Punters think Lab’s chances of winning most seats at the GE have improved – politicalbetting.com

rcs1000 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

IanB2 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Fishing said:

Sorry if already posted, but this is a quite interesting piece of ChatGPT psychology on the Trump/Zelensky disaster. That's what happens when you meet a narcissistic psychopath and his sidekick:

Conclusion
Trump and his team employed the full spectrum of abusive tactics: gaslighting, victim-blaming, coercion into gratitude, and manipulation of the concepts of peace and diplomacy. This was not a negotiation—it was an attempt to force Zelensky into accepting terms beneficial to the US but potentially fatal for Ukraine.
1. Blaming the victim for their own situation
Trump explicitly tells Zelensky: “You have allowed yourself to be in a very bad position.” This is classic abuser rhetoric—blaming the victim for their suffering.
2. Pressure and coercion into ‘gratitude’
Vance demands that Zelensky say “thank you.” This is an extremely toxic tactic—forcing the victim to express gratitude for the help they desperately need, only to later accuse them of ingratitude if they attempt to assert their rights.
3. Manipulating the concept of ‘peace’
Trump claims that Zelensky is “not ready for peace.” However, what he actually means is Ukraine’s capitulation. This is a classic manipulation technique—substituting the idea of a just peace with the notion of surrender.
4. Refusing to acknowledge the reality of war
Trump repeatedly insists that Zelensky has “no cards to play” and that “without us, you have nothing.” This is yet another abusive tactic—undermining the victim’s efforts by asserting that they are powerless without the mercy of their ‘saviour.’
5. Devaluing the victims of war
“If you get a ceasefire, you must accept it so that bullets stop flying and your people stop dying,” Trump says. Yet, he ignores the fact that a ceasefire without guarantees is merely an opportunity for Russia to strike again.
6. Dominance tactics
Trump constantly interrupts Zelensky, cutting him off: “No, no, you’ve already said enough,” This is deliberate psychological pressure designed to establish a hierarchy in which Zelensky is the subordinate.
7. Forcing capitulation under the guise of ‘diplomacy’
Vance asserts that “the path to peace lies through diplomacy.” This is a classic strategy where the aggressor is given the opportunity to continue their aggression unchallenged.
8. Projection and distortion of reality
Trump declares: “You are playing with the lives of millions of people.” Yet, in reality, it is he who is doing exactly that—shifting responsibility onto Zelensky.
9. Creating the illusion that Ukraine ‘owes’ the US
Yes, the US is assisting Ukraine, but presenting this aid as “you must obey, or you will receive nothing” is not a partnership—it is financial and military coercion.
10. Undermining Ukraine’s resistance
Trump states that “if it weren’t for our weapons, this war would have ended in two weeks.” This is an attempt to erase Ukraine’s achievements and portray its efforts as entirely dependent on US support.

ChatGPT writes what you want it to write.

It's an interesting information gathering and summary tool (as long as it’s caveated for accuracy, as it does itself). It should not be used to draw conclusions that it's not capable of drawing.

I always thought ChatGPT isn’t uploaded with recent internet and couldn’t comment on topical events?

Anyhow, PB’ers who were here this morning already witnessed a superlative demonstration of where a combination of AI and sub-par human intelligence can take you. It wasn’t pretty.

The paid ChatGPT versions have access to the current internet. The rest has up to 2 years ago.

Specifically: ChatGPT can search the internet to find more recent information. Perplexity and Grok can also do this, while Claude cannot.

Personally, I now self host Open WebUI and plug that into Groq on the backend. (I also plug it into OpenAI and OpenRouter.)

This means that (a) I get access to all the leading models, (b) they typically run a lot faster (particularly the ones hosted on Groq), (c) all models get access to the web, and (d) it costs me maybe $10/month, which is a massive saving on what I'd pay if I wanted access to Perplexity + DeepSeek + Anthropic + OpenAI.

It's a bit of work, but well worth it.

Carnyx said:

JohnLilburne said:

MaxPB said:

TimS said:

MaxPB said:

malcolmg said:

StillWaters said:

DavidL said:

Sod those WASPI women, it is surely the United faithful that need some compensation and consideration for unexpected and brutal disappointments. £20k a head seems light for the trauma we have had to endure. This is beyond depressing and I am getting beyond depressed. Help.

It could be worse - my EA’s partner just got sacked from MK Dons

What is an EA

Executive Assistant, the new job title for Secretary.

The American word. Hopefully one of the fallouts from last Friday will be less US biz-speak and more good British stuff like “close of play” - to my knowledge the only British sporting metaphor to have made it into day to day American jargon,

I had to Google "PTO" when someone used it on Slack at my last company which had a big American and Irish contingent. Just couldn't figure it out.

Power Take-Off

Pacific Theater of Operations. (WW2.)

JohnLilburne said:

TOPPING said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TOPPING said:

kle4 said:

TOPPING said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TOPPING said:

So as I see it when there is no deal and no ceasefire then PB en masse will be high fiving and celebrating a huge victory.

(PS: there will be a deal.)

A good deal is ideal, but no deal is better than a bad deal.

And the only way to get a good deal is to be prepared to accept walking away with no deal.

You should have learnt that lesson five years ago.

It's great fun playing with the lives of thousands of people you don't know, isn't it.

He's not playing with anything, this same argument was made 3 years ago for crying out loud. For one thing advising Ukraine to concede its territory is also playing with the lives of thousands by submitting them to Russian rule forever. But more fundamentally it's deferring to whether Ukraine and its people feel the cost of continuing is worth it and supporting them if they do.

Reasonable people may differ about that position, but the 'playing with lives' argument is as silly as the other one from 3 years ago 'hurr hurr, I don't see you going on the front line'.

There is no plan anywhere to do what the PB Ukraine ultras want and are advocating.

Despite the constant whining on here, all that is being talked about is more of the same of the last three years.

Now, it has long been my position that Ukraine should stop fighting when Ukraine wants to stop fighting. But the very controlled aid it has been getting is about to become further restricted. So Zelensky must navigate within those constraints and I have no doubt that he will and a deal will be done.

More of the same is the right thing to do.

The UK alone is richer than Russia.

The UK and Europe and other assorted allies are considerably wealthier than Russia. We can continue more of the same with or without America.

So what do we think Starmer's plan will be. Invasion of Russia or ceasefire somewhere along today's positions.

Luckyguy1983 said:

JohnLilburne said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

JohnLilburne said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

JohnLilburne said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

StillWaters said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

StillWaters said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

StillWaters said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Malmesbury said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

StillWaters said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

JohnLilburne said:

TOPPING said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

TOPPING said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

twistedfirestopper3 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

TOPPING said:

I mean I've only seen the highlights but surely Trump is simply taking a side in one of the oldest and most difficult dilemmas. What is worth giving up to stop the killing.

Why is dealing with that impossible question so reprehensible.

We see it in aid all the time (enable/support the tyrants to get food to the citizens..)

Yes, he’s decided that giving up Ukraine is worth it to stem the expense to the US.
The democratically elected government of Ukraine - along with the opposition, judging by their public comments yesterday, disagree.

Chuck into the mix Europe’s future security, which the US has apparently decided is no longer a matter for them, then a polite no thanks is in order.
No skin in the game, no say.

All that, of course, is predicated on Europe getting its shit together over the next few days and weeks.

I would like to see Europe get its shit together in the next 24 hours.

The billions the UK promised yesterday are a good start.

Lets show the Americans we can help defeat Russia with or without them - but if its without them, they don't get a say in what happens afterwards.

What jobs will guarantee exemption from being called up to fight in this proposed EU war against Russia?
I'll get my lads writing their job applications out ASAP.

Who said anything about the EU? Or war with Russia?

Russia is a small country, it is smaller than Italy economically. It is not some mighty bear that we should be afraid of.

Ukraine is able to defeat Russia with our backing, we have no reason or need to go to war, just continue to support Ukraine.

Do you think what is happening now (what you want to continue with) is going to allow Ukraine to defeat Russia.

Eventually, yes.

And that is a legitimate view, if misguided in my mind. It means thousands more deaths of people that are not you or your family but so be it. Trump's is that he wants the killing to stop. With all the compromises that involves. Why is that view so reprehensible.

Trump doesn't want the killing to stop. He wants Ukraine to surrender, after which hundreds of thousands will be killed by Russia. Stopping the war doesn't bring
peace, it enables genocide.

I think this probably needs a bit of an accompanying explainer?

Not for anyone who has been paying attention for the last decade

Well given that you seem to think that's what you've been doing, perhaps you will favour us with an explanation of how demographically challenged Russia, having achieved all its territorial ambitions, is going to slaughter 200,000+ innocents.

Historically, conquering armies have had little trouble in massacring civilians.

In Ukraine, we have detailed, criminal case grade evidence of murders, expulsions and kidnapping of children in the areas occupied by Russia. En masse.9

In addition, the original plans for the Russian invasion were captured. They included mass arrests of the political and intellectual classes, as part of a plan to eliminate the idea of Ukraine as a separate state to Russia, culturally.

So you need to explain why you think that the Russians would behave differently in any areas of the Ukraine they conquer from
now, to the way they behaved (and planned to behave) in those they have conquered.

I can well believe that they plan to do all
those horrible things. But none of them amount to killing hundreds of thousands, or anything like. That's why I asked for an explanation, and why I wasn't surprised not to get one.

May be we can work to the internationally accepted definition of “genocide” rather than the pretendy straw man made up by a
Russian sympathising conspiracy theorist such as yourself?

Maybe you could actually READ you daft fuckwit - I was asking for John Lilburne's explanation of his supposition that hundreds of thousands would be killed if Ukraine surrendered. Genocide wasn't mentioned.

It was in the other post line to which you originally replied on. But of course truth doesn’t matter to you. Just your master’s bidding.

This conversation is showing you up to be a complete loon. I questioned a claim that Putin would slaughter hundreds of thousands post-"surrender". Now I am apparently twisting the meaning of genocide by using the frames of reference given in the original post?

As for 'my master's bidding' - I don't have a master, and that allows me to speak as I find. Perhaps you should think about who has benefitted you, and how that has informed your own viewpoint, because your above post reads like classic projection to me.

The original post that I replied to - and where you responded to me - talked about genocide and you responded with a straw man on 200,000+ deaths

I know that you have consistently parroted Russian propaganda lines from MH17 onward. But I forget you are a truth seeker who treats all statements by western governments with scepticism. And yet, somehow, you always end up sharing the same position as the Russians.

But you’re right. I’ve no evidence that you are paid by the Russians. May be you are just a fool instead.

Dear God, This was the post I replied to:

Trump doesn't want the killing to stop. He wants Ukraine to surrender, after which hundreds of thousands will be killed by Russia. Stopping the war doesn't bring
peace, it enables genocide.

200,000+ is the minimum number that that comment could have been referring to. So it wasn't any kind of 'straw man' - it was a conservative summation of the statement I took issue with.

Did you read the Wikipedia article I posted? Or do you regard it as anti-Russian propaganda?

No, sorry, I was too busy defending myself from accusations of redefining genocide and making straw men for numbers that you had put forward. I can't see it in the thread, so if you wish to repost it, I'll read it.

Russians. It's what they do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes. Along with a prediction that what the Russians will do to Ukrainian intelligentsia if they win will look rather like Katyń

Sure. The streak of brutality that runs through Russian culture predates the Soviets - it even predates Peter the Great. I know that. I am not actually defending the invasion (I never have) or suggesting that Putin has "peaceful intentions". I took took issue with your statement because I see Russia killing 200,000 as a consequence of a ceasefire (or Ukrainian surrender as you put it) as extremely unlikely.

Russia can already (and does) kill people within the Ukrainian territory it holds. I see peace as making such killings less likely, due to such events not being camouflaged by the fog of war. I can certainly see opponents of Russia being targeted, but I would also imagine that they would be allowed to depart Russian-held territory as part of the peace deal (in exchange for those loyal to Russia being permitted to leave Ukrainian-held territory). So all in all, I see less Ukrainian people dying at the hands of Russia as a result of a peace deal, rather than more.

I can't share your optimism.

I think it's a fairly dispassionate analysis.

Indeed. Just wrong. The Russians will commit even more genocide in whatever part of Ukraine they occupy after peace is declared

Nigelb said:

Acronyms are dangerous, in the hands of fools.

DOGE just defunded a load of research into Point of Care healthcare, as their trawl identified ‘POC’ as the wokeist ‘People of Color’.

Scott_xP said:

The Royal family has been fairly spanking the colonials today...

The responses to this have been particularly choice

@nicksortor
You going on the frontlines too, King Charles?

Maybe some of your children?


Ummmmmmmmmmmmm...

Yokes said:

This isnt complicated:

1. Europe needs to financially support the Ukraine war effort on the basis the US is out
2. It needs to spend some of its own money and use those frozen Russian assets, not the interest, the assets, neatly ensuring Russia remains broke post war
3. Most of the basics of what Ukraine needs can be sourced internationally. The EU spent far too long talking about its own defence industry which couldnt supply enough whilst it should have been going elsewhere to get supplies. It eventually did but it was late and the amounts in that particular plan were not enough
4. It needs to pony up a large additional amount of cash, say 100billion over 3 years and offer it to buy US defence goods, particularly in the area of force multiplication where the best kit tends to be US, and dare the US government to say no.
5. It needs to open its stores and empty them to Ukraine because, believe me, there is plenty still there.
6. Offer a rare earth deal to Ukraine because these assets are just as important to Europe as they are to the US, particularly the US defence industry....
7. Stop fucking about and just do it

The direct Russian military threat, as evidenced by Ukraine isnt quite as mighty as it looks. The Europeans have time to build their own defence whilst giving full whack to Ukraine now.

Will they do it? Probably not, because for all Trumps arseholishness and the fact he is in Russia's pocket, he is right on one thing. Europe freeloaded off the US security umbrella for decades.

Nigelb said:

.

Carnyx said:

JohnLilburne said:

MaxPB said:

TimS said:

MaxPB said:

malcolmg said:

StillWaters said:

DavidL said:

Sod those WASPI women, it is surely the United faithful that need some compensation and consideration for unexpected and brutal disappointments. £20k a head seems light for the trauma we have had to endure. This is beyond depressing and I am getting beyond depressed. Help.

It could be worse - my EA’s partner just got sacked from MK Dons

What is an EA

Executive Assistant, the new job title for Secretary.

The American word. Hopefully one of the fallouts from last Friday will be less US biz-speak and more good British stuff like “close of play” - to my knowledge the only British sporting metaphor to have made it into day to day American jargon,

I had to Google "PTO" when someone used it on Slack at my last company which had a big American and Irish contingent. Just couldn't figure it out.

Power Take-Off

Pacific Theater of Operations. (WW2.)

Acronyms are dangerous, in the hands of fools.

DOGE just defunded a load of research into Point of Care healthcare, as their trawl identified ‘POC’ as the wokeist ‘People of Color’.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Beth Rigby of Sky reporting that as we are not In the EU it gives Starmer the space to negotiate with Trump and Starmer is an unexpected peacemaker

Brexit dividend !!!!

Malmesbury said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

TOPPING said:

Nigelb said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

TOPPING seems to be one of the few who is asking what ending the war means in practice.

He might be asking, but he's certainly not volunteering much.

I can't call what people involved will be willing to give up. I do know however that all parties will need to be pragmatic.

Which simple admission is already hugely more insightful than the wishful thinking on display by most of PB today.

It seems obvious to me that any deal is going to see Ukraine lose territory. Is this controversial?

No.

Where it becomes… interesting… is that a win for Russia (Putin) involves taking about half of Ukraine including the entire coastline.

So there cannot be a peace deal until that happens. Which means that Ukraine must be bought to its knees first. For Peace.

Scott_xP said:

The Royal family has been fairly spanking the colonials today...

The responses to this have been particularly choice

@nicksortor
You going on the frontlines too, King Charles?

Maybe some of your children?


Ummmmmmmmmmmmm...

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

@Mexicanpete you need to be locked up you menace

There is always the flag button.

It’s a joke Pete come on you joker

Nigelb said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mexicanpete said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sky

Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket

Corrected for you.

Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete

I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.

You changed my post and put it in bold

Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised

If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete

Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.

I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.

MarqueeMark said:

Yokes said:

This isnt complicated:

1. Europe needs to financially support the Ukraine war effort on the basis the US is out
2. It needs to spend some of its own money and use those frozen Russian assets, not the interest, the assets, neatly ensuring Russia remains broke post war
3. Most of the basics of what Ukraine needs can be sourced internationally. The EU spent far too long talking about its own defence industry which couldnt supply enough whilst it should have been going elsewhere to get supplies. It eventually did but it was late and the amounts in that particular plan were not enough
4. It needs to pony up a large additional amount of cash, say 100billion over 3 years and offer it to buy US defence goods, particularly in the area of force multiplication where the best kit tends to be US, and dare the US government to say no.
5. It needs to open its stores and empty them to Ukraine because, believe me, there is plenty still there.
6. Offer a rare earth deal to Ukraine because these assets are just as important to Europe as they are to the US, particularly the US defence industry....
7. Stop fucking about and just do it

The direct Russian military threat, as evidenced by Ukraine isnt quite as mighty as it looks. The Europeans have time to build their own defence whilst giving full whack to Ukraine now.

Will they do it? Probably not, because for all Trumps arseholishness and the fact he is in Russia's pocket, he is right on one thing. Europe freeloaded off the US security umbrella for decades.

Trump will hate 6. But - art of the deal.

Otherwise, spot on.

Mexicanpete said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

@Mexicanpete you need to be locked up you menace

There is always the flag button.

It’s a joke Pete come on you joker

I wasn't referencing yourself.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mexicanpete said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mexicanpete said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sky

Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket

Corrected for you.

Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete

I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.

You changed my post and put it in bold

Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised

If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete

Complain to the mods, that is what they are for. Ask for a ban.

I will never flag or ask the moderators to ban anyone

That is a matter entirely for the moderators and anyone asking for such disrespect the moderators

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nigelb said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mexicanpete said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sky

Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket

Corrected for you.

Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete

I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.

You changed my post and put it in bold

Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised

If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete

Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.

I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.

I simply do not accept altering anyone's post is reasonable - I could have made the amendments in bold

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nigelb said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mexicanpete said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sky

Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket

Corrected for you.

Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete

I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.

You changed my post and put it in bold

Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised

If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete

Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.

I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.

I simply do not accept altering anyone's post is reasonable - I could have made the amendments in bold

Mexicanpete said:

Jesus, Kuennsberg demanding Zelensky apologises to Trump on BBC News. What is wrong with these people?

kamski said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

...

kamski said:

.

Luckyguy1983 said:

...

kamski said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

williamglenn said:

This has gone under the radar but seems very significant:

https://x.com/nhazony/status/1895954842662883767

Israeli forces are preparing to advance toward Damascus, Syria, to defend the Druze suburb of Jaramana, currently under attack by the Syrian regime (HTS).

Good for Israel. Hope they can protect the Druze.

No doubt @bondegezou will be along before long to repeat his spin that Israel is attacking peaceful Syria unprovoked (despite them being legally at war), that the new regime are peaceful and have done nothing wrong (despite them being proscribed terrorists in this country before they took over) and that the Druze don't need protection.

Anything to blame Israel, plus ça change.

You are responding to a williamglenn post. You don’t think he might have selected a tweet from a somewhat biased source? Are you really that naive?

Oh I know full well he might have.

Not as naïve as the individual who claimed with a straight face that Israel is not at war with Syria. Who was that again?

Israel and Syria are legally at war, but there has been a UN-overseen ceasefire for decades. Israel has now repeatedly attacked Syria, unprovoked. They marched into the UN buffer zone. They have repeatedly bombed Syria. This is landgrab.

They are at war, yes. Ceasefire is meaningless, just ask the Ukrainians.

Syria is now under the control of what was a formerly proscribed terrorist organisation that has been nihilistic towards Israel and in favour of Israel's destruction. If grabbing land from their enemy they're at war with aids their survival, then good for them!

It’s a ceasefire that’s held for, I think, longer than you’ve been alive. To dismiss it is naive.

One person was killed in Damascus and Israel are saying that justifies invasion. Netanyahu is like Trump and Putin.

Yet not a ceasefire that led to a peace treaty so the status of war is still valid.

I despise Netanyahu but the war predates him, and my birth, and the birth of almost everyone on this site.

It's a shame that the Assad regime fell, as that regime protected minorities. The present regime are ISIS adjacent, and letting out ISIS (from their SDF captors) is likely to be the next step.

And we wonder why Trump questions liberal interventionism?

Not only did Assad support ISIS, but Trump has threatened to abandon the SDF, who are the ones primarily responsible (with US help) for containing ISIS. The new government in Damascus has every reason to want ISIS defeated, unlike Assad.

Israel, for their own reasons, just want to scupper the chance of an end to the civil war in Syria.

That's a collection of statements that bear no relation to each other or to the truth.

Which of those statements isn't true?

Assad supported ISIS
https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/media/4698

Trump threatened to abandon the SDF
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/19/us-troops-syria-withdrawal-trump

The SDF defeated ISIS in Syria:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-47678157

New government in Damascus has every reason ISIS is defeated: this is just logical, as they want control over the whole of Syria.

You seem to support Assad, who helped ISIS, refused to fight them while he was doing his best to murder everyone else, and is one of the worst war criminals in the world.

The essay you link to is interesting, but many of the statements in the introduction (I have not read further) don't seem to me to bear much scrutiny. Assad is accused of "buying oil from ISIS" and "buying grain from ISIS" - but what else does one do when ISIS controls the oil fields and the grain fields? Let the population starve in the dark?

He is also accused in the intro of "attacking the moderate rebels instead of ISIS" again I'm not sure what is to be expected of someone fighting a civil war. There were many flavours of rebel in the conflict, but few of them were moderate. I don't see how Assad could have prosecuted the war differently. Driven past the moderate rebels (taking fire) to get to ISIS?

I am a lot more persuaded by the regime's early support for ISIS in Iraq, which seems likely, and just proves that one should never work through such groups, as it always comes back to bite you.

Yes, the SDF is in a perilous position, but the reason that this makes ISIS more likely to rise again is that the HTS regime, which is ideologically adjacent to ISIS, will then be left holding the keys to the ISIS prisoners. You may find this piece interesting:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/isis-is-filling-the-vacuum-in-syria/

I supported Assad as the least worst option. Sadly events are proving me right, again. Every time the West gets on its white charger and decides to get rid of some nasty strongman, things invariably get worse, mostly much worse. It's a lesson we seem to need to learn again and again. I would like us, in Britain if nowhere else, to sort out our own issues, and stop trying to fix the rest of the world because they don't do things the way that we would like them to.

So all of my statements were either true, or at least arguable. Rather than 'a collection of statements that bear no relation to each other or the truth'.

What is your position? It's hard to tell, but you seem to think the US should withdraw entirely from Syria, and yet you also don't want ISIS prisoners released. This is completely incoherent.

You also say 'the West gets on its white charger and decides to get rid of some nasty strong man' - as if you imagine it was the West that got rid of Assad. Is that what you think? Because that only demonstrates total ignorance about what happened in Syria. Are you really willing to support a dictator who murdered hundreds of thousands of civilians while obviously not having informed yourself of the basic facts? I'm sorry but it's fucking disgusting.

Stuartinromford said:

Mexicanpete said:

Jesus, Kuennsberg demanding Zelensky apologises to Trump on BBC News. What is wrong with these people?

They saw that "Yes- IT'S WAR!" episode of The Day Today and didn't realise it was a joke.

I think Chris Morris and Armando Iannucci are genius-level comic minds, love everything they have done, but next time they come up with something to satirise... I hope they don't, because the risk of it coming true is too great.

Mexicanpete said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nigelb said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mexicanpete said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sky

Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket

Corrected for you.

Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete

I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.

You changed my post and put it in bold

Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised

If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete

Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.

I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.

I simply do not accept altering anyone's post is reasonable - I could have made the amendments in bold

"Fixed that for you" when editing a comment and putting the edit in bold is a very long-standing meme of expressing what you mean, nothing unreasonable about it. The bit in bold is the edit, that's the whole point.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/FTFY

If BigG. wants to make a big deal of it, that's his prerogative. I am not apologising for the reasons you outlined.

I could do with spending less time on here.

Eabhal said:

Benpointer said:

Everyone involved in Boldgate should be sent to Wick

That's a bit too far.

Mexicanpete said:

Benpointer said:

Do we need a PB Peace Summit to calm things down after Boldgate?

I am a big smelly poo.

Benpointer said:

Eabhal said:

Benpointer said:

Everyone involved in Boldgate should be sent to Wick

That's a bit too far.

Naughty!

rcs1000 said:

Mexicanpete said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nigelb said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mexicanpete said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sky

Zelenskyy ready to sign up to the protection racket

Corrected for you.

Rather than change posts that you have not written, maybe make the change in your own @Mexicanpete

I didn't change your original post just your post within mine. Minerals deal my arse. It's a mafia style protection racket.

You changed my post and put it in bold

Frankly if posting on PB can be altered by other posters than not only is it creating a wrong impression of the original post but if it became an acceptable practice then this forum would be compromised

If you have something to say keep it under @Mexicanpete

Putting it in bold was a pretty clear indication he’d changed it in order to comment, rather than misrepresent you, Big_G.

I don’t think it compromises you at all, though you’re entitled to disagree with his point.

I simply do not accept altering anyone's post is reasonable - I could have made the amendments in bold

"Fixed that for you" when editing a comment and putting the edit in bold is a very long-standing meme of expressing what you mean, nothing unreasonable about it. The bit in bold is the edit, that's the whole point.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/FTFY

If BigG. wants to make a big deal of it, that's his prerogative. I am not apologising for the reasons you outlined.

I could do with spending less time on here.

That's easy enough: all you need to do is constantly repost Kremlin talking points.

Mexicanpete said:

Nigelb said:

Mexicanpete said:

Jesus, Kuennsberg demanding Zelensky apologises to Trump on BBC News. What is wrong with these people?

Did Trump just appoint her to his administration ?
Or is she just talking shit ?

The latter.

nico67 said:

Will the US still be willing to sell arms to the UK and EU to be re-directed to Ukraine if it stops its own support?

rcs1000 said:

kamski said:

rcs1000 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

IanB2 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Fishing said:

Sorry if already posted, but this is a quite interesting piece of ChatGPT psychology on the Trump/Zelensky disaster. That's what happens when you meet a narcissistic psychopath and his sidekick:

Conclusion
Trump and his team employed the full spectrum of abusive tactics: gaslighting, victim-blaming, coercion into gratitude, and manipulation of the concepts of peace and diplomacy. This was not a negotiation—it was an attempt to force Zelensky into accepting terms beneficial to the US but potentially fatal for Ukraine.
1. Blaming the victim for their own situation
Trump explicitly tells Zelensky: “You have allowed yourself to be in a very bad position.” This is classic abuser rhetoric—blaming the victim for their suffering.
2. Pressure and coercion into ‘gratitude’
Vance demands that Zelensky say “thank you.” This is an extremely toxic tactic—forcing the victim to express gratitude for the help they desperately need, only to later accuse them of ingratitude if they attempt to assert their rights.
3. Manipulating the concept of ‘peace’
Trump claims that Zelensky is “not ready for peace.” However, what he actually means is Ukraine’s capitulation. This is a classic manipulation technique—substituting the idea of a just peace with the notion of surrender.
4. Refusing to acknowledge the reality of war
Trump repeatedly insists that Zelensky has “no cards to play” and that “without us, you have nothing.” This is yet another abusive tactic—undermining the victim’s efforts by asserting that they are powerless without the mercy of their ‘saviour.’
5. Devaluing the victims of war
“If you get a ceasefire, you must accept it so that bullets stop flying and your people stop dying,” Trump says. Yet, he ignores the fact that a ceasefire without guarantees is merely an opportunity for Russia to strike again.
6. Dominance tactics
Trump constantly interrupts Zelensky, cutting him off: “No, no, you’ve already said enough,” This is deliberate psychological pressure designed to establish a hierarchy in which Zelensky is the subordinate.
7. Forcing capitulation under the guise of ‘diplomacy’
Vance asserts that “the path to peace lies through diplomacy.” This is a classic strategy where the aggressor is given the opportunity to continue their aggression unchallenged.
8. Projection and distortion of reality
Trump declares: “You are playing with the lives of millions of people.” Yet, in reality, it is he who is doing exactly that—shifting responsibility onto Zelensky.
9. Creating the illusion that Ukraine ‘owes’ the US
Yes, the US is assisting Ukraine, but presenting this aid as “you must obey, or you will receive nothing” is not a partnership—it is financial and military coercion.
10. Undermining Ukraine’s resistance
Trump states that “if it weren’t for our weapons, this war would have ended in two weeks.” This is an attempt to erase Ukraine’s achievements and portray its efforts as entirely dependent on US support.

ChatGPT writes what you want it to write.

It's an interesting information gathering and summary tool (as long as it’s caveated for accuracy, as it does itself). It should not be used to draw conclusions that it's not capable of drawing.

I always thought ChatGPT isn’t uploaded with recent internet and couldn’t comment on topical events?

Anyhow, PB’ers who were here this morning already witnessed a superlative demonstration of where a combination of AI and sub-par human intelligence can take you. It wasn’t pretty.

The paid ChatGPT versions have access to the current internet. The rest has up to 2 years ago.

Specifically: ChatGPT can search the internet to find more recent information. Perplexity and Grok can also do this, while Claude cannot.

Personally, I now self host Open WebUI and plug that into Groq on the backend. (I also plug it into OpenAI and OpenRouter.)

This means that (a) I get access to all the leading models, (b) they typically run a lot faster (particularly the ones hosted on Groq), (c) all models get access to the web, and (d) it costs me maybe $10/month, which is a massive saving on what I'd pay if I wanted access to Perplexity + DeepSeek + Anthropic + OpenAI.

It's a bit of work, but well worth it.

Out of curiosity - worth it for what?

I have an LLM open in a window, always.

I'm constantly using then: is [x] accurate? When did [y] happen? Read the email below, is there any element which isn't clear?

Luckyguy1983 said:

Mexicanpete said:

Benpointer said:

Do we need a PB Peace Summit to calm things down after Boldgate?

I am a big smelly poo.

Ok, not something we needed to know, but fair enough.

ohnotnow said:

Stuartinromford said:

Mexicanpete said:

Jesus, Kuennsberg demanding Zelensky apologises to Trump on BBC News. What is wrong with these people?

They saw that "Yes- IT'S WAR!" episode of The Day Today and didn't realise it was a joke.

I think Chris Morris and Armando Iannucci are genius-level comic minds, love everything they have done, but next time they come up with something to satirise... I hope they don't, because the risk of it coming true is too great.

Oddly, I was watching that just the other day :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3BO6GP9NMY

I really need to rewatch them all.

Eabhal said:

Benpointer said:

Everyone involved in Boldgate should be sent to Wick

That's a bit too far.

nico67 said:

Apparently Trump will only agree to meet Zelenskyy again if he offers a grovelling apology .

Richard_Tyndall said:

nico67 said:

Apparently Trump will only agree to meet Zelenskyy again if he offers a grovelling apology .

He should be told to go fuck himself.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Mexicanpete said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Mexicanpete said:

Benpointer said:

Do we need a PB Peace Summit to calm things down after Boldgate?

I am a big smelly poo.

Ok, not something we needed to know, but fair enough.

I am often found inside Trump's diapers.

Nappies.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sky

Zelenskyy ready to sign the minerals deal

Richard_Tyndall said:

nico67 said:

Apparently Trump will only agree to meet Zelenskyy again if he offers a grovelling apology .

He should be told to go fuck himself.

Scott_xP said:

@factal

Eyewitnesses report large fire, explosion after apparent Ukrainian drone strike on oil refinery in Ufa, Russia, according to FSB-linked media

Foxy said:

Scott_xP said:

@factal

Eyewitnesses report large fire, explosion after apparent Ukrainian drone strike on oil refinery in Ufa, Russia, according to FSB-linked media

Ufa is really quite a long way from Ukraine.

Foxy said:

Mexicanpete said:

Benpointer said:

Do we need a PB Peace Summit to calm things down after Boldgate?

I don't believe it is my responsibility to report myself to the mods. BigG needs to do that for himself unless someone else is happy to flag on his behalf.

Isn't the first rule of ban club to never talk about ban club?

Foxy said:

Scott_xP said:

@factal

Eyewitnesses report large fire, explosion after apparent Ukrainian drone strike on oil refinery in Ufa, Russia, according to FSB-linked media

Ufa is really quite a long way from Ukraine.

nico67 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

nico67 said:

Apparently Trump will only agree to meet Zelenskyy again if he offers a grovelling apology .

He should be told to go fuck himself.

Perhaps he could blame it on English being his second language and next time he’ll bring an interpreter and say apologies if my words were mis-interpreted. It’s not really a proper apology but might allow the stain on humanity and his odious sidekick enough to see him again.