Howdy, Stranger!

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

DeSantis edges Trump out to become new WH2024 favourite – politicalbetting.com

1356

Comments

  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 16,562
    Defending Ukraine: Early Lessons from the Cyber War
    https://query.prod.cms.rt.microsoft.com/cms/api/am/binary/RE50KOK

    Published by Microsoft last week, this report describes cyber-warfare and also Russian propaganda operations.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 47,261
    edited June 28
    Sandpit said:

    glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61961871

    46 immigrants dead in lorry in Texas

    That’s horrific, and just one incident of many.
    240,000 people were caught trying to illegally enter the US in May alone. With the numbers at a record level tragedy is almost inevitable.
    That’s astonishing. If 240k people are being caught every month, then there must be many more getting through - with seemingly no way to stop the flow.

    Dare I say it, but perhaps the previous President had the right idea about building a physical border.
    The US actually catches a lot of the people who trek across the desert. Fundamentally, it's not tough to see them from helicopter with IR cameras.

    But the big issue is that less than 10% of illegal immigrants cross the US border in a way that would be affected by the wall.

    Most (50-60%) turn up on tourist visas and don't leave. The rest come in like the guys in the lorry. They pay to hide in the bottom of someone's car, or the back of a truck, or climb onto the top of the myriad trains crossing the border.

    (The other big issue is that the worst that can happen to an illegal immigrant is that they're sent back over the border. And then they try again. So unless you plan on imprisoning people for long periods - which would be exceptionally expensive - or executing them - which would be politically and ethically tricky - then how do you discourage them.)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,054

    Defending Ukraine: Early Lessons from the Cyber War
    https://query.prod.cms.rt.microsoft.com/cms/api/am/binary/RE50KOK

    Published by Microsoft last week, this report describes cyber-warfare and also Russian propaganda operations.

    Ooh, that’s very useful. Thanks for posting.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 47,261

    kjh said:

    DavidL said:

    Carnyx said:

    Sandpit said:

    What's wrong with taking your children to drag shows? That's the Florida panto season fucked. America is such a mess if this guy is being touted as the sane alternative to Trump.

    There’s nothing wrong with taking *your* children to a panto.

    There’s a lot wrong with schools staging for children what appear to be very adult-themed and sexually provocative drag shows, without asking parents first.
    Do you have a reliable news source for that, because it sounds like complete bollocks.
    We took our kids to a drag show at the Edinburgh Festival, it was very funny, sweet and had a positive message about letting people be who they want to be. I would have had no problem at all if the kids' school had taken them to see it. The only blatant ideological indoctrination that our daughter's primary school indulged in recently was around the Jubilee.
    I thought pantomimes WERE drag shows?
    They don't have pantos in America because they are terrified of sex, even while being utterly desensitised to violence. It is a very weird culture.
    Anyone who watches panto in this country but accuses others of being weird is, just possibly, lacking insight. Looked at objectively our panto is....weird.
    I've tried explaining what panto is to Americans on numerous occasions and always failed miserably.
    We took my French sister in law to the Greenwich Panto one year. She was an instant convert.
    Unfortunately, she was a convert to Satanism. Now, whenever you visit her, you have to bring animals to be sacrificed at the Black Mass. But heck, at least she seems happy.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 46,613
    To be honest, if the UK can't permanently deploy at least one fully equipped warfighting division (generally accepted to be the smallest formation that comprises a balanced force of all the arms, logistics and services needed for the independent conduct of operations - and that's about 12-15k in size) to Europe on roulement then we may as well not bother having an army. Just stick to a militia, ceremonial forces and some marines instead.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 102,905

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 9,720
    rcs1000 said:

    kjh said:

    DavidL said:

    Carnyx said:

    Sandpit said:

    What's wrong with taking your children to drag shows? That's the Florida panto season fucked. America is such a mess if this guy is being touted as the sane alternative to Trump.

    There’s nothing wrong with taking *your* children to a panto.

    There’s a lot wrong with schools staging for children what appear to be very adult-themed and sexually provocative drag shows, without asking parents first.
    Do you have a reliable news source for that, because it sounds like complete bollocks.
    We took our kids to a drag show at the Edinburgh Festival, it was very funny, sweet and had a positive message about letting people be who they want to be. I would have had no problem at all if the kids' school had taken them to see it. The only blatant ideological indoctrination that our daughter's primary school indulged in recently was around the Jubilee.
    I thought pantomimes WERE drag shows?
    They don't have pantos in America because they are terrified of sex, even while being utterly desensitised to violence. It is a very weird culture.
    Anyone who watches panto in this country but accuses others of being weird is, just possibly, lacking insight. Looked at objectively our panto is....weird.
    I've tried explaining what panto is to Americans on numerous occasions and always failed miserably.
    We took my French sister in law to the Greenwich Panto one year. She was an instant convert.
    Unfortunately, she was a convert to Satanism. Now, whenever you visit her, you have to bring animals to be sacrificed at the Black Mass. But heck, at least she seems happy.
    Well that's what happens when you let people watch a man in a dress.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 54,128
    Scott_xP said:

    Mid-Derbs Con MP Pauline Latham (who voted against PM in confidence vote) says time for cabinet to “push” PM out - says even if in event of 1922 rule change letters threshold met again “most PMs would then do the decent thing and resign but Boris won’t”, it’ll “fall on deaf ears”
    https://twitter.com/GeorgiaZemoreyR/status/1541715314433556480

    She is saying the obvious but too many in the cabinet know their cabinet careers end with Johnson
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,323
    kjh said:

    DavidL said:

    Carnyx said:

    Sandpit said:

    What's wrong with taking your children to drag shows? That's the Florida panto season fucked. America is such a mess if this guy is being touted as the sane alternative to Trump.

    There’s nothing wrong with taking *your* children to a panto.

    There’s a lot wrong with schools staging for children what appear to be very adult-themed and sexually provocative drag shows, without asking parents first.
    Do you have a reliable news source for that, because it sounds like complete bollocks.
    We took our kids to a drag show at the Edinburgh Festival, it was very funny, sweet and had a positive message about letting people be who they want to be. I would have had no problem at all if the kids' school had taken them to see it. The only blatant ideological indoctrination that our daughter's primary school indulged in recently was around the Jubilee.
    I thought pantomimes WERE drag shows?
    They don't have pantos in America because they are terrified of sex, even while being utterly desensitised to violence. It is a very weird culture.
    Anyone who watches panto in this country but accuses others of being weird is, just possibly, lacking insight. Looked at objectively our panto is....weird.
    I've tried explaining what panto is to Americans on numerous occasions and always failed miserably.
    Same with me in Germany. It doesn't help that that Pantomime in German is a false friend meaning mime. I presume the two words have a common source.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,054
    edited June 28
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61961871

    46 immigrants dead in lorry in Texas

    That’s horrific, and just one incident of many.
    240,000 people were caught trying to illegally enter the US in May alone. With the numbers at a record level tragedy is almost inevitable.
    That’s astonishing. If 240k people are being caught every month, then there must be many more getting through - with seemingly no way to stop the flow.

    Dare I say it, but perhaps the previous President had the right idea about building a physical border.
    The US actually catches a lot of the people who trek across the desert. Fundamentally, it's not tough to see them from helicopter with IR cameras.

    But the big issue is that less than 10% of illegal immigrants cross the US border in a way that would be affected by the wall.

    Most (50-60%) turn up on tourist visas and don't leave. The rest come in like the guys in the lorry. They pay to hide in the bottom of someone's car, or the back of a truck, or climb onto the top of the myriad trains crossing the border.
    Overstayers are always a difficult one, and it’s a big place for people to disappear. Crackdown on employers paying cash to labourers? Blacklisting deported people, so they can’t come back in?

    Do they also need to make the border posts themselves bigger, and make sure every vehicle is physically searched with a scanner?
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 2,145
    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    These odds are ludicrous given DeSantis will lose the Florida governorship 49% to 51% in November to likely Democrat candidate Charlie Crist on the latest poll.

    If he cannot even get re elected as Florida governor he has zero chance of the GOP nomination and Presidency in 2024.
    http://thelistenergroup.com/charlie-crist-leading-ron-desantis-in-very-close-race/

    Instead, Trump if he decides to run again, Pence running on a hard pro life platform and Haley would be the likely main candidates for the GOP nomination, perhaps with Ted Cruz

    How do you translate a 1% poll lead for Christ, which follows a 1% poll lead for DeSantis (according to 538) into:

    ...DeSantis will lose the Florida governorship 49% to 51% in November...?
    The poll before had Crist ahead 48% to 47%, if DeSantis is going to have the fight of his life to be re elected and on the latest polling would lose (taken before the SC ruling in pro choice Florida too) then as I said he has zero chance of the GOP nomination in 2024

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/full-throttle-florida-legislature-making-ron-desantis-gop-juggernaut-rcna31186
    Who would be the alternate front runner against Trump ?
    Pence
    Trump supporters (and Trump) hate Pence. Remember the calls to hang him? It’s hard to go from that to winning the nomination.

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 54,128
    eristdoof said:

    Cicero said:

    It is currently 34 degrees C in Tallinn, and the airless atmosphere spells heavy thunder later on. The political atmosphere is also pretty thundery, with slow progress being made to construct a new coalition. The principle sticking points are education and tax rates, but after the pause for the four day midsummer holiday, it now looks like the Conservative Isamaa party are ready to join the Social Democrats and the Reform (Liberal) Party of PM Kaja Kallas in a solid coalition that will hold at least until the elections due on March 5th.

    Estonia now has over 44,000 Ukrainian refugees and still more are set to come. We hear terrible stories of barbaric cruelty. The vermin responsible for these crimes should be sought to the ends of the earth for what they have done. The destruction of the shopping centre has only underlined to Estonian population, Russian and Estonian speaking alike, that there will be no mercy shown if the Putinists unleash their fury on the Baltic. Preparations are still being made. Bomb shelters are being set up in underground carparks, and the signs for these have appeared, even here in the Old Town of Tallinn.

    Yet, there is no sense of fear. Rather of cold rage and grim determination. The armed forces are on early warning for alert, but as Kaja said the other day, even a few days of Russian occupation could cause so much death and destruction that Estonia as we know it would not survive. The determination now is not to let the Putinists in at all. NATO preparations need to be accelerated. The point must be to accept that any direct challenge to NATO will be met with overwhelming force from the onset. Ministers of various allied countries come and go, and as with the coalition talks, it seems that solid, if slow, progress is being made.

    It is increasingly clear that the breach with Putin´s Russia is irreparable. There is zero chance that any deal he offers or agrees will hold. However, in addition to the poor performance of the Russian armed forces, there is now the growing crisis in the Russian economy. It is not just the collapse in their international trade, it is also the growing question of the internal cohesion of the domestic Russian economy. Russian local governments seem to be trying to avoid their own local markets being plundered by the centre and delays in food shipments and partial trade bans now seem to be occuring.

    So, we watch and wait. The storm clouds in Russia are gathering. We only hope that a Russian cloudburst does not inundate us here.

    Cicero's 'Letters from Estonia' should definitely be collected and published once all this is over.

    Great stuff @Cicero - please keep posting!
    They are and are a salutary warning to those in Germany, France, and elsewhere who would appease Putin that the whole of Europe must stand united against this war criminal and not concede any territory to him at all
    As good as no-one in Germany is appeasing Putin. I have no idea where you get that idea from. There are a few people in Die Linke who have a blanket "NATO=bad" opinion and who seem to forget that Russia is no longer the Soviet Union. And there is one Ex-Chancellor who has been defending his business links with Putin, who has been excommunicated from Berlin and pilloried in the media.

    Apart from that everyone is behind your opinion "that the whole of Europe must stand united against this war criminal and not concede any territory to him at all".

    It is valid to criticise the German government for being painfully slow at delivering promised arms to Ukraine, but to equate that with "appeasing Putin" is crazy.
    Action speaks louder than words and from day 1 Germany has obstructed arms deliveries to Ukraine and it is public knowledge Germany and France are willing to cede lands to Russia for peace
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 34,829
    eristdoof said:

    Cicero said:

    It is currently 34 degrees C in Tallinn, and the airless atmosphere spells heavy thunder later on. The political atmosphere is also pretty thundery, with slow progress being made to construct a new coalition. The principle sticking points are education and tax rates, but after the pause for the four day midsummer holiday, it now looks like the Conservative Isamaa party are ready to join the Social Democrats and the Reform (Liberal) Party of PM Kaja Kallas in a solid coalition that will hold at least until the elections due on March 5th.

    Estonia now has over 44,000 Ukrainian refugees and still more are set to come. We hear terrible stories of barbaric cruelty. The vermin responsible for these crimes should be sought to the ends of the earth for what they have done. The destruction of the shopping centre has only underlined to Estonian population, Russian and Estonian speaking alike, that there will be no mercy shown if the Putinists unleash their fury on the Baltic. Preparations are still being made. Bomb shelters are being set up in underground carparks, and the signs for these have appeared, even here in the Old Town of Tallinn.

    Yet, there is no sense of fear. Rather of cold rage and grim determination. The armed forces are on early warning for alert, but as Kaja said the other day, even a few days of Russian occupation could cause so much death and destruction that Estonia as we know it would not survive. The determination now is not to let the Putinists in at all. NATO preparations need to be accelerated. The point must be to accept that any direct challenge to NATO will be met with overwhelming force from the onset. Ministers of various allied countries come and go, and as with the coalition talks, it seems that solid, if slow, progress is being made.

    It is increasingly clear that the breach with Putin´s Russia is irreparable. There is zero chance that any deal he offers or agrees will hold. However, in addition to the poor performance of the Russian armed forces, there is now the growing crisis in the Russian economy. It is not just the collapse in their international trade, it is also the growing question of the internal cohesion of the domestic Russian economy. Russian local governments seem to be trying to avoid their own local markets being plundered by the centre and delays in food shipments and partial trade bans now seem to be occuring.

    So, we watch and wait. The storm clouds in Russia are gathering. We only hope that a Russian cloudburst does not inundate us here.

    Cicero's 'Letters from Estonia' should definitely be collected and published once all this is over.

    Great stuff @Cicero - please keep posting!
    They are and are a salutary warning to those in Germany, France, and elsewhere who would appease Putin that the whole of Europe must stand united against this war criminal and not concede any territory to him at all
    As good as no-one in Germany is appeasing Putin. I have no idea where you get that idea from. There are a few people in Die Linke who have a blanket "NATO=bad" opinion and who seem to forget that Russia is no longer the Soviet Union. And there is one Ex-Chancellor who has been defending his business links with Putin, who has been excommunicated from Berlin and pilloried in the media.

    Apart from that everyone is behind your opinion "that the whole of Europe must stand united against this war criminal and not concede any territory to him at all".

    It is valid to criticise the German government for being painfully slow at delivering promised arms to Ukraine, but to equate that with "appeasing Putin" is crazy.
    After the endless squawking on here about German appeasement and world beating support from the UK, there seems to be curiously little joy that Germany (unlike the UK) now has long range heavy weapons in Ukraine. Mystifying!
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,398
    JohnO said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Even in those circumstances (Tories largest party and SNP holding the balance), Starmer would not concede a referendum. Why should he? The SNP would never countenance a Tory govt through their abstentions. They would always support a minority Labour govt in any confidence vote but wouldn’t get much in return. Then after a few months’ honeymoon, Starmer would contrive a second election. It’s the 1974 playbook…
    To be fair - we should probably wait for Sturgeons speech instead of listening to the same old HFUYD declaration on here.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 9,998
    eristdoof said:



    It is valid to criticise the German government for being painfully slow at delivering promised arms to Ukraine, but to equate that with "appeasing Putin" is crazy.

    GAF have a regular A310 medevac flight out of Rzeszow to take Ukrainian casualties to hospital in Germany. A gesture that Johnson has failed to match.

    Germany is doing more than the UK at this point with armour and artillery. Apart from talking a good game, obviously.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 46,613

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    Sandpit said:

    Now 16 dead and 59 wounded, in the Russian missile attack on a shopping mall in Ukraine yesterday.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/06/28/ukraine-news-russia-war-invasion-latest-nato-grain-kremenchuk/

    NATO calling up an extra 250,000 troops(!) to a state of readiness, as they meet today following the G7. UK defence minister suggesting that 2% military spending target should move up to 2.5%.

    Deterrence is cheaper the earlier you do it. We need to get to the point where NATO conventional means are strong enough that there would be no purpose in Russia tanks crossing the Lithuanian border because they’d be turned to scrap within seconds.

    As we’re seeing now, it’s far harder to displace an army that’s already mounted an invasion than it is to deter the invasion to begin with.
    "Deterrence is cheaper the earlier you do it."

    Which is why the west's poor response to previous Russian actions are so notable. We gave Putin the indication that he could do whatever he wanted, and we would just chuck a few sanctions at him, tut, and then get on with the new world he had created.

    A worry is that he might still believe that is the case; that we will fold. A big worry is that we will.
    I don't think there is any danger whatsoever of us "folding". The biggest danger is that Putin is put in a position in which he sees no alternative to the use of nuclear weapons. That is why, alongside the full military resistance of the West, it is just as important to maintain dialogue exploring ways to end the war. Otherwise it seems pretty much nailed on that the battlefield nukes will come out as the Russian armies are driven back.
    I can't see Putin using nuclear weapons over Ukraine: the danger point for that has long past. But if he does use them over Ukraine, then he's a madman who would use them for *any* excuse.

    And of course it's important to maintain dialogue: and dialogue has been, and will be, happening - though it's difficult when you've got Putin threatening neighbouring countries in speeches, and Lavrov saying some fairly incredible things.

    "Otherwise it seems pretty much nailed on that the battlefield nukes will come out as the Russian armies are driven back"

    This just sounds like another "We must give the Russians what they want coz, you know, nukes." argument. Another version of the 'we must allow them to save face' rubbish.

    A question for you: if our fear of Russian nukes makes us cede territory to Russia, what makes you think Putin won't think "That worked!" and threaten their use over the rest of Ukraine; Estonia, Lithuania etc?
    Are you saying the Russian nuclear deterrent should not deter Ukraine or Nato, and if so, whither the British nuclear deterrent?
    It should deter Ukraine or NATO from launching an unprovoked attack on Russia.

    They haven't done so. Russia started the war.
    That is to misunderstand the theory of nuclear deterrence. Nuclear missiles were no-one's first resort, which is why we, Nato, Russia and everyone else has conventional forces.

    It is odd that advocates of Britain's nuclear deterrent seem under the illusion that Russia's nuclear arsenal will be ineffective.
    Maintaining nuclear weapons is very expensive.

    Remember Russian tyres in the first few weeks of the war? If Russian nukes have been subject to the same neglect, there is a high chance that most of them do not work, and may even be a threat mostly to those who seek to fire them.

    But with an estimated 6,000 nuclear warheads, even if they are 99% ineffective the result would be catastrophic.
    60 nukes being fired and successfully detonating at a variety of targets wouldn't be pretty but if that's all Russia had then it would lead to their total and swift annihilation.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 34,829
    edited June 28
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Big G & HYUFD on the same democracy blocking, granny bashing page, hot from *checks notes* North Wales and Epping.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 54,128

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Big G & HYUD on the same democracy blocking, granny bashing page, hot from *checks notes* North Wales and Epping.
    Maybe you should get the Scots to want indyref2 which they clearly do not and it clearly upsets you that some of us who have as much right as yourself to express an opposing view, and one that would win a referendum if it was held anyway
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 102,905

    JohnO said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Even in those circumstances (Tories largest party and SNP holding the balance), Starmer would not concede a referendum. Why should he? The SNP would never countenance a Tory govt through their abstentions. They would always support a minority Labour govt in any confidence vote but wouldn’t get much in return. Then after a few months’ honeymoon, Starmer would contrive a second election. It’s the 1974 playbook…
    To be fair - we should probably wait for Sturgeons speech instead of listening to the same old HFUYD declaration on here.
    Sturgeon’s speech is irrelevant, it is Johnson or Starmer who will decide whether an official indyref2 is ever granted
  • NorthofStokeNorthofStoke Posts: 1,720

    Scott_xP said:

    Mid-Derbs Con MP Pauline Latham (who voted against PM in confidence vote) says time for cabinet to “push” PM out - says even if in event of 1922 rule change letters threshold met again “most PMs would then do the decent thing and resign but Boris won’t”, it’ll “fall on deaf ears”
    https://twitter.com/GeorgiaZemoreyR/status/1541715314433556480

    She is saying the obvious but too many in the cabinet know their cabinet careers end with Johnson
    Let's hope that Gove hasn't lost his plotting skills. He must know he can't be king but could be king maker.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 9,637

    To be honest, if the UK can't permanently deploy at least one fully equipped warfighting division (generally accepted to be the smallest formation that comprises a balanced force of all the arms, logistics and services needed for the independent conduct of operations - and that's about 12-15k in size) to Europe on roulement then we may as well not bother having an army. Just stick to a militia, ceremonial forces and some marines instead.

    It's tempting to say that we're better off concentrating our resources on the Navy, but I don't think manning levels are that much better in the other services.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 6,736

    Scott_xP said:

    Mid-Derbs Con MP Pauline Latham (who voted against PM in confidence vote) says time for cabinet to “push” PM out - says even if in event of 1922 rule change letters threshold met again “most PMs would then do the decent thing and resign but Boris won’t”, it’ll “fall on deaf ears”
    https://twitter.com/GeorgiaZemoreyR/status/1541715314433556480

    She is saying the obvious but too many in the cabinet know their cabinet careers end with Johnson
    Good!
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 22,470

    eristdoof said:

    Cicero said:

    It is currently 34 degrees C in Tallinn, and the airless atmosphere spells heavy thunder later on. The political atmosphere is also pretty thundery, with slow progress being made to construct a new coalition. The principle sticking points are education and tax rates, but after the pause for the four day midsummer holiday, it now looks like the Conservative Isamaa party are ready to join the Social Democrats and the Reform (Liberal) Party of PM Kaja Kallas in a solid coalition that will hold at least until the elections due on March 5th.

    Estonia now has over 44,000 Ukrainian refugees and still more are set to come. We hear terrible stories of barbaric cruelty. The vermin responsible for these crimes should be sought to the ends of the earth for what they have done. The destruction of the shopping centre has only underlined to Estonian population, Russian and Estonian speaking alike, that there will be no mercy shown if the Putinists unleash their fury on the Baltic. Preparations are still being made. Bomb shelters are being set up in underground carparks, and the signs for these have appeared, even here in the Old Town of Tallinn.

    Yet, there is no sense of fear. Rather of cold rage and grim determination. The armed forces are on early warning for alert, but as Kaja said the other day, even a few days of Russian occupation could cause so much death and destruction that Estonia as we know it would not survive. The determination now is not to let the Putinists in at all. NATO preparations need to be accelerated. The point must be to accept that any direct challenge to NATO will be met with overwhelming force from the onset. Ministers of various allied countries come and go, and as with the coalition talks, it seems that solid, if slow, progress is being made.

    It is increasingly clear that the breach with Putin´s Russia is irreparable. There is zero chance that any deal he offers or agrees will hold. However, in addition to the poor performance of the Russian armed forces, there is now the growing crisis in the Russian economy. It is not just the collapse in their international trade, it is also the growing question of the internal cohesion of the domestic Russian economy. Russian local governments seem to be trying to avoid their own local markets being plundered by the centre and delays in food shipments and partial trade bans now seem to be occuring.

    So, we watch and wait. The storm clouds in Russia are gathering. We only hope that a Russian cloudburst does not inundate us here.

    Cicero's 'Letters from Estonia' should definitely be collected and published once all this is over.

    Great stuff @Cicero - please keep posting!
    They are and are a salutary warning to those in Germany, France, and elsewhere who would appease Putin that the whole of Europe must stand united against this war criminal and not concede any territory to him at all
    As good as no-one in Germany is appeasing Putin. I have no idea where you get that idea from. There are a few people in Die Linke who have a blanket "NATO=bad" opinion and who seem to forget that Russia is no longer the Soviet Union. And there is one Ex-Chancellor who has been defending his business links with Putin, who has been excommunicated from Berlin and pilloried in the media.

    Apart from that everyone is behind your opinion "that the whole of Europe must stand united against this war criminal and not concede any territory to him at all".

    It is valid to criticise the German government for being painfully slow at delivering promised arms to Ukraine, but to equate that with "appeasing Putin" is crazy.
    After the endless squawking on here about German appeasement and world beating support from the UK, there seems to be curiously little joy that Germany (unlike the UK) now has long range heavy weapons in Ukraine. Mystifying!
    It doesn't fit the 'say what you like about Johnson but at least he's helping Ukraine more than any other western leader' message.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 26,182
    edited June 28

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Big G & HYUD on the same democracy blocking, granny bashing page, hot from *checks notes* North Wales and Epping.
    Maybe you should get the Scots to want indyref2 which they clearly do not and it clearly upsets you that some of us who have as much right as yourself to express an opposing view, and one that would win a referendum if it was held anyway
    The electorate in Scotland voted to have one ...
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,442
    eristdoof said:

    kjh said:

    DavidL said:

    Carnyx said:

    Sandpit said:

    What's wrong with taking your children to drag shows? That's the Florida panto season fucked. America is such a mess if this guy is being touted as the sane alternative to Trump.

    There’s nothing wrong with taking *your* children to a panto.

    There’s a lot wrong with schools staging for children what appear to be very adult-themed and sexually provocative drag shows, without asking parents first.
    Do you have a reliable news source for that, because it sounds like complete bollocks.
    We took our kids to a drag show at the Edinburgh Festival, it was very funny, sweet and had a positive message about letting people be who they want to be. I would have had no problem at all if the kids' school had taken them to see it. The only blatant ideological indoctrination that our daughter's primary school indulged in recently was around the Jubilee.
    I thought pantomimes WERE drag shows?
    They don't have pantos in America because they are terrified of sex, even while being utterly desensitised to violence. It is a very weird culture.
    Anyone who watches panto in this country but accuses others of being weird is, just possibly, lacking insight. Looked at objectively our panto is....weird.
    I've tried explaining what panto is to Americans on numerous occasions and always failed miserably.
    Same with me in Germany. It doesn't help that that Pantomime in German is a false friend meaning mime. I presume the two words have a common source.
    μῖμος = actor or play (oddly) in Greek.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 26,182
    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Even in those circumstances (Tories largest party and SNP holding the balance), Starmer would not concede a referendum. Why should he? The SNP would never countenance a Tory govt through their abstentions. They would always support a minority Labour govt in any confidence vote but wouldn’t get much in return. Then after a few months’ honeymoon, Starmer would contrive a second election. It’s the 1974 playbook…
    To be fair - we should probably wait for Sturgeons speech instead of listening to the same old HFUYD declaration on here.
    Sturgeon’s speech is irrelevant, it is Johnson or Starmer who will decide whether an official indyref2 is ever granted
    You obviously believe that the Tory Party will not survive Mr Johnson in an electorally winning form.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 9,637

    eristdoof said:

    Cicero said:

    It is currently 34 degrees C in Tallinn, and the airless atmosphere spells heavy thunder later on. The political atmosphere is also pretty thundery, with slow progress being made to construct a new coalition. The principle sticking points are education and tax rates, but after the pause for the four day midsummer holiday, it now looks like the Conservative Isamaa party are ready to join the Social Democrats and the Reform (Liberal) Party of PM Kaja Kallas in a solid coalition that will hold at least until the elections due on March 5th.

    Estonia now has over 44,000 Ukrainian refugees and still more are set to come. We hear terrible stories of barbaric cruelty. The vermin responsible for these crimes should be sought to the ends of the earth for what they have done. The destruction of the shopping centre has only underlined to Estonian population, Russian and Estonian speaking alike, that there will be no mercy shown if the Putinists unleash their fury on the Baltic. Preparations are still being made. Bomb shelters are being set up in underground carparks, and the signs for these have appeared, even here in the Old Town of Tallinn.

    Yet, there is no sense of fear. Rather of cold rage and grim determination. The armed forces are on early warning for alert, but as Kaja said the other day, even a few days of Russian occupation could cause so much death and destruction that Estonia as we know it would not survive. The determination now is not to let the Putinists in at all. NATO preparations need to be accelerated. The point must be to accept that any direct challenge to NATO will be met with overwhelming force from the onset. Ministers of various allied countries come and go, and as with the coalition talks, it seems that solid, if slow, progress is being made.

    It is increasingly clear that the breach with Putin´s Russia is irreparable. There is zero chance that any deal he offers or agrees will hold. However, in addition to the poor performance of the Russian armed forces, there is now the growing crisis in the Russian economy. It is not just the collapse in their international trade, it is also the growing question of the internal cohesion of the domestic Russian economy. Russian local governments seem to be trying to avoid their own local markets being plundered by the centre and delays in food shipments and partial trade bans now seem to be occuring.

    So, we watch and wait. The storm clouds in Russia are gathering. We only hope that a Russian cloudburst does not inundate us here.

    Cicero's 'Letters from Estonia' should definitely be collected and published once all this is over.

    Great stuff @Cicero - please keep posting!
    They are and are a salutary warning to those in Germany, France, and elsewhere who would appease Putin that the whole of Europe must stand united against this war criminal and not concede any territory to him at all
    As good as no-one in Germany is appeasing Putin. I have no idea where you get that idea from. There are a few people in Die Linke who have a blanket "NATO=bad" opinion and who seem to forget that Russia is no longer the Soviet Union. And there is one Ex-Chancellor who has been defending his business links with Putin, who has been excommunicated from Berlin and pilloried in the media.

    Apart from that everyone is behind your opinion "that the whole of Europe must stand united against this war criminal and not concede any territory to him at all".

    It is valid to criticise the German government for being painfully slow at delivering promised arms to Ukraine, but to equate that with "appeasing Putin" is crazy.
    After the endless squawking on here about German appeasement and world beating support from the UK, there seems to be curiously little joy that Germany (unlike the UK) now has long range heavy weapons in Ukraine. Mystifying!
    It doesn't fit the 'say what you like about Johnson but at least he's helping Ukraine more than any other western leader' message.
    I and others have posted tweets about the German artillery reaching Ukraine and welcoming its arrival. Observation is inaccurate.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 54,128
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Big G & HYUD on the same democracy blocking, granny bashing page, hot from *checks notes* North Wales and Epping.
    Maybe you should get the Scots to want indyref2 which they clearly do not and it clearly upsets you that some of us who have as much right as yourself to express an opposing view, and one that would win a referendum if it was held anyway
    The electorate in Scotland voted to have one ...
    They voted for the SNP but do not want one at this time

    No polling has indicated support for indyref2 at this time and until it does Westminster will just say no
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 26,182
    IshmaelZ said:

    eristdoof said:

    kjh said:

    DavidL said:

    Carnyx said:

    Sandpit said:

    What's wrong with taking your children to drag shows? That's the Florida panto season fucked. America is such a mess if this guy is being touted as the sane alternative to Trump.

    There’s nothing wrong with taking *your* children to a panto.

    There’s a lot wrong with schools staging for children what appear to be very adult-themed and sexually provocative drag shows, without asking parents first.
    Do you have a reliable news source for that, because it sounds like complete bollocks.
    We took our kids to a drag show at the Edinburgh Festival, it was very funny, sweet and had a positive message about letting people be who they want to be. I would have had no problem at all if the kids' school had taken them to see it. The only blatant ideological indoctrination that our daughter's primary school indulged in recently was around the Jubilee.
    I thought pantomimes WERE drag shows?
    They don't have pantos in America because they are terrified of sex, even while being utterly desensitised to violence. It is a very weird culture.
    Anyone who watches panto in this country but accuses others of being weird is, just possibly, lacking insight. Looked at objectively our panto is....weird.
    I've tried explaining what panto is to Americans on numerous occasions and always failed miserably.
    Same with me in Germany. It doesn't help that that Pantomime in German is a false friend meaning mime. I presume the two words have a common source.
    μῖμος = actor or play (oddly) in Greek.
    And pant* = all. Presumably a general-purpose actor as opposed to a tragedian??
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 26,182

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Big G & HYUD on the same democracy blocking, granny bashing page, hot from *checks notes* North Wales and Epping.
    Maybe you should get the Scots to want indyref2 which they clearly do not and it clearly upsets you that some of us who have as much right as yourself to express an opposing view, and one that would win a referendum if it was held anyway
    The electorate in Scotland voted to have one ...
    They voted for the SNP but do not want one at this time

    No polling has indicated support for indyref2 at this time and until it does Westminster will just say no
    Amazing. First it's seats. Then it's percentage of the vote. Then it's what polling says.

    Do you not believe in parliamentary democracy?
  • eekeek Posts: 21,003
    Turns out the meeting I spent yesterday prepping for is actually tomorrow - oops but at least I'm ready,

    So as I'm taking 10 minutes of downtime I've just found this for @Leon

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/06/ancient-dna-points-to-where-the-black-death-began/

    They've found the "lab" where the black death originated and given it's location you could make it a stop on your current world tour.
  • eekeek Posts: 21,003
    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Even in those circumstances (Tories largest party and SNP holding the balance), Starmer would not concede a referendum. Why should he? The SNP would never countenance a Tory govt through their abstentions. They would always support a minority Labour govt in any confidence vote but wouldn’t get much in return. Then after a few months’ honeymoon, Starmer would contrive a second election. It’s the 1974 playbook…
    To be fair - we should probably wait for Sturgeons speech instead of listening to the same old HFUYD declaration on here.
    Sturgeon’s speech is irrelevant, it is Johnson or Starmer who will decide whether an official indyref2 is ever granted
    The problem is that Sturgeon can't wait that long - she can't spend another 2 years just blaming all her issues on Westminster so a referendum has to be run sooner rather than later...

    Because at some point even the stupidest Nationalist will realise that a lot of the issues don't come from Westminster but come from the Scottish Government...
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 54,128
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Big G & HYUD on the same democracy blocking, granny bashing page, hot from *checks notes* North Wales and Epping.
    Maybe you should get the Scots to want indyref2 which they clearly do not and it clearly upsets you that some of us who have as much right as yourself to express an opposing view, and one that would win a referendum if it was held anyway
    The electorate in Scotland voted to have one ...
    They voted for the SNP but do not want one at this time

    No polling has indicated support for indyref2 at this time and until it does Westminster will just say no
    Amazing. First it's seats. Then it's percentage of the vote. Then it's what polling says.

    Do you not believe in parliamentary democracy?
    If Westminster votes for section 30 then yes but if it doesn't then that is the decision of the Westminster Parliament
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 30,662
    Dura_Ace said:

    eristdoof said:



    It is valid to criticise the German government for being painfully slow at delivering promised arms to Ukraine, but to equate that with "appeasing Putin" is crazy.

    GAF have a regular A310 medevac flight out of Rzeszow to take Ukrainian casualties to hospital in Germany. A gesture that Johnson has failed to match.

    Germany is doing more than the UK at this point with armour and artillery. Apart from talking a good game, obviously.
    But we have a leader in Boris Johnson who has his heart & soul in the struggle. So much so that when asked if anything, anything at all, would cause him to resign he said yes - he'd resign if he felt we could no longer do our bit to help Ukraine.

    So, you tell me, it's your field, how many guns and tanks and missiles is that sort of spirit worth?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 9,431
    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Even in those circumstances (Tories largest party and SNP holding the balance), Starmer would not concede a referendum. Why should he? The SNP would never countenance a Tory govt through their abstentions. They would always support a minority Labour govt in any confidence vote but wouldn’t get much in return. Then after a few months’ honeymoon, Starmer would contrive a second election. It’s the 1974 playbook…
    To be fair - we should probably wait for Sturgeons speech instead of listening to the same old HFUYD declaration on here.
    Sturgeon’s speech is irrelevant, it is Johnson or Starmer who will decide whether an official indyref2 is ever granted
    Its not irrelevant. I firmly believe in self determination, and if enough of the residents of Scotland want to depart from the UK so be it. We would do well to learn from the Brexit shambles though. It needs clarity about the end state - currency, trade relations with rUK, rights of citizens after, national debt and on and on. It should not be just Yes or No to an independent Scotland.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 34,829

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Big G & HYUD on the same democracy blocking, granny bashing page, hot from *checks notes* North Wales and Epping.
    Maybe you should get the Scots to want indyref2 which they clearly do not and it clearly upsets you that some of us who have as much right as yourself to express an opposing view, and one that would win a referendum if it was held anyway
    You are entitled to express as many hypocritical, irrelevant and contradictory views as you want, as evidenced by the constant and unimpeded stream of them from North Wales.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 102,905

    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Even in those circumstances (Tories largest party and SNP holding the balance), Starmer would not concede a referendum. Why should he? The SNP would never countenance a Tory govt through their abstentions. They would always support a minority Labour govt in any confidence vote but wouldn’t get much in return. Then after a few months’ honeymoon, Starmer would contrive a second election. It’s the 1974 playbook…
    To be fair - we should probably wait for Sturgeons speech instead of listening to the same old HFUYD declaration on here.
    Sturgeon’s speech is irrelevant, it is Johnson or Starmer who will decide whether an official indyref2 is ever granted
    Its not irrelevant. I firmly believe in self determination, and if enough of the residents of Scotland want to depart from the UK so be it. We would do well to learn from the Brexit shambles though. It needs clarity about the end state - currency, trade relations with rUK, rights of citizens after, national debt and on and on. It should not be just Yes or No to an independent Scotland.
    Legally and constitutionally no.

    Under the 1707 Act of Union and Scotland Act 1998 the future of the Union is decided by the UK government and Westminster even if 100% of Scots wanted independence, let alone barely 50% at most as now
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,442
    kinabalu said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    eristdoof said:



    It is valid to criticise the German government for being painfully slow at delivering promised arms to Ukraine, but to equate that with "appeasing Putin" is crazy.

    GAF have a regular A310 medevac flight out of Rzeszow to take Ukrainian casualties to hospital in Germany. A gesture that Johnson has failed to match.

    Germany is doing more than the UK at this point with armour and artillery. Apart from talking a good game, obviously.
    But we have a leader in Boris Johnson who has his heart & soul in the struggle. So much so that when asked if anything, anything at all, would cause him to resign he said yes - he'd resign if he felt we could no longer do our bit to help Ukraine.

    So, you tell me, it's your field, how many guns and tanks and missiles is that sort of spirit worth?
    Can't say without knowing the muscle to fat ratio
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 102,905
    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    JohnO said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Even in those circumstances (Tories largest party and SNP holding the balance), Starmer would not concede a referendum. Why should he? The SNP would never countenance a Tory govt through their abstentions. They would always support a minority Labour govt in any confidence vote but wouldn’t get much in return. Then after a few months’ honeymoon, Starmer would contrive a second election. It’s the 1974 playbook…
    To be fair - we should probably wait for Sturgeons speech instead of listening to the same old HFUYD declaration on here.
    Sturgeon’s speech is irrelevant, it is Johnson or Starmer who will decide whether an official indyref2 is ever granted
    The problem is that Sturgeon can't wait that long - she can't spend another 2 years just blaming all her issues on Westminster so a referendum has to be run sooner rather than later...

    Because at some point even the stupidest Nationalist will realise that a lot of the issues don't come from Westminster but come from the Scottish Government...
    Yes but a referendum without Westminster consent would be boycotted by Unionists and ignored by Westminster
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,985
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    Democracy rules. KO
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,985
    Scott_xP said:

    Mid-Derbs Con MP Pauline Latham (who voted against PM in confidence vote) says time for cabinet to “push” PM out - says even if in event of 1922 rule change letters threshold met again “most PMs would then do the decent thing and resign but Boris won’t”, it’ll “fall on deaf ears”
    https://twitter.com/GeorgiaZemoreyR/status/1541715314433556480


    Ms Whiploss?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 54,128

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Big G & HYUD on the same democracy blocking, granny bashing page, hot from *checks notes* North Wales and Epping.
    Maybe you should get the Scots to want indyref2 which they clearly do not and it clearly upsets you that some of us who have as much right as yourself to express an opposing view, and one that would win a referendum if it was held anyway
    You are entitled to express as many hypocritical, irrelevant and contradictory views as you want, as evidenced by the constant and unimpeded stream of them from North Wales.

    I will post them from Scotland in three weeks time if that helps you

    However, you may attempt to downplay and belittle contributions from those who oppose your views, but at the end of the day you are not going to win indyref 2 no matter when it is held
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 42,015

    Defending Ukraine: Early Lessons from the Cyber War
    https://query.prod.cms.rt.microsoft.com/cms/api/am/binary/RE50KOK

    Published by Microsoft last week, this report describes cyber-warfare and also Russian propaganda operations.

    I see there's a new definition of RPI: Russian Propaganda Index.

    image
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 46,613

    To be honest, if the UK can't permanently deploy at least one fully equipped warfighting division (generally accepted to be the smallest formation that comprises a balanced force of all the arms, logistics and services needed for the independent conduct of operations - and that's about 12-15k in size) to Europe on roulement then we may as well not bother having an army. Just stick to a militia, ceremonial forces and some marines instead.

    It's tempting to say that we're better off concentrating our resources on the Navy, but I don't think manning levels are that much better in the other services.
    I think the RN are "short" of a couple of T45s (there were supposed to be eight, not six) and we need 17-18 frigate escorts, rather than pretending 13 is enough, but otherwise I don't think the strategic vision for the fleet is a million miles off. It's just undersized and, more importantly, undercrewed.

    The army is a complete joke.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 30,662
    On topic, do any of our US watchers have a view on whether DeSantis has a better or worse chance of beating Biden/Dem in the general?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 54,128
    Lord Ashcroft - My new polling from Ukraine, Russia – and 11 neighbouring countries

    Jun 28, 2022 09:00 am

    In both Ukraine and the neighbouring countries, we asked whether various states and institutions were doing enough to help. The general response was that people thought their own country was doing terribly well.

    Figures were much less good for NATO. Though it’s hard to define its role given the limited appetite for military involvement, which we will come to later, fewer than half of respondents in most countries thought NATO was doing enough. Figures were slightly better for the European Union.

    When we asked the same question of Ukrainians themselves, the picture was stark. Fewer than one in four thought France or Germany was doing enough, one in 3 said the same of NATO and just over 4 in 10 were satisfied with the EU. The United States was thought to be doing better, and top of the list, I’m pleased to say, was the UK. I’m told it really is true that Ukrainian soldiers shout “God save the Queen” when firing their British anti-tank weapons.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 9,998

    To be honest, if the UK can't permanently deploy at least one fully equipped warfighting division (generally accepted to be the smallest formation that comprises a balanced force of all the arms, logistics and services needed for the independent conduct of operations - and that's about 12-15k in size) to Europe on roulement then we may as well not bother having an army. Just stick to a militia, ceremonial forces and some marines instead.

    It's tempting to say that we're better off concentrating our resources on the Navy, but I don't think manning levels are that much better in the other services.
    The army is actually quite good on troop levels compared to recent travails. It's vehicles where they are incredibly fucked.

    Can't sustain a single regiment of Challenger 2 or AS90.
    Warrior CSP - cancelled.
    Ajax - not before 2025 if at all.
    Boxer - 2024 at best.
    Challenger 3 - 2028 in very small numbers
    ISD for any 155mm artillery replacement is strictly in the realms of imagination

    It's basically 35 years of continuing and sustained inability to buy an armoured vehicle culminating to negate it as a mobile fighting force.
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,268

    To be honest, if the UK can't permanently deploy at least one fully equipped warfighting division (generally accepted to be the smallest formation that comprises a balanced force of all the arms, logistics and services needed for the independent conduct of operations - and that's about 12-15k in size) to Europe on roulement then we may as well not bother having an army. Just stick to a militia, ceremonial forces and some marines instead.

    It's tempting to say that we're better off concentrating our resources on the Navy, but I don't think manning levels are that much better in the other services.
    I think the RN are "short" of a couple of T45s (there were supposed to be eight, not six) and we need 17-18 frigate escorts, rather than pretending 13 is enough, but otherwise I don't think the strategic vision for the fleet is a million miles off. It's just undersized and, more importantly, undercrewed.

    The army is a complete joke.
    it'd help if senior officers fought for better salaries and conditions rather than be seduced by defence manufacturers/snake oil salesmen who promise a lot but very rarely deliver on time/on budget -
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 23,517
    Berrettini out of Wimbledon.
    COVID.
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 1,397

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Big G & HYUD on the same democracy blocking, granny bashing page, hot from *checks notes* North Wales and Epping.
    Maybe you should get the Scots to want indyref2 which they clearly do not and it clearly upsets you that some of us who have as much right as yourself to express an opposing view, and one that would win a referendum if it was held anyway
    You are entitled to express as many hypocritical, irrelevant and contradictory views as you want, as evidenced by the constant and unimpeded stream of them from North Wales.

    I will post them from Scotland in three weeks time if that helps you

    However, you may attempt to downplay and belittle contributions from those who oppose your views, but at the end of the day you are not going to win indyref 2 no matter when it is held
    Surely he must mean Mrs. Trellis, not you, Big G.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 26,182
    Dura_Ace said:

    To be honest, if the UK can't permanently deploy at least one fully equipped warfighting division (generally accepted to be the smallest formation that comprises a balanced force of all the arms, logistics and services needed for the independent conduct of operations - and that's about 12-15k in size) to Europe on roulement then we may as well not bother having an army. Just stick to a militia, ceremonial forces and some marines instead.

    It's tempting to say that we're better off concentrating our resources on the Navy, but I don't think manning levels are that much better in the other services.
    The army is actually quite good on troop levels compared to recent travails. It's vehicles where they are incredibly fucked.

    Can't sustain a single regiment of Challenger 2 or AS90.
    Warrior CSP - cancelled.
    Ajax - not before 2025 if at all.
    Boxer - 2024 at best.
    Challenger 3 - 2028 in very small numbers
    ISD for any 155mm artillery replacement is strictly in the realms of imagination

    It's basically 35 years of continuing and sustained inability to buy an armoured vehicle culminating to negate it as a mobile fighting force.
    What's the MLRS (in a general sense, not specifically the M270) situation?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 47,261
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61961871

    46 immigrants dead in lorry in Texas

    That’s horrific, and just one incident of many.
    240,000 people were caught trying to illegally enter the US in May alone. With the numbers at a record level tragedy is almost inevitable.
    That’s astonishing. If 240k people are being caught every month, then there must be many more getting through - with seemingly no way to stop the flow.

    Dare I say it, but perhaps the previous President had the right idea about building a physical border.
    The US actually catches a lot of the people who trek across the desert. Fundamentally, it's not tough to see them from helicopter with IR cameras.

    But the big issue is that less than 10% of illegal immigrants cross the US border in a way that would be affected by the wall.

    Most (50-60%) turn up on tourist visas and don't leave. The rest come in like the guys in the lorry. They pay to hide in the bottom of someone's car, or the back of a truck, or climb onto the top of the myriad trains crossing the border.
    Overstayers are always a difficult one, and it’s a big place for people to disappear. Crackdown on employers paying cash to labourers?

    Do they also need to make the border posts themselves bigger, and make sure every vehicle is physically searched with a scanner?
    It's hard to scan a metal TEU - you need to unpack it.

    And don't forget that these are some of the busiest crossing points in the world. Plus... if you slow trade down, you make Mexico poorer, and you therefore increase the supply of migrants.

    Ultimately, the problem is that American businesses are incentivized to employ illegal immigrants. If ICE comes and finds you are employing illegal immigrants, they pick them up and back 'em off back to the border. And you, the employer, needs to go find more illegal immigrants to replace the ones you lost. Illegal immigrants are much cheaper - see - because you don't need to buy them healthcare.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 30,662
    IshmaelZ said:

    kinabalu said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    eristdoof said:



    It is valid to criticise the German government for being painfully slow at delivering promised arms to Ukraine, but to equate that with "appeasing Putin" is crazy.

    GAF have a regular A310 medevac flight out of Rzeszow to take Ukrainian casualties to hospital in Germany. A gesture that Johnson has failed to match.

    Germany is doing more than the UK at this point with armour and artillery. Apart from talking a good game, obviously.
    But we have a leader in Boris Johnson who has his heart & soul in the struggle. So much so that when asked if anything, anything at all, would cause him to resign he said yes - he'd resign if he felt we could no longer do our bit to help Ukraine.

    So, you tell me, it's your field, how many guns and tanks and missiles is that sort of spirit worth?
    Can't say without knowing the muscle to fat ratio
    Hate to say it but I think it's on the slide. He's not quite the specimen he was. Not to my eye anyway.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 9,998
    kinabalu said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    eristdoof said:



    It is valid to criticise the German government for being painfully slow at delivering promised arms to Ukraine, but to equate that with "appeasing Putin" is crazy.

    GAF have a regular A310 medevac flight out of Rzeszow to take Ukrainian casualties to hospital in Germany. A gesture that Johnson has failed to match.

    Germany is doing more than the UK at this point with armour and artillery. Apart from talking a good game, obviously.
    But we have a leader in Boris Johnson who has his heart & soul in the struggle. So much so that when asked if anything, anything at all, would cause him to resign he said yes - he'd resign if he felt we could no longer do our bit to help Ukraine.

    So, you tell me, it's your field, how many guns and tanks and missiles is that sort of spirit worth?
    It's worth exactly nothing because he was lying and didn't mean it.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 46,613
    Dura_Ace said:

    To be honest, if the UK can't permanently deploy at least one fully equipped warfighting division (generally accepted to be the smallest formation that comprises a balanced force of all the arms, logistics and services needed for the independent conduct of operations - and that's about 12-15k in size) to Europe on roulement then we may as well not bother having an army. Just stick to a militia, ceremonial forces and some marines instead.

    It's tempting to say that we're better off concentrating our resources on the Navy, but I don't think manning levels are that much better in the other services.
    The army is actually quite good on troop levels compared to recent travails. It's vehicles where they are incredibly fucked.

    Can't sustain a single regiment of Challenger 2 or AS90.
    Warrior CSP - cancelled.
    Ajax - not before 2025 if at all.
    Boxer - 2024 at best.
    Challenger 3 - 2028 in very small numbers
    ISD for any 155mm artillery replacement is strictly in the realms of imagination

    It's basically 35 years of continuing and sustained inability to buy an armoured vehicle culminating to negate it as a mobile fighting force.
    This is timely. If I had to guess I'd say it'll be going on equipment for the army but let's wait and see:

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nato-summit-2022-madrid-boris-johnson-defence-spending-5hpvk6g5m
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,054
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61961871

    46 immigrants dead in lorry in Texas

    That’s horrific, and just one incident of many.
    240,000 people were caught trying to illegally enter the US in May alone. With the numbers at a record level tragedy is almost inevitable.
    That’s astonishing. If 240k people are being caught every month, then there must be many more getting through - with seemingly no way to stop the flow.

    Dare I say it, but perhaps the previous President had the right idea about building a physical border.
    The US actually catches a lot of the people who trek across the desert. Fundamentally, it's not tough to see them from helicopter with IR cameras.

    But the big issue is that less than 10% of illegal immigrants cross the US border in a way that would be affected by the wall.

    Most (50-60%) turn up on tourist visas and don't leave. The rest come in like the guys in the lorry. They pay to hide in the bottom of someone's car, or the back of a truck, or climb onto the top of the myriad trains crossing the border.
    Overstayers are always a difficult one, and it’s a big place for people to disappear. Crackdown on employers paying cash to labourers?

    Do they also need to make the border posts themselves bigger, and make sure every vehicle is physically searched with a scanner?
    It's hard to scan a metal TEU - you need to unpack it.

    And don't forget that these are some of the busiest crossing points in the world. Plus... if you slow trade down, you make Mexico poorer, and you therefore increase the supply of migrants.

    Ultimately, the problem is that American businesses are incentivized to employ illegal immigrants. If ICE comes and finds you are employing illegal immigrants, they pick them up and back 'em off back to the border. And you, the employer, needs to go find more illegal immigrants to replace the ones you lost. Illegal immigrants are much cheaper - see - because you don't need to buy them healthcare.
    So there’s no meaningful penalty on the employer. Well there’s your problem right there.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,985
    Dura_Ace said:

    kinabalu said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    eristdoof said:



    It is valid to criticise the German government for being painfully slow at delivering promised arms to Ukraine, but to equate that with "appeasing Putin" is crazy.

    GAF have a regular A310 medevac flight out of Rzeszow to take Ukrainian casualties to hospital in Germany. A gesture that Johnson has failed to match.

    Germany is doing more than the UK at this point with armour and artillery. Apart from talking a good game, obviously.
    But we have a leader in Boris Johnson who has his heart & soul in the struggle. So much so that when asked if anything, anything at all, would cause him to resign he said yes - he'd resign if he felt we could no longer do our bit to help Ukraine.

    So, you tell me, it's your field, how many guns and tanks and missiles is that sort of spirit worth?
    It's worth exactly nothing because he was lying and didn't mean it.
    Do you mean his lips moved?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 54,128
    Cicero said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Big G & HYUD on the same democracy blocking, granny bashing page, hot from *checks notes* North Wales and Epping.
    Maybe you should get the Scots to want indyref2 which they clearly do not and it clearly upsets you that some of us who have as much right as yourself to express an opposing view, and one that would win a referendum if it was held anyway
    You are entitled to express as many hypocritical, irrelevant and contradictory views as you want, as evidenced by the constant and unimpeded stream of them from North Wales.

    I will post them from Scotland in three weeks time if that helps you

    However, you may attempt to downplay and belittle contributions from those who oppose your views, but at the end of the day you are not going to win indyref 2 no matter when it is held
    Surely he must mean Mrs. Trellis, not you, Big G.
    It seems that SNP supporters cannot accept that Scots living elsewhere in the UK can have an opinion on independence and indeed we will be visiting our expansive Scots family in the NE of Scotland later in July

    Indeed all my children and grandchildren have Scots heritage and have their own tartans
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 30,662
    edited June 28
    Dura_Ace said:

    kinabalu said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    eristdoof said:



    It is valid to criticise the German government for being painfully slow at delivering promised arms to Ukraine, but to equate that with "appeasing Putin" is crazy.

    GAF have a regular A310 medevac flight out of Rzeszow to take Ukrainian casualties to hospital in Germany. A gesture that Johnson has failed to match.

    Germany is doing more than the UK at this point with armour and artillery. Apart from talking a good game, obviously.
    But we have a leader in Boris Johnson who has his heart & soul in the struggle. So much so that when asked if anything, anything at all, would cause him to resign he said yes - he'd resign if he felt we could no longer do our bit to help Ukraine.

    So, you tell me, it's your field, how many guns and tanks and missiles is that sort of spirit worth?
    It's worth exactly nothing because he was lying and didn't mean it.
    That was my very confident take too. Bit of gratuitous virtue-signalling with a view to his image and position.

    I know it's not the most important of things, grand scheme, but it yet again had my teeth grinding. The man is a snake, he really is.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 42,995
    edited June 28

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    Sandpit said:

    Now 16 dead and 59 wounded, in the Russian missile attack on a shopping mall in Ukraine yesterday.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/06/28/ukraine-news-russia-war-invasion-latest-nato-grain-kremenchuk/

    NATO calling up an extra 250,000 troops(!) to a state of readiness, as they meet today following the G7. UK defence minister suggesting that 2% military spending target should move up to 2.5%.

    Deterrence is cheaper the earlier you do it. We need to get to the point where NATO conventional means are strong enough that there would be no purpose in Russia tanks crossing the Lithuanian border because they’d be turned to scrap within seconds.

    As we’re seeing now, it’s far harder to displace an army that’s already mounted an invasion than it is to deter the invasion to begin with.
    "Deterrence is cheaper the earlier you do it."

    Which is why the west's poor response to previous Russian actions are so notable. We gave Putin the indication that he could do whatever he wanted, and we would just chuck a few sanctions at him, tut, and then get on with the new world he had created.

    A worry is that he might still believe that is the case; that we will fold. A big worry is that we will.
    I don't think there is any danger whatsoever of us "folding". The biggest danger is that Putin is put in a position in which he sees no alternative to the use of nuclear weapons. That is why, alongside the full military resistance of the West, it is just as important to maintain dialogue exploring ways to end the war. Otherwise it seems pretty much nailed on that the battlefield nukes will come out as the Russian armies are driven back.
    I can't see Putin using nuclear weapons over Ukraine: the danger point for that has long past. But if he does use them over Ukraine, then he's a madman who would use them for *any* excuse.

    And of course it's important to maintain dialogue: and dialogue has been, and will be, happening - though it's difficult when you've got Putin threatening neighbouring countries in speeches, and Lavrov saying some fairly incredible things.

    "Otherwise it seems pretty much nailed on that the battlefield nukes will come out as the Russian armies are driven back"

    This just sounds like another "We must give the Russians what they want coz, you know, nukes." argument. Another version of the 'we must allow them to save face' rubbish.

    A question for you: if our fear of Russian nukes makes us cede territory to Russia, what makes you think Putin won't think "That worked!" and threaten their use over the rest of Ukraine; Estonia, Lithuania etc?
    Are you saying the Russian nuclear deterrent should not deter Ukraine or Nato, and if so, whither the British nuclear deterrent?
    It should deter Ukraine or NATO from launching an unprovoked attack on Russia.

    They haven't done so. Russia started the war.
    That is to misunderstand the theory of nuclear deterrence. Nuclear missiles were no-one's first resort, which is why we, Nato, Russia and everyone else has conventional forces.

    It is odd that advocates of Britain's nuclear deterrent seem under the illusion that Russia's nuclear arsenal will be ineffective.
    Maintaining nuclear weapons is very expensive.

    Remember Russian tyres in the first few weeks of the war? If Russian nukes have been subject to the same neglect, there is a high chance that most of them do not work, and may even be a threat mostly to those who seek to fire them.

    But with an estimated 6,000 nuclear warheads, even if they are 99% ineffective the result would be catastrophic.
    60 nukes being fired and successfully detonating at a variety of targets wouldn't be pretty but if that's all Russia had then it would lead to their total and swift annihilation.
    That's not the most likely of scenarios, though.

    The Atlantic has a pretty good article on the subject, written by Eric Schlosser (who knows a bit about the subject, having written Command and Control: Nuclear Weapons, the Damascus Accident, and the Illusion of Safety), and featuring an interview with William Perry, who knows a great deal more.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/06/russia-ukraine-nuclear-weapon-us-response/661315/

    It makes you glad that Biden is now president, and not Obama...
    ...During the summer of 2016, members of President Barack Obama’s national-security team secretly staged a war game in which Russia invades a NATO country in the Baltics and then uses a low-yield tactical nuclear weapon against NATO forces to end the conflict on favorable terms. As described by Fred Kaplan in The Bomb (2020), two groups of Obama officials reached widely divergent conclusions about what the United States should do. The National Security Council’s so-called Principals Committee—including Cabinet officers and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff—decided that the United States had no choice but to retaliate with nuclear weapons. Any other type of response, the committee argued, would show a lack of resolve, damage American credibility, and weaken the NATO alliance. Choosing a suitable nuclear target proved difficult, however. Hitting Russia’s invading force would kill innocent civilians in a NATO country. Striking targets inside Russia might escalate the conflict to an all-out nuclear war. In the end, the NSC Principals Committee recommended a nuclear attack on Belarus—a nation that had played no role whatsoever in the invasion of the NATO ally but had the misfortune of being a Russian ally.

    Deputy staff members at the NSC played the same war game and came up with a different response. Colin Kahl, who at the time was an adviser to Vice President Biden, argued that retaliating with a nuclear weapon would be a huge mistake, sacrificing the moral high ground. Kahl thought it would be far more effective to respond with a conventional attack and turn world opinion against Russia for violating the nuclear taboo. The others agreed, and Avril Haines, a deputy national security adviser, suggested making T-shirts with the slogan Deputies should run the world. Haines is now President Biden’s Director of National Intelligence, and Kahl is the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy....

  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 10,313
    eek said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    If Sturgeon and co wish to hold a referendum then they can but if it's not legitimate the easiest way to handle is to to encourage those who are against independence to completely ignore it.

    Then if 80% vote yes on a 40% turn out you've got nothing to worry about. 80% voting yes on a 65% turnout would however be a big problem..
    Democracy is “a big problem”. That’s Boris’s Brexit Britain for you.

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 30,662
    kinabalu said:

    On topic, do any of our US watchers have a view on whether DeSantis has a better or worse chance of beating Biden/Dem in the general?

    Sorry, a better or worse chance than Trump, I meant there.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 10,313
    Actors hail new Scottish union launch after Equity row

    Performers and arts industry workers are starting a new trade union to secure “cultural independence”.

    The collective has been formed after a row over the running of Equity, the actors’ union, and its approach to Scotland.

    Cairn will be open to anyone working in the performing arts in Scotland, including actors, dancers, directors, designers, producers, stage managers, models and voice artists.

    The Times €
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 31,292
    Many moons ago, I heard about robot deminers: machines that would go around detecting mines on a minefield for peacetime use. Semi-armoured sensors and machinery with cheap, disposable running gear, so if they hit a mine the expensive parts are safe and it is cheap to replace the other bits.

    Sadly, it looks as though humans still have to do the work:

    https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1541678933430751232
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    Still have the issue @kinablu

    FWIW, better. One major issue would be that, in any debate, the age contrast would be much starker and I think that would weigh in DeSantis' favour, especially if Biden had any slips.

    Turnout wise. I think DeSantis probably could get close to Trump enthusiasm levels but not there. Conversely, I don't think he (yet) generates the same level of hatred.
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    On topic, do any of our US watchers have a view on whether DeSantis has a better or worse chance of beating Biden/Dem in the general?

    Sorry, a better or worse chance than Trump, I meant there.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 10,313
    Is that poster about who claimed last week that “England doesn’t exist”? Her Majesty’s Government has news for him:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/active-travel-england-update
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 45,437

    Totally off topic, but who was the lockdown moth expert? Thought they might be interested in this. Over the past few days we've had several humming bird hawk moths on the verbena outside the kitchen window. Never seen anything like them before!


    Lovely image. The Hummers are having a good year.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 26,182
    edited June 28

    Is that poster about who claimed last week that “England doesn’t exist”? Her Majesty’s Government has news for him:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/active-travel-england-update

    Historic England, Natural England, English Heritage, ... all carrying out legal duties and functions.
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,211
    The first England and Wales census 2021 have been published.

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/populationandhouseholdestimatesenglandandwales/census2021



    On Census Day, 21 March 2021, the size of the usual resident population in England and Wales was 59,597,300 (56,489,800 in England and 3,107,500 in Wales); this was the largest population ever recorded through a census in England and Wales.

    The population of England and Wales grew by more than 3.5 million (6.3%) since the last census in 2011, when it was 56,075,912.

    The population grew in each of the nine regions of England and also grew in Wales; the region with the highest population growth was the East of England, which increased by 8.3% from 2011 (a gain of approximately 488,000 residents).

    There were 30,420,100 women (51.0% of the overall population) and 29,177,200 men (49.0%) in England and Wales.

    There were more people than ever before in the older age groups; the proportion of the population who were aged 65 years and over was 18.6% (16.4% in 2011).

    There were 24,782,800 households in England and Wales on Census Day; the number of households increased by more than 1.4 million since 2011 (6.1%), when there were 23,366,044 households.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 45,437
    ydoethur said:

    Second like Grant Shapps...

    Please, no! Second from bottom would be more like it.

    The only minister more openly dishonest and incompetent than Johnson himself.
    You need to show your working on that - how you dismissed about 6 other candidates.....
  • MISTYMISTY Posts: 1,594
    edited June 28
    Meanwhile in deep blue New England.

    https://www.suffolk.edu/news-features/news/2022/06/27/14/17/poll-rhode-island-congressional-district-could-flip-to-republican

    small sample. But voters there don't want four more years of Biden...? even dems
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,985
    Just had a newsflash from Sky re the census. Population of England and Wales is now 59.6 million of whom 18.6% are over 65 compared to 16.4% in 2011. No wonder Boris is throwing money at the pensioners.
    How sustainable, economically, that is has to be questionable!
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 23,517

    Just had a newsflash from Sky re the census. Population of England and Wales is now 59.6 million of whom 18.6% are over 65 compared to 16.4% in 2011. No wonder Boris is throwing money at the pensioners.
    How sustainable, economically, that is has to be questionable!

    That's why they're called Boomers tbf.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 16,562

    The first England and Wales census 2021 have been published.

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/populationandhouseholdestimatesenglandandwales/census2021



    On Census Day, 21 March 2021, the size of the usual resident population in England and Wales was 59,597,300 (56,489,800 in England and 3,107,500 in Wales); this was the largest population ever recorded through a census in England and Wales.

    The population of England and Wales grew by more than 3.5 million (6.3%) since the last census in 2011, when it was 56,075,912.

    The population grew in each of the nine regions of England and also grew in Wales; the region with the highest population growth was the East of England, which increased by 8.3% from 2011 (a gain of approximately 488,000 residents).

    There were 30,420,100 women (51.0% of the overall population) and 29,177,200 men (49.0%) in England and Wales.

    There were more people than ever before in the older age groups; the proportion of the population who were aged 65 years and over was 18.6% (16.4% in 2011).

    There were 24,782,800 households in England and Wales on Census Day; the number of households increased by more than 1.4 million since 2011 (6.1%), when there were 23,366,044 households.

    It will be interesting to see how the census compares with the electoral register in each region, because it is thought that basing constituencies on the latter was a form of Conservative gerrymandering. No doubt politics postgrads are doing the sums as we speak.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 9,998
    Carnyx said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    To be honest, if the UK can't permanently deploy at least one fully equipped warfighting division (generally accepted to be the smallest formation that comprises a balanced force of all the arms, logistics and services needed for the independent conduct of operations - and that's about 12-15k in size) to Europe on roulement then we may as well not bother having an army. Just stick to a militia, ceremonial forces and some marines instead.

    It's tempting to say that we're better off concentrating our resources on the Navy, but I don't think manning levels are that much better in the other services.
    The army is actually quite good on troop levels compared to recent travails. It's vehicles where they are incredibly fucked.

    Can't sustain a single regiment of Challenger 2 or AS90.
    Warrior CSP - cancelled.
    Ajax - not before 2025 if at all.
    Boxer - 2024 at best.
    Challenger 3 - 2028 in very small numbers
    ISD for any 155mm artillery replacement is strictly in the realms of imagination

    It's basically 35 years of continuing and sustained inability to buy an armoured vehicle culminating to negate it as a mobile fighting force.
    What's the MLRS (in a general sense, not specifically the M270) situation?
    Being fed through an upgrade program with Lockheed-Martin in the US after which they'll be in service to 2050+.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 23,517

    The first England and Wales census 2021 have been published.

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/populationandhouseholdestimatesenglandandwales/census2021



    On Census Day, 21 March 2021, the size of the usual resident population in England and Wales was 59,597,300 (56,489,800 in England and 3,107,500 in Wales); this was the largest population ever recorded through a census in England and Wales.

    The population of England and Wales grew by more than 3.5 million (6.3%) since the last census in 2011, when it was 56,075,912.

    The population grew in each of the nine regions of England and also grew in Wales; the region with the highest population growth was the East of England, which increased by 8.3% from 2011 (a gain of approximately 488,000 residents).

    There were 30,420,100 women (51.0% of the overall population) and 29,177,200 men (49.0%) in England and Wales.

    There were more people than ever before in the older age groups; the proportion of the population who were aged 65 years and over was 18.6% (16.4% in 2011).

    There were 24,782,800 households in England and Wales on Census Day; the number of households increased by more than 1.4 million since 2011 (6.1%), when there were 23,366,044 households.

    Both England and Wales populations are down on the 2020 estimates.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 30,662
    MrEd said:

    Still have the issue @kinablu

    FWIW, better. One major issue would be that, in any debate, the age contrast would be much starker and I think that would weigh in DeSantis' favour, especially if Biden had any slips.

    Turnout wise. I think DeSantis probably could get close to Trump enthusiasm levels but not there. Conversely, I don't think he (yet) generates the same level of hatred.

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    On topic, do any of our US watchers have a view on whether DeSantis has a better or worse chance of beating Biden/Dem in the general?

    Sorry, a better or worse chance than Trump, I meant there.
    Yes, that's what I'd have thought. He'd look robust and dynamic cf Joe. Mind you so would Trump. The age gap there is only a couple of years but it appears bigger.

    And on the hatred, Trump's levels are surely untouchable. Certainly I, fwiw, don't feel much of that personally about DeSantis. Course if I saw more of him I'd hope that would change and I could muster up some. Fairly sure I can.

    Anyway, on we go. I still sit with The Big Short on Donald Trump for candidate and WH - it's underwater but slowly rising towards the surface now.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 46,613
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    Sandpit said:

    Now 16 dead and 59 wounded, in the Russian missile attack on a shopping mall in Ukraine yesterday.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/06/28/ukraine-news-russia-war-invasion-latest-nato-grain-kremenchuk/

    NATO calling up an extra 250,000 troops(!) to a state of readiness, as they meet today following the G7. UK defence minister suggesting that 2% military spending target should move up to 2.5%.

    Deterrence is cheaper the earlier you do it. We need to get to the point where NATO conventional means are strong enough that there would be no purpose in Russia tanks crossing the Lithuanian border because they’d be turned to scrap within seconds.

    As we’re seeing now, it’s far harder to displace an army that’s already mounted an invasion than it is to deter the invasion to begin with.
    "Deterrence is cheaper the earlier you do it."

    Which is why the west's poor response to previous Russian actions are so notable. We gave Putin the indication that he could do whatever he wanted, and we would just chuck a few sanctions at him, tut, and then get on with the new world he had created.

    A worry is that he might still believe that is the case; that we will fold. A big worry is that we will.
    I don't think there is any danger whatsoever of us "folding". The biggest danger is that Putin is put in a position in which he sees no alternative to the use of nuclear weapons. That is why, alongside the full military resistance of the West, it is just as important to maintain dialogue exploring ways to end the war. Otherwise it seems pretty much nailed on that the battlefield nukes will come out as the Russian armies are driven back.
    I can't see Putin using nuclear weapons over Ukraine: the danger point for that has long past. But if he does use them over Ukraine, then he's a madman who would use them for *any* excuse.

    And of course it's important to maintain dialogue: and dialogue has been, and will be, happening - though it's difficult when you've got Putin threatening neighbouring countries in speeches, and Lavrov saying some fairly incredible things.

    "Otherwise it seems pretty much nailed on that the battlefield nukes will come out as the Russian armies are driven back"

    This just sounds like another "We must give the Russians what they want coz, you know, nukes." argument. Another version of the 'we must allow them to save face' rubbish.

    A question for you: if our fear of Russian nukes makes us cede territory to Russia, what makes you think Putin won't think "That worked!" and threaten their use over the rest of Ukraine; Estonia, Lithuania etc?
    Are you saying the Russian nuclear deterrent should not deter Ukraine or Nato, and if so, whither the British nuclear deterrent?
    It should deter Ukraine or NATO from launching an unprovoked attack on Russia.

    They haven't done so. Russia started the war.
    That is to misunderstand the theory of nuclear deterrence. Nuclear missiles were no-one's first resort, which is why we, Nato, Russia and everyone else has conventional forces.

    It is odd that advocates of Britain's nuclear deterrent seem under the illusion that Russia's nuclear arsenal will be ineffective.
    Maintaining nuclear weapons is very expensive.

    Remember Russian tyres in the first few weeks of the war? If Russian nukes have been subject to the same neglect, there is a high chance that most of them do not work, and may even be a threat mostly to those who seek to fire them.

    But with an estimated 6,000 nuclear warheads, even if they are 99% ineffective the result would be catastrophic.
    60 nukes being fired and successfully detonating at a variety of targets wouldn't be pretty but if that's all Russia had then it would lead to their total and swift annihilation.
    That's not the most likely of scenarios, though.

    The Atlantic has a pretty good article on the subject, written by Eric Schlosser (who knows a bit about the subject, having written Command and Control: Nuclear Weapons, the Damascus Accident, and the Illusion of Safety), and featuring an interview with William Perry, who knows a great deal more.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/06/russia-ukraine-nuclear-weapon-us-response/661315/

    It makes you glad that Biden is now president, and not Obama...
    ...During the summer of 2016, members of President Barack Obama’s national-security team secretly staged a war game in which Russia invades a NATO country in the Baltics and then uses a low-yield tactical nuclear weapon against NATO forces to end the conflict on favorable terms. As described by Fred Kaplan in The Bomb (2020), two groups of Obama officials reached widely divergent conclusions about what the United States should do. The National Security Council’s so-called Principals Committee—including Cabinet officers and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff—decided that the United States had no choice but to retaliate with nuclear weapons. Any other type of response, the committee argued, would show a lack of resolve, damage American credibility, and weaken the NATO alliance. Choosing a suitable nuclear target proved difficult, however. Hitting Russia’s invading force would kill innocent civilians in a NATO country. Striking targets inside Russia might escalate the conflict to an all-out nuclear war. In the end, the NSC Principals Committee recommended a nuclear attack on Belarus—a nation that had played no role whatsoever in the invasion of the NATO ally but had the misfortune of being a Russian ally.

    Deputy staff members at the NSC played the same war game and came up with a different response. Colin Kahl, who at the time was an adviser to Vice President Biden, argued that retaliating with a nuclear weapon would be a huge mistake, sacrificing the moral high ground. Kahl thought it would be far more effective to respond with a conventional attack and turn world opinion against Russia for violating the nuclear taboo. The others agreed, and Avril Haines, a deputy national security adviser, suggested making T-shirts with the slogan Deputies should run the world. Haines is now President Biden’s Director of National Intelligence, and Kahl is the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy....

    Yes, read that the other day and it was a very good article.

    Thanks for sharing.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 46,613

    The first England and Wales census 2021 have been published.

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/populationandhouseholdestimatesenglandandwales/census2021



    On Census Day, 21 March 2021, the size of the usual resident population in England and Wales was 59,597,300 (56,489,800 in England and 3,107,500 in Wales); this was the largest population ever recorded through a census in England and Wales.

    The population of England and Wales grew by more than 3.5 million (6.3%) since the last census in 2011, when it was 56,075,912.

    The population grew in each of the nine regions of England and also grew in Wales; the region with the highest population growth was the East of England, which increased by 8.3% from 2011 (a gain of approximately 488,000 residents).

    There were 30,420,100 women (51.0% of the overall population) and 29,177,200 men (49.0%) in England and Wales.

    There were more people than ever before in the older age groups; the proportion of the population who were aged 65 years and over was 18.6% (16.4% in 2011).

    There were 24,782,800 households in England and Wales on Census Day; the number of households increased by more than 1.4 million since 2011 (6.1%), when there were 23,366,044 households.

    56,489,801 in England.

    They missed out @Dura_Ace
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 47,261
    kinabalu said:

    On topic, do any of our US watchers have a view on whether DeSantis has a better or worse chance of beating Biden/Dem in the general?

    I think DeSantis would wipe the floor with pretty much any Dem, because the Dems (like the Conservatives here) are facing the cost of living crisis. Plus, of course, Biden is ... shall we say ... not as sharp as he used to be.

    Indeed, I think the Republicans have to be the clear favourites for 2024. The exception would be if Trump were the candidate again. Because a lot of the people who came out to vote against Trump last time will do so again. And there's also a host of Republicans who (while not voting for Biden/ADem) will likely sit on their hands if he is the nominee.

    Now, it's possible things turn around for the Dems before the General (not least if energy prices drop sharply, and if they get themselves a charismatic centrist below the age of 70 as candidate). But right now, I would say that DeSantis would be a very strong candidate for the Republicans in an election that favours them.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 47,261

    The first England and Wales census 2021 have been published.

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/populationandhouseholdestimatesenglandandwales/census2021



    On Census Day, 21 March 2021, the size of the usual resident population in England and Wales was 59,597,300 (56,489,800 in England and 3,107,500 in Wales); this was the largest population ever recorded through a census in England and Wales.

    The population of England and Wales grew by more than 3.5 million (6.3%) since the last census in 2011, when it was 56,075,912.

    The population grew in each of the nine regions of England and also grew in Wales; the region with the highest population growth was the East of England, which increased by 8.3% from 2011 (a gain of approximately 488,000 residents).

    There were 30,420,100 women (51.0% of the overall population) and 29,177,200 men (49.0%) in England and Wales.

    There were more people than ever before in the older age groups; the proportion of the population who were aged 65 years and over was 18.6% (16.4% in 2011).

    There were 24,782,800 households in England and Wales on Census Day; the number of households increased by more than 1.4 million since 2011 (6.1%), when there were 23,366,044 households.

    Any data on religion? (Asking as I have a bet with @isam.)
  • LeonLeon Posts: 26,353

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Big G & HYUD on the same democracy blocking, granny bashing page, hot from *checks notes* North Wales and Epping.
    Maybe you should get the Scots to want indyref2 which they clearly do not and it clearly upsets you that some of us who have as much right as yourself to express an opposing view, and one that would win a referendum if it was held anyway
    You are entitled to express as many hypocritical, irrelevant and contradictory views as you want, as evidenced by the constant and unimpeded stream of them from North Wales.

    Thank God we don’t get a similar stream of misinformed pro-Nat bile from <<< checks notes >>> Sweden
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,523

    The first England and Wales census 2021 have been published.

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/populationandhouseholdestimatesenglandandwales/census2021



    On Census Day, 21 March 2021, the size of the usual resident population in England and Wales was 59,597,300 (56,489,800 in England and 3,107,500 in Wales); this was the largest population ever recorded through a census in England and Wales.

    The population of England and Wales grew by more than 3.5 million (6.3%) since the last census in 2011, when it was 56,075,912.

    The population grew in each of the nine regions of England and also grew in Wales; the region with the highest population growth was the East of England, which increased by 8.3% from 2011 (a gain of approximately 488,000 residents).

    There were 30,420,100 women (51.0% of the overall population) and 29,177,200 men (49.0%) in England and Wales.

    There were more people than ever before in the older age groups; the proportion of the population who were aged 65 years and over was 18.6% (16.4% in 2011).

    There were 24,782,800 households in England and Wales on Census Day; the number of households increased by more than 1.4 million since 2011 (6.1%), when there were 23,366,044 households.

    56,489,801 in England.

    They missed out @Dura_Ace
    I'm sure everyone on here knows this, but just in case, the 56,489,800 is an estimate not a count. I think I read that they reckon the response rate was 97% (it was 93.9% in 2011), so the count would have been around 54.8 million.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 3,636

    eek said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    If Sturgeon and co wish to hold a referendum then they can but if it's not legitimate the easiest way to handle is to to encourage those who are against independence to completely ignore it.

    Then if 80% vote yes on a 40% turn out you've got nothing to worry about. 80% voting yes on a 65% turnout would however be a big problem..
    Democracy is “a big problem”. That’s Boris’s Brexit Britain for you.

    I'm going to get all rules is rules, here.

    To be democracy, the referendum has got to be legal, whether that is by Westminster's agreement or by legal ruling.

    Anything done outside that would be at very best advisory on Westminster, and essentially part of the politics rather than the democracy. As would any boycott, as are all the arguments around getting to a poll. And on the SNPs part could be good or bad politics depending on how the hand was played.

    Although still Unionist, I'd personally be in favour of another Indyref, and I'm in favour of giving an innate right of periodic referendum to Scottish Parliament (every 16 years, and 2 phase to allow voters to ratify the final negotiation, as. per Brexit learning). I still fear Boris will see the electoral advantage and, come the moment, will allow a jettisoning Indyref, where he plays the equivalent wrecking role as Corbyn did for remain. The rules will be the rules, but that would be a highly unsatisfactory way of going about things.

    .
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,054
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    Sandpit said:

    Now 16 dead and 59 wounded, in the Russian missile attack on a shopping mall in Ukraine yesterday.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/06/28/ukraine-news-russia-war-invasion-latest-nato-grain-kremenchuk/

    NATO calling up an extra 250,000 troops(!) to a state of readiness, as they meet today following the G7. UK defence minister suggesting that 2% military spending target should move up to 2.5%.

    Deterrence is cheaper the earlier you do it. We need to get to the point where NATO conventional means are strong enough that there would be no purpose in Russia tanks crossing the Lithuanian border because they’d be turned to scrap within seconds.

    As we’re seeing now, it’s far harder to displace an army that’s already mounted an invasion than it is to deter the invasion to begin with.
    "Deterrence is cheaper the earlier you do it."

    Which is why the west's poor response to previous Russian actions are so notable. We gave Putin the indication that he could do whatever he wanted, and we would just chuck a few sanctions at him, tut, and then get on with the new world he had created.

    A worry is that he might still believe that is the case; that we will fold. A big worry is that we will.
    I don't think there is any danger whatsoever of us "folding". The biggest danger is that Putin is put in a position in which he sees no alternative to the use of nuclear weapons. That is why, alongside the full military resistance of the West, it is just as important to maintain dialogue exploring ways to end the war. Otherwise it seems pretty much nailed on that the battlefield nukes will come out as the Russian armies are driven back.
    I can't see Putin using nuclear weapons over Ukraine: the danger point for that has long past. But if he does use them over Ukraine, then he's a madman who would use them for *any* excuse.

    And of course it's important to maintain dialogue: and dialogue has been, and will be, happening - though it's difficult when you've got Putin threatening neighbouring countries in speeches, and Lavrov saying some fairly incredible things.

    "Otherwise it seems pretty much nailed on that the battlefield nukes will come out as the Russian armies are driven back"

    This just sounds like another "We must give the Russians what they want coz, you know, nukes." argument. Another version of the 'we must allow them to save face' rubbish.

    A question for you: if our fear of Russian nukes makes us cede territory to Russia, what makes you think Putin won't think "That worked!" and threaten their use over the rest of Ukraine; Estonia, Lithuania etc?
    Are you saying the Russian nuclear deterrent should not deter Ukraine or Nato, and if so, whither the British nuclear deterrent?
    It should deter Ukraine or NATO from launching an unprovoked attack on Russia.

    They haven't done so. Russia started the war.
    That is to misunderstand the theory of nuclear deterrence. Nuclear missiles were no-one's first resort, which is why we, Nato, Russia and everyone else has conventional forces.

    It is odd that advocates of Britain's nuclear deterrent seem under the illusion that Russia's nuclear arsenal will be ineffective.
    Maintaining nuclear weapons is very expensive.

    Remember Russian tyres in the first few weeks of the war? If Russian nukes have been subject to the same neglect, there is a high chance that most of them do not work, and may even be a threat mostly to those who seek to fire them.

    But with an estimated 6,000 nuclear warheads, even if they are 99% ineffective the result would be catastrophic.
    60 nukes being fired and successfully detonating at a variety of targets wouldn't be pretty but if that's all Russia had then it would lead to their total and swift annihilation.
    That's not the most likely of scenarios, though.

    The Atlantic has a pretty good article on the subject, written by Eric Schlosser (who knows a bit about the subject, having written Command and Control: Nuclear Weapons, the Damascus Accident, and the Illusion of Safety), and featuring an interview with William Perry, who knows a great deal more.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/06/russia-ukraine-nuclear-weapon-us-response/661315/
    That’s scary as f***, just reading through it. Wouldn’t want to be Biden, Johnson or Macron at the moment, knowing this stuff is all going on in the background.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 26,353
    rcs1000 said:

    The first England and Wales census 2021 have been published.

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/populationandhouseholdestimatesenglandandwales/census2021



    On Census Day, 21 March 2021, the size of the usual resident population in England and Wales was 59,597,300 (56,489,800 in England and 3,107,500 in Wales); this was the largest population ever recorded through a census in England and Wales.

    The population of England and Wales grew by more than 3.5 million (6.3%) since the last census in 2011, when it was 56,075,912.

    The population grew in each of the nine regions of England and also grew in Wales; the region with the highest population growth was the East of England, which increased by 8.3% from 2011 (a gain of approximately 488,000 residents).

    There were 30,420,100 women (51.0% of the overall population) and 29,177,200 men (49.0%) in England and Wales.

    There were more people than ever before in the older age groups; the proportion of the population who were aged 65 years and over was 18.6% (16.4% in 2011).

    There were 24,782,800 households in England and Wales on Census Day; the number of households increased by more than 1.4 million since 2011 (6.1%), when there were 23,366,044 households.

    Any data on religion? (Asking as I have a bet with @isam.)
    Yes


    “Compared with people who considered religion very important in their lives, those who considered it“not at all important” had a tenfold risk of developing Parkinson's Disease. rd.springer.com/article/10.100… Disregards reverse causation, like premorbid Parkinson compromising religiosity“

    https://twitter.com/degenrolf/status/1541714975550574592?s=21&t=B1PCGPZWuzxmWePSFz5JzQ
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 53,782

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    Sandpit said:

    Now 16 dead and 59 wounded, in the Russian missile attack on a shopping mall in Ukraine yesterday.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/06/28/ukraine-news-russia-war-invasion-latest-nato-grain-kremenchuk/

    NATO calling up an extra 250,000 troops(!) to a state of readiness, as they meet today following the G7. UK defence minister suggesting that 2% military spending target should move up to 2.5%.

    Deterrence is cheaper the earlier you do it. We need to get to the point where NATO conventional means are strong enough that there would be no purpose in Russia tanks crossing the Lithuanian border because they’d be turned to scrap within seconds.

    As we’re seeing now, it’s far harder to displace an army that’s already mounted an invasion than it is to deter the invasion to begin with.
    "Deterrence is cheaper the earlier you do it."

    Which is why the west's poor response to previous Russian actions are so notable. We gave Putin the indication that he could do whatever he wanted, and we would just chuck a few sanctions at him, tut, and then get on with the new world he had created.

    A worry is that he might still believe that is the case; that we will fold. A big worry is that we will.
    I don't think there is any danger whatsoever of us "folding". The biggest danger is that Putin is put in a position in which he sees no alternative to the use of nuclear weapons. That is why, alongside the full military resistance of the West, it is just as important to maintain dialogue exploring ways to end the war. Otherwise it seems pretty much nailed on that the battlefield nukes will come out as the Russian armies are driven back.
    I can't see Putin using nuclear weapons over Ukraine: the danger point for that has long past. But if he does use them over Ukraine, then he's a madman who would use them for *any* excuse.

    And of course it's important to maintain dialogue: and dialogue has been, and will be, happening - though it's difficult when you've got Putin threatening neighbouring countries in speeches, and Lavrov saying some fairly incredible things.

    "Otherwise it seems pretty much nailed on that the battlefield nukes will come out as the Russian armies are driven back"

    This just sounds like another "We must give the Russians what they want coz, you know, nukes." argument. Another version of the 'we must allow them to save face' rubbish.

    A question for you: if our fear of Russian nukes makes us cede territory to Russia, what makes you think Putin won't think "That worked!" and threaten their use over the rest of Ukraine; Estonia, Lithuania etc?
    Are you saying the Russian nuclear deterrent should not deter Ukraine or Nato, and if so, whither the British nuclear deterrent?
    It should deter Ukraine or NATO from launching an unprovoked attack on Russia.

    They haven't done so. Russia started the war.
    That is to misunderstand the theory of nuclear deterrence. Nuclear missiles were no-one's first resort, which is why we, Nato, Russia and everyone else has conventional forces.

    It is odd that advocates of Britain's nuclear deterrent seem under the illusion that Russia's nuclear arsenal will be ineffective.
    Maintaining nuclear weapons is very expensive.

    Remember Russian tyres in the first few weeks of the war? If Russian nukes have been subject to the same neglect, there is a high chance that most of them do not work, and may even be a threat mostly to those who seek to fire them.

    But with an estimated 6,000 nuclear warheads, even if they are 99% ineffective the result would be catastrophic.
    60 nukes being fired and successfully detonating at a variety of targets wouldn't be pretty but if that's all Russia had then it would lead to their total and swift annihilation.
    That's not the most likely of scenarios, though.

    The Atlantic has a pretty good article on the subject, written by Eric Schlosser (who knows a bit about the subject, having written Command and Control: Nuclear Weapons, the Damascus Accident, and the Illusion of Safety), and featuring an interview with William Perry, who knows a great deal more.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/06/russia-ukraine-nuclear-weapon-us-response/661315/

    It makes you glad that Biden is now president, and not Obama...
    ...During the summer of 2016, members of President Barack Obama’s national-security team secretly staged a war game in which Russia invades a NATO country in the Baltics and then uses a low-yield tactical nuclear weapon against NATO forces to end the conflict on favorable terms. As described by Fred Kaplan in The Bomb (2020), two groups of Obama officials reached widely divergent conclusions about what the United States should do. The National Security Council’s so-called Principals Committee—including Cabinet officers and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff—decided that the United States had no choice but to retaliate with nuclear weapons. Any other type of response, the committee argued, would show a lack of resolve, damage American credibility, and weaken the NATO alliance. Choosing a suitable nuclear target proved difficult, however. Hitting Russia’s invading force would kill innocent civilians in a NATO country. Striking targets inside Russia might escalate the conflict to an all-out nuclear war. In the end, the NSC Principals Committee recommended a nuclear attack on Belarus—a nation that had played no role whatsoever in the invasion of the NATO ally but had the misfortune of being a Russian ally.

    Deputy staff members at the NSC played the same war game and came up with a different response. Colin Kahl, who at the time was an adviser to Vice President Biden, argued that retaliating with a nuclear weapon would be a huge mistake, sacrificing the moral high ground. Kahl thought it would be far more effective to respond with a conventional attack and turn world opinion against Russia for violating the nuclear taboo. The others agreed, and Avril Haines, a deputy national security adviser, suggested making T-shirts with the slogan Deputies should run the world. Haines is now President Biden’s Director of National Intelligence, and Kahl is the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy....

    Yes, read that the other day and it was a very good article.

    Thanks for sharing.
    If you don't want to sleep tonight: imagine the sorts of people Trump had around him in these kinds of positions doing the same wargame.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 71,907
    London data interesting. Looks like the poshest parts of inner London have experienced population decline.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 53,782
    MISTY said:

    Meanwhile in deep blue New England.

    https://www.suffolk.edu/news-features/news/2022/06/27/14/17/poll-rhode-island-congressional-district-could-flip-to-republican

    small sample. But voters there don't want four more years of Biden...? even dems

    I just don't see how Biden can plausible run.

    Which probably means he will.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 26,353
    Pro_Rata said:

    eek said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    If Sturgeon and co wish to hold a referendum then they can but if it's not legitimate the easiest way to handle is to to encourage those who are against independence to completely ignore it.

    Then if 80% vote yes on a 40% turn out you've got nothing to worry about. 80% voting yes on a 65% turnout would however be a big problem..
    Democracy is “a big problem”. That’s Boris’s Brexit Britain for you.

    I'm going to get all rules is rules, here.

    To be democracy, the referendum has got to be legal, whether that is by Westminster's agreement or by legal ruling.

    Anything done outside that would be at very best advisory on Westminster, and essentially part of the politics rather than the democracy. As would any boycott, as are all the arguments around getting to a poll. And on the SNPs part could be good or bad politics depending on how the hand was played.

    Although still Unionist, I'd personally be in favour of another Indyref, and I'm in favour of giving an innate right of periodic referendum to Scottish Parliament (every 16 years, and 2 phase to allow voters to ratify the final negotiation, as. per Brexit learning). I still fear Boris will see the electoral advantage and, come the moment, will allow a jettisoning Indyref, where he plays the equivalent wrecking role as Corbyn did for remain. The rules will be the rules, but that would be a highly unsatisfactory way of going about things.

    .
    Total misreading of Boris. He may be a lying shyster (OK he is) but he doesn’t want to be the man who lost the UK. No one does. It would make Cameron’s Brexit humiliation look like a minor by election set back in Newent
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,523
    Pulpstar said:

    London data interesting. Looks like the poshest parts of inner London have experienced population decline.

    That was true in 2011. Kensington and Chelsea was one of, I think, 14 areas to have a smaller population than in 2001. Barrow-in-Furness was another if I remember rightly.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 26,353
    Pulpstar said:

    London data interesting. Looks like the poshest parts of inner London have experienced population decline.

    Brexit and Covid
  • Pulpstar said:

    London data interesting. Looks like the poshest parts of inner London have experienced population decline.

    Seems like there should be some prime real estate there available to construct some new homes then. 👍
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 30,662
    rcs1000 said:

    kinabalu said:

    On topic, do any of our US watchers have a view on whether DeSantis has a better or worse chance of beating Biden/Dem in the general?

    I think DeSantis would wipe the floor with pretty much any Dem, because the Dems (like the Conservatives here) are facing the cost of living crisis. Plus, of course, Biden is ... shall we say ... not as sharp as he used to be.

    Indeed, I think the Republicans have to be the clear favourites for 2024. The exception would be if Trump were the candidate again. Because a lot of the people who came out to vote against Trump last time will do so again. And there's also a host of Republicans who (while not voting for Biden/ADem) will likely sit on their hands if he is the nominee.

    Now, it's possible things turn around for the Dems before the General (not least if energy prices drop sharply, and if they get themselves a charismatic centrist below the age of 70 as candidate). But right now, I would say that DeSantis would be a very strong candidate for the Republicans in an election that favours them.
    So GOP self-interest is to not pick Trump. American self-interest too, since he'd be a threat to its democracy, could knock that reeling beast out for the count.

    Will he only run for the nomination if it looks in the bag, I wonder? Or is that self-fulfilling in that IF he runs, DeSantis won't?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,054

    MISTY said:

    Meanwhile in deep blue New England.

    https://www.suffolk.edu/news-features/news/2022/06/27/14/17/poll-rhode-island-congressional-district-could-flip-to-republican

    small sample. But voters there don't want four more years of Biden...? even dems

    I just don't see how Biden can plausible run.

    Which probably means he will.
    They can’t possibly run someone who will turn 82 just after the election.

    The problem they have to deal with, is the Kamala Harris problem. The Dems need to get Biden out of the way, but without Harris becoming the presumptive nominee by default. She has even lower ratings than the President, and would likely lose to any Republican in November 2024.

    What I think happens is that a stalking horse challenges Biden in the primaries, to open up the contest to others.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 34,829
    ..
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    I see Douglas Ross is saying he wouldn't participate in any 'pretend referendum' if Sturgeon organises one. Given his track record on flip flopping I wouldn't be confident in him sticking to that though.

    Hmm. If he doesn't change his mind, he, and anyone who behaves like him, can therefore be disregarded completely, given that the SNP and Greens have a mandate. Yes, 'mandate', which his lords and masters in London make a great thing of having.
    I wonder what mandate the head of a party sub branch that has fought every single election since 2014 on the promise that voting for them will stop indy ref 2 and lost by a distance every time feels he has?

    If wee Dougie & Co follow through on the 'we're no playing' gambit it'll be great entertainment to see them trying to observe omerta while dying to spout Project Fear 347.
    The only mandate needed is the Tory majority at Westminster to respect the once in a generation vote.

    The UK government will therefore continue to refuse an official indyref2, tell Unionists to boycott any unofficial referendum and completely ignore the result, just as their conservative cousins in Spain did in 2017 with the unofficial Catalan independence referendum.

    The future of the Union is reserved to Westminster and the UK government alone
    It is not even that as labour and the lib dems are also opposed to indyref2, so even without a conservative government, which is increasingly likely, Westminster is not going to grant a section 30 agreement in years
    Indeed, the SNP's only chance is to get a hung parliament in 2024 with the Tories most seats but the SNP having the balance of power.

    Another Tory majority or Labour most seats and zero chance of an official indyref2
    Big G & HYUD on the same democracy blocking, granny bashing page, hot from *checks notes* North Wales and Epping.
    Maybe you should get the Scots to want indyref2 which they clearly do not and it clearly upsets you that some of us who have as much right as yourself to express an opposing view, and one that would win a referendum if it was held anyway
    You are entitled to express as many hypocritical, irrelevant and contradictory views as you want, as evidenced by the constant and unimpeded stream of them from North Wales.

    Thank God we don’t get a similar stream of misinformed pro-Nat bile from <<< checks notes >>> Sweden
    Or indeed from wherever the flint knapping takes yersel. Tbh your tourist's eye view of the Caucasus seems better informed than the same of Scotland, which gets a bit..repetitive.
  • MISTYMISTY Posts: 1,594
    edited June 28

    MISTY said:

    Meanwhile in deep blue New England.

    https://www.suffolk.edu/news-features/news/2022/06/27/14/17/poll-rhode-island-congressional-district-could-flip-to-republican

    small sample. But voters there don't want four more years of Biden...? even dems

    I just don't see how Biden can plausible run.

    Which probably means he will.

    I suppose Biden would argue he polled a vast number of votes last time out...
This discussion has been closed.