BlancheLivermore said:

I’ve found a problem with the east coast in the spring. It’s really hard to find somewhere sunny in the evening for a beer, and it gets bloody chilly in the shade. I’ve managed to find a place on the edge of the town square where I’ve got the last glimmer of sunshine coming down the street. When that goes I’ll need my coat and scarf on!

Blanchehenge 🙂

Well that’s a healthy lead for Macron and a healthy second for Le Pen.

These flash results are usually very accurate, so lay Melenchon to advance.

HYUFD said:

Projection of Macron 28.6%, Le Pen 24.4%, Melenchon 20%, Zemmour 7%, Pecresse 5%, Jadot 5% then from Ifop.

Largely as final polls predicted Macron and Le Pen head to the runoff, maybe a little higher for Melenchon and a little lower for Pecresse
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1513215861716398086?s=20&t=xwJkkIQdxvukYmwClxDJOA

51.4% for the more extreme candidates.

HYUFD said:

Projection of Macron 28.6%, Le Pen 24.4%, Melenchon 20%, Zemmour 7%, Pecresse 5%, Jadot 5% then from Ifop.

Largely as final polls predicted Macron and Le Pen head to the runoff, maybe a little higher for Melenchon and a little lower for Pecresse
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1513215861716398086?s=20&t=xwJkkIQdxvukYmwClxDJOA

I fear you are just projecting, HYUFD!

Just read on the Beeb Masters live feed that Scottie Scheffler is a big fan of the US The Office.

I guess when the very annoying US golf fans shout “GET IN THE HOLE!”, he’ll reply “THAT’S WHAT SHE SAID!”

Farooq said:

Malmesbury said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Farooq said:

Alanbrooke said:

NickPalmer said:

StillWaters said:

kjh said:

Nobody should admire Franco for any reason. Of course HYUFD talks again of stuff he didn't live thru' (unlike many of us who were around when he was in power and visited Spain), although a quick look at Wikipedia answers the question as to whether he should be admired for anything.

I know nothing about Franco except a vague sense that he was not a good guy based on the fact he was close to Mussolini and Peron. Is that unfair, or can I stick him on my list of shit I don’t to know about?

Franco was a butcher who overthrew a democratic government and slaughtered his opponents wholesale. One can make two mitigating claims for him. He stayed out of WW2, to the disappointment of Hitler, which enabled us to maintain Gibaltar. And in his later years, he largely stopped murdering people and it became possible to expressed mild dissent at an individual level without getting arrested.

All things are relative. He was arguably marginally less bad than Mussolini, and certainly less bad than Hitler.

Somehow Stalin never gets a look in.

Please, everyone, stop talking about how bad fascists are, it seems to upset Alanbrooke because reasons.

Alanbrooke makes a perfectly reasonable point. In the great league table of fucking rabid genocidal nutters Stalin wins hands down against all comers. Yet there is a faction of the left that seems to hate having this pointed out. Your reaction would seem to indicate you are part of this faction.

Of course that doesn't for a second excuse the right wing fucking rabid genocidal nutters but we still live in a world where it is acceptable to display the Hammer and Sickle but not the Swastika when both should be equally offensive.

Why are you all silent on Emperor Hirohito's forces massacring 14 million people in China and Asia more widely. I've always suspected this place to be a hotbed of Sinophobic fascists, and I guess that's now confirmed.

Hirohito and the boys were slackers - the War of the Triple Alliance is believed to have killed 80%+of the male 16+ population of Paraguay. And half the women.

I have always suspected PB of being a hotbed of Brazilian Imperialism....

Guilty as charged. God I hate those Paraguayans.

I see that we get the blame for it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_War#Theories_about_British_influence_on_the_outbreak_of_war

As I am not 'au fait' with the French procedures is Macron safe or does Le Pen have a chance and if so a realistic one ?

Big_G_NorthWales said:

As I am not 'au fait' with the French procedures is Macron safe or does Le Pen have a chance and if so a realistic one ?

Maybe not 'safe', but this first-round results suggests Macron should win with a reasonable margin.

So Macron has done better than last time, when he went on to win a thumping 2:1 victory.

As you were.

tlg86 said:

Interesting that Melancon went from around 11% a month ago to get 20%.

The two leading parties of France could not muster 10% between them.

Utterly incredible.

Foxy said:

Gary_Burton said:

#Macron (27,5%) reprend la tête, talonné par #LePen (24%), dans un nouveau sondage !

Macron 28.1% and Le Pen 23.3% in the exit poll on BBC.

Better than last time, and better than most polls.

Safe as houses.

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Farooq said:

Alanbrooke said:

NickPalmer said:

StillWaters said:

kjh said:

Nobody should admire Franco for any reason. Of course HYUFD talks again of stuff he didn't live thru' (unlike many of us who were around when he was in power and visited Spain), although a quick look at Wikipedia answers the question as to whether he should be admired for anything.

I know nothing about Franco except a vague sense that he was not a good guy based on the fact he was close to Mussolini and Peron. Is that unfair, or can I stick him on my list of shit I don’t to know about?

Franco was a butcher who overthrew a democratic government and slaughtered his opponents wholesale. One can make two mitigating claims for him. He stayed out of WW2, to the disappointment of Hitler, which enabled us to maintain Gibaltar. And in his later years, he largely stopped murdering people and it became possible to expressed mild dissent at an individual level without getting arrested.

All things are relative. He was arguably marginally less bad than Mussolini, and certainly less bad than Hitler.

Somehow Stalin never gets a look in.

Please, everyone, stop talking about how bad fascists are, it seems to upset Alanbrooke because reasons.

Alanbrooke makes a perfectly reasonable point. In the great league table of fucking rabid genocidal nutters Stalin wins hands down against all comers. Yet there is a faction of the left that seems to hate having this pointed out. Your reaction would seem to indicate you are part of this faction.

Of course that doesn't for a second excuse the right wing fucking rabid genocidal nutters but we still live in a world where it is acceptable to display the Hammer and Sickle but not the Swastika when both should be equally offensive.

Why are you all silent on Emperor Hirohito's forces massacring 14 million people in China and Asia more widely. I've always suspected this place to be a hotbed of Sinophobic fascists, and I guess that's now confirmed.

Because compared to Stalin and Mao he's an amateur.

Admit it, you just can't stand seeing those left wing icons being compared to the fascists.

(That last is slightly tongue in cheek)

No, to turn serious for a moment, I'm all in favour of repeating the truth about Stalin's crimes. Not a few months ago I was recommending a film ("Mr Jones") about the holodomor.
But it's a bit silly to essentially accuse people of ignoring Stalin's crimes when it does get talked about. .

It does, but he and his faction are still, comparitively speaking, oddly accepted by some. Same with Mao. But as you say the references were not meant as a definitive list.

Farooq said:

rcs1000 said:

Alanbrooke said:

NickPalmer said:

StillWaters said:

kjh said:

Nobody should admire Franco for any reason. Of course HYUFD talks again of stuff he didn't live thru' (unlike many of us who were around when he was in power and visited Spain), although a quick look at Wikipedia answers the question as to whether he should be admired for anything.

I know nothing about Franco except a vague sense that he was not a good guy based on the fact he was close to Mussolini and Peron. Is that unfair, or can I stick him on my list of shit I don’t to know about?

Franco was a butcher who overthrew a democratic government and slaughtered his opponents wholesale. One can make two mitigating claims for him. He stayed out of WW2, to the disappointment of Hitler, which enabled us to maintain Gibaltar. And in his later years, he largely stopped murdering people and it became possible to expressed mild dissent at an individual level without getting arrested.

All things are relative. He was arguably marginally less bad than Mussolini, and certainly less bad than Hitler.

Somehow Stalin never gets a look in.

He also forget Pol Pot, Fidel Castro, Mark Zuckerberg and Chairman Mao.

Somehow Jimmy Carter never gets a look in

Too right. All those folk with peanut allergy he's done in over the years.

williamglenn said:

French results (BFM):

Macron: 28.5%
Le Pen: 24.2%
Melenchon: 20.2%
Zemmour: 7.1%
Pecresse: 5.1%

Very consistent from Melenchon on last time. Are The Republicans going the say of the Socialist Party?

Though as I recall Le Pen's mob essentially get shut out in the assembly elections never mind her personal performance (given you only need to get to the low 20s to get into second place).

Socialist candidate Hidalgo, who is projected to get just 2%, first candidate to endorse Macron for the runoff

https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1513219450606137346?s=20&t=xwJkkIQdxvukYmwClxDJOA

Foxy said:

MattW said:

NickPalmer said:

StillWaters said:

kjh said:

Nobody should admire Franco for any reason. Of course HYUFD talks again of stuff he didn't live thru' (unlike many of us who were around when he was in power and visited Spain), although a quick look at Wikipedia answers the question as to whether he should be admired for anything.

I know nothing about Franco except a vague sense that he was not a good guy based on the fact he was close to Mussolini and Peron. Is that unfair, or can I stick him on my list of shit I don’t to know about?

Franco was a butcher who overthrew a democratic government and slaughtered his opponents wholesale. One can make two mitigating claims for him. He stayed out of WW2, to the disappointment of Hitler, which enabled us to maintain Gibaltar. And in his later years, he largely stopped murdering people and it became possible to expressed mild dissent at an individual level without getting arrested.

All things are relative. He was arguably marginally less bad than Mussolini, and certainly less bad than Hitler.

Hmmm.

How many of us were happy going to Spain on holiday whilst it was run by Franco? How many of us would be happy going to Russia now? Should it matter?

I'm, as Zsa-Zsa Gabor may have said to the end of her days, too young to have had the option.

I did go to Spain when Franco was in power, but was still in nappies at the time, so have an excuse. I greatly enjoyed the 2018 World Cup and am keen to see more of Russia. It has long been on my list to do the Trans-Siberian, but that have to put that off for a few years.

I'm not sure that excuses you @Foxy
At what age did you stop (assuming you have stopped) wearing nappies?

There is a new thred, but I can post 'first' in it

Houston nous avons une probleme

philiph said:

Foxy said:

MattW said:

NickPalmer said:

StillWaters said:

kjh said:

Nobody should admire Franco for any reason. Of course HYUFD talks again of stuff he didn't live thru' (unlike many of us who were around when he was in power and visited Spain), although a quick look at Wikipedia answers the question as to whether he should be admired for anything.

I know nothing about Franco except a vague sense that he was not a good guy based on the fact he was close to Mussolini and Peron. Is that unfair, or can I stick him on my list of shit I don’t to know about?

Franco was a butcher who overthrew a democratic government and slaughtered his opponents wholesale. One can make two mitigating claims for him. He stayed out of WW2, to the disappointment of Hitler, which enabled us to maintain Gibaltar. And in his later years, he largely stopped murdering people and it became possible to expressed mild dissent at an individual level without getting arrested.

All things are relative. He was arguably marginally less bad than Mussolini, and certainly less bad than Hitler.

Hmmm.

How many of us were happy going to Spain on holiday whilst it was run by Franco? How many of us would be happy going to Russia now? Should it matter?

I'm, as Zsa-Zsa Gabor may have said to the end of her days, too young to have had the option.

I did go to Spain when Franco was in power, but was still in nappies at the time, so have an excuse. I greatly enjoyed the 2018 World Cup and am keen to see more of Russia. It has long been on my list to do the Trans-Siberian, but that have to put that off for a few years.

I'm not sure that excuses you @Foxy
At what age did you stop (assuming you have stopped) wearing nappies?

It was a while back, and still some time before I need them again 😇

Foxy said:

philiph said:

Foxy said:

MattW said:

NickPalmer said:

StillWaters said:

kjh said:

Nobody should admire Franco for any reason. Of course HYUFD talks again of stuff he didn't live thru' (unlike many of us who were around when he was in power and visited Spain), although a quick look at Wikipedia answers the question as to whether he should be admired for anything.

I know nothing about Franco except a vague sense that he was not a good guy based on the fact he was close to Mussolini and Peron. Is that unfair, or can I stick him on my list of shit I don’t to know about?

Franco was a butcher who overthrew a democratic government and slaughtered his opponents wholesale. One can make two mitigating claims for him. He stayed out of WW2, to the disappointment of Hitler, which enabled us to maintain Gibaltar. And in his later years, he largely stopped murdering people and it became possible to expressed mild dissent at an individual level without getting arrested.

All things are relative. He was arguably marginally less bad than Mussolini, and certainly less bad than Hitler.

Hmmm.

How many of us were happy going to Spain on holiday whilst it was run by Franco? How many of us would be happy going to Russia now? Should it matter?

I'm, as Zsa-Zsa Gabor may have said to the end of her days, too young to have had the option.

I did go to Spain when Franco was in power, but was still in nappies at the time, so have an excuse. I greatly enjoyed the 2018 World Cup and am keen to see more of Russia. It has long been on my list to do the Trans-Siberian, but that have to put that off for a few years.

I'm not sure that excuses you @Foxy
At what age did you stop (assuming you have stopped) wearing nappies?

It was a while back, and still some time before I need them again 😇

Not in Extinction Rebellion, then.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

BigRich said:

There is a new thred, but I can post 'first' in it

I tried as well!

It's a sword in the stone situation, they who can post shall be crowned.

On these numbers, can we infer much about the parliamentary elections? Strong performance for FN?

NickPalmer said:

Foxy said:

MattW said:

StillWaters said:

kjh said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Farooq said:

HYUFD said:

Farooq said:

HYUFD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Stark_Dawning said:

HYUFD said:

Andy_JS said:

Rishi Sunak is about to be overtaken by Tom Tugendhat for second place in the next Tory leader stakes on BE.

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.160663234

Rather ridiculous given Tugendhat is a Remainer unlike Sunak and not even in the Cabinet.

Wallace should be in the top 3 to succeed Boris alongside Truss and Sunak, not Tugendhat

Is the Leaver/Remainer thing still a dynamic though? I get the impression that the Tories are now seeing Brexit as something of an embarrassment best forgotten about. (The last strained attempt to make a virtue out of it was the stuff with Rees-Mogg and The Sun but I doubt there'll be any repetition of that - just too silly.)

Of course it is, given the vast majority of Tory voters let alone Tory members are still strongly pro Brexit and the Brexit deal we have. That will continue to be the case for at least a generation

You live in a world of make believe

I am in favour of brexit but want a deal that draws the UK - EU closer together especially on trade

You are a Remain voter who voted for Blair and has never been a great fan of Boris.

That rather proves my point, you are hardly typical of most current Tory voters and Tory members

Mate, you are a fan of Franco. I think G is more in tune with Conservative voters than you are.

The average Tory member is probably more a fan of Franco than the EU now.

I never said I was a fan of his anyway, just he did keep Spain together

The average Tory member is probably more a fan of Franco than the EU now.

No. Just no.

He makes the most extraordinary comments with absolutely no evidence

Nobody should admire Franco for any reason. Of course HYUFD talks again of stuff he didn't live thru' (unlike many of us who were around when he was in power and visited Spain), although a quick look at Wikipedia answers the question as to whether he should be admired for anything.

I know nothing about Franco except a vague sense that he was not a good guy based on the fact he was close to Mussolini and Peron. Is that unfair, or can I stick him on my list of shit I don’t to know about?

I'd stick him on your list of people to read about. I make him one of the last 3 Dictators in Western Europe - Greece, Portugal, Spain all went in the mid-1970s.. I've left out Albania.

Won a bloody civil war in the late 1930s, with a leftist volunteer International Brigade opposition forces with many feel was heroic. 50k volunteers. 15k died. Echoes of Ukraine in some respects.

To approach the Spanish Civil War, I don't know who to advise you to read - except to approach it perhaps look out some of the reporting from Martha Gellhorn (I have no idea where to find it - New Yorker archives?) or read For Whom the Bell Tolls by Hemingway.

Others will know far more than me on that, and I would welcome recommendations myself.

Homage to Catalonia by George Orwell is very good. The infighting between Republican factions shows why they failed. It is also key to understanding how Orwells views of Stalin evolved.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Spanish-Civil-War-Hugh-Thomas/dp/0141011610/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=spanish+civil+war&qid=1649614568&sr=8-3 is generally considered to be the most balanced book - Thomas was at different times Labour, Conservative and Liberal, but he tried to represent the war fairly, though somewhat unhelpfully to the International Brigade. Orwell had a specific bias to the POUM (Trotskyists) who had a long feud with the Stalinist communists - neither side were exactly innocent and they were both idiots, as the feud facilitated Franco's victory. That said, there are lots of books that celebrate the International Brigade, which mobilised a whole generation of young leftists to die for the Popular Front.

Yes, Orwell writes from his own perspective, but really catches the flavour of the Revolutionaries on the Republicans side. I read Hugh Thomas some years ago, but found it an exhaustive but rather dull account.

nico679 said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

As I am not 'au fait' with the French procedures is Macron safe or does Le Pen have a chance and if so a realistic one ?

Le Pen still has a chance , much depends on how the left vote transfers . Macron has to put out an olive branch to those voters but today’s projections so far are better than he could have hoped for and suggest there was already some fear of Le Pen amongst voters .

Thank you

Andy_JS said:

Is there an election night programme stream available in the UK?

BBC news has one. Thats what the licence fee gives us minority interests!

kle4 said:

biggles said:

On these numbers, can we infer much about the parliamentary elections? Strong performance for FN?

It's a little better than last time but not much, and it didn't help them then. The key is presumably whether, this time, RN is more transfer friendly than FN, despite being the same party?

That feels right. I’m also assuming human nature means that if you feel “forced” to vote for Macron you’re going to give his lot a kicking in Parliament.

Farooq said:

We'll be able to post in the new thread when we have condemned all the world's dictators in order of severity.

I call Emomali Rahmon.

kle4 said:

biggles said:

On these numbers, can we infer much about the parliamentary elections? Strong performance for FN?

It's a little better than last time but not much, and it didn't help them then. The key is presumably whether, this time, RN is more transfer friendly than FN, despite being the same party?

Last time about 3 million people voted 'blanc' in the second round and turnout also dropped between the two rounds. She's probably less toxic than in 2017 so that effect may be bigger.

Ministry map isn't live, AFP seems to be test data so this Guardian live map is best one I've found so far, shows how many communes counted in each department:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2022/apr/10/french-election-2020-projected-results-and-latest-results

Marine Le Pen thanks the French people for putting her into the second round against "the outgoing President".

Good projection for Macron and Le Pen. Macron up 4% on what he got in the 2017 first round and Le Pen up 2 or 3% on what she got in the first round last time.

Reasonably good result for Melenchon too who is projected to be up slightly too on what he got last time and his supporters will likely now determine who wins the Presidency in the runoff.

Terrible projection for Pecresse, down 15% on what Fillon got in 2017 when he was Les Republicains candidate. Poor result for Hidalgo too who is also down 4% on what the Socialist party's 2017 candidate Hamon got.

OK result for Zemmour in that he beat Pecresse but he would have hoped for a higher voteshare. Most of his supporters will now probably switch to Le Pen in the runoff

Green Party Leader Yannick Jadot endorses Macron for the second round
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1513222960412303369?s=20&t=E1E1aZZAibAgmFK18IZADw

JohnLilburne said:

Sandpit said:

Alanbrooke said:

Sandpit said:

Foxy said:

MattW said:

NickPalmer said:

StillWaters said:

kjh said:

Nobody should admire Franco for any reason. Of course HYUFD talks again of stuff he didn't live thru' (unlike many of us who were around when he was in power and visited Spain), although a quick look at Wikipedia answers the question as to whether he should be admired for anything.

I know nothing about Franco except a vague sense that he was not a good guy based on the fact he was close to Mussolini and Peron. Is that unfair, or can I stick him on my list of shit I don’t to know about?

Franco was a butcher who overthrew a democratic government and slaughtered his opponents wholesale. One can make two mitigating claims for him. He stayed out of WW2, to the disappointment of Hitler, which enabled us to maintain Gibaltar. And in his later years, he largely stopped murdering people and it became possible to expressed mild dissent at an individual level without getting arrested.

All things are relative. He was arguably marginally less bad than Mussolini, and certainly less bad than Hitler.

Hmmm.

How many of us were happy going to Spain on holiday whilst it was run by Franco? How many of us would be happy going to Russia now? Should it matter?

I'm, as Zsa-Zsa Gabor may have said to the end of her days, too young to have had the option.

I did go to Spain when Franco was in power, but was still in nappies at the time, so have an excuse. I greatly enjoyed the 2018 World Cup and am keen to see more of Russia. It has long been on my list to do the Trans-Siberian, but that have to put that off for a few years.

Wife and I were last year planning the Trans-Siberian for next summer. Obviously not now, and not while Putin is alive.

Maybe Lviv this summer instead. Ukraine needs the foreign money.

I wanted to go to St Petersburg

hats probably out for some time.

That was on the list too, probably for the recently-announced F1 race there.

That’s not to be, either.

I had 3 weeks in Russia planned for this September. Will go to Ukraine if at all possible though.

Lviv, Odesa, Chernivitsi and the Carpathians all sound well worth a look, and should be fairly undamaged.

Benpointer said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

Mexicanpete said:

HYUFD said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Benpointer said:

FPT:

rcs1000 said:

TimT said:

rottenborough said:

CarlottaVance said:

Read this interview with Karaganov (reliable bellwether of 🇷🇺ruling elite majority consensus).

If afterwards you still harbor any illusions about sustainable negotiated settlement with Putin's Kremlin on European security order read it again. And again.

https://twitter.com/thorstenbenner/status/1513039187527806977

As he says, war with West looks more inevitable as each day goes by.

Hope to God he is wrong.

Indeed. Anyone with eyes and honest evidence knows that war with the West is not just unwinnable for Russia, but could only end in rout for them, unless:

1. The Putinists are very confident that they can mobilize 5th columns to great effect, or they can bring in China on their side (no other ally would make a significant difference), OR
2. It goes nuclear.

Given the shocking state of most Russian military kit, how likely are the Russians not to have skimped on nuclear weapon maintenance?

I think you made a similar point before and it's a very fair one but not desperately comforting.

Say 90% of their warheads don't work - that still leaves a totally trashed world in the event of them being fired. Especially since the Western retaliation would presumably have to be based on assumption Russian nukes work.

And the Chinese retaliation if they cannot accurately tell where incoming missiles are aimed.

Unless Putin fires a nuclear missile at a NATO nation there will be no NATO nuclear weapons fired at Russia and even then only a NATO nuclear response is guaranteed if France, the USA or UK are hit.

China is on the other side of the world, even if closer to Russia now.

You keep writing this. Do you think that the more times you write that NATO will only retaliate a strike on a NATO member the truer it becomes.

Were Russia to strike Finland or Sweden, I have no doubt the narrative changes.

Even then NATO would not nuke Russia, at most it would be an airstrike and even then not guaranteed as neither are in NATO so it could just be even tighter sanctions on Russia

Well what is the point of the nuclear deterrent if Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and NATO just shrugs it's shoulders and says "well it's not on our patch, carry on, as you were".

You know the answer to this. The nuclear deterrent is meant to protect those who possess it from nuclear attack. It deters nuclear attack upon those nations, as the would-be attacker knows that in return they will be nuked. Clearly it doesn't deter them from attacking a completely different country.

Mate, if you think Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and there's no response from NATO you're in cloud cuckoo land.

I have never suggested that 'there is no response from NATO', I am saying that the British nuclear deterrent would not be deployed in that circumstance. Trident is Trident. Its concept is simple - 'Launch a nuclear attack on Britain, and from the bunker, the UK PM will authorise a Trident strike on you' = deterrent. But we have a ridiculous scenario on here of Trident supporters wanting it to be what it ain't. You have HYUFD insisting that Thatcher could have used it on Argentina in The Falklands, now we have Ukraine-watchers insisting that it could be used on Russia without them striking or intending to strike us. If you want a flexible suite of nuclear options, that isn't Trident. Have the balls to support either the cancellation of Trident, or the acquiring of significant additional tactical nuclear capabilities that we do not currently have as well as Trident.

NickPalmer said:

StillWaters said:

kjh said:

Nobody should admire Franco for any reason. Of course HYUFD talks again of stuff he didn't live thru' (unlike many of us who were around when he was in power and visited Spain), although a quick look at Wikipedia answers the question as to whether he should be admired for anything.

I know nothing about Franco except a vague sense that he was not a good guy based on the fact he was close to Mussolini and Peron. Is that unfair, or can I stick him on my list of shit I don’t to know about?

Franco was a butcher who overthrew a democratic government and slaughtered his opponents wholesale. One can make two mitigating claims for him. He stayed out of WW2, to the disappointment of Hitler, which enabled us to maintain Gibaltar. And in his later years, he largely stopped murdering people and it became possible to expressed mild dissent at an individual level without getting arrested.

All things are relative. He was arguably marginally less bad than Mussolini, and certainly less bad than Hitler.

That’s pretty much aligned with what I assumed. So I can spend my time more productively (currently reading an interesting biography of Peter Thiel)

Malmesbury said:

StillWaters said:

kjh said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Farooq said:

HYUFD said:

Farooq said:

HYUFD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Stark_Dawning said:

HYUFD said:

Andy_JS said:

Rishi Sunak is about to be overtaken by Tom Tugendhat for second place in the next Tory leader stakes on BE.

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.160663234

Rather ridiculous given Tugendhat is a Remainer unlike Sunak and not even in the Cabinet.

Wallace should be in the top 3 to succeed Boris alongside Truss and Sunak, not Tugendhat

Is the Leaver/Remainer thing still a dynamic though? I get the impression that the Tories are now seeing Brexit as something of an embarrassment best forgotten about. (The last strained attempt to make a virtue out of it was the stuff with Rees-Mogg and The Sun but I doubt there'll be any repetition of that - just too silly.)

Of course it is, given the vast majority of Tory voters let alone Tory members are still strongly pro Brexit and the Brexit deal we have. That will continue to be the case for at least a generation

You live in a world of make believe

I am in favour of brexit but want a deal that draws the UK - EU closer together especially on trade

You are a Remain voter who voted for Blair and has never been a great fan of Boris.

That rather proves my point, you are hardly typical of most current Tory voters and Tory members

Mate, you are a fan of Franco. I think G is more in tune with Conservative voters than you are.

The average Tory member is probably more a fan of Franco than the EU now.

I never said I was a fan of his anyway, just he did keep Spain together

The average Tory member is probably more a fan of Franco than the EU now.

No. Just no.

He makes the most extraordinary comments with absolutely no evidence

Nobody should admire Franco for any reason. Of course HYUFD talks again of stuff he didn't live thru' (unlike many of us who were around when he was in power and visited Spain), although a quick look at Wikipedia answers the question as to whether he should be admired for anything.

I know nothing about Franco except a vague sense that he was not a good guy based on the fact he was close to Mussolini and Peron. Is that unfair, or can I stick him on my list of shit I don’t to know about?

He was a semi-demi-Fascist* dictator, who overthrew the democratically elected government of Spain in a violent coup, initiating a horrible civil war that kills thousands. He caused thousands more to be murdered - including, some say, his rivals on his own side.

He allied with Germany, who created the following piece of art -



He ran Spain with an iron grip until his death. All opposition was banned and many, many were imprisoned for not being in the Franco fan club.

He was an utter thunderknut. He improved the world by dying.

*He tried to distinguish himself and Francoism from the hard core Fascists (see the Blue Legion), but took many of their policies and mixed them up with hard core reactionary social policies. Forward to the 18th Century, pretty much.

Thanks

I reckon next time round it could well be Melenchon vs Le Pen. The economics of the next few years are going to be hideous.

With Zemmour and Pecresse doing so poorly, there arent that many far right votes left. It looks a comfortable 60/40 for Macron on tonights exit poll.

rcs1000 said:

Alanbrooke said:

rcs1000 said:

Alanbrooke said:

rcs1000 said:

Alanbrooke said:

rcs1000 said:

Alanbrooke said:

SouthamObserver said:

If Macron gets to 24% it means he has under-performed all the polling. Given how tight the R2 polling is between him and MLP that is very worrying for those of us who would prefer not to have a Putin apologist with access to all NATO’s military secrets living next door

you mean another apologist

Macron already is one

He's not been as resolute as Johnson has, but he has been better than the leaders of Italy, Germany, Japan, or a host of other countries. He has shipped weapons to Ukraine. And he has backed sanctions.

Now, could he have done more, such as getting Total to fully withdraw from Russia, and pressuring other state owned businesses such as Renault to pull out? Could he have backed a full ban on all energy imports from Russia? Sure he could. There's lots more he could have done.

But to claim that Macron and Le Pen are on the same page as far as Putinphilia is patently ridiculous.

Its a slow Sunday and its PB, we have to have a bit of excitement or else its Citys disallowed goal.

But lets be clear hes currently not just President of France, he's le grand fromage of Europe and so far he's done very little but do Maria Zakharovas job for her.

https://news.sky.com/story/emmanuel-macron-calls-polish-pm-mateusz-morawiecki-far-right-anti-semite-after-criticism-of-his-putin-calls-12585999

Wow. That's a spectacularly piece of "whataboutery".

I didnt say it Macron did, so much for solidarite commune in a time of crisis/

It is ridiculous whataboutery, and you know it.

Because the discussion wasn't about whether Macron is a cock, or whether he insulted the Polish PM, or whatever. It is about an equivalence in Putinaphilia between Le Pen and Macron.

And there is no equivalence.

Macron might not like Putin but he does still want his business and would happily sell the easten Europeans to get it.

And yet France has never been the block behind any of the EU sanctions - that would be Italy, Hungary and Germany. Nor have they been backward in sending arms.

So basically, it's an assertion without any actual evidence.

France is suffering - like the rest of the world - with a cost of living crisis. Macron is in a tight election. He could easily have sold out the Ukrainians for cheaper petrol at the pump. He did not.

Now, am I claiming he's somehow a paragon of virtue? Nope. He's got his eyes very firmly fixed on French national interest. And he's also anglophobe whose statements on AZ were beyond irresponsible.

But he has not sold out the Eastern Europeans. Maybe he will. Maybe he won't. But you don't know. And your attempts to claim that he is somehow equivalent with a woman who plastered Putin over her campaign literature really tells us more about you than anything else.

Macron having his eyes fixed firmly on the French national interest does not make him less virtuous, it makes him doing his job. If the leader of the UK doesn't have his eyes there, that's an issue.

MattW said:

Farooq said:

Malmesbury said:

Farooq said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Farooq said:

Alanbrooke said:

NickPalmer said:

StillWaters said:

kjh said:

Nobody should admire Franco for any reason. Of course HYUFD talks again of stuff he didn't live thru' (unlike many of us who were around when he was in power and visited Spain), although a quick look at Wikipedia answers the question as to whether he should be admired for anything.

I know nothing about Franco except a vague sense that he was not a good guy based on the fact he was close to Mussolini and Peron. Is that unfair, or can I stick him on my list of shit I don’t to know about?

Franco was a butcher who overthrew a democratic government and slaughtered his opponents wholesale. One can make two mitigating claims for him. He stayed out of WW2, to the disappointment of Hitler, which enabled us to maintain Gibaltar. And in his later years, he largely stopped murdering people and it became possible to expressed mild dissent at an individual level without getting arrested.

All things are relative. He was arguably marginally less bad than Mussolini, and certainly less bad than Hitler.

Somehow Stalin never gets a look in.

Please, everyone, stop talking about how bad fascists are, it seems to upset Alanbrooke because reasons.

Alanbrooke makes a perfectly reasonable point. In the great league table of fucking rabid genocidal nutters Stalin wins hands down against all comers. Yet there is a faction of the left that seems to hate having this pointed out. Your reaction would seem to indicate you are part of this faction.

Of course that doesn't for a second excuse the right wing fucking rabid genocidal nutters but we still live in a world where it is acceptable to display the Hammer and Sickle but not the Swastika when both should be equally offensive.

Why are you all silent on Emperor Hirohito's forces massacring 14 million people in China and Asia more widely. I've always suspected this place to be a hotbed of Sinophobic fascists, and I guess that's now confirmed.

Hirohito and the boys were slackers - the War of the Triple Alliance is believed to have killed 80%+of the male 16+ population of Paraguay. And half the women.

I have always suspected PB of being a hotbed of Brazilian Imperialism....

Guilty as charged. God I hate those Paraguayans.

I see that we get the blame for it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_War#Theories_about_British_influence_on_the_outbreak_of_war

Although historians have “noted little to no evidence” for this