politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boris gets his own back on Theresa

SystemSystem Posts: 12,561
edited December 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boris gets his own back on Theresa

Revenge is a Ferrero Rocher best served cold. Boris Johnson mocks Theresa May's leather 'lederhosen'. Gags in full: https://t.co/Te1nAx3Avw

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • IcarusIcarus Posts: 1,015
    edited December 2016
    First!! Boris (and I am not fan) does brighten up things doesn't he.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,672
    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    "Quite where this is all going will be one of the fun stories of 2017."

    Mrs May in the lounge with the candlestick?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,123
    At least he's clear on who wears the trousers in this government.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    That's more payback for her Spectator Awards speech, surely?
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Boris is right over Saudi. Helping the Saudis bomb the starving Yemenis will be a national shame.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,672
    foxinsoxuk said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Boris is right over Saudi. Helping the Saudis bomb the starving Yemenis will be a national shame.
    Yup.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 40,293
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    And sending him to grovel in person to the Saudis.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,672
    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    #Banter
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,672
    See if I was Boris I'd have gone for something like

    'I've learnt from experience, never upset a woman who wears leather trousers, they are very good at giving out discipline and punishment'
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    #Banter
    Only suitable for the Archbishop of Banterbury during his speeches in the Lords, surely? :D
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    #Banter
    Indeed.

    Harmless fun.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited December 2016
    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Black_Rook said:

    "Quite where this is all going will be one of the fun stories of 2017."

    Mrs May in the lounge with the candlestick?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNUP-so0ndQ
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,323
    #BorisBeingBoris
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,727
    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    Trust isn't the issue. People are far more likely to underestimate a clown.

    Good evening, everybody.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    edited December 2016
    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,683
    Oh boy. Either Boris is being reckless or he knows that, for now, he's unsackable. Probably a bit of both.

    But, Theresa May will notice and she won't forget.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/808802106769625088
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,131
    AnneJGP said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    Trust isn't the issue. People are far more likely to underestimate a clown.

    Good evening, everybody.
    Unfortunately, they may be estimating Boris entirely accurately. He's good at talking. But not much else.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    "As guests laughed at the reference, Johnson added: “They asked for no surprises in this speech, we cleared that one already.”"

    A sanctioned joke, apparently ;)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/808802106769625088

    An apt thumbnail!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,123
    RobD said:

    "As guests laughed at the reference, Johnson added: “They asked for no surprises in this speech, we cleared that one already.”"

    A sanctioned joke, apparently ;)

    From a sanctioned joker.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,683
    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    Maybe making everyone think he's a clown, whilst really being on his game, is part of the negotiation strategy, so they'll drop their guard?

    Ok, a stretch, but he's not an idiot and he won't want to fail in this.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,131
    RobD said:

    "As guests laughed at the reference, Johnson added: “They asked for no surprises in this speech, we cleared that one already.”"

    A sanctioned joke, apparently ;)

    "Sanction". A word like "cleave" that has two meanings, one being the exact opposite to the other.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,132
    edited December 2016
    Who can make the better jokes?
    And who can take a joke better?
    Boris wins on both scores.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 31,988
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Boris is right over Saudi. Helping the Saudis bomb the starving Yemenis will be a national shame.
    Yup.
    Thirded, though I can't help but feel this high-mindedness has been rather sudden to come upon you, as I don't remember you condemning Dave for kowtowing to the Saudis.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,131
    geoffw said:

    Who can make the better jokes?
    And who can take a joke better?
    Boris wins on both scores.

    Yes, he does. And if he learns to juggle as well, he'll be a marvellous entertainer at children's parties.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,132
    viewcode said:

    geoffw said:

    Who can make the better jokes?
    And who can take a joke better?
    Boris wins on both scores.

    Yes, he does. And if he learns to juggle as well, he'll be a marvellous entertainer at children's parties.
    At the expense of parties you mean? Like the Labour Party or the LibDem Party.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,131
    Casino_Royale said:

    ...he's not an idiot....

    As I have said in the past perhaps too often, I'm not sure that's true.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,107
    Must be frustrating for Boris being in a different league
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 31,988
    edited December 2016
    Casino_Royale said:

    Oh boy. Either Boris is being reckless or he knows that, for now, he's unsackable. Probably a bit of both.

    But, Theresa May will notice and she won't forget.

    Boris isn't un-sackable (Hammond, sadly, is un-sackable at the moment.). Either way he's eminently demotable. I would suggest that May's in on this as a way to defuse some of the tension that seems to be around.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited December 2016
    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,131
    geoffw said:

    viewcode said:

    geoffw said:

    Who can make the better jokes?
    And who can take a joke better?
    Boris wins on both scores.

    Yes, he does. And if he learns to juggle as well, he'll be a marvellous entertainer at children's parties.
    At the expense of parties you mean? Like the Labour Party or the LibDem Party.
    No, I meant gatherings with small irresponsible people running around a lot, making a lot of noise, screaming, making a mess and needing adults to clean up after them. Entirely different. Er... :)
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,132
    Many a true word said in jest.
    The jest-about-managing party perhaps.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,442
    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    That you think the two are equivalent clearly shows your own level of delusion.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,132
    How was it pronounced? Lederhosen or leaderhosen?
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    That you think the two are equivalent clearly shows your own level of delusion.
    What the EU want and what the Soft Brexiteers want are minds that will never meet.

    Once A50 is triggered, the fuse of Hard Brexit is lit.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,169
    viewcode said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    ...he's not an idiot....

    As I have said in the past perhaps too often, I'm not sure that's true.

    Johnson trades on his charm. It doesn't work for me personally. I can forgive a lot of people who make laugh but Johnson doesn't resonate with me that way. He clearly does with other people.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,132
    I'm sorry for you. But look on the bright side. There's always Jeremy and the whole posse of clowns around him.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,123
    foxinsoxuk said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    That you think the two are equivalent clearly shows your own level of delusion.
    What the EU want and what the Soft Brexiteers want are minds that will never meet.

    Once A50 is triggered, the fuse of Hard Brexit is lit.
    Once/if A50 is triggered and the intractability of anything other than Hard Brexit is revealed, the Soft Brexiteers will defect to the Remain camp and ensure A50 is revoked.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,132
    williamglenn said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    That you think the two are equivalent clearly shows your own level of delusion.
    What the EU want and what the Soft Brexiteers want are minds that will never meet.

    Once A50 is triggered, the fuse of Hard Brexit is lit.
    Once/if A50 is triggered and the intractability of anything other than Hard Brexit is revealed, the Soft Brexiteers will defect to the Remain camp and ensure A50 is revoked.
    Soft brexiteers between a rock and a hard place. Nice image.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    williamglenn said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    That you think the two are equivalent clearly shows your own level of delusion.
    What the EU want and what the Soft Brexiteers want are minds that will never meet.

    Once A50 is triggered, the fuse of Hard Brexit is lit.
    Once/if A50 is triggered and the intractability of anything other than Hard Brexit is revealed, the Soft Brexiteers will defect to the Remain camp and ensure A50 is revoked.
    I don't think so. Soft Brexiteers will metamorphose into hard Brexiteers for political gain. We see that already in Andy Burnhams Red Brexit.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,132
    I think it's the squeezed middle.
    (What happened to that?)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,123
    foxinsoxuk said:

    williamglenn said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    That you think the two are equivalent clearly shows your own level of delusion.
    What the EU want and what the Soft Brexiteers want are minds that will never meet.

    Once A50 is triggered, the fuse of Hard Brexit is lit.
    Once/if A50 is triggered and the intractability of anything other than Hard Brexit is revealed, the Soft Brexiteers will defect to the Remain camp and ensure A50 is revoked.
    I don't think so. Soft Brexiteers will metamorphose into hard Brexiteers for political gain. We see that already in Andy Burnhams Red Brexit.
    I see the metamorphosis in Andy Burnham, but not the political gain. :)
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,131
    SeanT said:

    fpt

    And America?

    The America of Chicago?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us/chicago-shootings-district-11.html?_r=0

    The America of Hillary's "can't we just drone this guy". The America that brought us the festival of democracy that is the modern Middle East - courtesy of Shock and Awe. The America that invades whomsoever it likes. The only country to drop the H bomb.

    [pedant mode on]

    A (atomic) bomb, not H (hydrogen) bomb. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both fission devices, in which a fissile material (an element high up the periodic table with heavier atoms than normal) is forced rapidly into a critical mass, at which point it undergoes fission (its heavy atoms split releasing electrons) and a chain reaction (each electron splits more atoms, so even more electrons...) and a rapid outpouring of energy (the explosion)

    A fusion bomb works the other way around: it forces light atoms to combine (fuse) rapidly. To do this you need a material with lighter atoms than normal, for example an isotope (variant) of hydrogen (hence "H bomb"). It is bloody difficult to make atoms fuse, so to set a fusion bomb off you have to wrap it in a fission bomb and set that off first

    [/pedant mode off]
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    viewcode said:

    its heavy atoms split releasing electrons) and a chain reaction (each electron splits more atoms, so even more electrons...)

    Do you mean Neutrons?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,131
    Scott_P said:

    viewcode said:

    its heavy atoms split releasing electrons) and a chain reaction (each electron splits more atoms, so even more electrons...)

    Do you mean Neutrons?
    Oh bollocks, you're right. I fail fission... :(

    Quick, think of a diversion...
    ..."Love Actually"'s on ITV2!

    (Phew, I think I got away with it...)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,123
    Scott_P said:

    viewcode said:

    its heavy atoms split releasing electrons) and a chain reaction (each electron splits more atoms, so even more electrons...)

    Do you mean Neutrons?
    Behind one door is an electron...
  • RationalPlanRationalPlan Posts: 75
    I think some here are being a bit complacent about Trump. Trump has been missing multiple national security briefings on national security that Presidents Elects traditionally receive while still finding time for NBC execs and Indian businessmen.

    After a bit of flack he turned up on FOX and said 'I don’t have to be told – you know, I’m, like, a smart person. I don’t have to be told the same thing in the same words every single day for the next eight years. Could be eight years – but eight years. I don’t need that. But I do say, “If something should change, let us know.”

    'But if they’re going to come in and tell me the exact same thing that they tell me — you know, it doesn’t change, necessarily. Now, there will be times where it might change. I mean, there will be some very fluid situations. I’ll be there not every day, but more than that. But I don’t need to be told, Chris, the same thing every day, every morning — same words. “Sir, nothing has changed. Let’s go over it again.” I don’t need that.'

    Meanwhile on Market news on LBC the other night they were joking about which overnight tweets were going to send which US corporations shares into a nosedive.

    This man has the attention span of a five year old and with the same level of entitlement. This mans hand is on the button. The danger of stumbling at a critical point is very real.
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,844
    foxinsoxuk said:



    I don't think so. Soft Brexiteers will metamorphose into hard Brexiteers for political gain. We see that already in Andy Burnhams Red Brexit.

    We now have Soft Brexit, Flaccid Brexit, Hard Brexit, Extreme Brexit, Dirty Brexit, Clean Brexit, Car Crash Brexit, Stop Brexit, Slow Brexit, Fast Brexit, Grey Brexit, and Red Brexit (any i've missed?).

    57 different varieties:
    Beanz Meanz Heinz Brexit Meanz Brexit.
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    edited December 2016
    Way a far left nut job won't assassinate Trump.

    http://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2016/dec/02/gavin-newsom/pences-support-conversion-therapy-not-settled-matt/

    http://www.teenvogue.com/story/mike-pence-record-reproductive-rights-lgbtq-refugees
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,442
    edited December 2016
    williamglenn said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    That you think the two are equivalent clearly shows your own level of delusion.
    What the EU want and what the Soft Brexiteers want are minds that will never meet.

    Once A50 is triggered, the fuse of Hard Brexit is lit.
    Once/if A50 is triggered and the intractability of anything other than Hard Brexit is revealed, the Soft Brexiteers will defect to the Remain camp and ensure A50 is revoked.
    LOL. Not a chance. As in all things there is a gradation. Soft Brexit may be better than hard Brexit but both are a million times better than staying in. I am afraid you really are heading for a very hard fall when you realise there is no returning to your beloved EU.
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,844
    RationalPlan said:

    I think some here are being a bit complacent about Trump. Trump has been missing multiple national security briefings on national security that Presidents Elects traditionally receive while still finding time for NBC execs and Indian businessmen.

    After a bit of flack he turned up on FOX and said 'I don’t have to be told – you know, I’m, like, a smart person. I don’t have to be told the same thing in the same words every single day for the next eight years. Could be eight years – but eight years. I don’t need that. But I do say, “If something should change, let us know.”

    'But if they’re going to come in and tell me the exact same thing that they tell me — you know, it doesn’t change, necessarily. Now, there will be times where it might change. I mean, there will be some very fluid situations. I’ll be there not every day, but more than that. But I don’t need to be told, Chris, the same thing every day, every morning — same words. “Sir, nothing has changed. Let’s go over it again.” I don’t need that.'

    Meanwhile on Market news on LBC the other night they were joking about which overnight tweets were going to send which US corporations shares into a nosedive.

    This man has the attention span of a five year old and with the same level of entitlement. This mans hand is on the button. The danger of stumbling at a critical point is very real.

    What's interesting is that a lot of people said after the election that he would become more 'presidential' after he won, that it was just a campaign style etc (I may have even said this myself!) - just like after he won the primaries. The whole unifier narrative with him and Obama and the transition has quickly vanished.

    He's completely reverted to type. The President-Elect bitching about SNL impressions of himself.

    I think he will end up disappointing his alt-right supporters, establishment republicans who backed him, and the rust-belt ex democrats, simply because he is going to overtly be focused on his own interests above and beyond any ideology (be it conservatism or alt-rightism), the party, or the voters.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited December 2016
    Paristonda said:

    foxinsoxuk said:



    I don't think so. Soft Brexiteers will metamorphose into hard Brexiteers for political gain. We see that already in Andy Burnhams Red Brexit.

    We now have Soft Brexit, Flaccid Brexit, Hard Brexit, Extreme Brexit, Dirty Brexit, Clean Brexit, Car Crash Brexit, Stop Brexit, Slow Brexit, Fast Brexit, Grey Brexit, and Red Brexit (any i've missed?).

    57 different varieties:
    Beanz Meanz Heinz Brexit Meanz Brexit.
    Red Brexit is my own neologism. It is the old fashioned suspicion of the EU as a capitalistic club, a cabal against the workers. It also contrasts nicely with May's red, white and blue Brexit. It is Brexit with a socialist face, a Brexit for Labour working class voters. It could become very popular indeed.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Interesting account of Rex Tillerson doing jury duty:

    http://rodenfordenton.com/2016/12/that-time-i-spent-a-week-with-rex-tillerson/
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    No, it shows the utter delusion of some of the more out-with-the-fairies Leavers that they are incapable of understanding the distinction between 'the EU', and a completely obscure MEP who made a completely bonkers suggestion which not a single sentient being on the continent takes seriously.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,080
    williamglenn said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    That you think the two are equivalent clearly shows your own level of delusion.
    What the EU want and what the Soft Brexiteers want are minds that will never meet.

    Once A50 is triggered, the fuse of Hard Brexit is lit.
    Once/if A50 is triggered and the intractability of anything other than Hard Brexit is revealed, the Soft Brexiteers will defect to the Remain camp and ensure A50 is revoked.
    You're fooling yourself. For one, the intractability will not be incontestable to the point normal people notice until well into the process. For two even then most will consider the die is regrettably cast. For three, even if it were possible to pull out then, it would rely on others agreeing who at that point had failed to agree on soft Brexit, so why agree to anything else, particularly as the fury it would unleash would ensure we continue to cause trouble.

    Hard Brexit is likely but not inevitable. Brexit is, other than immense political change that is unforeseeable, inevitable.

    It's the hope that will get you, and distract from winnable fights and allies on other fronts.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,442
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    No, it shows the utter delusion of some of the more out-with-the-fairies Leavers that they are incapable of understanding the distinction between 'the EU', and a completely obscure MEP who made a completely bonkers suggestion which not a single sentient being on the continent takes seriously.
    Um. The completely obscure MEP you mention is Michael Barnier who is in fact not obscure at all but is the EU's chief negotiator for the Brexit negotiations. He is probably the least obscure EU representative of all as far as the actual Brexit negotiations are concerned.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Has the December ICM been reported on PB?

    Con 41%
    Lab 27%
    UKIP 14%
    LD 9%
    Greens 3%
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited December 2016
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    No, it shows the utter delusion of some of the more out-with-the-fairies Leavers that they are incapable of understanding the distinction between 'the EU', and a completely obscure MEP who made a completely bonkers suggestion which not a single sentient being on the continent takes seriously.
    Um. The completely obscure MEP you mention is Michael Barnier who is in fact not obscure at all but is the EU's chief negotiator for the Brexit negotiations. He is probably the least obscure EU representative of all as far as the actual Brexit negotiations are concerned.
    I think the reference was to Charles Goerens.

    Edit: Ah, I see that it might have been a reference to this:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/12/exclusive-european-citizens-living-uk-should-remain-jurisdiction/

    Yeah, well, nice try by Monsieur Barnier. I doubt if he takes it seriously himself.
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,466
    I would be surprised if UKIP could garner 14% of the vote, While the others seem more or less right - they got 13.4% in Sleaford last week, I dont think the rest of the country would reflect that. However, I'd like to know their support in the Labour northern heartlands......
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,442
    edited December 2016
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    No, it shows the utter delusion of some of the more out-with-the-fairies Leavers that they are incapable of understanding the distinction between 'the EU', and a completely obscure MEP who made a completely bonkers suggestion which not a single sentient being on the continent takes seriously.
    Um. The completely obscure MEP you mention is Michael Barnier who is in fact not obscure at all but is the EU's chief negotiator for the Brexit negotiations. He is probably the least obscure EU representative of all as far as the actual Brexit negotiations are concerned.
    I think the reference was to Charles Goerens.
    The suggestion for keeping EU citizens living in the UK under EU law and able to appeal to the ECJ was made by Barnier.

    Edit: Sorry I see you have edited your posting as well along the same lines.
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,844
    foxinsoxuk said:

    Paristonda said:

    foxinsoxuk said:



    I don't think so. Soft Brexiteers will metamorphose into hard Brexiteers for political gain. We see that already in Andy Burnhams Red Brexit.

    We now have Soft Brexit, Flaccid Brexit, Hard Brexit, Extreme Brexit, Dirty Brexit, Clean Brexit, Car Crash Brexit, Stop Brexit, Slow Brexit, Fast Brexit, Grey Brexit, and Red Brexit (any i've missed?).

    57 different varieties:
    Beanz Meanz Heinz Brexit Meanz Brexit.
    Red Brexit is my own neologism. It is the old fashioned suspicion of the EU as a capitalistic club, a cabal against the workers. It also contrasts nicely with May's red, white and blue Brexit. It is Brexit with a socialist face, a Brexit for Labour working class voters. It could become very popular indeed.
    Yes I think that's quite possible. We've had the Leave or Remain debate, then the hard or soft debate - looking like the hard side will win at the moment. Which means that afterwards the terms of debate shift to a Red Brexit vs the Tories' natural inclination to a Singapore-On-Steroids Brexit. Not sure which side would win out there.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,123
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    No, it shows the utter delusion of some of the more out-with-the-fairies Leavers that they are incapable of understanding the distinction between 'the EU', and a completely obscure MEP who made a completely bonkers suggestion which not a single sentient being on the continent takes seriously.
    Um. The completely obscure MEP you mention is Michael Barnier who is in fact not obscure at all but is the EU's chief negotiator for the Brexit negotiations. He is probably the least obscure EU representative of all as far as the actual Brexit negotiations are concerned.
    I think the reference was to Charles Goerens.
    The suggestion for keeping EU citizens living in the UK under EU law and able to appeal to the ECJ was made by Barnier.
    As a thought experiment, imagine that Barnier's suggestion applied to the territory of Scotland only.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    williamglenn said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    No, it shows the utter delusion of some of the more out-with-the-fairies Leavers that they are incapable of understanding the distinction between 'the EU', and a completely obscure MEP who made a completely bonkers suggestion which not a single sentient being on the continent takes seriously.
    Um. The completely obscure MEP you mention is Michael Barnier who is in fact not obscure at all but is the EU's chief negotiator for the Brexit negotiations. He is probably the least obscure EU representative of all as far as the actual Brexit negotiations are concerned.
    I think the reference was to Charles Goerens.
    The suggestion for keeping EU citizens living in the UK under EU law and able to appeal to the ECJ was made by Barnier.
    As a thought experiment, imagine that Barnier's suggestion applied to the territory of Scotland only.
    I would have thought that would be unacceptable to the UK government.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    swing_voter said:

    I would be surprised if UKIP could garner 14% of the vote, While the others seem more or less right - they got 13.4% in Sleaford last week, I dont think the rest of the country would reflect that. However, I'd like to know their support in the Labour northern heartlands......

    The Leigh by-election will be very instructive (and the Liverpool Walton one too, though expecting anyone to overturn a 72% majority is unreasonable). Oldham was a false dawn for UKIP after the near-miss in Heywood last Parliament: what's a year of Corbyn and the fact of Brexit done for their chances?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    No, it shows the utter delusion of some of the more out-with-the-fairies Leavers that they are incapable of understanding the distinction between 'the EU', and a completely obscure MEP who made a completely bonkers suggestion which not a single sentient being on the continent takes seriously.
    Um. The completely obscure MEP you mention is Michael Barnier who is in fact not obscure at all but is the EU's chief negotiator for the Brexit negotiations. He is probably the least obscure EU representative of all as far as the actual Brexit negotiations are concerned.
    I think the reference was to Charles Goerens.

    Edit: Ah, I see that it might have been a reference to this:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/12/exclusive-european-citizens-living-uk-should-remain-jurisdiction/

    Yeah, well, nice try by Monsieur Barnier. I doubt if he takes it seriously himself.
    Good to see my delusional status is beyond repute :D
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    The suggestion for keeping EU citizens living in the UK under EU law and able to appeal to the ECJ was made by Barnier.

    Edit: Sorry I see you have edited your posting as well along the same lines.

    Of course, if our EU friends are happy to give UK courts equivalent jurisdiction over UK citizens in EU countries, we might have the basis of a deal.... but I think les porcs vont voler before they agree to that!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,123
    RobD said:

    williamglenn said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    No, it shows the utter delusion of some of the more out-with-the-fairies Leavers that they are incapable of understanding the distinction between 'the EU', and a completely obscure MEP who made a completely bonkers suggestion which not a single sentient being on the continent takes seriously.
    Um. The completely obscure MEP you mention is Michael Barnier who is in fact not obscure at all but is the EU's chief negotiator for the Brexit negotiations. He is probably the least obscure EU representative of all as far as the actual Brexit negotiations are concerned.
    I think the reference was to Charles Goerens.
    The suggestion for keeping EU citizens living in the UK under EU law and able to appeal to the ECJ was made by Barnier.
    As a thought experiment, imagine that Barnier's suggestion applied to the territory of Scotland only.
    I would have thought that would be unacceptable to the UK government.
    But desirable for the Scottish government to demand and create a fight with Westminster over.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:

    williamglenn said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    No, it shows the utter delusion of some of the more out-with-the-fairies Leavers that they are incapable of understanding the distinction between 'the EU', and a completely obscure MEP who made a completely bonkers suggestion which not a single sentient being on the continent takes seriously.
    Um. The completely obscure MEP you mention is Michael Barnier who is in fact not obscure at all but is the EU's chief negotiator for the Brexit negotiations. He is probably the least obscure EU representative of all as far as the actual Brexit negotiations are concerned.
    I think the reference was to Charles Goerens.
    The suggestion for keeping EU citizens living in the UK under EU law and able to appeal to the ECJ was made by Barnier.
    As a thought experiment, imagine that Barnier's suggestion applied to the territory of Scotland only.
    I would have thought that would be unacceptable to the UK government.
    But desirable for the Scottish government to demand and create a fight with Westminster over.
    The Scottish government aren't sitting at the negotiating table.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,123
    RobD said:

    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:

    williamglenn said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    No, it shows the utter delusion of some of the more out-with-the-fairies Leavers that they are incapable of understanding the distinction between 'the EU', and a completely obscure MEP who made a completely bonkers suggestion which not a single sentient being on the continent takes seriously.
    Um. The completely obscure MEP you mention is Michael Barnier who is in fact not obscure at all but is the EU's chief negotiator for the Brexit negotiations. He is probably the least obscure EU representative of all as far as the actual Brexit negotiations are concerned.
    I think the reference was to Charles Goerens.
    The suggestion for keeping EU citizens living in the UK under EU law and able to appeal to the ECJ was made by Barnier.
    As a thought experiment, imagine that Barnier's suggestion applied to the territory of Scotland only.
    I would have thought that would be unacceptable to the UK government.
    But desirable for the Scottish government to demand and create a fight with Westminster over.
    The Scottish government aren't sitting at the negotiating table.
    It's as if you're brainstorming ideas for Nicola Sturgeon's campaign. Good point - she'll use that to stir up dissent too.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:

    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:

    williamglenn said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    No, it shows the utter delusion of some of the more out-with-the-fairies Leavers that they are incapable of understanding the distinction between 'the EU', and a completely obscure MEP who made a completely bonkers suggestion which not a single sentient being on the continent takes seriously.
    Um. The completely obscure MEP you mention is Michael Barnier who is in fact not obscure at all but is the EU's chief negotiator for the Brexit negotiations. He is probably the least obscure EU representative of all as far as the actual Brexit negotiations are concerned.
    I think the reference was to Charles Goerens.
    The suggestion for keeping EU citizens living in the UK under EU law and able to appeal to the ECJ was made by Barnier.
    As a thought experiment, imagine that Barnier's suggestion applied to the territory of Scotland only.
    I would have thought that would be unacceptable to the UK government.
    But desirable for the Scottish government to demand and create a fight with Westminster over.
    The Scottish government aren't sitting at the negotiating table.
    It's as if you're brainstorming ideas for Nicola Sturgeon's campaign. Good point - she'll use that to stir up dissent too.
    Well my point is they can't demand anything!
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    RobD said:


    Good to see my delusional status is beyond repute :D

    Oops, my screw-up! Sorry!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    RobD said:


    Good to see my delusional status is beyond repute :D

    Oops, my screw-up! Sorry!
    Not to worry, the story was barmy enough in the first place!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,123
    RobD said:


    Well my point is they can't demand anything!

    The Irish government will have a seat at the table and can push for a similar solution for Northern Ireland.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:


    Well my point is they can't demand anything!

    The Irish government will have a seat at the table and can push for a similar solution for Northern Ireland.
    The position is already being pushed by the EU's chief negotiator. The negotiators sitting on the other side of the table probably have no interest in agreeing to it.
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,466
    Leigh will be difficult for UKIP as it is not as poor and deprived as some may think, and is a commuter belt for the many public sector voters who I think will keep it Lab, I cant see UKIP challenging that well there, whether Labour can deliver a clear message from BREXIT remains to be seen but my money is on a labour win with possible turnout issues.....which could throw up a chance if Labour's message is not right (I'm still not sure what its BREXIT message is).

    Liverpool Walton could be interesting, its next door to Doc Nuttall's stamping ground of Bootle. IIRC Bootle byelection back in the early 1990s was the nail in the SDP coffin so a bit of pressure for the purples there I think. Didnt know there was a possible byelection on in walton.

    In both contests I would expect a Tory push to capture the anti-EU vote (keep deposit was the traget in years past in Liverpool's seats)

    "The Leigh by-election will be very instructive (and the Liverpool Walton one too, though expecting anyone to overturn a 72% majority is unreasonable). Oldham was a false dawn for UKIP after the near-miss in Heywood last Parliament: what's a year of Corbyn and the fact of Brexit done for their chances?"



  • dugarbandierdugarbandier Posts: 2,596
    edited December 2016
    Paristonda said:

    RationalPlan said:

    I think some here are being a bit complacent about Trump. Trump has been missing multiple national security briefings on national security that Presidents Elects traditionally receive while still finding time for NBC execs and Indian businessmen.

    After a bit of flack he turned up on FOX and said 'I don’t have to be told – you know, I’m, like, a smart person. I don’t have to be told the same thing in the same words every single day for the next eight years. Could be eight years – but eight years. I don’t need that. But I do say, “If something should change, let us know.”

    'But if they’re going to come in and tell me the exact same thing that they tell me — you know, it doesn’t change, necessarily. Now, there will be times where it might change. I mean, there will be some very fluid situations. I’ll be there not every day, but more than that. But I don’t need to be told, Chris, the same thing every day, every morning — same words. “Sir, nothing has changed. Let’s go over it again.” I don’t need that.'

    Meanwhile on Market news on LBC the other night they were joking about which overnight tweets were going to send which US corporations shares into a nosedive.

    This man has the attention span of a five year old and with the same level of entitlement. This mans hand is on the button. The danger of stumbling at a critical point is very real.

    What's interesting is that a lot of people said after the election that he would become more 'presidential' after he won, that it was just a campaign style etc (I may have even said this myself!) - just like after he won the primaries. The whole unifier narrative with him and Obama and the transition has quickly vanished.

    He's completely reverted to type. The President-Elect bitching about SNL impressions of himself.

    I think he will end up disappointing his alt-right supporters, establishment republicans who backed him, and the rust-belt ex democrats, simply because he is going to overtly be focused on his own interests above and beyond any ideology (be it conservatism or alt-rightism), the party, or the voters.
    There's a fascinating article in JAMA and reviewed on 538 about health outcomes by county in the US.

    Some places just don't have anything to lose. Look at this map of deaths from substance abuse/mental disorders. (Why that would make them want to reject universal healthcare is another issue...)

    Edit - the percentage change map in the pink

    http://jamanetwork.com/data/Journals/JAMA/935924/joi160106f8.png
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,906
    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:


    Well my point is they can't demand anything!

    The Irish government will have a seat at the table and can push for a similar solution for Northern Ireland.
    Most of the Protestant-majority seats voted for Brexit.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    That didn't last long:

    The SNP will not stand candidates in elections outside of Scotland, PoliticsHome has learned – after Nicola Sturgeon said she was “tempted” by the idea.

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/snp/nicola-sturgeon/news/81709/excl-nicola-sturgeon-will-not-field-snp
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    edited December 2016
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/808802106769625088

    An apt thumbnail!

    Never rains but it pours.....

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/snp/news/81716/snp-mp-tasmina-ahmed-sheikh-facing-hmrc-court-hearing

    Ms Ahmed-Sheikh is the fourth member of the SNP's 2015 intake to find herself at the centre of financial controversy.

    Glasgow East MP Natalie McGarry has been charged after a police investigation into claims of financial discrepancies in a Scottish independence campaign group. She resigned the SNP whip when the allegations emerged last year.

    Michelle Thomson, the MP for Edinburgh West, also stood down from the party last year after police launched an investigation into “alleged irregularities relating to property deals”. She has vowed to clear her name.

    And Dundee West MP Chris Law has also been investigated by police over alleged irregularities in relation to a pro-Scottish independence campaign he set up.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,040
    Morning. SNP due diligence on candidates being shown up again. One is excusable, two isn't, three shows a pattern, yet now we have four MPs in trouble.

    Oh, and how on earth does a lawyer who now has an MP salary end up bankrupt - did she just forget to do her tax return for a few years?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,733
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    The suggestion for keeping EU citizens living in the UK under EU law and able to appeal to the ECJ was made by Barnier.

    Edit: Sorry I see you have edited your posting as well along the same lines.

    Of course, if our EU friends are happy to give UK courts equivalent jurisdiction over UK citizens in EU countries, we might have the basis of a deal.... but I think les porcs vont voler before they agree to that!
    EU aside, what with similar things for investor-state disputes I wonder if we'll end up adjudicating a lot of disputes in supra-national courts well before we have the other parts of the One World Government. Once people are going to the international court on a regular basis it becomes impractical for any national government to leave or disobey the court, because it would screw all their citizens and corporations that were trying to get judgements against other people.

    Once that's entrenched there will be pressure to bring these out-of-control global judges under democratic control, and hey presto, OWG.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Don't be daft.

    Slapping down Saudi Arabia mattered.

    This was just part of Boris's persona - and I'm rather glad that the Cabinet feels able to make little jokes at each other's expense. It's rather healthy.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    viewcode said:

    SeanT said:

    fpt

    And America?

    The America of Chicago?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us/chicago-shootings-district-11.html?_r=0

    The America of Hillary's "can't we just drone this guy". The America that brought us the festival of democracy that is the modern Middle East - courtesy of Shock and Awe. The America that invades whomsoever it likes. The only country to drop the H bomb.

    [pedant mode on]

    A (atomic) bomb, not H (hydrogen) bomb. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both fission devices, in which a fissile material (an element high up the periodic table with heavier atoms than normal) is forced rapidly into a critical mass, at which point it undergoes fission (its heavy atoms split releasing electrons) and a chain reaction (each electron splits more atoms, so even more electrons...) and a rapid outpouring of energy (the explosion)

    A fusion bomb works the other way around: it forces light atoms to combine (fuse) rapidly. To do this you need a material with lighter atoms than normal, for example an isotope (variant) of hydrogen (hence "H bomb"). It is bloody difficult to make atoms fuse, so to set a fusion bomb off you have to wrap it in a fission bomb and set that off first

    [/pedant mode off]
    Pedant mode on. There is no such thing as a pure fusion weapon. There are fusion-boosted fission weapons, the H bomb, and staged thermonuclear weapons. Pedant mode off.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    edited December 2016
    Charles said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    This was just part of Boris's persona - and I'm rather glad that the Cabinet feels able to make little jokes at each other's expense. It's rather healthy.
    I doubt Mrs May is remotely bothered by the Lederhosen gag (her hyperactive 'protectors' may be another matter - tho with a bit of luck they'll have been told to chill).

    Edit - imagine one of St Nicola's acolyte's trying it.....
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    MTimT said:

    viewcode said:

    SeanT said:

    fpt

    And America?

    The America of Chicago?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us/chicago-shootings-district-11.html?_r=0

    The America of Hillary's "can't we just drone this guy". The America that brought us the festival of democracy that is the modern Middle East - courtesy of Shock and Awe. The America that invades whomsoever it likes. The only country to drop the H bomb.

    [pedant mode on]

    A (atomic) bomb, not H (hydrogen) bomb. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both fission devices, in which a fissile material (an element high up the periodic table with heavier atoms than normal) is forced rapidly into a critical mass, at which point it undergoes fission (its heavy atoms split releasing electrons) and a chain reaction (each electron splits more atoms, so even more electrons...) and a rapid outpouring of energy (the explosion)

    A fusion bomb works the other way around: it forces light atoms to combine (fuse) rapidly. To do this you need a material with lighter atoms than normal, for example an isotope (variant) of hydrogen (hence "H bomb"). It is bloody difficult to make atoms fuse, so to set a fusion bomb off you have to wrap it in a fission bomb and set that off first

    [/pedant mode off]
    Pedant mode on. There is no such thing as a pure fusion weapon. There are fusion-boosted fission weapons, the H bomb, and staged thermonuclear weapons. Pedant mode off.
    What are the differences? (I love the story of how the UK detonated the largest atom bomb ever in a bid to hoodwink the yanks into thinking we had the H bomb...)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    edited December 2016
    CarlottaVance said:

    MTimT said:

    viewcode said:

    SeanT said:

    fpt

    And America?

    The America of Chicago?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us/chicago-shootings-district-11.html?_r=0

    The America of Hillary's "can't we just drone this guy". The America that brought us the festival of democracy that is the modern Middle East - courtesy of Shock and Awe. The America that invades whomsoever it likes. The only country to drop the H bomb.

    [pedant mode on]

    A (atomic) bomb, not H (hydrogen) bomb. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both fission devices, in which a fissile material (an element high up the periodic table with heavier atoms than normal) is forced rapidly into a critical mass, at which point it undergoes fission (its heavy atoms split releasing electrons) and a chain reaction (each electron splits more atoms, so even more electrons...) and a rapid outpouring of energy (the explosion)

    A fusion bomb works the other way around: it forces light atoms to combine (fuse) rapidly. To do this you need a material with lighter atoms than normal, for example an isotope (variant) of hydrogen (hence "H bomb"). It is bloody difficult to make atoms fuse, so to set a fusion bomb off you have to wrap it in a fission bomb and set that off first

    [/pedant mode off]
    Pedant mode on. There is no such thing as a pure fusion weapon. There are fusion-boosted fission weapons, the H bomb, and staged thermonuclear weapons. Pedant mode off.
    What are the differences? (I love the story of how the UK detonated the largest atom bomb ever in a bid to hoodwink the yanks into thinking we had the H bomb...)
    Fusion boosted just has a small fusion component, the neutrons from which increase the fission reaction. H bombs are a bombs with a fission primary and a fusion secondary. The small fission primary is used to ignite the much larger fusion secondary. Not sure if there is a difference between H bomb and staged thermonuclear weapons, I think they are the same?

    According to wiki, in the boosted weapons the fusion component only adds about 1% to the total yield (seems a bit pointless).
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,580
    and I think this is the story you referred to:

    http://www.reformation.org/british-thermonuclear-bluff.html
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    Can you give us a philosophical argument as to why we should accept extraterritorial jurisdiction?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    geoffw said:

    I think it's the squeezed middle.
    (What happened to that?)

    Squeeze something hard enough and it turns into JAM
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    RobD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    Yeah, members of the Government should try to avoid making fun of each other on supposedly serious occasions.
    While there are very few occasions that Britons find unsuitable for humour, most countries seperate it from serious business. Gallows humour is a great defuser of tension, but is very context specific. To the EU diplomats we appear to be a bunch of clowns, and who trusts a clown when negotiating?
    They are currently looking like the clowns at the moment, what with their demands for extraterritorial jurisdiction for the ECJ.
    I think that just demonstrates a level of delusion as great as the "Have cake and eat it" Brexiteers, and why we are heading to Hard Brexit.
    No, it shows the utter delusion of some of the more out-with-the-fairies Leavers that they are incapable of understanding the distinction between 'the EU', and a completely obscure MEP who made a completely bonkers suggestion which not a single sentient being on the continent takes seriously.
    Barnier apparently raised it at a meeting.

    Now we don't know the context - it's most likely one of a laundry list that the EU legal service included only for it to be dismissed as impractical/unobtainable.

    But Barnier is hardly "a completely obscure MEP"
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    RobD said:

    and I think this is the story you referred to:

    http://www.reformation.org/british-thermonuclear-bluff.html

    A somewhat more detailed and slightly less polemic account:

    http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Uk/UKOrigin.html
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    CarlottaVance said:

    Charles said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I heard that Boris was fuming at Phil Hammond's gag at Boris at the start of the Autumn statement.

    I'm assuming this is payback for this and Mrs May slapping him down for his comments over Saudi Arabia

    This was just part of Boris's persona - and I'm rather glad that the Cabinet feels able to make little jokes at each other's expense. It's rather healthy.
    I doubt Mrs May is remotely bothered by the Lederhosen gag (her hyperactive 'protectors' may be another matter - tho with a bit of luck they'll have been told to chill).

    Edit - imagine one of St Nicola's acolyte's trying it.....
    I agree. @TSE does seem a little over-sensitive at the moment
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    CarlottaVance said:

    MTimT said:

    viewcode said:

    SeanT said:

    fpt

    And America?

    The America of Chicago?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us/chicago-shootings-district-11.html?_r=0

    The America of Hillary's "can't we just drone this guy". The America that brought us the festival of democracy that is the modern Middle East - courtesy of Shock and Awe. The America that invades whomsoever it likes. The only country to drop the H bomb.

    [pedant mode on]

    A (atomic) bomb, not H (hydrogen) bomb. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both fission devices, in which a fissile material (an element high up the periodic table with heavier atoms than normal) is forced rapidly into a critical mass, at which point it undergoes fission (its heavy atoms split releasing electrons) and a chain reaction (each electron splits more atoms, so even more electrons...) and a rapid outpouring of energy (the explosion)

    A fusion bomb works the other way around: it forces light atoms to combine (fuse) rapidly. To do this you need a material with lighter atoms than normal, for example an isotope (variant) of hydrogen (hence "H bomb"). It is bloody difficult to make atoms fuse, so to set a fusion bomb off you have to wrap it in a fission bomb and set that off first

    [/pedant mode off]
    Pedant mode on. There is no such thing as a pure fusion weapon. There are fusion-boosted fission weapons, the H bomb, and staged thermonuclear weapons. Pedant mode off.
    What are the differences? (I love the story of how the UK detonated the largest atom bomb ever in a bid to hoodwink the yanks into thinking we had the H bomb...)
    A gun-design fission bomb fires some radioactive fuel (uranium or plutonium) into a ball of radioactive fuel to reach criticality (Hiroshima).

    An implosion fission bomb uses a shell of explosives around the radioactive fuel to implode it in on itself to reach criticality (Nagasaki).

    An H bomb does the same, but then uses that explosion to bring about fusion of deuterium and tritium (hence fusion-boosted fission and hence H bomb as deuterium and tritium are isomers of hydrogen).

    Later designs have multiple stage explosions. I believe the US got up to a 3-stage explosion.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    MTimT said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    MTimT said:

    viewcode said:

    SeanT said:

    fpt

    And America?

    The America of Chicago?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us/chicago-shootings-district-11.html?_r=0

    The America of Hillary's "can't we just drone this guy". The America that brought us the festival of democracy that is the modern Middle East - courtesy of Shock and Awe. The America that invades whomsoever it likes. The only country to drop the H bomb.

    [pedant mode on]

    A (atomic) bomb, not H (hydrogen) bomb. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both fission devices, in which a fissile material (an element high up the periodic table with heavier atoms than normal) is forced rapidly into a critical mass, at which point it undergoes fission (its heavy atoms split releasing electrons) and a chain reaction (each electron splits more atoms, so even more electrons...) and a rapid outpouring of energy (the explosion)

    A fusion bomb works the other way around: it forces light atoms to combine (fuse) rapidly. To do this you need a material with lighter atoms than normal, for example an isotope (variant) of hydrogen (hence "H bomb"). It is bloody difficult to make atoms fuse, so to set a fusion bomb off you have to wrap it in a fission bomb and set that off first

    [/pedant mode off]
    Pedant mode on. There is no such thing as a pure fusion weapon. There are fusion-boosted fission weapons, the H bomb, and staged thermonuclear weapons. Pedant mode off.
    What are the differences? (I love the story of how the UK detonated the largest atom bomb ever in a bid to hoodwink the yanks into thinking we had the H bomb...)
    A gun-design fission bomb fires some radioactive fuel (uranium or plutonium) into a ball of radioactive fuel to reach criticality (Hiroshima).

    An implosion fission bomb uses a shell of explosives around the radioactive fuel to implode it in on itself to reach criticality (Nagasaki).

    An H bomb does the same, but then uses that explosion to bring about fusion of deuterium and tritium (hence fusion-boosted fission and hence H bomb as deuterium and tritium are isomers of hydrogen).

    Later designs have multiple stage explosions. I believe the US got up to a 3-stage explosion.
    So an 'H-Bomb' is a single stage thermonuclear weapon?
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Morning all.

    Johnson’s amusing ribbing of the PM looks nothing like revenge, served hot or cold.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,152
    SeanT said:

    fpt for GardenWalker

    I would have reluctantly voted Hillary (as I said on here) but I thought Trump's victory was hilarious. In the way it enraged liberal-lefties. Just like Brexit.

    In office (as I have also long said) I expect him to be much more predictable and dull, he's a New York billionaire with foreign wives, he will be a pragmatic, hard-nosed and capitalist realpolitiker, he will disappoint many of his poorer voters - tho he might cheer them up by being white.

    He won't start a nuclear war. He will seek the best deal with anyone, including Putin. He won't invade places but he will continue to bomb enemies. He is Reagan for an America clearly in Relative Decline.

    My entire point is that he's not THAT different to Putin, and nor is America THAT different to Russia. Great powers with perceived interests. This is what they do. For a brief period, now definitely over, America was the unthreatened global hegemon and maybe sought to act as such, imposing democracy the way Britain - when it ruled the world - abolished slavery.

    Imperial Britain probably did better than Imperial America.

    "nor is America THAT different to Russia."

    LOL. No. America is flawed, but Russia is sadly another order of magnitude. Just look at a small area that is in the news at the moment, sports, and see how over 1,000 athletes benefited from doping in a state-run scheme.

    Not that some US sports stars don't use drugs, but the scale of what happened in Russia was something else.

    I'm also surprised that someone who lives and works in London for most of the time is so forgetful of Litvinenko. That messy, botched assassination could easily have caused more injury to innocents around, such as yourself.

    Your love of hardmen dictators such as Assad or Putin is odd given your occupation. As a journalist and writer, if you lived in such a state you would be one of the first people to be faced with a choice: bow down and support the government uncritically, or end up with you (and possibly your family) in jail or worse.

    So what would it be? Would you be a Solzhenitsyn and a Gerlich, or would you bow down to what you know are forces of evil?
This discussion has been closed.