If they are called to perform such duty, you have to acknowledge that there is a high chance of mistakes. Hence, they should only be used when you can be fairly sure (not certain) that the risk they are on the streets to prevent is greater than the risks from mistakes.
Much of the above depends on the type of emergency as well: if it is one where the population is in favour of them being there, the risks are much reduced over a NI-style situation.
The problem I have is that in the mainland UK we can only go from the use of a relatively small number of specialist police to calling out the army. There's no intermediate step in the escalation, if there is a national crisis it will be troops on the streets. Now I don't think that would be a catastrophe, but it would be better if we had some non-military option when we need more than a few thousand armed police.
Somebody was asking about Prince Charles being more visible on the last thread.
One way and another, the last few weeks has looked suspiciously like the start of a handing over process.
Which makes me wonder about this reported cold the Queen had. She was feeing unwell so decided not to make a medium length journey by train. OK, fair enough. But she was fit the following day to travel by helicopter? That really doesn't make sense to me. I can imagine no circumstances where somebody would be too ill to travel in comfort at a moderate speed on a luxury train, then immediately after well enough to travel in a rough, noisy and probably cramped helicopter. The advantage however is that it is very quick - so somebody with a long term condition is not away from treatment for long,
Perhaps we're having the ground prepared for an announcement about either her or Prince Philip.
Hopefully Charles had the good sense to abdicate to William quickly. He is a republican's best friend. I wouldn't be surprised to see Canada and Australia leave the realm under Charlie's watch. William would be unbelievably popular though, even more than the Queen.
I disagree. Charles may have some odd ideas and a messy love life but he is conscientious. Remember Edward VII was widely written off before he became King, but he worked hard, became if anything more popular than his mother and was very effective in some fields, especially in foreign affairs.
Well Charles has a lot to prove, I hope he is up to it as well.
Charles's biggest problem will be pretending he shares his mum's interest in horseracing for all five days of Royal Ascot.
Re NI, the borders weren't closed for all the reasons you describe. But the security services embarked on a pretty serious and, ultimately, successful campaign to make it difficult for the terrorists to operate. It's not at all clear that the same is being done by all the relevant European authorities in relation to the threat the whole of Europe faces from Islamist terrorism.
Indeed the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic was under a lot of surveillance, and likely it still is even if it is a lot less obvious now with the watch towers being removed.
@MaxPB I doubt Charles will abdicate, the monarchy isn't a popularity contest
Unfortunately it is, and if they want to keep the realm in tact then they will have realised that Wills and Kate are the key to keeping everything going. The UK will never dump the Monarchy, but Canada and Australia might.
Australia will be a republic within 5 years of QE2 going under the sod.
Someone's going to bury the ship?
When QEII's time comes she's going to St George's Chapel, Windsor, with her father, mother & sister's ashes....
Somebody was asking about Prince Charles being more visible on the last thread.
One way and another, the last few weeks has looked suspiciously like the start of a handing over process.
Which makes me wonder about this reported cold the Queen had. She was feeing unwell so decided not to make a medium length journey by train. OK, fair enough. But she was fit the following day to travel by helicopter? That really doesn't make sense to me. I can imagine no circumstances where somebody would be too ill to travel in comfort at a moderate speed on a luxury train, then immediately after well enough to travel in a rough, noisy and probably cramped helicopter. The advantage however is that it is very quick - so somebody with a long term condition is not away from treatment for long,
Perhaps we're having the ground prepared for an announcement about either her or Prince Philip.
Hopefully Charles had the good sense to abdicate to William quickly. He is a republican's best friend. I wouldn't be surprised to see Canada and Australia leave the realm under Charlie's watch. William would be unbelievably popular though, even more than the Queen.
I disagree. Charles may have some odd ideas and a messy love life but he is conscientious. Remember Edward VII was widely written off before he became King, but he worked hard, became if anything more popular than his mother and was very effective in some fields, especially in foreign affairs.
Given your username, perhaps you should be declaring an interest, Your Royal Highness?
" William would be unbelievably popular though, even more than the Queen."
I disagree - William (and Harry for that matter) demonstrate distinct playboy characteristics, and appear to enjoy nothing better than mixing with showbiz and other assorted luvvies. That's not what being a senior member of the Royal Family is supposed to be all about.
Airport Webcams UPDATE: Malta Airport closed. Inbounds holding or diverting to Palermo, Catania. Reports of '2 hijackers with grenades' | Pics: Sky News, RT https://t.co/ZCQJX5ZkOO
The Grand Tour - after six episodes all the smutty non-BBC jokes finally come out. Well I say they come out, they're not homosexual or anything though.
If they are called to perform such duty, you have to acknowledge that there is a high chance of mistakes. Hence, they should only be used when you can be fairly sure (not certain) that the risk they are on the streets to prevent is greater than the risks from mistakes.
Much of the above depends on the type of emergency as well: if it is one where the population is in favour of them being there, the risks are much reduced over a NI-style situation.
The problem I have is that in the mainland UK we can only go from the use of a relatively small number of specialist police to calling out the army. There's no intermediate step in the escalation, if there is a national crisis it will be troops on the streets. Now I don't think that would be a catastrophe, but it would be better if we had some non-military option when we need more than a few thousand armed police.
Do we really need such an increase in capacity ? We managed to police the Olympics without any obvious hitch; we haven't suffered any 'spectaculars' in recent years; the effectiveness of armed police against a heavy goods vehicle incident in minimal. Our resources are best kept in intelligence, which appears to be quite effective. And as rcs points out, just having that extra capacity is likely to lead to accidents.
That the police force itself might have been run down too much in recent years, thanks to funding cuts, is another matter... a bit like the 'peace dividend'.
The Grand Tour - after six episodes all the smutty non-BBC jokes finally come out. Well I say they come out, they're not homosexual or anything though.
Not one to watch with the young kids!
I'm still beyond peed off that Prime won't play on my Android. It's crap app. I can watch Netflix no problem - but need my laptap/TV for Amazon. Terrible tech.
The Grand Tour - after six episodes all the smutty non-BBC jokes finally come out. Well I say they come out, they're not homosexual or anything though.
Not one to watch with the young kids!
I'm still beyond peed off that Prime won't play on my Android. It's crap app. I can watch Netflix no problem - but need my laptap/TV for Amazon. Terrible tech.
I'm in the same boat Amazon wise. Use Kodi instead, streams perfectly on Android.
I look at it like this, and you are free to disagree:
The cost of securing long land borders is non-negligible, either in terms of the amount of manpower required, and in terms of the frictional costs on people in getting from a-to-b. Not only that, but long land borders are inherently porous. You can ski from Italy into Switzerland, for example, and no fence or wall is going to stop that.
So, as a country you have a choice: do you want to take the significant economic costs, inconvenience law abiding citizens, and which may still have only a limited effect on terrorists' ability to cross borders.
It's like this: we could cut road deaths 40% over night by dramatically reducing speed limits in the UK. But as a society there's been a tacit acceptance that the current limits have an acceptable casualty vs economics vs convenience trade off. The same is true of terrorism and crime.
In the early 1980s, with a major terrorist problem in Northern Ireland, and with IRA members flitting over the (Schengen-like) border without difficulty, Mrs Thatcher faced the same choice. Impose border controls and build a wall - with serious economic consequences on an already economically depressed region - or allow the terrorists to easily cross the border. They decided that the border could not be efficiently sealed, and therefore the costs were not worth it.
Now, you are free to say the countries of the Schengen zone (which, of course, includes Switzerland, who voted in a referendum to join), should prioritise prevention of terrorism. But I suspect they'll make the same calculation Mrs Thatcher made, and - except where there are obvious choke points that can be easily policed - leave the borders open.
That all makes sense. But it makes it imperative to have far more effective controls at your external borders and an effective system of removing those who get in but you don't want.
The (perceived?) lack of this is, I think, at the root cause of British people thinking that "immigration" is a problem. I suspect people would be generally happy with people coming here to work so long as they can be kicked out later if they need to be.
The Grand Tour - after six episodes all the smutty non-BBC jokes finally come out. Well I say they come out, they're not homosexual or anything though.
Not one to watch with the young kids!
I'm still beyond peed off that Prime won't play on my Android. It's crap app. I can watch Netflix no problem - but need my laptap/TV for Amazon. Terrible tech.
Frank Gardner #Berlin attack suspect Anis Amri's escape route was via hi-speed train thru France to Turin then regional train to Milan. Stopped at 3am
Interesting - if his aim was Milan (rather than just wandering about) a more direct route would be via Switzerland and Basel - but perhaps the Swiss have more robust checks....
" William would be unbelievably popular though, even more than the Queen."
I disagree - William (and Harry for that matter) demonstrate distinct playboy characteristics, and appear to enjoy nothing better than mixing with showbiz and other assorted luvvies. That's not what being a senior member of the Royal Family is supposed to be all about.
Quite. Of course they're relatively young yet, (though much older than Elizabeth was when her father died) but I'd be more worried about William as the heir than Charles at this point. Though I would expect William to shape up once he is the heir - at the moment he doesn't have to.
" William would be unbelievably popular though, even more than the Queen."
I disagree - William (and Harry for that matter) demonstrate distinct playboy characteristics, and appear to enjoy nothing better than mixing with showbiz and other assorted luvvies. That's not what being a senior member of the Royal Family is supposed to be all about.
Surely the whole point of monarchy is that the successor is determined by inheritance and that popularity with the public is irrelevant?
If we start to insist on Monarchs being popular we would be well on our way to an elected presidency.
As an asids, I think Charles will be perfectly popular but have a different style. Nothing wrong with that.
If they are called to perform such duty, you have to acknowledge that there is a high chance of mistakes. Hence, they should only be used when you can be fairly sure (not certain) that the risk they are on the streets to prevent is greater than the risks from mistakes.
Much of the above depends on the type of emergency as well: if it is one where the population is in favour of them being there, the risks are much reduced over a NI-style situation.
The problem I have is that in the mainland UK we can only go from the use of a relatively small number of specialist police to calling out the army. There's no intermediate step in the escalation, if there is a national crisis it will be troops on the streets. Now I don't think that would be a catastrophe, but it would be better if we had some non-military option when we need more than a few thousand armed police.
Do we really need such an increase in capacity ? We managed to police the Olympics without any obvious hitch; we haven't suffered any 'spectaculars' in recent years; the effectiveness of armed police against a heavy goods vehicle incident in minimal. Our resources are best kept in intelligence, which appears to be quite effective. And as rcs points out, just having that extra capacity is likely to lead to accidents.
That the police force itself might have been run down too much in recent years, thanks to funding cuts, is another matter... a bit like the 'peace dividend'
Security at the Olympics cost us a fortune - a figure of billions comes to mind, but might be wrong. It was far from 'normal' security.
The Grand Tour - after six episodes all the smutty non-BBC jokes finally come out. Well I say they come out, they're not homosexual or anything though.
Not one to watch with the young kids!
I was once asked by a young nephew to read a motor magazine to him as his 'bedtime story' - I very quickly realised I'd have to do some robust Bowdlerisation as I went along as more than a few of the metaphors were inappropriate for a 6 year old.....
Do we really need such an increase in capacity ? We managed to police the Olympics without any obvious hitch; we haven't suffered any 'spectaculars' in recent years; the effectiveness of armed police against a heavy goods vehicle incident in minimal. Our resources are best kept in intelligence, which appears to be quite effective. And as rcs points out, just having that extra capacity is likely to lead to accidents.
That the police force itself might have been run down too much in recent years, thanks to funding cuts, is another matter... a bit like the 'peace dividend'.
Those are fair points, the problem is we don't really know how we will cope until we face a similar situation to France. The Olympics were a large security operation, but across a few sites, how would we cope if we had to guard hundreds or maybe even thousands of sites simultaneously. I'm no expert in this stuff, but it looks to me that central London is well provided for but much of the rest of the country would really struggle in a crisis.
Frank Gardner #Berlin attack suspect Anis Amri's escape route was via hi-speed train thru France to Turin then regional train to Milan. Stopped at 3am
That's a very circuitous route. You don't just go from Germany to Turin by train via France - at least, not according to http://www.eurail.com/plan-your-trip/eurail-timetable - all the sensible routes I could find were via Switzerland.
Frank Gardner #Berlin attack suspect Anis Amri's escape route was via hi-speed train thru France to Turin then regional train to Milan. Stopped at 3am
Interesting - if his aim was Milan (rather than just wandering about) a more direct route would be via Switzerland and Basel - but perhaps the Swiss have more robust checks....
My experience though a decade old of Swiss borders is something. I used to drive there regularly, somehow ended up on Interpol check list (work colleague relative info) and always searched. Car was almost entirely dismantled once as coach parties gawped at the border.
I'd presume they'd be hotter now than all those years ago.
The url speaks for itself. But note the final paragraph:
"Ukip is not the only threat in Labour heartlands, and the report’s conclusions also warns: “Urban Labour MPs should keep an eye on Lib Dems.” "
This is a warning urban Labour MPs would do well to heed. If there's one area where an SNP type of eruption could take place against Labour MPs, it's among super-disaffected Remainers.
It is interesting that Winston Churchill gave a running commentary on World War II to King George VI but Theresa May is unable to give a running commentary to the Queen on Brexit.
The url speaks for itself. But note the final paragraph:
"Ukip is not the only threat in Labour heartlands, and the report’s conclusions also warns: “Urban Labour MPs should keep an eye on Lib Dems.” "
This is a warning urban Labour MPs would do well to heed. If there's one area where an SNP type of eruption could take place against Labour MPs, it's among super-disaffected Remainers.
All the more so if it's obvious Labour aren't going to win.
The url speaks for itself. But note the final paragraph:
"Ukip is not the only threat in Labour heartlands, and the report’s conclusions also warns: “Urban Labour MPs should keep an eye on Lib Dems.” "
This is a warning urban Labour MPs would do well to heed. If there's one area where an SNP type of eruption could take place against Labour MPs, it's among super-disaffected Remainers.
It is interesting that Winston Churchill gave a running commentary on World War II to King George VI but Theresa May is unable to give a running commentary to the Queen on Brexit.
Now I normally disagree with you about Mrs May but I found that shocking (if the reports are correct). Dangerously close to Lèse-majesté I'd have thought.
Somebody was asking about Prince Charles being more visible on the last thread.
One way and another, the last few weeks has looked suspiciously like the start of a handing over process.
Which makes me wonder about this reported cold the Queen had. She was feeing unwell so decided not to make a medium length journey by train. OK, fair enough. But she was fit the following day to travel by helicopter? That really doesn't make sense to me. I can imagine no circumstances where somebody would be too ill to travel in comfort at a moderate speed on a luxury train, then immediately after well enough to travel in a rough, noisy and probably cramped helicopter. The advantage however is that it is very quick - so somebody with a long term condition is not away from treatment for long,
Perhaps we're having the ground prepared for an announcement about either her or Prince Philip.
Hopefully Charles had the good sense to abdicate to William quickly. He is a republican's best friend. I wouldn't be surprised to see Canada and Australia leave the realm under Charlie's watch. William would be unbelievably popular though, even more than the Queen.
Charles I suspect would be much better than people suspect. He has lived knowing he would be king for a very long time, and has seen how his mother has behaved to keep the institution popular. Of course, many other monarchies have long had traditions of abdication due to old age, and he might decide his reign should be short for the same reason, though it would be a big step away from his mother's preferences in such matters. Canada and Australia leaving at some point is probably inevitable, I don't really see Charles adding much to it really, even if it happens during his reign.
Worth noting that if the terrorist had been stopped by two regular police officers in the UK he could have killed them both and escaped.
On the other hand, if police officers were equipped with guns in the UK, there would likely be a number of innocent people killed every year by accident. And there would - from time to time - be occasions when police shot unarmed fleeing suspects in the back.
Like all things in life, it's a question of trade offs.
Exactly , we the public are far safer if most of them do not have guns.
It is interesting that Winston Churchill gave a running commentary on World War II to King George VI but Theresa May is unable to give a running commentary to the Queen on Brexit.
Now I normally disagree with you about Mrs May but I found that shocking (if the reports are correct). Dangerously close to Lèse-majesté I'd have thought.
I could have understood if Mrs May had said 'Brexit is going to be very complex' but this really jarred
'The Queen and the duke were said to have been looking forward to hearing more about Mrs May’s thoughts on Brexit. This may have included insights into her selections for the cabinet, including the appointment of Boris Johnson as foreign secretary.
However, both were said to have been left disappointed, a source said.'
I wonder if Mrs May got star struck?
Or perhaps she doesn't have a clue apart from Brexit means Brexit.
Yes. There is a hierarchy of aid by the military under the categorisation of Military Aid to the Civil Authorities. Military Aid to the Civil Power (MACP) would be the appropriate deployment in such a situation.
The army would likely do a good job, but there is a fundamental difference between a police constable upholding the law and maintaining public order, and a soldier who is trained to fight our enemies being drafted in to fill a gap. If we have no other option, then use the army, but it would probably be better if we didn't have to do so.
Yep. The army don't have an illustrious history in acting as policemen; the roles are fundamentally different. .
Reminds me of a Denzel Washington and Bruce Willis movie about terrorism in, I think, New York, and the army being called in to lock down and police the area. Bruce Willis was the army general and eventual bad guy, for torturing suspects and so on, but I always thought him a little harshly portrayed, in that IIRC his character made basically the same point you just have, in that he advised against sending in the army (we're a broadsword not a scalpel), that is himself, but was obviously overruled.
If it's good enough for Naboo, then it's good enough for you.
A long, long time ago In a galaxy far away Naboo was under an attack
And I thought me and Qui-Gon Jinn Could talk the Federation in- To maybe cutting them a little slack
But their response it didn't thrill us They locked the doors and tried to kill us We escaped from that gas And met Jar-Jar and Boss Nass We took a bongo from the scene And we went to Theed to see the Queen We all wound up on Tattooine That's where We found This boy
Oh, my, my this here Anakin guy May be Vader some day later, now he's just a small fry And he left his home and kissed his mommy goodbye Saying soon I'm gonna be a Jedi Soon I'm gonna be a Jedi...
@MaxPB I doubt Charles will abdicate, the monarchy isn't a popularity contest
It is, in terms of keeping the institution popular, but that has to be weighed against the cost of disposing of monarchs too easily in the dace of trivial unpopularity, so that it becomes a direct popularity contest.
It's one reason Renly Baratheon's reasoning for declaring himself king was so destructive to the system.
Yes but we wouldn't be talking about a police constable, we would be talking about a robocop-type black-clad operative. No pointy hats and ello ello ellos.
That's because that's essentially all we have, about 5,000 authorised firearms officers out of 120,000 police, or in that ballpark. I think we could do with a lot more, and including "regular" police for emergency situations where we potentially need to guard many, many locations simultaneously.
And a great many officers won't do firearms training because of the post event witch-hunt against them.
It's so out of balance.
They do tend to kill lots of innocent people though, so is it any wonder.
Real Donald Trump Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!
We are building two aircraft carriers. Unlike most other carriers they can only handle aircraft that can land vertically. The only two production fighter aircraft with that capability are the F35B and the Harrier variants. If Trump cancels the F35B (a variant of the F35) for shits and giggles then we will be left with our arse hanging in the wind.
"Hotter now". I had no idea you had a thing for Swiss border guards.......
I'm very partial to all things Swiss. Their border guards were almost always marvellous specimens - fit, in nice uniforms and ultra polite to me even when taking the panels off my doors
The police in Northern Ireland have been armed for many many years. And despite all the problems with policing in NI, one issue that hasn't come up is large numbers of the wrong people being shot during ordinary policing operations.
The biggest barrier to arming the police on the mainland is that it would involve arming non-"specialist armed police" - no exotic semi-special forces training. So it would mean that someone in authority would have to take responsibility for that.
It is interesting that Winston Churchill gave a running commentary on World War II to King George VI but Theresa May is unable to give a running commentary to the Queen on Brexit.
Now I normally disagree with you about Mrs May but I found that shocking (if the reports are correct). Dangerously close to Lèse-majesté I'd have thought.
a source said
About a story four months old
Gideon too busy raking in the $$$ to brief his Times friends in a timely manner?
Real Donald Trump Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!
We are building two aircraft carriers. Unlike most other carriers they can only handle aircraft that can land vertically. The only two production fighter aircraft with that capability are the F35B and the Harrier variants. If Trump cancels the F35B (a variant of the F35) for shits and giggles then we will be left with our arse hanging in the wind.
"Hotter now". I had no idea you had a thing for Swiss border guards.......
I'm very partial to all things Swiss. Their border guards were almost always marvellous specimens - fit, in nice uniforms and ultra polite to me even when taking the panels off my doors
Real Donald Trump Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!
We are building two aircraft carriers. Unlike most other carriers they can only handle aircraft that can land vertically. The only two production fighter aircraft with that capability are the F35B and the Harrier variants. If Trump cancels the F35B (a variant of the F35) for shits and giggles then we will be left with our arse hanging in the wind.
Can monarchs pick any rental name, or have to use one of their various christian names, even if not their primary one?
Because I'm sick of all these George's and Edward's. And think of poor Henry's - they had before we had any george's, and none since. And what of Stephen? Doesn't sound like a kingly name at all they have avoided it ever since.
I'd go with Cnut, Aethelstan or something Scottish.
"Hotter now". I had no idea you had a thing for Swiss border guards.......
I'm very partial to all things Swiss. Their border guards were almost always marvellous specimens - fit, in nice uniforms and ultra polite to me even when taking the panels off my doors
Is that a euphemism?
Alas, as a faithful , luvved up wife - I was just window-shopping
Mr. kle4, if King Stephen hadn't been a merciful man, England would've fallen to France.
He spared the life of the very young hostage William Marshal. When King John finally did the decent thing and died, it was William Marshal that reconquered the half of England that had fallen to France.
Athelwulf sound's pretty cool. Mind you, the last King of York was Erik Bloodaxe.
Yes. There is a hierarchy of aid by the military under the categorisation of Military Aid to the Civil Authorities. Military Aid to the Civil Power (MACP) would be the appropriate deployment in such a situation.
The army would likely do a good job, but there is a fundamental difference between a police constable upholding the law and maintaining public order, and a soldier who is trained to fight our enemies being drafted in to fill a gap. If we have no other option, then use the army, but it would probably be better if we didn't have to do so.
Yep. The army don't have an illustrious history in acting as policemen; the roles are fundamentally different. .
Reminds me of a Denzel Washington and Bruce Willis movie about terrorism in, I think, New York, and the army being called in to lock down and police the area. Bruce Willis was the army general and eventual bad guy, for torturing suspects and so on, but I always thought him a little harshly portrayed, in that IIRC his character made basically the same point you just have, in that he advised against sending in the army (we're a broadsword not a scalpel), that is himself, but was obviously overruled.
* The function of an army is to kill people from other countries * The function of a police force[1] is to control people from this country without killing them.
Can monarchs pick any rental name, or have to use one of their various christian names, even if not their primary one?
Because I'm sick of all these George's and Edward's. And think of poor Henry's - they had before we had any george's, and none since. And what of Stephen? Doesn't sound like a kingly name at all they have avoided it ever since.
I'd go with Cnut, Aethelstan or something Scottish.
The regnal name Charles chooses should be something that accurately reflects the population of the United Kingdom.
Real Donald Trump Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!
We are building two aircraft carriers. Unlike most other carriers they can only handle aircraft that can land vertically. The only two production fighter aircraft with that capability are the F35B and the Harrier variants. If Trump cancels the F35B (a variant of the F35) for shits and giggles then we will be left with our arse hanging in the wind.
The Harriers are obsolete, so pretty pointless getting them back. The catapult/not catapult messing around has already cost us a few billion. Given the cost and risk of the naval VTOL F35 variant, it was a stupid decision not to opt for catapult capacity, particularly as that would have significantly increased the range and effectiveness of the F35 (if we ever get it), and/or allowed for a dozen other options.
Defence procurement has been a mess for decades. (Don't get me started on our battlefield armoured capacity...) We ought to contract it out to the Swedish procurement agency, which is about as good as it gets.
Can monarchs pick any rental name, or have to use one of their various christian names, even if not their primary one?
Because I'm sick of all these George's and Edward's. And think of poor Henry's - they had before we had any george's, and none since. And what of Stephen? Doesn't sound like a kingly name at all they have avoided it ever since.
I'd go with Cnut, Aethelstan or something Scottish.
The regnal name Charles chooses should be something that accurately reflects the population of the United Kingdom.
Can monarchs pick any rental name, or have to use one of their various christian names, even if not their primary one?
Because I'm sick of all these George's and Edward's. And think of poor Henry's - they had before we had any george's, and none since. And what of Stephen? Doesn't sound like a kingly name at all they have avoided it ever since.
I'd go with Cnut, Aethelstan or something Scottish.
The regnal name Charles chooses should be something that accurately reflects the population of the United Kingdom.
Somebody was asking about Prince Charles being more visible on the last thread.
One way and another, the last few weeks has looked suspiciously like the start of a handing over process.
Which makes me wonder about this reported cold the Queen had. She was feeing unwell so decided not to make a medium length journey by train. OK, fair enough. But she was fit the following day to travel by helicopter? That really doesn't make sense to me. I can imagine no circumstances where somebody would be too ill to travel in comfort at a moderate speed on a luxury train, then immediately after well enough to travel in a rough, noisy and probably cramped helicopter. The advantage however is that it is very quick - so somebody with a long term condition is not away from treatment for long,
Perhaps we're having the ground prepared for an announcement about either her or Prince Philip.
Hopefully Charles had the good sense to abdicate to William quickly. He is a republican's best friend. I wouldn't be surprised to see Canada and Australia leave the realm under Charlie's watch. William would be unbelievably popular though, even more than the Queen.
I disagree. Charles may have some odd ideas and a messy love life but he is conscientious. Remember Edward VII was widely written off before he became King, but he worked hard, became if anything more popular than his mother and was very effective in some fields, especially in foreign affairs.
Well Charles has a lot to prove, I hope he is up to it as well.
Charles's biggest problem will be pretending he shares his mum's interest in horseracing for all five days of Royal Ascot.
I'm not so sure, racing apart and polo in Charles' case, he very much takes after his mother in having absolutely zero interest in sports generally.
At the 2015 local elections held on the same day as the general election, Labour didn't contest 7 of the 29 wards in the Copeland constituency. It must be relatively unusual for the party holding a seat not to contest that many wards.
Somebody was asking about Prince Charles being more visible on the last thread.
One way and another, the last few weeks has looked suspiciously like the start of a handing over process.
Which makes me wonder about this reported cold the Queen had. She was feeing unwell so decided not to make a medium length journey by train. OK, fair enough. But she was fit the following day to travel by helicopter? That really doesn't make sense to me. I can imagine no circumstances where somebody would be too ill to travel in comfort at a moderate speed on a luxury train, then immediately after well enough to travel in a rough, noisy and probably cramped helicopter. The advantage however is that it is very quick - so somebody with a long term condition is not away from treatment for long,
Perhaps we're having the ground prepared for an announcement about either her or Prince Philip.
Hopefully Charles had the good sense to abdicate to William quickly. He is a republican's best friend. I wouldn't be surprised to see Canada and Australia leave the realm under Charlie's watch. William would be unbelievably popular though, even more than the Queen.
I disagree. Charles may have some odd ideas and a messy love life but he is conscientious. Remember Edward VII was widely written off before he became King, but he worked hard, became if anything more popular than his mother and was very effective in some fields, especially in foreign affairs.
Well Charles has a lot to prove, I hope he is up to it as well.
Charles's biggest problem will be pretending he shares his mum's interest in horseracing for all five days of Royal Ascot.
I'm not so sure, racing apart and polo in Charles' case, he very much takes after his mother in having absolutely zero interest in sports generally.
Well, ever since royals were no longer allowed to hunt the most dangerous game, man, can any sport really compensate?
The catapult/not catapult messing around has already cost us a few billion. Given the cost and risk of the naval VTOL F35 variant, it was a stupid decision not to opt for catapult capacity, particularly as that would have significantly increased the range and effectiveness of the F35 (if we ever get it), and/or allowed for a dozen other options.
CATOBAR ops were never a viable option for the RN FAA as it triples the manning requirement of the air wing and the RN would have no way of qualifying pilots due a lack of a CATOBAR capable training aircraft.
"... hugely expensive (retrofitting moving cables and their power supply to the carriers to enable conventional aircraft to fly off them) or humiliating (buying back the Harriers we sold to the USMC!)."
If memory serves, when the Coalition first came to power they looked seriously at converting the two QE class ships, then just starting to be built, into proper Cats and Traps carriers. The ability to do so was in the original design spec but to save money it had been quietly forgotten. I can't remember all of the published details of the study but essentially it was decided to be impossible to do the conversion. The fitting of an angled deck, catapults, upgrading the power systems installing arrestor wires etc. would have meant a complete redesign of the ships. So massive costs, massive delays to ships that were already late (due MoD incompetence and Gordon Brown repeatedly cutting the budget) - the original plan was for at least the first of them to be in service in 2012.
To try and do such retro fitting now that the QE is in the water and about to start sea trials and the PoW nearing completion would be a complete non-starter.
The alternative of buying back the Harriers also wouldn't work. I don't think many of them still exist for a start (having been canibalised for spares) and in any case they were the ground attack variant and no damn use as fighters. So would provide no sea power or means of fleet defence. The Sea Harriers, which could do both as per the Falklands, were scrapped in 2006.
So if Trump does scrap the F35B we would be left with two massive, but defenceless, helicopter carriers, which we don't need and almost the entire warfighting capability of the RN would have been sacrificed to provide.
The moral of the story is not to try to build capability on the cheap. For some value of cheap. Given the price of the carriers and the aircraft to fly off them we probably would have been better off building proper carriers from the outset.
Real Donald Trump Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!
We are building two aircraft carriers. Unlike most other carriers they can only handle aircraft that can land vertically. The only two production fighter aircraft with that capability are the F35B and the Harrier variants. If Trump cancels the F35B (a variant of the F35) for shits and giggles then we will be left with our arse hanging in the wind.
Real Donald Trump Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!
We are building two aircraft carriers. Unlike most other carriers they can only handle aircraft that can land vertically. The only two production fighter aircraft with that capability are the F35B and the Harrier variants. If Trump cancels the F35B (a variant of the F35) for shits and giggles then we will be left with our arse hanging in the wind.
The only stipulations we made about the carriers was that they were to be built in Gordon Brown's constituency, and that construction was underway before the 2010 election!
The 2010- SDSR then had a number of conversations about whether we should fit them with 'cats and traps' that would allow conventional planes to fly from them, as well as the developmental F35Bs, eventually deciding that it wasn't worth the cost.
Fast forward six years, and the F35 project is more than $100bn (!) over budget and still not close to being operational. If the incoming President actually cancels the USAF order - rather than shout about procurement - then we are up the proverbial creek, md had better dust off the old Harrier plans as nothing else can fly from the carriers, retrofitting cats and traps to fly something like F18 is thought to be impossible as a bigger power plant would be needed.
John Redwood, sadly, does not understand what "WTO rules" means.
Whether or not he does understand them, I am interested to know where his argument falls down around his references to WTO rules?
Whereas I realise that you think Brexit is a good thing, you've got to admit that if it's reached the point of "it's OK: John Redwood has a plan", then things have gone horribly wrong...
No, not at all. It reminded me I used to read Redwood's blog quite regularly, and probably should do again. He writes very clearly and cogently on economic matters - though it has to be said he doesn't begin or end his blogs very well, they seem to just stop rather than conclude.
RCS dismissed his statements on WTO rules, but either didn't see or didn't wish to answer my follow up question about what Redwood actually said that was wrong, so as far as I am concerned Redwood's comments still stand.
As for it being a plan, it isn't a plan. It is an argument that Britain's negotiating position is strong, which as a net loser both in trade and in funding arrangements currently, should be obvious.
It is a great pity that Redwood isn't in the Government. It's one of the signs that her conversion to Brexit may be a facade in my opinion. Of the Brexiteers she has on board, I only really have time for Davis. Liam Fox is on his last chance and will never make serious waves. Boris' views flap about like a windsock and he depends on May entirely to keep him as Foreign Sec.
Real Donald Trump Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!
We are building two aircraft carriers. Unlike most other carriers they can only handle aircraft that can land vertically. The only two production fighter aircraft with that capability are the F35B and the Harrier variants. If Trump cancels the F35B (a variant of the F35) for shits and giggles then we will be left with our arse hanging in the wind.
The Harriers are obsolete, so pretty pointless getting them back. The catapult/not catapult messing around has already cost us a few billion. Given the cost and risk of the naval VTOL F35 variant, it was a stupid decision not to opt for catapult capacity, particularly as that would have significantly increased the range and effectiveness of the F35 (if we ever get it), and/or allowed for a dozen other options.
Defence procurement has been a mess for decades. (Don't get me started on our battlefield armoured capacity...) We ought to contract it out to the Swedish procurement agency, which is about as good as it gets.
The carriers and their capabilities are oft-visited topics on here. Like many things, it's all Labours fault. ?Hoon? said that they had decided to go without CATOBAR (catapult and traps), but the carriers were being designed so they could be retrofitted with them later.
Years later, when the F35B project looked risky, and the carriers had been designed, the coalition went to BAE and asked them to look into fitting CATOBAR. It turns out the requirement for retrofitting the equipment had not been worked on for years, and there were many issues. AIUI lack of electrical power, deck heights and available spaces were two major ones.
Real Donald Trump Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!
We are building two aircraft carriers. Unlike most other carriers they can only handle aircraft that can land vertically. The only two production fighter aircraft with that capability are the F35B and the Harrier variants. If Trump cancels the F35B (a variant of the F35) for shits and giggles then we will be left with our arse hanging in the wind.
I think you're making the classic error of taking Trump LITERALLY, not figuratively.
He's saying publicly that defence contractors are on warning to stop taking the piss.
It's an unfiltered shot at those who've used US tax payers as patsies to subsidise their other commercial contracts.
Look at the sentiment behind his tweets, not the literal words and you'll get it.
If the last 18 months have taught me anything, it's to take people seriously when they say what they are going to do.
And so take Trump seriously - not literally. It's very clear and has been for over a year how he uses language. Getting all humpy by taking him literally adds nothing, but makes the politically outraged feel better.
John Redwood, sadly, does not understand what "WTO rules" means.
Whether or not he does understand them, I am interested to know where his argument falls down around his references to WTO rules?
Whereas I realise that you think Brexit is a good thing, you've got to admit that if it's reached the point of "it's OK: John Redwood has a plan", then things have gone horribly wrong...
It's one of the signs that her conversion to Brexit may be a facade in my opinion.
That would depend on what you mean by facade I think. She was officially Remain and so publicly on the record that staying in would have been preferable, so unless she says she was lying or mistaken before, the only option open to her is to say she is committed to making Brexit the best Brexit there is, and we shall do fantastically, while conveniently not mentioning she apparently thought we'd do more fantastically within the EU. She's converted to Brexit happening, because it must for her politically let alone democracy, but that doesn't mean her official position from before has been repudiated.
The Harriers are obsolete, so pretty pointless getting them back....Defence procurement has been a mess for decades...We ought to contract it out to the Swedish procurement agency, which is about as good as it gets.
If we can't get F35B's, what's left? We going to start fitting Sidewinders and ASRAAMs to Merlins?
Pause
Thinks.
Can we do that? Use helicopters as air-to-air launching platforms?
Comments
Gillian and Niall keep diverting into weather stories whilst Adam wibbled about homeless statistics.
No mention of Malta hijacking at all bar a screen grab
They've lost the plot wholesale.
When QEII's time comes she's going to St George's Chapel, Windsor, with her father, mother & sister's ashes....
I disagree - William (and Harry for that matter) demonstrate distinct playboy characteristics, and appear to enjoy nothing better than mixing with showbiz and other assorted luvvies. That's not what being a senior member of the Royal Family is supposed to be all about.
UPDATE: Malta Airport closed. Inbounds holding or diverting to Palermo, Catania. Reports of '2 hijackers with grenades' | Pics: Sky News, RT https://t.co/ZCQJX5ZkOO
#Berlin attack suspect Anis Amri's escape route was via hi-speed train thru France to Turin then regional train to Milan. Stopped at 3am
Edit - He may have caught the train to Milan in France.
Not one to watch with the young kids!
Con 38% (+38%)
22% swing. Con gain the North!
More seriously, very unusual that the Tories didn't manage to put up candidates in 2015.
NB This is also an 14% swing from 2011, which was likewise a straight Lab-Con fight.
We managed to police the Olympics without any obvious hitch; we haven't suffered any 'spectaculars' in recent years; the effectiveness of armed police against a heavy goods vehicle incident in minimal.
Our resources are best kept in intelligence, which appears to be quite effective.
And as rcs points out, just having that extra capacity is likely to lead to accidents.
That the police force itself might have been run down too much in recent years, thanks to funding cuts, is another matter... a bit like the 'peace dividend'.
I see there was actually a thread on this very subject years ago!
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/12/20/what-will-be-the-regnal-name-of-the-next-king/
Use Kodi instead, streams perfectly on Android.
'2 people on board have been threatening to blow up the plane' - Magda Magri Naudi, Deputy Mayor for Lija, Malta https://t.co/9RgIoleEjI https://t.co/RMzJAn3ufc
:-)
If we start to insist on Monarchs being popular we would be well on our way to an elected presidency.
As an asids, I think Charles will be perfectly popular but have a different style. Nothing wrong with that.
I was once asked by a young nephew to read a motor magazine to him as his 'bedtime story' - I very quickly realised I'd have to do some robust Bowdlerisation as I went along as more than a few of the metaphors were inappropriate for a 6 year old.....
If it's good enough for Naboo, then it's good enough for you.
......And we understand him well,
How he comes o'er us with our wilder days,
Not measuring what use we made of them.
I'd presume they'd be hotter now than all those years ago.
The url speaks for itself. But note the final paragraph:
"Ukip is not the only threat in Labour heartlands, and the report’s conclusions also warns: “Urban Labour MPs should keep an eye on Lib Dems.” "
This is a warning urban Labour MPs would do well to heed. If there's one area where an SNP type of eruption could take place against Labour MPs, it's among super-disaffected Remainers.
Mr. Eagles, Naboo also had the gungans[sp].
Edited extra bit: Mr. Eagles, agree on May. Cards close to the chest makes sense, to the public, but not to HM.
It's the only one that doesn't work.
"Hotter now". I had no idea you had a thing for Swiss border guards.......
'The Queen and the duke were said to have been looking forward to hearing more about Mrs May’s thoughts on Brexit. This may have included insights into her selections for the cabinet, including the appointment of Boris Johnson as foreign secretary.
However, both were said to have been left disappointed, a source said.'
I wonder if Mrs May got star struck?
Or perhaps she doesn't have a clue apart from Brexit means Brexit.
In a galaxy far away
Naboo was under an attack
And I thought me and Qui-Gon Jinn
Could talk the Federation in-
To maybe cutting them a little slack
But their response it didn't thrill us
They locked the doors and tried to kill us
We escaped from that gas
And met Jar-Jar and Boss Nass
We took a bongo from the scene
And we went to Theed to see the Queen
We all wound up on Tattooine
That's where
We found
This boy
Oh, my, my this here Anakin guy
May be Vader some day later, now he's just a small fry
And he left his home and kissed his mommy goodbye
Saying soon I'm gonna be a Jedi
Soon I'm gonna be a Jedi...
It's one reason Renly Baratheon's reasoning for declaring himself king was so destructive to the system.
All the alternatives are hugely expensive (retrofitting moving cables and their power supply to the carriers to enable conventional aircraft to fly off them) or humiliating (buying back the Harriers we sold to the USMC!). It is bad enough we're running a taxi service for the US Marines but this would make things worse.
The police in Northern Ireland have been armed for many many years. And despite all the problems with policing in NI, one issue that hasn't come up is large numbers of the wrong people being shot during ordinary policing operations.
The biggest barrier to arming the police on the mainland is that it would involve arming non-"specialist armed police" - no exotic semi-special forces training. So it would mean that someone in authority would have to take responsibility for that.
Gideon too busy raking in the $$$ to brief his Times friends in a timely manner?
I think we should be told...
'You're late dear?
Yes, there was this Swiss Border Guard took the panels off my doors..."
He's saying publicly that defence contractors are on warning to stop taking the piss.
It's an unfiltered shot at those who've used US tax payers as patsies to subsidise their other commercial contracts.
Look at the sentiment behind his tweets, not the literal words and you'll get it.
Because I'm sick of all these George's and Edward's. And think of poor Henry's - they had before we had any george's, and none since. And what of Stephen? Doesn't sound like a kingly name at all they have avoided it ever since.
I'd go with Cnut, Aethelstan or something Scottish.
He spared the life of the very young hostage William Marshal. When King John finally did the decent thing and died, it was William Marshal that reconquered the half of England that had fallen to France.
Athelwulf sound's pretty cool. Mind you, the last King of York was Erik Bloodaxe.
Edited extra bit: sounds*.
I am now off to commit ritual suicide.
* The function of a police force[1] is to control people from this country without killing them.
[1] I know, I know, police service, whateva...
So he should go for King Mohammed
The catapult/not catapult messing around has already cost us a few billion. Given the cost and risk of the naval VTOL F35 variant, it was a stupid decision not to opt for catapult capacity, particularly as that would have significantly increased the range and effectiveness of the F35 (if we ever get it), and/or allowed for a dozen other options.
Defence procurement has been a mess for decades. (Don't get me started on our battlefield armoured capacity...) We ought to contract it out to the Swedish procurement agency, which is about as good as it gets.
Its STOVL or nothing for UK fixed wing naval air.
"... hugely expensive (retrofitting moving cables and their power supply to the carriers to enable conventional aircraft to fly off them) or humiliating (buying back the Harriers we sold to the USMC!)."
If memory serves, when the Coalition first came to power they looked seriously at converting the two QE class ships, then just starting to be built, into proper Cats and Traps carriers. The ability to do so was in the original design spec but to save money it had been quietly forgotten. I can't remember all of the published details of the study but essentially it was decided to be impossible to do the conversion. The fitting of an angled deck, catapults, upgrading the power systems installing arrestor wires etc. would have meant a complete redesign of the ships. So massive costs, massive delays to ships that were already late (due MoD incompetence and Gordon Brown repeatedly cutting the budget) - the original plan was for at least the first of them to be in service in 2012.
To try and do such retro fitting now that the QE is in the water and about to start sea trials and the PoW nearing completion would be a complete non-starter.
The alternative of buying back the Harriers also wouldn't work. I don't think many of them still exist for a start (having been canibalised for spares) and in any case they were the ground attack variant and no damn use as fighters. So would provide no sea power or means of fleet defence. The Sea Harriers, which could do both as per the Falklands, were scrapped in 2006.
So if Trump does scrap the F35B we would be left with two massive, but defenceless, helicopter carriers, which we don't need and almost the entire warfighting capability of the RN would have been sacrificed to provide.
The moral of the story is not to try to build capability on the cheap. For some value of cheap. Given the price of the carriers and the aircraft to fly off them we probably would have been better off building proper carriers from the outset.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqzdd8RUbIs
The 2010- SDSR then had a number of conversations about whether we should fit them with 'cats and traps' that would allow conventional planes to fly from them, as well as the developmental F35Bs, eventually deciding that it wasn't worth the cost.
Fast forward six years, and the F35 project is more than $100bn (!) over budget and still not close to being operational. If the incoming President actually cancels the USAF order - rather than shout about procurement - then we are up the proverbial creek, md had better dust off the old Harrier plans as nothing else can fly from the carriers, retrofitting cats and traps to fly something like F18 is thought to be impossible as a bigger power plant would be needed.
It's a big bloody mess!
"I want to do something about Europe before I go"
Twas ever thus.
RCS dismissed his statements on WTO rules, but either didn't see or didn't wish to answer my follow up question about what Redwood actually said that was wrong, so as far as I am concerned Redwood's comments still stand.
As for it being a plan, it isn't a plan. It is an argument that Britain's negotiating position is strong, which as a net loser both in trade and in funding arrangements currently, should be obvious.
It is a great pity that Redwood isn't in the Government. It's one of the signs that her conversion to Brexit may be a facade in my opinion. Of the Brexiteers she has on board, I only really have time for Davis. Liam Fox is on his last chance and will never make serious waves. Boris' views flap about like a windsock and he depends on May entirely to keep him as Foreign Sec.
Years later, when the F35B project looked risky, and the carriers had been designed, the coalition went to BAE and asked them to look into fitting CATOBAR. It turns out the requirement for retrofitting the equipment had not been worked on for years, and there were many issues. AIUI lack of electrical power, deck heights and available spaces were two major ones.
Hoon really was disastrous for the military.
I'd prefer something a bit more traditional like Wulfgar, Gorfydydd, or Boroncinus.
AFP
Anis Amri: small-time criminal turned Berlin truck killer, believed to have been radicalised in an Italian prison https://t.co/10hPmmlkDI https://t.co/tsbzQunCXD
Pause
Thinks.
Can we do that? Use helicopters as air-to-air launching platforms?
Fun fact, my original attempt at spelling Prasutargus - Prasatargus, I was autocorrected to Taramasalata. But Prasutargus suggests Outargues.