Divide and conquer? Betting on the October 19th by-elections – politicalbetting.com

algarkirk said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Russia seems to be very clearly aligning itself with Hamas and Iran. Interesting that they choose now to make that quite fundamental choice.

I see Ramzan Kadyrov has been expressing his delight in the attacks. I can sort of see why on the basis of keeping a fractious Islamist population on side. But having Israel against you can’t be that sensible long term.

It feels like the world is dividing into a new hostility

USA
UK
France
Germany
Japan
Spain
Korea
Australia
Canada
Italy
Israel
Poland
NZ (hmm)
God


V

China
Russia
Iran
Ireland
Palestine
Wankers
Rogerdamus
Kinabalu
Er, Syria
Pakistan
South Africa
Satan




And still undecideds:

India
Saudi
UAE
Brazil
Turkey
Indonesia
@BartholomewRoberts
The Aliens

Ireland is not SFAICS, absolutely not, aligning with Hamas over this one. It's line is : Condemn Hamas, Israel's response should be proportionate though we have no idea what that means, and there should be a peace process.

I disagree with RoI about almost everything in military policy but let us be fair to the country that was quite content to see the UK be conquered by Hitler, our people massacred and enslaved and not lift a finger.

148grss said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

148grss said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

148grss said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

148grss said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

148grss said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

148grss said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

148grss said:

TheKitchenCabinet said:

148grss said:

Leon said:

148grss said:

JosiasJessop said:

148grss said:

TOPPING said:

kinabalu said:

TOPPING said:

kinabalu said:

TOPPING said:

kinabalu said:

TOPPING said:

148grss said:

FPT

TOPPING said:

bondegezou said:

TOPPING said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TOPPING said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TOPPING said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

TOPPING said:

bondegezou said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Leon said:

nico679 said:

Leon said:

nico679 said:

The fact that Israel has the ability to cut off power , water and food supplies to Gaza highlights one of the issues that have bred hatred .

Hamas lives off the hatred . Children are brought up with the hatred and it’s just a repeating cycle.

There are still those on both sides who wanted a peaceful resolution , sadly that’s been consigned to the bin for yet more years .

Israel can raze Gaza to the ground but the hatred will remain .

But if the Israelis can somehow shift the Gazans into Egypt, then the hatred will be further away, and the chances of Hamas repeating their spectacular incursion will be greatly minimised

I do wonder if that is what the Israelis are planning. I don't see any other point in wading into Gaza at the cost of many thousands of lives, quite a few of them Israeli

Will Egypt accept them ? The whole situation is just awful. There are no good outcomes here .

Absolutely. No good outcomes

If Egypt seals the border (and they have tightened control this morning) then Israel will be left with a cornered population unable to go anywhere. What then?

I may be wrong and this isn't the Israeli plan, but then I am bewildered as to what Israel thinks it can achieve with ANOTHER invasion that does nothing but stir up evermore enmity. It simply ensures further attacks down the line

As I said last night, they might possibly be planning a renewed Occupation of Gaza, with Israel in control, and the reintroduction of Israeli settlers, who will act as a de facto spy network and military police, so October 7 is not repeated. But that's damnably tricky and could so easily go wrong

The final possibility is that Israel doesn't have a plan. It is acting in a spirit of pure revenge

With whom would they negotiate? Hamas is the *government* of Gaza. Israel has declared war on Gaza amd it shouldn't be a surprise - its *government* has launched these attacks.

So the Israeli goal will I believe be simple - remove Hamas as a threat. How they achieve that is tricky, but they won't just be pushing the cross-border terrorists back into their prison.

Removal of Hamas - and the Hamas state - has to be the goal. And that will largely mean the killing of anyone who is Hamas, supports Hamas, lives near Hamas. It is going to be awful - war usually is. Especially when the aggressor is pledged to the extermination of the other side.

That may be Israel’s strategy. That (“killing of anyone who […] lives near Hamas”) would clearly be a war crime and we, as in the UK, should do everything we can to stop war crimes. We cannot criticise Russia for war crimes in Ukraine and wave through Israel, or Hamas, committing war crimes.

Here’s a simple rule of thumb: war crimes are bad. Don’t carry out war crimes. Don’t respond to say crimes with more war crimes. Why is that a proposition that some on PB struggle with?

"war crimes" is a fantasy. There is/are no such thing. They only exist for the winners in war.

The fact that they are typically enforced against the vanquished rather than the victors doesn't mean they aren't a "thing".

They are reasonably clearly defined by international convention, and provide at least some incentive to moderate the conduct of war in terms of impact on non-combatants. The incentive not to commit them is that if you turn out to be the vanquished, you'd probably rather slip away into exile and obscurity rather than ending up in The Hague or as a fugitive.

Should Israel deliberately target civilians? No. Do civilians have some responsibility to flee a war zone? Yes. Again Hamas are not just embedded in the civilian population, they are the government. So eradicating them is going to involve blowing a great many buildings up.

If your neighbour fires his AK47 at prayers 5 times a day, it is time to leave. Because in wartime it is always legitimate to go after CCC targets regardless of where the enemy has put them.

How exactly do 3 million people flee a war zone when they are not allowed to leave by any of the surrounding countries?

They should decide not to have Hamas as their leadership.

Even coming from you that is genuinely one of the stupidest comments any one has made on this topic.

I suppose the Catholics in Northern Ireland deserved to be bombed out and killed because they had Sinn Féin councillors.

There is huge support in Gaza for the Hamas leadership. They can send thousands of "militants" to Israel on near suicide missions. They have mass rallies of hundreds of thousands in the streets protesting against Israel and the Great Satan. They show pictures of six-yr old girls wielding AKs and crying with happiness at the onslaught happening in Israel.

But they are all harmless civilians who only want to find a way out of danger.

It must be very strange living inside your head where everything in the world is so black and white.

It is dangerously close to exactly the sort of attitude that led to Rwanda, Bosnia and indeed the Holocaust. Regarding people as a mass (and indeed to use the words of your friend Netenyahu as animals) rather than individuals is an easy road to 'untermensch'.

You seem pretty conflicted about it all.

Those poor Gazans who turned out in their hundreds of thousands to celebrate actions against Israel are now to be pitied. Of course it's best that civilians leave and they can do so via Egypt or indeed the coast if they wanted to. I have heard nothing about a port blockade perhaps you know different.

I don't for one moment think that every German in 1939 was complicit in the German war aims but I have read nowhere of a safe passage being discussed for them to escape the country before we bombed it.

This is the notion of collective guilt. It is explicitly a war crime.

Then it's one that every country including our own is guilty of. As noted above, it only matters if you lose. But actually of all the Nuremburg trials was one ever held for the bombing of Coventry?

See, I think this is where you and I differ @TOPPING - you see this as an argument for why we shouldn't worry about the plight of the Palestinian people. I see this as an argument for why we should have had a Nuremburg trial not only for the bombing of Coventry, but also the bombing of Dresden. And Hiroshima. Humanity got to a place where it almost said "only following orders" was not a good enough reason for individuals committing crimes against humanity. Much since has been trying to roll that back - we need only look at the indifference to history our Home Secretary displays when discussing the refugee convention, or our own history of "defending our troops" from the consequences of the crimes they committed during the Troubles.

And I find your view wholly admirable. And I do care about the plight of the Palestinian people. I think they have been dreadfully lead although bear not a small amount of responsibility for their leadership.

This is another Brexit issue. Because I was a Remainer it doesn't mean that I thought that everything the EU did was fantastic and beyond reproach; while Brexiters probably didn't think everything the EU did was dreadful, but internet forums, including if you can believe it PB, often force people to adopt those positions.

In this case Israel is not without fault in its behaviour over the past but after the events of the weekend I am giving them quite a lot of leeway to progress the war in whatever way they want and wanted only to point out that at some point a distinction between the sweet, good-natured, wouldn't harm a fly Palestinian people who only want peace with their beloved neighbours Israel, and the Palestinians who, in their hundreds of thousands march in support of the destruction of Israel needs to be drawn.

We didn't single out the nice Germans from the beastly ones and Israel can be forgiven for not doing the same in this instance wrt the Palestinians.

You're an odd fruit sometimes.

On the 'Putin attacking Ukraine' topic you've been at pains to explore the context, discuss the things that might have pushed him into the action (eg did the Iraq War set a precedent? I recall you posing that question quite doggedly), lots of that from you on that one.

Yet on this one, this 'Hamas attacking Israel' topic, any attempt by people to do similar, to mention the context, to discuss reasons why this attack might have happened (eg could the maltreatment of the Palestinians by Israel have anything to do with it?) seems to give you an attack of the vapors.

You aren't paying attention.

https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4564114#Comment_4564114.

I'm not slagging you off, I'm genuinely interested in the different way you approach the 2 topics. Putin Ukraine, very up for context and the whys and wherefores. Hamas Israel, not so much. Why is this, do we think?

I am extremely clear on why Hamas attacked Israel. I am extremely clear on why Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Transjordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt attacked them in 1948. And in 1967. And 1973. And 2023.

They attacked them because they wanted to wipe Israel off the map. In each instance they failed and in trying they got themselves into quite a pickle.

Has Israel behaved as you or indeed I would have wished them to over the past 70 years? I'm sure not. But it's useful idiots like you who think that if Israel had only been a bit nicer over the period everyone would be holding hands and making daisy chains together.

You think that I am excusing Israel's behaviour to the Palestinians on the one hand and ignoring the fact that this might be a root cause of this weekend's actions. Just like I seek to understand the reasons for Putin's actions.

I am here to educate you that for centuries and most recently decades the Arab world (and of course others) has been antipathetic to the Jews and hence this weekend's actions are a symptom of that hatred.

Thanks for non flip reply. Doesn't happen too often. I treasure it.

So iyo the antipathy towards Israel in Gaza has little to do with the maltreatment of its Palestinian population. It's down to the inherent appetite of Palestinians for antisemitism.

Ok. I think that's incredibly jaundiced (and arguably racist) but given that is your view of course you won't (as you say) be shedding too many tears if Israel does end up engaging in large scale collective punishment of 'innocent' Palestinians. Inverted commas since they won't be innocent, will they?

Makes sense now. Quality exchange. Thanks again. Chilean red and nuts time.

Hope you are enjoying your red & nuts. To you and @148grss it seems that you have difficulty believing that there is anti-semitism amongst the Arabs. And that Israel has committed some (original - we'll come on to that later) sin which has brought this behaviour upon them.

I think it doesn't take a google genius to determine quickly that there has been a long and well-documented history of anti-semitism amongst everyone including the Arabs.

For the Arabs it takes on a more "traditional" angle because there is a land angle there also. But a cursory reading of any text or oratory of many of today's Arab leaders now or indeed from history will show that there is deep antipathy towards the Jews. I think this is pervasive hence while someone somewhere in Hamas might see this as a homeland issue, to deny the rampant anti-semitism of much of the Arab world is imo to misunderstimate the dynamic of the Middle East both now and throughout history.

Is there a history of anti Semitism amongst Arabic peoples? Of course. But I do not think it is the driving force behind the issue of Israel, especially not to begin with. Indeed, if the finger of anti Semitism should point anywhere it should be at the hegemonic western powers who refused fleeing Jewish people to their shores prior to WW2 - whereas at that point multicultural communities built on common understanding between Palestinian and Jewish exiles were commonplace. The land that is Israel and Palestine were also relatively free of faith based conflict under Ottoman control - all faiths had the freedom to access Jerusalem, for instance. The issue, I would argue, hinges on the forced displacement of hundreds of thousands of people from their land. This creates long lasting conflict - it has done with India and Pakistan, it has done in Africa, and it is the case with Israel and Palestine. People want to return to their homes, to farm their olives, to live and die in the house they were born in. At least with Indian partition people on both Hindu/secular and the Muslim sides held both positions - with Israel it is clear that one side was being forced out by the other.

I wondered how long it would be before we got to: "It's all out fault!"

You really should look at the history of Jews in the region, e.g. Iraq, to see why your pretend high-minded ideal of allowing people to return is utterly bogus. Why are the Palestinians the only ones who have this right to return?

You may want to start here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farhud

I mean the history is quite clear that in many ways this is all our fault - both the British state specifically and western imperial nations more generally. I mean it was European imperialist states that committed pogroms and refused Jewish refugees entry for hundreds of years, and European imperialist logic that led to the holocaust. The concentration camp was not a Nazi invention, although their evolution into a specific death camp arguably was, and the European imperial powers had already committed acts of mass murder on par with the death camps - just over longer periods of time and less formalised in parts.

I mean I’m in favour of a stateless, classless society without borders - that goes slightly beyond the mere right to return in my mind - but yes, Jewish people should be able to live where they wish, especially more so if their near ancestors were expelled from there. That includes Iraq. I don’t see how me having the position that all states (if they are going to exist at all) should be like that therefore means I am specifically calling on Israel as a special case.

"I mean the history is quite clear that in many ways this is all our fault"

You really don't need to say any more than this. We already understand that this is your answer for EVERYTHING

I mean when you have an Empire that spanned a whole lot of the globe… yeah - lots of things that are bad with the world are going to be, in part, related to that. It’s not rocket science.

We are now at the stage that many countries in Africa have been independent longer than when they were actual colonies.

Even laying aside the fact that the norm in many colonies was for the powers to rule through the local tribes, how long should we assume everything is our fault and not those independent countries' own issues?

When we return to those previously colonised countries the same amount of relative wealth that we extracted from them when we colonised them?

I'm sure you're aware of the foot race metaphor for structural problems related to class, race, gender etc. That is the same between colonised and coloniser.

Britain extracted wealth and labour from other countries; it also destroyed industry in other countries so that industry based at home could monopolise markets (see how we destroyed the Indian manufacturing economy under British rule so that our manufactured goods could be sold more). Some of those things advantaged us, and our colonial contemporaries, and disadvantaged others. Again, see how Haiti was forced to pay the debt to France for their own emancipation.

Done, in full, with interest.

The previously colonised countries are mammothly richer per capita than they were before we arrived.

Britain didn't destroy manufacturing capacity, it invented it and exported it.

And if any isn't, its purely due to corruption and theft of its leaders, not us.

That is patently untrue - least of all because those countries may be richer per capita now before they arrived, but they still have to do labour for that. I am saying we should give them back resources relatively equal to the wealth we extracted from them under colonial rule with zero strings attached, for free, as reparations. The fact that we have offshored our sweatshops to their countries under the guise of "providing them with jobs" and have given "aid" to regimes that are friendly to western interests do not count and, indeed, count against us.

"We" should not do diddly shit, as "we" did not take anything from them - and its absolutely racist to say "we" did.

I had gone out of my way throughout much of this conversation all of today to either refer to a specific state and their empire, or to say western imperial powers or generally western imperial projects. That I decided to respond (somewhat lazily) in one post with the use of the term "we" instead (because it is late in the day and I am feeling lazier) should not, in my view, receive this kind of reaction if you were in any way sincerely interested in having this conversation.

Replace "we" with "British state", "British imperial state", "western imperialist states" or "imperial states" - my point still stands.

No, the point does not stand.

The state is the collection of the people in that state. Not one of whom was alive 200-300 years ago.

But to go back to the analogy of a foot race - those of us who are alive are advantaged or disadvantaged by the events that happened 200-300 years ago. So to have an equitable global society, you need to address that inequality - not ignore it and say "we'll we aren't (directly) exploiting you any more, so we're on equal footing now, pull yourself up by your bootstraps"

What a load of crap.

There are countries around the planet which are developed or not developed and its based on what those countries did in the past century, not the actions of three centuries ago.

A century ago Argentina had one of the highest GDPs/capita in the world. After a century of misrule its now impoverished.

People need to take responsibility for their own actions, not piss about and blame everything on centuries ago. Especially when they're better off than centuries ago, indeed ex-British Empire armies are almost universally better off than the alternatives.

"There are countries around the planet which are developed or not developed and its based on what those countries did in the past century, not the actions of three centuries ago." - yes, what the developed countries did was imperialism where they went in to the other countries and took their resources and labour at the point of a gun. The underdeveloped countries, after being mostly hollowed out, were then given loans using the financial system those imperialist powers had built with stringent strings such as enforced market access and high interest.

Let's take the single example of Haiti - a country that is extremely poor and was literally created by the emancipation of enslaved people. Let's take a single policy example - ignoring the military interventions of western imperial nations from the moment of emancipation all to modern times - and just look at the debt the Haitian nation supposedly owed to France. Why did it owe a debt to France, that it only stopped paying in 2016? For the loss of wealth that the emancipation of the enslaved people caused to the French state.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haiti_indemnity_controversy

This is a stark, clear example of the forms of injustice that the imperial period and the imperial nations have committed against people. That this example is so clearly unjust is why it is easy to point to. There are countless other examples across different colonial / post colonial relationships with varying specific contexts. But the underlying issue is the same - extraction of wealth and labour enriching imperial powers at the cost of the colonised countries.

Again you're talking BS.

What the UK did was better than almost any other powerful country in the history of the planet.

Name any ex-British colony that is worse off than comparable other nations, which is not because of their own actions.

History isn't perfect, far from it, and that's always been the case, but as harsh as it was the simple fact is that Britain left almost everywhere better than it found it, it didn't impoverish and then leave.

India was greatly impoverished by British rule! It went from a country with one of the largest global exports to one of with the smallest. Large scale famine did not exist in India before British rule because local rulers understood that taxing your subjects to death was bad - indeed local forms of mutual aid exists where if one area had a bad harvest or such another local area would subsidise it that year / time period, alongside a tax waver, with the understanding that if the situation were reversed that community would have done the same. British Imperial rule of India killed an astronomical number of Indians, which have reverberations to today:

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/humanrights/2023/07/12/beyond-the-raj-how-british-colonialism-continues-to-impact-human-rights-in-india/

The things you say are positives, like railways and democracy, were not build with the Indian people in mind - the railways were built with the transportation of soldiers and goods for the British Empire in mind, and the imported "democracy" was to replace traditional Indian practices (many of which like the above example related to mutual aid and tax waivers) with stringent inflexible laws and policies - with the singular aim of maximising resource and wealth extraction for the benefit of the British Empire.

Ironically the thread header "divide and conquer" is appropriate for such a topic:

https://peacenews.info/node/8779/shashi-tharoor-inglorious-empire-what-british-did-india

Your account of pre-Raj Indian history is (perhaps accidentally due to gaps in your knowledge) misleading. India didn't have self-rule before the British, it was ruled by the Mughal Empire.

As for famine, we have no way of knowing how severe famines were in the era preceding the British, because statistics weren't recorded. This article offers an interesting counterargument:
https://historyreclaimed.co.uk/colonialism-did-not-cause-the-indian-famines/

The Mughal Empire was itself a waning power at the time of the East India Trading companies greater involvement in the Indian subcontinent, and the divide and conquer strategy was in part a way of playing the factions within that empire against each other. The history of Mughal Imperial rule is also somewhat more mixed than I would typically attribute to European imperialism - obviously empires all do somewhat similar things when conquering land and peoples, but from my understanding the Mughal Empire was somewhat less extractivist and willing to allow for flexible and more equitable arrangements amongst the peoples in its empire.

The degree to which any government system is "self rule" is contentious - I would argue that for much of the British imperial period there was no real democracy at home and that the imperial aims of the empire were not an expression of the British people as much as a specific class of British elites. But, that being said, many British people at the time and now still benefit from the wealth of the British Empire.

Eabhal said:

Any UK politician who is at all equivocal on Hamas is going to look very stupid when the first ISIS-style hostage beheadings take place.

It's a big question for Hamas - double down and go full ISIS, or open negotiations? The hostages are awkward for all parties - apparently they are having to keep them safe from the lynch mobs in Gaza.

Benpointer said:

Nigelb said:

.

Alanbrooke said:

Jim_Miller said:

AlanBrooke asked: "Whats your take on RFK ?"

Haven't paid much attention to him, but am beginning to wonder whether Marx's tragedy/farce line might apply.

No that will be New New Labour next year

LOL.
What do you think the Tories have been acting out these last few years ?

They've been acting out Gordon Brown's masterplan obvs. Remember, it's all Gordon's fault.

Leon said:

TimS said:

Russia seems to be very clearly aligning itself with Hamas and Iran. Interesting that they choose now to make that quite fundamental choice.

I see Ramzan Kadyrov has been expressing his delight in the attacks. I can sort of see why on the basis of keeping a fractious Islamist population on side. But having Israel against you can’t be that sensible long term.

It feels like the world is dividing into a new hostility

USA
UK
France
Germany
Japan
Spain
Korea
Australia
Canada
Italy
Israel
Poland
NZ (hmm)
God


V

China
Russia
Iran
Ireland
Palestine
Wankers
Rogerdamus
Kinabalu
Er, Syria
Pakistan
South Africa
Satan




And still undecideds:

India
Saudi
UAE
Brazil
Turkey
Indonesia
@BartholomewRoberts
The Aliens

algarkirk said:

Malmesbury said:

algarkirk said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Russia seems to be very clearly aligning itself with Hamas and Iran. Interesting that they choose now to make that quite fundamental choice.

I see Ramzan Kadyrov has been expressing his delight in the attacks. I can sort of see why on the basis of keeping a fractious Islamist population on side. But having Israel against you can’t be that sensible long term.

It feels like the world is dividing into a new hostility

USA
UK
France
Germany
Japan
Spain
Korea
Australia
Canada
Italy
Israel
Poland
NZ (hmm)
God


V

China
Russia
Iran
Ireland
Palestine
Wankers
Rogerdamus
Kinabalu
Er, Syria
Pakistan
South Africa
Satan




And still undecideds:

India
Saudi
UAE
Brazil
Turkey
Indonesia
@BartholomewRoberts
The Aliens

Ireland is not SFAICS, absolutely not, aligning with Hamas over this one. It's line is : Condemn Hamas, Israel's response should be proportionate though we have no idea what that means, and there should be a peace process.

I disagree with RoI about almost everything in military policy but let us be fair to the country that was quite content to see the UK be conquered by Hitler, our people massacred and enslaved and not lift a finger.

No, it wasn’t.

Like all states, there were factions in the government. The military were very pro British - to point of practically encouraging serving Irish soldiers to enlist in the British military. U.K. overflights were ignored - every flying boat that took off for patrol from NI went through Irish airspace, at one point. Any Allied servicemen who ended up in Ireland got given a meal and a bus ticket to the border - all the Germans were interred.

De Valera and his cronies did their thing, but it didn’t amount to much.

Thanks for that qualification. BTW I suspect the Germans were interned rather than interred.

It amounted to a policy of accepting that their proximate neighbours could be conquered and enslaved by the most barbarian force ever seen but they would save their own skins in that eventuality.

moonshine said:

.

Yokes said:

Leon said:

Yokes said:

It appears Hamas is feeling the military pressure already. Will explain the signs if I have time later.

I think "calling for a truce" is a bit of a giveaway

It's too late. Israel is going to take this to the end

Its a mix. They are losing hundreds of their number every day killed and injured, with a fair number of their best sent into Israel now dead. The hostages dont appear to be the bargaining chips they thought, hence the plan to broadcast their killings and the claim that the Israeli strikes have killed some of them already.

The position of Hizbollah up North is still in question. There are reasonably sound reports that some of their 'elite' units are turning up close to the Israeli border, both Syria and Lebanon side. There is also unconfrmed (and probably will never be confirmed) reports in a few Israeli media outlets of a message very kindly passed on via the French to Hizbollah and their sponsors explaining why they should behave. That message suggest not only what the Israelis will do, but also the US, which is a real wild card.

Does anyone really believe that about this White House? They’ve turned a blind eye to sanctions evasion of Iranian oil, even as Tehran floods the battlefield with drones to murder Ukrainians. Dragged their feet on seeing through the job on arms support to fend off Russia, after that ridiculous “it depends what sort of invasion” comment. Surrendered to the Taliban.

The world’s autocrats and barbarians have concluded Biden is all fur coat and no knickers. If the Mullahs are paying attention, they’ll go hell for leather to acquire the bomb this side of a U.S. election. As for the Chinese, we are lucky that they are not yet ready for conflict themselves.

Malmesbury said:

algarkirk said:

Malmesbury said:

algarkirk said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Russia seems to be very clearly aligning itself with Hamas and Iran. Interesting that they choose now to make that quite fundamental choice.

I see Ramzan Kadyrov has been expressing his delight in the attacks. I can sort of see why on the basis of keeping a fractious Islamist population on side. But having Israel against you can’t be that sensible long term.

It feels like the world is dividing into a new hostility

USA
UK
France
Germany
Japan
Spain
Korea
Australia
Canada
Italy
Israel
Poland
NZ (hmm)
God


V

China
Russia
Iran
Ireland
Palestine
Wankers
Rogerdamus
Kinabalu
Er, Syria
Pakistan
South Africa
Satan




And still undecideds:

India
Saudi
UAE
Brazil
Turkey
Indonesia
@BartholomewRoberts
The Aliens

Ireland is not SFAICS, absolutely not, aligning with Hamas over this one. It's line is : Condemn Hamas, Israel's response should be proportionate though we have no idea what that means, and there should be a peace process.

I disagree with RoI about almost everything in military policy but let us be fair to the country that was quite content to see the UK be conquered by Hitler, our people massacred and enslaved and not lift a finger.

No, it wasn’t.

Like all states, there were factions in the government. The military were very pro British - to point of practically encouraging serving Irish soldiers to enlist in the British military. U.K. overflights were ignored - every flying boat that took off for patrol from NI went through Irish airspace, at one point. Any Allied servicemen who ended up in Ireland got given a meal and a bus ticket to the border - all the Germans were interred.

De Valera and his cronies did their thing, but it didn’t amount to much.

Thanks for that qualification. BTW I suspect the Germans were interned rather than interred.

It amounted to a policy of accepting that their proximate neighbours could be conquered and enslaved by the most barbarian force ever seen but they would save their own skins in that eventuality.

Nope - Ireland had nothing to add to the war effort apart from men. Who enlisted with the Allies in considerable numbers. No industry to speak of, no military power. Joining the war would probably have taken more resources from the Allies than they would have given in return.

BartholomewRoberts said:

moonshine said:

.

Yokes said:

Leon said:

Yokes said:

It appears Hamas is feeling the military pressure already. Will explain the signs if I have time later.

I think "calling for a truce" is a bit of a giveaway

It's too late. Israel is going to take this to the end

Its a mix. They are losing hundreds of their number every day killed and injured, with a fair number of their best sent into Israel now dead. The hostages dont appear to be the bargaining chips they thought, hence the plan to broadcast their killings and the claim that the Israeli strikes have killed some of them already.

The position of Hizbollah up North is still in question. There are reasonably sound reports that some of their 'elite' units are turning up close to the Israeli border, both Syria and Lebanon side. There is also unconfrmed (and probably will never be confirmed) reports in a few Israeli media outlets of a message very kindly passed on via the French to Hizbollah and their sponsors explaining why they should behave. That message suggest not only what the Israelis will do, but also the US, which is a real wild card.

Does anyone really believe that about this White House? They’ve turned a blind eye to sanctions evasion of Iranian oil, even as Tehran floods the battlefield with drones to murder Ukrainians. Dragged their feet on seeing through the job on arms support to fend off Russia, after that ridiculous “it depends what sort of invasion” comment. Surrendered to the Taliban.

The world’s autocrats and barbarians have concluded Biden is all fur coat and no knickers. If the Mullahs are paying attention, they’ll go hell for leather to acquire the bomb this side of a U.S. election. As for the Chinese, we are lucky that they are not yet ready for conflict themselves.

Hello Donald, your fake tan is dripping.

Meanwhile in the real world, this White House has stood steadfast behind Ukraine and given Zelensky ammunition to defeat Putin in the face of Trumpian opposition.

Luckyguy1983 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Benpointer said:

Nigelb said:

.

Alanbrooke said:

Jim_Miller said:

AlanBrooke asked: "Whats your take on RFK ?"

Haven't paid much attention to him, but am beginning to wonder whether Marx's tragedy/farce line might apply.

No that will be New New Labour next year

LOL.
What do you think the Tories have been acting out these last few years ?

They've been acting out Gordon Brown's masterplan obvs. Remember, it's all Gordon's fault.

Agreed.

Sunak is the heir to Brown.

He needs to go.

Who's your pick to replace him? Genuine question - I'm stumped.

moonshine said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

moonshine said:

.

Yokes said:

Leon said:

Yokes said:

It appears Hamas is feeling the military pressure already. Will explain the signs if I have time later.

I think "calling for a truce" is a bit of a giveaway

It's too late. Israel is going to take this to the end

Its a mix. They are losing hundreds of their number every day killed and injured, with a fair number of their best sent into Israel now dead. The hostages dont appear to be the bargaining chips they thought, hence the plan to broadcast their killings and the claim that the Israeli strikes have killed some of them already.

The position of Hizbollah up North is still in question. There are reasonably sound reports that some of their 'elite' units are turning up close to the Israeli border, both Syria and Lebanon side. There is also unconfrmed (and probably will never be confirmed) reports in a few Israeli media outlets of a message very kindly passed on via the French to Hizbollah and their sponsors explaining why they should behave. That message suggest not only what the Israelis will do, but also the US, which is a real wild card.

Does anyone really believe that about this White House? They’ve turned a blind eye to sanctions evasion of Iranian oil, even as Tehran floods the battlefield with drones to murder Ukrainians. Dragged their feet on seeing through the job on arms support to fend off Russia, after that ridiculous “it depends what sort of invasion” comment. Surrendered to the Taliban.

The world’s autocrats and barbarians have concluded Biden is all fur coat and no knickers. If the Mullahs are paying attention, they’ll go hell for leather to acquire the bomb this side of a U.S. election. As for the Chinese, we are lucky that they are not yet ready for conflict themselves.

Hello Donald, your fake tan is dripping.

Meanwhile in the real world, this White House has stood steadfast behind Ukraine and given Zelensky ammunition to defeat Putin in the face of Trumpian opposition.

Is that the best you’ve got? I aspire to a better functioning White House than “at least it’s not Trump”. Biden has dragged his heels for a year and it’s clear that it has emboldened the West’s enemies.

Theuniondivvie said:

Malmesbury said:

algarkirk said:

Malmesbury said:

algarkirk said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Russia seems to be very clearly aligning itself with Hamas and Iran. Interesting that they choose now to make that quite fundamental choice.

I see Ramzan Kadyrov has been expressing his delight in the attacks. I can sort of see why on the basis of keeping a fractious Islamist population on side. But having Israel against you can’t be that sensible long term.

It feels like the world is dividing into a new hostility

USA
UK
France
Germany
Japan
Spain
Korea
Australia
Canada
Italy
Israel
Poland
NZ (hmm)
God


V

China
Russia
Iran
Ireland
Palestine
Wankers
Rogerdamus
Kinabalu
Er, Syria
Pakistan
South Africa
Satan




And still undecideds:

India
Saudi
UAE
Brazil
Turkey
Indonesia
@BartholomewRoberts
The Aliens

Ireland is not SFAICS, absolutely not, aligning with Hamas over this one. It's line is : Condemn Hamas, Israel's response should be proportionate though we have no idea what that means, and there should be a peace process.

I disagree with RoI about almost everything in military policy but let us be fair to the country that was quite content to see the UK be conquered by Hitler, our people massacred and enslaved and not lift a finger.

No, it wasn’t.

Like all states, there were factions in the government. The military were very pro British - to point of practically encouraging serving Irish soldiers to enlist in the British military. U.K. overflights were ignored - every flying boat that took off for patrol from NI went through Irish airspace, at one point. Any Allied servicemen who ended up in Ireland got given a meal and a bus ticket to the border - all the Germans were interred.

De Valera and his cronies did their thing, but it didn’t amount to much.

Thanks for that qualification. BTW I suspect the Germans were interned rather than interred.

It amounted to a policy of accepting that their proximate neighbours could be conquered and enslaved by the most barbarian force ever seen but they would save their own skins in that eventuality.

Nope - Ireland had nothing to add to the war effort apart from men. Who enlisted with the Allies in considerable numbers. No industry to speak of, no military power. Joining the war would probably have taken more resources from the Allies than they would have given in return.

NI was of course excused conscription in WWII for reasons and had a notably poor volunteer rate, so it’s likely more joined from the Republic than from the ‘loyal’ north.

biggles said:

williamglenn said:

More footage from Kensington. They appear to have a soundstage set up.

https://x.com/5pillarsuk/status/1711442459853488306

Nice of them to identify themselves mind.

BartholomewRoberts said:

moonshine said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

moonshine said:

.

Yokes said:

Leon said:

Yokes said:

It appears Hamas is feeling the military pressure already. Will explain the signs if I have time later.

I think "calling for a truce" is a bit of a giveaway

It's too late. Israel is going to take this to the end

Its a mix. They are losing hundreds of their number every day killed and injured, with a fair number of their best sent into Israel now dead. The hostages dont appear to be the bargaining chips they thought, hence the plan to broadcast their killings and the claim that the Israeli strikes have killed some of them already.

The position of Hizbollah up North is still in question. There are reasonably sound reports that some of their 'elite' units are turning up close to the Israeli border, both Syria and Lebanon side. There is also unconfrmed (and probably will never be confirmed) reports in a few Israeli media outlets of a message very kindly passed on via the French to Hizbollah and their sponsors explaining why they should behave. That message suggest not only what the Israelis will do, but also the US, which is a real wild card.

Does anyone really believe that about this White House? They’ve turned a blind eye to sanctions evasion of Iranian oil, even as Tehran floods the battlefield with drones to murder Ukrainians. Dragged their feet on seeing through the job on arms support to fend off Russia, after that ridiculous “it depends what sort of invasion” comment. Surrendered to the Taliban.

The world’s autocrats and barbarians have concluded Biden is all fur coat and no knickers. If the Mullahs are paying attention, they’ll go hell for leather to acquire the bomb this side of a U.S. election. As for the Chinese, we are lucky that they are not yet ready for conflict themselves.

Hello Donald, your fake tan is dripping.

Meanwhile in the real world, this White House has stood steadfast behind Ukraine and given Zelensky ammunition to defeat Putin in the face of Trumpian opposition.

Is that the best you’ve got? I aspire to a better functioning White House than “at least it’s not Trump”. Biden has dragged his heels for a year and it’s clear that it has emboldened the West’s enemies.

Biden has done a better job than any of his predecessors this century.

Especially when the party of Reagan have become full on Russian apologists.

Nigelb said:

If you don't live in Israel or consume Israeli media, you don't know who Yair Golan is. He is a 61-year-old retired Major General in the Israel army and a former parliament MP. Spend a minute to read this story...
https://twitter.com/gadishamia/status/1711240299987562977

Yokes said:

Leon said:

Yokes said:

It appears Hamas is feeling the military pressure already. Will explain the signs if I have time later.

I think "calling for a truce" is a bit of a giveaway

It's too late. Israel is going to take this to the end

Its a mix. They are losing hundreds of their number every day killed and injured, with a fair number of their best sent into Israel now dead. The hostages dont appear to be the bargaining chips they thought, hence the plan to broadcast their killings and the claim that the Israeli strikes have killed some of them already.

The position of Hizbollah up North is still in question. There are reasonably sound reports that some of their 'elite' units are turning up close to the Israeli border, both Syria and Lebanon side. There is also unconfrmed (and probably will never be confirmed) reports in a few Israeli media outlets of a message very kindly passed on via the French to Hizbollah and their sponsors explaining why they should behave. That message suggest not only what the Israelis will do, but also the US, which is a real wild card.

MarqueeMark said:

Jim_Miller said:

On RFK: "Attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s pivot Monday to an independent run for president met immediate resistance from Republican leaders, who have concluded that his new effort threatens to cannibalize their vote share next year, helping to reelect President Biden."
source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/10/09/republican-leaders-attack-robert-kennedy-jr-independent-campaign-announcement/

FWIW.

On the other hand: 'His family is divided on his campaign, with some in attendance supporting his speech Monday. Four of his siblings released a statement Monday denouncing his independent bid as “dangerous for the country."'

More like, dangerous for Brand Kennedy.

rottenborough said:

biggles said:

williamglenn said:

More footage from Kensington. They appear to have a soundstage set up.

https://x.com/5pillarsuk/status/1711442459853488306

Nice of them to identify themselves mind.

Looks like the last Labour conference under Corbyn.

TimS said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

Luckyguy1983 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Benpointer said:

Nigelb said:

.

Alanbrooke said:

Jim_Miller said:

AlanBrooke asked: "Whats your take on RFK ?"

Haven't paid much attention to him, but am beginning to wonder whether Marx's tragedy/farce line might apply.

No that will be New New Labour next year

LOL.
What do you think the Tories have been acting out these last few years ?

They've been acting out Gordon Brown's masterplan obvs. Remember, it's all Gordon's fault.

Agreed.

Sunak is the heir to Brown.

He needs to go.

Who's your pick to replace him? Genuine question - I'm stumped.

Check out Penny's speech from the conference. And then put your annual salary on Suella.

Stand up and fight.
Stand up…and fight!

Stand up and fight

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

Robert Reich
@RBReich
·
3h
Democracy won by a whisker in 2020. Just 44K votes in AZ, GA, and WI decided the outcome

If RFK Jr, or any third-party candidate, peels off just a fraction of the vote from Biden, while Trump's base stays with him, they will delivery a victory to Trump. 9/10

https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1711439251622019226

It's scarily close. And a lot of the people who worked for him and now say he is unfit for office will be replaced by people far worse next time.

rottenborough said:

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

Robert Reich
@RBReich
·
3h
Democracy won by a whisker in 2020. Just 44K votes in AZ, GA, and WI decided the outcome

If RFK Jr, or any third-party candidate, peels off just a fraction of the vote from Biden, while Trump's base stays with him, they will delivery a victory to Trump. 9/10

https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1711439251622019226

It's scarily close. And a lot of the people who worked for him and now say he is unfit for office will be replaced by people far worse next time.

This time next year it will be up to the American people: do they want to continue to live in a democracy or not?

Nothing else is on the ballot.

I think they will say they don't.

Bleak.

And brace as @Leon would say.

kinabalu said:

Barnesian said:

Alanbrooke said:

Jim_Miller said:

On topic, sort of: It looks to me as if Mid Bedfordshire is fairly close to the center (or, if you prefer, the centre) of England's population.

(By center, I am thinking mean, rather than median, following the standard practice of the US Census Burea, but I would be interested in knowing either, or both, for England.)

Whats your take on RFK ?

I'm interested in this too. He's announced he's standing as an independent. Will he take more votes from Trump or Biden?

My guess is more votes from Trump, which is ironic as I understand RFK is financed by a Republican PAC.

That's assuming Trump and Biden are on the ballot. Which I'm not.

kle4 said:

kinabalu said:

Barnesian said:

Alanbrooke said:

Jim_Miller said:

On topic, sort of: It looks to me as if Mid Bedfordshire is fairly close to the center (or, if you prefer, the centre) of England's population.

(By center, I am thinking mean, rather than median, following the standard practice of the US Census Burea, but I would be interested in knowing either, or both, for England.)

Whats your take on RFK ?

I'm interested in this too. He's announced he's standing as an independent. Will he take more votes from Trump or Biden?

My guess is more votes from Trump, which is ironic as I understand RFK is financed by a Republican PAC.

That's assuming Trump and Biden are on the ballot. Which I'm not.

What do you think takes either one out of the race, voluntarily or otherwise?

Short of death I can't see it, and I'm not even sure that would stop the Trump fans.

GIN1138 said:

TimS said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

Luckyguy1983 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Benpointer said:

Nigelb said:

.

Alanbrooke said:

Jim_Miller said:

AlanBrooke asked: "Whats your take on RFK ?"

Haven't paid much attention to him, but am beginning to wonder whether Marx's tragedy/farce line might apply.

No that will be New New Labour next year

LOL.
What do you think the Tories have been acting out these last few years ?

They've been acting out Gordon Brown's masterplan obvs. Remember, it's all Gordon's fault.

Agreed.

Sunak is the heir to Brown.

He needs to go.

Who's your pick to replace him? Genuine question - I'm stumped.

Check out Penny's speech from the conference. And then put your annual salary on Suella.

Stand up and fight.
Stand up…and fight!

Stand up and fight

“When your back is against the wall, there is only one thing to do, and that is turn around and fight”.

I think bearing arms at King Charles coronation has gone to her head.

That said, I'd engage my sword for Penny M any day of the week... 😍

Leon said:

GENTLEMEN, CHOOSE YOUR SIDES

Leon said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

Robert Reich
@RBReich
·
3h
Democracy won by a whisker in 2020. Just 44K votes in AZ, GA, and WI decided the outcome

If RFK Jr, or any third-party candidate, peels off just a fraction of the vote from Biden, while Trump's base stays with him, they will delivery a victory to Trump. 9/10

https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1711439251622019226

It's scarily close. And a lot of the people who worked for him and now say he is unfit for office will be replaced by people far worse next time.

This time next year it will be up to the American people: do they want to continue to live in a democracy or not?

Nothing else is on the ballot.

I think they will say they don't.

Bleak.

And brace as @Leon would say.

Even if Trump is defeated, you simply have to assume America is now capable of electing someone who will essentially end liberal democracy in their country. God help us all if Trump is elected again.

The Woke are already intent on ending liberal democracy, and the Enlightenment. Hence, in part, Trump

Jeezusss fucking Christ how can you not get this? It's not advanced quantum fuckodynamics

rottenborough said:

Labour must be wishing Hamas had waited a single week.

Foxy said:

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

I missed this...

Ben Riley-Smith
@benrileysmith
NEW: Labour conference has just backed delivering HS2 "in full"... days after Keir Starmer made clear he wouldn't bring back the second leg. Ah.

Is that something that binds the leadership or are conference votes more of a message being sent kind of thing?

Still, with the LD leadership defeated on a NIMBY vote (the conference membership apparently having a moment of disassociative disorder about the party's identity), conferences showing some spine or initiative is pretty welcome.

No. Labour conference last hear passed a motion calling for PR. Starmer vetoed it.

The days when policy formulation in Labour were democratic are long gone. Now a leader is elected who can do as they please and ignore the inconvenient membership.

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

kinabalu said:

Barnesian said:

Alanbrooke said:

Jim_Miller said:

On topic, sort of: It looks to me as if Mid Bedfordshire is fairly close to the center (or, if you prefer, the centre) of England's population.

(By center, I am thinking mean, rather than median, following the standard practice of the US Census Burea, but I would be interested in knowing either, or both, for England.)

Whats your take on RFK ?

I'm interested in this too. He's announced he's standing as an independent. Will he take more votes from Trump or Biden?

My guess is more votes from Trump, which is ironic as I understand RFK is financed by a Republican PAC.

That's assuming Trump and Biden are on the ballot. Which I'm not.

What do you think takes either one out of the race, voluntarily or otherwise?

Short of death I can't see it, and I'm not even sure that would stop the Trump fans.

Trump, the legal stuff, slide in polls, the non crazies coalescing around someone else.

Biden, age related frailty.

I rate it about 50% that neither end up on the ballot.

kle4 said:

Leon said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

Robert Reich
@RBReich
·
3h
Democracy won by a whisker in 2020. Just 44K votes in AZ, GA, and WI decided the outcome

If RFK Jr, or any third-party candidate, peels off just a fraction of the vote from Biden, while Trump's base stays with him, they will delivery a victory to Trump. 9/10

https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1711439251622019226

It's scarily close. And a lot of the people who worked for him and now say he is unfit for office will be replaced by people far worse next time.

This time next year it will be up to the American people: do they want to continue to live in a democracy or not?

Nothing else is on the ballot.

I think they will say they don't.

Bleak.

And brace as @Leon would say.

Even if Trump is defeated, you simply have to assume America is now capable of electing someone who will essentially end liberal democracy in their country. God help us all if Trump is elected again.

The Woke are already intent on ending liberal democracy, and the Enlightenment. Hence, in part, Trump

Jeezusss fucking Christ how can you not get this? It's not advanced quantum fuckodynamics

Not all sins are equal, how can you not get that?

I think a lot of woke stuff is utterly barmy. But only one side in American tried to remain in office after losing (no, moaning about losing is not the same thing), and that is a whole different ball game from when he was first elected.

Is there a reason someone like Trump emerged, a reaction against some things which really are wacky or wrong? Sure. But let's talk about scale. This is a point about age, but it still applies.

This dude is not one of the early Never Trumpers by the way. He was MAGA. He even now opposes the proposed court orders to stop Trump threatening people online, because of free speech. He is not a fan of Romney and other Establishment republicans.

I don't think you're a Trump fan at all. But as idiotic as some 'woke' ideology is I have difficulty believing you think it is equivalent to him, yet you often claim it is.

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

kinabalu said:

Barnesian said:

Alanbrooke said:

Jim_Miller said:

On topic, sort of: It looks to me as if Mid Bedfordshire is fairly close to the center (or, if you prefer, the centre) of England's population.

(By center, I am thinking mean, rather than median, following the standard practice of the US Census Burea, but I would be interested in knowing either, or both, for England.)

Whats your take on RFK ?

I'm interested in this too. He's announced he's standing as an independent. Will he take more votes from Trump or Biden?

My guess is more votes from Trump, which is ironic as I understand RFK is financed by a Republican PAC.

That's assuming Trump and Biden are on the ballot. Which I'm not.

What do you think takes either one out of the race, voluntarily or otherwise?

Short of death I can't see it, and I'm not even sure that would stop the Trump fans.

Trump, the legal stuff, slide in polls, the non crazies coalescing around someone else.

Biden, age related frailty.

I rate it about 50% that neither end up on the ballot.

kle4 said:

Leon said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

Robert Reich
@RBReich
·
3h
Democracy won by a whisker in 2020. Just 44K votes in AZ, GA, and WI decided the outcome

If RFK Jr, or any third-party candidate, peels off just a fraction of the vote from Biden, while Trump's base stays with him, they will delivery a victory to Trump. 9/10

https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1711439251622019226

It's scarily close. And a lot of the people who worked for him and now say he is unfit for office will be replaced by people far worse next time.

This time next year it will be up to the American people: do they want to continue to live in a democracy or not?

Nothing else is on the ballot.

I think they will say they don't.

Bleak.

And brace as @Leon would say.

Even if Trump is defeated, you simply have to assume America is now capable of electing someone who will essentially end liberal democracy in their country. God help us all if Trump is elected again.

The Woke are already intent on ending liberal democracy, and the Enlightenment. Hence, in part, Trump

Jeezusss fucking Christ how can you not get this? It's not advanced quantum fuckodynamics

Not all sins are equal, how can you not get that?

I think a lot of woke stuff is utterly barmy. But only one side in American tried to remain in office after losing (no, moaning about losing is not the same thing), and that is a whole different ball game from when he was first elected.

Is there a reason someone like Trump emerged, a reaction against some things which really are wacky or wrong? Sure. But let's talk about scale. This is a point about age, but it still applies.

This dude is not one of the early Never Trumpers by the way. He was MAGA. He even now opposes the proposed court orders to stop Trump threatening people online, because of free speech. He is not a fan of Romney and other Establishment republicans.

I don't think you're a Trump fan at all. But as idiotic as some 'woke' ideology is I have difficulty believing you think it is equivalent to him, yet you often claim it is.

Leon said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

Robert Reich
@RBReich
·
3h
Democracy won by a whisker in 2020. Just 44K votes in AZ, GA, and WI decided the outcome

If RFK Jr, or any third-party candidate, peels off just a fraction of the vote from Biden, while Trump's base stays with him, they will delivery a victory to Trump. 9/10

https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1711439251622019226

It's scarily close. And a lot of the people who worked for him and now say he is unfit for office will be replaced by people far worse next time.

This time next year it will be up to the American people: do they want to continue to live in a democracy or not?

Nothing else is on the ballot.

I think they will say they don't.

Bleak.

And brace as @Leon would say.

Even if Trump is defeated, you simply have to assume America is now capable of electing someone who will essentially end liberal democracy in their country. God help us all if Trump is elected again.

The Woke are already intent on ending liberal democracy, and the Enlightenment. Hence, in part, Trump

Jeezusss fucking Christ how can you not get this? It's not advanced quantum fuckodynamics

Not all sins are equal, how can you not get that?

I think a lot of woke stuff is utterly barmy. But only one side in American tried to remain in office after losing (no, moaning about losing is not the same thing), and that is a whole different ball game from when he was first elected.

Is there a reason someone like Trump emerged, a reaction against some things which really are wacky or wrong? Sure. But let's talk about scale. This is a point about age, but it still applies.

This dude is not one of the early Never Trumpers by the way. He was MAGA. He even now opposes the proposed court orders to stop Trump threatening people online, because of free speech. He is not a fan of Romney and other Establishment republicans.

I don't think you're a Trump fan at all. But as idiotic as some 'woke' ideology is I have difficulty believing you think it is equivalent to him, yet you often claim it is.

No, you're an idiot

I think Wokeness is much worse than Trump. In all seriousness. You don't understand

However Wokeness is a generational challenge and can only be defeated over decades. Trump is a more proximate and immediate danger, to the most powerful democracy in the West, so Trump must not win in 2024

To adapt an analogy of my own, we are trapped on an ice floe, the ice floe is heading to the warm sea where it will eventually melt and we will definitely drown. The sea current carrying us is: Wokeness

However, sharing this same ice floe with us is a polar bear. That's Trump. It doesn't matter if we manage to steer the ice floe in a different direction if the polar bear comes over and eats several of our limbs in the meantime

Ergo, we have to shoot the polar bear first, then work out how to stop drowning

Leon said:

GENTLEMEN, CHOOSE YOUR SIDES

BlancheLivermore said:

Leon said:

GENTLEMEN, CHOOSE YOUR SIDES

Equivocation, right now, is right next to supporting rape and murder of innocents

rottenborough said:

kinabalu said:

kle4 said:

kinabalu said:

Barnesian said:

Alanbrooke said:

Jim_Miller said:

On topic, sort of: It looks to me as if Mid Bedfordshire is fairly close to the center (or, if you prefer, the centre) of England's population.

(By center, I am thinking mean, rather than median, following the standard practice of the US Census Burea, but I would be interested in knowing either, or both, for England.)

Whats your take on RFK ?

I'm interested in this too. He's announced he's standing as an independent. Will he take more votes from Trump or Biden?

My guess is more votes from Trump, which is ironic as I understand RFK is financed by a Republican PAC.

That's assuming Trump and Biden are on the ballot. Which I'm not.

What do you think takes either one out of the race, voluntarily or otherwise?

Short of death I can't see it, and I'm not even sure that would stop the Trump fans.

Trump, the legal stuff, slide in polls, the non crazies coalescing around someone else.

Biden, age related frailty.

I rate it about 50% that neither end up on the ballot.

Wow. 50%??

Andy_JS said:

kle4 said:

Andy_JS said:

rottenborough said:

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

Robert Reich
@RBReich
·
3h
Democracy won by a whisker in 2020. Just 44K votes in AZ, GA, and WI decided the outcome

If RFK Jr, or any third-party candidate, peels off just a fraction of the vote from Biden, while Trump's base stays with him, they will delivery a victory to Trump. 9/10

https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1711439251622019226

It's scarily close. And a lot of the people who worked for him and now say he is unfit for office will be replaced by people far worse next time.

This time next year it will be up to the American people: do they want to continue to live in a democracy or not?

Nothing else is on the ballot.

I think they will say they don't.

Bleak.

And brace as @Leon would say.

Do you really think Trump would abolish democracy if elected next year?

He already tried to overthrow a democratic election once already. His supporters claim to believe the Constitution gives one man the power the decide the outcome regardless of what the certified elector votes say, and that a President is immune from all actions taken whilst in office, even if nothing to do with their office.

Without even getting in to the his many statements on the subject, why are you so skeptical about the risk?

It's not exactly Trump derangement syndrome if he has said far more deranged things.

I just don't see it as a possibility. I don't see how it could happen.

Andy_JS said:

kle4 said:

Andy_JS said:

rottenborough said:

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

Robert Reich
@RBReich
·
3h
Democracy won by a whisker in 2020. Just 44K votes in AZ, GA, and WI decided the outcome

If RFK Jr, or any third-party candidate, peels off just a fraction of the vote from Biden, while Trump's base stays with him, they will delivery a victory to Trump. 9/10

https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1711439251622019226

It's scarily close. And a lot of the people who worked for him and now say he is unfit for office will be replaced by people far worse next time.

This time next year it will be up to the American people: do they want to continue to live in a democracy or not?

Nothing else is on the ballot.

I think they will say they don't.

Bleak.

And brace as @Leon would say.

Do you really think Trump would abolish democracy if elected next year?

He already tried to overthrow a democratic election once already. His supporters claim to believe the Constitution gives one man the power the decide the outcome regardless of what the certified elector votes say, and that a President is immune from all actions taken whilst in office, even if nothing to do with their office.

Without even getting in to the his many statements on the subject, why are you so skeptical about the risk?

It's not exactly Trump derangement syndrome if he has said far more deranged things.

I just don't see it as a possibility. I don't see how it could happen.

Eabhal said:

Would it be fair to say that, ideally, Israel would rather go after those funding and supporting Hamas than launching a ground invasion of Gaza?

They are fighting the symptom rather than the cause. And aggravating it at the same time.

But they have no choice - I assume going after Iran could turn into an existential crisis? Could the international community intervene and there is some sort of deal of a blockade on Iran in return for Israel not flattening Gaza?

Leon said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Leon said:

GENTLEMEN, CHOOSE YOUR SIDES

Equivocation, right now, is right next to supporting rape and murder of innocents

Yep

This feels like one of those Civil War movies when the graduates at West Point are confronted with the reality: Civil War over slavery

The commander tells his young officers they can ride off in either direction, with dignity, and in safety, but the time has come to choose

You can ride off south to the Confederacy, and slavery, and Islamofascism, and terror, and Palestine, and Ireland, and Russia, and China, and beheadings, and Iran, and all the wankers of the world

Or you can ride off to the Union, and the West, and democracy, and emancipation, and England and America and France, and Judeo-Christianity, and the Renaissance, and the Enlightenment, and even Israel (with all its many many flaws) and female freedom, and not being like ISIS

Gentlemen, mount your steeds, and ride

Leon said:

Benpointer said:

Leon said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

kle4 said:

rottenborough said:

Robert Reich
@RBReich
·
3h
Democracy won by a whisker in 2020. Just 44K votes in AZ, GA, and WI decided the outcome

If RFK Jr, or any third-party candidate, peels off just a fraction of the vote from Biden, while Trump's base stays with him, they will delivery a victory to Trump. 9/10

https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1711439251622019226

It's scarily close. And a lot of the people who worked for him and now say he is unfit for office will be replaced by people far worse next time.

This time next year it will be up to the American people: do they want to continue to live in a democracy or not?

Nothing else is on the ballot.

I think they will say they don't.

Bleak.

And brace as @Leon would say.

Even if Trump is defeated, you simply have to assume America is now capable of electing someone who will essentially end liberal democracy in their country. God help us all if Trump is elected again.

The Woke are already intent on ending liberal democracy, and the Enlightenment. Hence, in part, Trump

Jeezusss fucking Christ how can you not get this? It's not advanced quantum fuckodynamics

You need a totally alt-right warped brain like yours to think the left is the danger to which Trump is the solution. Still, since the course of history is against you, you will remain sadly disappointed for the rest of your days.

What you class as 'woke' is the natural outcome of the Enlightenment. Indeed, I would say the Enlightenment and 'wokism' are facets of the same long trend of human evolution away from 'the strongest wins' towards a more altruistic nature. See for example the long-term trend towards an aversion to animal cruelty.

It's not a path without serious setbacks and it's not a path on which everyone has reached the same point, but it's undeniably happening.

I'm gonna have a wild wild guess that no one has ever mistaken you for "an intellectual"