Howdy, Stranger!

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

Our first taste of a packed House of Commons for 17 months – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited August 18 in General
imageOur first taste of a packed House of Commons for 17 months – politicalbetting.com

This morning’s emergency debate on Afghanistan is the first time that we have seen a largely packed House of Commons since the first lockdown came into force in March last year and it has been a big reminder of how abnormal politics has been.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 6,961
    Test
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,461
    Even if one doesn't agree with Tugendhat, it was a powerful speech of the type that HoC sees so rarely in modern times.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 46,227
    I have just returned home and agree with the thread 100%
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,402
    FPT:

    What would the vote be on

    Rt Hon Tobias Ellwood MP (Bournemouth East, Conservative) Regrets there will not be a vote in the House today because he believes the government would not have the support of the house.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,936
    Pulpstar said:

    FPT:

    What would the vote be on

    Rt Hon Tobias Ellwood MP (Bournemouth East, Conservative) Regrets there will not be a vote in the House today because he believes the government would not have the support of the house.

    That the House Support's the government's policy on Afghanistan
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,376
    Tugendhat was excellent as is Ellwood now.

    Meanwhile Biden's approval rating has plunged to just 46%
    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-approval-drops-lowest-level-this-year-after-taliban-takeover-2021-08-17/
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,936
    dixiedean said:

    Pulpstar said:

    FPT:

    What would the vote be on

    Rt Hon Tobias Ellwood MP (Bournemouth East, Conservative) Regrets there will not be a vote in the House today because he believes the government would not have the support of the house.

    That the House Support's the government's policy on Afghanistan
    Which is?
    Good question - which is why it would deserve to fail in a vote.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 651
    HYUFD said:

    Tugendhat was excellent as is Ellwood now.

    Meanwhile Biden's approval rating has plunged to just 46%
    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-approval-drops-lowest-level-this-year-after-taliban-takeover-2021-08-17/

    Swayne is a national disgrace, though.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,925
    Good to see a packed house again, while at the same time sad for the reasons they’ve had to reconvene, and not really sure what’s hoped to be achieved.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 2,806
    HYUFD said:

    Tugendhat was excellent as is Ellwood now.

    Meanwhile Biden's approval rating has plunged to just 46%
    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-approval-drops-lowest-level-this-year-after-taliban-takeover-2021-08-17/

    The astonishing thing (from that report) is how many Americans have a positive view of Biden's and his predecessors' handling of Afghanistan: 44% for Biden; 51% for Trump and Obama and even 47% for Bush!
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,936
    mwadams said:

    HYUFD said:

    Tugendhat was excellent as is Ellwood now.

    Meanwhile Biden's approval rating has plunged to just 46%
    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-approval-drops-lowest-level-this-year-after-taliban-takeover-2021-08-17/

    Swayne is a national disgrace, though.
    Redwood got put back in his box by May too.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 15,403
    Burnham on radio calling for all LA's to take their share of refugees. Not just cities.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,893
    Anybody backing Tugendhat for tory leader is throwing their money away. A Remainer who is also a French citizen? No fucking chance.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,742
    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 46,227
    dixiedean said:

    Burnham on radio calling for all LA's to take their share of refugees. Not just cities.

    I agree
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 1,498
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    We quite evidently have no foreign policy independent of the US. US leaves Afghanistan - we follow.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 13,999
    dixiedean said:

    Pulpstar said:

    FPT:

    What would the vote be on

    Rt Hon Tobias Ellwood MP (Bournemouth East, Conservative) Regrets there will not be a vote in the House today because he believes the government would not have the support of the house.

    That the House Support's the government's policy on Afghanistan
    Which is?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8IkbCeZ9to
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884
    edited August 18
    dixiedean said:

    Pulpstar said:

    FPT:

    What would the vote be on

    Rt Hon Tobias Ellwood MP (Bournemouth East, Conservative) Regrets there will not be a vote in the House today because he believes the government would not have the support of the house.

    That the House Support's the government's policy on Afghanistan
    Which is?
    LOL absolutely.

    It is a fiction. We are trying to make ourselves feel better.

    There are several to blame.

    1. The politicians at the time (2006) who wanted to go in.
    2. The Generals who agreed and set out a wholly unrealistic plan - under-resourced and under-equipped.

    The only group that comes out well is the soldiers, sailors and (I suppose !!!) airmen whose stubborn courage and commitment did much to mask the shocking decisions at the theatre and strategic level.

    For most of the campaign and in the hotspot outposts we were just a self-licking lollipop.

    Of course interested to hear @Dura's view.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,742

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    We quite evidently have no foreign policy independent of the US. US leaves Afghanistan - we follow.
    Well it was inevitable. Our role in Afghanistan was as a support player. We simply don't have the means to take over the role of the US. It would need a tripling or quadrupling of the current defence budget and at least 4-6 years of that to reverse the damage of the last 25 years of defence cuts. Who is going to pay for it?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,637

    dixiedean said:

    Burnham on radio calling for all LA's to take their share of refugees. Not just cities.

    I agree
    Although I have been critical of HYUFD's excitable commentary over the last few days, he has made a valid point on AQ arriving via the Trojan Horse of Afghan asylum applications.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,893



    We quite evidently have no foreign policy independent of the US. US leaves Afghanistan - we follow.

    No European nation has strategic autonomy in NATO. That's trade off for having their defence capabilities massively subsidised by the US tax payer.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,936
    Johnny Mercer going for the jugular on government support for veterans.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,402

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    We quite evidently have no foreign policy independent of the US. US leaves Afghanistan - we follow.
    Well yes, our role in the middle east for the past 30 years, if not longer has been to support the USA there. It'd be lunacy to remain somewhere without them.

    The question we need to ask ourselves is do we head in with them in the first place next time they fancy another foreign adventure, not whether or not we come out when they do - it'd be the geopolitics of the madhouse to not follow them out when they leave anywhere.

    Should we follow Russia in on their Syrian sojourn, or the French and Germans into - well that issue never really arises...
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 5,162
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884
    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    Exactly. And *spoilers* - no we aren't. It is a bizarre fiction.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,742

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
    Well I'd imagine a big chunk of the budget increase would go on salary increases so recruits were easier to find.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 5,279
    The Tory government is a disgrace. Floundering about like fish out of water. Just embarrassing to see the low quality of the Con front bench. Most of them would barely have made junior ministerial level in Thatcher’s ministries.

    There was a real sense of the House v HMG.
  • FossFoss Posts: 437
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    We quite evidently have no foreign policy independent of the US. US leaves Afghanistan - we follow.
    Well it was inevitable. Our role in Afghanistan was as a support player. We simply don't have the means to take over the role of the US. It would need a tripling or quadrupling of the current defence budget and at least 4-6 years of that to reverse the damage of the last 25 years of defence cuts. Who is going to pay for it?
    More importantly, who's going to go? Does anyone actually think there are 100,000 more young men itching to stand around in the Middle East for a couple years getting shot at, all the while knowing that their future sons (and possibly grandsons) will have to do the same just because the locals cannot be trusted not to go nuts as soon as the UK's back is turned?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884

    dixiedean said:

    Burnham on radio calling for all LA's to take their share of refugees. Not just cities.

    I agree
    Although I have been critical of HYUFD's excitable commentary over the last few days, he has made a valid point on AQ arriving via the Trojan Horse of Afghan asylum applications.
    Mate they can arrive on the 12.46 Luton- London Kings Cross. I wouldn't over worry.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 8,811
    Wow there's a lot of rightly deeply upset MPs here. Rightly so. Government getting a huge kicking.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 1,498
    Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."

    Exactly
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 2,142
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    We quite evidently have no foreign policy independent of the US. US leaves Afghanistan - we follow.
    Well it was inevitable. Our role in Afghanistan was as a support player. We simply don't have the means to take over the role of the US. It would need a tripling or quadrupling of the current defence budget and at least 4-6 years of that to reverse the damage of the last 25 years of defence cuts. Who is going to pay for it?
    Thats the bit i don't get, what do people think the UK could have done with America leaving?

    As Russia showed in the early 80's you cannot win a war in Afghanistan, you can have 100,000s of troops there keeping a form of peace but.that cannot be a long term solution. I have seen much criticism everywhere of the withdrawal but no ideas for a decent future for Afghanistan.

    The lack of defence against the Taliban from a well funded and resourced Afghan Army just showed that there heart was not in it.

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,637

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
    Reintroducing mandatory conscription for young people would be a massive vote winner for Boris, enthusing those ageing Tory voters who were unfortunate enough to miss out on their own National Service after it was curtailed in 1960.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 68,402

    Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."

    Exactly

    The current geopolitical reality.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,704
    Sandpit said:

    Good to see a packed house again, while at the same time sad for the reasons they’ve had to reconvene, and not really sure what’s hoped to be achieved.

    Sometimes railing futilely at the darkness is a necessary release.

    For the government it knows this is a catastrophe, and taking the hits in the chamber is the least it can do.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884

    Wow there's a lot of rightly deeply upset MPs here. Rightly so. Government getting a huge kicking.

    Why are they getting a kicking and why rightly?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 13,999

    Johnny Mercer going for the jugular on government support for veterans.

    Johnson sacked this former Afghanistan veteran by text for his temerity in holding the Liar and his government to its word on the treatment of ex-servicemen and women.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,936
    Interesting......

    There can be a vote. The @HouseofCommons cannot amend this motion to commit to something but MPs can force a division (vote) to demonstrate whether or not the govt has the support of the House. MPs who feel like @Tobias_Ellwood could then express their view. Lets see at 5pm...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,704

    dixiedean said:

    Burnham on radio calling for all LA's to take their share of refugees. Not just cities.

    I agree
    I do too, though it never works out that way, and whilst the desperate cannot be choosers some may not want placement in some areas, and clustering to some degree may be beneficial.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,637
    TOPPING said:

    dixiedean said:

    Burnham on radio calling for all LA's to take their share of refugees. Not just cities.

    I agree
    Although I have been critical of HYUFD's excitable commentary over the last few days, he has made a valid point on AQ arriving via the Trojan Horse of Afghan asylum applications.
    Mate they can arrive on the 12.46 Luton- London Kings Cross. I wouldn't over worry.
    I do worry. HYUFD has sent me all Priti Patel over this issue.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,449
    edited August 18

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
    Reintroducing mandatory conscription for young people would be a massive vote winner for Boris, enthusing those ageing Tory voters who were unfortunate enough to miss out on their own National Service after it was curtailed in 1960.

    And yet the forces would not be happy. They were very glad to see it go. Not worth training someone if he or she is going to sod off in 2 years after entry (3 years for RN I think it was, but I may be wrong).

    Edit: I do know (?) you are being ironic - but it is worth considering all the same in the current discussion.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 13,999
    TOPPING said:

    Wow there's a lot of rightly deeply upset MPs here. Rightly so. Government getting a huge kicking.

    Why are they getting a kicking and why rightly?
    Why do you think?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,449

    Interesting......

    There can be a vote. The @HouseofCommons cannot amend this motion to commit to something but MPs can force a division (vote) to demonstrate whether or not the govt has the support of the House. MPs who feel like @Tobias_Ellwood could then express their view. Lets see at 5pm...

    Thanks - I was just about to ask you on that very point.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,637
    Carnyx said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
    Reintroducing mandatory conscription for young people would be a massive vote winner for Boris, enthusing those ageing Tory voters who were unfortunate enough to miss out on their own National Service after it was curtailed in 1960.

    And yet the forces would not be happy. They were very glad to see it go. Not worth training someone if he or she is going to sod off in 2 years after entry (3 years for RN I think it was, but I may be wrong).
    Tory political gold dust though, just like hanging and flogging.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884
    Foss said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    We quite evidently have no foreign policy independent of the US. US leaves Afghanistan - we follow.
    Well it was inevitable. Our role in Afghanistan was as a support player. We simply don't have the means to take over the role of the US. It would need a tripling or quadrupling of the current defence budget and at least 4-6 years of that to reverse the damage of the last 25 years of defence cuts. Who is going to pay for it?
    More importantly, who's going to go? Does anyone actually think there are 100,000 more young men itching to stand around in the Middle East for a couple years getting shot at, all the while knowing that their future sons (and possibly grandsons) will have to do the same just because the locals cannot be trusted not to go nuts as soon as the UK's back is turned?
    Or even when it is not turned.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13473534.amp

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 20,675
    Interesting that some people who defend Biden are happy to pile into Johnson (and, yes, vice versa).

    Not seen Blair on TV recently.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,936

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    We quite evidently have no foreign policy independent of the US. US leaves Afghanistan - we follow.
    Well it was inevitable. Our role in Afghanistan was as a support player. We simply don't have the means to take over the role of the US. It would need a tripling or quadrupling of the current defence budget and at least 4-6 years of that to reverse the damage of the last 25 years of defence cuts. Who is going to pay for it?
    Thats the bit i don't get, what do people think the UK could have done with America leaving?

    As Russia showed in the early 80's you cannot win a war in Afghanistan, you can have 100,000s of troops there keeping a form of peace but.that cannot be a long term solution. I have seen much criticism everywhere of the withdrawal but no ideas for a decent future for Afghanistan.

    The lack of defence against the Taliban from a well funded and resourced Afghan Army just showed that there heart was not in it.

    According to Alicia Kearns MP (Rutland and Melton, Conservative) the UK's attempt to form a "coalition of the willing" foundered when only Turkey in NATO was willing to participate.

    After that, the UK could have done what France did and organise evacuation from July, not scrambling to do it now.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 1,003
    Pulpstar said:

    Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."

    Exactly

    The current geopolitical reality.
    At the end of the day only the USA has the will and the resources to do anything serious about "out of area" interventions. The UK can, and sometimes does, support but obviously we cant act unilaterally, and trying to get EU members to do anything is like herding cats.

    So far as the Conservative Party is concerned this episode has destroyed any lingering hopes that Raab may have had of reaching the top of the greasy pole and reduced any slack that members may have been prepared to grant Boris in the future. Antagonising traditional Tory supporters who have a lot of respect for people like Tugendhat and Mercer is not a good look.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 5,279
    Dura_Ace said:

    Anybody backing Tugendhat for tory leader is throwing their money away. A Remainer who is also a French citizen? No fucking chance.

    Next con leader

    Sunak 2/1
    Gove 8/1
    Hunt 16/1
    Javid 16/1
    Raab 16/1
    Patel 20/1
    Dowden 33/1
    Truss 33/1
    Tugendhat 33/1
    Mordaunt 35/1
    55 bar
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 2,142

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    We quite evidently have no foreign policy independent of the US. US leaves Afghanistan - we follow.
    Well it was inevitable. Our role in Afghanistan was as a support player. We simply don't have the means to take over the role of the US. It would need a tripling or quadrupling of the current defence budget and at least 4-6 years of that to reverse the damage of the last 25 years of defence cuts. Who is going to pay for it?
    Thats the bit i don't get, what do people think the UK could have done with America leaving?

    As Russia showed in the early 80's you cannot win a war in Afghanistan, you can have 100,000s of troops there keeping a form of peace but.that cannot be a long term solution. I have seen much criticism everywhere of the withdrawal but no ideas for a decent future for Afghanistan.

    The lack of defence against the Taliban from a well funded and resourced Afghan Army just showed that there heart was not in it.

    According to Alicia Kearns MP (Rutland and Melton, Conservative) the UK's attempt to form a "coalition of the willing" foundered when only Turkey in NATO was willing to participate.

    After that, the UK could have done what France did and organise evacuation from July, not scrambling to do it now.
    So handled the evacuation better?

  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 1,668

    Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."

    Exactly

    Has that not been true for about 80 years? What should we plan to do about it? Complaining about the reality is pointless.

    If there was an EU army (ha!), would it want to fight in Afghanistan, and would it be effective? I'm guessing not.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,936
    Carnyx said:

    Interesting......

    There can be a vote. The @HouseofCommons cannot amend this motion to commit to something but MPs can force a division (vote) to demonstrate whether or not the govt has the support of the House. MPs who feel like @Tobias_Ellwood could then express their view. Lets see at 5pm...

    Thanks - I was just about to ask you on that very point.
    Missed the link:

    https://twitter.com/RuthFox01/status/1427945817759957001?s=20

    Tweet from: Director of @HansardSociety
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,461

    Dura_Ace said:

    Anybody backing Tugendhat for tory leader is throwing their money away. A Remainer who is also a French citizen? No fucking chance.

    Next con leader

    Sunak 2/1
    Gove 8/1
    Hunt 16/1
    Javid 16/1
    Raab 16/1
    Patel 20/1
    Dowden 33/1
    Truss 33/1
    Tugendhat 33/1
    Mordaunt 35/1
    55 bar
    At this stage I see Tugendhat as a trading bet.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 1,003

    Dura_Ace said:

    Anybody backing Tugendhat for tory leader is throwing their money away. A Remainer who is also a French citizen? No fucking chance.

    Next con leader

    Sunak 2/1
    Gove 8/1
    Hunt 16/1
    Javid 16/1
    Raab 16/1
    Patel 20/1
    Dowden 33/1
    Truss 33/1
    Tugendhat 33/1
    Mordaunt 35/1
    55 bar
    Penny Mordaunt's odds should be shorter. She is the obvious alternative to Rishi should he stumble.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,936
    edited August 18
    Thread:
    There’s a lot of criticism of Parliament’s #Afghanistan debate recall - of the too little, too late, what’s the point variety. But a lot of this criticism fails to reflect Parliament's purpose and range of functions.....

    Today the reputation of politicians is rarely built solely on the basis of their command of the @UKHouseofCommons chamber. But perform badly - fail to rise to the occasion - and reputations can be badly damaged.

    The debate is an opportunity for MPs - and the wider public here and internationally - to get some clarity - or not - about the situation on the ground in Afghanistan, about the UK govt's response to the humanitarian situation, and for refugee asylum plans.....

    Our model is far from perfect but because of this recall the Prime Minister has to come before MPs and account for his govt’s policy. I haven't seen much evidence of other parliament’s in coalition nations involved in Afghanistan holding their govt's to account this week.


    https://twitter.com/RuthFox01/status/1427928965570777090?s=20
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 4,768
    edited August 18

    Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."

    Exactly

    Has that not been true for about 80 years? What should we plan to do about it? Complaining about the reality is pointless.

    If there was an EU army (ha!), would it want to fight in Afghanistan, and would it be effective? I'm guessing not.
    The only way we'll ever have any relatively independent military say again is as part of an organisation like that. It doesn't have to be in the EU, although we haven't done ourselves any favours whatsoever to make it more likely by leaving it.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 5,279

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
    One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,925

    Dura_Ace said:

    Anybody backing Tugendhat for tory leader is throwing their money away. A Remainer who is also a French citizen? No fucking chance.

    Next con leader

    Sunak 2/1
    Gove 8/1
    Hunt 16/1
    Javid 16/1
    Raab 16/1
    Patel 20/1
    Dowden 33/1
    Truss 33/1
    Tugendhat 33/1
    Mordaunt 35/1
    55 bar
    Penny Mordaunt's odds should be shorter. She is the obvious alternative to Rishi should he stumble.
    Was just thinking the same. Also Liz Truss, if Sunak or Raab need replacing. She’s been doing a great job at Trade though, would be a shame for her to lose that role.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 4,437

    Dura_Ace said:

    Anybody backing Tugendhat for tory leader is throwing their money away. A Remainer who is also a French citizen? No fucking chance.

    Next con leader

    Sunak 2/1
    Gove 8/1
    Hunt 16/1
    Javid 16/1
    Raab 16/1
    Patel 20/1
    Dowden 33/1
    Truss 33/1
    Tugendhat 33/1
    Mordaunt 35/1
    55 bar
    Ones I definitely don't want to see in that role are: Gove, Raab, and Patel.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    Wow there's a lot of rightly deeply upset MPs here. Rightly so. Government getting a huge kicking.

    Think this is all about Afghanistan? Or a wider frustration?
  • isamisam Posts: 38,441
    edited August 18

    Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."

    Exactly

    Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!

    https://youtu.be/ABhZQ_VRbsQ
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884

    TOPPING said:

    Wow there's a lot of rightly deeply upset MPs here. Rightly so. Government getting a huge kicking.

    Why are they getting a kicking and why rightly?
    Why do you think?
    No idea.

    Veterans support? The government could and should do a shit lot more.

    But why is the debate now and not months/years ago?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,194
    Via Telegraph

    What a cluster ...

    "US troops turned away Dutch embassy workers and translators despite being cleared for evacuation and having an aircraft waiting for them on the tarmac

    "It's awful. Many were there at the gates of the airport with their families," Sigrid Kaag, the Dutch foreign minister, told the Dutch news agency ANP.

    The Netherlands aims to get up to 1,000 local embassy workers, translators and their families out of the country.

    Kaag said U.S. armed forces securing the airport did not allow any Afghans to enter the gates even if they had the right credentials.

    The military aircraft, which was operated by the Dutch together with other northern European countries and was only on the runway for about half an hour, left Kabul without any people destined for the Netherlands. "
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,637
    .

    Dura_Ace said:

    Anybody backing Tugendhat for tory leader is throwing their money away. A Remainer who is also a French citizen? No fucking chance.

    Next con leader

    Sunak 2/1
    Gove 8/1
    Hunt 16/1
    Javid 16/1
    Raab 16/1
    Patel 20/1
    Dowden 33/1
    Truss 33/1
    Tugendhat 33/1
    Mordaunt 35/1
    55 bar
    Surely Dowden is a comedy entry?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,449

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
    One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
    Like what happened to the Glosters in Korea: many conscripts there.

    But the disadvantage is the disproportionate impact on the poor and non-criminal of society (the powerful can evade, or get cushy numbers, and the criminals get rejected).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,376

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
    One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
    Conscription is pointless and weakens the effectiveness of a professional army in most deployments.

    The only time you might need conscription is if you are at war with an enemy with a huge number of troops itself eg in WW2 when we needed it to fight Nazi Germany or if we ever went to war with Russia or China which is unlikely
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,449

    Wow there's a lot of rightly deeply upset MPs here. Rightly so. Government getting a huge kicking.

    Think this is all about Afghanistan? Or a wider frustration?
    A Tory-acceptable or Tory-inescapable reason to get rid of Mr Johnson before things get even more serious?
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 1,498
    isam said:

    Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."

    Exactly

    Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!

    https://youtu.be/ABhZQ_VRbsQ
    I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.

    If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,936
    edited August 18
    It's a genuine wonder why the SNP fail to attract any corporate donations.

    With financial genius like this you'd have thought they'd be falling over themselves to gain a foothold.

    NEW: Kate Forbes says the record £36bn deficit is "not an obstacle" to independence.


    https://twitter.com/BrianSpanner1/status/1427954463562772485?s=20

    Kate Forbes: record deficits 'strengthens' case for independence

    https://twitter.com/HTScotPol/status/1427955563044954115?s=20
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    Carnyx said:

    Wow there's a lot of rightly deeply upset MPs here. Rightly so. Government getting a huge kicking.

    Think this is all about Afghanistan? Or a wider frustration?
    A Tory-acceptable or Tory-inescapable reason to get rid of Mr Johnson before things get even more serious?
    Interesting theory. Whatever the reason this is far less comfortable for Johnson than he thought it might be, judging by his expression!
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 3,858
    TOPPING said:

    Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."

    Exactly

    Are people really waking up to this transparent truth just now?

    Jeez.
    I'm a bit concerned that the people who apparently did not realise this includes a recent former Prime Minister of this country.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 2,142
    HYUFD said:
    So why did the Afghan Army with all their equipment and training just let the Taliban in? Surely it is their role to protect their women from the Taliban?
  • isamisam Posts: 38,441
    edited August 18

    isam said:

    Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."

    Exactly

    Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!

    https://youtu.be/ABhZQ_VRbsQ
    I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.

    If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
    We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out of this is that people will realise now
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 13,999
    Fascinating debate so far. An absolute pile-on against the government with a side-order of Biden outrage (with only Theresa May pulling it back to Trump).

    If you are a government whip are you now trying to get one of the new pliant MPs to stand up and say some vacuous shit in favour of Raab doing bugger all from his beach towel until it was too late?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,449

    Carnyx said:

    Wow there's a lot of rightly deeply upset MPs here. Rightly so. Government getting a huge kicking.

    Think this is all about Afghanistan? Or a wider frustration?
    A Tory-acceptable or Tory-inescapable reason to get rid of Mr Johnson before things get even more serious?
    Interesting theory. Whatever the reason this is far less comfortable for Johnson than he thought it might be, judging by his expression!
    There's such a thing as a scapegoat - but there is also such a thing as using an event to pile all the blame for other events on: a sort of scapegoat event, if you like. It'll be interestding to see if there is a motion today.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 1,003

    It's a genuine wonder why the SNP fail to attract any corporate donations.

    With financial genius like this you'd have thought they'd be falling over themselves to gain a foothold.

    NEW: Kate Forbes says the record £36bn deficit is "not an obstacle" to independence.


    https://twitter.com/BrianSpanner1/status/1427954463562772485?s=20

    Kate Forbes: record deficits 'strengthens' case for independence

    https://twitter.com/HTScotPol/status/1427955563044954115?s=20

    The SNP's abandonment of the oil and gas sector, plus this, completely kills off any kind of economic case for Indy. It really is dead as a dodo. Attempting to engineer a deal with the Scottish Greens is just hammering a few more nails into the coffin.

    For me, the interesting thing is how long Nicola hangs on, and how resilient the SNP vote will be after she departs.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 1,498
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."

    Exactly

    Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!

    https://youtu.be/ABhZQ_VRbsQ
    I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.

    If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
    We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
    I hope so..
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 46,227
    Inflation at 2% in July and in line with BOE forecast
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,893
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
    Well I'd imagine a big chunk of the budget increase would go on salary increases so recruits were easier to find.
    The forces have a retention problem not a recruitment problem. Until the government have a more people focused and modern view of service personnel that is not going to change. The USAF recently redesigned their flying training program and one of the key drivers was to minimise the amount of times the trainees have to relocate themselves and their families. Unfortunately that type of thinking is still utterly alien to the MoD.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 30,177
    Carnyx said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
    One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
    Like what happened to the Glosters in Korea: many conscripts there.

    But the disadvantage is the disproportionate impact on the poor and non-criminal of society (the powerful can evade, or get cushy numbers, and the criminals get rejected).
    My dad was a lieutenant>captain (volunteered) in the Glosters for Korea. I never asked him but I assume that the Glosters was the catch all unit for anyone wanting to sign up for that conflict?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,194
    A moving speech listened to respectfully by all sides of the house

    https://order-order.com/2021/08/18/tugendhat-applauded-for-emotional-speech-on-afghanistan/
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 1,003
    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Anybody backing Tugendhat for tory leader is throwing their money away. A Remainer who is also a French citizen? No fucking chance.

    Next con leader

    Sunak 2/1
    Gove 8/1
    Hunt 16/1
    Javid 16/1
    Raab 16/1
    Patel 20/1
    Dowden 33/1
    Truss 33/1
    Tugendhat 33/1
    Mordaunt 35/1
    55 bar
    Penny Mordaunt's odds should be shorter. She is the obvious alternative to Rishi should he stumble.
    Was just thinking the same. Also Liz Truss, if Sunak or Raab need replacing. She’s been doing a great job at Trade though, would be a shame for her to lose that role.
    She's certainly a possible Chancellor but not leader.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 46,227

    It's a genuine wonder why the SNP fail to attract any corporate donations.

    With financial genius like this you'd have thought they'd be falling over themselves to gain a foothold.

    NEW: Kate Forbes says the record £36bn deficit is "not an obstacle" to independence.


    https://twitter.com/BrianSpanner1/status/1427954463562772485?s=20

    Kate Forbes: record deficits 'strengthens' case for independence

    https://twitter.com/HTScotPol/status/1427955563044954115?s=20

    The SNP's abandonment of the oil and gas sector, plus this, completely kills off any kind of economic case for Indy. It really is dead as a dodo. Attempting to engineer a deal with the Scottish Greens is just hammering a few more nails into the coffin.

    For me, the interesting thing is how long Nicola hangs on, and how resilient the SNP vote will be after she departs.
    And of course business investment will be hard to find due to years of uncertain constitutional arguments
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 13,999
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Buried in that gem of a @theresa_may speech, this line... Not from Macron. From the last British PM. "What does it say about us, what does it say about NATO if we are entirely dependent on a unilateral decision taken by the United States."

    Exactly

    Couldn’t that have been said that at anytime in the last 70 years? George Michael wrote a song about it in 2002!

    https://youtu.be/ABhZQ_VRbsQ
    I think in terms of it being so blatantly obvious, no. We’ve tended to go along in lock step - this is the first incident I can recall where we’ve been quite so let down by an action that seems to have been made in total isolation by the USA.

    If the USA is unable to work multilaterally, then that signals the end of the golden period for USA dominance. It cannot act unilaterally without consequence any longer.
    We have been insignificant lapdogs to the US for generations, militarily. Maybe one good thing to come out if this is that people will realise that now
    "But the special relationship". America has been increasingly bonkers for a good while and is now deep into a cultural civil war with the lunatics desperate for Gilead.

    One of the positive things being advocated by Brexiteers is the proposed CANZUK group. It will do sod all to replace trade lost locally, but strategically it could be an alternative to an America-led world where America first really means shitkickers first and try to stop half of America from voting.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,782

    Wow there's a lot of rightly deeply upset MPs here. Rightly so. Government getting a huge kicking.

    There's nothing our government could have done about a US decision. Ridiculous for them to get upset at the government.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884
    Dura_Ace said:

    TOPPING said:



    Of course interested to hear @Dura's view.

    I never actually set foot in Afghanistan and my campaign was over by the end of 2001. We were relieved on station by the Stennis on 15th December and were in Singapore by Christmas. One night after the watershed, we'll swing the lamps and I'll tell the tale of Christmas Eve on Orchard Road in the "Four Floors of W****s".

    I know a few comrades who saw plenty of contact at Tarin Kowt and Helmand. My impression from them was that it was a slow motion Basra with unreliable allies in the local forces, where the objectives became diffuse and taking casualties was a severely career limiting move for any CO. There were the usual issues that are endemic to any lengthy overseas deployment of British forces of inadequate equipment, etc. There simply was no strategy beyond being there even though there was little to be achieved because withdrawal, as we have seen, is politically difficult.

    Yesterday somebody asked me if I were (subjunctive mood, statement contrary to fact) bitter about my involvement given the tragic outcome. I had to answer frankly that I was not. At the time, although I did not realise it, I was I at my mental and physical peak as an aviator. I was surrounded by a formidable team of warriors on the USN VF squadron with which I was exchanged and the whole experience was just incredible.
    Thanks v interesting. Flawless grammar with notes also so a real boon.

    My time ended a while before yours and was not kinetic a la Iraq and Afghan. But absolutely - people join HMF not just to ski/mountaineer/play rugby. They join to soldier and to do what you are paid to do. I loved my time whether in Cancun on a break from Belize or patrolling over the cuds in Co Fermanagh, etc, when it was quite busy in the Six Counties.

    That said the govt does need to help those who have been badly affected whether physically or mentally, and "The Generals" (some friends) were nearly criminally culpable for their use it or lose it glory land grab when the politicians asked.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 46,227

    Fascinating debate so far. An absolute pile-on against the government with a side-order of Biden outrage (with only Theresa May pulling it back to Trump).

    If you are a government whip are you now trying to get one of the new pliant MPs to stand up and say some vacuous shit in favour of Raab doing bugger all from his beach towel until it was too late?

    And of course Biden was also on holiday and appeared even later than Raab
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 2,142
    Andy_JS said:

    Wow there's a lot of rightly deeply upset MPs here. Rightly so. Government getting a huge kicking.

    There's nothing our government could have done about a US decision. Ridiculous for them to get upset at the government.
    Exactly!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,925
    To lighten the mood a little, apparently our favourite student *anker on “holiday” in the ‘Stan, is upset that the British government have transported him to the nearest safe country and told him he’s on his own, that the charter flights onward to the UK are for diplomats and refugees.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9901167/British-student-21-shares-video-aboard-RAF-military-plane.html
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884
    edited August 18
    Perhaps we should look at this outpouring by MPs in the same way as the footie fans going on the rampage at Wembley.

    Keep people cooped up for months on end and when they are let out they go a bit bonkers.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 1,003

    It's a genuine wonder why the SNP fail to attract any corporate donations.

    With financial genius like this you'd have thought they'd be falling over themselves to gain a foothold.

    NEW: Kate Forbes says the record £36bn deficit is "not an obstacle" to independence.


    https://twitter.com/BrianSpanner1/status/1427954463562772485?s=20

    Kate Forbes: record deficits 'strengthens' case for independence

    https://twitter.com/HTScotPol/status/1427955563044954115?s=20

    The SNP's abandonment of the oil and gas sector, plus this, completely kills off any kind of economic case for Indy. It really is dead as a dodo. Attempting to engineer a deal with the Scottish Greens is just hammering a few more nails into the coffin.

    For me, the interesting thing is how long Nicola hangs on, and how resilient the SNP vote will be after she departs.
    And of course business investment will be hard to find due to years of uncertain constitutional arguments
    There would almost certainly be a considerable degree of capital flight and relocations. Most decent-sized Scottish-based businesses work on the basis of the UK being their home market. Why be on the side of the border which constitutes 8% of your market, rather than on the side which has 92% of your customers?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,637
    .

    Inflation at 2% in July and in line with BOE forecast

    The price of clothing must have dropped like a stone to over compensate for my £1.36 per litre for diesel this morning.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,936
    edited August 18
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 31,884

    Carnyx said:

    MaxPB said:

    TOPPING said:

    Tugendhat was superb. Put money on him to have a serious impact in the party going forward

    Genuinely important stuff in parliament at the moment. Feels like a shift in Johnson’s leadership in terms of overall tone and patience running out, and a genuine acknowledgment we cannot rely on America anymore

    I’ve not seen a house so directly critical to a US president (Trump excluded). I even agreed with Blackwood

    Your post is nonsensical.

    Cannot rely on America.

    What does that mean? What is the UK's independent policy on Afghan?

    More to the point if it's true then are we as a nation looking to triple/quadruple the defence budget? I doubt it.
    And bring back conscription given that the armed forces haven't managed to meet their manpower targets for many years, even as we've shrunk them.
    One of the advantages of conscription is that it would make the electorate extremely reluctant to enter into foreign escapades.
    Like what happened to the Glosters in Korea: many conscripts there.

    But the disadvantage is the disproportionate impact on the poor and non-criminal of society (the powerful can evade, or get cushy numbers, and the criminals get rejected).
    My dad was a lieutenant>captain (volunteered) in the Glosters for Korea. I never asked him but I assume that the Glosters was the catch all unit for anyone wanting to sign up for that conflict?
    I don't know much about the Glosters (apart from the 2x cap badges) but that engagement has become military folklore. Your dad will have experienced extraordinary things.
This discussion has been closed.