Howdy, Stranger!

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

How the general election would have looked under different voting systems – politicalbetting.com

12346»

Comments

  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,297
    IanB2 said:

    Because you are running away from something that it would be off topic for us to even begin to consider.
    Since when are we banned from discussing the weather?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,433
    Leon said:

    Why do you think I go to these places?
    Money, mainly.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,858

    There's a counterfactual where Hitler dies in 1938 after the Anschluss with Austria but before the really naughty stuff started. He would probably be remembered as a great German who saved the nation from chaos (and communism), got the nation going again and revitalised German pride. And never forget that for very many Germans, a lot of the bad stuff that happened would have been stopped if only the Fuhrer knew, such was his image even quite deep into the war.
    Probably true. Even worse would be if he died just after beating France. That would build a Nazi myth that would endure.
  • We subverted democracy in technical terms with the Government of National Unity in 1939 to 1945 did we not.

    Please read what I have suggested.

    Not a 10 year Labour Govt but a genuine Government of national unity
    No you are not

    You suggested an action to deny the democratic process because you do not like the possible result

    Frankly you do not do yourself any favours with this nonsense
  • I get what you're saying, but maybe you could've phrased it better? Picking and choosing is literally what you do under a democracy, after all.
    Do I get a pass because I am old !!!!!
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,200

    We subverted democracy in technical terms with the Government of National Unity in 1939 to 1945 did we not.

    Please read what I have suggested.

    Not a 10 year Labour Govt but a genuine Government of national unity
    What a great idea for a thread. A fantasy centrist Dad cabinet for a govt of National Unity.

    There would have to be a role for Rory Stewart and Caroline Lucas as well. Two titans sadly not on the stage anymore.

    Why not write an article and pitch it.

    Your Bestie Jess could get a plum job to match her intellect and gravitas.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,047
    edited December 2024

    "Putin’s regime is not yet at [economic collapse] but it would only take one more change in the Middle East to bring matters to a head. If the Saudis again decide to flood the world with cheap crude to recoup market share – as many predict – oil will fall below $40 and Russia will spin out of economic control.

    The Ukraine war may end in Riyadh."

    AEP - Telegraph

    It's a little more complicated than that, because while Saudi could probably add about one million barrels a day to production, that will have an impact on drilling activity in the US. (Plus, of course, there's refinery capacity to think about.)

    With that said, a million barrels a day of incremental crude would almost certainly push prices down meaningfully. It would also make it harder for Russia to offer meaningful discounts to the Indians and Chinese.

    Russia's financial situation would be meaningfully impacted by such a move.

    HOWEVER.

    Why would Saudi do such a thing? Russia, while not a member of OPEC, has had friendly relations with them, and has - from time to time - reduced production in concert with them to lift global oil prices. Is there any guarantee a new Russian regime would do similarly? ON the other hand a Russian collapse would almost certainly result in a near term reduction in Russian oil exports, which would probably be a benefit to OPEC.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,400

    Do I get a pass because I am old !!!!!
    No you get a great big clap on the back because it was enormously amusing :)
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,297

    Money, mainly.
    Actually - and sincerely - it isn’t. It’s a factor but way down the list. The reason I travel a lot is

    1. I love it
    2. It stops me being bored (see item 1)
    3. I get to do it for free
    4. I get sent to amazing places
    5. I get to avoid British weather
    6. I get paid
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,047

    Because buses don't actual travel that many miles in a day, batteries aren't a problem. Interestingly, there is a move to battery trams - getting rid of the overhead wires (for at least a portion of the journeys) is a massive saving. Both in money and time to get approval/construct.

    There have also been some interesting experiments in the design of lengthened buses, with each segment using smart steering to follow the previous one.

    The cost per mile of building tram lines is insane - and must be factored into the overall costs. Yes, more effective once running, but with the same money, you could line the roads with electric buses.
    Yes; I was wondering about battery trams the other day. You wouldn't necessarily want to remove all of the overhead electrical distribution, but being able to serve less dense areas, or to reduce maintenance costs while increasing reliability make the idea a really interesting one.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,375

    There's a counterfactual where Hitler dies in 1938 after the Anschluss with Austria but before the really naughty stuff started. He would probably be remembered as a great German who saved the nation from chaos (and communism), got the nation going again and revitalised German pride. And never forget that for very many Germans, a lot of the bad stuff that happened would have been stopped if only the Fuhrer knew, such was his image even quite deep into the war.
    That's an odd view of the "really naughty stuff". Nazi concentration camps had started in 1933. Dachau opened 22 March 1933. The Nuremberg Laws were passed in 1935, restricting Jews' citizenship rights and banning relationships between Jews and non-Jews. The expropriation of Jewish businesses began in 1937. Kristallnacht came after Anschluss, but there were plenty of smaller pogroms before then.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,477
    Taz said:

    Love Actually, which we discussed here the other day.

    I still have no desire to see it.
    Me neither. Looks shite.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,297
    Talking of travel where is @TimS?

    We should be getting daily pics of riverine life in Senegal

    Hope he’s OK
  • This is a question that I thought yesterday when Israel took out the Syrian navy

    For such a small country how is it possible to use so much weaponry and keep a constant supply
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,710
    viewcode said:

    What is the difference between a joist and a girder?
    What is the difference between an enzyme and a hormone?

    (both of these are jokes, btw)
    Go on...?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,116

    This is a question that I thought yesterday when Israel took out the Syrian navy

    For such a small country how is it possible to use so much weaponry and keep a constant supply

    1) stockpile.
    2) use orders of magnitude fewer weapons by using expensive smart bombs, rather then carpet bombing with 'dumb' bombs/shells.
    3) surge manufacturing.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,978
    Carnyx said:

    Not IHT - there is provision for downsizing as one gets old. Or at least IHT shouldn't be a worry.

    People (as so often) may be getting unnecessarily worked up about it, like the elderly relative who was getting all panicky about IHT (about ten years too late, IMV, but I didn't point that out): I had to sit him down, point out the values of his house and his savings, and explain in words of fewer than four letters that IHT was not payable on his e3state .;..
    The problem with IHT is not so much the detail but the vibe.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,433
    Leon said:

    Actually - and sincerely - it isn’t. It’s a factor but way down the list. The reason I travel a lot is

    1. I love it
    2. It stops me being bored (see item 1)
    3. I get to do it for free
    4. I get sent to amazing places
    5. I get to avoid British weather
    6. I get paid
    Fair enough but arguably 3 counts as 'for the money', as you would otherwise need to pay for these trips, and some of them if not all seem rather high end (have thought of slumming it for a few, perhaps Butlins at Minehead? To clear the palate?)
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,200
    viewcode said:

    What is the difference between a joist and a girder?
    What is the difference between an enzyme and a hormone?

    (both of these are jokes, btw)
    What's the difference between a Buffalo and a Bison

    Yow cor wosh yor ands in a Buffalo !!!!

    I'm here all week. Try the fish.
  • Taz said:

    Maybe she walked in and discovered them humping ? The girl may not have told her but she found out inadvertently as seems to be the case quite a bit from Reddit threads about people found in the middle of the act.
    Also, what would people say about a Thai bloke coming to the UK and shagging a 15 year old.

    Although if she had gone back to another country it is unlikely it would meet the evidentiary requirements for a conviction.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,092

    "Putin’s regime is not yet at [economic collapse] but it would only take one more change in the Middle East to bring matters to a head. If the Saudis again decide to flood the world with cheap crude to recoup market share – as many predict – oil will fall below $40 and Russia will spin out of economic control.

    The Ukraine war may end in Riyadh."

    :o

    AEP - Telegraph

    Oh.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,433

    That's an odd view of the "really naughty stuff". Nazi concentration camps had started in 1933. Dachau opened 22 March 1933. The Nuremberg Laws were passed in 1935, restricting Jews' citizenship rights and banning relationships between Jews and non-Jews. The expropriation of Jewish businesses began in 1937. Kristallnacht came after Anschluss, but there were plenty of smaller pogroms before then.
    Again, as with leon, I think you are missing the tongue firmly in cheek. But even taking those points, I stand by what I said. A Hiltler heart attack and death as the border to Austria came down and he would be a hero in history. After all, even after all that we now know, there are still idiots who persist in trying suggest that Hitler never ordered the Holocaust etc.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,920
    edited December 2024

    1) stockpile.
    2) use orders of magnitude fewer weapons by using expensive smart bombs, rather then carpet bombing with 'dumb' bombs/shells.
    3) surge manufacturing.
    Yes but having visited Israel, the Golan Heights, and the West Bank it is a small country to do as you say and at a huge cost
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,534

    There's a counterfactual where Hitler dies in 1938 after the Anschluss with Austria but before the really naughty stuff started. He would probably be remembered as a great German who saved the nation from chaos (and communism), got the nation going again and revitalised German pride. And never forget that for very many Germans, a lot of the bad stuff that happened would have been stopped if only the Fuhrer knew, such was his image even quite deep into the war.
    The mass re-armament of Germany that happened in the 1930s was mostly funded with by huge deficit spending backed mostly (but not exclusively) by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mefo_bills . By 1938 the government was officially spending 1.6 times it’s income, with much more funded by the circulating Mefo notes. A collapse in the value of these notes was inevitable: The only reason the German economy hadn’t already suffered rampant inflation was the total destruction of the labour movement by the Nazis, leaving workers unable to bid up their own pay in the face of a steady climb in shop prices.

    Germany in 1938 was either going to suffer a terrible economic crisis or it was going to take all the weaponry it had spent the last ten years building & go to war. They had been planning for the latter for a decade: war was inevitable, Hitler or no Hitler.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,959
    Cookie said:

    Go on...?
    What is the difference between a joist and a girder? Joyce wrote Ulysses and Goethe wrote Faust
    What is the difference between an enzyme and a hormone? You can't make an en zyme but you can make a [Stop right there - Ed]
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,967

    Again, as with leon, I think you are missing the tongue firmly in cheek. But even taking those points, I stand by what I said. A Hiltler heart attack and death as the border to Austria came down and he would be a hero in history. After all, even after all that we now know, there are still idiots who persist in trying suggest that Hitler never ordered the Holocaust etc.
    Remember, he came within 15 minutes of being killed by explosion, before any of the really bad warmongering stuff even happened.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,297

    Fair enough but arguably 3 counts as 'for the money', as you would otherwise need to pay for these trips, and some of them if not all seem rather high end (have thought of slumming it for a few, perhaps Butlins at Minehead? To clear the palate?)
    They’re really not all high end; they’re quite mixed and sometimes seriously primitive or even dangerous

    eg Ukraine

    That’s how I cleanse my palate! Constant luxury would be seriously boring. I’ve done dozens if not hundreds of luxury hotels and they tend to blur after a while - they offer the same tip-top comforts

    Indeed a stand out five star is quite unusual (but brilliant when you encounter them)



  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,092

    Also, what would people say about a Thai bloke coming to the UK and shagging a 15 year old.

    Although if she had gone back to another country it is unlikely it would meet the evidentiary requirements for a conviction.
    Or the Jeremy Forrest/Megan Stammers case.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,116
    Lots of tweets on Twix stating that NATO is over because Russia has a new superweapon: the Oreshnik.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oreshnik_(missile)

    Which seems so much cope. The claims - such as all the US's carriers gone immediately - would see repercussions. That's what Russia and their propagandists - child-molester Scott Ritter amongst them - forget. They seem to think Russia can use weapons and there will be no consequences. Because Russia is stronk or something.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,135
    edited December 2024

    This is a question that I thought yesterday when Israel took out the Syrian navy

    For such a small country how is it possible to use so much weaponry and keep a constant supply

    Israel gets a lot of ammunition and military support from the US. They've also had a few recent decades experience of the importance of having a strong military, and so have prioritised ensuring that they have supplies for this sort of situation.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,200

    Also, what would people say about a Thai bloke coming to the UK and shagging a 15 year old.

    I would expect the difference in age would partly colour peoples views. A couple of years, like in this case, less of an issue than, say, the age of the sort of man who goes from the UK to Thailand for that sort of thing.

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,116

    Yes but having visited Israel, the Golan Heights, and the West Bank it is a small country to do as you say and at a huge cost
    Indeed. But the modern state of Israel has been in existence for over seventy years, and has been on a war footing almost permanently ever since.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,406

    This is a question that I thought yesterday when Israel took out the Syrian navy

    For such a small country how is it possible to use so much weaponry and keep a constant supply

    The US of A.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,534

    That's an odd view of the "really naughty stuff". Nazi concentration camps had started in 1933. Dachau opened 22 March 1933. The Nuremberg Laws were passed in 1935, restricting Jews' citizenship rights and banning relationships between Jews and non-Jews. The expropriation of Jewish businesses began in 1937. Kristallnacht came after Anschluss, but there were plenty of smaller pogroms before then.
    I’d also add the Night of the Long Knives (1933) & the officially mandated end to the rule of law that followed to post-hoc justify it & make extra-judicial state killing legal. Nazi Germany was already a totalitarian state at this point, but afterwards there was no pretending otherwise.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,858

    Yes but having visited Israel, the Golan Heights, and the West Bank it is a small country to do as you say and at a huge cost
    The Israeli economy is multiple times more effective than its neighbours. American aid helps, but look at the money that falls into the pit of the Egyptian economy from the same source.

    In addition the Israeli military is actually capable. Books have been written on why the local dictatorships can't afford (in the political sense) to have effective militaries.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,400
    Leon said:

    They’re really not all high end; they’re quite mixed and sometimes seriously primitive or even dangerous

    eg Ukraine

    That’s how I cleanse my palate! Constant luxury would be seriously boring. I’ve done dozens if not hundreds of luxury hotels and they tend to blur after a while - they offer the same tip-top comforts

    Indeed a stand out five star is quite unusual (but brilliant when you encounter them)



    Do the hotels you stay in know that you're from the Gazette? By which I mean when you stay in a lovely suite, is it likely to be extra lovely because they have prepared?

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,858

    Lots of tweets on Twix stating that NATO is over because Russia has a new superweapon: the Oreshnik.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oreshnik_(missile)

    Which seems so much cope. The claims - such as all the US's carriers gone immediately - would see repercussions. That's what Russia and their propagandists - child-molester Scott Ritter amongst them - forget. They seem to think Russia can use weapons and there will be no consequences. Because Russia is stronk or something.

    Why are you bothering with Twatter?

    Big! Russian! Weapon! Stonk! World! has been the refrain for decades. Putin sits on the toilet, measuring his weapon all time....
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,297
    Omnium said:

    Do the hotels you stay in know that you're from the Gazette? By which I mean when you stay in a lovely suite, is it likely to be extra lovely because they have prepared?

    Often, yes
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,135

    Lots of tweets on Twix stating that NATO is over because Russia has a new superweapon: the Oreshnik.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oreshnik_(missile)

    Which seems so much cope. The claims - such as all the US's carriers gone immediately - would see repercussions. That's what Russia and their propagandists - child-molester Scott Ritter amongst them - forget. They seem to think Russia can use weapons and there will be no consequences. Because Russia is stronk or something.

    Sounds like Russia will use the Oreshnik again in a couple of days. Wonder if they'll put any explosive on it this time?
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,400
    Leon said:

    Often, yes
    Good for you obviously, but my god you must have to deal with the most extremes of oily people. Eek!
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,375

    Again, as with leon, I think you are missing the tongue firmly in cheek. But even taking those points, I stand by what I said. A Hiltler heart attack and death as the border to Austria came down and he would be a hero in history. After all, even after all that we now know, there are still idiots who persist in trying suggest that Hitler never ordered the Holocaust etc.
    There are idiots who suggest many things. There is no need to encourage them. With a resurgence of fascism in the real world, personally, I think it is more helpful to take 1930s Germany seriously. Trump is proposing rounding people up in camps and deporting US citizens, which would put us around 1934?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,047
    edited December 2024

    Lots of tweets on Twix stating that NATO is over because Russia has a new superweapon: the Oreshnik.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oreshnik_(missile)

    Which seems so much cope. The claims - such as all the US's carriers gone immediately - would see repercussions. That's what Russia and their propagandists - child-molester Scott Ritter amongst them - forget. They seem to think Russia can use weapons and there will be no consequences. Because Russia is stronk or something.

    Errr: isn't the difficult bit with carriers finding them?

    There have been lots of weapons (including nuclear ones) that are pretty effective at destroying carriers. The difficult bit is finding the carrier group in an ocean of sea, and knowing exactly where it will be when your missile arrives there, and having the missile move at a speed that enables it to use sensors to maneuver.

    Because the problem with hypersonic missiles and the like is that sensor performance is essentially destroyed by the act of travelling through the air at Mach 8 or whatever. So how can you see what it is that you want to hit?

    Edit to add: that means that these missiles can be great at hitting ground based targets that don't move (hospitals! power stations!) but are rubbish at hitting moving targets. Even slowly moving ones.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,858
    Phil said:

    The mass re-armament of Germany that happened in the 1930s was mostly funded with by huge deficit spending backed mostly (but not exclusively) by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mefo_bills . By 1938 the government was officially spending 1.6 times it’s income, with much more funded by the circulating Mefo notes. A collapse in the value of these notes was inevitable: The only reason the German economy hadn’t already suffered rampant inflation was the total destruction of the labour movement by the Nazis, leaving workers unable to bid up their own pay in the face of a steady climb in shop prices.

    Germany in 1938 was either going to suffer a terrible economic crisis or it was going to take all the weaponry it had spent the last ten years building & go to war. They had been planning for the latter for a decade: war was inevitable, Hitler or no Hitler.
    There is a theory that Schacht managed to convince Hitler that the economy was about to crash. Hitler's response was to go to war early, rather than Schacht's solution - reduce re-armament. So he started making moves in 1939 that he was planning for 1942 (when the re-armament was supposed to ready).

    This caught other countries by surprise - they knew the german timetable. It was evident in the naval building program, which couldn't be hidden. For example, the Poles hadn't got their tanks yet (French), and the British plan of building up productivity capacity, *then* using mass production to build the latest weapons was caught in a mis-step.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,858
    rcs1000 said:

    Errr: isn't the difficult bit with carriers finding them?

    There have been lots of weapons (including nuclear ones) that are pretty effective at destroying carriers. The difficult bit is finding the carrier group in an ocean of sea, and knowing exactly where it will be when your missile arrives there, and having the missile move at a speed that enables it to use sensors to maneuver.

    Because the problem with hypersonic missiles and the like is that sensor performance is essentially destroyed by the act of travelling through the air at Mach 8 or whatever. So how can you see what it is that you want to hit?
    Quite. And then there is the small, inconvenient fact that the Americans removed the restrictions on Aegis system to act an ABM system. And procured better missiles to go with it. Each ship, before deployment, practises shooting down ballistic missiles, and hypersonic targets.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-174_Standard_ERAM
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-161_Standard_Missile_3
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,400
    rcs1000 said:

    Errr: isn't the difficult bit with carriers finding them?

    There have been lots of weapons (including nuclear ones) that are pretty effective at destroying carriers. The difficult bit is finding the carrier group in an ocean of sea, and knowing exactly where it will be when your missile arrives there, and having the missile move at a speed that enables it to use sensors to maneuver.

    Because the problem with hypersonic missiles and the like is that sensor performance is essentially destroyed by the act of travelling through the air at Mach 8 or whatever. So how can you see what it is that you want to hit?

    Edit to add: that means that these missiles can be great at hitting ground based targets that don't move (hospitals! power stations!) but are rubbish at hitting moving targets. Even slowly moving ones.
    Satellites can find carriers with complete certainty.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,047
    Phil said:

    The mass re-armament of Germany that happened in the 1930s was mostly funded with by huge deficit spending backed mostly (but not exclusively) by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mefo_bills . By 1938 the government was officially spending 1.6 times it’s income, with much more funded by the circulating Mefo notes. A collapse in the value of these notes was inevitable: The only reason the German economy hadn’t already suffered rampant inflation was the total destruction of the labour movement by the Nazis, leaving workers unable to bid up their own pay in the face of a steady climb in shop prices.

    Germany in 1938 was either going to suffer a terrible economic crisis or it was going to take all the weaponry it had spent the last ten years building & go to war. They had been planning for the latter for a decade: war was inevitable, Hitler or no Hitler.
    There was a really good book on this that I read about a decade ago: The Wages of Destruction by Adam Tooze.
  • NEW THREAD

  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,297
    Omnium said:

    Good for you obviously, but my god you must have to deal with the most extremes of oily people. Eek!
    Somehow I cope with the grovelling

    To give you an example of how absurd it gets, I once stayed at an outrageously expensive five star in Chiang Mai. High end Asian five stars are always outrageously luxe so I was kinda expecting my own butler and my own grand piano in my own villa. And yes I got all those

    But I also had my own paddy field AND MY OWN PEASANT

    There was a paddy field out the back to add some greenery to my pleasure. And in the middle of the paddy field was a peasant looking absurdly picturesque in a conical hat. It was like an idealised vision of Asian rural life

    Then I got suspicious. It was TOO picturesque and also the guy never did any work. Never bent over and picked rice

    So I asked the management and they sheepishly said “yeah we gave you a peasant to make it look better”
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,546
    I feel we've covered the question of the limits of a democratic vote and when it should be set aside before.

    The first question is whether the campaign and vote has been conducted properly according to the established rules in place at the time. If no, recourse up to and including the annulment of a result is entirely proper, if that is proportionate to the breach, as has occurred in recent council by-elections and at a higher level what happened in Oldham East and Saddleworth in 2010, where that election had to be re-run. It is what Romania faces at national level now. What matters is correct judicial application of the rules.

    If Farage breached such rules nationally or at constituency level, courts would be arbiters.

    We had this with the Brexit vote as well, when Arron Banks was under investigation for funny money. That the vote was advisory was deemed important, effectively the courts passed on any judicial role to parliament. Ultimately, no charges were brought, so one possible line of reasoning for a second referendum, as proper recourse for electoral irregularities, was moot.

    Beyond that, if courts are nobbled, if process overturned in defence of early autocracy, if the line is crossed, then street protest to force issues to a head has to be regarded as part of the democratic furniture. This is obviously less amenable to fixed rules than going through the courts, and one can argue about specific instances of this, but it needs to be there.

    But, overall it is better not to arrive at those places in the first instance. And, if autocracy does set in for a while, in the West at least, we had better hope and trust that our collective memories of what remains a system of government that delivers sound outcomes for society is strong enough to rebound when the opportunity presents itself.

    Even reasonable pre-cognition of general autocratic intentions of Trump or Farage, shouldn't be the arbiter of democracy, though specific rule breaking that invalidates their successes might.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,047
    Omnium said:

    Satellites can find carriers with complete certainty.
    Sure they can.

    And you can know where the carrier is and what direction it's heading for exactly the short period it flies directly overhead.

    Say you launch your missile within 30 seconds, and it only has to travel 1,000 miles. Well, the carrier (which can do 40 knots) is now a mile from where you thought it was.

    If it's changed direction (and bear in mind that carrier groups know exactly where spy satellites are), then how will the missile hit it? You need the missile to slow down when it's still 50 miles away from the carrier group to a speed at which it can "see", at which point it is suddenly vulnerable to all the carrier's defences.
  • MightyAlexMightyAlex Posts: 1,750
    rcs1000 said:

    Errr: isn't the difficult bit with carriers finding them?

    There have been lots of weapons (including nuclear ones) that are pretty effective at destroying carriers. The difficult bit is finding the carrier group in an ocean of sea, and knowing exactly where it will be when your missile arrives there, and having the missile move at a speed that enables it to use sensors to maneuver.

    Because the problem with hypersonic missiles and the like is that sensor performance is essentially destroyed by the act of travelling through the air at Mach 8 or whatever. So how can you see what it is that you want to hit?

    Edit to add: that means that these missiles can be great at hitting ground based targets that don't move (hospitals! power stations!) but are rubbish at hitting moving targets. Even slowly moving ones.
    I'm sure a few reconnaissance satellites could track a carrier port to port without a problem. No doubt the Chinese know exactly where each US carrier groups is and I'd imagine they know where each USN surface ship is.

    Apparently Russians satellites are providing the Houthis with targeting information for their USVs/ASBM/ASCM.
  • I'd agree 100% in all circumstances besides this.

    Farage is backed by dirty money from Putin, from the excesses of Bannon and Putin

    This is not home grown Fascism like we saw from NF / BNP this is foreign funded Facism imported in to the UK to support Tommy Robinson and Andrew Tate.

    Farage is Farage a spiv chancer ready to head up any anti democratic bandwagon

    He has a window of opportunity with Trump and Musk in Washington on power and before Putin wanes.

    He would destroy democracy in one of the great democracies.

    We postponed democracy for 6 years 1939 to 1945 to fight for our freedoms and may need to do so again.

    We can all agree or disagree across the spectrum when fundamentally decent people challenge for power, however misguided we may think they are or not

    However the threat we now face from foreign funded Fascism under the guise of Reform is greater than at any time since 1939. Greater than any threat from Communism, greater than any threat from Islam.

    Trump and Putin have their finger on the majority of nuclear arms, they have allowed Musk to control the heavens....

    The threat is very very real

    Does anyone seriously believe this Country would be safe under a Reform Government.

    It would be a fascist dystopia hell. We had a glimpse of it on the streets of Lancashire, Tamworth and other places in the summer.

    I'll say nothing else about this
    ..

    I just hope I'm wrong
    What is democratic about the EU? You go on about facism but have 88 in your username. You can edit your username at CFTC.political erring.com
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,710
    Sandpit said:

    Was wondering how long this one would take to come up!

    Yes, having sex with a 17-year-old, even when consentual, is illegal in loads of places.

    Also, criminal justice works differently in different countries.

    The usual MO from Brits arrested in Dubai is to scream half a story at the Daily Mail, and hope the negative headlines can help the British Ambassador plead for clemency on the basis of the bad publicity. Sometimes it works, other times not.
    It's not even, as I can see, half a story. He doesn't appear to even claim to have a leg to stand on, apart from "the law shouldn't apply to me."
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,695
    Leon said:

    Talking of travel where is @TimS?

    We should be getting daily pics of riverine life in Senegal

    Hope he’s OK

    I’ve been sending daily pics of riverine life in Senegal, but perhaps not at times you were online. I’ve only had time and bandwidth generally to post once per day.

    I am getting towards the end of my trip now and in a very interesting and atypical place: the ile de Goree where we’re spending 2 nights. It’s more like a quaint Mediterranean island than an African town, but with a slave house.

    I was impressed with the maison des esclaves and its famous door of no return. The nuanced descriptions of the history of Goree and the slave trade were pitched just right I thought, and didn’t patronise. The National Trust would be proud. Not the Americanised guilt trip I’d expected.

    And like many French style heritage hotspots it fills up with day trippers off the ferry during the day then empties out in the evening and takes on a serene air.

    Here’s a pic for the day - typical Goree backstreet:


  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,284
    MattW said:

    TBH that's just the Telegrunt's Grunt of the Day for the benefit of the Blue Rinse Brigade.

    I don't see what the issue is - it's a normal tax liability. Though if the plan is to lessen IHT on family businesses, such should be included as business assets. I'm surprised that small incorporated LL businesses have not been addressed, which avoid much of the same taxes, as well as the rest ... one man bands etc.

    Full piece: https://archive.ph/JVdE9

    I did enjoy the other piece it linked me to:

    ‘Our £700k home is a money pit – how can I still retire at 60?’

    (The guy is 34, living with partner in a 3400 sqft listed townhouse in Leicestershire.)

    Er ... move somewhere smaller?

    https://archive.ph/AiJMD
    My ex piet de terre in Soho almost directly opposite Grouchos is exactly 10% the size of your listed town house in Leicestershire and it's just going on the market for £880,000. And I bet you don't get girls peeing against the wall in Dean St either
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,116
    rcs1000 said:

    Errr: isn't the difficult bit with carriers finding them?

    There have been lots of weapons (including nuclear ones) that are pretty effective at destroying carriers. The difficult bit is finding the carrier group in an ocean of sea, and knowing exactly where it will be when your missile arrives there, and having the missile move at a speed that enables it to use sensors to maneuver.

    Because the problem with hypersonic missiles and the like is that sensor performance is essentially destroyed by the act of travelling through the air at Mach 8 or whatever. So how can you see what it is that you want to hit?

    Edit to add: that means that these missiles can be great at hitting ground based targets that don't move (hospitals! power stations!) but are rubbish at hitting moving targets. Even slowly moving ones.
    IMV there are many issues with what they are saying. My main point was that they seem to think they could do something, and there would be zero repercussions. "We can do this to you!"

    They don't hear the reply: "And what do you think we'd do to you if you did?"

    Satellites can help track carriers; but I'm unsure how much coverage Russia has 24/7 worldwide.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    Taz said:

    The story just says a holiday romance, it doesn't go into any of the gruesome details. Sex with a minor is a different matter. The article says he is jailed over a holiday romance which seems pretty benign.
    He’s jailed for sex with a minor.

    Some countries apply leniency over statutory rape laws when two willing participants are of roughly similar age. Other countries don’t.

    I suspect what happens is that in a couple of weeks in the big house the young man agrees to plead guilty and be deported. AIUI he’s a resident currently at school and living with his parents in Dubai, which makes for a complex situation as far as the family is concerned.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,047

    IMV there are many issues with what they are saying. My main point was that they seem to think they could do something, and there would be zero repercussions. "We can do this to you!"

    They don't hear the reply: "And what do you think we'd do to you if you did?"

    Satellites can help track carriers; but I'm unsure how much coverage Russia has 24/7 worldwide.
    I can help with the last one.

    And the answer is "not a lot". Tracking a moving carrier group is difficult, because a single satellite will give you a picture of an area every 90 minutes or so. If the weather is clear, great! It can't have moved far enough to leave your track, and you can adjust the orbit so you have constant (i.e. every hour and a half) eyes on it.

    But what if the weather is bad? Suddenly you might not have eyes on the carrier group for 12 hours. Now where is it? At 30 knots, it can have moved 400 miles. That's a box 800 miles by 800 miles, or almost twice the size of a box containing France!

    It's easy for spy satellites to watch a port. Or to watch the Malacca Straits or the Straits of Hormuz.

    It's a lot harder for them to track a carrier group, even if they had infinite fuel for maneuvering. Which they don't.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,207
    edited December 2024

    (a) Compensation would require someone who had them to sue, but most people who had them were eager to take them. It's not those who received them who are concerned about them, by and large.

    (b) I doubt such comments now would mean the prescriptions at the time would fail the Bolam test.
    Listening back to the full statement, I am really impressed with his approach to this - sensitive, serious, thoughtful, and evidence based.

    Compliments from across the house, as far as I can see.

    And equally high quality responses from the other MPs I listened to, starting with the Shadow Health Secretary.

    I recommend a listen.
    https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/5c91805c-f151-45de-b806-816d8b7215d8?in=13:30:42

    (Also quite impressed with the Home Secretary Yvette Cooper on People Smuggling after her foreign trip, but that's a separate one.)
  • xyzxyzxyz said:

    What is democratic about the EU? You go on about facism but have 88 in your username. You can edit your username at CFTC.political erring.com
    1988 was the year I was born

    Is that a crime
  • xyzxyzxyz said:

    What is democratic about the EU? You go on about facism but have 88 in your username. You can edit your username at CFTC.political erring.com
    The EU is actually quite "democratic", contrary to how those with a propensity to have swivel eyes would have one believe.

    The executive of the EU is the Council of Ministers, or Council of The EU is the executive and is made up of ministers from each member countries, who are democratically elected by each member state. The Presidential roles are appointed by said democratically elected leaders. The European Parliament is directly elected.

    Contrast this with the UK : An unelected hereditary head of state. A bicameral legislature made up of an upper house that is still made up of random appointments and hereditaries. A lower house that currently has a party with a massive majority and untrammelled power that was voted in by just 20% of those eligible to vote.

    There is your answer and here endeth the lesson. The EU is massively more democratic than the UK. Fact.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,858
    rcs1000 said:

    I can help with the last one.

    And the answer is "not a lot". Tracking a moving carrier group is difficult, because a single satellite will give you a picture of an area every 90 minutes or so. If the weather is clear, great! It can't have moved far enough to leave your track, and you can adjust the orbit so you have constant (i.e. every hour and a half) eyes on it.

    But what if the weather is bad? Suddenly you might not have eyes on the carrier group for 12 hours. Now where is it? At 30 knots, it can have moved 400 miles. That's a box 800 miles by 800 miles, or almost twice the size of a box containing France!

    It's easy for spy satellites to watch a port. Or to watch the Malacca Straits or the Straits of Hormuz.

    It's a lot harder for them to track a carrier group, even if they had infinite fuel for maneuvering. Which they don't.
    As Herman Kahn put it - "Enemies are rarely cooperative. In fact they seem to try, often, to do the most inconvenient thing from the point of view of the decision maker."
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,858

    1988 was the year I was born

    Is that a crime
    Yes. You are guilty.

    {puts on black cap}

    You will be taken from this place to place a of punishment. There you will confined in a room with Piers Corby, Piers Morgan and Julian Assange. The only food will be pizza with pineapple on it. The only entertainment will be

    1) the worst Radiohead song on permanent repeat, with no way to stop it or reduce the volume.
    2) a laptop that only offers programming in python, or reading the comments on Conservative Home.

    May God have no mercy upon your soul.
  • The EU is actually quite "democratic", contrary to how those with a propensity to have swivel eyes would have one believe.

    The executive of the EU is the Council of Ministers, or Council of The EU is the executive and is made up of ministers from each member countries, who are democratically elected by each member state. The Presidential roles are appointed by said democratically elected leaders. The European Parliament is directly elected.

    Contrast this with the UK : An unelected hereditary head of state. A bicameral legislature made up of an upper house that is still made up of random appointments and hereditaries. A lower house that currently has a party with a massive majority and untrammelled power that was voted in by just 20% of those eligible to vote.

    There is your answer and here endeth the lesson. The EU is massively more democratic than the UK. Fact.
    The Commission is appointed, and the EU parliament just a talking shop. There is no way a EU citizen can effectively vote for the EU "government" to do something else. The President at least should be direct y elected. I would actually have been happier being in an EU having more of the trappings of a state, if they included an elected government and a single border force (Schengen is a great idea, but needs a ring of steel round the outside that shouldn't be the responsibility of governments)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,858
    On Russian satellite recon - https://www.thespacereview.com/article/4006/1

    Note that the first comment under the article is Dwayne Day giving it a thumbs up.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,794

    More or less fascist than, "[Hitler] then went on to stabilise the German economy, modernise the transport system (eg autobahns), host a great Olympics, and generally revitalise the whole nation."?
    The commissar supports the idea of cancelling elections if someone he doesn't like looks as if they're going to win. Shocker.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,794
    rcs1000 said:

    It's a little more complicated than that, because while Saudi could probably add about one million barrels a day to production, that will have an impact on drilling activity in the US. (Plus, of course, there's refinery capacity to think about.)

    With that said, a million barrels a day of incremental crude would almost certainly push prices down meaningfully. It would also make it harder for Russia to offer meaningful discounts to the Indians and Chinese.

    Russia's financial situation would be meaningfully impacted by such a move.

    HOWEVER.

    Why would Saudi do such a thing? Russia, while not a member of OPEC, has had friendly relations with them, and has - from time to time - reduced production in concert with them to lift global oil prices. Is there any guarantee a new Russian regime would do similarly? ON the other hand a Russian collapse would almost certainly result in a near term reduction in Russian oil exports, which would probably be a benefit to OPEC.
    I think Trump may convince the Saudis to pump more oil temporarily to help get US inflation down, that may have the side effect of pushing the Russian economy off the cliff edge.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,615
    rcs1000 said:

    It's a little more complicated than that, because while Saudi could probably add about one million barrels a day to production, that will have an impact on drilling activity in the US. (Plus, of course, there's refinery capacity to think about.)

    With that said, a million barrels a day of incremental crude would almost certainly push prices down meaningfully. It would also make it harder for Russia to offer meaningful discounts to the Indians and Chinese.

    Russia's financial situation would be meaningfully impacted by such a move.

    HOWEVER.

    Why would Saudi do such a thing? Russia, while not a member of OPEC, has had friendly relations with them, and has - from time to time - reduced production in concert with them to lift global oil prices. Is there any guarantee a new Russian regime would do similarly? ON the other hand a Russian collapse would almost certainly result in a near term reduction in Russian oil exports, which would probably be a benefit to OPEC.
    From a value perspective, given the trend against oil, doesn’t it make sense for Saudi to take a competitor down and maximise their near term volume/price? Longer time their oil is going to have fewer buyers
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,615
    Taz said:

    What's the difference between a Buffalo and a Bison

    Yow cor wosh yor ands in a Buffalo !!!!

    I'm here all week. Try the fish.
    Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo

    Is one of my favourite grammatically correct sentences in English
This discussion has been closed.