O/T this is a terrible idea, Raab should be fired into the heart of the sun for this.
Magistrates are to be given tougher sentencing powers, allowing them to jail offenders for up to a year, under plans to reduce a backlog of cases clogging the crown courts.
The reform, which will be announced today by Dominic Raab, the justice secretary, will double the maximum prison sentence that can be handed down in magistrates’ courts in England and Wales.
Penal reform campaigners described the measure as “the height of irresponsibility”, warning that it would stretch the prison system to breaking point.
Justice ministry officials predicted that the reform — which is due to come into effect within months — would free up 2,000 sitting days at crown courts and shift about 500 trials to magistrates each year.
Ministers acknowledged that it had to an extent been forced on the government, which was struggling to deal with the impact of the pandemic on the justice system.
Stupid but also clever in that it looks like red meat to Save Big Dog but also reminds the backbench electorate of Raab's claim to the Number 10 crown.
For all her veneration, Merkel got some major calls wrong. Axing nuclear after Fukushima (Germany, of course, being famous for earthquakes and tidal waves) was bloody stupid.
Brexit is dead. You know what else is dead? Levelling up.
Boris doesn’t care enough to focus on the details, and Rishi is actively hostile to it.
IPPR North’s report today is brutal. - Most Levelling Up promises are broken - Paltry new spend of £32 pp v £413 in austerity cuts - 95p in every £1 spent by central government four years ago is now 96p. - Jobs and proverty data show north/south divide is getting worse.
I am not sure any of this electorally salient, and the “North” and “Midlands” don’t seem to vote in their own economic interests, but it is worth noting.
Perhaps you should visit some of those constituencies which went Conservative in 2019 and see all the new housing estates being built.
As for jobs, different places have different levels.
But you've got full employment in the mining areas for the first time since anyone can remember.
The critics of “Leveling Up” think it’s only about public spending, preferably on huge projects such as trains to London. That’s a very Civil Service mindset, which is how we got to this position in the first place. What most people in these areas want are good opportunities, and the sense that government are actually listenening to them rather than insulting them.
Caring Tories?
Good luck selling that.
The Tories are not calling them deplorables, so they’re already up.
Not much about the Cummings allegations this morning on PB... FWIW I think he's got more than just this, he's lucky the media are giving him so much airtime (after all he is a disgrunted ex-employee/contractor).
Being prepared to swear on oath that Boris lied to Parliament is rather more than 'not much'.
O/T this is a terrible idea, Raab should be fired into the heart of the sun for this.
Magistrates are to be given tougher sentencing powers, allowing them to jail offenders for up to a year, under plans to reduce a backlog of cases clogging the crown courts.
The reform, which will be announced today by Dominic Raab, the justice secretary, will double the maximum prison sentence that can be handed down in magistrates’ courts in England and Wales.
Penal reform campaigners described the measure as “the height of irresponsibility”, warning that it would stretch the prison system to breaking point.
Justice ministry officials predicted that the reform — which is due to come into effect within months — would free up 2,000 sitting days at crown courts and shift about 500 trials to magistrates each year.
Ministers acknowledged that it had to an extent been forced on the government, which was struggling to deal with the impact of the pandemic on the justice system.
Stupid but also clever in that it looks like red meat to Save Big Dog but also reminds the backbench electorate of Raab's claim to the Number 10 crown.
A valuable reminder to colleagues that they could, just about, have an even worse leader.
I know who sent the email to Martin Reynolds on 20 May 2020 telling him the planned “bring your own booze” party should not go ahead - though the sender tells me he does not want to be seen as agent provocateur against the prime minister and has asked me not to name him. Before I go on, I regard the evidence of this “senior official” - as styled by Dominic Cummings in his Monday blog - as compelling, because if it turns out he is lying he knows it will come out and he would be seriously damaged. The email was copied to an official in Reynolds’s office and to the PM’s then main aide - now estranged - Mr Cummings.
Sue Gray, who is investigating that party and others, can easily find the email, since there will not be so many received by Mr Reynolds and Mr Cummings on 20 May.
She has also told the sender of the dynamite email she would like to speak with him but has not yet
...
Pesto is great at keeping sources anonymous....too lazy to put "they".
Sounds like this email is the big moment, the smoking gun? Totally contradicts what Boris said last week to the commons, in his fulsome apology, gives every MP the cover they need.
Boris lied about lying about lying about lying about lying about an event that he didn't know happened despite being there.
Exquisite summary. And yet Con MPs want to keep him in office.
If the Russians are genuinely likely to invade Ukraine, Cummings may want to dramatically speeds things up. The window of opportunity may close.
What more does Cummings need to do - he's said the PM lied to Parliament and where to look for the email that demonstrates the fact that Boris knew about the party so lied to Parliament.
What Cummings has done is throw the Gray report wide apart as the report now needs to cover something she was hoping to avoid going near.
Brexit is dead. You know what else is dead? Levelling up.
Boris doesn’t care enough to focus on the details, and Rishi is actively hostile to it.
IPPR North’s report today is brutal. - Most Levelling Up promises are broken - Paltry new spend of £32 pp v £413 in austerity cuts - 95p in every £1 spent by central government four years ago is now 96p. - Jobs and proverty data show north/south divide is getting worse.
I am not sure any of this electorally salient, and the “North” and “Midlands” don’t seem to vote in their own economic interests, but it is worth noting.
Perhaps you should visit some of those constituencies which went Conservative in 2019 and see all the new housing estates being built.
As for jobs, different places have different levels.
But you've got full employment in the mining areas for the first time since anyone can remember.
The critics of “Leveling Up” think it’s only about public spending, preferably on huge projects such as trains to London. That’s a very Civil Service mindset, which is how we got to this position in the first place. What most people in these areas want are good opportunities, and the sense that government are actually listenening to them rather than insulting them.
Caring Tories?
Good luck selling that.
Stuart
Why are you trying to scare people with your avatar?
Some people saying Boris "implicitly" thought it was a work event. But he didn't get "implicitly" invited to the party. He didn't see the e-mail. So someone invited him. Who. And when they invited him, what did they say they were inviting him to. https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1483349214541324294
If the Russians are genuinely likely to invade Ukraine, Cummings may want to dramatically speeds things up. The window of opportunity may close.
What more does Cummings need to do - he's said the PM lied to Parliament and where to look for the email that demonstrates the fact that Boris knew about the party so lied to Parliament.
What Cummings has done is throw the Gray report wide apart as the report now needs to cover something she was hoping to avoid going near.
That's true, but he may also have access to leaked photos and videos. If I was him I would obviously want to do everything possible before there was any risk of the news agenda moving somewhere completely different.
Lords watchdog launches inquiry into Michelle Mone over ‘VIP lane’ contract Investigation into Tory peer relates to PPE company awarded £203m in government contracts
The commissioner confirmed that the investigation would be for “alleged involvement in procuring contracts for PPE Medpro, leading to potential breaches” of three provisions of the Lords code, which cover the requirement that peers publicly register “all relevant interests”, and prohibit them from lobbying for a company or a person in which a peer “has a financial interest”.
The commissioner also stated that Mone would be investigated under the more general provisions of the code’s paragraph 9, which includes that peers “should always act on their personal honour”; must never accept “any financial inducement as an incentive or reward for exercising parliamentary influence”; and “must not seek to profit from membership of the house by accepting or agreeing to accept payment or other incentive or reward in return for providing parliamentary advice or services.”
If the Russians are genuinely likely to invade Ukraine, Cummings may want to dramatically speeds things up. The window of opportunity may close.
What more does Cummings need to do - he's said the PM lied to Parliament and where to look for the email that demonstrates the fact that Boris knew about the party so lied to Parliament.
What Cummings has done is throw the Gray report wide apart as the report now needs to cover something she was hoping to avoid going near.
I feel quite sorry for Ms Gray; get the feeling that every time she types the words 'and in conclusion' something else pops up!
I'm disturbed by the emphasis on the No 10 drinking culture element of the Boris story in the papers today. Office culture over the years is ultimately a moral and managerial judgement. What's important here is that Downing Street staff couldn't do what everyone else in the country was being forced to do, change their normal life in response to the pandemic. I have no interest in whether Downing Street staff cracked open the wine at lunchtime in 2019.
Mr Meeks gives his take on Dom Raab's don't tell him Pike moment.
The obvious conclusion is that Dominic Raab is not taking his line from Downing Street. Which is more interesting than the “gotcha!” takes flying around.
We should always consider the possibility that he meant to say what he said. He probably did.
Well done Britain, but what on Earth are Germany playing at here? “Staying neutral” starting to look very like supporting the Russians. European unity looking very much in danger this morning.
Why should Germany consider ex-member UK's actions as relevant to European unity? NATO unity, perhaps, but really we have no claim whatsoever to be promoting European unity.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Lords watchdog launches inquiry into Michelle Mone over ‘VIP lane’ contract Investigation into Tory peer relates to PPE company awarded £203m in government contracts
The commissioner confirmed that the investigation would be for “alleged involvement in procuring contracts for PPE Medpro, leading to potential breaches” of three provisions of the Lords code, which cover the requirement that peers publicly register “all relevant interests”, and prohibit them from lobbying for a company or a person in which a peer “has a financial interest”.
The commissioner also stated that Mone would be investigated under the more general provisions of the code’s paragraph 9, which includes that peers “should always act on their personal honour”; must never accept “any financial inducement as an incentive or reward for exercising parliamentary influence”; and “must not seek to profit from membership of the house by accepting or agreeing to accept payment or other incentive or reward in return for providing parliamentary advice or services.”
Lords watchdog launches inquiry into Michelle Mone over ‘VIP lane’ contract Investigation into Tory peer relates to PPE company awarded £203m in government contracts
The commissioner confirmed that the investigation would be for “alleged involvement in procuring contracts for PPE Medpro, leading to potential breaches” of three provisions of the Lords code, which cover the requirement that peers publicly register “all relevant interests”, and prohibit them from lobbying for a company or a person in which a peer “has a financial interest”.
The commissioner also stated that Mone would be investigated under the more general provisions of the code’s paragraph 9, which includes that peers “should always act on their personal honour”; must never accept “any financial inducement as an incentive or reward for exercising parliamentary influence”; and “must not seek to profit from membership of the house by accepting or agreeing to accept payment or other incentive or reward in return for providing parliamentary advice or services.”
On the subject of Mone, can anyone explain to me this insult she allegedly whatsapped someone that’s caused trouble - according to the papers she called someone “a waste of a white man’s skin”.
Has anyone ever heard this phrase before? It sounds like something from early Victorian times - maybe Captain Bligh berating Fletcher Christian but I’ve never come across it in my life!
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
David Miliband @DMiliband · 8h I worked in 10 Downing Street for 4 years (1997-2001). There were receptions in the state rooms, working dinners with dignitaries, but I don’t remember a single party, DJ etc. There was much more reverence than revelry. This idea “they’re all at it” is nonsense
Clearly that falls under "receptions in the state rooms" and not "dinners with dignitaries". Ah, for the days of Cool Britannia.
I've been to a few of those receptions, hosted by Tony and Gordon respectively. You got one glass of wine or juice when you came in and some peanuts. When Gordon came in, we thought he might stop the peanuts, but no, he added crisps! We felt very spoiled.
Mr Meeks gives his take on Dom Raab's don't tell him Pike moment.
The obvious conclusion is that Dominic Raab is not taking his line from Downing Street. Which is more interesting than the “gotcha!” takes flying around.
We should always consider the possibility that he meant to say what he said. He probably did.
Brexit is dead. You know what else is dead? Levelling up.
Boris doesn’t care enough to focus on the details, and Rishi is actively hostile to it.
IPPR North’s report today is brutal. - Most Levelling Up promises are broken - Paltry new spend of £32 pp v £413 in austerity cuts - 95p in every £1 spent by central government four years ago is now 96p. - Jobs and proverty data show north/south divide is getting worse.
I am not sure any of this electorally salient, and the “North” and “Midlands” don’t seem to vote in their own economic interests, but it is worth noting.
Perhaps you should visit some of those constituencies which went Conservative in 2019 and see all the new housing estates being built.
As for jobs, different places have different levels.
But you've got full employment in the mining areas for the first time since anyone can remember.
The critics of “Leveling Up” think it’s only about public spending, preferably on huge projects such as trains to London. That’s a very Civil Service mindset, which is how we got to this position in the first place. What most people in these areas want are good opportunities, and the sense that government are actually listenening to them rather than insulting them.
Caring Tories?
Good luck selling that.
Stuart
Why are you trying to scare people with your avatar?
Peoples get the governments they deserve. The English voted in a Midwich Cuckoo, and that fact deserves to be rammed down your throats at every opportunity until you repent.
Judging by the opinion polls, you may be repenting, but we don’t want any swingback now do we? Naughty boys and girls.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
His was the right call. The overruling was frankly disgusting and shameful.
Edit. I thought it was all too typical that the first confirmed death on Tonga was a Brit who got swept away trying to save her dogs. There is a streak of madness in the British psyche that is not nearly as endearing as we like to think.
Few people’s interventions are more likely to make the Conservative Party rally round the leader than those of Cummings. As I keep saying, Johnson’s going nowhere. This is already blowing over. Bad for those of us with BDS but good, longer term, for the Labour Party.
Lords watchdog launches inquiry into Michelle Mone over ‘VIP lane’ contract Investigation into Tory peer relates to PPE company awarded £203m in government contracts
The commissioner confirmed that the investigation would be for “alleged involvement in procuring contracts for PPE Medpro, leading to potential breaches” of three provisions of the Lords code, which cover the requirement that peers publicly register “all relevant interests”, and prohibit them from lobbying for a company or a person in which a peer “has a financial interest”.
The commissioner also stated that Mone would be investigated under the more general provisions of the code’s paragraph 9, which includes that peers “should always act on their personal honour”; must never accept “any financial inducement as an incentive or reward for exercising parliamentary influence”; and “must not seek to profit from membership of the house by accepting or agreeing to accept payment or other incentive or reward in return for providing parliamentary advice or services.”
On the subject of Mone, can anyone explain to me this insult she allegedly whatsapped someone that’s caused trouble - according to the papers she called someone “a waste of a white man’s skin”.
Has anyone ever heard this phrase before? It sounds like something from early Victorian times - maybe Captain Bligh berating Fletcher Christian but I’ve never come across it in my life!
I've heard the reverse term, a waste of a black man's skin, about people perceived to be coconuts.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
His was the right call. The overruling was frankly disgusting and shameful.
But if he was competent or not a eunuch then he should have resigned and flagged up the issue at the time.
David Miliband @DMiliband · 8h I worked in 10 Downing Street for 4 years (1997-2001). There were receptions in the state rooms, working dinners with dignitaries, but I don’t remember a single party, DJ etc. There was much more reverence than revelry. This idea “they’re all at it” is nonsense
Clearly that falls under "receptions in the state rooms" and not "dinners with dignitaries". Ah, for the days of Cool Britannia.
I've been to a few of those receptions, hosted by Tony and Gordon respectively. You got one glass of wine or juice when you came in and some peanuts. When Gordon came in, we thought he might stop the peanuts, but no, he added crisps! We felt very spoiled.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Didn't go to Eton. Strong Scottish connections.
No chance.
Also a remainer so unacceptable to most tories and deeply boring with the air of a photocopier salesman.
He manages to make the prospect of Britain going to war with Russia over Ukraine seem tedious.
Dan Bloom @danbloom1 Raab: "There was speculation that the May 20 party was held in my honor to thank me, it's just ridiculous."
@KayBurley : So it was a party! "No, exactly, er, no, er, the, no no no no. This is the claim that was made, it was nonsense, I wasn't invited and I didn't attend."
Lords watchdog launches inquiry into Michelle Mone over ‘VIP lane’ contract Investigation into Tory peer relates to PPE company awarded £203m in government contracts
The commissioner confirmed that the investigation would be for “alleged involvement in procuring contracts for PPE Medpro, leading to potential breaches” of three provisions of the Lords code, which cover the requirement that peers publicly register “all relevant interests”, and prohibit them from lobbying for a company or a person in which a peer “has a financial interest”.
The commissioner also stated that Mone would be investigated under the more general provisions of the code’s paragraph 9, which includes that peers “should always act on their personal honour”; must never accept “any financial inducement as an incentive or reward for exercising parliamentary influence”; and “must not seek to profit from membership of the house by accepting or agreeing to accept payment or other incentive or reward in return for providing parliamentary advice or services.”
In fairness to the SCUP, can she be called a Scottish Tory (except in the expat, Govian, sense)? She did threaten to throw her big pink fluffy doggie out of the pram and move herself and her business out of Scotland if Yes won indyref, and in the event ejected aforesaid cuddly pooch from pram and moved herself, and later sold off the business, when No won.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Ive been backing him around 40 next Tory leader. Seems well placed to do a Major if he goes for it, not particularly associated with Johnson, and international events may sadly raise his profile in the next couple of months.
I suspect the Speaker will have a firm view on whether lying to Parliament on something utterly trivial* is a normal event
* I can see reasons why you may not reveal everything in some very highly classified situations that could result in you accidently lying - but a party in May 2020 isn't really that classified.
When Russia has an entrenched falling-to-stagnant population, why does Putin want Lebensraum?
Shall I tell you something really amazing about Russia?
In 1998, a solid 88% of Russia's exports were of primary commodities: i.e. oil, gas, coal, wood (and a small amount of agriculture). Most of the rest was of refined commodities. And then there was a very small percentage that was export of "defence" products to Russian client states.
And at that time, Russia's exports were slightly greater than Belgium's.
In the past twenty years, we've had a commodities supercycle. Oil sells for 10x the price it did back in 1998. Gas is up a lot. Coal ditto.
Yet more than 85% of Russia's exports are still primary commodities. And Belgium has overtaken them.
And yet they have upgraded their nukes, and can still destroy the world. Unlike Belgium.
Putin has two hobbies - accumulating money (of which he has more than anyone in Belgium) and war.
Ukraine will fight any invasion, whether we help them ir not. He is, IMO, slightly less likely to invade if we help them now.
I see Putin as being similar to Erdogan in Turkey. Both are very different characters to when they first won power, when they were both more moderate. But having got power, they realise they quite like it and its trappings. So it becomes a case of ensuring they keep that power, and they become increasingly authoritarian and anti-democratic.
Putin who, when faced with term limits as prime minister, became president and switched legislative control to that office? Who from the beginning asserted a Russian sphere of influence over former Soviet states? That Putin?
Yes, that Putin. The term limits thing came about he'd been in power for eight years, so it hardly smashes my thesis. And any Russian leader would try to assert a sphere of influence over the former Russian states. He sort-of inherited the Second Chechen War, and the Russo-Georgian war occurred about eight or nine years later.
As I said: they get power, then decide they quite like it. I'm far from convinced they envisaged their current positions when they first got power.
Erdogan's current economic vandalism is a good example.
Both wanted to go this way. Erdogan was quite proud of his line about democracy being a train - when you get to the destination, you get off.
All dictators take time to expand into their role.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
Also, given the MoDs track record of late (pun intended) on acquiring combat vehicles, has he achieved much there to improve procurement? (Might have, for all I know, tbf.)
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
His was the right call. The overruling was frankly disgusting and shameful.
But if he was competent or not a eunuch then he should have resigned and flagged up the issue at the time.
Displaying some leadership qualities might also have been a good idea if he aspired to the leadership. Competent rubber stamp ?
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
His was the right call. The overruling was frankly disgusting and shameful.
But if he was competent or not a eunuch then he should have resigned and flagged up the issue at the time.
I don't think so. He was very clearly irritated by it as an absurd and immoral distraction from saving people we had duties of care to but that was his priority and rightly so.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Didn't go to Eton. Strong Scottish connections.
No chance.
Also a remainer so unacceptable to most tories and deeply boring with the air of a photocopier salesman.
He manages to make the prospect of Britain going to war with Russia over Ukraine seem tedious.
The Tories’ last brush with chrome domed ex forces types is not auspicious.
When Russia has an entrenched falling-to-stagnant population, why does Putin want Lebensraum?
Shall I tell you something really amazing about Russia?
In 1998, a solid 88% of Russia's exports were of primary commodities: i.e. oil, gas, coal, wood (and a small amount of agriculture). Most of the rest was of refined commodities. And then there was a very small percentage that was export of "defence" products to Russian client states.
And at that time, Russia's exports were slightly greater than Belgium's.
In the past twenty years, we've had a commodities supercycle. Oil sells for 10x the price it did back in 1998. Gas is up a lot. Coal ditto.
Yet more than 85% of Russia's exports are still primary commodities. And Belgium has overtaken them.
And yet they have upgraded their nukes, and can still destroy the world. Unlike Belgium.
Putin has two hobbies - accumulating money (of which he has more than anyone in Belgium) and war.
Ukraine will fight any invasion, whether we help them ir not. He is, IMO, slightly less likely to invade if we help them now.
I don't disagree with any of that.
It's like with Hitler - if we'd been willing to fight for the Saarland, then the whole Second World War might have been avoided.
When Russia has an entrenched falling-to-stagnant population, why does Putin want Lebensraum?
Shall I tell you something really amazing about Russia?
In 1998, a solid 88% of Russia's exports were of primary commodities: i.e. oil, gas, coal, wood (and a small amount of agriculture). Most of the rest was of refined commodities. And then there was a very small percentage that was export of "defence" products to Russian client states.
And at that time, Russia's exports were slightly greater than Belgium's.
In the past twenty years, we've had a commodities supercycle. Oil sells for 10x the price it did back in 1998. Gas is up a lot. Coal ditto.
Yet more than 85% of Russia's exports are still primary commodities. And Belgium has overtaken them.
And yet they have upgraded their nukes, and can still destroy the world. Unlike Belgium.
Putin has two hobbies - accumulating money (of which he has more than anyone in Belgium) and war.
Ukraine will fight any invasion, whether we help them ir not. He is, IMO, slightly less likely to invade if we help them now.
I don't disagree with any of that.
It's like with Hitler - if we'd been willing to fight for the Saarland, then the whole Second World War might have been avoided.
Fight for the Saarland? Maybe you mean fight against the remilitarization of the Rhineland in 1936?
Things I’ve learned this morning: Her Majesty has four “Counsellors of State“, people who deputise for her on official duties, sign routine documents and welcome ambassadors.
The problem she has, is that two of them are Harry and Andrew, and they’re appointed for decades thanks to the order of succession. She wants to step back from the duties herself, but obviously doesn’t want the two black sheep anywhere near anything. Perhaps Anne and Edward would step up, if they could remove Harry and Andrew from the succession line.
What a horrible last year or two she’s had, losing her husband and two of her senior family.
Is the way to fix the Downing St drinking culture, simply to insist on the visitors being completely smashed on a their way in, at 10 o’clock in the morning?
Not much about the Cummings allegations this morning on PB... FWIW I think he's got more than just this, he's lucky the media are giving him so much airtime (after all he is a disgrunted ex-employee/contractor).
Cummings was Johnsons right hand man at the time, and Gray needs to interview him. At which point there is only one conclusion to be drawn.
I think that he is one of the most hateful people ever in British politics. Johnson chose his nemesis and only has himself to blame.
What I love about Cummings is that this is all about him yet is nothing at all about him.
He is clearly out to enact revenge on a man he sees as completely unfit and unsuitable to be PM. And he himself has broken any concept of trust with the public after his Barnard Castle coverup. But we don't need to question what Cummings says or thinks.
What he can prove - the damning evidence - is far more compelling than any opinion he could give. We can discount Cummings and his POV because he is able to trowel on more damaging revelations with evidence.
Who would have thought that doing stupid and politically damaging things could be politically damaging? Clearly Peppa didn't. School is in and the teacher has his red pen out ...
Indeed, it doesn't matter who is flying the Lancaster or why - whether he is after a DFM or is just trying to finish his allotted total of operations. So long as it is on target, the Tallboy is still the same, objectively.
Lords watchdog launches inquiry into Michelle Mone over ‘VIP lane’ contract Investigation into Tory peer relates to PPE company awarded £203m in government contracts
The commissioner confirmed that the investigation would be for “alleged involvement in procuring contracts for PPE Medpro, leading to potential breaches” of three provisions of the Lords code, which cover the requirement that peers publicly register “all relevant interests”, and prohibit them from lobbying for a company or a person in which a peer “has a financial interest”.
The commissioner also stated that Mone would be investigated under the more general provisions of the code’s paragraph 9, which includes that peers “should always act on their personal honour”; must never accept “any financial inducement as an incentive or reward for exercising parliamentary influence”; and “must not seek to profit from membership of the house by accepting or agreeing to accept payment or other incentive or reward in return for providing parliamentary advice or services.”
On the subject of Mone, can anyone explain to me this insult she allegedly whatsapped someone that’s caused trouble - according to the papers she called someone “a waste of a white man’s skin”.
Has anyone ever heard this phrase before? It sounds like something from early Victorian times - maybe Captain Bligh berating Fletcher Christian but I’ve never come across it in my life!
I’m more up on my Christian Fletcher than my Fletcher Christian.
Never heard the expression, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it derives from her childhood in the rougher bits of Glasgow. My dad had a similar upbringing (albeit nearly half a century before Mone) and he had a wide range of casually racist expressions. The well-known “Dae ye think a came up the Clyde in a banana boat?” springs to mind, but he routinely described people he perceived to be annoying as “black-faced Babylonians”, which I have never seen or heard anywhere else.
Mone is a wee lassie who never grew up and discovered, among other things, the merits of a moral backbone.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
His was the right call. The overruling was frankly disgusting and shameful.
But if he was competent or not a eunuch then he should have resigned and flagged up the issue at the time.
I don't think so. He was very clearly irritated by it as an absurd and immoral distraction from saving people we had duties of care to but that was his priority and rightly so.
Under his watch, doggies were prioritised over darkies, that will be his shameful epitaph.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
Also, given the MoDs track record of late (pun intended) on acquiring combat vehicles, has he achieved much there to improve procurement? (Might have, for all I know, tbf.)
Cancelled Warrior CSP (good). Replaced it with nothing (bad).
Cancelled ISSGW anti ship missile (bad). Replaced it with nothing (worse).
What, of course, is insane about this is, is that YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE IN YOUR COUNTRY WHO DON'T WANT TO BE IN YOUR COUNTRY.
I mean, this isn't rocket science. If you invade Ukraine, then the resources of the Russian state will be used to handle the inevitable low level insurgency in Ukraine. In the 1950s, Britain realized that ruling all these countries that didn't want to be ruled by you, was a major economic negative. How hard is this to understand?
Well, quite. That's why I don't think it will happen. Russia and Ukraine both have an interest in talking it up - Russia gets a lever to deter NATO expansion, Ukraine gets sympathy when they'd otherwise be largely ignored. But Russia occupying Kiev? Just Afghanistan all over again, with a much MORE hostile population. The Russians have been there, done that (as have we).
I don't like Putin, but the fact that he's is a reckless reactionary nationalist doesn't mean he's an idiot. And some of the warnings we see about both Russia and China are just ex-cold war stuff. How's the Russian invasion of Sweden getting on? And are the Chinese landings in Taiwan making progress?
1. “Absolutely nothing the British do will make any material difference to the outcome of a Russia - Ukraine armed conflict so this is pure virtue signalling” - Dura Ace
2. “. A big pile of up-to-date portable anti-tank weapons could make a difference. Turn it into an attritional battle in depth.“ - Malmesbury
3. “is a Russian invasion of the Ukraine the one thing that could save Johnson? The ultimate dead cat?” - Ben Pointer
We have PBers who can properly answer the questions I am sure 🙂
we have taken option to send troops - the Daily Mail claim we have, so can we clear that one up, is the Mail lying?
at least latest technology to kill as many Russians as possible if they invade? To act as a military deterrent? Or virtue signalling?
If you go do you go all in to save Ukraine from Putin, with allies, or what is the value of just a token measure? I can understand value of trying to save Ukraine and it’s West leaning democracy, but a token effort just flags up our business is quite the opposite of genuinely answering their pleas for help? underlines we are not really willing to fight for Ukraine, or acting with many like minded allies when the Ukraines who resist are slaughtered in front of us on news Channel?
Should we do anything to encourage them to slaughter themselves 😕
Surely any military move, especially when we commit troops, or even small ones like this has a purpose, value and gains to make, you can appear in front reporters explain what you are getting into and exit strategy to get out? So can rule out unlike other government business this week this nothing to do with Operation Save the Dog, our commitment and action carefully planned?
I fully support Boris and Biden, or whoever is in charge, taking whatever measures are necessary to defend Ukraine against that fascist pig bastard Putin. Democracies need to stick together against totalitarian aggression. We should have dealt with this back in 2014 when he first invaded Ukraine. Our collective failure then has lead to this present danger. If we don't deal with it this time, we'll be back in another situation in another few years. And then who will it be? Lithuania? Finland?
but you completely blind to my point yet again - we are not really all in though are we? Wr are not properly defending the democracy of Ukraine against the fascist pig bastard. We are going to let him get away with annexing more of it.
All we are doing is, as Malmsy said “two fingers for the novochuk killings you bastard” and then looking away as he annexes away.
We never agree Farooq. You need to think about it.
If we send a NATO army into Ukraine, then that is WWIII. At that point Putin can't back down. So if he starts losing, he knows it curtains for him, so he might risk escalation...
So we are going to fight a poxy war, if it comes to war. The Russians and Ukrainians will do the dying.
The deterrent for Putin is that he will be sending his troops into a meat grinder. After a while, even a dictatorial government has to show *some* success.
“think of it as a FuckYouVeryMuch for the murders committed in the UK by the Russian state. “.
Yes that is helpful, thank you, 🙂 because I remember the Salisbury poisoning that was bang out of order! Me and Everyone in my family were shouting at the TV screen and shouting at Corbyn the traitor!
Meat grinder though. Yuk.
Correct me where I’m wrong. Is this really the best way of getting our own back? Putin has made clear he’s annexing. We have made clear we are letting him. So why does there have to be a fight? I mean What’s the reality in outcome from fight first agree second rather than just peacefully agree?
I am not sure it will properly stop for years. It just moves the front line into other peoples gardens, schools, hospitals? People will just end up living miserably in a war zone getting killed as they attempt to live their lives. It’s going to be horrible and sad for all of us watching it on the news. ☹️
The Ukrainians will fight, because it's their country.
The Russians lost in the end, because the number of young men with no legs became noticeable even in a dictatorship.
This was how the Cold War was waged - start fighting directly and 24-36 hours in, the nuclear missiles are flying. Killing each other by proxy is so much more civilised.
This is about making the cost to Putin (and Russia) of Ukrainian real estate really high.
The alternative is fighting Putin when he decides there is a piece of another country he could really, really likes. Like, say, Latvia.
Yeah I do understand the point you are making. But at the end of the day though when the final whistle goes everyonecshakes hands, and 70 years later we are all proudly posing in our German and Japanese cars (because they won the war against our car industry).
Don’t you ever thinking though It’s not a paintballing event. People will be trying to live their lives in the proxy war zone. What about them? They will turn into refugees. We will have to deflect them away with our sonar weapons. Why do we do such counterintuitive things to our own security and influence have all these proxy wars? Is proxy wars really last resort? Why don’t we have lots more peace deals?
Most wars are stupid. Historically the majority of wars were started by the side that lost. My favourite is the War of the Triple Alliance - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_War. As PJ O'Rourke observed, over a century later, Paraguay is one South American country that doesn't feel crowded. "We fought like madmen, because we loved our country insanely".....
The problem comes down to - what do you do when someone decides he wants to steal a country? Let him? Or fight?
And when he has stolen that one, what does he think of next? Tea, biscuits, which country next?
“You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour, and you will have war."
So our Problems Putin, you are very sure of that. And I don’t disagree. He says it’s us. I’m not saying fascist pig bastard as Farooq poetically called him isn’t an enemy or a problem. he is. Like you said his over funded spy team and killings on our soil. But firstly is he a worthy enemy? Secondly are we addicted to proxy wars like Syria to try and thrawt his growing influence? And thirdly, we have to ask, do we encroach a bit much at times as well, making the bear agitated?
Defence is about getting the detente right? And war also comes as soft power. Like against the Chinese and Russians to an extent, have us so reliant on oil pipe lines and investment in infrastructure, and political party funding, and allowing them to own media, are we even awake to their soft power engagement?
you say Ukrainians will fight because it’s their country. But a complicated sort of country? You explained it yourself to us very well. The border, where it’s Eastern orthodox religion and Slav ethnicity, and rest lots of Catholic with polish and Lithuanian empire history is you explained yourself few weeks ago, complicated, and difficult for a peace deal.
Difficult questions.
But does a fight actually answer the difficult questions in any durable way?
And if we are keen for a bit of revenge, and it’s a proxy war, lots of geopolitical power games proxy war, is it even still that same fight trying to answer those same timeless questions?
And the people living in the “theatre” for years. 😕
Do you see what I mean?
I might look at this and regret it when sobered up, I’m shooting from the hip. Because I’m not a pacifist. Just one proxy war after another isn’t really the last resort open to us is it, in dealing with Putin? Unless you say it is.
I’m going to call it a night now. But it’s been fun 🙋♀️
The answer to all of that, is - indeed.
There are guarantees in war - Death, horror, desolation.
What would make Putin stop? Saying please? Abandoning the Eastern half of Europe, and hoping that is his last demand?
What makes him stop? You are talking about where do we draw the line? In our diplomacy, European security, best achieved via detente? I’ll have a go.
To start with what makes him stop, we need to know what makes him tick.
Let’s use your example. You are suggesting Ukraine and Latvia as much and the same thing, so Putin wants to grab them in much the same way for much the same reasons? But Latvia is mostly Protestant and then Catholic. Ukraine much more complicated, Orthodox, but various types. Just Orthodox, but not just Just Orthodox. We haven’t got all night. Latvians Letts it be known are Baltic, not even Western Slavs. Ukrainians are very much considered Eastern Slavs. And we learn a lesson from History, the agitating French created the Crimean War with agreement with Ottomans allowing Catholic jurisdiction over Orthodox lands. So we should know to make allowances Mother Russia gets touchy over this? Early twentieth century the Germanic’s were duffing up the southern Slavs and dragged Mother Russia into something that escalated into the First World War.
I think my paragraph, by all means take it apart, if accurate gives clear guidelines what from our standpoint are no go’s for them, and what bits are a headache for both parties.
As for Putins claim there was agreement with west NATO would not encroach, and we have broken it, I think we have been sensible not to over Ukraine. We could have signed them up for NATO and flooded place with watch towers by now. As far as I’m aware we have been careful not to provoke. In a way it could be a historic surprise if Russia doesn’t want all of Ukraine considering it Slav and orthodox make up and only wants now to partition and a cleaner border. If that really is all Russia wants, maybe Ukraine and West could negotiated border and lived in peace to see how it works. But too late now as we have clearly chosen proxy war.
Putin, according to people who have met him, is a Greater Russian Nationalist - he believes that Russia should rule the largest territorial boundaries it ever had. It is more about empires than ethnicity.
Chechnya was never Slavic, for example.
"Clean border" - no, you don't want to say things like that. That's how Stalin and Hitler thought - we get a big broom and push all the "wrong" people over "there"..... Oh dear we seem to have broken a few. Never mind.....
As to Ukraine - there is quite a bit of dispute as to how much the people "liberated" by that nice Mr Putin, already, really wanted to be back in Mother Russia.
And why does Russia get to partition Ukraine? Without going through all that bothersome asking people stuff?
Or are we back in the Age of Empires? If so, I have a list of minor territorial modifications I would like. Starting with France - I want the whole lot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Troyes
What, of course, is insane about this is, is that YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE IN YOUR COUNTRY WHO DON'T WANT TO BE IN YOUR COUNTRY.
I mean, this isn't rocket science. If you invade Ukraine, then the resources of the Russian state will be used to handle the inevitable low level insurgency in Ukraine. In the 1950s, Britain realized that ruling all these countries that didn't want to be ruled by you, was a major economic negative. How hard is this to understand?
For a Greater X Nationalist (there are versions of this all over the world - Hungary for example., Or China) the imperative is that their country needs to be as Great as it ever was. Which is at (partially*) expressed by ruling over all the territories that it did back when it was The Biggest And Baddest Empire.
It's faith & belief, rather than any kind of rational analysis. Though it is often wrapped (partially) in rational arguments.
*Another element is that the neighbours need to be properly weak, afraid of and admire the Big Bad Renewed Empire etc.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
Also, given the MoDs track record of late (pun intended) on acquiring combat vehicles, has he achieved much there to improve procurement? (Might have, for all I know, tbf.)
Cancelled Warrior CSP (good). Replaced it with nothing (bad).
Cancelled ISSGW anti ship missile (bad). Replaced it with nothing (worse).
Same old story, really.
Thanks. And the ongoing Ajax combat vehicle story is not good. Always difficult to be sure when the media are making more than a meal than they justifiably should, but carting the squaddies off to hospital after a ride in the thing does not sound promising.
Lords watchdog launches inquiry into Michelle Mone over ‘VIP lane’ contract Investigation into Tory peer relates to PPE company awarded £203m in government contracts
The commissioner confirmed that the investigation would be for “alleged involvement in procuring contracts for PPE Medpro, leading to potential breaches” of three provisions of the Lords code, which cover the requirement that peers publicly register “all relevant interests”, and prohibit them from lobbying for a company or a person in which a peer “has a financial interest”.
The commissioner also stated that Mone would be investigated under the more general provisions of the code’s paragraph 9, which includes that peers “should always act on their personal honour”; must never accept “any financial inducement as an incentive or reward for exercising parliamentary influence”; and “must not seek to profit from membership of the house by accepting or agreeing to accept payment or other incentive or reward in return for providing parliamentary advice or services.”
In fairness to the SCUP, can she be called a Scottish Tory (except in the expat, Govian, sense)? She did threaten to throw her big pink fluffy doggie out of the pram and move herself and her business out of Scotland if Yes won indyref, and in the event ejected aforesaid cuddly pooch from pram and moved herself, and later sold off the business, when No won.
The paradise that Johan Lamont, Nick Clegg et al promised her did not come to pass? Didums.
Lords watchdog launches inquiry into Michelle Mone over ‘VIP lane’ contract Investigation into Tory peer relates to PPE company awarded £203m in government contracts
The commissioner confirmed that the investigation would be for “alleged involvement in procuring contracts for PPE Medpro, leading to potential breaches” of three provisions of the Lords code, which cover the requirement that peers publicly register “all relevant interests”, and prohibit them from lobbying for a company or a person in which a peer “has a financial interest”.
The commissioner also stated that Mone would be investigated under the more general provisions of the code’s paragraph 9, which includes that peers “should always act on their personal honour”; must never accept “any financial inducement as an incentive or reward for exercising parliamentary influence”; and “must not seek to profit from membership of the house by accepting or agreeing to accept payment or other incentive or reward in return for providing parliamentary advice or services.”
On the subject of Mone, can anyone explain to me this insult she allegedly whatsapped someone that’s caused trouble - according to the papers she called someone “a waste of a white man’s skin”.
Has anyone ever heard this phrase before? It sounds like something from early Victorian times - maybe Captain Bligh berating Fletcher Christian but I’ve never come across it in my life!
Mone is a wee lassie who never grew up and discovered, among other things, the merits of a moral backbone.
Maybe the lack of backbone led her to making corsets……
For all her veneration, Merkel got some major calls wrong. Axing nuclear after Fukushima (Germany, of course, being famous for earthquakes and tidal waves) was bloody stupid.
+1
I’m that rare beast: an independence supporter who also favours nuclear power (at least for now).
Not everyone has the luck* of geography with which Scotland is blessed.
Lords watchdog launches inquiry into Michelle Mone over ‘VIP lane’ contract Investigation into Tory peer relates to PPE company awarded £203m in government contracts
The commissioner confirmed that the investigation would be for “alleged involvement in procuring contracts for PPE Medpro, leading to potential breaches” of three provisions of the Lords code, which cover the requirement that peers publicly register “all relevant interests”, and prohibit them from lobbying for a company or a person in which a peer “has a financial interest”.
The commissioner also stated that Mone would be investigated under the more general provisions of the code’s paragraph 9, which includes that peers “should always act on their personal honour”; must never accept “any financial inducement as an incentive or reward for exercising parliamentary influence”; and “must not seek to profit from membership of the house by accepting or agreeing to accept payment or other incentive or reward in return for providing parliamentary advice or services.”
On the subject of Mone, can anyone explain to me this insult she allegedly whatsapped someone that’s caused trouble - according to the papers she called someone “a waste of a white man’s skin”.
Has anyone ever heard this phrase before? It sounds like something from early Victorian times - maybe Captain Bligh berating Fletcher Christian but I’ve never come across it in my life!
Mone is a wee lassie who never grew up and discovered, among other things, the merits of a moral backbone.
Maybe the lack of backbone led her to making corsets……
Lords watchdog launches inquiry into Michelle Mone over ‘VIP lane’ contract Investigation into Tory peer relates to PPE company awarded £203m in government contracts
The commissioner confirmed that the investigation would be for “alleged involvement in procuring contracts for PPE Medpro, leading to potential breaches” of three provisions of the Lords code, which cover the requirement that peers publicly register “all relevant interests”, and prohibit them from lobbying for a company or a person in which a peer “has a financial interest”.
The commissioner also stated that Mone would be investigated under the more general provisions of the code’s paragraph 9, which includes that peers “should always act on their personal honour”; must never accept “any financial inducement as an incentive or reward for exercising parliamentary influence”; and “must not seek to profit from membership of the house by accepting or agreeing to accept payment or other incentive or reward in return for providing parliamentary advice or services.”
On the subject of Mone, can anyone explain to me this insult she allegedly whatsapped someone that’s caused trouble - according to the papers she called someone “a waste of a white man’s skin”.
Has anyone ever heard this phrase before? It sounds like something from early Victorian times - maybe Captain Bligh berating Fletcher Christian but I’ve never come across it in my life!
I’m more up on my Christian Fletcher than my Fletcher Christian.
Never heard the expression, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it derives from her childhood in the rougher bits of Glasgow. My dad had a similar upbringing (albeit nearly half a century before Mone) and he had a wide range of casually racist expressions. The well-known “Dae ye think a came up the Clyde in a banana boat?” springs to mind, but he routinely described people he perceived to be annoying as “black-faced Babylonians”, which I have never seen or heard anywhere else.
Mone is a wee lassie who never grew up and discovered, among other things, the merits of a moral backbone.
The burning issue of the day - does the Prime Minister know a party when he's at one?
One gets the impression that the prime minister has turned 10 Downing Street into the set of “Bottom”. When you live in such a surreal world, you maybe don’t understand basic social codes?
She doesn't need to make the decision - she just needs to outline the evidence and whether physical evidence exists.
Assuming no-one trashed Dominic Cummings email account and those of other people who have left that should be easy to find out. Heck even deleted emails of all No 10 staff should be being kept and be accessible so if Cummings says there are emails they should be findable or something else is seriously wrong.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
Also, given the MoDs track record of late (pun intended) on acquiring combat vehicles, has he achieved much there to improve procurement? (Might have, for all I know, tbf.)
Cancelled Warrior CSP (good). Replaced it with nothing (bad).
Cancelled ISSGW anti ship missile (bad). Replaced it with nothing (worse).
Same old story, really.
The problem is surely that the MoD require far more kit at any one time than they can afford to cover the range of threats. The sane thing to do is to choose, which is what he seems to be doing.
The insane thing is to soldier on with all these programs eating up money, slowing them down and cutting them back to reduce short term costs but catastrophically increasing the long term costs with the result all too much of the kit is redundant before the much reduced order ever gets into service.
Focusing the available budget on a limited range of projects and getting them actually delivered seems a much better way forward.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
His was the right call. The overruling was frankly disgusting and shameful.
But if he was competent or not a eunuch then he should have resigned and flagged up the issue at the time.
I don't think so. He was very clearly irritated by it as an absurd and immoral distraction from saving people we had duties of care to but that was his priority and rightly so.
Under his watch, doggies were prioritised over darkies, that will be his shameful epitaph.
He fought it as hard as he could, and it's not a job from which you can really flounce from while the shit is htf.
Good on the coffin dodgers to send the stupid policing bill back to the idiots. I fear that they will be overruled but at least there's some people in the country with some integrity left.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
Also, given the MoDs track record of late (pun intended) on acquiring combat vehicles, has he achieved much there to improve procurement? (Might have, for all I know, tbf.)
Cancelled Warrior CSP (good). Replaced it with nothing (bad).
Cancelled ISSGW anti ship missile (bad). Replaced it with nothing (worse).
Same old story, really.
The problem is surely that the MoD require far more kit at any one time than they can afford to cover the range of threats. The sane thing to do is to choose, which is what he seems to be doing.
The insane thing is to soldier on with all these programs eating up money, slowing them down and cutting them back to reduce short term costs but catastrophically increasing the long term costs with the result all too much of the kit is redundant before the much reduced order ever gets into service.
Focusing the available budget on a limited range of projects and getting them actually delivered seems a much better way forward.
I think the problem is more that HMG policy is to confront an unfeasibly large range of threats (including some unfeasibly large and distant individual threats). And to buy as much as possible not off the shelf (admittedly nothing new: vide the mess over the Phantom re-engining with UK engines which ended up with a heavier and costglier but not noticeably faster plane).
The burning issue of the day - does the Prime Minister know a party when he's at one?
I’ve heard from an insider on Sue Gray’s team that Boris will be cleared - Downing St Chief of Staff said to Boris “come and join the troops - the party isn’t a party without you” and Boris quite reasonably and “implicitly” understood that the “party” referred to was the Tory Party and that he was required for a strategy meeting in the garden and therefore it was work.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
His was the right call. The overruling was frankly disgusting and shameful.
But if he was competent or not a eunuch then he should have resigned and flagged up the issue at the time.
I don't think so. He was very clearly irritated by it as an absurd and immoral distraction from saving people we had duties of care to but that was his priority and rightly so.
Under his watch, doggies were prioritised over darkies, that will be his shameful epitaph.
He fought it as hard as he could, and it's not a job from which you can really flounce from while the shit is htf.
Meanwhile the Taliban reduce a musician to tears as they mock him and burn his instruments in front of him
Not often that I say this sort of thing, but this an exceptional article by the defence secretary. Literate, forceful, gutsy and moral. He is entirely correct in every aspect.
The burning issue of the day - does the Prime Minister know a party when he's at one?
To play devil’s advocate for a minute, the staff at Downing St probably do have formal definitions for the various functions that take place there.
To them, a party will involve at least a caterer and an entertainer such as a musician or DJ. Parties were banned during the pandemic, there were no caterers and no musicians allowed, so having a few staff bring their own bottles to sit on the lawn outside for half an hour can’t possibly be a party.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
And passionate about his work, as evidenced by that emotional interview on Afghanistan.
If sober competence is the order of the day, added sprinkles of real feeling might be important.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
Also, given the MoDs track record of late (pun intended) on acquiring combat vehicles, has he achieved much there to improve procurement? (Might have, for all I know, tbf.)
Cancelled Warrior CSP (good). Replaced it with nothing (bad).
Cancelled ISSGW anti ship missile (bad). Replaced it with nothing (worse).
Same old story, really.
Thanks. And the ongoing Ajax combat vehicle story is not good. Always difficult to be sure when the media are making more than a meal than they justifiably should, but carting the squaddies off to hospital after a ride in the thing does not sound promising.
Ajax started with a noble aim: buy from anybody but BAE. The decision to level up Merthyr Tydfil by repurposing an abandoned forklift factory to make complex 38 ton AFVs probably made it doomed it from the start.
Still the project has only been running for 25 years. Let's not rush to judgement.
1. “Absolutely nothing the British do will make any material difference to the outcome of a Russia - Ukraine armed conflict so this is pure virtue signalling” - Dura Ace
2. “. A big pile of up-to-date portable anti-tank weapons could make a difference. Turn it into an attritional battle in depth.“ - Malmesbury
3. “is a Russian invasion of the Ukraine the one thing that could save Johnson? The ultimate dead cat?” - Ben Pointer
We have PBers who can properly answer the questions I am sure 🙂
we have taken option to send troops - the Daily Mail claim we have, so can we clear that one up, is the Mail lying?
at least latest technology to kill as many Russians as possible if they invade? To act as a military deterrent? Or virtue signalling?
If you go do you go all in to save Ukraine from Putin, with allies, or what is the value of just a token measure? I can understand value of trying to save Ukraine and it’s West leaning democracy, but a token effort just flags up our business is quite the opposite of genuinely answering their pleas for help? underlines we are not really willing to fight for Ukraine, or acting with many like minded allies when the Ukraines who resist are slaughtered in front of us on news Channel?
Should we do anything to encourage them to slaughter themselves 😕
Surely any military move, especially when we commit troops, or even small ones like this has a purpose, value and gains to make, you can appear in front reporters explain what you are getting into and exit strategy to get out? So can rule out unlike other government business this week this nothing to do with Operation Save the Dog, our commitment and action carefully planned?
I fully support Boris and Biden, or whoever is in charge, taking whatever measures are necessary to defend Ukraine against that fascist pig bastard Putin. Democracies need to stick together against totalitarian aggression. We should have dealt with this back in 2014 when he first invaded Ukraine. Our collective failure then has lead to this present danger. If we don't deal with it this time, we'll be back in another situation in another few years. And then who will it be? Lithuania? Finland?
but you completely blind to my point yet again - we are not really all in though are we? Wr are not properly defending the democracy of Ukraine against the fascist pig bastard. We are going to let him get away with annexing more of it.
All we are doing is, as Malmsy said “two fingers for the novochuk killings you bastard” and then looking away as he annexes away.
We never agree Farooq. You need to think about it.
If we send a NATO army into Ukraine, then that is WWIII. At that point Putin can't back down. So if he starts losing, he knows it curtains for him, so he might risk escalation...
So we are going to fight a poxy war, if it comes to war. The Russians and Ukrainians will do the dying.
The deterrent for Putin is that he will be sending his troops into a meat grinder. After a while, even a dictatorial government has to show *some* success.
“think of it as a FuckYouVeryMuch for the murders committed in the UK by the Russian state. “.
Yes that is helpful, thank you, 🙂 because I remember the Salisbury poisoning that was bang out of order! Me and Everyone in my family were shouting at the TV screen and shouting at Corbyn the traitor!
Meat grinder though. Yuk.
Correct me where I’m wrong. Is this really the best way of getting our own back? Putin has made clear he’s annexing. We have made clear we are letting him. So why does there have to be a fight? I mean What’s the reality in outcome from fight first agree second rather than just peacefully agree?
I am not sure it will properly stop for years. It just moves the front line into other peoples gardens, schools, hospitals? People will just end up living miserably in a war zone getting killed as they attempt to live their lives. It’s going to be horrible and sad for all of us watching it on the news. ☹️
The Ukrainians will fight, because it's their country.
The Russians lost in the end, because the number of young men with no legs became noticeable even in a dictatorship.
This was how the Cold War was waged - start fighting directly and 24-36 hours in, the nuclear missiles are flying. Killing each other by proxy is so much more civilised.
This is about making the cost to Putin (and Russia) of Ukrainian real estate really high.
The alternative is fighting Putin when he decides there is a piece of another country he could really, really likes. Like, say, Latvia.
Yeah I do understand the point you are making. But at the end of the day though when the final whistle goes everyonecshakes hands, and 70 years later we are all proudly posing in our German and Japanese cars (because they won the war against our car industry).
Don’t you ever thinking though It’s not a paintballing event. People will be trying to live their lives in the proxy war zone. What about them? They will turn into refugees. We will have to deflect them away with our sonar weapons. Why do we do such counterintuitive things to our own security and influence have all these proxy wars? Is proxy wars really last resort? Why don’t we have lots more peace deals?
Most wars are stupid. Historically the majority of wars were started by the side that lost. My favourite is the War of the Triple Alliance - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_War. As PJ O'Rourke observed, over a century later, Paraguay is one South American country that doesn't feel crowded. "We fought like madmen, because we loved our country insanely".....
The problem comes down to - what do you do when someone decides he wants to steal a country? Let him? Or fight?
And when he has stolen that one, what does he think of next? Tea, biscuits, which country next?
“You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour, and you will have war."
So our Problems Putin, you are very sure of that. And I don’t disagree. He says it’s us. I’m not saying fascist pig bastard as Farooq poetically called him isn’t an enemy or a problem. he is. Like you said his over funded spy team and killings on our soil. But firstly is he a worthy enemy? Secondly are we addicted to proxy wars like Syria to try and thrawt his growing influence? And thirdly, we have to ask, do we encroach a bit much at times as well, making the bear agitated?
Defence is about getting the detente right? And war also comes as soft power. Like against the Chinese and Russians to an extent, have us so reliant on oil pipe lines and investment in infrastructure, and political party funding, and allowing them to own media, are we even awake to their soft power engagement?
you say Ukrainians will fight because it’s their country. But a complicated sort of country? You explained it yourself to us very well. The border, where it’s Eastern orthodox religion and Slav ethnicity, and rest lots of Catholic with polish and Lithuanian empire history is you explained yourself few weeks ago, complicated, and difficult for a peace deal.
Difficult questions.
But does a fight actually answer the difficult questions in any durable way?
And if we are keen for a bit of revenge, and it’s a proxy war, lots of geopolitical power games proxy war, is it even still that same fight trying to answer those same timeless questions?
And the people living in the “theatre” for years. 😕
Do you see what I mean?
I might look at this and regret it when sobered up, I’m shooting from the hip. Because I’m not a pacifist. Just one proxy war after another isn’t really the last resort open to us is it, in dealing with Putin? Unless you say it is.
I’m going to call it a night now. But it’s been fun 🙋♀️
The answer to all of that, is - indeed.
There are guarantees in war - Death, horror, desolation.
What would make Putin stop? Saying please? Abandoning the Eastern half of Europe, and hoping that is his last demand?
What makes him stop? You are talking about where do we draw the line? In our diplomacy, European security, best achieved via detente? I’ll have a go.
To start with what makes him stop, we need to know what makes him tick.
Let’s use your example. You are suggesting Ukraine and Latvia as much and the same thing, so Putin wants to grab them in much the same way for much the same reasons? But Latvia is mostly Protestant and then Catholic. Ukraine much more complicated, Orthodox, but various types. Just Orthodox, but not just Just Orthodox. We haven’t got all night. Latvians Letts it be known are Baltic, not even Western Slavs. Ukrainians are very much considered Eastern Slavs. And we learn a lesson from History, the agitating French created the Crimean War with agreement with Ottomans allowing Catholic jurisdiction over Orthodox lands. So we should know to make allowances Mother Russia gets touchy over this? Early twentieth century the Germanic’s were duffing up the southern Slavs and dragged Mother Russia into something that escalated into the First World War.
I think my paragraph, by all means take it apart, if accurate gives clear guidelines what from our standpoint are no go’s for them, and what bits are a headache for both parties.
As for Putins claim there was agreement with west NATO would not encroach, and we have broken it, I think we have been sensible not to over Ukraine. We could have signed them up for NATO and flooded place with watch towers by now. As far as I’m aware we have been careful not to provoke. In a way it could be a historic surprise if Russia doesn’t want all of Ukraine considering it Slav and orthodox make up and only wants now to partition and a cleaner border. If that really is all Russia wants, maybe Ukraine and West could negotiated border and lived in peace to see how it works. But too late now as we have clearly chosen proxy war.
Putin, according to people who have met him, is a Greater Russian Nationalist - he believes that Russia should rule the largest territorial boundaries it ever had. It is more about empires than ethnicity.
Chechnya was never Slavic, for example.
"Clean border" - no, you don't want to say things like that. That's how Stalin and Hitler thought - we get a big broom and push all the "wrong" people over "there"..... Oh dear we seem to have broken a few. Never mind.....
As to Ukraine - there is quite a bit of dispute as to how much the people "liberated" by that nice Mr Putin, already, really wanted to be back in Mother Russia.
And why does Russia get to partition Ukraine? Without going through all that bothersome asking people stuff?
Or are we back in the Age of Empires? If so, I have a list of minor territorial modifications I would like. Starting with France - I want the whole lot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Troyes
What, of course, is insane about this is, is that YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE IN YOUR COUNTRY WHO DON'T WANT TO BE IN YOUR COUNTRY.
I mean, this isn't rocket science. If you invade Ukraine, then the resources of the Russian state will be used to handle the inevitable low level insurgency in Ukraine. In the 1950s, Britain realized that ruling all these countries that didn't want to be ruled by you, was a major economic negative. How hard is this to understand?
For a Greater X Nationalist (there are versions of this all over the world - Hungary for example., Or China) the imperative is that their country needs to be as Great as it ever was. Which is at (partially*) expressed by ruling over all the territories that it did back when it was The Biggest And Baddest Empire.
It's faith & belief, rather than any kind of rational analysis. Though it is often wrapped (partially) in rational arguments.
*Another element is that the neighbours need to be properly weak, afraid of and admire the Big Bad Renewed Empire etc.
Thank God we live in a country unaffected by such delusions of grandeur.
The burning issue of the day - does the Prime Minister know a party when he's at one?
To play devil’s advocate for a minute, the staff at Downing St probably do have formal definitions for the various functions that take place there.
To them, a party will involve at least a caterer and an entertainer such as a musician or DJ. Parties were banned during the pandemic, there were no caterers and no musicians allowed, so having a few staff bring their own bottles to sit on the lawn outside for half an hour can’t possibly be a party.
That must be it. The law didn't prohibit parties so long as you did the catering yourself and didn't hire a professional entertainer.
Gosh, how many people must be kicking themselves now that they didn't realise that all through lockdown.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
Also, given the MoDs track record of late (pun intended) on acquiring combat vehicles, has he achieved much there to improve procurement? (Might have, for all I know, tbf.)
Cancelled Warrior CSP (good). Replaced it with nothing (bad).
Cancelled ISSGW anti ship missile (bad). Replaced it with nothing (worse).
Same old story, really.
Thanks. And the ongoing Ajax combat vehicle story is not good. Always difficult to be sure when the media are making more than a meal than they justifiably should, but carting the squaddies off to hospital after a ride in the thing does not sound promising.
Ajax started with a noble aim: buy from anybody but BAE. The decision to level up Merthyr Tydfil by repurposing an abandoned forklift factory to make complex 38 ton AFVs probably made it doomed it from the start.
Still the project has only been running for 25 years. Let's not rush to judgement.
Hmm. Add another four years for in-service (if it can be made to work). That's only the time it took to get from Little Willie to Centurion.
1. “Absolutely nothing the British do will make any material difference to the outcome of a Russia - Ukraine armed conflict so this is pure virtue signalling” - Dura Ace
2. “. A big pile of up-to-date portable anti-tank weapons could make a difference. Turn it into an attritional battle in depth.“ - Malmesbury
3. “is a Russian invasion of the Ukraine the one thing that could save Johnson? The ultimate dead cat?” - Ben Pointer
We have PBers who can properly answer the questions I am sure 🙂
we have taken option to send troops - the Daily Mail claim we have, so can we clear that one up, is the Mail lying?
at least latest technology to kill as many Russians as possible if they invade? To act as a military deterrent? Or virtue signalling?
If you go do you go all in to save Ukraine from Putin, with allies, or what is the value of just a token measure? I can understand value of trying to save Ukraine and it’s West leaning democracy, but a token effort just flags up our business is quite the opposite of genuinely answering their pleas for help? underlines we are not really willing to fight for Ukraine, or acting with many like minded allies when the Ukraines who resist are slaughtered in front of us on news Channel?
Should we do anything to encourage them to slaughter themselves 😕
Surely any military move, especially when we commit troops, or even small ones like this has a purpose, value and gains to make, you can appear in front reporters explain what you are getting into and exit strategy to get out? So can rule out unlike other government business this week this nothing to do with Operation Save the Dog, our commitment and action carefully planned?
I fully support Boris and Biden, or whoever is in charge, taking whatever measures are necessary to defend Ukraine against that fascist pig bastard Putin. Democracies need to stick together against totalitarian aggression. We should have dealt with this back in 2014 when he first invaded Ukraine. Our collective failure then has lead to this present danger. If we don't deal with it this time, we'll be back in another situation in another few years. And then who will it be? Lithuania? Finland?
but you completely blind to my point yet again - we are not really all in though are we? Wr are not properly defending the democracy of Ukraine against the fascist pig bastard. We are going to let him get away with annexing more of it.
All we are doing is, as Malmsy said “two fingers for the novochuk killings you bastard” and then looking away as he annexes away.
We never agree Farooq. You need to think about it.
If we send a NATO army into Ukraine, then that is WWIII. At that point Putin can't back down. So if he starts losing, he knows it curtains for him, so he might risk escalation...
So we are going to fight a poxy war, if it comes to war. The Russians and Ukrainians will do the dying.
The deterrent for Putin is that he will be sending his troops into a meat grinder. After a while, even a dictatorial government has to show *some* success.
“think of it as a FuckYouVeryMuch for the murders committed in the UK by the Russian state. “.
Yes that is helpful, thank you, 🙂 because I remember the Salisbury poisoning that was bang out of order! Me and Everyone in my family were shouting at the TV screen and shouting at Corbyn the traitor!
Meat grinder though. Yuk.
Correct me where I’m wrong. Is this really the best way of getting our own back? Putin has made clear he’s annexing. We have made clear we are letting him. So why does there have to be a fight? I mean What’s the reality in outcome from fight first agree second rather than just peacefully agree?
I am not sure it will properly stop for years. It just moves the front line into other peoples gardens, schools, hospitals? People will just end up living miserably in a war zone getting killed as they attempt to live their lives. It’s going to be horrible and sad for all of us watching it on the news. ☹️
The Ukrainians will fight, because it's their country.
The Russians lost in the end, because the number of young men with no legs became noticeable even in a dictatorship.
This was how the Cold War was waged - start fighting directly and 24-36 hours in, the nuclear missiles are flying. Killing each other by proxy is so much more civilised.
This is about making the cost to Putin (and Russia) of Ukrainian real estate really high.
The alternative is fighting Putin when he decides there is a piece of another country he could really, really likes. Like, say, Latvia.
Yeah I do understand the point you are making. But at the end of the day though when the final whistle goes everyonecshakes hands, and 70 years later we are all proudly posing in our German and Japanese cars (because they won the war against our car industry).
Don’t you ever thinking though It’s not a paintballing event. People will be trying to live their lives in the proxy war zone. What about them? They will turn into refugees. We will have to deflect them away with our sonar weapons. Why do we do such counterintuitive things to our own security and influence have all these proxy wars? Is proxy wars really last resort? Why don’t we have lots more peace deals?
Most wars are stupid. Historically the majority of wars were started by the side that lost. My favourite is the War of the Triple Alliance - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_War. As PJ O'Rourke observed, over a century later, Paraguay is one South American country that doesn't feel crowded. "We fought like madmen, because we loved our country insanely".....
The problem comes down to - what do you do when someone decides he wants to steal a country? Let him? Or fight?
And when he has stolen that one, what does he think of next? Tea, biscuits, which country next?
“You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour, and you will have war."
So our Problems Putin, you are very sure of that. And I don’t disagree. He says it’s us. I’m not saying fascist pig bastard as Farooq poetically called him isn’t an enemy or a problem. he is. Like you said his over funded spy team and killings on our soil. But firstly is he a worthy enemy? Secondly are we addicted to proxy wars like Syria to try and thrawt his growing influence? And thirdly, we have to ask, do we encroach a bit much at times as well, making the bear agitated?
Defence is about getting the detente right? And war also comes as soft power. Like against the Chinese and Russians to an extent, have us so reliant on oil pipe lines and investment in infrastructure, and political party funding, and allowing them to own media, are we even awake to their soft power engagement?
you say Ukrainians will fight because it’s their country. But a complicated sort of country? You explained it yourself to us very well. The border, where it’s Eastern orthodox religion and Slav ethnicity, and rest lots of Catholic with polish and Lithuanian empire history is you explained yourself few weeks ago, complicated, and difficult for a peace deal.
Difficult questions.
But does a fight actually answer the difficult questions in any durable way?
And if we are keen for a bit of revenge, and it’s a proxy war, lots of geopolitical power games proxy war, is it even still that same fight trying to answer those same timeless questions?
And the people living in the “theatre” for years. 😕
Do you see what I mean?
I might look at this and regret it when sobered up, I’m shooting from the hip. Because I’m not a pacifist. Just one proxy war after another isn’t really the last resort open to us is it, in dealing with Putin? Unless you say it is.
I’m going to call it a night now. But it’s been fun 🙋♀️
The answer to all of that, is - indeed.
There are guarantees in war - Death, horror, desolation.
What would make Putin stop? Saying please? Abandoning the Eastern half of Europe, and hoping that is his last demand?
What makes him stop? You are talking about where do we draw the line? In our diplomacy, European security, best achieved via detente? I’ll have a go.
To start with what makes him stop, we need to know what makes him tick.
Let’s use your example. You are suggesting Ukraine and Latvia as much and the same thing, so Putin wants to grab them in much the same way for much the same reasons? But Latvia is mostly Protestant and then Catholic. Ukraine much more complicated, Orthodox, but various types. Just Orthodox, but not just Just Orthodox. We haven’t got all night. Latvians Letts it be known are Baltic, not even Western Slavs. Ukrainians are very much considered Eastern Slavs. And we learn a lesson from History, the agitating French created the Crimean War with agreement with Ottomans allowing Catholic jurisdiction over Orthodox lands. So we should know to make allowances Mother Russia gets touchy over this? Early twentieth century the Germanic’s were duffing up the southern Slavs and dragged Mother Russia into something that escalated into the First World War.
I think my paragraph, by all means take it apart, if accurate gives clear guidelines what from our standpoint are no go’s for them, and what bits are a headache for both parties.
As for Putins claim there was agreement with west NATO would not encroach, and we have broken it, I think we have been sensible not to over Ukraine. We could have signed them up for NATO and flooded place with watch towers by now. As far as I’m aware we have been careful not to provoke. In a way it could be a historic surprise if Russia doesn’t want all of Ukraine considering it Slav and orthodox make up and only wants now to partition and a cleaner border. If that really is all Russia wants, maybe Ukraine and West could negotiated border and lived in peace to see how it works. But too late now as we have clearly chosen proxy war.
Putin, according to people who have met him, is a Greater Russian Nationalist - he believes that Russia should rule the largest territorial boundaries it ever had. It is more about empires than ethnicity.
Chechnya was never Slavic, for example.
"Clean border" - no, you don't want to say things like that. That's how Stalin and Hitler thought - we get a big broom and push all the "wrong" people over "there"..... Oh dear we seem to have broken a few. Never mind.....
As to Ukraine - there is quite a bit of dispute as to how much the people "liberated" by that nice Mr Putin, already, really wanted to be back in Mother Russia.
And why does Russia get to partition Ukraine? Without going through all that bothersome asking people stuff?
Or are we back in the Age of Empires? If so, I have a list of minor territorial modifications I would like. Starting with France - I want the whole lot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Troyes
What, of course, is insane about this is, is that YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE IN YOUR COUNTRY WHO DON'T WANT TO BE IN YOUR COUNTRY.
I mean, this isn't rocket science. If you invade Ukraine, then the resources of the Russian state will be used to handle the inevitable low level insurgency in Ukraine. In the 1950s, Britain realized that ruling all these countries that didn't want to be ruled by you, was a major economic negative. How hard is this to understand?
For a Greater X Nationalist (there are versions of this all over the world - Hungary for example., Or China) the imperative is that their country needs to be as Great as it ever was. Which is at (partially*) expressed by ruling over all the territories that it did back when it was The Biggest And Baddest Empire.
It's faith & belief, rather than any kind of rational analysis. Though it is often wrapped (partially) in rational arguments.
*Another element is that the neighbours need to be properly weak, afraid of and admire the Big Bad Renewed Empire etc.
Thank God we live in a country unaffected by such delusions of grandeur.
Well we've got past the invade-the-neighbours-because-its-thursday phase.
The burning issue of the day - does the Prime Minister know a party when he's at one?
I’ve heard from an insider on Sue Gray’s team that Boris will be cleared - Downing St Chief of Staff said to Boris “come and join the troops - the party isn’t a party without you” and Boris quite reasonably and “implicitly” understood that the “party” referred to was the Tory Party and that he was required for a strategy meeting in the garden and therefore it was work.
"Now is the time for all good men to come to the party"
A serious speech by the UK defence secretary on Ukraine, in which he not only takes down the Kremlin’s bogus arguments, but also shows what British foreign policy, if undertaken with competence, can stand for.
It's a bit strange Ben Wallace is never talked about as a potential leader. It may be too early for him but he is impressive and competent. Not many in the Cabinet can claim both.
Is he competent? He was overruled on not helping Pen Farthing by the Prime Minister's PPS.
His was the right call. The overruling was frankly disgusting and shameful.
But if he was competent or not a eunuch then he should have resigned and flagged up the issue at the time.
I don't think so. He was very clearly irritated by it as an absurd and immoral distraction from saving people we had duties of care to but that was his priority and rightly so.
Under his watch, doggies were prioritised over darkies, that will be his shameful epitaph.
He fought it as hard as he could, and it's not a job from which you can really flounce from while the shit is htf.
Meanwhile the Taliban reduce a musician to tears as they mock him and burn his instruments in front of him
Did someone above suggest this was "blowing over"?
It truly isn't. The Tory rebels efforts even have a project name. And whilst I remember that photo of John Redwood and his rebels, remember that the embarrassing collection of assorted lunatics wazzocks and incompetents is the *Prime Minister*'s team, not the usurper(s).
Cummings is the Poker player with 17 packs-worth of aces up his sleeve.
Comments
I suspect SKS (a criminal lawyer remember given his previous job) will have a field day with it...
For all her veneration, Merkel got some major calls wrong. Axing nuclear after Fukushima (Germany, of course, being famous for earthquakes and tidal waves) was bloody stupid.
https://twitter.com/tripperhead/status/1483343163997962240?s=20
The figures are the first to exclude the impact of the government's furlough scheme which ended on 31 September.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60035312
That's up there with 'Don't tell him, Pike.'
What Cummings has done is throw the Gray report wide apart as the report now needs to cover something she was hoping to avoid going near.
Why are you trying to scare people with your avatar?
A small bright spot on an otherwise somewhat depressing morning, particularly Chez Cole.
Although it looks as if the fog outside may clear.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1483349214541324294
https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1483352205491064833
Lords watchdog launches inquiry into Michelle Mone over ‘VIP lane’ contract
Investigation into Tory peer relates to PPE company awarded £203m in government contracts
The commissioner confirmed that the investigation would be for “alleged involvement in procuring contracts for PPE Medpro, leading to potential breaches” of three provisions of the Lords code, which cover the requirement that peers publicly register “all relevant interests”, and prohibit them from lobbying for a company or a person in which a peer “has a financial interest”.
The commissioner also stated that Mone would be investigated under the more general provisions of the code’s paragraph 9, which includes that peers “should always act on their personal honour”; must never accept “any financial inducement as an incentive or reward for exercising parliamentary influence”; and “must not seek to profit from membership of the house by accepting or agreeing to accept payment or other incentive or reward in return for providing parliamentary advice or services.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/17/lords-standards-commissioner-launches-inquiry-into-michelle-mone
The obvious conclusion is that Dominic Raab is not taking his line from Downing Street. Which is more interesting than the “gotcha!” takes flying around.
We should always consider the possibility that he meant to say what he said. He probably did.
https://twitter.com/AlastairMeeks/status/1483352801451425792
Sorry, scrub that, I know explicitly that he’s a fuking idiot.
Has anyone ever heard this phrase before? It sounds like something from early Victorian times - maybe Captain Bligh berating Fletcher Christian but I’ve never come across it in my life!
Judging by the opinion polls, you may be repenting, but we don’t want any swingback now do we? Naughty boys and girls.
No chance.
Edit. I thought it was all too typical that the first confirmed death on Tonga was a Brit who got swept away trying to save her dogs. There is a streak of madness in the British psyche that is not nearly as endearing as we like to think.
He manages to make the prospect of Britain going to war with Russia over Ukraine seem tedious.
@danbloom1
Raab: "There was speculation that the May 20 party was held in my honor to thank me, it's just ridiculous."
@KayBurley
: So it was a party! "No, exactly, er, no, er, the, no no no no. This is the claim that was made, it was nonsense, I wasn't invited and I didn't attend."
* I can see reasons why you may not reveal everything in some very highly classified situations that could result in you accidently lying - but a party in May 2020 isn't really that classified.
All dictators take time to expand into their role.
Competent rubber stamp ?
Boris Johnson ally Ben Wallace threatens to go 'Game of Thrones' on Michael Gove and give him a penectomy.
It seems he wasn't happy about the Lord Chancellor's bid for leadership
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/michael-gove-game-of-thrones-tory-leadership-brexit-boris-johnson-ally-threatens-theon-greyjoy-penectomy-a7113656.html
#baldiesneverwin
Maybe you mean fight against the remilitarization of the Rhineland in 1936?
Never heard the expression, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it derives from her childhood in the rougher bits of Glasgow. My dad had a similar upbringing (albeit nearly half a century before Mone) and he had a wide range of casually racist expressions. The well-known “Dae ye think a came up the Clyde in a banana boat?” springs to mind, but he routinely described people he perceived to be annoying as “black-faced Babylonians”, which I have never seen or heard anywhere else.
Mone is a wee lassie who never grew up and discovered, among other things, the merits of a moral backbone.
Cancelled ISSGW anti ship missile (bad). Replaced it with nothing (worse).
Same old story, really.
I don't like Putin, but the fact that he's is a reckless reactionary nationalist doesn't mean he's an idiot. And some of the warnings we see about both Russia and China are just ex-cold war stuff. How's the Russian invasion of Sweden getting on? And are the Chinese landings in Taiwan making progress?
Good judgment, Pen etc
Articulate, good speech/article this morning
Loyal, Gove etc
A bit dull, according to @Dura_Ace
Fair enough. No chance.
It's faith & belief, rather than any kind of rational analysis. Though it is often wrapped (partially) in rational arguments.
*Another element is that the neighbours need to be properly weak, afraid of and admire the Big Bad Renewed Empire etc.
But also unfair to pin the decision of who is lying on her.. really not her job and she’s in increasingly impossible position.
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1483359424945270784
I’m that rare beast: an independence supporter who also favours nuclear power (at least for now).
Not everyone has the luck* of geography with which Scotland is blessed.
(*and curse)
https://california.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1525/california/9780520280861.001.0001/upso-9780520280861
(which doesn't preclude it being a Weegie slang term by transfer, obvs)
@c_drosten, Germany's virologist-in-chief. Source:
https://twitter.com/codendahl/status/1482652290347581441?s=21
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=322476
Like the headline in Brideshead Revisited - "Marquis's Son Unused to Wine".
Assuming no-one trashed Dominic Cummings email account and those of other people who have left that should be easy to find out. Heck even deleted emails of all No 10 staff should be being kept and be accessible so if Cummings says there are emails they should be findable or something else is seriously wrong.
The insane thing is to soldier on with all these programs eating up money, slowing them down and cutting them back to reduce short term costs but catastrophically increasing the long term costs with the result all too much of the kit is redundant before the much reduced order ever gets into service.
Focusing the available budget on a limited range of projects and getting them actually delivered seems a much better way forward.
https://twitter.com/VICEWorldNews/status/1483135699142467587?s=20
Not often that I say this sort of thing, but this an exceptional article by the defence secretary. Literate, forceful, gutsy and moral. He is entirely correct in every aspect.
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1483360484950691846?s=20
To them, a party will involve at least a caterer and an entertainer such as a musician or DJ. Parties were banned during the pandemic, there were no caterers and no musicians allowed, so having a few staff bring their own bottles to sit on the lawn outside for half an hour can’t possibly be a party.
If sober competence is the order of the day, added sprinkles of real feeling might be important.
Still the project has only been running for 25 years. Let's not rush to judgement.
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=322373
Gosh, how many people must be kicking themselves now that they didn't realise that all through lockdown.
Excl poll by @YonderConsult for @gbnews
83% believe “Boris clearly broke the government’s own rules during Covid lockdown”
44% now no longer feel any obligation to follow new rules in light of the Downing Street parties
Just 23% think Boris is the right person to be PM
https://twitter.com/tomhfh/status/1483352549478514688?s=20
It truly isn't. The Tory rebels efforts even have a project name. And whilst I remember that photo of John Redwood and his rebels, remember that the embarrassing collection of assorted lunatics wazzocks and incompetents is the *Prime Minister*'s team, not the usurper(s).
Cummings is the Poker player with 17 packs-worth of aces up his sleeve.
This is the new brand name.
Politically not the best decision in my opinion, even if the science says otherwise.