Meanwhile, paging @ydoethur and others in the PB edu-posse. This is serious ravens-leaving-the-Tower-of-London stuff. So big it needs an international press conference to distract from it.
Bloody hell Nick Gibb's gone. I assume hell has actually frozen over?
Meanwhile, paging @ydoethur and others in the PB edu-posse. This is serious ravens-leaving-the-Tower-of-London stuff. So big it needs an international press conference to distract from it.
Bloody hell Nick Gibb's gone. I assume hell has actually frozen over?
Got the game on my laptop and Sky News in the background on the TV, but Sky just seem to be talking about the reshuffle still, not a hint from them of the PM speaking with POTUS and Aussie PM as far as I've seen.
I keep being told our foreign policy is finished after Brexit and the advantage is wholly with the EU.
I wait to hear the detail but this could be a very dramatic development with lots of implications for NATO and others
And this from Joe Biden not Trump
I suspect it probably isn't - just some extra defence cooperation and a political astatement - but I'm sure it will be interesting nonetheless.
Possibly but I don't see why that would not be a Defence Secretary announcement instead of Heads of Government. Which suggests something major.
Johnson's bridge to Ireland is going to be extended to Australia via San Fransisco?
Dilyn to become Joint Head of all three countries with Carrie as Regent
I still reckon they're re-uniting under the Crown but maybe they're skipping Charles and going straight to the new Queen Emma Raducanu, which is why it needs a pretty big build-up
Fine by me. A really Hot Teen Queen (to be known as HTQ from now on)
What happens when she stops being a teen? Ritual sacrifice or abdication followed by a replacement selected Strictly/X Factor stylee?
Got the game on my laptop and Sky News in the background on the TV, but Sky just seem to be talking about the reshuffle still, not a hint from them of the PM speaking with POTUS and Aussie PM as far as I've seen.
Got the game on my laptop and Sky News in the background on the TV, but Sky just seem to be talking about the reshuffle still, not a hint from them of the PM speaking with POTUS and Aussie PM as far as I've seen.
Nope, no-one elected Mark Milley but no-one elected Vasili Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov either, but we might not still be here if they hadn’t done what they did.
And US military swear oaths to obey lawful orders from their superiors, and the bit about defending the Constitution comes first IIRC. Hard to defend a constitution if the country it constitutes is a pile of smoking rubble.
Stanislav Petrov is a bad example. He was the Duty Officer and made a decision that the alarm was probably false.
It is slightly different to telling your opposite number you will give them advance notice of an attack and consult no civilian on your actions.
As I said to @ydoethur the question is, if Milley did this to a Democrat President under the same circumstances or a similar situation, would you see it as similarly justified or say it is wrong?
Any sane person would see it as justified.
I am aware this definition does not include most current Republican voters.
Most sane - and true - liberal voters would see Milley’s actions as unjustified. And you still haven’t answered whether you would support Milley’s actions if a Democratic President was involved in a similar situation.
Really?
British nuclear weapon launching is under military rather than political control, I believe.
But with civilian authorisation. Correct me if I am wrong but, unless in extreme circumstances, the military can’t go launching nuclear missles by themselves.
Unlike the Americans, British Nukes are launched by the submarine crew, with no code required.
While I want the things scrapped, I would rather trust the Royal Naval officers, than politicians of any Party.
Have to admit I thought that was barmy and must be wrong but you are right. I stand corrected.
Got the game on my laptop and Sky News in the background on the TV, but Sky just seem to be talking about the reshuffle still, not a hint from them of the PM speaking with POTUS and Aussie PM as far as I've seen.
What’s your guess then?
Its this awfully named AUUKUS agreement but I'm not sure why that needs heads of government announcing it on TV like this.
Got the game on my laptop and Sky News in the background on the TV, but Sky just seem to be talking about the reshuffle still, not a hint from them of the PM speaking with POTUS and Aussie PM as far as I've seen.
Got the game on my laptop and Sky News in the background on the TV, but Sky just seem to be talking about the reshuffle still, not a hint from them of the PM speaking with POTUS and Aussie PM as far as I've seen.
Nor BBC
Very strange
This story is either far bigger than anyone can imagine or the dampest of damp squibs.
I keep being told our foreign policy is finished after Brexit and the advantage is wholly with the EU.
I wait to hear the detail but this could be a very dramatic development with lots of implications for NATO and others
And this from Joe Biden not Trump
I suspect it probably isn't - just some extra defence cooperation and a political astatement - but I'm sure it will be interesting nonetheless.
Possibly but I don't see why that would not be a Defence Secretary announcement instead of Heads of Government. Which suggests something major.
Johnson's bridge to Ireland is going to be extended to Australia via San Fransisco?
Dilyn to become Joint Head of all three countries with Carrie as Regent
I still reckon they're re-uniting under the Crown but maybe they're skipping Charles and going straight to the new Queen Emma Raducanu, which is why it needs a pretty big build-up
Fine by me. A really Hot Teen Queen (to be known as HTQ from now on)
What happens when she stops being a teen? Ritual sacrifice or abdication followed by a replacement selected Strictly/X Factor stylee?
Presumably some will still use HTG with “Teen” replaced by “Twenties”
Got the game on my laptop and Sky News in the background on the TV, but Sky just seem to be talking about the reshuffle still, not a hint from them of the PM speaking with POTUS and Aussie PM as far as I've seen.
Nor BBC
Very strange
Nothing whatsoever trending on Twitter either
I'm willing to bet it is not UFOs. Sadly. Coz that would be enormous fun
Really odd how tv news is just ignoring this impending announcement. And basically all the print media websites are keeping quiet on what it’s about.
Sorry, but I though it was known to be about technology sharing with Australia. Probably making a big deal to show China the Pacific isn't theirs. I feel like it's a presser for Beijing's eyes more than ours.
An emergency presser just for Beijing while it’s 5am in Beijing
Nope, no-one elected Mark Milley but no-one elected Vasili Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov either, but we might not still be here if they hadn’t done what they did.
And US military swear oaths to obey lawful orders from their superiors, and the bit about defending the Constitution comes first IIRC. Hard to defend a constitution if the country it constitutes is a pile of smoking rubble.
Stanislav Petrov is a bad example. He was the Duty Officer and made a decision that the alarm was probably false.
It is slightly different to telling your opposite number you will give them advance notice of an attack and consult no civilian on your actions.
As I said to @ydoethur the question is, if Milley did this to a Democrat President under the same circumstances or a similar situation, would you see it as similarly justified or say it is wrong?
Any sane person would see it as justified.
I am aware this definition does not include most current Republican voters.
Most sane - and true - liberal voters would see Milley’s actions as unjustified. And you still haven’t answered whether you would support Milley’s actions if a Democratic President was involved in a similar situation.
Really?
British nuclear weapon launching is under military rather than political control, I believe.
But with civilian authorisation. Correct me if I am wrong but, unless in extreme circumstances, the military can’t go launching nuclear missles by themselves.
Quite right that the military shouldn't go launching the weapons by themselves without checks.
Nor should the President.
If the President goes crazy the military absolutely has the duty to double-check with other relevant people before following through with such madness just because a deranged individual is telling them to send the weapons flying.
My preference for Trump But, correct me if I am wrong
You're wrong
Thanks, I bow to your superior knowledge and intellect.
On a more useful note, since you know everything, can you tell me who will the next few horse races?
I don't know everything. I only see things clearly that are plain to anyone with eyes. I have no great skill. But you're a wrong 'un. I'm certain of that.
Yes, yes, and I bet you go around telling everyone you are a good person who is a true democrat, and you can’t believe all the evil people in the world. As long as you vote for a person that you approve of.
If you want to label all those who said they would vote Trump as wrong and evil, go ahead. I said at the time his post election behaviour was wrong.
We had a discussion on here the other day about whether Labour would ever win again. It’s individuals like you - and your attitude - who make that unlikely. Nobody likes the smug, superior type even if they do have a degree in Sociology or Media Studies
No, I'm not even a nice person if you must know. But I steer clear of fascist writers and supporting sex pest politicians, so there's always that.
Oh and I got kicked off my Media Studies course, so I don't have a degree at all. Ha, bet you feel silly now!
Knew it was Media Studies though 😀
What's wrong with Media Studies? Of more practical modern day use than my Politics degree. I have never needed to use my encyclopaedic knowledge of Robert Nozick's political discourse for one moment during my working life.
Really odd how tv news is just ignoring this impending announcement. And basically all the print media websites are keeping quiet on what it’s about.
Getting your hopes up?
I hope it’s not UFOs. I mean it would be nice to have been right and all. But I’ve thought about it deeply for quite a long time now. And it would make me sick to my stomach. I’ve had an unpleasant racing heart for an hour just on the off chance it really is.
Got the game on my laptop and Sky News in the background on the TV, but Sky just seem to be talking about the reshuffle still, not a hint from them of the PM speaking with POTUS and Aussie PM as far as I've seen.
Nor BBC
Very strange
Nothing whatsoever trending on Twitter either
I take it that the Tweeter in the header is actually reliable?
Nope, no-one elected Mark Milley but no-one elected Vasili Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov either, but we might not still be here if they hadn’t done what they did.
And US military swear oaths to obey lawful orders from their superiors, and the bit about defending the Constitution comes first IIRC. Hard to defend a constitution if the country it constitutes is a pile of smoking rubble.
Stanislav Petrov is a bad example. He was the Duty Officer and made a decision that the alarm was probably false.
It is slightly different to telling your opposite number you will give them advance notice of an attack and consult no civilian on your actions.
As I said to @ydoethur the question is, if Milley did this to a Democrat President under the same circumstances or a similar situation, would you see it as similarly justified or say it is wrong?
Any sane person would see it as justified.
I am aware this definition does not include most current Republican voters.
Most sane - and true - liberal voters would see Milley’s actions as unjustified. And you still haven’t answered whether you would support Milley’s actions if a Democratic President was involved in a similar situation.
Really?
British nuclear weapon launching is under military rather than political control, I believe.
But with civilian authorisation. Correct me if I am wrong but, unless in extreme circumstances, the military can’t go launching nuclear missles by themselves.
Unlike the Americans, British Nukes are launched by the submarine crew, with no code required.
While I want the things scrapped, I would rather trust the Royal Naval officers, than politicians of any Party.
Have to admit I thought that was barmy and must be wrong but you are right. I stand corrected.
Bloody Hell.
For a little extra flavour, there's often talk when a new PM comes in about "the letter" they have to write: instructions to the subs about what to do if "contact is lost", i.e. a surprise attack has taken out the UK government thoroughly enough that no instructions on whether to retaliate or not. The contents of the letter are kept secret.
Don’t they also get a visit from the minister for magic?
Got the game on my laptop and Sky News in the background on the TV, but Sky just seem to be talking about the reshuffle still, not a hint from them of the PM speaking with POTUS and Aussie PM as far as I've seen.
Nor BBC
Very strange
Nothing whatsoever trending on Twitter either
I take it that the Tweeter in the header is actually reliable?
Sky just referenced it in an interview with Tobias Elwood(?). But aren’t really talking about it. There’s an embargo that seems to be holding.
My preference for Trump But, correct me if I am wrong
You're wrong
Thanks, I bow to your superior knowledge and intellect.
On a more useful note, since you know everything, can you tell me who will the next few horse races?
I don't know everything. I only see things clearly that are plain to anyone with eyes. I have no great skill. But you're a wrong 'un. I'm certain of that.
Yes, yes, and I bet you go around telling everyone you are a good person who is a true democrat, and you can’t believe all the evil people in the world. As long as you vote for a person that you approve of.
If you want to label all those who said they would vote Trump as wrong and evil, go ahead. I said at the time his post election behaviour was wrong.
We had a discussion on here the other day about whether Labour would ever win again. It’s individuals like you - and your attitude - who make that unlikely. Nobody likes the smug, superior type even if they do have a degree in Sociology or Media Studies
No, I'm not even a nice person if you must know. But I steer clear of fascist writers and supporting sex pest politicians, so there's always that.
Oh and I got kicked off my Media Studies course, so I don't have a degree at all. Ha, bet you feel silly now!
Knew it was Media Studies though 😀
What's wrong with Media Studies? Of more practical modern day use than my Politics degree. I have never needed to use my encyclopaedic knowledge of Robert Nozick's political discourse for one moment during my working life.
Actually, nothing per se except I’ve never known anyone in Media who actually has the degree. Maybe I’ve missed them but I wonder where they go to.
Nope, no-one elected Mark Milley but no-one elected Vasili Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov either, but we might not still be here if they hadn’t done what they did.
And US military swear oaths to obey lawful orders from their superiors, and the bit about defending the Constitution comes first IIRC. Hard to defend a constitution if the country it constitutes is a pile of smoking rubble.
Stanislav Petrov is a bad example. He was the Duty Officer and made a decision that the alarm was probably false.
It is slightly different to telling your opposite number you will give them advance notice of an attack and consult no civilian on your actions.
As I said to @ydoethur the question is, if Milley did this to a Democrat President under the same circumstances or a similar situation, would you see it as similarly justified or say it is wrong?
Any sane person would see it as justified.
I am aware this definition does not include most current Republican voters.
Most sane - and true - liberal voters would see Milley’s actions as unjustified. And you still haven’t answered whether you would support Milley’s actions if a Democratic President was involved in a similar situation.
Really?
British nuclear weapon launching is under military rather than political control, I believe.
But with civilian authorisation. Correct me if I am wrong but, unless in extreme circumstances, the military can’t go launching nuclear missles by themselves.
Unlike the Americans, British Nukes are launched by the submarine crew, with no code required.
While I want the things scrapped, I would rather trust the Royal Naval officers, than politicians of any Party.
Have to admit I thought that was barmy and must be wrong but you are right. I stand corrected.
Bloody Hell.
For a little extra flavour, there's often talk when a new PM comes in about "the letter" they have to write: instructions to the subs about what to do if "contact is lost", i.e. a surprise attack has taken out the UK government thoroughly enough that no instructions on whether to retaliate or not. The contents of the letter are kept secret.
Yes, which is why I thought the subs just couldn’t launch them by themselves but they obviously can. Quite scary.
Just when the cabinet couldn’t be more rancid up pops the clueless Dorries to head Culture . The only qualifications needed to be in the cabinet from hell is to be a Bozo boot licker and member of the Brexit Unicorn cult .
My preference for Trump But, correct me if I am wrong
You're wrong
Thanks, I bow to your superior knowledge and intellect.
On a more useful note, since you know everything, can you tell me who will the next few horse races?
I don't know everything. I only see things clearly that are plain to anyone with eyes. I have no great skill. But you're a wrong 'un. I'm certain of that.
Yes, yes, and I bet you go around telling everyone you are a good person who is a true democrat, and you can’t believe all the evil people in the world. As long as you vote for a person that you approve of.
If you want to label all those who said they would vote Trump as wrong and evil, go ahead. I said at the time his post election behaviour was wrong.
We had a discussion on here the other day about whether Labour would ever win again. It’s individuals like you - and your attitude - who make that unlikely. Nobody likes the smug, superior type even if they do have a degree in Sociology or Media Studies
No, I'm not even a nice person if you must know. But I steer clear of fascist writers and supporting sex pest politicians, so there's always that.
Oh and I got kicked off my Media Studies course, so I don't have a degree at all. Ha, bet you feel silly now!
Knew it was Media Studies though 😀
What's wrong with Media Studies? Of more practical modern day use than my Politics degree. I have never needed to use my encyclopaedic knowledge of Robert Nozick's political discourse for one moment during my working life.
Media Studies is just a new version of English that incorporates more than the written page.
Got the game on my laptop and Sky News in the background on the TV, but Sky just seem to be talking about the reshuffle still, not a hint from them of the PM speaking with POTUS and Aussie PM as far as I've seen.
What’s your guess then?
Its this awfully named AUUKUS agreement but I'm not sure why that needs heads of government announcing it on TV like this.
The agreement might not need a big telly announcement, but at least two of the heads of government could do with a chance to do a big announcement with lots of flags.
My preference for Trump But, correct me if I am wrong
You're wrong
Thanks, I bow to your superior knowledge and intellect.
On a more useful note, since you know everything, can you tell me who will the next few horse races?
I don't know everything. I only see things clearly that are plain to anyone with eyes. I have no great skill. But you're a wrong 'un. I'm certain of that.
Yes, yes, and I bet you go around telling everyone you are a good person who is a true democrat, and you can’t believe all the evil people in the world. As long as you vote for a person that you approve of.
If you want to label all those who said they would vote Trump as wrong and evil, go ahead. I said at the time his post election behaviour was wrong.
We had a discussion on here the other day about whether Labour would ever win again. It’s individuals like you - and your attitude - who make that unlikely. Nobody likes the smug, superior type even if they do have a degree in Sociology or Media Studies
No, I'm not even a nice person if you must know. But I steer clear of fascist writers and supporting sex pest politicians, so there's always that.
Oh and I got kicked off my Media Studies course, so I don't have a degree at all. Ha, bet you feel silly now!
Knew it was Media Studies though 😀
What's wrong with Media Studies? Of more practical modern day use than my Politics degree. I have never needed to use my encyclopaedic knowledge of Robert Nozick's political discourse for one moment during my working life.
I don't actually know what people study in Media Studies. Has anyone here genuinely studied it? I'll bet there's something cool in there.
Nope, no-one elected Mark Milley but no-one elected Vasili Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov either, but we might not still be here if they hadn’t done what they did.
And US military swear oaths to obey lawful orders from their superiors, and the bit about defending the Constitution comes first IIRC. Hard to defend a constitution if the country it constitutes is a pile of smoking rubble.
Stanislav Petrov is a bad example. He was the Duty Officer and made a decision that the alarm was probably false.
It is slightly different to telling your opposite number you will give them advance notice of an attack and consult no civilian on your actions.
As I said to @ydoethur the question is, if Milley did this to a Democrat President under the same circumstances or a similar situation, would you see it as similarly justified or say it is wrong?
Any sane person would see it as justified.
I am aware this definition does not include most current Republican voters.
Most sane - and true - liberal voters would see Milley’s actions as unjustified. And you still haven’t answered whether you would support Milley’s actions if a Democratic President was involved in a similar situation.
Really?
British nuclear weapon launching is under military rather than political control, I believe.
But with civilian authorisation. Correct me if I am wrong but, unless in extreme circumstances, the military can’t go launching nuclear missles by themselves.
Unlike the Americans, British Nukes are launched by the submarine crew, with no code required.
While I want the things scrapped, I would rather trust the Royal Naval officers, than politicians of any Party.
Have to admit I thought that was barmy and must be wrong but you are right. I stand corrected.
Bloody Hell.
For a little extra flavour, there's often talk when a new PM comes in about "the letter" they have to write: instructions to the subs about what to do if "contact is lost", i.e. a surprise attack has taken out the UK government thoroughly enough that no instructions on whether to retaliate or not. The contents of the letter are kept secret.
Don’t they also get a visit from the minister for magic?
I think He Who Must Not Be Named is in charge of nuclear armageddon.
Really odd how tv news is just ignoring this impending announcement. And basically all the print media websites are keeping quiet on what it’s about.
Getting your hopes up?
I hope it’s not UFOs. I mean it would be nice to have been right and all. But I’ve thought about it deeply for quite a long time now. And it would make me sick to my stomach. I’ve had an unpleasant racing heart for an hour just on the off chance it really is.
I just watched the NASA chief's interview. You're right, he is basically saying Yes, these are very likely some form of alien tech
Which is pretty fucking extraordinary, and yet we shrug
I've taken my eye off this story as I've regained my life - fun and bars and travel and the like. But, wow
My preference for Trump But, correct me if I am wrong
You're wrong
Thanks, I bow to your superior knowledge and intellect.
On a more useful note, since you know everything, can you tell me who will the next few horse races?
I don't know everything. I only see things clearly that are plain to anyone with eyes. I have no great skill. But you're a wrong 'un. I'm certain of that.
Yes, yes, and I bet you go around telling everyone you are a good person who is a true democrat, and you can’t believe all the evil people in the world. As long as you vote for a person that you approve of.
If you want to label all those who said they would vote Trump as wrong and evil, go ahead. I said at the time his post election behaviour was wrong.
We had a discussion on here the other day about whether Labour would ever win again. It’s individuals like you - and your attitude - who make that unlikely. Nobody likes the smug, superior type even if they do have a degree in Sociology or Media Studies
No, I'm not even a nice person if you must know. But I steer clear of fascist writers and supporting sex pest politicians, so there's always that.
Oh and I got kicked off my Media Studies course, so I don't have a degree at all. Ha, bet you feel silly now!
Knew it was Media Studies though 😀
What's wrong with Media Studies? Of more practical modern day use than my Politics degree. I have never needed to use my encyclopaedic knowledge of Robert Nozick's political discourse for one moment during my working life.
Actually, nothing per se except I’ve never known anyone in Media who actually has the degree. Maybe I’ve missed them but I wonder where they go to.
I suspect you don't move in Labour Party circles. I expect they all have them at Southside.
This had better be worth staying up until 1am to watch.
It inevitably won't be. I expect it will be a reannouncement of stuff we already know plus some stuff about the special relationship, old alliances etc... Very little tangible policy shifts from any of the three just empty words intended to scare China.
Really odd how tv news is just ignoring this impending announcement. And basically all the print media websites are keeping quiet on what it’s about.
Getting your hopes up?
I hope it’s not UFOs. I mean it would be nice to have been right and all. But I’ve thought about it deeply for quite a long time now. And it would make me sick to my stomach. I’ve had an unpleasant racing heart for an hour just on the off chance it really is.
I just watched the NASA chief's interview. You're right, he is basically saying Yes, these are very likely some form of alien tech
Which is pretty fucking extraordinary, and yet we shrug
I've taken my eye off this story as I've regained my life - fun and bars and travel and the like. But, wow
I mean that’s fine, you were busy having sex with (at least?) two women after all.
But yes, they now have their cover don't they. “We didn’t lie and cover it up! We fucking told you! What more did you want from us!?”
Nope, no-one elected Mark Milley but no-one elected Vasili Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov either, but we might not still be here if they hadn’t done what they did.
And US military swear oaths to obey lawful orders from their superiors, and the bit about defending the Constitution comes first IIRC. Hard to defend a constitution if the country it constitutes is a pile of smoking rubble.
Stanislav Petrov is a bad example. He was the Duty Officer and made a decision that the alarm was probably false.
It is slightly different to telling your opposite number you will give them advance notice of an attack and consult no civilian on your actions.
As I said to @ydoethur the question is, if Milley did this to a Democrat President under the same circumstances or a similar situation, would you see it as similarly justified or say it is wrong?
Any sane person would see it as justified.
I am aware this definition does not include most current Republican voters.
Most sane - and true - liberal voters would see Milley’s actions as unjustified. And you still haven’t answered whether you would support Milley’s actions if a Democratic President was involved in a similar situation.
Really?
British nuclear weapon launching is under military rather than political control, I believe.
But with civilian authorisation. Correct me if I am wrong but, unless in extreme circumstances, the military can’t go launching nuclear missles by themselves.
Quite right that the military shouldn't go launching the weapons by themselves without checks.
Nor should the President.
If the President goes crazy the military absolutely has the duty to double-check with other relevant people before following through with such madness just because a deranged individual is telling them to send the weapons flying.
Absolutely agree with that. Believe it or not, I don’t want nuclear war.
However, if this is a comment on my Milley point, I’ll reiterate - Milley wasn’t told by Trump to launch an attack nor were there any suggestions given but instead believed it could happen - without consulting anyone - and then acted on his own.
If you want to flip examples, let’s do a roll play scenario in 2017 where Michael Flynn is Chief of Staff and HRC is President. Flynn believes HRC is going to attack Russia over its Crimea behaviour and thinks she is going too far. He therefore takes steps to make sure HRC cant launch the missies even though she has given no direct orders to do so. Is he right to take action?
Nope, no-one elected Mark Milley but no-one elected Vasili Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov either, but we might not still be here if they hadn’t done what they did.
And US military swear oaths to obey lawful orders from their superiors, and the bit about defending the Constitution comes first IIRC. Hard to defend a constitution if the country it constitutes is a pile of smoking rubble.
Stanislav Petrov is a bad example. He was the Duty Officer and made a decision that the alarm was probably false.
It is slightly different to telling your opposite number you will give them advance notice of an attack and consult no civilian on your actions.
As I said to @ydoethur the question is, if Milley did this to a Democrat President under the same circumstances or a similar situation, would you see it as similarly justified or say it is wrong?
Any sane person would see it as justified.
I am aware this definition does not include most current Republican voters.
Most sane - and true - liberal voters would see Milley’s actions as unjustified. And you still haven’t answered whether you would support Milley’s actions if a Democratic President was involved in a similar situation.
Really?
British nuclear weapon launching is under military rather than political control, I believe.
But with civilian authorisation. Correct me if I am wrong but, unless in extreme circumstances, the military can’t go launching nuclear missles by themselves.
Unlike the Americans, British Nukes are launched by the submarine crew, with no code required.
While I want the things scrapped, I would rather trust the Royal Naval officers, than politicians of any Party.
Have to admit I thought that was barmy and must be wrong but you are right. I stand corrected.
Bloody Hell.
For a little extra flavour, there's often talk when a new PM comes in about "the letter" they have to write: instructions to the subs about what to do if "contact is lost", i.e. a surprise attack has taken out the UK government thoroughly enough that no instructions on whether to retaliate or not. The contents of the letter are kept secret.
Don’t they also get a visit from the minister for magic?
Nope, no-one elected Mark Milley but no-one elected Vasili Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov either, but we might not still be here if they hadn’t done what they did.
And US military swear oaths to obey lawful orders from their superiors, and the bit about defending the Constitution comes first IIRC. Hard to defend a constitution if the country it constitutes is a pile of smoking rubble.
Stanislav Petrov is a bad example. He was the Duty Officer and made a decision that the alarm was probably false.
It is slightly different to telling your opposite number you will give them advance notice of an attack and consult no civilian on your actions.
As I said to @ydoethur the question is, if Milley did this to a Democrat President under the same circumstances or a similar situation, would you see it as similarly justified or say it is wrong?
Any sane person would see it as justified.
I am aware this definition does not include most current Republican voters.
Most sane - and true - liberal voters would see Milley’s actions as unjustified. And you still haven’t answered whether you would support Milley’s actions if a Democratic President was involved in a similar situation.
Really?
British nuclear weapon launching is under military rather than political control, I believe.
But with civilian authorisation. Correct me if I am wrong but, unless in extreme circumstances, the military can’t go launching nuclear missles by themselves.
Quite right that the military shouldn't go launching the weapons by themselves without checks.
Nor should the President.
If the President goes crazy the military absolutely has the duty to double-check with other relevant people before following through with such madness just because a deranged individual is telling them to send the weapons flying.
Absolutely agree with that. Believe it or not, I don’t want nuclear war.
However, if this is a comment on my Milley point, I’ll reiterate - Milley wasn’t told by Trump to launch an attack nor were there any suggestions given but instead believed it could happen - without consulting anyone - and then acted on his own.
If you want to flip examples, let’s do a roll play scenario in 2017 where Michael Flynn is Chief of Staff and HRC is President. Flynn believes HRC is going to attack Russia over its Crimea behaviour and thinks she is going too far. He therefore takes steps to make sure HRC cant launch the missies even though she has given no direct orders to do so. Is he right to take action?
My preference for Trump But, correct me if I am wrong
You're wrong
Thanks, I bow to your superior knowledge and intellect.
On a more useful note, since you know everything, can you tell me who will the next few horse races?
I don't know everything. I only see things clearly that are plain to anyone with eyes. I have no great skill. But you're a wrong 'un. I'm certain of that.
Yes, yes, and I bet you go around telling everyone you are a good person who is a true democrat, and you can’t believe all the evil people in the world. As long as you vote for a person that you approve of.
If you want to label all those who said they would vote Trump as wrong and evil, go ahead. I said at the time his post election behaviour was wrong.
We had a discussion on here the other day about whether Labour would ever win again. It’s individuals like you - and your attitude - who make that unlikely. Nobody likes the smug, superior type even if they do have a degree in Sociology or Media Studies
No, I'm not even a nice person if you must know. But I steer clear of fascist writers and supporting sex pest politicians, so there's always that.
Oh and I got kicked off my Media Studies course, so I don't have a degree at all. Ha, bet you feel silly now!
Knew it was Media Studies though 😀
What's wrong with Media Studies? Of more practical modern day use than my Politics degree. I have never needed to use my encyclopaedic knowledge of Robert Nozick's political discourse for one moment during my working life.
Actually, nothing per se except I’ve never known anyone in Media who actually has the degree. Maybe I’ve missed them but I wonder where they go to.
I suspect you don't move in Labour Party circles. I expect they all have them at Southside.
I certainly don’t although, believe it or not (and I suspect you won’t), I was a member years back. God, there were some boring meetings .
Nope, no-one elected Mark Milley but no-one elected Vasili Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov either, but we might not still be here if they hadn’t done what they did.
And US military swear oaths to obey lawful orders from their superiors, and the bit about defending the Constitution comes first IIRC. Hard to defend a constitution if the country it constitutes is a pile of smoking rubble.
Stanislav Petrov is a bad example. He was the Duty Officer and made a decision that the alarm was probably false.
It is slightly different to telling your opposite number you will give them advance notice of an attack and consult no civilian on your actions.
As I said to @ydoethur the question is, if Milley did this to a Democrat President under the same circumstances or a similar situation, would you see it as similarly justified or say it is wrong?
Any sane person would see it as justified.
I am aware this definition does not include most current Republican voters.
Most sane - and true - liberal voters would see Milley’s actions as unjustified. And you still haven’t answered whether you would support Milley’s actions if a Democratic President was involved in a similar situation.
Really?
British nuclear weapon launching is under military rather than political control, I believe.
But with civilian authorisation. Correct me if I am wrong but, unless in extreme circumstances, the military can’t go launching nuclear missles by themselves.
Unlike the Americans, British Nukes are launched by the submarine crew, with no code required.
While I want the things scrapped, I would rather trust the Royal Naval officers, than politicians of any Party.
Have to admit I thought that was barmy and must be wrong but you are right. I stand corrected.
Bloody Hell.
For a little extra flavour, there's often talk when a new PM comes in about "the letter" they have to write: instructions to the subs about what to do if "contact is lost", i.e. a surprise attack has taken out the UK government thoroughly enough that no instructions on whether to retaliate or not. The contents of the letter are kept secret.
Don’t they also get a visit from the minister for magic?
Nope, no-one elected Mark Milley but no-one elected Vasili Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov either, but we might not still be here if they hadn’t done what they did.
And US military swear oaths to obey lawful orders from their superiors, and the bit about defending the Constitution comes first IIRC. Hard to defend a constitution if the country it constitutes is a pile of smoking rubble.
Stanislav Petrov is a bad example. He was the Duty Officer and made a decision that the alarm was probably false.
It is slightly different to telling your opposite number you will give them advance notice of an attack and consult no civilian on your actions.
As I said to @ydoethur the question is, if Milley did this to a Democrat President under the same circumstances or a similar situation, would you see it as similarly justified or say it is wrong?
Any sane person would see it as justified.
I am aware this definition does not include most current Republican voters.
Most sane - and true - liberal voters would see Milley’s actions as unjustified. And you still haven’t answered whether you would support Milley’s actions if a Democratic President was involved in a similar situation.
Really?
British nuclear weapon launching is under military rather than political control, I believe.
But with civilian authorisation. Correct me if I am wrong but, unless in extreme circumstances, the military can’t go launching nuclear missles by themselves.
Quite right that the military shouldn't go launching the weapons by themselves without checks.
Nor should the President.
If the President goes crazy the military absolutely has the duty to double-check with other relevant people before following through with such madness just because a deranged individual is telling them to send the weapons flying.
Absolutely agree with that. Believe it or not, I don’t want nuclear war.
However, if this is a comment on my Milley point, I’ll reiterate - Milley wasn’t told by Trump to launch an attack nor were there any suggestions given but instead believed it could happen - without consulting anyone - and then acted on his own.
If you want to flip examples, let’s do a roll play scenario in 2017 where Michael Flynn is Chief of Staff and HRC is President. Flynn believes HRC is going to attack Russia over its Crimea behaviour and thinks she is going too far. He therefore takes steps to make sure HRC cant launch the missies even though she has given no direct orders to do so. Is he right to take action?
Nope, no-one elected Mark Milley but no-one elected Vasili Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov either, but we might not still be here if they hadn’t done what they did.
And US military swear oaths to obey lawful orders from their superiors, and the bit about defending the Constitution comes first IIRC. Hard to defend a constitution if the country it constitutes is a pile of smoking rubble.
Stanislav Petrov is a bad example. He was the Duty Officer and made a decision that the alarm was probably false.
It is slightly different to telling your opposite number you will give them advance notice of an attack and consult no civilian on your actions.
As I said to @ydoethur the question is, if Milley did this to a Democrat President under the same circumstances or a similar situation, would you see it as similarly justified or say it is wrong?
Any sane person would see it as justified.
I am aware this definition does not include most current Republican voters.
Most sane - and true - liberal voters would see Milley’s actions as unjustified. And you still haven’t answered whether you would support Milley’s actions if a Democratic President was involved in a similar situation.
Really?
British nuclear weapon launching is under military rather than political control, I believe.
But with civilian authorisation. Correct me if I am wrong but, unless in extreme circumstances, the military can’t go launching nuclear missles by themselves.
Quite right that the military shouldn't go launching the weapons by themselves without checks.
Nor should the President.
If the President goes crazy the military absolutely has the duty to double-check with other relevant people before following through with such madness just because a deranged individual is telling them to send the weapons flying.
Absolutely agree with that. Believe it or not, I don’t want nuclear war.
However, if this is a comment on my Milley point, I’ll reiterate - Milley wasn’t told by Trump to launch an attack nor were there any suggestions given but instead believed it could happen - without consulting anyone - and then acted on his own.
If you want to flip examples, let’s do a roll play scenario in 2017 where Michael Flynn is Chief of Staff and HRC is President. Flynn believes HRC is going to attack Russia over its Crimea behaviour and thinks she is going too far. He therefore takes steps to make sure HRC cant launch the missies even though she has given no direct orders to do so. Is he right to take action?
He feared the POTUS could order a nuclear strike and did no more than make clear that anyone he could give the order to knew to double-check before sending the missiles.
Absolutely that's entirely reasonable and nobody can object to that. He didn't say Trump couldn't order a strike, he just said that if an unprovoked first strike were ordered then rather than sending the missile it should be checked first.
Told my son about tonight's announcement which he is very interested in
However, he has just had a shout by the RNLI
Chinese warships off Anglesey?
It may be more serious than that
You mean the invasion could already be underway. I do hope Johnson gets to say "we will fight them on the beaches". He would have lived his life for that moment..
Nope, no-one elected Mark Milley but no-one elected Vasili Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov either, but we might not still be here if they hadn’t done what they did.
And US military swear oaths to obey lawful orders from their superiors, and the bit about defending the Constitution comes first IIRC. Hard to defend a constitution if the country it constitutes is a pile of smoking rubble.
Stanislav Petrov is a bad example. He was the Duty Officer and made a decision that the alarm was probably false.
It is slightly different to telling your opposite number you will give them advance notice of an attack and consult no civilian on your actions.
As I said to @ydoethur the question is, if Milley did this to a Democrat President under the same circumstances or a similar situation, would you see it as similarly justified or say it is wrong?
Any sane person would see it as justified.
I am aware this definition does not include most current Republican voters.
Most sane - and true - liberal voters would see Milley’s actions as unjustified. And you still haven’t answered whether you would support Milley’s actions if a Democratic President was involved in a similar situation.
Really?
British nuclear weapon launching is under military rather than political control, I believe.
But with civilian authorisation. Correct me if I am wrong but, unless in extreme circumstances, the military can’t go launching nuclear missles by themselves.
Unlike the Americans, British Nukes are launched by the submarine crew, with no code required.
While I want the things scrapped, I would rather trust the Royal Naval officers, than politicians of any Party.
Have to admit I thought that was barmy and must be wrong but you are right. I stand corrected.
Bloody Hell.
For a little extra flavour, there's often talk when a new PM comes in about "the letter" they have to write: instructions to the subs about what to do if "contact is lost", i.e. a surprise attack has taken out the UK government thoroughly enough that no instructions on whether to retaliate or not. The contents of the letter are kept secret.
Don’t they also get a visit from the minister for magic?
Great victory for Liverpool and Sky just acknowledging the announcement live after the ads now.
It’s quite the incentive to reach the heights of PM or president, just to see exactly what you do get told on day one...
It’s scary, very much so.
One of the very first tasks of a new Prime Minister, is to write the Standing Orders letters to the Trident sub commanders.
Every single former PM, when asked what was the worst part of the job, has referred to an SAS mission abroad, many of which we don’t get to hear about, but where UK military lives were on the line to save others.
My preference for Trump But, correct me if I am wrong
You're wrong
Thanks, I bow to your superior knowledge and intellect.
On a more useful note, since you know everything, can you tell me who will the next few horse races?
I don't know everything. I only see things clearly that are plain to anyone with eyes. I have no great skill. But you're a wrong 'un. I'm certain of that.
Yes, yes, and I bet you go around telling everyone you are a good person who is a true democrat, and you can’t believe all the evil people in the world. As long as you vote for a person that you approve of.
If you want to label all those who said they would vote Trump as wrong and evil, go ahead. I said at the time his post election behaviour was wrong.
We had a discussion on here the other day about whether Labour would ever win again. It’s individuals like you - and your attitude - who make that unlikely. Nobody likes the smug, superior type even if they do have a degree in Sociology or Media Studies
No, I'm not even a nice person if you must know. But I steer clear of fascist writers and supporting sex pest politicians, so there's always that.
Oh and I got kicked off my Media Studies course, so I don't have a degree at all. Ha, bet you feel silly now!
Knew it was Media Studies though 😀
What's wrong with Media Studies? Of more practical modern day use than my Politics degree. I have never needed to use my encyclopaedic knowledge of Robert Nozick's political discourse for one moment during my working life.
Actually, nothing per se except I’ve never known anyone in Media who actually has the degree. Maybe I’ve missed them but I wonder where they go to.
I suspect you don't move in Labour Party circles. I expect they all have them at Southside.
I certainly don’t although, believe it or not (and I suspect you won’t), I was a member years back. God, there were some boring meetings .
I used to go to ones in Camden in the 1980s. Surreal was the word I would use.
Comments
Bloody hell Nick Gibb's gone. I assume hell has actually frozen over?
https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1438233786400088069?s=19
On something like this it would perhaps be sensible.
Very strange
Bloody Hell.
Not long to go.
However, he has just had a shout by the RNLI
Nor should the President.
If the President goes crazy the military absolutely has the duty to double-check with other relevant people before following through with such madness just because a deranged individual is telling them to send the weapons flying.
Which is pretty fucking extraordinary, and yet we shrug
I've taken my eye off this story as I've regained my life - fun and bars and travel and the like. But, wow
But yes, they now have their cover don't they. “We didn’t lie and cover it up! We fucking told you! What more did you want from us!?”
However, if this is a comment on my Milley point, I’ll reiterate - Milley wasn’t told by Trump to launch an attack nor were there any suggestions given but instead believed it could happen - without consulting anyone - and then acted on his own.
If you want to flip examples, let’s do a roll play scenario in 2017 where Michael Flynn is Chief of Staff and HRC is President. Flynn believes HRC is going to attack Russia over its Crimea behaviour and thinks she is going too far. He therefore takes steps to make sure HRC cant launch the missies even though she has given no direct orders to do so. Is he right to take action?
Great victory for Liverpool and Sky just acknowledging the announcement live after the ads now.
PM security announcement next
Absolutely that's entirely reasonable and nobody can object to that. He didn't say Trump couldn't order a strike, he just said that if an unprovoked first strike were ordered then rather than sending the missile it should be checked first.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4chEI8Q5PE
One of the very first tasks of a new Prime Minister, is to write the Standing Orders letters to the Trident sub commanders.
Every single former PM, when asked what was the worst part of the job, has referred to an SAS mission abroad, many of which we don’t get to hear about, but where UK military lives were on the line to save others.
Jesus
The 3 flags are behind Boris too. Biden has the 3 flags repeatedly.
The BBC seriously is a bag of shite.
The BBC needs to be put down.