Honours for politicians and their cronies should go.
It's a dishonourable racket.
Better than pardons.
Honours are baubles with no practical impact in the real world.
Composition of the second chamber is a different question but should be address from first principles which no one has been willing to do
Nick Clegg did, to be fair, but the Bill he presented on behalf of the Government in the Coalition years was ultimately withdrawn in the face of Tory backbench opposition. You can say his was the wrong reform package if you like, but you can't really say nobody has been willing to do it and come up with legislation.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
He said he’d like to re-write the deal . We don’t know what if any changes are possible until we get to that point . Not sure it’s fair to accuse him of lying . The EU has a lot more goodwill towards Labour than the handmaidens of Brexit.
If you rule out SM/CU then the golden goose was really Horizon and Sunak has already plucked it. It may be possible to have more trusted trader schemes etc but that will make very little difference to 99.9% of the population.
Starmer made remarks about ‘getting a better EU deal for my kids’ and to me that means, probably, restoring some kind of Free Movement
I do wonder if he will go for it
Some sort of freedom of movement might be possible. The reality is that this exists already. I was doing a trial recently where one of the charges was attempting to pervert the course of justice. The accused was an Algerian but had been living here pretending to have been French (using false documents) and pretending to be covered by the transitional provisions applicable at the time of Brexit. Millions of people were granted such rights with very little inquiry and it does not take a lot of imagination to conclude that a fair number of these will have been for those wanting to sell a package of documentation to the likes of that Algerian.
The right seems to be overjoyed that Starmer has talked about improving the Brexit deal . They think it allows the Tories lots of attack lines .
They seem to be living in 2016.
Closer ties have strong support across the country .
Cuts the legs out from under the Lib Dems
I just don’t think this move by Starmer is that controversial. The Tories might try and portray it as such but the country is in a different place from 2016 .
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
He said he’d like to re-write the deal . We don’t know what if any changes are possible until we get to that point . Not sure it’s fair to accuse him of lying . The EU has a lot more goodwill towards Labour than the handmaidens of Brexit.
If you rule out SM/CU then the golden goose was really Horizon and Sunak has already plucked it. It may be possible to have more trusted trader schemes etc but that will make very little difference to 99.9% of the population.
Starmer made remarks about ‘getting a better EU deal for my kids’ and to me that means, probably, restoring some kind of Free Movement
I do wonder if he will go for it
Some sort of freedom of movement might be possible. The reality is that this exists already. I was doing a trial recently where one of the charges was attempting to pervert the course of justice. The accused was an Algerian but had been living here pretending to have been French (using false documents) and pretending to be covered by the transitional provisions applicable at the time of Brexit. Millions of people were granted such rights with very little inquiry and it does not take a lot of imagination to conclude that a fair number of these will have been for those wanting to sell a package of documentation to the likes of that Algerian.
I largely agree. I never had issues with Free Movement and it is now clear - as has been said on here - that neither party has any intention (or ability?) to really tackle mass immigration
So it is arguable we might as well get the benefits of the Single Market - perhaps
On topic: No, it shouldn't. Absent some general rules on eligibility to have a list, she was PM and if she wants to do one then whatever. The whole system seems nuts to me, but if we have it then it shouldn't be restricted based on whether a PM is any good or not. You could introduce some general minimum term or make the number you can nominate proportional to time served - e.g. you get X nominations per completed year as PM, say.
Mind you, she looks crass for pushing it, I think. And anyone with self-respect would surely refuse one of her resignation honours. But that's a different question to whether it should actually be blocked.
An easy general rule for eligibility would be PM for 2 King's/Queen's speeches. This means that either the PM has survived one whole parliamentary Term (or whatever the right term is) or, if they became PM and then had an election within a year or so, then the PM won an election.
But yes the whole system is nuts. There is no way that one person alone should be chosing who gets to sit in the upper house for the rest of their life.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are other arrangements already in existence - as an example Turkey has a customs union with the EU. Not *the* customs union, its own version. So we can not join the Customs Union but be in union with customs...
The Turkish Customs Union is a notoriously shit deal for turkey.
As I recall you saying back during the negotiations?
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
Honours for politicians and their cronies should go.
It's a dishonourable racket.
Better than pardons.
Honours are baubles with no practical impact in the real world.
Composition of the second chamber is a different question but should be address from first principles which no one has been willing to do
Nick Clegg did, to be fair, but the Bill he presented on behalf of the Government in the Coalition years was ultimately withdrawn in the face of Tory backbench opposition. You can say his was the wrong reform package if you like, but you can't really say nobody has been willing to do it and come up with legislation.
Did he address it from first principles? I’d entirely forgotten about his bill!
It always runs into elected vs appointed. First the Commons needs to align on what the upper house’s powers should be - that drives whether it needs democratic legitimacy or not
The right seems to be overjoyed that Starmer has talked about improving the Brexit deal . They think it allows the Tories lots of attack lines .
They seem to be living in 2016.
Closer ties have strong support across the country .
Cuts the legs out from under the Lib Dems
I just don’t think this move by Starmer is that controversial. The Tories might try and portray it as such but the country is in a different place from 2016 .
My point was different - why should someone vote Lib Dem not Labour?
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
The right seems to be overjoyed that Starmer has talked about improving the Brexit deal . They think it allows the Tories lots of attack lines .
They seem to be living in 2016.
Closer ties have strong support across the country .
Cuts the legs out from under the Lib Dems
I just don’t think this move by Starmer is that controversial. The Tories might try and portray it as such but the country is in a different place from 2016 .
My point was different - why should someone vote Lib Dem not Labour?
To remove the Tories .
I’ll be voting Lib Dem in my area as voting Labour just delivers the seat to the Tories .
The reason why we should want this norm of PMs doling out honours on their resignation ended (and the reason why it won't be) is that patronage is one of the powers a PM has to convince people to do things that they don't want to do, or think ought not to be done.
Patronage is an enemy to good governance and a stepping stone to corruption.
If a particularly egregious example of this, in the form of Liz Truss' resignation honours, can be the catalyst for change, then I would have to add it to the short list of positive changes she brought to the country.
So I disagree with those who argue that we shouldn't deny Truss this custom. We should use it as an opportunity to try and create a change that will otherwise be extremely difficult to make. This is the way in which most British constitutional precedents have been created - in response to a particular absurdity that demanded a change to the status quo.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are other arrangements already in existence - as an example Turkey has a customs union with the EU. Not *the* customs union, its own version. So we can not join the Customs Union but be in union with customs...
The Turkish Customs Union is a notoriously shit deal for turkey.
As I recall you saying back during the negotiations?
And? It exists. Which means non-CU customs deals are possible. Which directly contradicts the point Leon was making.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
He said he’d like to re-write the deal . We don’t know what if any changes are possible until we get to that point . Not sure it’s fair to accuse him of lying . The EU has a lot more goodwill towards Labour than the handmaidens of Brexit.
Sir Keir will doubtless love the irony of 'We Hold All The Cards' Leavers telling him that the mighty EU will never surrender to the little UK's risible demands.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are other arrangements already in existence - as an example Turkey has a customs union with the EU. Not *the* customs union, its own version. So we can not join the Customs Union but be in union with customs...
The Turkish Customs Union is a notoriously shit deal for turkey.
As I recall you saying back during the negotiations?
And? It exists. Which means non-CU customs deals are possible. Which directly contradicts the point Leon was making.
My apologies - thought you were proposing it as a way forward
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
He said he’d like to re-write the deal . We don’t know what if any changes are possible until we get to that point . Not sure it’s fair to accuse him of lying . The EU has a lot more goodwill towards Labour than the handmaidens of Brexit.
If you rule out SM/CU then the golden goose was really Horizon and Sunak has already plucked it. It may be possible to have more trusted trader schemes etc but that will make very little difference to 99.9% of the population.
Starmer made remarks about ‘getting a better EU deal for my kids’ and to me that means, probably, restoring some kind of Free Movement
I do wonder if he will go for it
Some sort of freedom of movement might be possible. The reality is that this exists already. I was doing a trial recently where one of the charges was attempting to pervert the course of justice. The accused was an Algerian but had been living here pretending to have been French (using false documents) and pretending to be covered by the transitional provisions applicable at the time of Brexit. Millions of people were granted such rights with very little inquiry and it does not take a lot of imagination to conclude that a fair number of these will have been for those wanting to sell a package of documentation to the likes of that Algerian.
I largely agree. I never had issues with Free Movement and it is now clear - as has been said on here - that neither party has any intention (or ability?) to really tackle mass immigration
So it is arguable we might as well get the benefits of the Single Market - perhaps
Pretty soon all the parties will be doing things to tackle mass immigration.
Somewhat OT, but it seems my local council (Derbyshire) is on the point of going bust. Further reading suggests that this has been precipitated, at least in part, a failed project to build a waste incinerator.
From my brief reading up, what seems to have happened is: Derbyshire and Derby City Councils teamed up to build a new incinerator. They dished out some sort of PFI type contract to a private sector consortium to build it. The incinerator is built, but repeatedly fails commissioning tests. Eventually the councils decide to pull the plug on the basis that the plant is clearly a turkey. This is after dishing out various management and maintenance contracts worth millions to look after the closed plant. Somehow the councils find themselves sharing the liability for a £100millon payment to the an outfit behind the building of the incinerator. Derbyshire's £57million share of this appears to be a large part of what is putting them very in the red this year.
Can anyone explain: a) How did the councils manage to end up paying out to not use a facility which they paid to have built which doesn't work, and seems to have little prospect of ever working? b) How on earth this isn't a massive political scandal, given that at best it's spectacular incompetence and at worst it smells more like straight up corruption. To manage to end up in a mess like this must have taken some gritty determination to pick all the wrong choices at every point.
The spivocracy continues to entertain. They sign a contract to build a new incinerator. The thing is built but cannot be commissioned as has been constructed out of chocolate. Why on earth does the contract not have basic performance clauses in it?
Here in the private sector contracts are usually pretty tight - certainly are when I am involved. If there is non-conformance or worse, what happens is clearly spelled out. For the protection of all parties.
And yet in PFI it seems that we pay £stupid for cheaply built crap, with no ability to claw back if the building is unusable or the PPE is unsuitable. The spivs get their money, we get the bill. Why?
Public procurement is essentially set up to deliver the cheapest option, even if it doesn't work. These systems were set up because we didn't believe public sector procurement was either as cheap as it could be or as honest as it could be. And to be fair, it has succeeded in its aims. What it now doesn't deliver is quality. It's quite a challenge for those working in the public sector not to get stuck in this trap, and it's surprising it doesn't happen more often than it does.
A friend of mine was telling me about public procurement in the Netherlands yesterday. Apparently standard practice is to rule out the cheapest bid. The effect of this is that nobody tries to buy the job - if you can't do it just by being as cheap as possible, you have to be offer something else. You still have to be good value, but have added quality elsewhere. It's not perfect of course. And it's considerably more expensive up front. But I find it quite an interesting approach.
I was advised, when young, to always accept the middle estimate. Was it Ruskin who said something about always someone who can make something a little cheaper and nastier and the man who buys by price alone is that man’s lawful prey!
To be honest, as someone who has worked in the public procurement area, I actually think that approach is more common than the one Cookie describes. Personal experiences differ, of course, but what I've seen is a marked reluctance to go for the lower price, lower quality option as that is much more liable to come back and bite the people involved in the procurement process.
That's not to say the process is brilliant by any means, and there are lots of procurements with a bad outcome, but I'm not sure it is correct to say price routinely wins out over quality - in my experience at least.
Of all the things that SKS has done I am most surprised at reopening up the Brexit wound. Yes, the Brexit deal we have now is bad, but he has given the Tories another election where they can harp on about being the only true defenders of Brexit. I know most voters think Brexit has been a failure, and that the Tories own that failure, but still... It's surprisingly bold - in a way I don't actually know will pay off
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
In order to reach the point of making a dramatic breakthrough and major gains Ukraine has to first go through the process of destroying the Russian army's ability to resist. I'm confident that Ukraine is making good progress on this task, but it does mean that if you only look at territorial change it all looks like a lot of effort for little gain.
But it's in three nature of things that we would expect a non-linear rate of change in territorial control.
It is taking longer to wear the Russian forces down then we'd all hoped, but I think that the Russian army will break again - as it has done in Kyiv, Kharkiv and Kherson before - if Ukraine continues to receive support from the US and Europe, and Russia does not receive support from China.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
I personally wouldn’t write off the offensive just yet. Nobody promised a breakthrough, although they (and we) certainly hoped for one.
The Ukrainians seems to be making slow but steady grinding progress in the south & the Russians are responding not by giving ground & trying to grind up the Ukrainian advance but by throwing troops into the maw. There are signs they are running low on functional artillery pieces - the overwhelming Russian artillery advantage they enjoyed last year seems to have disappeared.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Covid has given remain voters a free hit to blame everything on Brexit, whilst pretending the lockdowns they never wanted to end didnt ruin the economy
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are other arrangements already in existence - as an example Turkey has a customs union with the EU. Not *the* customs union, its own version. So we can not join the Customs Union but be in union with customs...
The Turkish Customs Union is a notoriously shit deal for turkey.
As I recall you saying back during the negotiations?
And? It exists. Which means non-CU customs deals are possible. Which directly contradicts the point Leon was making.
My apologies - thought you were proposing it as a way forward
We would be bonkers to copy the Turkish deal. But we could absolutely get a special deal for the UK, as so many other countries do. It was Boris! who insisted that we be tret as a third country. We can go back and change this so that we actually have a trading deal with them.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
The new defence minister, in Ukraine, appoints new deputy defence ministers. Bringing in your own team etc.
The reason why we should want this norm of PMs doling out honours on their resignation ended (and the reason why it won't be) is that patronage is one of the powers a PM has to convince people to do things that they don't want to do, or think ought not to be done.
Patronage is an enemy to good governance and a stepping stone to corruption.
If a particularly egregious example of this, in the form of Liz Truss' resignation honours, can be the catalyst for change, then I would have to add it to the short list of positive changes she brought to the country.
So I disagree with those who argue that we shouldn't deny Truss this custom. We should use it as an opportunity to try and create a change that will otherwise be extremely difficult to make. This is the way in which most British constitutional precedents have been created - in response to a particular absurdity that demanded a change to the status quo.
Whilst I agree the resignation honours system should be ended, I'm not actually sure it's a particularly important part of the PM's arsenal in terms of patronage. "I might sling you a gong when I'm out the door anyway - although you'll never be able to hold me to it" isn't that strong a line. Whilst they are actually PM, the PM can hand out real jobs as well as honours in the regular honours lists. Indeed I recall Theresa May gave a couple of knighthoods to backbenchers completely outside the regular lists in a pretty naked attempt to buy votes for her doomed Brexit deal.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
FWIW Ukraine had a spectacular week last week, including the destruction of a submarine and a landing ship and the rout of an entire Russian Brigade, as well as advances in at least four different areas in the South, East and on the Dnipro.
Putinism is in a terrible state and Russia highly unstable, but sure its Ukraine that is on the back foot...
Leon has reverted to his usual Chicken Licken Ninnyism...
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
As predicted, the reasons for not popping your Labour cherry are bunching up.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Oh for goodness sake even if we were roaring away successful and Europe was going off a cliff edge that doesn't mean Brexit is successful. You have to compare what you have gained to what you have lost, not compare us with another country and go 'look they are having problems too'. About the only thing you did get right there is it isn't all about Brexit. There are lots of other stuff that has an impact making your observation utterly pointless. You can only look at the gains and losses.
So the question is has the improvements in exporting and importing to the rest of the world greater than the loss in importing and exporting to Europe. To my mind the answer to that question is very very clear.
If not do the freedoms/restrictions of being outside of Europe in other areas outweigh the freedoms/restrictions of being in Europe. And the answer to that question in my mind is even clearer.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
You put too much weight on journalists write stuff about which they know little
I thought you would have learnt that, if nothing else, from Covid
This is working. It’s painstaking and slow work to do it right
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
He said he’d like to re-write the deal . We don’t know what if any changes are possible until we get to that point . Not sure it’s fair to accuse him of lying . The EU has a lot more goodwill towards Labour than the handmaidens of Brexit.
If you rule out SM/CU then the golden goose was really Horizon and Sunak has already plucked it. It may be possible to have more trusted trader schemes etc but that will make very little difference to 99.9% of the population.
Starmer made remarks about ‘getting a better EU deal for my kids’ and to me that means, probably, restoring some kind of Free Movement
I do wonder if he will go for it
Some sort of freedom of movement might be possible. The reality is that this exists already. I was doing a trial recently where one of the charges was attempting to pervert the course of justice. The accused was an Algerian but had been living here pretending to have been French (using false documents) and pretending to be covered by the transitional provisions applicable at the time of Brexit. Millions of people were granted such rights with very little inquiry and it does not take a lot of imagination to conclude that a fair number of these will have been for those wanting to sell a package of documentation to the likes of that Algerian.
I largely agree. I never had issues with Free Movement and it is now clear - as has been said on here - that neither party has any intention (or ability?) to really tackle mass immigration
So it is arguable we might as well get the benefits of the Single Market - perhaps
Pretty soon all the parties will be doing things to tackle mass immigration.
Not while the parties are convinced we need immigration to fill low-skilled jobs workshy Brits refuse, to do highly-skilled jobs like doctors and nurses that we don't train enough of and to counter the demographic timebomb. Something something Japan.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
Wasn’t that his winning strategy last winter as well?
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
I'm not sure what you expect?
There's no magic way to win a war. You have to destroy the enemy army. Before you have done this they will be able to resist and hold ground.
I think there's decent evidence that Ukraine are inflicting greater losses then they are suffering, and so, if they are inflicting losses on Russia more quickly then Russia can replace those losses, they will eventually reach a point where Russia is unable to defend the current front line. But this will necessarily take time and it will look like not much progress is made while it plays out.
Meanwhile, for example, we can see that Ukraine is able to attack valuable Russians assets almost at will, whole Russia is unable to enforce it's blockade of Ukrainian ports.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
FWIW Ukraine had a spectacular week last week, including the destruction of a submarine and a landing ship and the rout of an entire Russian Brigade, as well as advances in at least four different areas in the South, East and on the Dnipro.
Putinism is in a terrible state and Russia highly unstable, but sure its Ukraine that is on the back foot...
Leon has reverted to his usual Chicken Licken Ninnyism...
Yes, of course, for merely pointing out the facts on the ground, I am some kind of coward and a ‘fucking appeaser’ and pro Putin and wishing for Ukrainian defeat, etc
We had this debate about a month ago when I queried Ukrainian progress and I was roundly accused then of defeatism and appeasement and the like, and you all said, just wait, the breakthrough is nearly here, soon the brave Ukrainians will smash through the first line of defence and race to the Azov and cut off Crimea
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
Er. Russia tried that last winter. Failed. Ukraine now has much better air defences.
How can repeating a failed strategy in less favourable circumstances be a possible winning strategy?
Of all the things that SKS has done I am most surprised at reopening up the Brexit wound. Yes, the Brexit deal we have now is bad, but he has given the Tories another election where they can harp on about being the only true defenders of Brexit. I know most voters think Brexit has been a failure, and that the Tories own that failure, but still... It's surprisingly bold - in a way I don't actually know will pay off
Not sure the Tory hits work because most think Brexit is having a negative economic impact .
The Red Wall voters who have moved back to Labour are those who think Brexit hasn’t delivered and they’re not going to jump ship because Starmer wants a better deal .
The Tories banging on about Brexit betrayal just isn’t going to resonate like it did in 2019 .
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Oh for goodness sake even if we were roaring away successful and Europe was going off a cliff edge that doesn't mean Brexit is successful. You have to compare what you have gained to what you have lost, not compare us with another country and go 'look they are having problems too'. About the only thing you did get right there is it isn't all about Brexit. There are lots of other stuff that has an impact making your observation utterly pointless. You can only look at the gains and losses.
So the question is has the improvements in exporting and importing to the rest of the world greater than the loss in importing and exporting to Europe. To my mind the answer to that question is very very clear.
If not do the freedoms/restrictions of being outside of Europe in other areas outweigh the freedoms/restrictions of being in Europe. And the answer to that question in my mind is even clearer.
How many times can we repeat this argument? For me, Brexit is Brexit
Regaining sovereignty and proper democracy is really all that I cared about. That’s been done. So for me it is a success. I understand that you differ
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Covid has given remain voters a free hit to blame everything on Brexit, whilst pretending the lockdowns they never wanted to end didnt ruin the economy
Covid has also given leave voters a free hit to blame the economic hit from Brexit on the Covid restrictions.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
Of all the things that SKS has done I am most surprised at reopening up the Brexit wound. Yes, the Brexit deal we have now is bad, but he has given the Tories another election where they can harp on about being the only true defenders of Brexit. I know most voters think Brexit has been a failure, and that the Tories own that failure, but still... It's surprisingly bold - in a way I don't actually know will pay off
Not sure the Tory hits work because most think Brexit is having a negative economic impact .
The Red Wall voters who have moved back to Labour are those who think Brexit hasn’t delivered and they’re not going to jump ship because Starmer wants a better deal .
The Tories banging on about Brexit betrayal just isn’t going to resonate like it did in 2019 .
I agree - but Starmer also must rely on Tory abstentions as much as Red Wall voters coming back. If the DKs do vote they will, in my view, likely vote Tory - they cannot justify to themselves now but Brexit may be the thing that does.
For all those professing there is actually a Scopttish Labour Party: There is no Scottish Labour.
With all due respect to SLAB, I wouldn't be surprised if they acceded to this command, but am I correct in thinking that WLAB is very inward-looking (to put it politely) and would simply ignore it?
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
I'm not sure what you expect?
There's no magic way to win a war. You have to destroy the enemy army. Before you have done this they will be able to resist and hold ground.
I think there's decent evidence that Ukraine are inflicting greater losses then they are suffering, and so, if they are inflicting losses on Russia more quickly then Russia can replace those losses, they will eventually reach a point where Russia is unable to defend the current front line. But this will necessarily take time and it will look like not much progress is made while it plays out.
Meanwhile, for example, we can see that Ukraine is able to attack valuable Russians assets almost at will, whole Russia is unable to enforce it's blockade of Ukrainian ports.
Probably the wrong analogy, but in the first world war the British fought an epic battle on the Somme and then a year later another at Passchendaele, both often regarded as at best pyrrhic victories. Yet both were instrumental in the weakening and ultimate defeat of the Imperial German Army. The Somme was described as 'the muddy grave of the German Army' and resulted in the withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line in 1917. After Passchendaele a German general staff publication had "Germany had been brought near to certain destruction (sicheren Untergang) by the Flanders battle of 1917".
Yet after both battles, I suspect @Leon would have been calling them failures.
I cannot see the future, but I think the danger of Russia 'winning' in Ukraine is gone, and its now all about whether Russia can be ejected fully (and at what cost) or if Putin finally gets replaced. Regimes can fall very fast at the end.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
As predicted, the reasons for not popping your Labour cherry are bunching up.
Yes, I've spoken to SKS and told him not to count on that 'PBLeon' vote. His face went ashen.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
He said he’d like to re-write the deal . We don’t know what if any changes are possible until we get to that point . Not sure it’s fair to accuse him of lying . The EU has a lot more goodwill towards Labour than the handmaidens of Brexit.
If you rule out SM/CU then the golden goose was really Horizon and Sunak has already plucked it. It may be possible to have more trusted trader schemes etc but that will make very little difference to 99.9% of the population.
Starmer made remarks about ‘getting a better EU deal for my kids’ and to me that means, probably, restoring some kind of Free Movement
I do wonder if he will go for it
Some sort of freedom of movement might be possible. The reality is that this exists already. I was doing a trial recently where one of the charges was attempting to pervert the course of justice. The accused was an Algerian but had been living here pretending to have been French (using false documents) and pretending to be covered by the transitional provisions applicable at the time of Brexit. Millions of people were granted such rights with very little inquiry and it does not take a lot of imagination to conclude that a fair number of these will have been for those wanting to sell a package of documentation to the likes of that Algerian.
I largely agree. I never had issues with Free Movement and it is now clear - as has been said on here - that neither party has any intention (or ability?) to really tackle mass immigration
So it is arguable we might as well get the benefits of the Single Market - perhaps
Pretty soon all the parties will be doing things to tackle mass immigration.
Not while the parties are convinced we need immigration to fill low-skilled jobs workshy Brits refuse, to do highly-skilled jobs like doctors and nurses that we don't train enough of and to counter the demographic timebomb. Something something Japan.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
I'm not sure what you expect?
There's no magic way to win a war. You have to destroy the enemy army. Before you have done this they will be able to resist and hold ground.
I think there's decent evidence that Ukraine are inflicting greater losses then they are suffering, and so, if they are inflicting losses on Russia more quickly then Russia can replace those losses, they will eventually reach a point where Russia is unable to defend the current front line. But this will necessarily take time and it will look like not much progress is made while it plays out.
Meanwhile, for example, we can see that Ukraine is able to attack valuable Russians assets almost at will, whole Russia is unable to enforce it's blockade of Ukrainian ports.
Probably the wrong analogy, but in the first world war the British fought an epic battle on the Somme and then a year later another at Passchendaele, both often regarded as at best pyrrhic victories. Yet both were instrumental in the weakening and ultimate defeat of the Imperial German Army. The Somme was described as 'the muddy grave of the German Army' and resulted in the withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line in 1917. After Passchendaele a German general staff publication had "Germany had been brought near to certain destruction (sicheren Untergang) by the Flanders battle of 1917".
Yet after both battles, I suspect @Leon would have been calling them failures.
I cannot see the future, but I think the danger of Russia 'winning' in Ukraine is gone, and its now all about whether Russia can be ejected fully (and at what cost) or if Putin finally gets replaced. Regimes can fall very fast at the end.
See also Normandy 1944 - when collapse comes, it can come very swiftly indeed.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Covid has given remain voters a free hit to blame everything on Brexit, whilst pretending the lockdowns they never wanted to end didnt ruin the economy
Covid has also given leave voters a free hit to blame the economic hit from Brexit on the Covid restrictions.
As usual the truth lays between the two extremes.
It does, but I strongly suspect that forcing people to stay at home, paid by the government for months on end, and everything else, has had a much bigger impact than making trade a bit more sticky (than (a) it was and (b) than it ought to be).
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
As predicted, the reasons for not popping your Labour cherry are bunching up.
Yes, I've spoken to SKS and told him not to count on that 'PBLeon' vote. His face went ashen.
More ashen than his normal face? It's quite tricky to judge ashen-ness with Starmer - it's an acquired skill, a bit like watching snooker on a black and white telly.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Oh for goodness sake even if we were roaring away successful and Europe was going off a cliff edge that doesn't mean Brexit is successful. You have to compare what you have gained to what you have lost, not compare us with another country and go 'look they are having problems too'. About the only thing you did get right there is it isn't all about Brexit. There are lots of other stuff that has an impact making your observation utterly pointless. You can only look at the gains and losses.
So the question is has the improvements in exporting and importing to the rest of the world greater than the loss in importing and exporting to Europe. To my mind the answer to that question is very very clear.
If not do the freedoms/restrictions of being outside of Europe in other areas outweigh the freedoms/restrictions of being in Europe. And the answer to that question in my mind is even clearer.
How many times can we repeat this argument? For me, Brexit is Brexit
Regaining sovereignty and proper democracy is really all that I cared about. That’s been done. So for me it is a success. I understand that you differ
Yep and that is a perfectly valid argument and comes under the 2nd part of my post 'Freedoms/Restrictions' and why we differ in our view but neither of us are actually wrong as this is just an opinion. Interestingly I was backing up and agreeing with @BartholomewRoberts on this very point a few days ago on how we can both be liberals yet have opposing views on Brexit.
HOWEVER that is not what you just posted is it? If you had I would have agreed with you and even given you a 'like'.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Covid has given remain voters a free hit to blame everything on Brexit, whilst pretending the lockdowns they never wanted to end didnt ruin the economy
Covid has also given leave voters a free hit to blame the economic hit from Brexit on the Covid restrictions.
As usual the truth lays between the two extremes.
Yes, it seems we can never truly know. But I don’t hear the remain crowd ever caveating their certainty that it’s all down to Brexit by noting the economic hit of lockdown
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
You can work out what's going on between general NAFO bros on X and Рыбарь with heavy critical reading analysis.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
I didn't read Phil's point as being about number of missiles but nature of missiles. Given Russia tried to destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure last year, with limited success, and Ukraine has strengthened its air defences, presumably Russia would need to have gained access to more sophisticated weapons over the past 12 months. Maybe they have, but I doubt Kim brought them in his little train.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
They are spasmodically firing salvos, which match quite closely to the very reduced production rates of those missiles they have in production. And some Iranian drones. When they can get them.
It’s not exactly the classic WWIII scenarios where, in the battle of the Atlantic Part Deux the Russians launch enough missiles to overwhelm multiple Aegis ships. On a daily basis…
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
You are weirdly gullible Leon - you repeat alt-right talking points in an oddly naïve “just asking questions” fashion that suggests you spend far too much time paling around with neo-fascist Putinists.
Russia has run down it’s missile stocks & now appears to be lobbing the things at Ukraine at roughly the rate it can make more of them. Hence the dependency on cheap Iranian Shaheed drones for the majority of long range strikes (now manufactured in Russia IIRC). If you go back to the articles written about this topic on rusi.org & elsewhere you’ll see that they never claimed Russia would run out, just that their rate of use at the time was unsustainable.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
I'm not sure what you expect?
There's no magic way to win a war. You have to destroy the enemy army. Before you have done this they will be able to resist and hold ground.
I think there's decent evidence that Ukraine are inflicting greater losses then they are suffering, and so, if they are inflicting losses on Russia more quickly then Russia can replace those losses, they will eventually reach a point where Russia is unable to defend the current front line. But this will necessarily take time and it will look like not much progress is made while it plays out.
Meanwhile, for example, we can see that Ukraine is able to attack valuable Russians assets almost at will, whole Russia is unable to enforce it's blockade of Ukrainian ports.
Probably the wrong analogy, but in the first world war the British fought an epic battle on the Somme and then a year later another at Passchendaele, both often regarded as at best pyrrhic victories. Yet both were instrumental in the weakening and ultimate defeat of the Imperial German Army. The Somme was described as 'the muddy grave of the German Army' and resulted in the withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line in 1917. After Passchendaele a German general staff publication had "Germany had been brought near to certain destruction (sicheren Untergang) by the Flanders battle of 1917".
Yet after both battles, I suspect @Leon would have been calling them failures.
I cannot see the future, but I think the danger of Russia 'winning' in Ukraine is gone, and its now all about whether Russia can be ejected fully (and at what cost) or if Putin finally gets replaced. Regimes can fall very fast at the end.
See also Normandy 1944 - when collapse comes, it can come very swiftly indeed.
I certainly do not rule out a Russian collapse, they have been throwing what they have into the most tactically advantageous position, when the Ukrainians cannot use their new western toys because they are tiptoeing through minefields. But the Russians have undoubtedly proved far more resolute and logistically resourceful than optimists thought. This really could go either way right now with a Russian collapse or Ukrainian exhaustion.
Positive signs are the increasing effectiveness of Ukrainian counter battery against Russian artillery. Negative ones is that there are several lines of defence to breach yet.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
I'm not sure what you expect?
There's no magic way to win a war. You have to destroy the enemy army. Before you have done this they will be able to resist and hold ground.
I think there's decent evidence that Ukraine are inflicting greater losses then they are suffering, and so, if they are inflicting losses on Russia more quickly then Russia can replace those losses, they will eventually reach a point where Russia is unable to defend the current front line. But this will necessarily take time and it will look like not much progress is made while it plays out.
Meanwhile, for example, we can see that Ukraine is able to attack valuable Russians assets almost at will, whole Russia is unable to enforce it's blockade of Ukrainian ports.
Probably the wrong analogy, but in the first world war the British fought an epic battle on the Somme and then a year later another at Passchendaele, both often regarded as at best pyrrhic victories. Yet both were instrumental in the weakening and ultimate defeat of the Imperial German Army. The Somme was described as 'the muddy grave of the German Army' and resulted in the withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line in 1917. After Passchendaele a German general staff publication had "Germany had been brought near to certain destruction (sicheren Untergang) by the Flanders battle of 1917".
Yet after both battles, I suspect @Leon would have been calling them failures.
I cannot see the future, but I think the danger of Russia 'winning' in Ukraine is gone, and its now all about whether Russia can be ejected fully (and at what cost) or if Putin finally gets replaced. Regimes can fall very fast at the end.
It's not a terrible analogy, because it highlights that the enemy army has to be destroyed in order to defeat it, but there are key differences.
The most important is that Ukraine has an advantage with key weapons - drones, HIMARS, Storm Shadow, etc - which means they can destroy the Russian army with considerably less losses than that suffered by the British and French in WWI.
I think there's decent evidence that Ukraine are inflicting greater losses then they are suffering
It is incredibly difficult to prove that metric (unless you are doing things like counting tanks destroyed) and it's not as meaningful as you think. If Ukraine - halevai - destroyed all the tanks and the Russians still occupied the same area, then it's meaningless. The point is to get them to shift. If they ain't shifting, they ain't losing.
I am genuinely sympathetic to the argument that the tactics will work eventually. But there is a political dimension. If it takes so long that Ukrainian public support is lost then the war will be lost. If it takes so long that Allied public support is lost then the war will probably be lost.
Of all the things that SKS has done I am most surprised at reopening up the Brexit wound. Yes, the Brexit deal we have now is bad, but he has given the Tories another election where they can harp on about being the only true defenders of Brexit. I know most voters think Brexit has been a failure, and that the Tories own that failure, but still... It's surprisingly bold - in a way I don't actually know will pay off
Not sure the Tory hits work because most think Brexit is having a negative economic impact .
The Red Wall voters who have moved back to Labour are those who think Brexit hasn’t delivered and they’re not going to jump ship because Starmer wants a better deal .
The Tories banging on about Brexit betrayal just isn’t going to resonate like it did in 2019 .
I agree - but Starmer also must rely on Tory abstentions as much as Red Wall voters coming back. If the DKs do vote they will, in my view, likely vote Tory - they cannot justify to themselves now but Brexit may be the thing that does.
I think DKs move back towards the Tories regardless of Brexit . Maybe I’m just too pessimistic but I don’t see a huge Labour majority. At this point my expectations are low . As long as the Tories can’t form a government I’ll be happy and extremely relieved.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
He said he’d like to re-write the deal . We don’t know what if any changes are possible until we get to that point . Not sure it’s fair to accuse him of lying . The EU has a lot more goodwill towards Labour than the handmaidens of Brexit.
If you rule out SM/CU then the golden goose was really Horizon and Sunak has already plucked it. It may be possible to have more trusted trader schemes etc but that will make very little difference to 99.9% of the population.
Starmer made remarks about ‘getting a better EU deal for my kids’ and to me that means, probably, restoring some kind of Free Movement
I do wonder if he will go for it
Some sort of freedom of movement might be possible. The reality is that this exists already. I was doing a trial recently where one of the charges was attempting to pervert the course of justice. The accused was an Algerian but had been living here pretending to have been French (using false documents) and pretending to be covered by the transitional provisions applicable at the time of Brexit. Millions of people were granted such rights with very little inquiry and it does not take a lot of imagination to conclude that a fair number of these will have been for those wanting to sell a package of documentation to the likes of that Algerian.
I largely agree. I never had issues with Free Movement and it is now clear - as has been said on here - that neither party has any intention (or ability?) to really tackle mass immigration
So it is arguable we might as well get the benefits of the Single Market - perhaps
Pretty soon all the parties will be doing things to tackle mass immigration.
Not while the parties are convinced we need immigration to fill low-skilled jobs workshy Brits refuse, to do highly-skilled jobs like doctors and nurses that we don't train enough of and to counter the demographic timebomb. Something something Japan.
Truly back to 2015
Truly back to 2023 and every year before that. Just the other day we had Theresa May, author of the hostile environment and scourge of the Windrush generation, telling us how important is immigration.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Oh for goodness sake even if we were roaring away successful and Europe was going off a cliff edge that doesn't mean Brexit is successful. You have to compare what you have gained to what you have lost, not compare us with another country and go 'look they are having problems too'. About the only thing you did get right there is it isn't all about Brexit. There are lots of other stuff that has an impact making your observation utterly pointless. You can only look at the gains and losses.
So the question is has the improvements in exporting and importing to the rest of the world greater than the loss in importing and exporting to Europe. To my mind the answer to that question is very very clear.
If not do the freedoms/restrictions of being outside of Europe in other areas outweigh the freedoms/restrictions of being in Europe. And the answer to that question in my mind is even clearer.
How many times can we repeat this argument? For me, Brexit is Brexit
Regaining sovereignty and proper democracy is really all that I cared about. That’s been done. So for me it is a success. I understand that you differ
Yep and that is a perfectly valid argument and comes under the 2nd part of my post 'Freedoms/Restrictions' and why we differ in our view but neither of us are actually wrong as this is just an opinion. Interestingly I was backing up and agreeing with @BartholomewRoberts on this very point a few days ago on how we can both be liberals yet have opposing views on Brexit.
HOWEVER that is not what you just posted is it? If you had I would have agreed with you and even given you a 'like'.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Oh for goodness sake even if we were roaring away successful and Europe was going off a cliff edge that doesn't mean Brexit is successful. You have to compare what you have gained to what you have lost, not compare us with another country and go 'look they are having problems too'. About the only thing you did get right there is it isn't all about Brexit. There are lots of other stuff that has an impact making your observation utterly pointless. You can only look at the gains and losses.
So the question is has the improvements in exporting and importing to the rest of the world greater than the loss in importing and exporting to Europe. To my mind the answer to that question is very very clear.
If not do the freedoms/restrictions of being outside of Europe in other areas outweigh the freedoms/restrictions of being in Europe. And the answer to that question in my mind is even clearer.
How many times can we repeat this argument? For me, Brexit is Brexit
Regaining sovereignty and proper democracy is really all that I cared about. That’s been done. So for me it is a success. I understand that you differ
What about Britain out of the EU makes it a "proper democracy"? A party that fails to win a majority of votes can still receive a majority of seats. An individual seat is still won by FPTP. Our Commons is still whipped and cajoled by the leadership, and very few votes fall outside of that. A political consensus that drips from the media and tufton street still holds sway. Indeed, the two major parties of government have very little policy differences between them - one of them offering a shit future administered poorly and the other one offering a shit future administered efficiently.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Covid has given remain voters a free hit to blame everything on Brexit, whilst pretending the lockdowns they never wanted to end didnt ruin the economy
Covid has also given leave voters a free hit to blame the economic hit from Brexit on the Covid restrictions.
As usual the truth lays between the two extremes.
Yes, it seems we can never truly know. But I don’t hear the remain crowd ever caveating their certainty that it’s all down to Brexit by noting the economic hit of lockdown
You have no chance, Remainers would have to admit their forecast were just scare mongering
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
Russia has been able to produce more new missiles than expected, because sanctions have been less effective than hoped. Yes, not all predictions are right, and Russia is also fighting the war and has a say in how it develops.
Not that it does them much good. Very few Russian missiles now hit a target because Ukrainian air defences are much improved.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
I didn't read Phil's point as being about number of missiles but nature of missiles. Given Russia tried to destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure last year, with limited success, and Ukraine has strengthened its air defences, presumably Russia would need to have gained access to more sophisticated weapons over the past 12 months. Maybe they have, but I doubt Kim brought them in his little train.
I actually agree with this. Russia tried exactly this last year - destroying Ukraine’s infra - and it didn’t work. I see no reason why it should work a second time around
But this is my point. I am - despite what half of you believe - not predicting a Russian victory. It seems pretty unlikely. However at the same time I cannot see how Ukraine can drive Russia back to the 2014 borders especially if that means reclaiming Crimea. Not gonna happen
Two caveats.
The Ukrainian attack on Russia proper has potential. If they can seriously degrade Russian military and morale that way, that might change the game. But they need megatons of weapons
Kadyrov’s death is also ‘interesting’. Perhaps Ukes could take out Putin. That would alter everything
As for Russia. How can they win? Perhaps a lightning strike on Kyiv from the north, as they first intended. Not exactly easy, however
Or they go postal and drop a tactical nuke and the war freezes, instantly, and an armistice is signed with the frontiers where they are now
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
He said he’d like to re-write the deal . We don’t know what if any changes are possible until we get to that point . Not sure it’s fair to accuse him of lying . The EU has a lot more goodwill towards Labour than the handmaidens of Brexit.
He’s lying because he’s either
1. Knowingly promising something he can’t deliver - a much ‘better’ deal with the EU. This is impossible without SM/CU membership
Or
2. He’s actually intending to take us into some form of the SM/CU, but won’t admit it - ie lying
I often wonder if it is (2). He can say ‘omg we’ve looked at the books and it’s a disaster, we need to be in the single market’
But then that means being a rule taker and accepting freedom of movement: a very hard sell
This is all true. The problem remains. It is economically essential to be in the SM, it is politically essential not to have FOM. This is as true for Sir K as all others.
As to the future; we should of course have joined EFTA/EEA after the Brexit vote (with FOM of course).perhaps we still shall.
One of the two essentials (SM or FOM) has to change sometime. I guess in the long run FOM may become less of a hot potato, now we all know that being outside FOM has made no difference at all to the need for inward migration to keep the UK show on the road.
Do you think this will actually filter down to public consciousness? Brexit was such a handy means of showing a dislike of immigration that short of stopping the boats (LOL), I can't see anything as performative for people who don't like foreigners coming over here and resurfacing our drives.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
I'm not sure what you expect?
There's no magic way to win a war. You have to destroy the enemy army. Before you have done this they will be able to resist and hold ground.
I think there's decent evidence that Ukraine are inflicting greater losses then they are suffering, and so, if they are inflicting losses on Russia more quickly then Russia can replace those losses, they will eventually reach a point where Russia is unable to defend the current front line. But this will necessarily take time and it will look like not much progress is made while it plays out.
Meanwhile, for example, we can see that Ukraine is able to attack valuable Russians assets almost at will, whole Russia is unable to enforce it's blockade of Ukrainian ports.
Probably the wrong analogy, but in the first world war the British fought an epic battle on the Somme and then a year later another at Passchendaele, both often regarded as at best pyrrhic victories. Yet both were instrumental in the weakening and ultimate defeat of the Imperial German Army. The Somme was described as 'the muddy grave of the German Army' and resulted in the withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line in 1917. After Passchendaele a German general staff publication had "Germany had been brought near to certain destruction (sicheren Untergang) by the Flanders battle of 1917".
Yet after both battles, I suspect @Leon would have been calling them failures.
I cannot see the future, but I think the danger of Russia 'winning' in Ukraine is gone, and its now all about whether Russia can be ejected fully (and at what cost) or if Putin finally gets replaced. Regimes can fall very fast at the end.
It's not a terrible analogy, because it highlights that the enemy army has to be destroyed in order to defeat it, but there are key differences.
The most important is that Ukraine has an advantage with key weapons - drones, HIMARS, Storm Shadow, etc - which means they can destroy the Russian army with considerably less losses than that suffered by the British and French in WWI.
But another key difference is that the combined populations of France and Britain, and the British and French empires, vastly exceeded the population of the kaiser’s Germany. In brutal terms, the western powers could afford to lose more men than Berlin, in the end. And then the Americans joined in, tilting it even further
That is very much not the case here. The Russian population is 3x that of Ukraine
In a brutal war of attrition, this basic maths matters. I also dispute that Ukraine is losing fewer men now, than Russia. Ukraine is on the offensive, that is always more expensive in lives than defence
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
I didn't read Phil's point as being about number of missiles but nature of missiles. Given Russia tried to destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure last year, with limited success, and Ukraine has strengthened its air defences, presumably Russia would need to have gained access to more sophisticated weapons over the past 12 months. Maybe they have, but I doubt Kim brought them in his little train.
I actually agree with this. Russia tried exactly this last year - destroying Ukraine’s infra - and it didn’t work. I see no reason why it should work a second time around
But this is my point. I am - despite what half of you believe - not predicting a Russian victory. It seems pretty unlikely. However at the same time I cannot see how Ukraine can drive Russia back to the 2014 borders especially if that means reclaiming Crimea. Not gonna happen
Two caveats.
The Ukrainian attack on Russia proper has potential. If they can seriously degrade Russian military and morale that way, that might change the game. But they need megatons of weapons
Kadyrov’s death is also ‘interesting’. Perhaps Ukes could take out Putin. That would alter everything
As for Russia. How can they win? Perhaps a lightning strike on Kyiv from the north, as they first intended. Not exactly easy, however
Or they go postal and drop a tactical nuke and the war freezes, instantly, and an armistice is signed with the frontiers where they are now
The most interesting comment from Zelensky was comparing Ukraine to Israel. That paired with lines about the value of human life and long term procurement of F16s suggests that are thinking about fighting Russia for several years to come.
A plan B of the current lines + knocking out the Black Sea fleet + Crimea under constant threat is pretty good in the circumstances.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Covid has given remain voters a free hit to blame everything on Brexit, whilst pretending the lockdowns they never wanted to end didnt ruin the economy
Covid has also given leave voters a free hit to blame the economic hit from Brexit on the Covid restrictions.
As usual the truth lays between the two extremes.
Yes, it seems we can never truly know. But I don’t hear the remain crowd ever caveating their certainty that it’s all down to Brexit by noting the economic hit of lockdown
You have no chance, Remainers would have to admit their forecast were just scare mongering
The treasury forecasts were wrong but Brexit has hit GDP. If you voted for Brexit due to concerns over immigration then you were had , if you voted for the idea of more sovereignty then I think no one disputes that has occurred.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
He said he’d like to re-write the deal . We don’t know what if any changes are possible until we get to that point . Not sure it’s fair to accuse him of lying . The EU has a lot more goodwill towards Labour than the handmaidens of Brexit.
If you rule out SM/CU then the golden goose was really Horizon and Sunak has already plucked it. It may be possible to have more trusted trader schemes etc but that will make very little difference to 99.9% of the population.
Starmer made remarks about ‘getting a better EU deal for my kids’ and to me that means, probably, restoring some kind of Free Movement
I do wonder if he will go for it
Some sort of freedom of movement might be possible. The reality is that this exists already. I was doing a trial recently where one of the charges was attempting to pervert the course of justice. The accused was an Algerian but had been living here pretending to have been French (using false documents) and pretending to be covered by the transitional provisions applicable at the time of Brexit. Millions of people were granted such rights with very little inquiry and it does not take a lot of imagination to conclude that a fair number of these will have been for those wanting to sell a package of documentation to the likes of that Algerian.
I largely agree. I never had issues with Free Movement and it is now clear - as has been said on here - that neither party has any intention (or ability?) to really tackle mass immigration
So it is arguable we might as well get the benefits of the Single Market - perhaps
Pretty soon all the parties will be doing things to tackle mass immigration.
Not while the parties are convinced we need immigration to fill low-skilled jobs workshy Brits refuse, to do highly-skilled jobs like doctors and nurses that we don't train enough of and to counter the demographic timebomb. Something something Japan.
Truly back to 2015
Perhaps. But I await someone to propose an alternative: 1 Too many Brits are workshy. We have an attitude problem as a workforce compared to so many from eastern Europe and elsewhere. Despite a positive push of people out of the UK after Brexit, Brits haven't filled these jobs because they don't want them and never did. 2 Where we need skilled workers, we don't want to invest in training them. Things like the nursing bursary being cut are wholly counter-productive. "we can't afford it" ignores the costs of not having it, as usual. 3 I get repeatedly assured by PB Brexiteers that the likes of fruit farms should automate. Except that they can't because they don't have the money and the industry is financially a basket case. We have scrapped the hated CAP and replaced it with nothing. Farmers hated being told what to do for the money, voted to leave, and now have all the freedom but no actual money
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
I don't know if anybody made that specific prediction, but I'm certain that somebody made a similar prediction (Russia will run out of X by Y) because Task and Purpose did. It illustrates the folly of such metrics, as i) new missiles can be manufactured, ii) new missiles can be bought, iii) tactics can be changed to use something else or do something else.
To put it bluntly: such metrics don't matter in a war of occupation.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Oh for goodness sake even if we were roaring away successful and Europe was going off a cliff edge that doesn't mean Brexit is successful. You have to compare what you have gained to what you have lost, not compare us with another country and go 'look they are having problems too'. About the only thing you did get right there is it isn't all about Brexit. There are lots of other stuff that has an impact making your observation utterly pointless. You can only look at the gains and losses.
So the question is has the improvements in exporting and importing to the rest of the world greater than the loss in importing and exporting to Europe. To my mind the answer to that question is very very clear.
If not do the freedoms/restrictions of being outside of Europe in other areas outweigh the freedoms/restrictions of being in Europe. And the answer to that question in my mind is even clearer.
How many times can we repeat this argument? For me, Brexit is Brexit
Regaining sovereignty and proper democracy is really all that I cared about. That’s been done. So for me it is a success. I understand that you differ
What about Britain out of the EU makes it a "proper democracy"? A party that fails to win a majority of votes can still receive a majority of seats. An individual seat is still won by FPTP. Our Commons is still whipped and cajoled by the leadership, and very few votes fall outside of that. A political consensus that drips from the media and tufton street still holds sway. Indeed, the two major parties of government have very little policy differences between them - one of them offering a shit future administered poorly and the other one offering a shit future administered efficiently.
The biggest single win from Brexit has been preventing politicans doing things which they may or may not want to do and saying "EU rules, nothing we can do other than comply".
I'd vote for Brexit again tomorrow, regardless of economic cost, in order to prevent them getting that nasty little figleaf back (most of the time it was things they wanted to do, but the public wouldn't wear). A democracy where the top elected politicans can plausibly claim they are being made to do things the voters don't want by a higher power is not a proper democracy by any standard.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
I didn't read Phil's point as being about number of missiles but nature of missiles. Given Russia tried to destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure last year, with limited success, and Ukraine has strengthened its air defences, presumably Russia would need to have gained access to more sophisticated weapons over the past 12 months. Maybe they have, but I doubt Kim brought them in his little train.
I actually agree with this. Russia tried exactly this last year - destroying Ukraine’s infra - and it didn’t work. I see no reason why it should work a second time around
But this is my point. I am - despite what half of you believe - not predicting a Russian victory. It seems pretty unlikely. However at the same time I cannot see how Ukraine can drive Russia back to the 2014 borders especially if that means reclaiming Crimea. Not gonna happen
Two caveats.
The Ukrainian attack on Russia proper has potential. If they can seriously degrade Russian military and morale that way, that might change the game. But they need megatons of weapons
Kadyrov’s death is also ‘interesting’. Perhaps Ukes could take out Putin. That would alter everything
As for Russia. How can they win? Perhaps a lightning strike on Kyiv from the north, as they first intended. Not exactly easy, however
Or they go postal and drop a tactical nuke and the war freezes, instantly, and an armistice is signed with the frontiers where they are now
The Russians will not be able to mount a surprise attack on Kyiv a 2nd time. The Ukrainians would bomb any massed force to small pieces the moment they tried to assemble it, border or not.
The Russian hold on Crimea depends on them holding the left bank of the Dnipro. If the Ukrainians do succeed in pushing them out of the south, then they gain fire control over all the routes available to supply Crimea.
A frozen conflict is certainly possible but is not, at this point, anything like a certainty.
If the Russians want to piss absolutely everyone off then dropping a nuke on Kyiv would certainly do that. Can’t see it myself - it’s a table flipping move that directly risks the homeland: Nothing would be off the cards once they’d crossed that line.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Oh for goodness sake even if we were roaring away successful and Europe was going off a cliff edge that doesn't mean Brexit is successful. You have to compare what you have gained to what you have lost, not compare us with another country and go 'look they are having problems too'. About the only thing you did get right there is it isn't all about Brexit. There are lots of other stuff that has an impact making your observation utterly pointless. You can only look at the gains and losses.
So the question is has the improvements in exporting and importing to the rest of the world greater than the loss in importing and exporting to Europe. To my mind the answer to that question is very very clear.
If not do the freedoms/restrictions of being outside of Europe in other areas outweigh the freedoms/restrictions of being in Europe. And the answer to that question in my mind is even clearer.
How many times can we repeat this argument? For me, Brexit is Brexit
Regaining sovereignty and proper democracy is really all that I cared about. That’s been done. So for me it is a success. I understand that you differ
What about Britain out of the EU makes it a "proper democracy"? A party that fails to win a majority of votes can still receive a majority of seats. An individual seat is still won by FPTP. Our Commons is still whipped and cajoled by the leadership, and very few votes fall outside of that. A political consensus that drips from the media and tufton street still holds sway. Indeed, the two major parties of government have very little policy differences between them - one of them offering a shit future administered poorly and the other one offering a shit future administered efficiently.
The biggest single win from Brexit has been preventing politicans doing things which they may or may not want to do and saying "EU rules, nothing we can do other than comply".
I'd vote for Brexit again tomorrow, regardless of economic cost, in order to prevent them getting that nasty little figleaf back (most of the time it was things they wanted to do, but the public wouldn't wear). A democracy where the top elected politicans can plausibly claim they are being made to do things the voters don't want by a higher power is not a proper democracy by any standard.
La Truss has been giving her speech today. She was the top elected politician, tried to do something, and was forced instead to do things that voters don't want by a higher power.
So Britain needs to leave the international money markets. Take Back Control of our lives by going back to simpler times where we simply took the things we wanted and sent a gunboat to shoot anyone who thought that was a bad idea.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Oh for goodness sake even if we were roaring away successful and Europe was going off a cliff edge that doesn't mean Brexit is successful. You have to compare what you have gained to what you have lost, not compare us with another country and go 'look they are having problems too'. About the only thing you did get right there is it isn't all about Brexit. There are lots of other stuff that has an impact making your observation utterly pointless. You can only look at the gains and losses.
So the question is has the improvements in exporting and importing to the rest of the world greater than the loss in importing and exporting to Europe. To my mind the answer to that question is very very clear.
If not do the freedoms/restrictions of being outside of Europe in other areas outweigh the freedoms/restrictions of being in Europe. And the answer to that question in my mind is even clearer.
How many times can we repeat this argument? For me, Brexit is Brexit
Regaining sovereignty and proper democracy is really all that I cared about. That’s been done. So for me it is a success. I understand that you differ
Yep and that is a perfectly valid argument and comes under the 2nd part of my post 'Freedoms/Restrictions' and why we differ in our view but neither of us are actually wrong as this is just an opinion. Interestingly I was backing up and agreeing with @BartholomewRoberts on this very point a few days ago on how we can both be liberals yet have opposing views on Brexit.
HOWEVER that is not what you just posted is it? If you had I would have agreed with you and even given you a 'like'.
Christ, I missed out on a “like”
Fuck
I know. Devastating isn't it. Never mind.
But seriously you did just go and move the goal posts spectacularly.
Worse, not only did you miss out on a like, but I had to waste my time correcting you. There was a lot more effort in doing that than just giving you a like which is all I would have had to do if you had just made the second post.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
I'm not sure what you expect?
There's no magic way to win a war. You have to destroy the enemy army. Before you have done this they will be able to resist and hold ground.
I think there's decent evidence that Ukraine are inflicting greater losses then they are suffering, and so, if they are inflicting losses on Russia more quickly then Russia can replace those losses, they will eventually reach a point where Russia is unable to defend the current front line. But this will necessarily take time and it will look like not much progress is made while it plays out.
Meanwhile, for example, we can see that Ukraine is able to attack valuable Russians assets almost at will, whole Russia is unable to enforce it's blockade of Ukrainian ports.
Probably the wrong analogy, but in the first world war the British fought an epic battle on the Somme and then a year later another at Passchendaele, both often regarded as at best pyrrhic victories. Yet both were instrumental in the weakening and ultimate defeat of the Imperial German Army. The Somme was described as 'the muddy grave of the German Army' and resulted in the withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line in 1917. After Passchendaele a German general staff publication had "Germany had been brought near to certain destruction (sicheren Untergang) by the Flanders battle of 1917".
Yet after both battles, I suspect @Leon would have been calling them failures.
I cannot see the future, but I think the danger of Russia 'winning' in Ukraine is gone, and its now all about whether Russia can be ejected fully (and at what cost) or if Putin finally gets replaced. Regimes can fall very fast at the end.
It's not a terrible analogy, because it highlights that the enemy army has to be destroyed in order to defeat it, but there are key differences.
The most important is that Ukraine has an advantage with key weapons - drones, HIMARS, Storm Shadow, etc - which means they can destroy the Russian army with considerably less losses than that suffered by the British and French in WWI.
But another key difference is that the combined populations of France and Britain, and the British and French empires, vastly exceeded the population of the kaiser’s Germany. In brutal terms, the western powers could afford to lose more men than Berlin, in the end. And then the Americans joined in, tilting it even further
That is very much not the case here. The Russian population is 3x that of Ukraine
In a brutal war of attrition, this basic maths matters. I also dispute that Ukraine is losing fewer men now, than Russia. Ukraine is on the offensive, that is always more expensive in lives than defence
& yet the North Vietnamese defeated the French & USA, despite their relatively puny size.
I think there's decent evidence that Ukraine are inflicting greater losses then they are suffering
It is incredibly difficult to prove that metric (unless you are doing things like counting tanks destroyed) and it's not as meaningful as you think. If Ukraine - halevai - destroyed all the tanks and the Russians still occupied the same area, then it's meaningless. The point is to get them to shift. If they ain't shifting, they ain't losing.
I am genuinely sympathetic to the argument that the tactics will work eventually. But there is a political dimension. If it takes so long that Ukrainian public support is lost then the war will be lost. If it takes so long that Allied public support is lost then the war will probably be lost.
Tanks might not be important, but artillery is. Russia will need more than bodies with small arms to hold land.
People gather what information they can and they have looked at FIRMS data, which suggest a change in the balance of artillery fire in Ukraine's favour over the course of the year.
For sure, there's a degree of hoping for the best, I'm not saying I can prove it, but I think there is cause for optimism and that being unduly pessimistic can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Little will dissuade people from providing support to Ukraine more than the idea that doing so is futile.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
I'm not sure what you expect?
There's no magic way to win a war. You have to destroy the enemy army. Before you have done this they will be able to resist and hold ground.
I think there's decent evidence that Ukraine are inflicting greater losses then they are suffering, and so, if they are inflicting losses on Russia more quickly then Russia can replace those losses, they will eventually reach a point where Russia is unable to defend the current front line. But this will necessarily take time and it will look like not much progress is made while it plays out.
Meanwhile, for example, we can see that Ukraine is able to attack valuable Russians assets almost at will, whole Russia is unable to enforce it's blockade of Ukrainian ports.
Probably the wrong analogy, but in the first world war the British fought an epic battle on the Somme and then a year later another at Passchendaele, both often regarded as at best pyrrhic victories. Yet both were instrumental in the weakening and ultimate defeat of the Imperial German Army. The Somme was described as 'the muddy grave of the German Army' and resulted in the withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line in 1917. After Passchendaele a German general staff publication had "Germany had been brought near to certain destruction (sicheren Untergang) by the Flanders battle of 1917".
Yet after both battles, I suspect @Leon would have been calling them failures.
I cannot see the future, but I think the danger of Russia 'winning' in Ukraine is gone, and its now all about whether Russia can be ejected fully (and at what cost) or if Putin finally gets replaced. Regimes can fall very fast at the end.
It's not a terrible analogy, because it highlights that the enemy army has to be destroyed in order to defeat it, but there are key differences.
The most important is that Ukraine has an advantage with key weapons - drones, HIMARS, Storm Shadow, etc - which means they can destroy the Russian army with considerably less losses than that suffered by the British and French in WWI.
But another key difference is that the combined populations of France and Britain, and the British and French empires, vastly exceeded the population of the kaiser’s Germany. In brutal terms, the western powers could afford to lose more men than Berlin, in the end. And then the Americans joined in, tilting it even further
That is very much not the case here. The Russian population is 3x that of Ukraine
In a brutal war of attrition, this basic maths matters. I also dispute that Ukraine is losing fewer men now, than Russia. Ukraine is on the offensive, that is always more expensive in lives than defence
That is true, but asymmetric wars of invasion don't necessarily follow the maths. The most obvious from the top of my head is also Russian, the Winter War with Finland (there are other Ukraine parallels too, though many differences as well).
Of course, Finland still ended up giving Russian the lion's share of Karelia in the end.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
It came true.
The Russian strategy (which was completely successful in prior conflicts) was total bombardment, wipe out land, level it, then go in through the ashes.
The problem is that by autumn 2022 they ran out of armaments for that. It wasn't working. Ukrainian defences were more robust than expected, so the Russian strategy that won them prior wars failed in Ukraine.
Lobbing a few missiles unproductively is not the same as total bombardment. Obviously they're able to generate new missiles, it'd be amazing if they couldn't, but their limitless stock to use "shock and awe" style has been depleted.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Oh for goodness sake even if we were roaring away successful and Europe was going off a cliff edge that doesn't mean Brexit is successful. You have to compare what you have gained to what you have lost, not compare us with another country and go 'look they are having problems too'. About the only thing you did get right there is it isn't all about Brexit. There are lots of other stuff that has an impact making your observation utterly pointless. You can only look at the gains and losses.
So the question is has the improvements in exporting and importing to the rest of the world greater than the loss in importing and exporting to Europe. To my mind the answer to that question is very very clear.
If not do the freedoms/restrictions of being outside of Europe in other areas outweigh the freedoms/restrictions of being in Europe. And the answer to that question in my mind is even clearer.
How many times can we repeat this argument? For me, Brexit is Brexit
Regaining sovereignty and proper democracy is really all that I cared about. That’s been done. So for me it is a success. I understand that you differ
What about Britain out of the EU makes it a "proper democracy"? A party that fails to win a majority of votes can still receive a majority of seats. An individual seat is still won by FPTP. Our Commons is still whipped and cajoled by the leadership, and very few votes fall outside of that. A political consensus that drips from the media and tufton street still holds sway. Indeed, the two major parties of government have very little policy differences between them - one of them offering a shit future administered poorly and the other one offering a shit future administered efficiently.
The biggest single win from Brexit has been preventing politicans doing things which they may or may not want to do and saying "EU rules, nothing we can do other than comply".
I'd vote for Brexit again tomorrow, regardless of economic cost, in order to prevent them getting that nasty little figleaf back (most of the time it was things they wanted to do, but the public wouldn't wear). A democracy where the top elected politicans can plausibly claim they are being made to do things the voters don't want by a higher power is not a proper democracy by any standard.
La Truss has been giving her speech today. She was the top elected politician, tried to do something, and was forced instead to do things that voters don't want by a higher power.
So Britain needs to leave the international money markets. Take Back Control of our lives by going back to simpler times where we simply took the things we wanted and sent a gunboat to shoot anyone who thought that was a bad idea.
The 'international money markets' have decided that Sunak's way is twice as shit as Truss's way.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
Russia has been able to produce more new missiles than expected, because sanctions have been less effective than hoped. Yes, not all predictions are right, and Russia is also fighting the war and has a say in how it develops.
Not that it does them much good. Very few Russian missiles now hit a target because Ukrainian air defences are much improved.
But on the other hand, there is some truth in the 'run out of missiles' line. If you compare current rates of firing by the Russians to those in the early days, then it's clear they're either very low on stocks, or they're holding some back for a blitz attack to overwhelm Ukrainian defences.
Also, there are reports that components of the missiles being fired at the moment are fairly recent, having been made in the last few years. Basically, they're not firing off stocks, but ones they're building now. And that does limit them.
Also remember that one of Russia's supposed strengths was the depth of its ex-Soviet stocks.
The latest Perun video goes into this wrt tanks and planes. Basically, whilst Russia are taking new production of equipment seriously, they do have limited capabilities. But it's nowhere near enough. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctrtAwT2sgs
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
I didn't read Phil's point as being about number of missiles but nature of missiles. Given Russia tried to destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure last year, with limited success, and Ukraine has strengthened its air defences, presumably Russia would need to have gained access to more sophisticated weapons over the past 12 months. Maybe they have, but I doubt Kim brought them in his little train.
I actually agree with this. Russia tried exactly this last year - destroying Ukraine’s infra - and it didn’t work. I see no reason why it should work a second time around
But this is my point. I am - despite what half of you believe - not predicting a Russian victory. It seems pretty unlikely. However at the same time I cannot see how Ukraine can drive Russia back to the 2014 borders especially if that means reclaiming Crimea. Not gonna happen
Two caveats.
The Ukrainian attack on Russia proper has potential. If they can seriously degrade Russian military and morale that way, that might change the game. But they need megatons of weapons
Kadyrov’s death is also ‘interesting’. Perhaps Ukes could take out Putin. That would alter everything
As for Russia. How can they win? Perhaps a lightning strike on Kyiv from the north, as they first intended. Not exactly easy, however
Or they go postal and drop a tactical nuke and the war freezes, instantly, and an armistice is signed with the frontiers where they are now
Its remarkable how many people confidently predict Ukraine liberating Crimea is "not gonna happen" but without giving any reasons whatsoever. While simultaneously saying don't make confident predictions too.
Whether Ukraine will or won't liberate Crimea is currently a "known unknown" to quote Rumsfeld, but its certainly possible that they could. There is a very realistic and plausible path for them to do so, and they are (albeit slowly) following it currently.
Of all the things that SKS has done I am most surprised at reopening up the Brexit wound. Yes, the Brexit deal we have now is bad, but he has given the Tories another election where they can harp on about being the only true defenders of Brexit. I know most voters think Brexit has been a failure, and that the Tories own that failure, but still... It's surprisingly bold - in a way I don't actually know will pay off
Not sure the Tory hits work because most think Brexit is having a negative economic impact .
The Red Wall voters who have moved back to Labour are those who think Brexit hasn’t delivered and they’re not going to jump ship because Starmer wants a better deal .
The Tories banging on about Brexit betrayal just isn’t going to resonate like it did in 2019 .
I agree - but Starmer also must rely on Tory abstentions as much as Red Wall voters coming back. If the DKs do vote they will, in my view, likely vote Tory - they cannot justify to themselves now but Brexit may be the thing that does.
On the contrary, the significant commitment that Starmer has made is an explicit one that renegotiation would not result in the UK re-entering the customs union or single market. In other words, it's giving a bit of substance to the pledge to "Make Brexit Work". If anything, the announcement should reassure those who want the UK to remain outside the EU. A renegotiation is needed in 2025 anyway, the fact that Starmer says that some key components of Brexit will remain off limits is hardly going to be seen as threatening, rather the reverse.
I think it's rather clever politics by Starmer. Labour could have said nothing over the coming months, just leaving a blank canvass which the Conservatives would define for them. As it is, a potential Conservative line of attack has been shut down.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
He said he’d like to re-write the deal . We don’t know what if any changes are possible until we get to that point . Not sure it’s fair to accuse him of lying . The EU has a lot more goodwill towards Labour than the handmaidens of Brexit.
If you rule out SM/CU then the golden goose was really Horizon and Sunak has already plucked it. It may be possible to have more trusted trader schemes etc but that will make very little difference to 99.9% of the population.
Starmer made remarks about ‘getting a better EU deal for my kids’ and to me that means, probably, restoring some kind of Free Movement
I do wonder if he will go for it
Some sort of freedom of movement might be possible. The reality is that this exists already. I was doing a trial recently where one of the charges was attempting to pervert the course of justice. The accused was an Algerian but had been living here pretending to have been French (using false documents) and pretending to be covered by the transitional provisions applicable at the time of Brexit. Millions of people were granted such rights with very little inquiry and it does not take a lot of imagination to conclude that a fair number of these will have been for those wanting to sell a package of documentation to the likes of that Algerian.
I largely agree. I never had issues with Free Movement and it is now clear - as has been said on here - that neither party has any intention (or ability?) to really tackle mass immigration
So it is arguable we might as well get the benefits of the Single Market - perhaps
Pretty soon all the parties will be doing things to tackle mass immigration.
Not while the parties are convinced we need immigration to fill low-skilled jobs workshy Brits refuse, to do highly-skilled jobs like doctors and nurses that we don't train enough of and to counter the demographic timebomb. Something something Japan.
Truly back to 2015
Perhaps. But I await someone to propose an alternative: 1 Too many Brits are workshy. We have an attitude problem as a workforce compared to so many from eastern Europe and elsewhere. Despite a positive push of people out of the UK after Brexit, Brits haven't filled these jobs because they don't want them and never did. 2 Where we need skilled workers, we don't want to invest in training them. Things like the nursing bursary being cut are wholly counter-productive. "we can't afford it" ignores the costs of not having it, as usual. 3 I get repeatedly assured by PB Brexiteers that the likes of fruit farms should automate. Except that they can't because they don't have the money and the industry is financially a basket case. We have scrapped the hated CAP and replaced it with nothing. Farmers hated being told what to do for the money, voted to leave, and now have all the freedom but no actual money
The CAP was replaced pretty much like for like. As with a host of other things.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
On the other hand the great Ukrainian counter-offensive has been a terrifically expensive failure, chewing up tens of thousands of men to gain about 3 villages. Where is the oft-promised breakthrough? The severing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
They have a breakthrough in southern Ukraine. It’s painstaking work and doesn’t make for good TV so you judge it a failure
They don’t have a breakthrough. From today’s Guardian
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
I'm not sure what you expect?
There's no magic way to win a war. You have to destroy the enemy army. Before you have done this they will be able to resist and hold ground.
I think there's decent evidence that Ukraine are inflicting greater losses then they are suffering, and so, if they are inflicting losses on Russia more quickly then Russia can replace those losses, they will eventually reach a point where Russia is unable to defend the current front line. But this will necessarily take time and it will look like not much progress is made while it plays out.
Meanwhile, for example, we can see that Ukraine is able to attack valuable Russians assets almost at will, whole Russia is unable to enforce it's blockade of Ukrainian ports.
Probably the wrong analogy, but in the first world war the British fought an epic battle on the Somme and then a year later another at Passchendaele, both often regarded as at best pyrrhic victories. Yet both were instrumental in the weakening and ultimate defeat of the Imperial German Army. The Somme was described as 'the muddy grave of the German Army' and resulted in the withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line in 1917. After Passchendaele a German general staff publication had "Germany had been brought near to certain destruction (sicheren Untergang) by the Flanders battle of 1917".
Yet after both battles, I suspect @Leon would have been calling them failures.
I cannot see the future, but I think the danger of Russia 'winning' in Ukraine is gone, and its now all about whether Russia can be ejected fully (and at what cost) or if Putin finally gets replaced. Regimes can fall very fast at the end.
It's not a terrible analogy, because it highlights that the enemy army has to be destroyed in order to defeat it, but there are key differences.
The most important is that Ukraine has an advantage with key weapons - drones, HIMARS, Storm Shadow, etc - which means they can destroy the Russian army with considerably less losses than that suffered by the British and French in WWI.
But another key difference is that the combined populations of France and Britain, and the British and French empires, vastly exceeded the population of the kaiser’s Germany. In brutal terms, the western powers could afford to lose more men than Berlin, in the end. And then the Americans joined in, tilting it even further
That is very much not the case here. The Russian population is 3x that of Ukraine
In a brutal war of attrition, this basic maths matters. I also dispute that Ukraine is losing fewer men now, than Russia. Ukraine is on the offensive, that is always more expensive in lives than defence
Ukraine haven't made many direct assaults of the kind that we saw in early June, where we saw damaged Leopard tanks. If they had we would be seeing the photos of it from the Russians. They've deliberately been fighting in a way to minimise casualties. It also sounds like the western kit might not be magic in terms of forcing a breakthrough, but does a great job on saving lives. The Ukrainian tank crews are walking away from most of Western armoured vehicles when they're damaged or destroyed.
So I think it's quite plausible that Ukrainian casualties are lower than Russian.
Also, number of soldiers dead is not likely to be the determinant of Russia reaching a breaking point. Running out of military equipment will come first. This is why Ukraine's success in the artillery war is so important.
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
There was recent speculation about a winning strategy for Russia. Wait for winter then destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure. OK, it is probably a war crime but will Putin care?
With what armaments? They tried that last winter & Ukraine has better air defences now than it did then.
IIRC Russia was meant to run out of missiles in october 2022. Whatever happened to that prediction?
I didn't read Phil's point as being about number of missiles but nature of missiles. Given Russia tried to destroy Ukraine's energy infrastructure last year, with limited success, and Ukraine has strengthened its air defences, presumably Russia would need to have gained access to more sophisticated weapons over the past 12 months. Maybe they have, but I doubt Kim brought them in his little train.
I actually agree with this. Russia tried exactly this last year - destroying Ukraine’s infra - and it didn’t work. I see no reason why it should work a second time around
But this is my point. I am - despite what half of you believe - not predicting a Russian victory. It seems pretty unlikely. However at the same time I cannot see how Ukraine can drive Russia back to the 2014 borders especially if that means reclaiming Crimea. Not gonna happen
Two caveats.
The Ukrainian attack on Russia proper has potential. If they can seriously degrade Russian military and morale that way, that might change the game. But they need megatons of weapons
Kadyrov’s death is also ‘interesting’. Perhaps Ukes could take out Putin. That would alter everything
As for Russia. How can they win? Perhaps a lightning strike on Kyiv from the north, as they first intended. Not exactly easy, however
Or they go postal and drop a tactical nuke and the war freezes, instantly, and an armistice is signed with the frontiers where they are now
The Russians will not be able to mount a surprise attack on Kyiv a 2nd time. The Ukrainians would bomb any massed force to small pieces the moment they tried to assemble it, border or not.
The Russian hold on Crimea depends on them holding the left bank of the Dnipro. If the Ukrainians do succeed in pushing them out of the south, then they gain fire control over all the routes available to supply Crimea.
A frozen conflict is certainly possible but is not, at this point, anything like a certainty.
If the Russians want to piss absolutely everyone off then dropping a nuke on Kyiv would certainly do that. Can’t see it myself - it’s a table flipping move that directly risks the homeland: Nothing would be off the cards once they’d crossed that line.
I also feel the Kyiv (or Odesa or similar) nuke is highly unlikely; a little less unlikely (though still improbable) would be some tactical nuclear shenanigans on an infrastructure target or something.
I wonder if a nuclear order would actually be carried out, or if that would precipitate 'internal struggles'.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
He said he’d like to re-write the deal . We don’t know what if any changes are possible until we get to that point . Not sure it’s fair to accuse him of lying . The EU has a lot more goodwill towards Labour than the handmaidens of Brexit.
If you rule out SM/CU then the golden goose was really Horizon and Sunak has already plucked it. It may be possible to have more trusted trader schemes etc but that will make very little difference to 99.9% of the population.
Starmer made remarks about ‘getting a better EU deal for my kids’ and to me that means, probably, restoring some kind of Free Movement
I do wonder if he will go for it
Some sort of freedom of movement might be possible. The reality is that this exists already. I was doing a trial recently where one of the charges was attempting to pervert the course of justice. The accused was an Algerian but had been living here pretending to have been French (using false documents) and pretending to be covered by the transitional provisions applicable at the time of Brexit. Millions of people were granted such rights with very little inquiry and it does not take a lot of imagination to conclude that a fair number of these will have been for those wanting to sell a package of documentation to the likes of that Algerian.
I largely agree. I never had issues with Free Movement and it is now clear - as has been said on here - that neither party has any intention (or ability?) to really tackle mass immigration
So it is arguable we might as well get the benefits of the Single Market - perhaps
Pretty soon all the parties will be doing things to tackle mass immigration.
Not while the parties are convinced we need immigration to fill low-skilled jobs workshy Brits refuse, to do highly-skilled jobs like doctors and nurses that we don't train enough of and to counter the demographic timebomb. Something something Japan.
Truly back to 2015
Perhaps. But I await someone to propose an alternative: 1 Too many Brits are workshy. We have an attitude problem as a workforce compared to so many from eastern Europe and elsewhere. Despite a positive push of people out of the UK after Brexit, Brits haven't filled these jobs because they don't want them and never did. 2 Where we need skilled workers, we don't want to invest in training them. Things like the nursing bursary being cut are wholly counter-productive. "we can't afford it" ignores the costs of not having it, as usual. 3 I get repeatedly assured by PB Brexiteers that the likes of fruit farms should automate. Except that they can't because they don't have the money and the industry is financially a basket case. We have scrapped the hated CAP and replaced it with nothing. Farmers hated being told what to do for the money, voted to leave, and now have all the freedom but no actual money
Alternative: Pay people more.
If people are paid more then they will apply to do those jobs they don't want to do at shit wages (1).
If people are paid more and treated professionally, they'll get engaged with training (2).
If there's no money for training or investment then the businesses that are failing should go bust and someone else should be able to buy the land for a song and invest in productivity, whether it be investment in automation or investment in training professionals paid a decent salary.
If you're unproductive, you have no divine right for the government to solve your problems for you. That's a "you" problem.
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
There are some small changes that shouldn’t be too controversial and the EU would likely agree with . A large scale re-negotiation I agree is out of the question.
Ergo, one way or another, Starmer is lying. Not for the first time
He said he’d like to re-write the deal . We don’t know what if any changes are possible until we get to that point . Not sure it’s fair to accuse him of lying . The EU has a lot more goodwill towards Labour than the handmaidens of Brexit.
If you rule out SM/CU then the golden goose was really Horizon and Sunak has already plucked it. It may be possible to have more trusted trader schemes etc but that will make very little difference to 99.9% of the population.
Starmer made remarks about ‘getting a better EU deal for my kids’ and to me that means, probably, restoring some kind of Free Movement
I do wonder if he will go for it
Some sort of freedom of movement might be possible. The reality is that this exists already. I was doing a trial recently where one of the charges was attempting to pervert the course of justice. The accused was an Algerian but had been living here pretending to have been French (using false documents) and pretending to be covered by the transitional provisions applicable at the time of Brexit. Millions of people were granted such rights with very little inquiry and it does not take a lot of imagination to conclude that a fair number of these will have been for those wanting to sell a package of documentation to the likes of that Algerian.
I largely agree. I never had issues with Free Movement and it is now clear - as has been said on here - that neither party has any intention (or ability?) to really tackle mass immigration
So it is arguable we might as well get the benefits of the Single Market - perhaps
Pretty soon all the parties will be doing things to tackle mass immigration.
Not while the parties are convinced we need immigration to fill low-skilled jobs workshy Brits refuse, to do highly-skilled jobs like doctors and nurses that we don't train enough of and to counter the demographic timebomb. Something something Japan.
Truly back to 2015
Perhaps. But I await someone to propose an alternative: 1 Too many Brits are workshy. We have an attitude problem as a workforce compared to so many from eastern Europe and elsewhere. Despite a positive push of people out of the UK after Brexit, Brits haven't filled these jobs because they don't want them and never did. 2 Where we need skilled workers, we don't want to invest in training them. Things like the nursing bursary being cut are wholly counter-productive. "we can't afford it" ignores the costs of not having it, as usual. 3 I get repeatedly assured by PB Brexiteers that the likes of fruit farms should automate. Except that they can't because they don't have the money and the industry is financially a basket case. We have scrapped the hated CAP and replaced it with nothing. Farmers hated being told what to do for the money, voted to leave, and now have all the freedom but no actual money
Reminds me of this line from Full Metal Jacket, on the north Vietnamese stubbornly refusing to be liberated: "They'd rather be alive than free, I guess. Poor dumb bastards."
“Probably the biggest delusion yet to be unpicked is Sir Keir's repeated assertion that there is a better deal with the EU out there. This is simply not true. There was a lot of vindictive commentary from the EU during the entire Brexit process, but the deal that was eventually agreed was a reasonable third-country trade deal.. If your bottom line is that you do not wish to rejoin the single market and the customs union, there really is not a lot more out there.”
Starmer has ruled out SM/CU. There is, in that case, nothing to be done. The EU is not interested in rolling over to give Starmer a special deal. Why would it?
His Labour government is going to collide with the tank traps of reality very quickly
As I said earlier joining the single market is the only way to change the EU, and anything else is cosmetic
And at the moment raising that issue is certain to rouse latent Brexit support from its slumber. Single Market is Freedom Of Movement. Single Market is putting all of those terrible Euroregulations back into British Law.
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
But we’re not gently bleeding. We are growing faster than Germany and about the same speed as France
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
Oh for goodness sake even if we were roaring away successful and Europe was going off a cliff edge that doesn't mean Brexit is successful. You have to compare what you have gained to what you have lost, not compare us with another country and go 'look they are having problems too'. About the only thing you did get right there is it isn't all about Brexit. There are lots of other stuff that has an impact making your observation utterly pointless. You can only look at the gains and losses.
So the question is has the improvements in exporting and importing to the rest of the world greater than the loss in importing and exporting to Europe. To my mind the answer to that question is very very clear.
If not do the freedoms/restrictions of being outside of Europe in other areas outweigh the freedoms/restrictions of being in Europe. And the answer to that question in my mind is even clearer.
How many times can we repeat this argument? For me, Brexit is Brexit
Regaining sovereignty and proper democracy is really all that I cared about. That’s been done. So for me it is a success. I understand that you differ
What about Britain out of the EU makes it a "proper democracy"? A party that fails to win a majority of votes can still receive a majority of seats. An individual seat is still won by FPTP. Our Commons is still whipped and cajoled by the leadership, and very few votes fall outside of that. A political consensus that drips from the media and tufton street still holds sway. Indeed, the two major parties of government have very little policy differences between them - one of them offering a shit future administered poorly and the other one offering a shit future administered efficiently.
The biggest single win from Brexit has been preventing politicans doing things which they may or may not want to do and saying "EU rules, nothing we can do other than comply".
I'd vote for Brexit again tomorrow, regardless of economic cost, in order to prevent them getting that nasty little figleaf back (most of the time it was things they wanted to do, but the public wouldn't wear). A democracy where the top elected politicans can plausibly claim they are being made to do things the voters don't want by a higher power is not a proper democracy by any standard.
La Truss has been giving her speech today. She was the top elected politician, tried to do something, and was forced instead to do things that voters don't want by a higher power.
So Britain needs to leave the international money markets. Take Back Control of our lives by going back to simpler times where we simply took the things we wanted and sent a gunboat to shoot anyone who thought that was a bad idea.
The 'international money markets' have decided that Sunak's way is twice as shit as Truss's way.
In what way? I don't want to defend Sunak/Hunt too vehemently, but the pound is a fair bit stronger than it was with Truss/Kwarteng at the helm, and the Bank of England hasn't needed to come in with a multi-billion pound package to stave off an imminent collapse in pension funds. It's not a high bar, but they do appear to have cleared it.
Comments
More seriously, the Russians must know by now that they’re stuffed. Black Sea fleet on it’s way to being completely destroyed as a viable force, the entirety of their Soviet arsenal chewed up into pieces in the fields of Ukraine, along with the flower of both their infantry & cavalry. The only thing keeping them going is a stubborn refusal to admit the inevitable. Still, something might turn up for them I guess - a Trump 2024 victory perhaps? It seems hope is all they have left & hope is not a wining strategy.
So it is arguable we might as well get the benefits of the Single Market - perhaps
Dear Liza, dear Liza...
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/economy/article/2023/09/18/was-brexit-s-impact-on-the-uk-s-economy-ultimately-negligible_6137084_19.html
But yes the whole system is nuts. There is no way that one person alone should be chosing who gets to sit in the upper house for the rest of their life.
As I recall you saying back during the negotiations?
It’s not happening, is it? We are now in mid September and it all grinds on, pointlessly
Russia cannot win this war (without Trump) but nor, I fear, can Ukraine
Personally, I'd be fine with that. I'd even be fine if we fully aligned indefinitely and waited for a monthly email from Brussels telling us what new stuff they've come up with for us. (The freedoms at a personal level seem worth it to me.) But it would send the right, and the press, dolally, and Starmer isn't going to touch the button marked "Pressing This Button Is Incredibly Risky". There are enough people who hate all that to give Rishi a liferaft he doesn't deserve.
It's going to be like I said in 2020.
The next thing we try, 2025ish, will be a TCA that realistically co-operates on trade. Vet agreements, standards marking, that sort of thing. It will help a bit, but no- not much. That looks like Starmer's plan. But he won't be PM forever.
Beyond that, it gets speculative, anything might happen, but I haven't seen anything to change my rough schedule.
Single Market will be 2030ish. We can probably chuck in some Union of Customs as well. The Brit deals aren't coming out with anything special, and we can leave CPTPP with six months notice.
And then, who knows? Maybe the UK will be fine tagging along with whatever Brussels says. A lot of it is boring technical stuff, and there is the possibility of being consulted. A bit. I don't think the UK political classes are going to be happy with that, which is why Rejoin might happen, but only under a new generation of politicians.
All a bit rubbish, because the UK is gently bleeding under the current arrangements. But I wouldn't have started here.
It always runs into elected vs appointed. First the Commons needs to align on what the upper house’s powers should be - that drives whether it needs democratic legitimacy or not
I’ll be voting Lib Dem in my area as voting Labour just delivers the seat to the Tories .
Patronage is an enemy to good governance and a stepping stone to corruption.
If a particularly egregious example of this, in the form of Liz Truss' resignation honours, can be the catalyst for change, then I would have to add it to the short list of positive changes she brought to the country.
So I disagree with those who argue that we shouldn't deny Truss this custom. We should use it as an opportunity to try and create a change that will otherwise be extremely difficult to make. This is the way in which most British constitutional precedents have been created - in response to a particular absurdity that demanded a change to the status quo.
Britain is not in a great position but neither is much of Europe, or, indeed, the world
98% of our problems have nothing to do with Brexit and many of them are down to chronic, self inflicted stupidity and a dysfunctional government and civil service - eg HS2
That's not to say the process is brilliant by any means, and there are lots of procurements with a bad outcome, but I'm not sure it is correct to say price routinely wins out over quality - in my experience at least.
But it's in three nature of things that we would expect a non-linear rate of change in territorial control.
It is taking longer to wear the Russian forces down then we'd all hoped, but I think that the Russian army will break again - as it has done in Kyiv, Kharkiv and Kherson before - if Ukraine continues to receive support from the US and Europe, and Russia does not receive support from China.
The Ukrainians seems to be making slow but steady grinding progress in the south & the Russians are responding not by giving ground & trying to grind up the Ukrainian advance but by throwing troops into the maw. There are signs they are running low on functional artillery pieces - the overwhelming Russian artillery advantage they enjoyed last year seems to have disappeared.
I wouldn’t give up on the Ukrainians just yet.
“Earlier Maliar had issued a lengthy update on Telegram, claiming that Ukrainian forces have repelled Russian attacks in a number of areas, including in the Kupyansk, Bakhmut, and Marinka directions. Maliar also gave new figures for the amount of territory recaptured by Ukraine. She said 2 sq km had been captured around Bakhmut, and in the past week, and that 51 sq km had been recaptured there since the start of the counteroffensive“
51sq km. That’s about two London boroughs. Maybe 6km by 9km. At a cost of 10,000 men? 20,000? And it’s taken months
Face it, this is not working
They’ve also just sacked 6 defence ministers, which says something in itself
Putinism is in a terrible state and Russia highly unstable, but sure its Ukraine that is on the back foot...
Leon has reverted to his usual Chicken Licken Ninnyism...
So the question is has the improvements in exporting and importing to the rest of the world greater than the loss in importing and exporting to Europe. To my mind the answer to that question is very very clear.
If not do the freedoms/restrictions of being outside of Europe in other areas outweigh the freedoms/restrictions of being in Europe. And the answer to that question in my mind is even clearer.
I thought you would have learnt that, if nothing else, from Covid
This is working. It’s painstaking and slow work to do it right
There's no magic way to win a war. You have to destroy the enemy army. Before you have done this they will be able to resist and hold ground.
I think there's decent evidence that Ukraine are inflicting greater losses then they are suffering, and so, if they are inflicting losses on Russia more quickly then Russia can replace those losses, they will eventually reach a point where Russia is unable to defend the current front line. But this will necessarily take time and it will look like not much progress is made while it plays out.
Meanwhile, for example, we can see that Ukraine is able to attack valuable Russians assets almost at will, whole Russia is unable to enforce it's blockade of Ukrainian ports.
We had this debate about a month ago when I queried Ukrainian progress and I was roundly accused then of defeatism and appeasement and the like, and you all said, just wait, the breakthrough is nearly here, soon the brave Ukrainians will smash through the first line of defence and race to the Azov and cut off Crimea
And it hasn’t happened
How can repeating a failed strategy in less favourable circumstances be a possible winning strategy?
The Red Wall voters who have moved back to Labour are those who think Brexit hasn’t delivered and they’re not going to jump ship because Starmer wants a better deal .
The Tories banging on about Brexit betrayal just isn’t going to resonate like it did in 2019 .
Regaining sovereignty and proper democracy is really all that I cared about. That’s been done. So for me it is a success. I understand that you differ
As usual the truth lays between the two extremes.
https://order-order.com/2023/09/18/watch-andrew-pierce-and-bev-turners-furious-clash-over-russell-brand-allegations/
Yet after both battles, I suspect @Leon would have been calling them failures.
I cannot see the future, but I think the danger of Russia 'winning' in Ukraine is gone, and its now all about whether Russia can be ejected fully (and at what cost) or if Putin finally gets replaced. Regimes can fall very fast at the end.
HOWEVER that is not what you just posted is it? If you had I would have agreed with you and even given you a 'like'.
It’s not exactly the classic WWIII scenarios where, in the battle of the Atlantic Part Deux the Russians launch enough missiles to overwhelm multiple Aegis ships. On a daily basis…
Russia has run down it’s missile stocks & now appears to be lobbing the things at Ukraine at roughly the rate it can make more of them. Hence the dependency on cheap Iranian Shaheed drones for the majority of long range strikes (now manufactured in Russia IIRC). If you go back to the articles written about this topic on rusi.org & elsewhere you’ll see that they never claimed Russia would run out, just that their rate of use at the time was unsustainable.
Positive signs are the increasing effectiveness of Ukrainian counter battery against Russian artillery. Negative ones is that there are several lines of defence to breach yet.
The most important is that Ukraine has an advantage with key weapons - drones, HIMARS, Storm Shadow, etc - which means they can destroy the Russian army with considerably less losses than that suffered by the British and French in WWI.
I am genuinely sympathetic to the argument that the tactics will work eventually. But there is a political dimension. If it takes so long that Ukrainian public support is lost then the war will be lost. If it takes so long that Allied public support is lost then the war will probably be lost.
Fuck
Not that it does them much good. Very few Russian missiles now hit a target because Ukrainian air defences are much improved.
But this is my point. I am - despite what half of you believe - not predicting a Russian victory. It seems pretty unlikely. However at the same time I cannot see how Ukraine can drive Russia back to the 2014 borders especially if that means reclaiming Crimea. Not gonna happen
Two caveats.
The Ukrainian attack on Russia proper has potential. If they can seriously degrade Russian military and morale that way, that might change the game. But they need megatons of weapons
Kadyrov’s death is also ‘interesting’. Perhaps Ukes could take out Putin. That would alter everything
As for Russia. How can they win? Perhaps a lightning strike on Kyiv from the north, as they first intended. Not exactly easy, however
Or they go postal and drop a tactical nuke and the war freezes, instantly, and an armistice is signed with the frontiers where they are now
That is very much not the case here. The Russian population is 3x that of Ukraine
In a brutal war of attrition, this basic maths matters. I also dispute that Ukraine is losing fewer men now, than Russia. Ukraine is on the offensive, that is always more expensive in lives than defence
A plan B of the current lines + knocking out the Black Sea fleet + Crimea under constant threat is pretty good in the circumstances.
1 Too many Brits are workshy. We have an attitude problem as a workforce compared to so many from eastern Europe and elsewhere. Despite a positive push of people out of the UK after Brexit, Brits haven't filled these jobs because they don't want them and never did.
2 Where we need skilled workers, we don't want to invest in training them. Things like the nursing bursary being cut are wholly counter-productive. "we can't afford it" ignores the costs of not having it, as usual.
3 I get repeatedly assured by PB Brexiteers that the likes of fruit farms should automate. Except that they can't because they don't have the money and the industry is financially a basket case. We have scrapped the hated CAP and replaced it with nothing. Farmers hated being told what to do for the money, voted to leave, and now have all the freedom but no actual money
To put it bluntly: such metrics don't matter in a war of occupation.
I'd vote for Brexit again tomorrow, regardless of economic cost, in order to prevent them getting that nasty little figleaf back (most of the time it was things they wanted to do, but the public wouldn't wear). A democracy where the top elected politicans can plausibly claim they are being made to do things the voters don't want by a higher power is not a proper democracy by any standard.
The Russian hold on Crimea depends on them holding the left bank of the Dnipro. If the Ukrainians do succeed in pushing them out of the south, then they gain fire control over all the routes available to supply Crimea.
A frozen conflict is certainly possible but is not, at this point, anything like a certainty.
If the Russians want to piss absolutely everyone off then dropping a nuke on Kyiv would certainly do that. Can’t see it myself - it’s a table flipping move that directly risks the homeland: Nothing would be off the cards once they’d crossed that line.
So Britain needs to leave the international money markets. Take Back Control of our lives by going back to simpler times where we simply took the things we wanted and sent a gunboat to shoot anyone who thought that was a bad idea.
But seriously you did just go and move the goal posts spectacularly.
Worse, not only did you miss out on a like, but I had to waste my time correcting you. There was a lot more effort in doing that than just giving you a like which is all I would have had to do if you had just made the second post.
People gather what information they can and they have looked at FIRMS data, which suggest a change in the balance of artillery fire in Ukraine's favour over the course of the year.
For sure, there's a degree of hoping for the best, I'm not saying I can prove it, but I think there is cause for optimism and that being unduly pessimistic can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Little will dissuade people from providing support to Ukraine more than the idea that doing so is futile.
Of course, Finland still ended up giving Russian the lion's share of Karelia in the end.
The Russian strategy (which was completely successful in prior conflicts) was total bombardment, wipe out land, level it, then go in through the ashes.
The problem is that by autumn 2022 they ran out of armaments for that. It wasn't working. Ukrainian defences were more robust than expected, so the Russian strategy that won them prior wars failed in Ukraine.
Lobbing a few missiles unproductively is not the same as total bombardment. Obviously they're able to generate new missiles, it'd be amazing if they couldn't, but their limitless stock to use "shock and awe" style has been depleted.
Also, there are reports that components of the missiles being fired at the moment are fairly recent, having been made in the last few years. Basically, they're not firing off stocks, but ones they're building now. And that does limit them.
Also remember that one of Russia's supposed strengths was the depth of its ex-Soviet stocks.
The latest Perun video goes into this wrt tanks and planes. Basically, whilst Russia are taking new production of equipment seriously, they do have limited capabilities. But it's nowhere near enough.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctrtAwT2sgs
Whether Ukraine will or won't liberate Crimea is currently a "known unknown" to quote Rumsfeld, but its certainly possible that they could. There is a very realistic and plausible path for them to do so, and they are (albeit slowly) following it currently.
I think it's rather clever politics by Starmer. Labour could have said nothing over the coming months, just leaving a blank canvass which the Conservatives would define for them. As it is, a potential Conservative line of attack has been shut down.
So I think it's quite plausible that Ukrainian casualties are lower than Russian.
Also, number of soldiers dead is not likely to be the determinant of Russia reaching a breaking point. Running out of military equipment will come first. This is why Ukraine's success in the artillery war is so important.
I wonder if a nuclear order would actually be carried out, or if that would precipitate 'internal struggles'.
If people are paid more then they will apply to do those jobs they don't want to do at shit wages (1).
If people are paid more and treated professionally, they'll get engaged with training (2).
If there's no money for training or investment then the businesses that are failing should go bust and someone else should be able to buy the land for a song and invest in productivity, whether it be investment in automation or investment in training professionals paid a decent salary.
If you're unproductive, you have no divine right for the government to solve your problems for you. That's a "you" problem.