiwan getting nuclear weapons as it seems we will not defend it) then we have to ensure that does not become Xi's Anschluss or Sudetenland.
If China then moved onto South Korea and Japan then war involving the West would be inevitable
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Like what happened to the Glosters in Korea: many conscripts there.
But the disadvantage is the disproportionate impact on the poor and non-criminal of society (the powerful can evade, or get cushy numbers, and the criminals get rejected).
My dad was a lieutenant>captain (volunteered) in the Glosters for Korea. I never asked him but I assume that the Glosters was the catch all unit for anyone wanting to sign up for that conflict?
I don't know much about the Glosters (apart from the 2x cap badges) but that engagement has become military folklore. Your dad will have experienced extraordinary things.
My dad was a voluble chap but (not unusual among sodjers I gather) pretty quiet on that part of his service. The one thing I remember him saying was that Korean civilians took a hell of a pounding from all sides.
Talked more about his post-Korea stint in Suez where he got up to all sorts of high jinks including smashing up a not legally signed out jeep while pished and barely avoiding a dishonourable discharge.
Almost as if soldiers don't change down the ages...
Calendar TV presenter. Labour MP. But perhaps above all remembered for the Don Revie v Brian Clough interview just after Clough had been sacked by Leeds.
Even if one doesn't agree with Tugendhat, it was a powerful speech of the type that HoC sees so rarely in modern times.
It was a powerful speech.
But I'm afraid that his talk of 'strategic patience', and the comparison with South Korea was facile. We didn't much engage in any kind of nation building there - just left it to the post-war dictators, and lucked out with Park Chung-hee (who wouldn't be acceptable these days in may different ways).
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
Even if one doesn't agree with Tugendhat, it was a powerful speech of the type that HoC sees so rarely in modern times.
It was a powerful speech.
But I'm afraid that his talk of 'strategic patience', and the comparison with South Korea was facile. We didn't much engage in any kind of nation building there - just left it to the post-war dictators, and lucked out with Park Chung-hee (who wouldn't be acceptable these days in may different ways).
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
But they have covered the alleged thief in tar and dragged him behind a truck in a very specific and limited way.
CNN would call that a mostly peaceful tarring and dragging.
Plenty of London cabbies would be saying that's the sort of 'fing we should be doin' to fieves in our country, guv'nor, they've got the right idea.....
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Like what happened to the Glosters in Korea: many conscripts there.
But the disadvantage is the disproportionate impact on the poor and non-criminal of society (the powerful can evade, or get cushy numbers, and the criminals get rejected).
My dad was a lieutenant>captain (volunteered) in the Glosters for Korea. I never asked him but I assume that the Glosters was the catch all unit for anyone wanting to sign up for that conflict?
I don't know much about the Glosters (apart from the 2x cap badges) but that engagement has become military folklore. Your dad will have experienced extraordinary things.
My dad was a voluble chap but (not unusual among sodjers I gather) pretty quiet on that part of his service. The one thing I remember him saying was that Korean civilians took a hell of a pounding from all sides.
Talked more about his post-Korea stint in Suez where he got up to all sorts of high jinks including smashing up a not legally signed out jeep while pished and barely avoiding a dishonourable discharge.
Almost as if soldiers don't change down the ages...
I guess not. Further to your and DA's meditations on your service, I'd say my father's periods in the navy and army were certainly the most profound and important things to happen to him. This perhaps didn't bode well for his marriages, children and his own subsequent life, but whit can ye do?
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
Trump was a Democrat?
It is the Trumpite wing of the GOP and the Biden and Sanders wing of the Democrats who are responsible for this withdrawal.
The Bush-McCain-Romney wing of the GOP and the Hillary Clinton wing of the Democrats and the neocons opposed this withdrawal, the divisions were often interparty not just across party lines
I seem to remember that at one point he changed his name, by deedpoll, to Austin Haddock, in protest at the evisceration of the fishing industry. He was MP for Grimsby and an outspoken Euro-sceptic. Also very funny.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
It can't be, as soon as the abject terms of the deal Trump signed, far more worthy of "surrender bill" than any nonsense Johnson ever talked about in the Commons, are looked at for any length of time.
Following that, as his former defence secretary Esper said yesterday, Trump appears to have deliberately booby-trapped even this dreadful deal for Biden by pushing for an even faster pullout, and crucially before the Taliban had fulfilled pretty much anything of their half of an already terrible deal, as soon as he lost re-election.
That seens entirely characteristic of him, if we look at his actions in other areas after the election.
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Not it the governing party's voters are mainly well over the age of conscription.
Inflation at 2% in July and in line with BOE forecast
The price of clothing must have dropped like a stone to over compensate for my £1.36 per litre for diesel this morning.
Maybe it is difficult to put one litre of diesel in a basket of household essentials. It certainly wouldn't do much for the clothes from Primark. But then again...
Even if one doesn't agree with Tugendhat, it was a powerful speech of the type that HoC sees so rarely in modern times.
It was a powerful speech.
But I'm afraid that his talk of 'strategic patience', and the comparison with South Korea was facile. We didn't much engage in any kind of nation building there - just left it to the post-war dictators, and lucked out with Park Chung-hee (who wouldn't be acceptable these days in may different ways).
That's on the MO of it and in the immediate aftermath. Once this has died down and is off the front page ask "Should we have stayed?" and I bet you'll get something closer to 0% than 50% for Yes.
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Like what happened to the Glosters in Korea: many conscripts there.
But the disadvantage is the disproportionate impact on the poor and non-criminal of society (the powerful can evade, or get cushy numbers, and the criminals get rejected).
My dad was a lieutenant>captain (volunteered) in the Glosters for Korea. I never asked him but I assume that the Glosters was the catch all unit for anyone wanting to sign up for that conflict?
I don't know much about the Glosters (apart from the 2x cap badges) but that engagement has become military folklore. Your dad will have experienced extraordinary things.
My dad was a voluble chap but (not unusual among sodjers I gather) pretty quiet on that part of his service. The one thing I remember him saying was that Korean civilians took a hell of a pounding from all sides.
Talked more about his post-Korea stint in Suez where he got up to all sorts of high jinks including smashing up a not legally signed out jeep while pished and barely avoiding a dishonourable discharge.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Has that not been true for about 80 years? What should we plan to do about it? Complaining about the reality is pointless.
If there was an EU army (ha!), would it want to fight in Afghanistan, and would it be effective? I'm guessing not.
If there were, and it did, it might become so. But all that is exceedingly unlikely.
But they have covered the alleged thief in tar and dragged him behind a truck in a very specific and limited way.
CNN would call that a mostly peaceful tarring and dragging.
Plenty of London cabbies would be saying that's the sort of 'fing we should be doin' to fieves in our country, guv'nor, they've got the right idea.....
If he's found guilty, it'll be hands chopped for him - as per 5:38 of the qu'ran وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُواْ أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاء بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالاً مِّنَ اللّهِ وَاللّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ
Thread: There’s a lot of criticism of Parliament’s #Afghanistan debate recall - of the too little, too late, what’s the point variety. But a lot of this criticism fails to reflect Parliament's purpose and range of functions.....
Today the reputation of politicians is rarely built solely on the basis of their command of the @UKHouseofCommons chamber. But perform badly - fail to rise to the occasion - and reputations can be badly damaged.
The debate is an opportunity for MPs - and the wider public here and internationally - to get some clarity - or not - about the situation on the ground in Afghanistan, about the UK govt's response to the humanitarian situation, and for refugee asylum plans.....
Our model is far from perfect but because of this recall the Prime Minister has to come before MPs and account for his govt’s policy. I haven't seen much evidence of other parliament’s in coalition nations involved in Afghanistan holding their govt's to account this week.
To lighten the mood a little, apparently our favourite student *anker on “holiday” in the ‘Stan, is upset that the British government have transported him to the nearest safe country and told him he’s on his own, that the charter flights onward to the UK are for diplomats and refugees.
To lighten the mood a little, apparently our favourite student *anker on “holiday” in the ‘Stan, is upset that the British government have transported him to the nearest safe country and told him he’s on his own, that the charter flights onward to the UK are for diplomats and refugees.
Penny Mordaunt's odds should be shorter. She is the obvious alternative to Rishi should he stumble.
Was just thinking the same. Also Liz Truss, if Sunak or Raab need replacing. She’s been doing a great job at Trade though, would be a shame for her to lose that role.
Not sure about Truss. At best she can operate a photocopier/word processor well, considering most of the trade deals are just cut and paste of EU deals.
The next Tory leadership election and the next general election will not have much to do with Brexit. I’d have Tugenhat in tomorrow because he sees the world as it really it is and isn’t afraid to say what he sees. But I expect his time might only come when China takes Taiwan. We’ll continue with a self defeating transactional view of China and the world until that moment I think.
To go with the self-defeating transactional view of Scotland.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Has that not been true for about 80 years? What should we plan to do about it? Complaining about the reality is pointless.
If there was an EU army (ha!), would it want to fight in Afghanistan, and would it be effective? I'm guessing not.
If there were, and it did, it might become so. But all that is exceedingly unlikely.
I believe that the Germans were the next biggest contingent after the USA of the NATO forces in Afghanistan.
But, yes May is correct. The USA is an unreliable allie.
Priti vs. Macron: Patel has an article in the Telegraph today urging other European countries to follow Britain in accepting refugees. In remarks that appear to respond to French President Emmanuel Macron’s warnings about “irregular migratory flows,” Patel writes: “The U.K. is also doing all it can to encourage other countries to help. Not only do we want to lead by example, we cannot do this alone.” Which, in terms of rhetoric at least, positions Macron somewhere to the right of Britain’s hardcore home secretary on migration.
Penny Mordaunt's odds should be shorter. She is the obvious alternative to Rishi should he stumble.
Was just thinking the same. Also Liz Truss, if Sunak or Raab need replacing. She’s been doing a great job at Trade though, would be a shame for her to lose that role.
Not sure about Truss. At best she can operate a photocopier/word processor well, considering most of the trade deals are just cut and paste of EU deals.
Quite an impressive skillset when compared to Johnson's umbrella operation.
Inflation at 2% in July and in line with BOE forecast
The price of clothing must have dropped like a stone to over compensate for my £1.36 per litre for diesel this morning.
Maybe it is difficult to put one litre of diesel in a basket of household essentials. It certainly wouldn't do much for the clothes from Primark. But then again...
4 hrs after the jab the sore arm kicks in, curse these dangerous vaccine side effects.
I had this for weeks, which extraordinarily was suddenly cured by falling into some stinging nettles. Subsequently, and on the advice of an eccentric gardener, I've started deliberately taking a few stings every now and then as a curative to feel better more generally - and amazingly, it works.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
Trump was a Democrat?
It is the Trumpite wing of the GOP and the Biden and Sanders wing of the Democrats who are responsible for this withdrawal.
The Bush-McCain-Romney wing of the GOP and the Hillary Clinton wing of the Democrats and the neocons opposed this withdrawal, the divisions were often interparty not just across party lines
The "Trumpite wing" of the GOP is 90% of the party.
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Like what happened to the Glosters in Korea: many conscripts there.
But the disadvantage is the disproportionate impact on the poor and non-criminal of society (the powerful can evade, or get cushy numbers, and the criminals get rejected).
My dad was a lieutenant>captain (volunteered) in the Glosters for Korea. I never asked him but I assume that the Glosters was the catch all unit for anyone wanting to sign up for that conflict?
Memory was that the men who fought the last stand of the Glosters included conscripts (and reservists) who were called up to the Reg Depot and were volunteered rather than volunterring to go out East. But I'll have a look for the book I have in mind - couldn't find it on a quick check. Will PM you when I come across it.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Has that not been true for about 80 years? What should we plan to do about it? Complaining about the reality is pointless.
If there was an EU army (ha!), would it want to fight in Afghanistan, and would it be effective? I'm guessing not.
Why? Eurocorps had command of the ISAF mission for two years with French, Bulgarian and Polish troops. Their flounderings were not noticeably worse than the British efforts.
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Not it the governing party's voters are mainly well over the age of conscription.
But older people usually have children, grandchildren, friends and neighbours. Will they really want to see them mangled and maimed in foreign follies for the sake of pricks like Tony Blair’s career?
4 hrs after the jab the sore arm kicks in, curse these dangerous vaccine side effects.
I had this for weeks, which extraordinarily was cured by falling into some stinging nettles. Subsequently ,and on the advice of an eccentric gardener, I've started deliberately taking a few stings every now and then since then, as a curative to feel better more generally - and amazingly, it works.
I bet he's having a giggle and cannot believe you fell for it, but if it works for you I guess!
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Not it the governing party's voters are mainly well over the age of conscription.
But older people usually have children, grandchildren, friends and neighbours. Will they really want to see them mangled and maimed in foreign follies for the sake of pricks like Tony Blair’s career?
Certainly an incentive to work hard to be favourite child/grandchild.
To lighten the mood a little, apparently our favourite student *anker on “holiday” in the ‘Stan, is upset that the British government have transported him to the nearest safe country and told him he’s on his own, that the charter flights onward to the UK are for diplomats and refugees.
If he likes danger tourism I'd think experiencing travel difficulties is part of it.
Telling the world about his hideaway beforte he was out of Kabul was not the way to avoid difficulties. You'd think he didn't think the Taliban could use a keyboard, never mind search on the net.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
Trump was a Democrat?
Biden has literally said, "the buck stops with me".
He's been in power for eight months, for goodness' sake.
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Like what happened to the Glosters in Korea: many conscripts there.
But the disadvantage is the disproportionate impact on the poor and non-criminal of society (the powerful can evade, or get cushy numbers, and the criminals get rejected).
My dad was a lieutenant>captain (volunteered) in the Glosters for Korea. I never asked him but I assume that the Glosters was the catch all unit for anyone wanting to sign up for that conflict?
Memory was that the men who fought the last stand of the Glosters included conscripts (and reservists) who were called up to the Reg Depot and were volunteered rather than volunterring to go out East. But I'll have a look for the book I have in mind - couldn't find it on a quick check. Will PM you when I come across it.
4 hrs after the jab the sore arm kicks in, curse these dangerous vaccine side effects.
I had this for weeks, which extraordinarily was cured by falling into some stinging nettles. Subsequently ,and on the advice of an eccentric gardener, I've started deliberately taking a few stings every now and then since then, as a curative to feel better more generally - and amazingly, it works.
I bet he's having a giggle and cannot believe you fell for it, but if it works for you I guess!
A bit of research subsequently indicated nettle being used in a similar way for millennia, so I suspect not entirely his idea. An eccentric gardener in the best way, though.
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Not it the governing party's voters are mainly well over the age of conscription.
But older people usually have children, grandchildren, friends and neighbours. Will they really want to see them mangled and maimed in foreign follies for the sake of pricks like Tony Blair’s career?
Aren't these the same people who think a bit of ethnic cleansing is a jolly imperial jape? They wouldn't let such trivialities get in the way of that.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Has that not been true for about 80 years? What should we plan to do about it? Complaining about the reality is pointless.
If there was an EU army (ha!), would it want to fight in Afghanistan, and would it be effective? I'm guessing not.
If there were, and it did, it might become so. But all that is exceedingly unlikely.
I believe that the Germans were the next biggest contingent after the USA of the NATO forces in Afghanistan.
But, yes May is correct. The USA is an unreliable allie.
Yes, after US, Germany had next biggest contingent.
I saw a good table on this and now cannot find it. I think UK was third or fourth. Pro rata I think Denmark had most involvement?
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Not it the governing party's voters are mainly well over the age of conscription.
That's only if they don't have children and grandchildren. As the approved Tory voters must, at least in the Tory Zeitgeist, given the special pampering that wealthy pensioners with children get in inheritance tax allowances.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
Trump was a Democrat?
It is the Trumpite wing of the GOP and the Biden and Sanders wing of the Democrats who are responsible for this withdrawal.
The Bush-McCain-Romney wing of the GOP and the Hillary Clinton wing of the Democrats and the neocons opposed this withdrawal, the divisions were often interparty not just across party lines
The "Trumpite wing" of the GOP is 90% of the party.
Inflation at 2% in July and in line with BOE forecast
The price of clothing must have dropped like a stone to over compensate for my £1.36 per litre for diesel this morning.
Maybe it is difficult to put one litre of diesel in a basket of household essentials. It certainly wouldn't do much for the clothes from Primark. But then again...
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Not it the governing party's voters are mainly well over the age of conscription.
But older people usually have children, grandchildren, friends and neighbours. Will they really want to see them mangled and maimed in foreign follies for the sake of pricks like Tony Blair’s career?
Certainly an incentive to work hard to be favourite child/grandchild.
Mummy/granny cannot protect you from conscription.
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Like what happened to the Glosters in Korea: many conscripts there.
But the disadvantage is the disproportionate impact on the poor and non-criminal of society (the powerful can evade, or get cushy numbers, and the criminals get rejected).
My dad was a lieutenant>captain (volunteered) in the Glosters for Korea. I never asked him but I assume that the Glosters was the catch all unit for anyone wanting to sign up for that conflict?
Memory was that the men who fought the last stand of the Glosters included conscripts (and reservists) who were called up to the Reg Depot and were volunteered rather than volunterring to go out East. But I'll have a look for the book I have in mind - couldn't find it on a quick check. Will PM you when I come across it.
To The Last Round ?
Andrew Salmon's Scorched Earth, Black Snow was also excellent.
Even if one doesn't agree with Tugendhat, it was a powerful speech of the type that HoC sees so rarely in modern times.
It was a powerful speech.
But I'm afraid that his talk of 'strategic patience', and the comparison with South Korea was facile. We didn't much engage in any kind of nation building there - just left it to the post-war dictators, and lucked out with Park Chung-hee (who wouldn't be acceptable these days in may different ways).
That's on the MO of it and in the immediate aftermath. Once this has died down and is off the front page ask "Should we have stayed?" and I bet you'll get something closer to 0% than 50% for Yes.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
Trump was a Democrat?
It is the Trumpite wing of the GOP and the Biden and Sanders wing of the Democrats who are responsible for this withdrawal.
The Bush-McCain-Romney wing of the GOP and the Hillary Clinton wing of the Democrats and the neocons opposed this withdrawal, the divisions were often interparty not just across party lines
The "Trumpite wing" of the GOP is 90% of the party.
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Not it the governing party's voters are mainly well over the age of conscription.
But older people usually have children, grandchildren, friends and neighbours. Will they really want to see them mangled and maimed in foreign follies for the sake of pricks like Tony Blair’s career?
Certainly an incentive to work hard to be favourite child/grandchild.
Mummy/granny cannot protect you from conscription.
Och, bone spurs and a determined Lewis mammy can go a long way..
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Not it the governing party's voters are mainly well over the age of conscription.
But older people usually have children, grandchildren, friends and neighbours. Will they really want to see them mangled and maimed in foreign follies for the sake of pricks like Tony Blair’s career?
Certainly an incentive to work hard to be favourite child/grandchild.
Mummy/granny cannot protect you from conscription.
No, but we were discussing if they, as the most active part of the electorate, would be more or less in favour of foreign escapades. An estranged grandchild would tug the heartstrings at the prospect less than dear old Johnny/Jane possibly being called up.
Good to see the HoC as crowded as a flight from Kabul again but the painful reality is that these decisions were not made by us, we have to mitigate the consequences for those that helped us and who are now at risk and we need to accept that is only in our power to a very limited extent.
Pray for the people of Afghanistan, the women particularly.
Jezbollah speaking from his perch between Ricky Dicky Di Do Burgon and John McDonnell. Mentions his concern for Trade Unionists in Afghanistan. Fails to call for cash for Jihadis. Shame.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
Trump was a Democrat?
Biden has literally said, "the buck stops with me".
He's been in power for eight months, for goodness' sake.
Yep. He is taking direct ownership of this shit show much to his credit. My point was in response to "entirely owned by a Democrat President" which ignores that this is Trump's plan, claimed by both Trump and the GOP as their success, where they said Biden hadn't withdrawn fast enough in his 8 months.
The buck stops with Biden. But to claim no ownership by Trump is laughable. Trump negotiated this withdrawal with the Taliban - no way to row back on that catastrophic strategic fubar.
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Not it the governing party's voters are mainly well over the age of conscription.
But older people usually have children, grandchildren, friends and neighbours. Will they really want to see them mangled and maimed in foreign follies for the sake of pricks like Tony Blair’s career?
Certainly an incentive to work hard to be favourite child/grandchild.
Mummy/granny cannot protect you from conscription.
No, but we were discussing if they, as the most active part of the electorate, would be more or less in favour of foreign escapades. An estranged grandchild would tug the heartstrings at the prospect less than dear old Johnny/Jane possibly being called up.
In modern warfare conscriptees, as the Russians have discovered, are a net negative. They don't provide any useful military capability and require the presence of a lot of regular troops to provide leadership, training and discipline.
Listening to an excerpt from IDS just now, I'm trying to think if senior Tory MPs have ever kicked a sitting American President like this, ever, Democrat or Republican.
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Not it the governing party's voters are mainly well over the age of conscription.
But older people usually have children, grandchildren, friends and neighbours. Will they really want to see them mangled and maimed in foreign follies for the sake of pricks like Tony Blair’s career?
Certainly an incentive to work hard to be favourite child/grandchild.
Mummy/granny cannot protect you from conscription.
What you need is bone spurs, or in Biden's case asthma.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
Trump was a Democrat?
Biden has literally said, "the buck stops with me".
He's been in power for eight months, for goodness' sake.
Yep. He is taking direct ownership of this shit show much to his credit. My point was in response to "entirely owned by a Democrat President" which ignores that this is Trump's plan, claimed by both Trump and the GOP as their success, where they said Biden hadn't withdrawn fast enough in his 8 months.
The buck stops with Biden. But to claim no ownership by Trump is laughable. Trump negotiated this withdrawal with the Taliban - no way to row back on that catastrophic strategic fubar.
No way? If they wanted to they could have found a way.
As an aside, dock leaves cure the stinging of nettles.
This is the sum total of my herb lore.
A few weeks ago I had to run through fifty metres of waist-high nettles (*). I had full-length trousers on, but still got nettle stings all up my legs. And on my privates.
Sadly there were no dock leaves to rub on my d*ck. Or perhaps fortunately, as a woman was feeding horses in an adjacent paddock.
Not my best run ever ...
(*) An apparently very-disused public footpath. Except the nettles were either side of, and in, an immaculate metal clappergate.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
Trump was a Democrat?
Biden has literally said, "the buck stops with me".
He's been in power for eight months, for goodness' sake.
Yep. He is taking direct ownership of this shit show much to his credit. My point was in response to "entirely owned by a Democrat President" which ignores that this is Trump's plan, claimed by both Trump and the GOP as their success, where they said Biden hadn't withdrawn fast enough in his 8 months.
The buck stops with Biden. But to claim no ownership by Trump is laughable. Trump negotiated this withdrawal with the Taliban - no way to row back on that catastrophic strategic fubar.
No way? If they wanted to they could have found a way.
Inflation at 2% in July and in line with BOE forecast
The price of clothing must have dropped like a stone to over compensate for my £1.36 per litre for diesel this morning.
Maybe it is difficult to put one litre of diesel in a basket of household essentials. It certainly wouldn't do much for the clothes from Primark. But then again...
My local Asda was 1.29 or was last week
Which Asda was that? Riyadh.
No chance! You should hear the complaints out here that petrol just went over 50p a litre
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
Trump was a Democrat?
Biden has literally said, "the buck stops with me".
He's been in power for eight months, for goodness' sake.
Yep. He is taking direct ownership of this shit show much to his credit. My point was in response to "entirely owned by a Democrat President" which ignores that this is Trump's plan, claimed by both Trump and the GOP as their success, where they said Biden hadn't withdrawn fast enough in his 8 months.
The buck stops with Biden. But to claim no ownership by Trump is laughable. Trump negotiated this withdrawal with the Taliban - no way to row back on that catastrophic strategic fubar.
No way? If they wanted to they could have found a way.
Only by breaking an Agreement (Doha) signed by Trump and the Taliban in Feb 2020.
Obviously, if it had been Boris rather than Biden, he would have had no hesitation in breaking a signed agreement.
Listening to an excerpt from IDS just now, I'm trying to think if senior Tory MPs have ever kicked a sitting American President like this, ever, Democrat or Republican.
Well there was the time we burned down the White House. I don’t think Joe Biden needs to worry about that.
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Like what happened to the Glosters in Korea: many conscripts there.
But the disadvantage is the disproportionate impact on the poor and non-criminal of society (the powerful can evade, or get cushy numbers, and the criminals get rejected).
My dad was a lieutenant>captain (volunteered) in the Glosters for Korea. I never asked him but I assume that the Glosters was the catch all unit for anyone wanting to sign up for that conflict?
Memory was that the men who fought the last stand of the Glosters included conscripts (and reservists) who were called up to the Reg Depot and were volunteered rather than volunterring to go out East. But I'll have a look for the book I have in mind - couldn't find it on a quick check. Will PM you when I come across it.
To The Last Round ?
Andrew Salmon's Scorched Earth, Black Snow was also excellent.
No; the book I have in mind was a collection of accounts of National Service. B S Johnson 'All bull' A particularly good one, getting away from the usual 'Carry on Sergeant' style of life (though the film of that name captures a certain side of it, especially the more futile whitewashing the coal in the depot life). For instance the book had David Hockney's account of being a hospital orderly (as a conscientious objector) and (I think) Alan Sillitoe as an operator for blind bombing beams during the Malayan Emergency. But I can't verify my memory for TUD re the Glosters - or even if they were included - 'till I find my copy!
However the more recent formal but very readable history by David Vinen 'National service: a generation in uniform 1945-1963' does comnfirm that plenty of conscripts and reservists were called up and sent to Korea - no obvious mention of volunteering (though I'm sure one could ask to be put on a draft to Korea rather than somewhere else, esp. if one was an officer). It was only those under 19 or almost finishing their terms of service who were let off - and the Gmt increased the term of conscription because of the Korean war.
I've always been scepticxal about conscription (certainly, without heavy modifications such as consc ientious objection and alternative service) after reading the first book and I haven't changed my views: much as with capital punishment, an awareness of history does inform one.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
Trump was a Democrat?
Biden has literally said, "the buck stops with me".
He's been in power for eight months, for goodness' sake.
Yep. He is taking direct ownership of this shit show much to his credit. My point was in response to "entirely owned by a Democrat President" which ignores that this is Trump's plan, claimed by both Trump and the GOP as their success, where they said Biden hadn't withdrawn fast enough in his 8 months.
The buck stops with Biden. But to claim no ownership by Trump is laughable. Trump negotiated this withdrawal with the Taliban - no way to row back on that catastrophic strategic fubar.
Edit: deleted, because I hadn't bothered to read the agreement signed by the US before posting.
As the first Covid lockdown hit, workers in Britain opted to turn their sheds into offices – “shoffices” – and bars, but the trend has led to a surge in outbuilding fires.
Data from freedom of information requests by the insurer Zurich found that blazes in sheds, garages and conservatories rose by 16% in 2020 compared with the previous year.
Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."
Exactly
Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!
I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.
If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
"But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.
One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
You seem to be so busy attacking the American Right, that you have failed to notice that today's specific issue of unilateral US withdrawal from Afghanistan without proper planning, is entirely owned by a Democrat President.
Trump was a Democrat?
Biden has literally said, "the buck stops with me".
He's been in power for eight months, for goodness' sake.
Yep. He is taking direct ownership of this shit show much to his credit. My point was in response to "entirely owned by a Democrat President" which ignores that this is Trump's plan, claimed by both Trump and the GOP as their success, where they said Biden hadn't withdrawn fast enough in his 8 months.
The buck stops with Biden. But to claim no ownership by Trump is laughable. Trump negotiated this withdrawal with the Taliban - no way to row back on that catastrophic strategic fubar.
No way? If they wanted to they could have found a way.
Only by breaking an Agreement (Doha) signed by Trump and the Taliban in Feb 2020.
Obviously, if it had been Boris rather than Biden, he would have had no hesitation in breaking a signed agreement.
Like I said. If they wanted to, they could have found a way.
Cracking quote regarding Biden from Tom Tugendhat. What a shame Biden will not get to hear it.
If he did would he care anyway ? Would Johnson care if an obscure US politician commented on him ?
One might hope that as he was, like his predecessor, a draft dodger, he might cringe at the realisation he outrageously called people much braver than him cowards.
Ed Davey’s LibDems have been going in hard on Afghanistan, both calling for a greater number of refugees to be allowed into the UK and strongly condemning the US & UK military withdrawal, saying “our leaders should all hang their heads in shame.”
Back at the LibDems’ 2009 conference, their future leader was instead calling for “tea with the Taliban”, and for Taliban fighters to be offered “a decent daily wage” to get them to defect. Now he criticises the withdrawal of troops, yet ten years ago Davey told the LibDem faithful:
“You don’t win wars by fighting in Afghanistan: witness the Soviets, witness the three Anglo-Afghan wars fought by the British Empire, witness Alexander the Great.”
As the first Covid lockdown hit, workers in Britain opted to turn their sheds into offices – “shoffices” – and bars, but the trend has led to a surge in outbuilding fires.
Data from freedom of information requests by the insurer Zurich found that blazes in sheds, garages and conservatories rose by 16% in 2020 compared with the previous year.
Whoops. Wonder how many people have wired up their own shed, then put a big heater in it?
Listening to an excerpt from IDS just now, I'm trying to think if senior Tory MPs have ever kicked a sitting American President like this, ever, Democrat or Republican.
Well there was the time we burned down the White House. I don’t think Joe Biden needs to worry about that.
As an aside, dock leaves cure the stinging of nettles.
This is the sum total of my herb lore.
A few weeks ago I had to run through fifty metres of waist-high nettles (*). I had full-length trousers on, but still got nettle stings all up my legs. And on my privates.
Sadly there were no dock leaves to rub on my d*ck. Or perhaps fortunately, as a woman was feeding horses in an adjacent paddock.
Not my best run ever ...
(*) An apparently very-disused public footpath. Except the nettles were either side of, and in, an immaculate metal clappergate.
Perhaps the woman in adjacent paddock grew and encouraged the nettles?
Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward
Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore
I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood
Your post is nonsensical.
Cannot rely on America.
What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?
More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
Like what happened to the Glosters in Korea: many conscripts there.
But the disadvantage is the disproportionate impact on the poor and non-criminal of society (the powerful can evade, or get cushy numbers, and the criminals get rejected).
My dad was a lieutenant>captain (volunteered) in the Glosters for Korea. I never asked him but I assume that the Glosters was the catch all unit for anyone wanting to sign up for that conflict?
Memory was that the men who fought the last stand of the Glosters included conscripts (and reservists) who were called up to the Reg Depot and were volunteered rather than volunterring to go out East. But I'll have a look for the book I have in mind - couldn't find it on a quick check. Will PM you when I come across it.
To The Last Round ?
Andrew Salmon's Scorched Earth, Black Snow was also excellent.
No; the book I have in mind was a collection of accounts of National Service. B S Johnson 'All bull' A particularly good one, getting away from the usual 'Carry on Sergeant' style of life (though the film of that name captures a certain side of it, especially the more futile whitewashing the coal in the depot life). For instance the book had David Hockney's account of being a hospital orderly (as a conscientious objector) and (I think) Alan Sillitoe as an operator for blind bombing beams during the Malayan Emergency. But I can't verify my memory for TUD re the Glosters - or even if they were included - 'till I find my copy!
However the more recent formal but very readable history by David Vinen 'National service: a generation in uniform 1945-1963' does comnfirm that plenty of conscripts and reservists were called up and sent to Korea - no obvious mention of volunteering (though I'm sure one could ask to be put on a draft to Korea rather than somewhere else, esp. if one was an officer). It was only those under 19 or almost finishing their terms of service who were let off - and the Gmt increased the term of conscription because of the Korean war.
I've always been scepticxal about conscription (certainly, without heavy modifications such as consc ientious objection and alternative service) after reading the first book and I haven't changed my views: much as with capital punishment, an awareness of history does inform one.
My father was on the reserve (King's Shropshire Light Infantry) and received papers (or a letter saying he might be called up) but thankfully was not
Ed Davey’s LibDems have been going in hard on Afghanistan, both calling for a greater number of refugees to be allowed into the UK and strongly condemning the US & UK military withdrawal, saying “our leaders should all hang their heads in shame.”
Back at the LibDems’ 2009 conference, their future leader was instead calling for “tea with the Taliban”, and for Taliban fighters to be offered “a decent daily wage” to get them to defect. Now he criticises the withdrawal of troops, yet ten years ago Davey told the LibDem faithful:
“You don’t win wars by fighting in Afghanistan: witness the Soviets, witness the three Anglo-Afghan wars fought by the British Empire, witness Alexander the Great.”
Mainly because of the complete change of the LD voter coalition.
Most of the current LD vote is made up of centrist Remainers many of whom voted for Blair and/or Cameron.
Most of the pre 2010 LD vote was made up of leftwing anti Iraq war voters who defected back to Labour when Ed Miliband and Corbyn took over and are still voting Labour or even Green post Starmer
Comments
Though given his old age rather less sad news than the news Sean Lock died at just 58 today
Talked more about his post-Korea stint in Suez where he got up to all sorts of high jinks including smashing up a not legally signed out jeep while pished and barely avoiding a dishonourable discharge.
If China then moved onto South Korea and Japan then war involving the West would be inevitable
And of course, he was the host of the Clough v. Revie bout.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTiIdbDBmZc
But I'm afraid that his talk of 'strategic patience', and the comparison with South Korea was facile.
We didn't much engage in any kind of nation building there - just left it to the post-war dictators, and lucked out with Park Chung-hee (who wouldn't be acceptable these days in may different ways).
Strategic patience is simply not possible when nearly three quarters of the US public wanted out and you've already signed a deal to leave.
The American public now has what it wanted.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/08/afghanistan-your-fault/619769/
https://morningconsult.com/2021/08/16/afghanistan-withdrawal-taliban-polling/
Further to your and DA's meditations on your service, I'd say my father's periods in the navy and army were certainly the most profound and important things to happen to him. This perhaps didn't bode well for his marriages, children and his own subsequent life, but whit can ye do?
The Bush-McCain-Romney wing of the GOP and the Hillary Clinton wing of the Democrats and the neocons opposed this withdrawal, the divisions were often interparty not just across party lines
https://twitter.com/PaulNuki/status/1427247002430197764
Following that, as his former defence secretary Esper said yesterday, Trump appears to have deliberately booby-trapped even this dreadful deal for Biden by pushing for an even faster pullout, and crucially before the Taliban had fulfilled pretty much anything of their half of an already terrible deal, as soon as he lost re-election.
That seens entirely characteristic of him, if we look at his actions in other areas after the election.
But all that is exceedingly unlikely.
وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُواْ أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاء بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالاً مِّنَ اللّهِ وَاللّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ
We don’t want him in Dubai, that’s for sure. Give him an escort to the Emirates ticket desk!
But, yes May is correct. The USA is an unreliable allie.
https://www.politico.eu/newsletter/london-playbook/politico-london-playbook-bojo-vs-joe-5-year-wait-fcdoffed-with-raab/
https://twitter.com/laurie_bristow/status/1427964008548741120?s=20
He's been in power for eight months, for goodness' sake.
This is the sum total of my herb lore.
I saw a good table on this and now cannot find it. I think UK was third or fourth. Pro rata I think Denmark had most involvement?
58% of Republican voters now opposed the Afghanistan withdrawal by Biden compared to 69% of Democrats who supported it
https://morningconsult.com/2021/08/16/afghanistan-withdrawal-taliban-polling/
Andrew Salmon's Scorched Earth, Black Snow was also excellent.
https://morningconsult.com/2021/08/16/afghanistan-withdrawal-taliban-polling/
Pray for the people of Afghanistan, the women particularly.
The buck stops with Biden. But to claim no ownership by Trump is laughable. Trump negotiated this withdrawal with the Taliban - no way to row back on that catastrophic strategic fubar.
Sadly there were no dock leaves to rub on my d*ck. Or perhaps fortunately, as a woman was feeding horses in an adjacent paddock.
Not my best run ever ...
(*) An apparently very-disused public footpath. Except the nettles were either side of, and in, an immaculate metal clappergate.
Obviously, if it had been Boris rather than Biden, he would have had no hesitation in breaking a signed agreement.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/All-Bull-National-Servicemen-Johnson/dp/0704310023
However the more recent formal but very readable history by David Vinen 'National service: a generation in uniform 1945-1963' does comnfirm that plenty of conscripts and reservists were called up and sent to Korea - no obvious mention of volunteering (though I'm sure one could ask to be put on a draft to Korea rather than somewhere else, esp. if one was an officer). It was only those under 19 or almost finishing their terms of service who were let off - and the Gmt increased the term of conscription because of the Korean war.
I've always been scepticxal about conscription (certainly, without heavy modifications such as consc ientious objection and alternative service) after reading the first book and I haven't changed my views: much as with capital punishment, an awareness of history does inform one.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-58254859
https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2009/09/11/should-clegg-call-for-a-withdrawal-from-afghanistan/
https://twitter.com/HelpforHeroes/status/1427665962749374476
Data from freedom of information requests by the insurer Zurich found that blazes in sheds, garages and conservatories rose by 16% in 2020 compared with the previous year.
https://order-order.com/2021/08/18/ed-davey-moves-on-from-tea-with-the-taliban-call/
Ed Davey’s LibDems have been going in hard on Afghanistan, both calling for a greater number of refugees to be allowed into the UK and strongly condemning the US & UK military withdrawal, saying “our leaders should all hang their heads in shame.”
Back at the LibDems’ 2009 conference, their future leader was instead calling for “tea with the Taliban”, and for Taliban fighters to be offered “a decent daily wage” to get them to defect. Now he criticises the withdrawal of troops, yet ten years ago Davey told the LibDem faithful:
“You don’t win wars by fighting in Afghanistan: witness the Soviets, witness the three Anglo-Afghan wars fought by the British Empire, witness Alexander the Great.”
Most of the current LD vote is made up of centrist Remainers many of whom voted for Blair and/or Cameron.
Most of the pre 2010 LD vote was made up of leftwing anti Iraq war voters who defected back to Labour when Ed Miliband and Corbyn took over and are still voting Labour or even Green post Starmer