Howdy, Stranger!

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

The SNP vs The Lib Dems – politicalbetting.com

135

Comments

  • biggles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    Those middling people, who want to support good people on all sides, the state of Israel's right to exist without the threat of massacre or holocaust and the Palestinian's right to an autonomous state struggle with these questions, and find few answers from polemics of any sort:

    What is the best policy for supporting peace loving people on all sides

    How should Israel have responded instead if you oppose what they are doing

    What is the best policy for Palestinians who do want their autonomy and also recognise Israel's rights.
    My personal policy is that Israel must simultaneously make diplomatic overtures in support of a two-state solution, while focusing its military ambitions on recovery of its hostages, a blockade of Gaza, and surgical destruction of Hamas capability.

    Palestinian supporters must call for the immediate release of hostages, condemn Hamas, and call for the resumption of democracy in Gaza.

    Of course, I am a centrist dad, so these things are not going to happen. I agree it’s a bugger’s muddle, which is why by the way I kind of refuse to condemn those calling at present for a ceasefire.
    Two ways of solving problems.

    One is to have a map from here to the destination. The other is to have a vague idea of where the destination is, but basically look in front of you and do what seems to be the best choice of the immediate options available, then pause and reorientate and repeat.

    I've been musing on it in the context of sixth formers failing to do physics questions, but it's probably true more widely. It's usually best to have an advance plan all the way to the destination, but what do we do when that plan doesn't exist? We bumble, wander, try low-cost bets to see what happens. And usually, that gets us somewhere OK.

    So, right now, the realistic choices for Israel are to continue their current actions, or in some sense to pause or turn down their intensity, or to go in harder.

    Which of those is really going to give them the best odds of achieving what they want? Not sure that it's their current path. One of the criteria for a just war is that it has a reasonable chance of success.
    We know what Hamas's ideal destination is: no Israel.
    And for many on the Israeli Right, the ideal destination is no Arabs anywhere in Israel proper OR the Territories.
    'many' = 'a tiny few'
    If he'd said 'many on the Israeli right want to incorporate the West Bank into Israel and make Gaza uninhabitable,' however, he wouldn't have been far wrong.

    We may be watching it happen over the next few months.
    At some stage, I wonder if we need to stop giving Likud the cover of being called “on the right” as if they are a mainstream western party. “Hardline nationalist” seems fair.
    Likud are the direct descendants of Irgun, the terrorist organisation behind the bombing of the King David Hotel. Ancient history of course, but in 2006 Netanyahu described it as a “legitimate act”.

    Israel has basically been a Likud-run state for 20 years.
    Back in 1995, Bibi was happy to march alongside extremists chanting "Death to Rabin!".
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,661

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    Keep Calmer and Vote Starmer!
    There was some bloke with as sign saying that. I guess it must have rusted away.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,250
    edited November 2023
    Endillion said:

    biggles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    Those middling people, who want to support good people on all sides, the state of Israel's right to exist without the threat of massacre or holocaust and the Palestinian's right to an autonomous state struggle with these questions, and find few answers from polemics of any sort:

    What is the best policy for supporting peace loving people on all sides

    How should Israel have responded instead if you oppose what they are doing

    What is the best policy for Palestinians who do want their autonomy and also recognise Israel's rights.
    My personal policy is that Israel must simultaneously make diplomatic overtures in support of a two-state solution, while focusing its military ambitions on recovery of its hostages, a blockade of Gaza, and surgical destruction of Hamas capability.

    Palestinian supporters must call for the immediate release of hostages, condemn Hamas, and call for the resumption of democracy in Gaza.

    Of course, I am a centrist dad, so these things are not going to happen. I agree it’s a bugger’s muddle, which is why by the way I kind of refuse to condemn those calling at present for a ceasefire.
    Two ways of solving problems.

    One is to have a map from here to the destination. The other is to have a vague idea of where the destination is, but basically look in front of you and do what seems to be the best choice of the immediate options available, then pause and reorientate and repeat.

    I've been musing on it in the context of sixth formers failing to do physics questions, but it's probably true more widely. It's usually best to have an advance plan all the way to the destination, but what do we do when that plan doesn't exist? We bumble, wander, try low-cost bets to see what happens. And usually, that gets us somewhere OK.

    So, right now, the realistic choices for Israel are to continue their current actions, or in some sense to pause or turn down their intensity, or to go in harder.

    Which of those is really going to give them the best odds of achieving what they want? Not sure that it's their current path. One of the criteria for a just war is that it has a reasonable chance of success.
    We know what Hamas's ideal destination is: no Israel.
    And for many on the Israeli Right, the ideal destination is no Arabs anywhere in Israel proper OR the Territories.
    'many' = 'a tiny few'
    If he'd said 'many on the Israeli right want to incorporate the West Bank into Israel and make Gaza uninhabitable,' however, he wouldn't have been far wrong.

    We may be watching it happen over the next few months.
    At some stage, I wonder if we need to stop giving Likud the cover of being called “on the right” as if they are a mainstream western party. “Hardline nationalist” seems fair.
    Likud are the direct descendants of Irgun, the terrorist organisation behind the bombing of the King David Hotel. Ancient history of course, but in 2006 Netanyahu described it as a “legitimate act”.

    Israel has basically been a Likud-run state for 20 years.
    PR's wonderful, isn't it?

    Your post is more or less correct, of course, but that 20 year period does include Likud co-founder Ariel Sharon's complete disengagement from Gaza in 2005 - a move that cost him and his party a huge amount, politically and personally.

    Sharon staked his reputation on the Gaza disengagement being a huge step towards long term peace, on the basis that it would be that much harder for Hamas and the other terror groups in Gaza to recruit, if there was no obvious enemy to fight against, and if Israel was seen to be providing water, jobs and other economic resources to the Strip. That theory has now been tested to destruction and been found severely wanting.
    Sharon was very brave to support Gaza disengagement.

    But let’s remember Sharon’s long career, including his responsibility for various civilian massacres when commanding Unit 101 for the IDF, and his championing of Israeli settlement in the West Bank.

    The problem with this whole situation is that very much, both sides are shits.

    My sympathies are with the Israeli left, and the even smaller number of Palestinians democrats.
  • Omnium said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    Keep Calmer and Vote Starmer!
    There was some bloke with as sign saying that. I guess it must have rusted away.
    You mean this one? Well, you can probably tell I'm not 100% happy with Sir Keir's stance on the Mid East, BUT, BUT, I still think in a UK context, the number one priority is to make sure we end Tory Rule at the next election. It has to be.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,725
    A difficult bet when there’s a reasonable chance that one or both participants could have a mare of an election.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,903
    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    I'll be voting Labour but I'm hoping this might be a wake up call. I don't want a Labour leader drifting in the slipstream of the Tories on the presumption that they'll lose because they're crap. I was a big fan of Blair because until Iraq I always felt his instincts were sound. I'm really having my doubts about Starmer.
    Doubts because of Gaza or more generally?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,068

    Endillion said:

    biggles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    Those middling people, who want to support good people on all sides, the state of Israel's right to exist without the threat of massacre or holocaust and the Palestinian's right to an autonomous state struggle with these questions, and find few answers from polemics of any sort:

    What is the best policy for supporting peace loving people on all sides

    How should Israel have responded instead if you oppose what they are doing

    What is the best policy for Palestinians who do want their autonomy and also recognise Israel's rights.
    My personal policy is that Israel must simultaneously make diplomatic overtures in support of a two-state solution, while focusing its military ambitions on recovery of its hostages, a blockade of Gaza, and surgical destruction of Hamas capability.

    Palestinian supporters must call for the immediate release of hostages, condemn Hamas, and call for the resumption of democracy in Gaza.

    Of course, I am a centrist dad, so these things are not going to happen. I agree it’s a bugger’s muddle, which is why by the way I kind of refuse to condemn those calling at present for a ceasefire.
    Two ways of solving problems.

    One is to have a map from here to the destination. The other is to have a vague idea of where the destination is, but basically look in front of you and do what seems to be the best choice of the immediate options available, then pause and reorientate and repeat.

    I've been musing on it in the context of sixth formers failing to do physics questions, but it's probably true more widely. It's usually best to have an advance plan all the way to the destination, but what do we do when that plan doesn't exist? We bumble, wander, try low-cost bets to see what happens. And usually, that gets us somewhere OK.

    So, right now, the realistic choices for Israel are to continue their current actions, or in some sense to pause or turn down their intensity, or to go in harder.

    Which of those is really going to give them the best odds of achieving what they want? Not sure that it's their current path. One of the criteria for a just war is that it has a reasonable chance of success.
    We know what Hamas's ideal destination is: no Israel.
    And for many on the Israeli Right, the ideal destination is no Arabs anywhere in Israel proper OR the Territories.
    'many' = 'a tiny few'
    If he'd said 'many on the Israeli right want to incorporate the West Bank into Israel and make Gaza uninhabitable,' however, he wouldn't have been far wrong.

    We may be watching it happen over the next few months.
    At some stage, I wonder if we need to stop giving Likud the cover of being called “on the right” as if they are a mainstream western party. “Hardline nationalist” seems fair.
    Likud are the direct descendants of Irgun, the terrorist organisation behind the bombing of the King David Hotel. Ancient history of course, but in 2006 Netanyahu described it as a “legitimate act”.

    Israel has basically been a Likud-run state for 20 years.
    PR's wonderful, isn't it?

    Your post is more or less correct, of course, but that 20 year period does include Likud co-founder Ariel Sharon's complete disengagement from Gaza in 2005 - a move that cost him and his party a huge amount, politically and personally.

    Sharon staked his reputation on the Gaza disengagement being a huge step towards long term peace, on the basis that it would be that much harder for Hamas and the other terror groups in Gaza to recruit, if there was no obvious enemy to fight against, and if Israel was seen to be providing water, jobs and other economic resources to the Strip. That theory has now been tested to destruction and been found severely wanting.
    Sharon was very brave to support Gaza disengagement.

    But let’s remember Sharon’s long career, including his responsibility for various civilian massacres when commanding Unit 101 for the IDF, and his championing of Israeli settlement in the West Bank.

    The problem with this whole situation is that very much, both sides are shits.

    My sympathies are with the Israeli left, and the even smaller number of Palestinians democrats.
    What’s agonising is that about 49% of Israelis would actually support a more or less decent government, but time and again, the shitbags get a tiny majority in the Knesset.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,028

    AUTUMN STATEMENT 1 There is zero chance of the inheritance tax rate being cut on Wednesday. The chancellor was clear today that all tax measures will be designed to stimulate growth - ie they will be supply side reforms - and an IHT cut does not fit that rubric. If it happens it will come in spring budget (it has been considered by Treasury)

    https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1726304375776202832

    Feck.

    They're going to do it.

    In the words of the great Private Frazer, this is like watching men committing suicide.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,284
    kinabalu said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    I'll be voting Labour but I'm hoping this might be a wake up call. I don't want a Labour leader drifting in the slipstream of the Tories on the presumption that they'll lose because they're crap. I was a big fan of Blair because until Iraq I always felt his instincts were sound. I'm really having my doubts about Starmer.
    Doubts because of Gaza or more generally?
    I agree with Roger, basically more generally, but Gaza has focused my doubts. I’m tempted again by the LibDems, but my vote will probably be tactical.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,661

    Omnium said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    Keep Calmer and Vote Starmer!
    There was some bloke with as sign saying that. I guess it must have rusted away.
    You mean this one? Well, you can probably tell I'm not 100% happy with Sir Keir's stance on the Mid East, BUT, BUT, I still think in a UK context, the number one priority is to make sure we end Tory Rule at the next election. It has to be.

    I did indeed have that in mind. I'm just hoping that given enough opportunity you'll get away from it and post again the wonderful railways travelogues.

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,411
    kinabalu said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    I'll be voting Labour but I'm hoping this might be a wake up call. I don't want a Labour leader drifting in the slipstream of the Tories on the presumption that they'll lose because they're crap. I was a big fan of Blair because until Iraq I always felt his instincts were sound. I'm really having my doubts about Starmer.
    Doubts because of Gaza or more generally?
    Blair is apparently being suggested by the Israeli government as a “friendly” figure to head humanitarian aid efforts in Gaza…
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,028

    Endillion said:

    biggles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    Those middling people, who want to support good people on all sides, the state of Israel's right to exist without the threat of massacre or holocaust and the Palestinian's right to an autonomous state struggle with these questions, and find few answers from polemics of any sort:

    What is the best policy for supporting peace loving people on all sides

    How should Israel have responded instead if you oppose what they are doing

    What is the best policy for Palestinians who do want their autonomy and also recognise Israel's rights.
    My personal policy is that Israel must simultaneously make diplomatic overtures in support of a two-state solution, while focusing its military ambitions on recovery of its hostages, a blockade of Gaza, and surgical destruction of Hamas capability.

    Palestinian supporters must call for the immediate release of hostages, condemn Hamas, and call for the resumption of democracy in Gaza.

    Of course, I am a centrist dad, so these things are not going to happen. I agree it’s a bugger’s muddle, which is why by the way I kind of refuse to condemn those calling at present for a ceasefire.
    Two ways of solving problems.

    One is to have a map from here to the destination. The other is to have a vague idea of where the destination is, but basically look in front of you and do what seems to be the best choice of the immediate options available, then pause and reorientate and repeat.

    I've been musing on it in the context of sixth formers failing to do physics questions, but it's probably true more widely. It's usually best to have an advance plan all the way to the destination, but what do we do when that plan doesn't exist? We bumble, wander, try low-cost bets to see what happens. And usually, that gets us somewhere OK.

    So, right now, the realistic choices for Israel are to continue their current actions, or in some sense to pause or turn down their intensity, or to go in harder.

    Which of those is really going to give them the best odds of achieving what they want? Not sure that it's their current path. One of the criteria for a just war is that it has a reasonable chance of success.
    We know what Hamas's ideal destination is: no Israel.
    And for many on the Israeli Right, the ideal destination is no Arabs anywhere in Israel proper OR the Territories.
    'many' = 'a tiny few'
    If he'd said 'many on the Israeli right want to incorporate the West Bank into Israel and make Gaza uninhabitable,' however, he wouldn't have been far wrong.

    We may be watching it happen over the next few months.
    At some stage, I wonder if we need to stop giving Likud the cover of being called “on the right” as if they are a mainstream western party. “Hardline nationalist” seems fair.
    Likud are the direct descendants of Irgun, the terrorist organisation behind the bombing of the King David Hotel. Ancient history of course, but in 2006 Netanyahu described it as a “legitimate act”.

    Israel has basically been a Likud-run state for 20 years.
    PR's wonderful, isn't it?

    Your post is more or less correct, of course, but that 20 year period does include Likud co-founder Ariel Sharon's complete disengagement from Gaza in 2005 - a move that cost him and his party a huge amount, politically and personally.

    Sharon staked his reputation on the Gaza disengagement being a huge step towards long term peace, on the basis that it would be that much harder for Hamas and the other terror groups in Gaza to recruit, if there was no obvious enemy to fight against, and if Israel was seen to be providing water, jobs and other economic resources to the Strip. That theory has now been tested to destruction and been found severely wanting.
    Sharon was very brave to support Gaza disengagement.

    But let’s remember Sharon’s long career, including his responsibility for various civilian massacres when commanding Unit 101 for the IDF, and his championing of Israeli settlement in the West Bank.

    The problem with this whole situation is that very much, both sides are shits.

    My sympathies are with the Israeli left, and the even smaller number of Palestinians democrats.
    I think it is worth remembering Sharon was playing a very deep game in Gaza. It wasn't just, or even especially, that it would be a long step towards peace. It was to make annexing the West Bank (which is what he really wanted) easier by dividing the Palestinian Territories.

    Even as he ordered the settlers out of Gaza, he was authorising more settlements in the West Bank.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,903

    kinabalu said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    I'll be voting Labour but I'm hoping this might be a wake up call. I don't want a Labour leader drifting in the slipstream of the Tories on the presumption that they'll lose because they're crap. I was a big fan of Blair because until Iraq I always felt his instincts were sound. I'm really having my doubts about Starmer.
    Doubts because of Gaza or more generally?
    I agree with Roger, basically more generally, but Gaza has focused my doubts. I’m tempted again by the LibDems, but my vote will probably be tactical.
    Tactical makes sense imo. I think I'd do that if necessary for the seat I'm in.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,676
    In 1947-48 when it was fighting to establish the state, Israel realised it was winning and hence thought fuck it let's look at that greater Israel.

    Supporters of Israel say in war, and especially in an existential war, land grabs are part and parcel of conflict as they have been throughout history all over the world.

    Critics of Israel say Nakba.

    I wonder if we are at an analogous stage now whereby Israel might just think fuck it we'll take the West Bank too.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,652

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    It was inevitable the moment always wrong Leon called it the worst reshuffle in history.

    My legendary modesty prevents me from pointing out that I said the return of Dave would lead to a Tory boost.
    I was delighted when call me Dave came back. Could only be good.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,660
    Sean_F said:

    Endillion said:

    biggles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    Those middling people, who want to support good people on all sides, the state of Israel's right to exist without the threat of massacre or holocaust and the Palestinian's right to an autonomous state struggle with these questions, and find few answers from polemics of any sort:

    What is the best policy for supporting peace loving people on all sides

    How should Israel have responded instead if you oppose what they are doing

    What is the best policy for Palestinians who do want their autonomy and also recognise Israel's rights.
    My personal policy is that Israel must simultaneously make diplomatic overtures in support of a two-state solution, while focusing its military ambitions on recovery of its hostages, a blockade of Gaza, and surgical destruction of Hamas capability.

    Palestinian supporters must call for the immediate release of hostages, condemn Hamas, and call for the resumption of democracy in Gaza.

    Of course, I am a centrist dad, so these things are not going to happen. I agree it’s a bugger’s muddle, which is why by the way I kind of refuse to condemn those calling at present for a ceasefire.
    Two ways of solving problems.

    One is to have a map from here to the destination. The other is to have a vague idea of where the destination is, but basically look in front of you and do what seems to be the best choice of the immediate options available, then pause and reorientate and repeat.

    I've been musing on it in the context of sixth formers failing to do physics questions, but it's probably true more widely. It's usually best to have an advance plan all the way to the destination, but what do we do when that plan doesn't exist? We bumble, wander, try low-cost bets to see what happens. And usually, that gets us somewhere OK.

    So, right now, the realistic choices for Israel are to continue their current actions, or in some sense to pause or turn down their intensity, or to go in harder.

    Which of those is really going to give them the best odds of achieving what they want? Not sure that it's their current path. One of the criteria for a just war is that it has a reasonable chance of success.
    We know what Hamas's ideal destination is: no Israel.
    And for many on the Israeli Right, the ideal destination is no Arabs anywhere in Israel proper OR the Territories.
    'many' = 'a tiny few'
    If he'd said 'many on the Israeli right want to incorporate the West Bank into Israel and make Gaza uninhabitable,' however, he wouldn't have been far wrong.

    We may be watching it happen over the next few months.
    At some stage, I wonder if we need to stop giving Likud the cover of being called “on the right” as if they are a mainstream western party. “Hardline nationalist” seems fair.
    Likud are the direct descendants of Irgun, the terrorist organisation behind the bombing of the King David Hotel. Ancient history of course, but in 2006 Netanyahu described it as a “legitimate act”.

    Israel has basically been a Likud-run state for 20 years.
    PR's wonderful, isn't it?

    Your post is more or less correct, of course, but that 20 year period does include Likud co-founder Ariel Sharon's complete disengagement from Gaza in 2005 - a move that cost him and his party a huge amount, politically and personally.

    Sharon staked his reputation on the Gaza disengagement being a huge step towards long term peace, on the basis that it would be that much harder for Hamas and the other terror groups in Gaza to recruit, if there was no obvious enemy to fight against, and if Israel was seen to be providing water, jobs and other economic resources to the Strip. That theory has now been tested to destruction and been found severely wanting.
    Sharon was very brave to support Gaza disengagement.

    But let’s remember Sharon’s long career, including his responsibility for various civilian massacres when commanding Unit 101 for the IDF, and his championing of Israeli settlement in the West Bank.

    The problem with this whole situation is that very much, both sides are shits.

    My sympathies are with the Israeli left, and the even smaller number of Palestinians democrats.
    What’s agonising is that about 49% of Israelis would actually support a more or less decent government, but time and again, the shitbags get a tiny majority in the Knesset.
    I had a good chat with an Israeli tourist in Georgia - seemed to be a Sephardic Jew from one of the North African countries so not your classic liberal Ashkenazi Euro or American migrant - and it was pretty clear normal young people are in despair at the populist shits in power there.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,411
    ydoethur said:

    Endillion said:

    biggles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    Those middling people, who want to support good people on all sides, the state of Israel's right to exist without the threat of massacre or holocaust and the Palestinian's right to an autonomous state struggle with these questions, and find few answers from polemics of any sort:

    What is the best policy for supporting peace loving people on all sides

    How should Israel have responded instead if you oppose what they are doing

    What is the best policy for Palestinians who do want their autonomy and also recognise Israel's rights.
    My personal policy is that Israel must simultaneously make diplomatic overtures in support of a two-state solution, while focusing its military ambitions on recovery of its hostages, a blockade of Gaza, and surgical destruction of Hamas capability.

    Palestinian supporters must call for the immediate release of hostages, condemn Hamas, and call for the resumption of democracy in Gaza.

    Of course, I am a centrist dad, so these things are not going to happen. I agree it’s a bugger’s muddle, which is why by the way I kind of refuse to condemn those calling at present for a ceasefire.
    Two ways of solving problems.

    One is to have a map from here to the destination. The other is to have a vague idea of where the destination is, but basically look in front of you and do what seems to be the best choice of the immediate options available, then pause and reorientate and repeat.

    I've been musing on it in the context of sixth formers failing to do physics questions, but it's probably true more widely. It's usually best to have an advance plan all the way to the destination, but what do we do when that plan doesn't exist? We bumble, wander, try low-cost bets to see what happens. And usually, that gets us somewhere OK.

    So, right now, the realistic choices for Israel are to continue their current actions, or in some sense to pause or turn down their intensity, or to go in harder.

    Which of those is really going to give them the best odds of achieving what they want? Not sure that it's their current path. One of the criteria for a just war is that it has a reasonable chance of success.
    We know what Hamas's ideal destination is: no Israel.
    And for many on the Israeli Right, the ideal destination is no Arabs anywhere in Israel proper OR the Territories.
    'many' = 'a tiny few'
    If he'd said 'many on the Israeli right want to incorporate the West Bank into Israel and make Gaza uninhabitable,' however, he wouldn't have been far wrong.

    We may be watching it happen over the next few months.
    At some stage, I wonder if we need to stop giving Likud the cover of being called “on the right” as if they are a mainstream western party. “Hardline nationalist” seems fair.
    Likud are the direct descendants of Irgun, the terrorist organisation behind the bombing of the King David Hotel. Ancient history of course, but in 2006 Netanyahu described it as a “legitimate act”.

    Israel has basically been a Likud-run state for 20 years.
    PR's wonderful, isn't it?

    Your post is more or less correct, of course, but that 20 year period does include Likud co-founder Ariel Sharon's complete disengagement from Gaza in 2005 - a move that cost him and his party a huge amount, politically and personally.

    Sharon staked his reputation on the Gaza disengagement being a huge step towards long term peace, on the basis that it would be that much harder for Hamas and the other terror groups in Gaza to recruit, if there was no obvious enemy to fight against, and if Israel was seen to be providing water, jobs and other economic resources to the Strip. That theory has now been tested to destruction and been found severely wanting.
    Sharon was very brave to support Gaza disengagement.

    But let’s remember Sharon’s long career, including his responsibility for various civilian massacres when commanding Unit 101 for the IDF, and his championing of Israeli settlement in the West Bank.

    The problem with this whole situation is that very much, both sides are shits.

    My sympathies are with the Israeli left, and the even smaller number of Palestinians democrats.
    I think it is worth remembering Sharon was playing a very deep game in Gaza. It wasn't just, or even especially, that it would be a long step towards peace. It was to make annexing the West Bank (which is what he really wanted) easier by dividing the Palestinian Territories.

    Even as he ordered the settlers out of Gaza, he was authorising more settlements in the West Bank.
    “Deep”? It wasn’t exactly 3D chess. Give up what you don’t want and can’t keep to gain brownie points….

    Maybe in the context of the Middle East, where a policy decision that isn’t stupid and immediately self harming is a rarity…
  • Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    Keep Calmer and Vote Starmer!
    There was some bloke with as sign saying that. I guess it must have rusted away.
    You mean this one? Well, you can probably tell I'm not 100% happy with Sir Keir's stance on the Mid East, BUT, BUT, I still think in a UK context, the number one priority is to make sure we end Tory Rule at the next election. It has to be.

    I did indeed have that in mind. I'm just hoping that given enough opportunity you'll get away from it and post again the wonderful railways travelogues.

    Brent Cross West station is due to open in 3 weeks! The first four-platform station to open on National Rail since the new Bromsgrove in 2016.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,660

    kinabalu said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    I'll be voting Labour but I'm hoping this might be a wake up call. I don't want a Labour leader drifting in the slipstream of the Tories on the presumption that they'll lose because they're crap. I was a big fan of Blair because until Iraq I always felt his instincts were sound. I'm really having my doubts about Starmer.
    Doubts because of Gaza or more generally?
    I agree with Roger, basically more generally, but Gaza has focused my doubts. I’m tempted again by the LibDems, but my vote will probably be tactical.
    Hmm. Is it possible the Lib Dems might actually be picking up Labour voters on the basis of Gaza policy?

    I’ve long thought Layla Moran was a bit meh but she’s been excellent on this crisis. Pitch perfect in empathy for both sides and the realism of what’s happening. A member of her family was killed last week.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    TOPPING said:

    In 1947-48 when it was fighting to establish the state, Israel realised it was winning and hence thought fuck it let's look at that greater Israel.

    Supporters of Israel say in war, and especially in an existential war, land grabs are part and parcel of conflict as they have been throughout history all over the world.

    Critics of Israel say Nakba.

    I wonder if we are at an analogous stage now whereby Israel might just think fuck it we'll take the West Bank too.

    If it did that not only would Israel be an international outcast, even the Biden administration would oppose occupation of the West Bank, it would also increase Palestinian terrorism against it tenfold
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,661

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    Keep Calmer and Vote Starmer!
    There was some bloke with as sign saying that. I guess it must have rusted away.
    You mean this one? Well, you can probably tell I'm not 100% happy with Sir Keir's stance on the Mid East, BUT, BUT, I still think in a UK context, the number one priority is to make sure we end Tory Rule at the next election. It has to be.

    I did indeed have that in mind. I'm just hoping that given enough opportunity you'll get away from it and post again the wonderful railways travelogues.

    Brent Cross West station is due to open in 3 weeks! The first four-platform station to open on National Rail since the new Bromsgrove in 2016.
    But really, didn't you at one time post some nice rambling travelling observations?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,139

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    Keep Calmer and Vote Starmer!
    There was some bloke with as sign saying that. I guess it must have rusted away.
    You mean this one? Well, you can probably tell I'm not 100% happy with Sir Keir's stance on the Mid East, BUT, BUT, I still think in a UK context, the number one priority is to make sure we end Tory Rule at the next election. It has to be.

    I did indeed have that in mind. I'm just hoping that given enough opportunity you'll get away from it and post again the wonderful railways travelogues.

    Brent Cross West station is due to open in 3 weeks! The first four-platform station to open on National Rail since the new Bromsgrove in 2016.
    To be joined in two years' time by another, Cambridge South.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,141
    I’d be very dubious of any IDF claims re hostages being killed by Hamas .

    It’s not in their interests to kill hostages as they are bargaining chips .
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,903

    kinabalu said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    I'll be voting Labour but I'm hoping this might be a wake up call. I don't want a Labour leader drifting in the slipstream of the Tories on the presumption that they'll lose because they're crap. I was a big fan of Blair because until Iraq I always felt his instincts were sound. I'm really having my doubts about Starmer.
    Doubts because of Gaza or more generally?
    Blair is apparently being suggested by the Israeli government as a “friendly” figure to head humanitarian aid efforts in Gaza…
    Perhaps he can team up with our new Foreign Secretary. The Boys are back in town.
  • The Lib Dems could win 30+ seats as things stand. The SNP could well drop below that, especially if thing go to court before the election. That much is in clear sight between here and the horizon. Just over the horizon is a small hill, the top of which can be seen from where we are now. This is what interests me more.

    The path that would take us to that hill is a continuation of the long slow decline in Tory polling. 2 years ago, the Tories were 10% higher than they are now. 4 years ago it was nearly 20%. With FPTP, if you drop below about 25%, you enter a zone where loose seats at a murderous rate for each point drop in polling. The last couple of weeks have been terrible for Tory polling. The average of the last 10 polls is 24.5% for the Tories.

    With just a little tactical voting, Electoral Calculus' voodoo suggests 100 Tory seats on current numbers. It would only take another 3% of voters switching from Con to Lab and the Tories drop to 38, vs 41 Lib Dems. That possibility is so far away it is almost hidden over the horizon. But it is there, tantalisingly just out of reach.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,028
    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    In 1947-48 when it was fighting to establish the state, Israel realised it was winning and hence thought fuck it let's look at that greater Israel.

    Supporters of Israel say in war, and especially in an existential war, land grabs are part and parcel of conflict as they have been throughout history all over the world.

    Critics of Israel say Nakba.

    I wonder if we are at an analogous stage now whereby Israel might just think fuck it we'll take the West Bank too.

    If it did that not only would Israel be an international outcast, even the Biden administration would oppose occupation of the West Bank, it would also increase Palestinian terrorism against it tenfold
    I have often thought the rather grim irony is if they *had* taken the West Bank in 1948 nobody would have stopped them and probably the situation would be rather easier now, given it's unlikely if Israel had held it for 75 years as part of Israel anyone would think of it as part of a possible Palestinian state except irredentists like Hamas who want the lot anyway.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,660
    edited November 2023
    I was reflecting this afternoon on the times in my adulthood when British life has been disrupted by things that in hindsight seem completely mad. Almost all were related to epidemics of some sort.

    - Not being able to eat beef on the bone because of BSE. Crazy, and almost forgotten now. Imagine life without rib of beef, or bone marrow or all those other accoutrements of 21st century beef life we take for granted
    - Piles of burning cattle corpses littering the fields of Britain, consumed in apocalyptic pyres to try to rid the country of foot and mouth. Weird to think back to that time
    - Obviously the Covid lockdowns
    - Curfews across most English cities as kids in summer 2011 went on a shopping spree with more emphasis on free audiovisual equipment than any political cause. The riots washed up as far as the bottom of our street, but nobody knew what they were rioting about
    - those days after 9/11 when we honestly thought Armageddon had started and viewed every low flying plane heading into LCY with terror

    Remarkable how much weirdness we’ve had in only a couple of decades.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269

    Matthew Syed comes out for fundamental asylum treaty reform in the ST today.

    As suggested by various PB'ers on here over the years.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    ydoethur said:

    Endillion said:

    biggles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    Those middling people, who want to support good people on all sides, the state of Israel's right to exist without the threat of massacre or holocaust and the Palestinian's right to an autonomous state struggle with these questions, and find few answers from polemics of any sort:

    What is the best policy for supporting peace loving people on all sides

    How should Israel have responded instead if you oppose what they are doing

    What is the best policy for Palestinians who do want their autonomy and also recognise Israel's rights.
    My personal policy is that Israel must simultaneously make diplomatic overtures in support of a two-state solution, while focusing its military ambitions on recovery of its hostages, a blockade of Gaza, and surgical destruction of Hamas capability.

    Palestinian supporters must call for the immediate release of hostages, condemn Hamas, and call for the resumption of democracy in Gaza.

    Of course, I am a centrist dad, so these things are not going to happen. I agree it’s a bugger’s muddle, which is why by the way I kind of refuse to condemn those calling at present for a ceasefire.
    Two ways of solving problems.

    One is to have a map from here to the destination. The other is to have a vague idea of where the destination is, but basically look in front of you and do what seems to be the best choice of the immediate options available, then pause and reorientate and repeat.

    I've been musing on it in the context of sixth formers failing to do physics questions, but it's probably true more widely. It's usually best to have an advance plan all the way to the destination, but what do we do when that plan doesn't exist? We bumble, wander, try low-cost bets to see what happens. And usually, that gets us somewhere OK.

    So, right now, the realistic choices for Israel are to continue their current actions, or in some sense to pause or turn down their intensity, or to go in harder.

    Which of those is really going to give them the best odds of achieving what they want? Not sure that it's their current path. One of the criteria for a just war is that it has a reasonable chance of success.
    We know what Hamas's ideal destination is: no Israel.
    And for many on the Israeli Right, the ideal destination is no Arabs anywhere in Israel proper OR the Territories.
    'many' = 'a tiny few'
    If he'd said 'many on the Israeli right want to incorporate the West Bank into Israel and make Gaza uninhabitable,' however, he wouldn't have been far wrong.

    We may be watching it happen over the next few months.
    At some stage, I wonder if we need to stop giving Likud the cover of being called “on the right” as if they are a mainstream western party. “Hardline nationalist” seems fair.
    Likud are the direct descendants of Irgun, the terrorist organisation behind the bombing of the King David Hotel. Ancient history of course, but in 2006 Netanyahu described it as a “legitimate act”.

    Israel has basically been a Likud-run state for 20 years.
    PR's wonderful, isn't it?

    Your post is more or less correct, of course, but that 20 year period does include Likud co-founder Ariel Sharon's complete disengagement from Gaza in 2005 - a move that cost him and his party a huge amount, politically and personally.

    Sharon staked his reputation on the Gaza disengagement being a huge step towards long term peace, on the basis that it would be that much harder for Hamas and the other terror groups in Gaza to recruit, if there was no obvious enemy to fight against, and if Israel was seen to be providing water, jobs and other economic resources to the Strip. That theory has now been tested to destruction and been found severely wanting.
    Sharon was very brave to support Gaza disengagement.

    But let’s remember Sharon’s long career, including his responsibility for various civilian massacres when commanding Unit 101 for the IDF, and his championing of Israeli settlement in the West Bank.

    The problem with this whole situation is that very much, both sides are shits.

    My sympathies are with the Israeli left, and the even smaller number of Palestinians democrats.
    I think it is worth remembering Sharon was playing a very deep game in Gaza. It wasn't just, or even especially, that it would be a long step towards peace. It was to make annexing the West Bank (which is what he really wanted) easier by dividing the Palestinian Territories.

    Even as he ordered the settlers out of Gaza, he was authorising more settlements in the West Bank.
    “Deep”? It wasn’t exactly 3D chess. Give up what you don’t want and can’t keep to gain brownie points….

    Maybe in the context of the Middle East, where a policy decision that isn’t stupid and immediately self harming is a rarity…
    As I said, it has very much turned out to be self-harming in the long run. The October 7 atrocities could never have been carried out from the West Bank - even thought the Palestinians there are far more numerous, and carry just as much hatred towards Jews - because Israel has such a strong military and police presence there, which limits the operational effectiveness of groups such as Hamas.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    Smart51 said:

    The Lib Dems could win 30+ seats as things stand. The SNP could well drop below that, especially if thing go to court before the election. That much is in clear sight between here and the horizon. Just over the horizon is a small hill, the top of which can be seen from where we are now. This is what interests me more.

    The path that would take us to that hill is a continuation of the long slow decline in Tory polling. 2 years ago, the Tories were 10% higher than they are now. 4 years ago it was nearly 20%. With FPTP, if you drop below about 25%, you enter a zone where loose seats at a murderous rate for each point drop in polling. The last couple of weeks have been terrible for Tory polling. The average of the last 10 polls is 24.5% for the Tories.

    With just a little tactical voting, Electoral Calculus' voodoo suggests 100 Tory seats on current numbers. It would only take another 3% of voters switching from Con to Lab and the Tories drop to 38, vs 41 Lib Dems. That possibility is so far away it is almost hidden over the horizon. But it is there, tantalisingly just out of reach.

    Yet Opinium yesterday has the Tories back up to 193 seats, ie above 1997 and 2001 levels and not far off 2005 levels
    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=27&LAB=40&LIB=12&Reform=9&Green=6&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=19.5&SCOTLAB=33.5&SCOTLIB=5.5&SCOTReform=1&SCOTGreen=2.5&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=34&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,284

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    Keep Calmer and Vote Starmer!
    There was some bloke with as sign saying that. I guess it must have rusted away.
    You mean this one? Well, you can probably tell I'm not 100% happy with Sir Keir's stance on the Mid East, BUT, BUT, I still think in a UK context, the number one priority is to make sure we end Tory Rule at the next election. It has to be.

    I did indeed have that in mind. I'm just hoping that given enough opportunity you'll get away from it and post again the wonderful railways travelogues.

    Brent Cross West station is due to open in 3 weeks! The first four-platform station to open on National Rail since the new Bromsgrove in 2016.
    To be joined in two years' time by another, Cambridge South.
    There’s a new station being built in Chelmsford, too. To serve the big new estate to the North of the city.
  • Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    Keep Calmer and Vote Starmer!
    There was some bloke with as sign saying that. I guess it must have rusted away.
    You mean this one? Well, you can probably tell I'm not 100% happy with Sir Keir's stance on the Mid East, BUT, BUT, I still think in a UK context, the number one priority is to make sure we end Tory Rule at the next election. It has to be.

    I did indeed have that in mind. I'm just hoping that given enough opportunity you'll get away from it and post again the wonderful railways travelogues.

    Brent Cross West station is due to open in 3 weeks! The first four-platform station to open on National Rail since the new Bromsgrove in 2016.
    But really, didn't you at one time post some nice rambling travelling observations?
    Well, I completed the National Rail network in July last year. Since then I've done the West Midlands Metro extensions to Edgbaston and Wolverhampton Station, Edinburgh Trams to Newhaven (Leith), the Swanage Railway link to Wareham, and the Luton DART transit.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,676
    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    In 1947-48 when it was fighting to establish the state, Israel realised it was winning and hence thought fuck it let's look at that greater Israel.

    Supporters of Israel say in war, and especially in an existential war, land grabs are part and parcel of conflict as they have been throughout history all over the world.

    Critics of Israel say Nakba.

    I wonder if we are at an analogous stage now whereby Israel might just think fuck it we'll take the West Bank too.

    If it did that not only would Israel be an international outcast, even the Biden administration would oppose occupation of the West Bank, it would also increase Palestinian terrorism against it tenfold
    Maybe. Maybe not - the Biden bit. The rest? I'm not sure they care that much. Another few weeks of this - and there will be another few weeks of it - and they will have arrived at international outcast anyway.

    Much more of it and they might even lose Sunil's support.
  • HYUFD said:

    Smart51 said:

    The Lib Dems could win 30+ seats as things stand. The SNP could well drop below that, especially if thing go to court before the election. That much is in clear sight between here and the horizon. Just over the horizon is a small hill, the top of which can be seen from where we are now. This is what interests me more.

    The path that would take us to that hill is a continuation of the long slow decline in Tory polling. 2 years ago, the Tories were 10% higher than they are now. 4 years ago it was nearly 20%. With FPTP, if you drop below about 25%, you enter a zone where loose seats at a murderous rate for each point drop in polling. The last couple of weeks have been terrible for Tory polling. The average of the last 10 polls is 24.5% for the Tories.

    With just a little tactical voting, Electoral Calculus' voodoo suggests 100 Tory seats on current numbers. It would only take another 3% of voters switching from Con to Lab and the Tories drop to 38, vs 41 Lib Dems. That possibility is so far away it is almost hidden over the horizon. But it is there, tantalisingly just out of reach.

    Yet Opinium yesterday has the Tories back up to 193 seats, ie above 1997 and 2001 levels and not far off 2005 levels
    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=27&LAB=40&LIB=12&Reform=9&Green=6&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=19.5&SCOTLAB=33.5&SCOTLIB=5.5&SCOTReform=1&SCOTGreen=2.5&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=34&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
    Sure, I'm not saying it is likely, just that it is a spectre that will haunt the Tories if they continue to let things get worse.
  • The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    The chaotic incompetence that missed a massive terrorist attack across their border has continued in Israel crossing back over the border to revenge themselves. They don’t seem to have clear aims aside from destroying Hamas as a threat (which thus far they’re making a crap job of), they’ve managed to lose a ton of international support since 7th October and the assault on the Al-Shifa hospital seems an absolute shit show.

    Nice work Bibi.
  • Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    Keep Calmer and Vote Starmer!
    There was some bloke with as sign saying that. I guess it must have rusted away.
    You mean this one? Well, you can probably tell I'm not 100% happy with Sir Keir's stance on the Mid East, BUT, BUT, I still think in a UK context, the number one priority is to make sure we end Tory Rule at the next election. It has to be.

    I did indeed have that in mind. I'm just hoping that given enough opportunity you'll get away from it and post again the wonderful railways travelogues.

    Brent Cross West station is due to open in 3 weeks! The first four-platform station to open on National Rail since the new Bromsgrove in 2016.
    To be joined in two years' time by another, Cambridge South.
    There’s a new station being built in Chelmsford, too. To serve the big new estate to the North of the city.
    Beaulieu Park - station construction delayed considerably!
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    ydoethur said:

    Endillion said:

    biggles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    Those middling people, who want to support good people on all sides, the state of Israel's right to exist without the threat of massacre or holocaust and the Palestinian's right to an autonomous state struggle with these questions, and find few answers from polemics of any sort:

    What is the best policy for supporting peace loving people on all sides

    How should Israel have responded instead if you oppose what they are doing

    What is the best policy for Palestinians who do want their autonomy and also recognise Israel's rights.
    My personal policy is that Israel must simultaneously make diplomatic overtures in support of a two-state solution, while focusing its military ambitions on recovery of its hostages, a blockade of Gaza, and surgical destruction of Hamas capability.

    Palestinian supporters must call for the immediate release of hostages, condemn Hamas, and call for the resumption of democracy in Gaza.

    Of course, I am a centrist dad, so these things are not going to happen. I agree it’s a bugger’s muddle, which is why by the way I kind of refuse to condemn those calling at present for a ceasefire.
    Two ways of solving problems.

    One is to have a map from here to the destination. The other is to have a vague idea of where the destination is, but basically look in front of you and do what seems to be the best choice of the immediate options available, then pause and reorientate and repeat.

    I've been musing on it in the context of sixth formers failing to do physics questions, but it's probably true more widely. It's usually best to have an advance plan all the way to the destination, but what do we do when that plan doesn't exist? We bumble, wander, try low-cost bets to see what happens. And usually, that gets us somewhere OK.

    So, right now, the realistic choices for Israel are to continue their current actions, or in some sense to pause or turn down their intensity, or to go in harder.

    Which of those is really going to give them the best odds of achieving what they want? Not sure that it's their current path. One of the criteria for a just war is that it has a reasonable chance of success.
    We know what Hamas's ideal destination is: no Israel.
    And for many on the Israeli Right, the ideal destination is no Arabs anywhere in Israel proper OR the Territories.
    'many' = 'a tiny few'
    If he'd said 'many on the Israeli right want to incorporate the West Bank into Israel and make Gaza uninhabitable,' however, he wouldn't have been far wrong.

    We may be watching it happen over the next few months.
    At some stage, I wonder if we need to stop giving Likud the cover of being called “on the right” as if they are a mainstream western party. “Hardline nationalist” seems fair.
    Likud are the direct descendants of Irgun, the terrorist organisation behind the bombing of the King David Hotel. Ancient history of course, but in 2006 Netanyahu described it as a “legitimate act”.

    Israel has basically been a Likud-run state for 20 years.
    PR's wonderful, isn't it?

    Your post is more or less correct, of course, but that 20 year period does include Likud co-founder Ariel Sharon's complete disengagement from Gaza in 2005 - a move that cost him and his party a huge amount, politically and personally.

    Sharon staked his reputation on the Gaza disengagement being a huge step towards long term peace, on the basis that it would be that much harder for Hamas and the other terror groups in Gaza to recruit, if there was no obvious enemy to fight against, and if Israel was seen to be providing water, jobs and other economic resources to the Strip. That theory has now been tested to destruction and been found severely wanting.
    Sharon was very brave to support Gaza disengagement.

    But let’s remember Sharon’s long career, including his responsibility for various civilian massacres when commanding Unit 101 for the IDF, and his championing of Israeli settlement in the West Bank.

    The problem with this whole situation is that very much, both sides are shits.

    My sympathies are with the Israeli left, and the even smaller number of Palestinians democrats.
    I think it is worth remembering Sharon was playing a very deep game in Gaza. It wasn't just, or even especially, that it would be a long step towards peace. It was to make annexing the West Bank (which is what he really wanted) easier by dividing the Palestinian Territories.

    Even as he ordered the settlers out of Gaza, he was authorising more settlements in the West Bank.
    I'm sorry, but that is complete bollocks. Almost no-one in Israel supports West Bank annexation - and certainly the Right do not - because the demographic implications lead long term to the destruction of the state of Israel. Netanyahu's goal in supporting settler movements is to create enough facts on the ground to render the negotiations required for a two state solution functionally impossible, and hence force the international community to come up with a plan that might actually work.

    Which, in practice, probably means the Arab world stepping up and offering resettlement for those in the West Bank refugee camps.
  • Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    ·
    5h
    New NBC News national poll (11/10-14)

    General Election:
    Trump 46%
    Biden 44%
  • Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    From early 2019 through today, we have now polled a Trump/Biden match-up 16 times. This is the first one of them to show Trump ahead.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1726241766955790746
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,676

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    The chaotic incompetence that missed a massive terrorist attack across their border has continued in Israel crossing back over the border to revenge themselves. They don’t seem to have clear aims aside from destroying Hamas as a threat (which thus far they’re making a crap job of), they’ve managed to lose a ton of international support since 7th October and the assault on the Al-Shifa hospital seems an absolute shit show.

    Nice work Bibi.
    LOL you are actually blaming Netanyahu for October 7th.

    Asking for it were they?
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,407
    TimS said:

    I was reflecting this afternoon on the times in my adulthood when British life has been disrupted by things that in hindsight seem completely mad. Almost all were related to epidemics of some sort.

    - Not being able to eat beef on the bone because of BSE. Crazy, and almost forgotten now. Imagine life without rib of beef, or bone marrow or all those other accoutrements of 21st century beef life we take for granted
    - Piles of burning cattle corpses littering the fields of Britain, consumed in apocalyptic pyres to try to rid the country of foot and mouth. Weird to think back to that time
    - Obviously the Covid lockdowns
    - Curfews across most English cities as kids in summer 2011 went on a shopping spree with more emphasis on free audiovisual equipment than any political cause. The riots washed up as far as the bottom of our street, but nobody knew what they were rioting about
    - those days after 9/11 when we honestly thought Armageddon had started and viewed every low flying plane heading into LCY with terror

    Remarkable how much weirdness we’ve had in only a couple of decades.

    Also remarkable how easy it is to forget these things - until your post I forgot about the ban on beef on the bone and the 2011 riots. 9/11 only really is in consciousness in any large way because of its presence in films/dramas and documentaries. Foot and mouth is something it’s hard to remember off the top of the head if ten years ago, twenty or thirty.

    Covid will become a fuzzy memory in ten years where everyone just has their war stories real or imagined. People will talk about that war with Ukraine and Russia and one of those big flare ups in the Middle East.

    New big stories and disasters will take their places.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,028
    edited November 2023
    Endillion said:

    ydoethur said:

    Endillion said:

    biggles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    Those middling people, who want to support good people on all sides, the state of Israel's right to exist without the threat of massacre or holocaust and the Palestinian's right to an autonomous state struggle with these questions, and find few answers from polemics of any sort:

    What is the best policy for supporting peace loving people on all sides

    How should Israel have responded instead if you oppose what they are doing

    What is the best policy for Palestinians who do want their autonomy and also recognise Israel's rights.
    My personal policy is that Israel must simultaneously make diplomatic overtures in support of a two-state solution, while focusing its military ambitions on recovery of its hostages, a blockade of Gaza, and surgical destruction of Hamas capability.

    Palestinian supporters must call for the immediate release of hostages, condemn Hamas, and call for the resumption of democracy in Gaza.

    Of course, I am a centrist dad, so these things are not going to happen. I agree it’s a bugger’s muddle, which is why by the way I kind of refuse to condemn those calling at present for a ceasefire.
    Two ways of solving problems.

    One is to have a map from here to the destination. The other is to have a vague idea of where the destination is, but basically look in front of you and do what seems to be the best choice of the immediate options available, then pause and reorientate and repeat.

    I've been musing on it in the context of sixth formers failing to do physics questions, but it's probably true more widely. It's usually best to have an advance plan all the way to the destination, but what do we do when that plan doesn't exist? We bumble, wander, try low-cost bets to see what happens. And usually, that gets us somewhere OK.

    So, right now, the realistic choices for Israel are to continue their current actions, or in some sense to pause or turn down their intensity, or to go in harder.

    Which of those is really going to give them the best odds of achieving what they want? Not sure that it's their current path. One of the criteria for a just war is that it has a reasonable chance of success.
    We know what Hamas's ideal destination is: no Israel.
    And for many on the Israeli Right, the ideal destination is no Arabs anywhere in Israel proper OR the Territories.
    'many' = 'a tiny few'
    If he'd said 'many on the Israeli right want to incorporate the West Bank into Israel and make Gaza uninhabitable,' however, he wouldn't have been far wrong.

    We may be watching it happen over the next few months.
    At some stage, I wonder if we need to stop giving Likud the cover of being called “on the right” as if they are a mainstream western party. “Hardline nationalist” seems fair.
    Likud are the direct descendants of Irgun, the terrorist organisation behind the bombing of the King David Hotel. Ancient history of course, but in 2006 Netanyahu described it as a “legitimate act”.

    Israel has basically been a Likud-run state for 20 years.
    PR's wonderful, isn't it?

    Your post is more or less correct, of course, but that 20 year period does include Likud co-founder Ariel Sharon's complete disengagement from Gaza in 2005 - a move that cost him and his party a huge amount, politically and personally.

    Sharon staked his reputation on the Gaza disengagement being a huge step towards long term peace, on the basis that it would be that much harder for Hamas and the other terror groups in Gaza to recruit, if there was no obvious enemy to fight against, and if Israel was seen to be providing water, jobs and other economic resources to the Strip. That theory has now been tested to destruction and been found severely wanting.
    Sharon was very brave to support Gaza disengagement.

    But let’s remember Sharon’s long career, including his responsibility for various civilian massacres when commanding Unit 101 for the IDF, and his championing of Israeli settlement in the West Bank.

    The problem with this whole situation is that very much, both sides are shits.

    My sympathies are with the Israeli left, and the even smaller number of Palestinians democrats.
    I think it is worth remembering Sharon was playing a very deep game in Gaza. It wasn't just, or even especially, that it would be a long step towards peace. It was to make annexing the West Bank (which is what he really wanted) easier by dividing the Palestinian Territories.

    Even as he ordered the settlers out of Gaza, he was authorising more settlements in the West Bank.
    I'm sorry, but that is complete bollocks. Almost no-one in Israel supports West Bank annexation - and certainly the Right do not - because the demographic implications lead long term to the destruction of the state of Israel. Netanyahu's goal in supporting settler movements is to create enough facts on the ground to render the negotiations required for a two state solution functionally impossible, and hence force the international community to come up with a plan that might actually work.

    Which, in practice, probably means the Arab world stepping up and offering resettlement for those in the West Bank refugee camps.
    I've been to both, and that's not what they tell me.

    Edit - as for your last two sentences, they're contradictory to the point of being completely nonsensical. You're saying the solution is to remove the Palestinians and then somehow that will mean Israel won't annex the West Bank because...reasons?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    They have recovered a number of bodies of hostages. The latest was of a young Tanzanian aged 22 who came to Israel to learn about agriculture. May he rest in peace.

    A reminder that it was not just Israelis or Jews who were killed or taken hostage by Hamas. You don't hear much about them.
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,720
    Serious questions for those international organisations in Gaza who denied/questioned Hamas were operating out of Al Shifa Hospital given this was apparently going on in broad daylight.

    https://twitter.com/talschneider/status/1726310948737077707
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974

    Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    ·
    5h
    New NBC News national poll (11/10-14)

    General Election:
    Trump 46%
    Biden 44%

    46% for Trump is actually less than the 46.8% he got in 2020, it is the unpopularity of the Biden administration putting him ahead not any love for him (and that is before the results of his civil and criminal trials)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,411
    nico679 said:

    I’d be very dubious of any IDF claims re hostages being killed by Hamas .

    It’s not in their interests to kill hostages as they are bargaining chips .

    Yet, Hamas has killed hostages in the past.

    Among other things, you are assuming uniformity and rationality. Organisations like Hamas have lethal internal power struggles nearly all the time and the people who win those struggles are not always disciples of Adlai Stevenson
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:

    TOPPING said:

    In 1947-48 when it was fighting to establish the state, Israel realised it was winning and hence thought fuck it let's look at that greater Israel.

    Supporters of Israel say in war, and especially in an existential war, land grabs are part and parcel of conflict as they have been throughout history all over the world.

    Critics of Israel say Nakba.

    I wonder if we are at an analogous stage now whereby Israel might just think fuck it we'll take the West Bank too.

    If it did that not only would Israel be an international outcast, even the Biden administration would oppose occupation of the West Bank, it would also increase Palestinian terrorism against it tenfold
    Maybe. Maybe not - the Biden bit. The rest? I'm not sure they care that much. Another few weeks of this - and there will be another few weeks of it - and they will have arrived at international outcast anyway.

    Much more of it and they might even lose Sunil's support.
    Even if they willing to take being international pariahs, are they willing to take even more Israelis being taken hostage and even more militant Palestinian terrorist attacks? There is no point trying to eliminate Hamas in Gaza if you just increase Palestinan terrorism by trying to occupy the West Bank as well as Gaza
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    nico679 said:

    I’d be very dubious of any IDF claims re hostages being killed by Hamas .

    It’s not in their interests to kill hostages as they are bargaining chips .

    Some were old and taken without medicine, others were injured. There is a strong likelihood that some will have died of their injuries.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,139

    Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    Keep Calmer and Vote Starmer!
    There was some bloke with as sign saying that. I guess it must have rusted away.
    You mean this one? Well, you can probably tell I'm not 100% happy with Sir Keir's stance on the Mid East, BUT, BUT, I still think in a UK context, the number one priority is to make sure we end Tory Rule at the next election. It has to be.

    I did indeed have that in mind. I'm just hoping that given enough opportunity you'll get away from it and post again the wonderful railways travelogues.

    Brent Cross West station is due to open in 3 weeks! The first four-platform station to open on National Rail since the new Bromsgrove in 2016.
    To be joined in two years' time by another, Cambridge South.
    There’s a new station being built in Chelmsford, too. To serve the big new estate to the North of the city.
    Ah, I'd sorta forgotten about that. Three platforms apparently; the same as the recent Cambridge North.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,598

    kinabalu said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    I'll be voting Labour but I'm hoping this might be a wake up call. I don't want a Labour leader drifting in the slipstream of the Tories on the presumption that they'll lose because they're crap. I was a big fan of Blair because until Iraq I always felt his instincts were sound. I'm really having my doubts about Starmer.
    Doubts because of Gaza or more generally?
    I agree with Roger, basically more generally, but Gaza has focused my doubts. I’m tempted again by the LibDems, but my vote will probably be tactical.
    That could well be said of some folk in Scotland, too, though there they have the SNP to choose from as well. Add that to SKS's adoption of other Tory policies, concealed at the Rutherglen by election by the candidate (pretending to be?) adopting diametrically opposing ones which happened to be SNP ones.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 5,843

    Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    From early 2019 through today, we have now polled a Trump/Biden match-up 16 times. This is the first one of them to show Trump ahead.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1726241766955790746

    Then it I can’t work out, because it’s hard without being an American, is the likelihood of his legal problems rendering all of this irrelevant on the basis he won’t be able to stand. If that’s the case, there must be bags of value in the other Republican candidates, since there will need to be one.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,598
    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    On Indy I think the change is not the support for YES, but the sense of it as an urgent necessity rather than a vague but pleasing aspiration

    For a long time the Nats - brilliantly - kept dangling the YES Indy carrot like the donkey electorate was gonna eat it any moment. Now the donkey realises the carrot was a hologram, and any nice food is a long way down the road

    Sure, the donkey would still LIKE a juicy carrot, but the donkey has accepted that there are now more pressing needs, like eating some grass, getting down the road, maybe humping a sexy jackass in the next village

    So 45% support for YES no longer translates into anything like 45 points for the SNP, coz the SNP don’t have any fake carrots left, and the new SNP are also really quite shit, and resented for the whole carrot thing, and because donkey is bored of carrying them

    I reckon the Nats are more likely to go under 30 seats than stay over, so the LDs are probably, rightly, modest favorites in this market

    The 2014 referendum was not a hologram and nor was the demand for another one after the Brexit-fuelled Holyrood victory of the SNP on that specific platform.

    Suspect your analogy comes mainly from a desire to present Sindy supporting Scottish people as donkies.
    What? Of course 2014 was not a hologram. My point is that AFTER that vote the idea of an imminent new vote became increasingly fantastical, in reality, yet the SNP managed to persuade everyone, and keep persuading them, that Sindyref2 was just a few inches away. One more heave

    That illusion is shattered. Stop being stupid. You’re already quite boring. Stupid AS WELL would make you unreadable
    But you didn't say that. You just said they've been dangling their carrots "for a long time". If by this you specifically meant since 2014 well ok (ish) but how would we be expected to guess that?

    After all you used to bang on about 2014 being very recent. So recent that it would be absurd to even think about another referendum despite it being voted for!

    See? Hoist again, I'm afraid. Bamboozled by Kuntibula the Logic Monster.
    Also given that we are being held hostage , it would not matter if SNP got ZERO votes , we would still have to do something else.
    Like what though? It's hard to see a Sindy route which doesn't go via another referendum - and that's in the gift of Westminster.
    Not if you look at it on the union treaty rather than some English later confection in English Law.
    That would require UDI, which Westminster, the successor to the 1707 English and Scottish Parliaments, wouldn't grant either
    Holyrood is the successor to the 1707 Scottish Parliament. Look at th eproceedings of the first session of that then emphatically Unionist body.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    Carnyx said:

    kinabalu said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    I'll be voting Labour but I'm hoping this might be a wake up call. I don't want a Labour leader drifting in the slipstream of the Tories on the presumption that they'll lose because they're crap. I was a big fan of Blair because until Iraq I always felt his instincts were sound. I'm really having my doubts about Starmer.
    Doubts because of Gaza or more generally?
    I agree with Roger, basically more generally, but Gaza has focused my doubts. I’m tempted again by the LibDems, but my vote will probably be tactical.
    That could well be said of some folk in Scotland, too, though there they have the SNP to choose from as well. Add that to SKS's adoption of other Tory policies, concealed at the Rutherglen by election by the candidate (pretending to be?) adopting diametrically opposing ones which happened to be SNP ones.
    His adoption of 'Tory policies' has Scottish Labour on 32% in last week's Yougov Scottish subsample, which would be its highest Westminster voteshare since 2010 and the SNP on 37%, which would be its lowest voteshare since 2017. So doesn't seem to be doing them that much harm
    https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/TheTimes_VI_231115_W.pdf
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    It will be interesting to see the size of next week's March against Anti-Semitism in London.

    Will the numbers be as large as in the similar recent Paris march?
    Will any politicians and, if so, from which parties attend?
    Will celebrities concerned by racism be there?
    Who will the attendees be?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,675
    @DominicPenna
    👀 Ex-cabinet minister: “People are weighing up whether changing leader could make things any worse than it currently is”

    Tory MPs: “Anybody who has a brain knows that he cannot remain in place”

    “I wouldn’t be surprised if there were another challenge”

    https://x.com/DominicPenna/status/1726191666988740627?s=20
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    On Indy I think the change is not the support for YES, but the sense of it as an urgent necessity rather than a vague but pleasing aspiration

    For a long time the Nats - brilliantly - kept dangling the YES Indy carrot like the donkey electorate was gonna eat it any moment. Now the donkey realises the carrot was a hologram, and any nice food is a long way down the road

    Sure, the donkey would still LIKE a juicy carrot, but the donkey has accepted that there are now more pressing needs, like eating some grass, getting down the road, maybe humping a sexy jackass in the next village

    So 45% support for YES no longer translates into anything like 45 points for the SNP, coz the SNP don’t have any fake carrots left, and the new SNP are also really quite shit, and resented for the whole carrot thing, and because donkey is bored of carrying them

    I reckon the Nats are more likely to go under 30 seats than stay over, so the LDs are probably, rightly, modest favorites in this market

    The 2014 referendum was not a hologram and nor was the demand for another one after the Brexit-fuelled Holyrood victory of the SNP on that specific platform.

    Suspect your analogy comes mainly from a desire to present Sindy supporting Scottish people as donkies.
    What? Of course 2014 was not a hologram. My point is that AFTER that vote the idea of an imminent new vote became increasingly fantastical, in reality, yet the SNP managed to persuade everyone, and keep persuading them, that Sindyref2 was just a few inches away. One more heave

    That illusion is shattered. Stop being stupid. You’re already quite boring. Stupid AS WELL would make you unreadable
    But you didn't say that. You just said they've been dangling their carrots "for a long time". If by this you specifically meant since 2014 well ok (ish) but how would we be expected to guess that?

    After all you used to bang on about 2014 being very recent. So recent that it would be absurd to even think about another referendum despite it being voted for!

    See? Hoist again, I'm afraid. Bamboozled by Kuntibula the Logic Monster.
    Also given that we are being held hostage , it would not matter if SNP got ZERO votes , we would still have to do something else.
    Like what though? It's hard to see a Sindy route which doesn't go via another referendum - and that's in the gift of Westminster.
    Not if you look at it on the union treaty rather than some English later confection in English Law.
    That would require UDI, which Westminster, the successor to the 1707 English and Scottish Parliaments, wouldn't grant either
    Holyrood is the successor to the 1707 Scottish Parliament. Look at th eproceedings of the first session of that then emphatically Unionist body.
    It isn't, the original 1707 Scottish Parliament voted to dissolve itself into Westminster. Westminster then created Holyrood as a devolved Parliament for some Scottish domestic policy, whatever some sentimentalist MSPs in 1999 believed
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,544
    edited November 2023
    biggles said:

    Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    From early 2019 through today, we have now polled a Trump/Biden match-up 16 times. This is the first one of them to show Trump ahead.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1726241766955790746

    Then it I can’t work out, because it’s hard without being an American, is the likelihood of his legal problems rendering all of this irrelevant on the basis he won’t be able to stand. If that’s the case, there must be bags of value in the other Republican candidates, since there will need to be one.
    It's totally baffling. I get why Biden is unpopular, but Trump? Jeez.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,993
    ...
    TOPPING said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    The chaotic incompetence that missed a massive terrorist attack across their border has continued in Israel crossing back over the border to revenge themselves. They don’t seem to have clear aims aside from destroying Hamas as a threat (which thus far they’re making a crap job of), they’ve managed to lose a ton of international support since 7th October and the assault on the Al-Shifa hospital seems an absolute shit show.

    Nice work Bibi.
    LOL you are actually blaming Netanyahu for October 7th.

    Asking for it were they?
    What a foolish final statement.

    Hamas are a death cult that needs to be crushed, the 7th of October was at their whim. However the secret services and the IDF were asleep at the wheel. The focus was on the West Bank when it should have been on Gaza. The buck stops with Bibi.

    Subsequently Bibi has been rather casual with the hostages, as borne out by hostage families marching on Jerusalem. There has been little concern by Bibi for civilian collateral damage. Bibi doesn't like Palestinians, any Palestinians, not just the bad ones. When he's finished the death toll could be enormous.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    Scott_xP said:

    @DominicPenna
    👀 Ex-cabinet minister: “People are weighing up whether changing leader could make things any worse than it currently is”

    Tory MPs: “Anybody who has a brain knows that he cannot remain in place”

    “I wouldn’t be surprised if there were another challenge”

    https://x.com/DominicPenna/status/1726191666988740627?s=20

    Ex-cabinet minister (presumably Braverman) 'I'm free'.

    'Tory MPs' maybe Truss and Kruger
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,598
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    On Indy I think the change is not the support for YES, but the sense of it as an urgent necessity rather than a vague but pleasing aspiration

    For a long time the Nats - brilliantly - kept dangling the YES Indy carrot like the donkey electorate was gonna eat it any moment. Now the donkey realises the carrot was a hologram, and any nice food is a long way down the road

    Sure, the donkey would still LIKE a juicy carrot, but the donkey has accepted that there are now more pressing needs, like eating some grass, getting down the road, maybe humping a sexy jackass in the next village

    So 45% support for YES no longer translates into anything like 45 points for the SNP, coz the SNP don’t have any fake carrots left, and the new SNP are also really quite shit, and resented for the whole carrot thing, and because donkey is bored of carrying them

    I reckon the Nats are more likely to go under 30 seats than stay over, so the LDs are probably, rightly, modest favorites in this market

    The 2014 referendum was not a hologram and nor was the demand for another one after the Brexit-fuelled Holyrood victory of the SNP on that specific platform.

    Suspect your analogy comes mainly from a desire to present Sindy supporting Scottish people as donkies.
    What? Of course 2014 was not a hologram. My point is that AFTER that vote the idea of an imminent new vote became increasingly fantastical, in reality, yet the SNP managed to persuade everyone, and keep persuading them, that Sindyref2 was just a few inches away. One more heave

    That illusion is shattered. Stop being stupid. You’re already quite boring. Stupid AS WELL would make you unreadable
    But you didn't say that. You just said they've been dangling their carrots "for a long time". If by this you specifically meant since 2014 well ok (ish) but how would we be expected to guess that?

    After all you used to bang on about 2014 being very recent. So recent that it would be absurd to even think about another referendum despite it being voted for!

    See? Hoist again, I'm afraid. Bamboozled by Kuntibula the Logic Monster.
    Also given that we are being held hostage , it would not matter if SNP got ZERO votes , we would still have to do something else.
    Like what though? It's hard to see a Sindy route which doesn't go via another referendum - and that's in the gift of Westminster.
    Not if you look at it on the union treaty rather than some English later confection in English Law.
    That would require UDI, which Westminster, the successor to the 1707 English and Scottish Parliaments, wouldn't grant either
    Holyrood is the successor to the 1707 Scottish Parliament. Look at th eproceedings of the first session of that then emphatically Unionist body.
    It isn't, the original 1707 Scottish Parliament voted to dissolve itself into Westminster. Westminster then created Holyrood as a devolved Parliament for some Scottish domestic policy, whatever some sentimentalist MSPs in 1999 believed
    You're just a sentimentalist Tory, and your pronouncements have no meaning at all in modern politics.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,411

    biggles said:

    Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    From early 2019 through today, we have now polled a Trump/Biden match-up 16 times. This is the first one of them to show Trump ahead.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1726241766955790746

    Then it I can’t work out, because it’s hard without being an American, is the likelihood of his legal problems rendering all of this irrelevant on the basis he won’t be able to stand. If that’s the case, there must be bags of value in the other Republican candidates, since there will need to be one.
    It's totally baffling. I mean, I get why Biden is unpopular but Trump? Jeez.
    Most populists of Trumps ilk are like that - read the story of Boulanger or Peron and you see the same

    - intense popularity among some groups
    - no evident basis for that popularity
    - no real ability
    - etc
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,993
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    kinabalu said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    TimS said:

    Odd, looking at all the post reshuffle polls, to see an apparent trend of Labour down, Tories up a bit, Lib Dems up and Ref fairly flat. Wasn’t expecting that.

    Two fortuitous events. Ridding himself of Braverman gets rid of a nasty niff that's been hanging around the Tories since her appointment and Starmer's behaviour on Gaza. If a quarter of the parliamentary Party are sufficiently mad with him to risk their careers by voting against him just think what it must be like for his voters.

    Lets hope this isn't terminal. I wouldn't bet on it.
    Well, 'terminal' means 5 more years of Tory nastiness, ineptitude and scandal, so you need to suck it up pal and get back on board.
    I'll be voting Labour but I'm hoping this might be a wake up call. I don't want a Labour leader drifting in the slipstream of the Tories on the presumption that they'll lose because they're crap. I was a big fan of Blair because until Iraq I always felt his instincts were sound. I'm really having my doubts about Starmer.
    Doubts because of Gaza or more generally?
    I agree with Roger, basically more generally, but Gaza has focused my doubts. I’m tempted again by the LibDems, but my vote will probably be tactical.
    That could well be said of some folk in Scotland, too, though there they have the SNP to choose from as well. Add that to SKS's adoption of other Tory policies, concealed at the Rutherglen by election by the candidate (pretending to be?) adopting diametrically opposing ones which happened to be SNP ones.
    His adoption of 'Tory policies' has Scottish Labour on 32% in last week's Yougov Scottish subsample, which would be its highest Westminster voteshare since 2010 and the SNP on 37%, which would be its lowest voteshare since 2017. So doesn't seem to be doing them that much harm
    https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/TheTimes_VI_231115_W.pdf
    Beware the Scottish sub-sample.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,325
    edited November 2023
    edit
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 5,843
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @DominicPenna
    👀 Ex-cabinet minister: “People are weighing up whether changing leader could make things any worse than it currently is”

    Tory MPs: “Anybody who has a brain knows that he cannot remain in place”

    “I wouldn’t be surprised if there were another challenge”

    https://x.com/DominicPenna/status/1726191666988740627?s=20

    Ex-cabinet minister (presumably Braverman) 'I'm free'.

    'Tory MPs' maybe Truss and Kruger
    You must be about right surely? Surely Sunak’s biggest critics (other than the likes of Braverman and Truss) understand there is no good outcome to be had changing leader yet again.
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,720

    nico679 said:

    I’d be very dubious of any IDF claims re hostages being killed by Hamas .

    It’s not in their interests to kill hostages as they are bargaining chips .

    Yet, Hamas has killed hostages in the past.

    Among other things, you are assuming uniformity and rationality. Organisations like Hamas have lethal internal power struggles nearly all the time and the people who win those struggles are not always disciples of Adlai Stevenson
    'It's not in their interests to kill the hostages' is a very odd thing to claim when one of the most famous/infamous hostage situations in history ended with...errr... a Palestinian terrorist group massacring Israelis after they believed they were trapped (having already earlier killed hostages who were difficult to subdue and manage).
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,325
    Cyclefree said:

    Matthew Syed comes out for fundamental asylum treaty reform in the ST today.

    As suggested by various PB'ers on here over the years.
    Yes, it's needed, though there is approx nil chance of it getting done. The hard matter is the question of what it should say, what it would solve and how.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,250
    PBers are I think confused about Trump’s popularity.

    It is largely a vote against the centrist and possibly (from the vantage point of Hicksville, Arkansas) elitist status quo. It’s a vote against the New York Times, Black Lives Matter, and trans activism. It’s a vote against big banks, woke corporates, and globalisation.

    That Trump is a moral black hole is largely overlooked.
    He is seen as having the stones to fight back against the clerisy.

    Biden is also mildly unpopular. He is not given credit for the economic recovery because people are still stunned by the recent rise in the cost of living. And he is old, and feeble, and his son is a ne’er-do-well. He does not attract the ire of a Hillary Clinton or a Kamala Harris might, but he’s certainly not regarded as an ally of the white working class.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,325
    "Sunak could block Human Rights Act to force through Rwanda asylum plan"

    Guardian headline which would be true if "Could" were amended to "Could not".
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,250

    biggles said:

    Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    From early 2019 through today, we have now polled a Trump/Biden match-up 16 times. This is the first one of them to show Trump ahead.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1726241766955790746

    Then it I can’t work out, because it’s hard without being an American, is the likelihood of his legal problems rendering all of this irrelevant on the basis he won’t be able to stand. If that’s the case, there must be bags of value in the other Republican candidates, since there will need to be one.
    It's totally baffling. I mean, I get why Biden is unpopular but Trump? Jeez.
    Most populists of Trumps ilk are like that - read the story of Boulanger or Peron and you see the same

    - intense popularity among some groups
    - no evident basis for that popularity
    - no real ability
    - etc
    Ditto Farage, and Johnson.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,028
    algarkirk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Matthew Syed comes out for fundamental asylum treaty reform in the ST today.

    As suggested by various PB'ers on here over the years.
    Yes, it's needed, though there is approx nil chance of it getting done. The hard matter is the question of what it should say, what it would solve and how.
    Asylum reform could go wider.

    For example, how many lunatic asylums are needed to put divers members of our governing class in?
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,652
    Cyclefree said:

    nico679 said:

    I’d be very dubious of any IDF claims re hostages being killed by Hamas .

    It’s not in their interests to kill hostages as they are bargaining chips .

    Some were old and taken without medicine, others were injured. There is a strong likelihood that some will have died of their injuries.
    I wouldn't necessarily believe anything that was said by either side
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 5,843
    algarkirk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Matthew Syed comes out for fundamental asylum treaty reform in the ST today.

    As suggested by various PB'ers on here over the years.
    Yes, it's needed, though there is approx nil chance of it getting done. The hard matter is the question of what it should say, what it would solve and how.
    Agree. We had one shot at this, post WWII, when the big international agreements on these matters could be done in the shadow of what had just happened.

    Sadly, it takes an event like that, and I think we all hope there will never be another.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,654
    Cyclefree said:

    Matthew Syed comes out for fundamental asylum treaty reform in the ST today.

    As suggested by various PB'ers on here over the years.
    Yes a lot of it seemed very familiar including essentially repealing the right to asylum and the power to return those we don’t want to where they came from.

    But I suspect that this is because these are obvious and necessary steps, not because he is copying ideas off PB.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,139
    MJW said:

    nico679 said:

    I’d be very dubious of any IDF claims re hostages being killed by Hamas .

    It’s not in their interests to kill hostages as they are bargaining chips .

    Yet, Hamas has killed hostages in the past.

    Among other things, you are assuming uniformity and rationality. Organisations like Hamas have lethal internal power struggles nearly all the time and the people who win those struggles are not always disciples of Adlai Stevenson
    'It's not in their interests to kill the hostages' is a very odd thing to claim when one of the most famous/infamous hostage situations in history ended with...errr... a Palestinian terrorist group massacring Israelis after they believed they were trapped (having already earlier killed hostages who were difficult to subdue and manage).
    The sort of people who are willing to rape, maim, kill and kidnap men, women and children in a terrorist attack are really not, at heart, nice people who will think killing hostages is a step too far. They're not good guys.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,411

    PBers are I think confused about Trump’s popularity.

    It is largely a vote against the centrist and possibly (from the vantage point of Hicksville, Arkansas) elitist status quo. It’s a vote against the New York Times, Black Lives Matter, and trans activism. It’s a vote against big banks, woke corporates, and globalisation.

    That Trump is a moral black hole is largely overlooked.
    He is seen as having the stones to fight back against the clerisy.

    Biden is also mildly unpopular. He is not given credit for the economic recovery because people are still stunned by the recent rise in the cost of living. And he is old, and feeble, and his son is a ne’er-do-well. He does not attract the ire of a Hillary Clinton or a Kamala Harris might, but he’s certainly not regarded as an ally of the white working class.

    "He is seen as having the stones to fight back against the clerisy." - which is why a certain PBer was a fan for so long...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,676

    ...

    TOPPING said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    The chaotic incompetence that missed a massive terrorist attack across their border has continued in Israel crossing back over the border to revenge themselves. They don’t seem to have clear aims aside from destroying Hamas as a threat (which thus far they’re making a crap job of), they’ve managed to lose a ton of international support since 7th October and the assault on the Al-Shifa hospital seems an absolute shit show.

    Nice work Bibi.
    LOL you are actually blaming Netanyahu for October 7th.

    Asking for it were they?
    What a foolish final statement.

    Hamas are a death cult that needs to be crushed, the 7th of October was at their whim. However the secret services and the IDF were asleep at the wheel. The focus was on the West Bank when it should have been on Gaza. The buck stops with Bibi.

    Subsequently Bibi has been rather casual with the hostages, as borne out by hostage families marching on Jerusalem. There has been little concern by Bibi for civilian collateral damage. Bibi doesn't like Palestinians, any Palestinians, not just the bad ones. When he's finished the death toll could be enormous.
    Does being asleep at the wheel mean it was their fault.

    What about all those householders who are burgled while they are asleep in their beds.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,250
    Replacing Sunak would be an act of grotesque irresponsibility. He is totally shit of course, but there is no-one less shit who presents themselves as either a serious or election-winning candidate.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,028

    Replacing Sunak would be an act of grotesque irresponsibility. He is totally shit of course, but there is no-one less shit who presents themselves as either a serious or election-winning candidate.

    TBF, I don't think we really *want* the Tories to find an election wining candidate.
  • biggles said:

    Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    From early 2019 through today, we have now polled a Trump/Biden match-up 16 times. This is the first one of them to show Trump ahead.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1726241766955790746

    Then it I can’t work out, because it’s hard without being an American, is the likelihood of his legal problems rendering all of this irrelevant on the basis he won’t be able to stand. If that’s the case, there must be bags of value in the other Republican candidates, since there will need to be one.
    Re his legal issues, don't bet on it. The documents case will almost certainly be pushed back to post-the election. In Georgia, Fani Willis the DA is indicating heavily it will go past November 2024. In the NY case, Trump has just won a reversal of his gag order on the grounds it is unconstitutional, which - may - increase his chances of getting a mistrial. You are therefore looking at the Jack Smith Fed Prosecutor case.

    You also have to look at the politics of this. It's probably not a coincidence that the talk about prosecuting Trump ASAP have lessened as the poll numbers have shown this issues are not hurting him and may be helping him.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,250
    TOPPING said:

    ...

    TOPPING said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    The chaotic incompetence that missed a massive terrorist attack across their border has continued in Israel crossing back over the border to revenge themselves. They don’t seem to have clear aims aside from destroying Hamas as a threat (which thus far they’re making a crap job of), they’ve managed to lose a ton of international support since 7th October and the assault on the Al-Shifa hospital seems an absolute shit show.

    Nice work Bibi.
    LOL you are actually blaming Netanyahu for October 7th.

    Asking for it were they?
    What a foolish final statement.

    Hamas are a death cult that needs to be crushed, the 7th of October was at their whim. However the secret services and the IDF were asleep at the wheel. The focus was on the West Bank when it should have been on Gaza. The buck stops with Bibi.

    Subsequently Bibi has been rather casual with the hostages, as borne out by hostage families marching on Jerusalem. There has been little concern by Bibi for civilian collateral damage. Bibi doesn't like Palestinians, any Palestinians, not just the bad ones. When he's finished the death toll could be enormous.
    Does being asleep at the wheel mean it was their fault.

    What about all those householders who are burgled while they are asleep in their beds.
    A majority of Israelis seem to hold Bibi in part responsible for being “asleep at the wheel”, so you are - per usual on this subject - barking up the wrong tree.

    There ought to be a term for PB Israel ultras who are more ultra than the Israelis themselves.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,670
    ydoethur said:

    Replacing Sunak would be an act of grotesque irresponsibility. He is totally shit of course, but there is no-one less shit who presents themselves as either a serious or election-winning candidate.

    TBF, I don't think we really *want* the Tories to find an election wining candidate.
    "Election wining candidate" is Boris, surely?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,250

    biggles said:

    Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    From early 2019 through today, we have now polled a Trump/Biden match-up 16 times. This is the first one of them to show Trump ahead.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1726241766955790746

    Then it I can’t work out, because it’s hard without being an American, is the likelihood of his legal problems rendering all of this irrelevant on the basis he won’t be able to stand. If that’s the case, there must be bags of value in the other Republican candidates, since there will need to be one.
    Re his legal issues, don't bet on it. The documents case will almost certainly be pushed back to post-the election. In Georgia, Fani Willis the DA is indicating heavily it will go past November 2024. In the NY case, Trump has just won a reversal of his gag order on the grounds it is unconstitutional, which - may - increase his chances of getting a mistrial. You are therefore looking at the Jack Smith Fed Prosecutor case.

    You also have to look at the politics of this. It's probably not a coincidence that the talk about prosecuting Trump ASAP have lessened as the poll numbers have shown this issues are not hurting him and may be helping him.
    I, too, doubt that Trump’s legal issues will somehow prevent or thwart his candidacy.

    To the extent there is an establishment plot against Trump, they’ve kind of left it too late.

    As it happens, I don’t think there *is* an establishment plot against Trump, mores the pity. He’s a clear and present danger to the Republic.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,676

    TOPPING said:

    ...

    TOPPING said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    The chaotic incompetence that missed a massive terrorist attack across their border has continued in Israel crossing back over the border to revenge themselves. They don’t seem to have clear aims aside from destroying Hamas as a threat (which thus far they’re making a crap job of), they’ve managed to lose a ton of international support since 7th October and the assault on the Al-Shifa hospital seems an absolute shit show.

    Nice work Bibi.
    LOL you are actually blaming Netanyahu for October 7th.

    Asking for it were they?
    What a foolish final statement.

    Hamas are a death cult that needs to be crushed, the 7th of October was at their whim. However the secret services and the IDF were asleep at the wheel. The focus was on the West Bank when it should have been on Gaza. The buck stops with Bibi.

    Subsequently Bibi has been rather casual with the hostages, as borne out by hostage families marching on Jerusalem. There has been little concern by Bibi for civilian collateral damage. Bibi doesn't like Palestinians, any Palestinians, not just the bad ones. When he's finished the death toll could be enormous.
    Does being asleep at the wheel mean it was their fault.

    What about all those householders who are burgled while they are asleep in their beds.
    A majority of Israelis seem to hold Bibi in part responsible for being “asleep at the wheel”, so you are - per usual on this subject - barking up the wrong tree.

    There ought to be a term for PB Israel ultras who are more ultra than the Israelis themselves.
    Was October 7th the fault of Netanyahu.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,250
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    ...

    TOPPING said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    The chaotic incompetence that missed a massive terrorist attack across their border has continued in Israel crossing back over the border to revenge themselves. They don’t seem to have clear aims aside from destroying Hamas as a threat (which thus far they’re making a crap job of), they’ve managed to lose a ton of international support since 7th October and the assault on the Al-Shifa hospital seems an absolute shit show.

    Nice work Bibi.
    LOL you are actually blaming Netanyahu for October 7th.

    Asking for it were they?
    What a foolish final statement.

    Hamas are a death cult that needs to be crushed, the 7th of October was at their whim. However the secret services and the IDF were asleep at the wheel. The focus was on the West Bank when it should have been on Gaza. The buck stops with Bibi.

    Subsequently Bibi has been rather casual with the hostages, as borne out by hostage families marching on Jerusalem. There has been little concern by Bibi for civilian collateral damage. Bibi doesn't like Palestinians, any Palestinians, not just the bad ones. When he's finished the death toll could be enormous.
    Does being asleep at the wheel mean it was their fault.

    What about all those householders who are burgled while they are asleep in their beds.
    A majority of Israelis seem to hold Bibi in part responsible for being “asleep at the wheel”, so you are - per usual on this subject - barking up the wrong tree.

    There ought to be a term for PB Israel ultras who are more ultra than the Israelis themselves.
    Was October 7th the fault of Netanyahu.
    Not directly of course.
    But no doubt he holds responsibility for the lack of security against the attack, and indeed his political policy to support the funding of Hamas.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,670
    boulay said:

    TimS said:

    I was reflecting this afternoon on the times in my adulthood when British life has been disrupted by things that in hindsight seem completely mad. Almost all were related to epidemics of some sort.

    - Not being able to eat beef on the bone because of BSE. Crazy, and almost forgotten now. Imagine life without rib of beef, or bone marrow or all those other accoutrements of 21st century beef life we take for granted
    - Piles of burning cattle corpses littering the fields of Britain, consumed in apocalyptic pyres to try to rid the country of foot and mouth. Weird to think back to that time
    - Obviously the Covid lockdowns
    - Curfews across most English cities as kids in summer 2011 went on a shopping spree with more emphasis on free audiovisual equipment than any political cause. The riots washed up as far as the bottom of our street, but nobody knew what they were rioting about
    - those days after 9/11 when we honestly thought Armageddon had started and viewed every low flying plane heading into LCY with terror

    Remarkable how much weirdness we’ve had in only a couple of decades.

    Also remarkable how easy it is to forget these things - until your post I forgot about the ban on beef on the bone and the 2011 riots. 9/11 only really is in consciousness in any large way because of its presence in films/dramas and documentaries. Foot and mouth is something it’s hard to remember off the top of the head if ten years ago, twenty or thirty.

    Covid will become a fuzzy memory in ten years where everyone just has their war stories real or imagined. People will talk about that war with Ukraine and Russia and one of those big flare ups in the Middle East.

    New big stories and disasters will take their places.
    We'll always remember Liz though. And the epic What Three Words battle when the two armies misheard a word and ended up fighting themselves on opposite sides of the world.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    edited November 2023

    PBers are I think confused about Trump’s popularity.

    It is largely a vote against the centrist and possibly (from the vantage point of Hicksville, Arkansas) elitist status quo. It’s a vote against the New York Times, Black Lives Matter, and trans activism. It’s a vote against big banks, woke corporates, and globalisation.

    That Trump is a moral black hole is largely overlooked.
    He is seen as having the stones to fight back against the clerisy.

    Biden is also mildly unpopular. He is not given credit for the economic recovery because people are still stunned by the recent rise in the cost of living. And he is old, and feeble, and his son is a ne’er-do-well. He does not attract the ire of a Hillary Clinton or a Kamala Harris might, but he’s certainly not regarded as an ally of the white working class.

    Biden's current approval rating is just 39% on average, the only President since WW2 who got lower average approval at this stage of their Presidency was Carter. Trump was fractionally higher at 41% but neither he nor Carter were re elected.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/

    If it wasn't for the possibility of Trump being GOP nominee and jailed (or not being nominee and going Independent) Biden would be odds on to lose his re election bid whoever the GOP candidate is

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,028
    edited November 2023

    biggles said:

    Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    From early 2019 through today, we have now polled a Trump/Biden match-up 16 times. This is the first one of them to show Trump ahead.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1726241766955790746

    Then it I can’t work out, because it’s hard without being an American, is the likelihood of his legal problems rendering all of this irrelevant on the basis he won’t be able to stand. If that’s the case, there must be bags of value in the other Republican candidates, since there will need to be one.
    Re his legal issues, don't bet on it. The documents case will almost certainly be pushed back to post-the election. In Georgia, Fani Willis the DA is indicating heavily it will go past November 2024. In the NY case, Trump has just won a reversal of his gag order on the grounds it is unconstitutional, which - may - increase his chances of getting a mistrial. You are therefore looking at the Jack Smith Fed Prosecutor case.

    You also have to look at the politics of this. It's probably not a coincidence that the talk about prosecuting Trump ASAP have lessened as the poll numbers have shown this issues are not hurting him and may be helping him.
    He hasn't 'just won' a reversal of his gag order. It's been paused while the State Supreme Court assess it.

    That's also separate from the mistrial which ironically only Engoron can rule on (so he will not rule there has been, and in fact yesterday ruled there has not been).

    However, that's not likely to be an issue in his running for the Presidency although it may ultimately lead him to financial ruin.

    It's more interesting that (by rather circuitous reasoning) the Colorado judge ruled the President isn't an officer of the United States according to the framers of the amendment in question, but did note in passing that Trump was clearly guilty of insurrection.

    Far from dying down, what has happened is as these trials move into the preliminary court phase the newsworthiness becomes a little less. I suspect when he actually takes the stand he will find life - difficult.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,654

    MJW said:

    nico679 said:

    I’d be very dubious of any IDF claims re hostages being killed by Hamas .

    It’s not in their interests to kill hostages as they are bargaining chips .

    Yet, Hamas has killed hostages in the past.

    Among other things, you are assuming uniformity and rationality. Organisations like Hamas have lethal internal power struggles nearly all the time and the people who win those struggles are not always disciples of Adlai Stevenson
    'It's not in their interests to kill the hostages' is a very odd thing to claim when one of the most famous/infamous hostage situations in history ended with...errr... a Palestinian terrorist group massacring Israelis after they believed they were trapped (having already earlier killed hostages who were difficult to subdue and manage).
    The sort of people who are willing to rape, maim, kill and kidnap men, women and children in a terrorist attack are really not, at heart, nice people who will think killing hostages is a step too far. They're not good guys.
    These truths we hold to be self evident.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,974
    edited November 2023

    biggles said:

    Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    From early 2019 through today, we have now polled a Trump/Biden match-up 16 times. This is the first one of them to show Trump ahead.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1726241766955790746

    Then it I can’t work out, because it’s hard without being an American, is the likelihood of his legal problems rendering all of this irrelevant on the basis he won’t be able to stand. If that’s the case, there must be bags of value in the other Republican candidates, since there will need to be one.
    Re his legal issues, don't bet on it. The documents case will almost certainly be pushed back to post-the election. In Georgia, Fani Willis the DA is indicating heavily it will go past November 2024. In the NY case, Trump has just won a reversal of his gag order on the grounds it is unconstitutional, which - may - increase his chances of getting a mistrial. You are therefore looking at the Jack Smith Fed Prosecutor case.

    You also have to look at the politics of this. It's probably not a coincidence that the talk about prosecuting Trump ASAP have lessened as the poll numbers have shown this issues are not hurting him and may be helping him.
    I, too, doubt that Trump’s legal issues will somehow prevent or thwart his candidacy.

    To the extent there is an establishment plot against Trump, they’ve kind of left it too late.

    As it happens, I don’t think there *is* an establishment plot against Trump, mores the pity. He’s a clear and present danger to the Republic.
    The establishment of both parties, Clintons, Obama, Biden, Bushes, Romney, McConnell etc all hate Trump, as does most of Hollywood, the media, the DC civil service and CIA, lots of the big banks and corporations due to his isolationism, tariffs and protectionism, which is part of his appeal to the white working class.

    For them the multiple court cases against him is just further evidence of an establishment plot to stop him
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,654
    ydoethur said:

    biggles said:

    Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    From early 2019 through today, we have now polled a Trump/Biden match-up 16 times. This is the first one of them to show Trump ahead.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1726241766955790746

    Then it I can’t work out, because it’s hard without being an American, is the likelihood of his legal problems rendering all of this irrelevant on the basis he won’t be able to stand. If that’s the case, there must be bags of value in the other Republican candidates, since there will need to be one.
    Re his legal issues, don't bet on it. The documents case will almost certainly be pushed back to post-the election. In Georgia, Fani Willis the DA is indicating heavily it will go past November 2024. In the NY case, Trump has just won a reversal of his gag order on the grounds it is unconstitutional, which - may - increase his chances of getting a mistrial. You are therefore looking at the Jack Smith Fed Prosecutor case.

    You also have to look at the politics of this. It's probably not a coincidence that the talk about prosecuting Trump ASAP have lessened as the poll numbers have shown this issues are not hurting him and may be helping him.
    He hasn't 'just won' a reversal of his gag order. It's been paused while the State Supreme Court assess it.

    That's also separate from the mistrial which ironically only Engoron can rule on (so he will not rule there has been, and in fact yesterday ruled there has not been).

    However, that's not likely to be an issue in his running for the Presidency although it may ultimately lead him to financial ruin.

    It's more interesting that (by rather circuitous reasoning) the Colorado judge ruled the President isn't an officer of the United States according to the framers of the amendment in question, but did note in passing that Trump was clearly guilty of insurrection.

    Far from dying down, what has happened is as these trials move into the preliminary court phase the newsworthiness becomes a little less. I suspect when he actually takes the stand he will find life - difficult.
    He has already given evidence in the NY fraudulent declaration case with no obvious damage amongst Republicans.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,028
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    On Indy I think the change is not the support for YES, but the sense of it as an urgent necessity rather than a vague but pleasing aspiration

    For a long time the Nats - brilliantly - kept dangling the YES Indy carrot like the donkey electorate was gonna eat it any moment. Now the donkey realises the carrot was a hologram, and any nice food is a long way down the road

    Sure, the donkey would still LIKE a juicy carrot, but the donkey has accepted that there are now more pressing needs, like eating some grass, getting down the road, maybe humping a sexy jackass in the next village

    So 45% support for YES no longer translates into anything like 45 points for the SNP, coz the SNP don’t have any fake carrots left, and the new SNP are also really quite shit, and resented for the whole carrot thing, and because donkey is bored of carrying them

    I reckon the Nats are more likely to go under 30 seats than stay over, so the LDs are probably, rightly, modest favorites in this market

    The 2014 referendum was not a hologram and nor was the demand for another one after the Brexit-fuelled Holyrood victory of the SNP on that specific platform.

    Suspect your analogy comes mainly from a desire to present Sindy supporting Scottish people as donkies.
    What? Of course 2014 was not a hologram. My point is that AFTER that vote the idea of an imminent new vote became increasingly fantastical, in reality, yet the SNP managed to persuade everyone, and keep persuading them, that Sindyref2 was just a few inches away. One more heave

    That illusion is shattered. Stop being stupid. You’re already quite boring. Stupid AS WELL would make you unreadable
    But you didn't say that. You just said they've been dangling their carrots "for a long time". If by this you specifically meant since 2014 well ok (ish) but how would we be expected to guess that?

    After all you used to bang on about 2014 being very recent. So recent that it would be absurd to even think about another referendum despite it being voted for!

    See? Hoist again, I'm afraid. Bamboozled by Kuntibula the Logic Monster.
    Also given that we are being held hostage , it would not matter if SNP got ZERO votes , we would still have to do something else.
    Like what though? It's hard to see a Sindy route which doesn't go via another referendum - and that's in the gift of Westminster.
    Not if you look at it on the union treaty rather than some English later confection in English Law.
    That would require UDI, which Westminster, the successor to the 1707 English and Scottish Parliaments, wouldn't grant either
    Holyrood is the successor to the 1707 Scottish Parliament. Look at th eproceedings of the first session of that then emphatically Unionist body.
    The first Speaker was a Nat!

    And talking bollocks. The Estates of Scotland, to give them their correct name, were a different beast from the Scottish Parliament, and they were not prorogued, they were abolished.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,676
    edited November 2023

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    ...

    TOPPING said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    The chaotic incompetence that missed a massive terrorist attack across their border has continued in Israel crossing back over the border to revenge themselves. They don’t seem to have clear aims aside from destroying Hamas as a threat (which thus far they’re making a crap job of), they’ve managed to lose a ton of international support since 7th October and the assault on the Al-Shifa hospital seems an absolute shit show.

    Nice work Bibi.
    LOL you are actually blaming Netanyahu for October 7th.

    Asking for it were they?
    What a foolish final statement.

    Hamas are a death cult that needs to be crushed, the 7th of October was at their whim. However the secret services and the IDF were asleep at the wheel. The focus was on the West Bank when it should have been on Gaza. The buck stops with Bibi.

    Subsequently Bibi has been rather casual with the hostages, as borne out by hostage families marching on Jerusalem. There has been little concern by Bibi for civilian collateral damage. Bibi doesn't like Palestinians, any Palestinians, not just the bad ones. When he's finished the death toll could be enormous.
    Does being asleep at the wheel mean it was their fault.

    What about all those householders who are burgled while they are asleep in their beds.
    A majority of Israelis seem to hold Bibi in part responsible for being “asleep at the wheel”, so you are - per usual on this subject - barking up the wrong tree.

    There ought to be a term for PB Israel ultras who are more ultra than the Israelis themselves.
    Was October 7th the fault of Netanyahu.
    Not directly of course.
    But no doubt he holds responsibility for the lack of security against the attack, and indeed his political policy to support the funding of Hamas.
    So no. It wasn't his fault we are making progress. Yes he absolutely is responsible for the lack of security and he is responsible for being asleep at the wheel.

    But yer man upthread by implication lumped in the attack with those failings.

    "Nice work Bibi", after cataloguing the events were the exact words.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,028
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    biggles said:

    Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    From early 2019 through today, we have now polled a Trump/Biden match-up 16 times. This is the first one of them to show Trump ahead.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1726241766955790746

    Then it I can’t work out, because it’s hard without being an American, is the likelihood of his legal problems rendering all of this irrelevant on the basis he won’t be able to stand. If that’s the case, there must be bags of value in the other Republican candidates, since there will need to be one.
    Re his legal issues, don't bet on it. The documents case will almost certainly be pushed back to post-the election. In Georgia, Fani Willis the DA is indicating heavily it will go past November 2024. In the NY case, Trump has just won a reversal of his gag order on the grounds it is unconstitutional, which - may - increase his chances of getting a mistrial. You are therefore looking at the Jack Smith Fed Prosecutor case.

    You also have to look at the politics of this. It's probably not a coincidence that the talk about prosecuting Trump ASAP have lessened as the poll numbers have shown this issues are not hurting him and may be helping him.
    He hasn't 'just won' a reversal of his gag order. It's been paused while the State Supreme Court assess it.

    That's also separate from the mistrial which ironically only Engoron can rule on (so he will not rule there has been, and in fact yesterday ruled there has not been).

    However, that's not likely to be an issue in his running for the Presidency although it may ultimately lead him to financial ruin.

    It's more interesting that (by rather circuitous reasoning) the Colorado judge ruled the President isn't an officer of the United States according to the framers of the amendment in question, but did note in passing that Trump was clearly guilty of insurrection.

    Far from dying down, what has happened is as these trials move into the preliminary court phase the newsworthiness becomes a little less. I suspect when he actually takes the stand he will find life - difficult.
    He has already given evidence in the NY fraudulent declaration case with no obvious damage amongst Republicans.
    He wasn't defending himself against charges of insurrection then!
  • ydoethur said:

    biggles said:

    Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    From early 2019 through today, we have now polled a Trump/Biden match-up 16 times. This is the first one of them to show Trump ahead.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1726241766955790746

    Then it I can’t work out, because it’s hard without being an American, is the likelihood of his legal problems rendering all of this irrelevant on the basis he won’t be able to stand. If that’s the case, there must be bags of value in the other Republican candidates, since there will need to be one.
    Re his legal issues, don't bet on it. The documents case will almost certainly be pushed back to post-the election. In Georgia, Fani Willis the DA is indicating heavily it will go past November 2024. In the NY case, Trump has just won a reversal of his gag order on the grounds it is unconstitutional, which - may - increase his chances of getting a mistrial. You are therefore looking at the Jack Smith Fed Prosecutor case.

    You also have to look at the politics of this. It's probably not a coincidence that the talk about prosecuting Trump ASAP have lessened as the poll numbers have shown this issues are not hurting him and may be helping him.
    He hasn't 'just won' a reversal of his gag order. It's been paused while the State Supreme Court assess it.

    That's also separate from the mistrial which ironically only Engoron can rule on (so he will not rule there has been, and in fact yesterday ruled there has not been).

    However, that's not likely to be an issue in his running for the Presidency although it may ultimately lead him to financial ruin.

    It's more interesting that (by rather circuitous reasoning) the Colorado judge ruled the President isn't an officer of the United States according to the framers of the amendment in question, but did note in passing that Trump was clearly guilty of insurrection.

    Far from dying down, what has happened is as these trials move into the preliminary court phase the newsworthiness becomes a little less. I suspect when he actually takes the stand he will find life - difficult.
    So far the consensual view re Trump's trials hurting him have been wrong. That does not mean they will continue to be but....

    Re the Colorado case, there has been a widespread view the President is not an Officer of the United States - not unanimous but a fair body of opinion. There will be another attempt no doubt to bar him from the ballot at the state level.

    Re the Jan 6 hearings, I see 95% of the footage is being released so there will be some noise around that.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,654
    ydoethur said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    malcolmg said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    On Indy I think the change is not the support for YES, but the sense of it as an urgent necessity rather than a vague but pleasing aspiration

    For a long time the Nats - brilliantly - kept dangling the YES Indy carrot like the donkey electorate was gonna eat it any moment. Now the donkey realises the carrot was a hologram, and any nice food is a long way down the road

    Sure, the donkey would still LIKE a juicy carrot, but the donkey has accepted that there are now more pressing needs, like eating some grass, getting down the road, maybe humping a sexy jackass in the next village

    So 45% support for YES no longer translates into anything like 45 points for the SNP, coz the SNP don’t have any fake carrots left, and the new SNP are also really quite shit, and resented for the whole carrot thing, and because donkey is bored of carrying them

    I reckon the Nats are more likely to go under 30 seats than stay over, so the LDs are probably, rightly, modest favorites in this market

    The 2014 referendum was not a hologram and nor was the demand for another one after the Brexit-fuelled Holyrood victory of the SNP on that specific platform.

    Suspect your analogy comes mainly from a desire to present Sindy supporting Scottish people as donkies.
    What? Of course 2014 was not a hologram. My point is that AFTER that vote the idea of an imminent new vote became increasingly fantastical, in reality, yet the SNP managed to persuade everyone, and keep persuading them, that Sindyref2 was just a few inches away. One more heave

    That illusion is shattered. Stop being stupid. You’re already quite boring. Stupid AS WELL would make you unreadable
    But you didn't say that. You just said they've been dangling their carrots "for a long time". If by this you specifically meant since 2014 well ok (ish) but how would we be expected to guess that?

    After all you used to bang on about 2014 being very recent. So recent that it would be absurd to even think about another referendum despite it being voted for!

    See? Hoist again, I'm afraid. Bamboozled by Kuntibula the Logic Monster.
    Also given that we are being held hostage , it would not matter if SNP got ZERO votes , we would still have to do something else.
    Like what though? It's hard to see a Sindy route which doesn't go via another referendum - and that's in the gift of Westminster.
    Not if you look at it on the union treaty rather than some English later confection in English Law.
    That would require UDI, which Westminster, the successor to the 1707 English and Scottish Parliaments, wouldn't grant either
    Holyrood is the successor to the 1707 Scottish Parliament. Look at th eproceedings of the first session of that then emphatically Unionist body.
    The first Speaker was a Nat!

    And talking bollocks. The Estates of Scotland, to give them their correct name, were a different beast from the Scottish Parliament, and they were not prorogued, they were abolished.
    The current Scottish Parliament is the statutory creation of the Westminster Parliament. The original Scottish Parliament very much was not. It was, as you have pointed out, not even a Parliament in the modern democratic sense. It was dissolved by the Act of Union.
  • Why would you take into consideration a mainstream UK political party's stance on the situation in the Middle East when deciding on how to vote in a GE? It's just performative bollocks, isn't it? They're not going to say "fuck the jews" or "fuck the Palestinians" are they? Theyll just keep on being mainstream. It means nothing to us in the grand scheme of things if Starmer or Sunak says something or nothing about a ceasefire so why get stressed out about it?
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,720

    MJW said:

    nico679 said:

    I’d be very dubious of any IDF claims re hostages being killed by Hamas .

    It’s not in their interests to kill hostages as they are bargaining chips .

    Yet, Hamas has killed hostages in the past.

    Among other things, you are assuming uniformity and rationality. Organisations like Hamas have lethal internal power struggles nearly all the time and the people who win those struggles are not always disciples of Adlai Stevenson
    'It's not in their interests to kill the hostages' is a very odd thing to claim when one of the most famous/infamous hostage situations in history ended with...errr... a Palestinian terrorist group massacring Israelis after they believed they were trapped (having already earlier killed hostages who were difficult to subdue and manage).
    The sort of people who are willing to rape, maim, kill and kidnap men, women and children in a terrorist attack are really not, at heart, nice people who will think killing hostages is a step too far. They're not good guys.
    Well quite. But also even if we ascribe a certain rationality, kidnappers killing hostages is hardly unknown or particularly rare - even in cases where the hostage takers haven't already murdered over a thousand people and view themselves as fighting a holy war against those they've taken hostages 'from'.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    ydoethur said:

    Endillion said:

    ydoethur said:

    Endillion said:

    biggles said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    Those middling people, who want to support good people on all sides, the state of Israel's right to exist without the threat of massacre or holocaust and the Palestinian's right to an autonomous state struggle with these questions, and find few answers from polemics of any sort:

    What is the best policy for supporting peace loving people on all sides

    How should Israel have responded instead if you oppose what they are doing

    What is the best policy for Palestinians who do want their autonomy and also recognise Israel's rights.
    My personal policy is that Israel must simultaneously make diplomatic overtures in support of a two-state solution, while focusing its military ambitions on recovery of its hostages, a blockade of Gaza, and surgical destruction of Hamas capability.

    Palestinian supporters must call for the immediate release of hostages, condemn Hamas, and call for the resumption of democracy in Gaza.

    Of course, I am a centrist dad, so these things are not going to happen. I agree it’s a bugger’s muddle, which is why by the way I kind of refuse to condemn those calling at present for a ceasefire.
    Two ways of solving problems.

    One is to have a map from here to the destination. The other is to have a vague idea of where the destination is, but basically look in front of you and do what seems to be the best choice of the immediate options available, then pause and reorientate and repeat.

    I've been musing on it in the context of sixth formers failing to do physics questions, but it's probably true more widely. It's usually best to have an advance plan all the way to the destination, but what do we do when that plan doesn't exist? We bumble, wander, try low-cost bets to see what happens. And usually, that gets us somewhere OK.

    So, right now, the realistic choices for Israel are to continue their current actions, or in some sense to pause or turn down their intensity, or to go in harder.

    Which of those is really going to give them the best odds of achieving what they want? Not sure that it's their current path. One of the criteria for a just war is that it has a reasonable chance of success.
    We know what Hamas's ideal destination is: no Israel.
    And for many on the Israeli Right, the ideal destination is no Arabs anywhere in Israel proper OR the Territories.
    'many' = 'a tiny few'
    If he'd said 'many on the Israeli right want to incorporate the West Bank into Israel and make Gaza uninhabitable,' however, he wouldn't have been far wrong.

    We may be watching it happen over the next few months.
    At some stage, I wonder if we need to stop giving Likud the cover of being called “on the right” as if they are a mainstream western party. “Hardline nationalist” seems fair.
    Likud are the direct descendants of Irgun, the terrorist organisation behind the bombing of the King David Hotel. Ancient history of course, but in 2006 Netanyahu described it as a “legitimate act”.

    Israel has basically been a Likud-run state for 20 years.
    PR's wonderful, isn't it?

    Your post is more or less correct, of course, but that 20 year period does include Likud co-founder Ariel Sharon's complete disengagement from Gaza in 2005 - a move that cost him and his party a huge amount, politically and personally.

    Sharon staked his reputation on the Gaza disengagement being a huge step towards long term peace, on the basis that it would be that much harder for Hamas and the other terror groups in Gaza to recruit, if there was no obvious enemy to fight against, and if Israel was seen to be providing water, jobs and other economic resources to the Strip. That theory has now been tested to destruction and been found severely wanting.
    Sharon was very brave to support Gaza disengagement.

    But let’s remember Sharon’s long career, including his responsibility for various civilian massacres when commanding Unit 101 for the IDF, and his championing of Israeli settlement in the West Bank.

    The problem with this whole situation is that very much, both sides are shits.

    My sympathies are with the Israeli left, and the even smaller number of Palestinians democrats.
    I think it is worth remembering Sharon was playing a very deep game in Gaza. It wasn't just, or even especially, that it would be a long step towards peace. It was to make annexing the West Bank (which is what he really wanted) easier by dividing the Palestinian Territories.

    Even as he ordered the settlers out of Gaza, he was authorising more settlements in the West Bank.
    I'm sorry, but that is complete bollocks. Almost no-one in Israel supports West Bank annexation - and certainly the Right do not - because the demographic implications lead long term to the destruction of the state of Israel. Netanyahu's goal in supporting settler movements is to create enough facts on the ground to render the negotiations required for a two state solution functionally impossible, and hence force the international community to come up with a plan that might actually work.

    Which, in practice, probably means the Arab world stepping up and offering resettlement for those in the West Bank refugee camps.
    I've been to both, and that's not what they tell me.

    Edit - as for your last two sentences, they're contradictory to the point of being completely nonsensical. You're saying the solution is to remove the Palestinians and then somehow that will mean Israel won't annex the West Bank because...reasons?
    Remove just the refugee camps, not the pre-existing towns and cities.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,654
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    biggles said:

    Steve Kornacki
    @SteveKornacki
    From early 2019 through today, we have now polled a Trump/Biden match-up 16 times. This is the first one of them to show Trump ahead.

    https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1726241766955790746

    Then it I can’t work out, because it’s hard without being an American, is the likelihood of his legal problems rendering all of this irrelevant on the basis he won’t be able to stand. If that’s the case, there must be bags of value in the other Republican candidates, since there will need to be one.
    Re his legal issues, don't bet on it. The documents case will almost certainly be pushed back to post-the election. In Georgia, Fani Willis the DA is indicating heavily it will go past November 2024. In the NY case, Trump has just won a reversal of his gag order on the grounds it is unconstitutional, which - may - increase his chances of getting a mistrial. You are therefore looking at the Jack Smith Fed Prosecutor case.

    You also have to look at the politics of this. It's probably not a coincidence that the talk about prosecuting Trump ASAP have lessened as the poll numbers have shown this issues are not hurting him and may be helping him.
    He hasn't 'just won' a reversal of his gag order. It's been paused while the State Supreme Court assess it.

    That's also separate from the mistrial which ironically only Engoron can rule on (so he will not rule there has been, and in fact yesterday ruled there has not been).

    However, that's not likely to be an issue in his running for the Presidency although it may ultimately lead him to financial ruin.

    It's more interesting that (by rather circuitous reasoning) the Colorado judge ruled the President isn't an officer of the United States according to the framers of the amendment in question, but did note in passing that Trump was clearly guilty of insurrection.

    Far from dying down, what has happened is as these trials move into the preliminary court phase the newsworthiness becomes a little less. I suspect when he actually takes the stand he will find life - difficult.
    He has already given evidence in the NY fraudulent declaration case with no obvious damage amongst Republicans.
    He wasn't defending himself against charges of insurrection then!
    It is depressing that he seems to remain bullet proof. And indeed leading in the polls.
  • TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    ...

    TOPPING said:

    The problem, we are told, with a “ceasefire”, is that it denies Israel’s right to defend itself.

    But after several weeks of bombing, all Israel has managed to do is kill ~10,000 Palestinians, of which many will be children.

    How many hostages have they recovered?
    How are Israel’s military aims distinguishable from simply expelling Palestinians from Gaza outright?

    Israel has lost Gen Z opinion, to the extent that’s important, and is losing the support of the reasonable minded in the West.

    The chaotic incompetence that missed a massive terrorist attack across their border has continued in Israel crossing back over the border to revenge themselves. They don’t seem to have clear aims aside from destroying Hamas as a threat (which thus far they’re making a crap job of), they’ve managed to lose a ton of international support since 7th October and the assault on the Al-Shifa hospital seems an absolute shit show.

    Nice work Bibi.
    LOL you are actually blaming Netanyahu for October 7th.

    Asking for it were they?
    What a foolish final statement.

    Hamas are a death cult that needs to be crushed, the 7th of October was at their whim. However the secret services and the IDF were asleep at the wheel. The focus was on the West Bank when it should have been on Gaza. The buck stops with Bibi.

    Subsequently Bibi has been rather casual with the hostages, as borne out by hostage families marching on Jerusalem. There has been little concern by Bibi for civilian collateral damage. Bibi doesn't like Palestinians, any Palestinians, not just the bad ones. When he's finished the death toll could be enormous.
    Does being asleep at the wheel mean it was their fault.

    What about all those householders who are burgled while they are asleep in their beds.
    A majority of Israelis seem to hold Bibi in part responsible for being “asleep at the wheel”, so you are - per usual on this subject - barking up the wrong tree.

    There ought to be a term for PB Israel ultras who are more ultra than the Israelis themselves.
    Was October 7th the fault of Netanyahu.
    An awfully convenient pretext for him to conquer Gaza.
This discussion has been closed.