Howdy, Stranger!

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

Boris Johnson has worse net ratings than Starmer, Badenoch, and Farage – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,529
edited June 18 in General
Boris Johnson has worse net ratings than Starmer, Badenoch, and Farage – politicalbetting.com

Latest political net favourability ratings (15-16 June 2025)Party leadersFarage: -31Starmer: -34Badenoch: -34Davey: -5 (41% DK)Denyer: -6 (76% DK)Ramsay: -8 (81% DK)Other high-profile politiciansRayner: -26Johnson: -35Corbyn: -38Reeves: -42yougov.co.uk/politics/art…

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,368
    First.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,619
    Don't tell @HYUFD !!!
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,391
    edited June 18
    The favourable ratings for Johnson aren't that bad. It would be interesting to compare his figures with other ex-PMs.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,188
    No surprises here.
    His sycophants seem not to notice the general public had had quite enough of him when he went.
    Rather like Margaret before him.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,619
    Why would anyone supplant a leader with somebody with worse ratings than Kemi Badenoch and Sir Keir Starmer?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,188
    edited June 18
    Although "not an MP" is rather less surmountable an obstacle at the moment, given that the Tories don't have a safe seat anywhere just now
  • LeonLeon Posts: 61,994
    I quite like Boris, but his time has come and gone, and let's face it, he f*cked up being PM. Also, no one will forgive him for the Boriswave

    Soz Boz
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,944

    Why would anyone supplant a leader with somebody with worse ratings than Kemi Badenoch and Sir Keir Starmer?

    Because they still covet the title Prime Minister with the heat of a thousand Suns on a day like this.
    dixiedean said:

    No surprises here.
    His sycophants seem not to notice the general public had had quite enough of him when he went.
    Rather like Margaret before him.

    One of my theories about the Conservative Party is that it still has unresolved Mummy Issues that have festered since November 1990. Hence all of this.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,134
    Those are desperate favourable ratings for all political leaders - Starmer, Farage and Badenoch. Even Davey is more of a withheld judgement than an endorsement.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 23,065
    Where you have a lot of D/K, this distorts the figures. Perhaps the ratio of favourable to unfavourble would be a better metric?

    Then, for example, Starmer is 0.45 and Jenrick is 0.38, so the latter scores worse.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 61,994
    FF43 said:

    Those are desperate favourable ratings for all political leaders - Starmer, Farage and Badenoch. Even Davey is more of a withheld judgement than an endorsement.

    i doubt if more than 10% of British voters can identify Ed Davey. I struggle, sometimes
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 10,124

    Why would anyone supplant a leader with somebody with worse ratings than Kemi Badenoch and Sir Keir Starmer?

    Because they still covet the title Prime Minister with the heat of a thousand Suns on a day like this.
    dixiedean said:

    No surprises here.
    His sycophants seem not to notice the general public had had quite enough of him when he went.
    Rather like Margaret before him.

    One of my theories about the Conservative Party is that it still has unresolved Mummy Issues that have festered since November 1990. Hence all of this.
    Curiously, the emergence of Trump and MAGA might help resolve matters. Thatcherism is being abandoned at speed by the British Right as the US Right has done with Reaganism. The sun may soon be setting on the era of Maggie.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,452

    The favourable ratings for Johnson aren't that bad. It would be interesting to compare his figures with other ex-PMs.

    Unlike the other departed PMs he remains relevant because of his continued self - promotion and total lack of self-awareness that being a crap stand up was not the perfect credentials for the role of Prime Minister.

    He lingers like a bad smell.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,134
    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    Those are desperate favourable ratings for all political leaders - Starmer, Farage and Badenoch. Even Davey is more of a withheld judgement than an endorsement.

    i doubt if more than 10% of British voters can identify Ed Davey. I struggle, sometimes
    As many like him as they do Farage and Starmer, which is not that many. The rest are more Don't Know than dislike, unlike for the other two.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 61,994
    Hmm....

    "Iran faces near total internet shutdown

    The previous sharp drop in traffic in Iran was found to be due to a cyber attack. Why the internet crashed in Iran this time is still unclear."

    https://x.com/SprinterObserve/status/1935345408126918790
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 24,808

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,744
    OT. The Orkney Assassin; Murder in the Isles.

    An outstanding documentary

    https://www.firecrestfilms.com/films/the-orkney-assassin-murder-in-the-isles
  • Penddu2Penddu2 Posts: 773
    Following previous conversation about going back in time to abort an individual - my preferred abortee would be Nigel Farage...
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 65,768
    Good afternoon

    I am sure @HYUFD will be along to explain why you are wrong

    For me Johnson is over and is not about to be resurrected in any form
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,368
    WTF. DWP seem to have put a clause in the new benefits bill that allows Sec of State to exempt pension age PIP people from the harsher rules on points.

    Boomers. Time after time after time, their nest is redecorated with new feathers while everyone else pays.

    Astonishing.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 55,172
    Leon said:

    Hmm....

    "Iran faces near total internet shutdown

    The previous sharp drop in traffic in Iran was found to be due to a cyber attack. Why the internet crashed in Iran this time is still unclear."

    https://x.com/SprinterObserve/status/1935345408126918790

    The Iranians announced they would be turning off Internet links in/out of Iran, yesterday, IIRC.

    Due to Biden specifically requesting it, Starlink works in Iran, though.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,452

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,368
    Leon said:

    Hmm....

    "Iran faces near total internet shutdown

    The previous sharp drop in traffic in Iran was found to be due to a cyber attack. Why the internet crashed in Iran this time is still unclear."

    https://x.com/SprinterObserve/status/1935345408126918790

    Is that a good idea from the Israeli side? How can the opposition protest in Tehran start if there is no internet for smart mobbing?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 55,172

    Leon said:

    Hmm....

    "Iran faces near total internet shutdown

    The previous sharp drop in traffic in Iran was found to be due to a cyber attack. Why the internet crashed in Iran this time is still unclear."

    https://x.com/SprinterObserve/status/1935345408126918790

    Is that a good idea from the Israeli side? How can the opposition protest in Tehran start if there is no internet for smart mobbing?
    Looks like it’s the Iranians, themselves.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/iran-plunged-internet-blackout-deepening-conflict-rcna213544
  • CookieCookie Posts: 15,378

    Leon said:

    Hmm....

    "Iran faces near total internet shutdown

    The previous sharp drop in traffic in Iran was found to be due to a cyber attack. Why the internet crashed in Iran this time is still unclear."

    https://x.com/SprinterObserve/status/1935345408126918790

    Is that a good idea from the Israeli side? How can the opposition protest in Tehran start if there is no internet for smart mobbing?
    Suspect this is the regime taking down the internet. ISTR they (i.e. the Iranian regime) said they were going to do this. Presumably because they fear revolt.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,351
    dixiedean said:

    Although "not an MP" is rather less surmountable an obstacle at the moment, given that the Tories don't have a safe seat anywhere just now

    He also appears to have no inclination to return. If he did, and fancied being LotO, he could have stood at the last GE - where despite the Tories' awful polling there were still seats he could have won - from where he'd have been extremely well-placed to win a leadership contest.

    Besides, how is the timing of a Johnson return / Badenoch ousting supposed to work? If he waits until she's no-confidenced or resigns, it's too late: he couldn't be an MP before the election was already underway (even if he had a friendly MP who'd resign for him and the Tories decided to hold the by-election before the leadership election, which would have to be doubtful). On the other hand, if he wants to come back first, and has the ability for force events, why isn't he already doing so?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 15,378
    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    Those are desperate favourable ratings for all political leaders - Starmer, Farage and Badenoch. Even Davey is more of a withheld judgement than an endorsement.

    i doubt if more than 10% of British voters can identify Ed Davey. I struggle, sometimes
    In a picture round of a quiz attended by over 100 people, last year, I'm pretty sure I was the only one who could identify him.
    (The round was 'visual clues to places in Trafford' - a car, a ring and a one ton weight for 'Carrington', a picture of a sailing boat for 'Sale', and so on; and this clue was a picture of Ed Davey and a picture of John Hulme. And I refuse to believe that anyone who could identify Ed Davey could not have then guessed 'Davyhulme'. There is nowhere else in Trafford starting 'Davey...' or 'Ed...'. Certainly ours was the only team who got the point on that one, and that question was pretty much a Cookie solo effort.)
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,650

    WTF. DWP seem to have put a clause in the new benefits bill that allows Sec of State to exempt pension age PIP people from the harsher rules on points.

    Boomers. Time after time after time, their nest is redecorated with new feathers while everyone else pays.

    Astonishing.

    Visit to the courts for breaching the equality act for them then.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 61,994
    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    Those are desperate favourable ratings for all political leaders - Starmer, Farage and Badenoch. Even Davey is more of a withheld judgement than an endorsement.

    i doubt if more than 10% of British voters can identify Ed Davey. I struggle, sometimes
    In a picture round of a quiz attended by over 100 people, last year, I'm pretty sure I was the only one who could identify him.
    (The round was 'visual clues to places in Trafford' - a car, a ring and a one ton weight for 'Carrington', a picture of a sailing boat for 'Sale', and so on; and this clue was a picture of Ed Davey and a picture of John Hulme. And I refuse to believe that anyone who could identify Ed Davey could not have then guessed 'Davyhulme'. There is nowhere else in Trafford starting 'Davey...' or 'Ed...'. Certainly ours was the only team who got the point on that one, and that question was pretty much a Cookie solo effort.)
    Yes, he's not only unknown, but even if you are told who he is, what he does, he is weirdly forgettable, he slips from your mind. Occasionally I remember that he exists, and I am always faintly surprised

    The Tories are no better. Who or what is a Philp? Does it do mel strides?
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,351

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 31,766
    Leon said:

    I quite like Boris, but his time has come and gone, and let's face it, he f*cked up being PM. Also, no one will forgive him for the Boriswave

    Soz Boz

    Mayor of London he should go for.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,408

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,383

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    He'll get through it thanks to his Sunni outlook on life?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 15,378

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,408
    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,017

    Leon said:

    I quite like Boris, but his time has come and gone, and let's face it, he f*cked up being PM. Also, no one will forgive him for the Boriswave

    Soz Boz

    Mayor of London he should go for.
    Yes! If only to see him come third or fourth.
  • vikvik Posts: 516

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Trump likes using force, but only against weak targets who cave immediately under pressure. If his opponent resists aggressively then Trump usually ends up chickening out.

    At the moment, it does look like Trump is going to chicken out again, because the Iranians are defiant and show no signs of "unconditionally surrending" like he demanded.

    He's now backtracking & wavering once again:

    President Trump said Wednesday that the United States may join the Israeli bombing campaign against Iran. But he also said the U.S. may not.

    “Nobody knows what I’m going to do,” he said during an event to install flag poles outside the White House.


    https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/06/18/world/israel-iran-trump/trump-says-nobody-knows-what-im-going-to-do-on-iran?smid=url-share
  • CookieCookie Posts: 15,378
    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    Those are desperate favourable ratings for all political leaders - Starmer, Farage and Badenoch. Even Davey is more of a withheld judgement than an endorsement.

    i doubt if more than 10% of British voters can identify Ed Davey. I struggle, sometimes
    In a picture round of a quiz attended by over 100 people, last year, I'm pretty sure I was the only one who could identify him.
    (The round was 'visual clues to places in Trafford' - a car, a ring and a one ton weight for 'Carrington', a picture of a sailing boat for 'Sale', and so on; and this clue was a picture of Ed Davey and a picture of John Hulme. And I refuse to believe that anyone who could identify Ed Davey could not have then guessed 'Davyhulme'. There is nowhere else in Trafford starting 'Davey...' or 'Ed...'. Certainly ours was the only team who got the point on that one, and that question was pretty much a Cookie solo effort.)
    Yes, he's not only unknown, but even if you are told who he is, what he does, he is weirdly forgettable, he slips from your mind. Occasionally I remember that he exists, and I am always faintly surprised

    The Tories are no better. Who or what is a Philp? Does it do mel strides?
    Indeed, as further evidence of his fogettability, there was a team who did spot John Hulme - but couldn't manage to guess 'Daveyhulme', going instead for 'Hulme' (which is in Manchester, not Trafford.) The sheer negative memorability of Ed Davey prevented them remembering the suburb of Davyhulme (older posters - i.e. all of you - will remember used to be the name of a constituency, once held by Winston Churchill's eponymous grandson).
  • CookieCookie Posts: 15,378

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    I did say almost.
    Was it militarily though? I've forgotten the details already (though I insist the book is very good) but I have half a memory that we basically bought our way to victory. Can't remember OTTOMH.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 5,076
    edited June 18

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    I don't suppose you have to occupy that many places to assume 'control' (in the Afghan sense).

    The Lut Desert has the highest ground surface temperatures on earth. 80C, according to the MODIS satellite.

    You can probably leave that bit off the invasion plan.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 38,916
    Leon said:

    Hmm....

    "Iran faces near total internet shutdown

    The previous sharp drop in traffic in Iran was found to be due to a cyber attack. Why the internet crashed in Iran this time is still unclear."

    https://x.com/SprinterObserve/status/1935345408126918790

    You could have read PB yesterday

    @KianpourWorld
    I was just told that Iranians have been informed the internet will be cut off from tonight. Unless they have Starlink, they won’t have connection.
    https://x.com/KianpourWorld/status/1935000795323170989
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,017

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Has there been an official calculation yet of how many human lives one shred of Netanyahu's reputation is worth (in Netanyahu's eyes)?
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 5,076
    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Has there been an official calculation yet of how many human lives one shred of Netanyahu's reputation is worth (in Netanyahu's eyes)?
    8.2bn - 1 ?
  • MightyAlexMightyAlex Posts: 1,775

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    We knew they had the gases because the Germans sold them the precursors.

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

    Seemed strange at the time that invading a nuclear armed country would be a good idea. ipso facto we knew they didn't have nukes and exaggerated the arsenal as a pretext.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,944

    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Has there been an official calculation yet of how many human lives one shred of Netanyahu's reputation is worth (in Netanyahu's eyes)?
    8.2bn - 1 ?
    That ignores any people yet to be born.

    All the stuff about differently-sized infinities is one of the reasons I ended up in physics not maths.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 35,744
    Scott_xP said:

    Leon said:

    Hmm....

    "Iran faces near total internet shutdown

    The previous sharp drop in traffic in Iran was found to be due to a cyber attack. Why the internet crashed in Iran this time is still unclear."

    https://x.com/SprinterObserve/status/1935345408126918790

    You could have read PB yesterday

    @KianpourWorld
    I was just told that Iranians have been informed the internet will be cut off from tonight. Unless they have Starlink, they won’t have connection.
    https://x.com/KianpourWorld/status/1935000795323170989
    Is this shutdown an internal or external thing?
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,383

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    Presumably they installed the mountains and deserts as a response to that incursion.

    Much as we dug out the Channel after 1066.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 55,774

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    The lesson is that we can achieve anything when we're on the same side as the Russians.
  • vikvik Posts: 516
    vik said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Trump likes using force, but only against weak targets who cave immediately under pressure. If his opponent resists aggressively then Trump usually ends up chickening out.

    At the moment, it does look like Trump is going to chicken out again, because the Iranians are defiant and show no signs of "unconditionally surrending" like he demanded.

    He's now backtracking & wavering once again:

    President Trump said Wednesday that the United States may join the Israeli bombing campaign against Iran. But he also said the U.S. may not.

    “Nobody knows what I’m going to do,” he said during an event to install flag poles outside the White House.


    https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/06/18/world/israel-iran-trump/trump-says-nobody-knows-what-im-going-to-do-on-iran?smid=url-share
    LOL:

    Minutes after saying he had not decided whether to strike Iran, President Donald Trump was asked whether he had given Iranians an ultimatum.

    “Uh,” Trump said, pausing and pursing his lips. “You could say so. They know. They know what’s happening. Maybe you could call it the ultimate — the ultimate ultimatum, right?”

    Asked what he meant by that, Trump replied, “Oh, I don’t want to say — look, I mean, give me a break.”


    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/06/18/israel-iran-strikes-live-us-trump/#link-DAB6ZKOULJECXC4XQYOQGRXQSA
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 5,076
    edited June 18

    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Has there been an official calculation yet of how many human lives one shred of Netanyahu's reputation is worth (in Netanyahu's eyes)?
    8.2bn - 1 ?
    That ignores any people yet to be born.

    All the stuff about differently-sized infinities is one of the reasons I ended up in physics not maths.
    Yeah, but what's all this String Theory nonsense? Engineering. It works, or it doesn't.


    Anyway, I thought we'd established that entities not yet born weren't people? That's what the government tells me.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,408
    edited June 18

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    The lesson is that we can achieve anything when we're on the same side as the Russians.
    It’s hard to believe the Vanilla spambot checker thinks you’re likely to be a Russian troll.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,014

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    The lesson is that we can achieve anything when we're on the same side as the Russians.
    Signed: A. Hitler, 1939
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,680

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    The lesson is that we can achieve anything when we're on the same side as the Russians.
    It’s hard to believe the Vanilla spambot checker thinks you’re likely to be a Russian troll.
    Who's the least likely of the frequent posters?
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,293

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    The lesson is that we can achieve anything when we're on the same side as the Russians.
    It’s hard to believe the Vanilla spambot checker thinks you’re likely to be a Russian troll.
    I've thought for a while that the Saturday Russian trolls are so terrible for the sole reason of distracting from any good ones that are on here.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 38,916
    CatMan said:

    I've thought for a while that the Saturday Russian trolls are so terrible for the sole reason of distracting from any good ones that are on here.

    Cannon fodder
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,292
    CatMan said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    The lesson is that we can achieve anything when we're on the same side as the Russians.
    It’s hard to believe the Vanilla spambot checker thinks you’re likely to be a Russian troll.
    I've thought for a while that the Saturday Russian trolls are so terrible for the sole reason of distracting from any good ones that are on here.
    A good Russian troll would say that wouldn’t they as a way of diverting attention away from them.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 31,766
    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    I quite like Boris, but his time has come and gone, and let's face it, he f*cked up being PM. Also, no one will forgive him for the Boriswave

    Soz Boz

    Mayor of London he should go for.
    Yes! If only to see him come third or fourth.
    If he does a lot better than Safety with Susan, it will be fine. If he comes anywhere near winning, that will be even better.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 55,172
    Andy_JS said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Leon said:

    Hmm....

    "Iran faces near total internet shutdown

    The previous sharp drop in traffic in Iran was found to be due to a cyber attack. Why the internet crashed in Iran this time is still unclear."

    https://x.com/SprinterObserve/status/1935345408126918790

    You could have read PB yesterday

    @KianpourWorld
    I was just told that Iranians have been informed the internet will be cut off from tonight. Unless they have Starlink, they won’t have connection.
    https://x.com/KianpourWorld/status/1935000795323170989
    Is this shutdown an internal or external thing?
    Internal

    https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/iran-plunged-internet-blackout-deepening-conflict-rcna213544

    The Iranian government has (tried) to cut links to the outside world.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,650
    3 planes from Southern Iran landed in Oman a little while ago. Seems unlikely to be a negotiations team (with who??) So the regime exodus looks to have started
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 55,172
    vik said:

    vik said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Trump likes using force, but only against weak targets who cave immediately under pressure. If his opponent resists aggressively then Trump usually ends up chickening out.

    At the moment, it does look like Trump is going to chicken out again, because the Iranians are defiant and show no signs of "unconditionally surrending" like he demanded.

    He's now backtracking & wavering once again:

    President Trump said Wednesday that the United States may join the Israeli bombing campaign against Iran. But he also said the U.S. may not.

    “Nobody knows what I’m going to do,” he said during an event to install flag poles outside the White House.


    https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/06/18/world/israel-iran-trump/trump-says-nobody-knows-what-im-going-to-do-on-iran?smid=url-share
    LOL:

    Minutes after saying he had not decided whether to strike Iran, President Donald Trump was asked whether he had given Iranians an ultimatum.

    “Uh,” Trump said, pausing and pursing his lips. “You could say so. They know. They know what’s happening. Maybe you could call it the ultimate — the ultimate ultimatum, right?”

    Asked what he meant by that, Trump replied, “Oh, I don’t want to say — look, I mean, give me a break.”


    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/06/18/israel-iran-strikes-live-us-trump/#link-DAB6ZKOULJECXC4XQYOQGRXQSA
    Following a little known codicil to the UN founding conventions, Iran is on Double Secret Probation.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,969

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    So when in the last 32 years did he attack Iran.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,969

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    So when in the last 32 years did he attack Iran.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 55,774
    If Trump can pull off a successful restoration of the Iranian monarchy, he’ll become the greatest foreign policy president since at least Reagan.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,969
    On topic, top Cons are uttering the B-Word but I don't think seriously with a view to his return, but just in despair as in he couldn't be any worse (they expect Kemi out shortly).

    Plus Boris does appeal to a large number of people - not People Like US off of PB but the masses. You know, those people who you step over on your way out of the opera.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,949

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    We knew they had the gases because the Germans sold them the precursors.

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

    (Snip)
    David is correct; we knew they had had various weaponised gasses because *they used those gasses* many times, against Kurds and Iran. Attacks that, decades later, still have effects on the populations.

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

    So with Iraq, we had a country that was able to manufacture, weaponise, and deliver chemical weapons, along with a will to use them on multiple occasions and (to put it mildly) non-cooperation with the UN investigators.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,011
    TOPPING said:

    On topic, top Cons are uttering the B-Word but I don't think seriously with a view to his return, but just in despair as in he couldn't be any worse (they expect Kemi out shortly).

    Plus Boris does appeal to a large number of people - not People Like US off of PB but the masses. You know, those people who you step over on your way out of the opera.

    The ultimate would be for him to put up in a 'safe' seat and to lose.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 38,916
    TOPPING said:

    On topic, top Cons are uttering the B-Word but I don't think seriously with a view to his return, but just in despair as in he couldn't be any worse (they expect Kemi out shortly).

    Plus Boris does appeal to a large number of people - not People Like US off of PB but the masses. You know, those people who you step over on your way out of the opera.

    Cargo Cult politics
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,967

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    The lesson is that we can achieve anything when we're on the same side as the Russians.
    It’s hard to believe the Vanilla spambot checker thinks you’re likely to be a Russian troll.
    Indeed.

    Most of us don't think it merely 'likely.'
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,949
    A summary of the Spanish power outage, in English:

    https://x.com/simoncgallagher/status/1935157920905187410

    It ends with the summary: "Basically, the system operator got it very wrong in terms of voltage control."

    It's also interesting that there were problems with the grid in the hours up to the outage.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,969
    Scott_xP said:

    TOPPING said:

    On topic, top Cons are uttering the B-Word but I don't think seriously with a view to his return, but just in despair as in he couldn't be any worse (they expect Kemi out shortly).

    Plus Boris does appeal to a large number of people - not People Like US off of PB but the masses. You know, those people who you step over on your way out of the opera.

    Cargo Cult politics
    You'll have to explain a) what that means; and b) why that is different from every other type of politics.
  • TazTaz Posts: 19,091
    ydoethur said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    The lesson is that we can achieve anything when we're on the same side as the Russians.
    It’s hard to believe the Vanilla spambot checker thinks you’re likely to be a Russian troll.
    Indeed.

    Most of us don't think it merely 'likely.'
    Really.

    I’m always wary of such things especially as some brain donor here has made a similar accusation of me.


  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,650

    TOPPING said:

    On topic, top Cons are uttering the B-Word but I don't think seriously with a view to his return, but just in despair as in he couldn't be any worse (they expect Kemi out shortly).

    Plus Boris does appeal to a large number of people - not People Like US off of PB but the masses. You know, those people who you step over on your way out of the opera.

    The ultimate would be for him to put up in a 'safe' seat and to lose.
    He'd probably win his old seat of Uxbridge reasonably comfortably, but its currently Lab heid so tough luck Bozza
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,967
    Taz said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    The lesson is that we can achieve anything when we're on the same side as the Russians.
    It’s hard to believe the Vanilla spambot checker thinks you’re likely to be a Russian troll.
    Indeed.

    Most of us don't think it merely 'likely.'
    Really.

    I’m always wary of such things especially as some brain donor here has made a similar accusation of me.
    I was not being entirely serious. Apart from anything else, he can spell and punctuate.

    However, William does seem to like a good troll. He reminds me a bit of contrarian or possibly Hyufd in that way, with the important difference that he doesn't seem to altogether believe what he says.
  • TazTaz Posts: 19,091
    I see former weather girl and tv star, Wincey Willis, has gone to join nana and the angles.

    RIP
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,011

    TOPPING said:

    On topic, top Cons are uttering the B-Word but I don't think seriously with a view to his return, but just in despair as in he couldn't be any worse (they expect Kemi out shortly).

    Plus Boris does appeal to a large number of people - not People Like US off of PB but the masses. You know, those people who you step over on your way out of the opera.

    The ultimate would be for him to put up in a 'safe' seat and to lose.
    He'd probably win his old seat of Uxbridge reasonably comfortably, but its currently Lab heid so tough luck Bozza
    So neither Uxbridge nor Henley are available. How sad!
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 45,754
    TOPPING said:

    On topic, top Cons are uttering the B-Word but I don't think seriously with a view to his return, but just in despair as in he couldn't be any worse (they expect Kemi out shortly).

    Plus Boris does appeal to a large number of people - not People Like US off of PB but the masses. You know, those people who you step over on your way out of the opera.

    KB exit: What do you think they meant by "shortly"?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 11,650
    Iran commences today's round of lobbing stuff at Terry Aviv
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 24,808

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    You're so blinded by your dislike for Bibi that you can't see the facts staring you in the face.

    Iran has been caught with a dangerous amount of uranium that is being weaponised.

    Iran did not get there overnight. They've been working on this for years. Those saying Iran needed to be dealt with during that time were right all along.

    The can had been kicked but we are running out of road.

    This has nothing to do with Bibi.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,102
    Telegraph
    Spain’s disastrous national blackout was triggered by solar farms switching off in response to plummeting power prices, an official investigation has found.

    A government report into Europe’s biggest power cut found that Spain’s solar farms were generating so much power on April 28, a particularly sunny day, that prices became “negative” – meaning there were no profits to be made in operating them.

    Plunging prices triggered a mass switch-off, which sent voltage and frequency fluctuations cascading across the national grids of both Spain and Portugal. Back-up systems meant to guard against such fluctuations were not in effect.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 14,343

    A summary of the Spanish power outage, in English:

    https://x.com/simoncgallagher/status/1935157920905187410

    It ends with the summary: "Basically, the system operator got it very wrong in terms of voltage control."

    It's also interesting that there were problems with the grid in the hours up to the outage.

    If it was cyber attack, would we ever be told it was? Can such things actually be publicly admitted?

    As nuclear weapons were being created and developed, they were being tested. If people were creating and developing cyber weapons, such as to take down a nations power grid, how would they know they hold one, without testing?
  • RattersRatters Posts: 1,365
    geoffw said:

    Telegraph
    Spain’s disastrous national blackout was triggered by solar farms switching off in response to plummeting power prices, an official investigation has found.

    A government report into Europe’s biggest power cut found that Spain’s solar farms were generating so much power on April 28, a particularly sunny day, that prices became “negative” – meaning there were no profits to be made in operating them.

    Plunging prices triggered a mass switch-off, which sent voltage and frequency fluctuations cascading across the national grids of both Spain and Portugal. Back-up systems meant to guard against such fluctuations were not in effect.

    Sounds like primarily a failure of their national grid operator rather than any individual power supplier.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 24,808
    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    The lesson is that we can achieve anything when we're on the same side as the Russians.
    It’s hard to believe the Vanilla spambot checker thinks you’re likely to be a Russian troll.
    Indeed.

    Most of us don't think it merely 'likely.'
    Really.

    I’m always wary of such things especially as some brain donor here has made a similar accusation of me.
    I was not being entirely serious. Apart from anything else, he can spell and punctuate.

    However, William does seem to like a good troll. He reminds me a bit of contrarian or possibly Hyufd in that way, with the important difference that he doesn't seem to altogether believe what he says.
    There's a big difference between a troll and a zealot.

    HYUFD is the latter, he is a true believer in what he says and nobody and no evidence will convince him otherwise.

    William I suspect is the former. Hard to tell sometimes though.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 24,896
    Taz said:

    I see former weather girl and tv star, Wincey Willis, has gone to join nana and the angles.

    RIP

    Age is cruel and in her case particularly so: dementia is not a good way to go. :(
  • TazTaz Posts: 19,091
    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    The lesson is that we can achieve anything when we're on the same side as the Russians.
    It’s hard to believe the Vanilla spambot checker thinks you’re likely to be a Russian troll.
    Indeed.

    Most of us don't think it merely 'likely.'
    Really.

    I’m always wary of such things especially as some brain donor here has made a similar accusation of me.
    I was not being entirely serious. Apart from anything else, he can spell and punctuate.

    However, William does seem to like a good troll. He reminds me a bit of contrarian or possibly Hyufd in that way, with the important difference that he doesn't seem to altogether believe what he says.
    You don’t know that and don’t know him to make that judgement. He too a lot of shit during the US election but was right.

    He’s failed the PB purity test so is clearly open to being questioned.
  • TazTaz Posts: 19,091

    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    🚨 BREAKING: The UK is weighing up whether to provide military assistance to the US if President Trump decides to bomb Iran

    https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1935334839391256862

    How about, Nah, not this time

    You would have every right to call Starmer out for that. I would be highly surprised if Starmer could get that through Parliament even with his majority. We would find ourselves with a f*** load of ProPalestine/Iran inner city MPs at the next GE if he pulls that stroke. I'd vote for them myself too!
    It looks like the assistance will be restricted to "letting them use Diego Garcia", which is perhaps more permissible

    We really don't want the RAF bombing bloody Qom. What extra can we add other than making us more of a target for understandable retaliation?
    I don't think we can argue with that. I would be very disappointed if Akrotiri is used. US bombers can fly from Israel.

    After the catastrophe of Iraq the last thing a new Labour government needs is a big f***-off American vanity war in the Middle East.
    Don't make the mistake of fighting the last war.

    Iraq did not have WMDs, Iran is seeking not just WMDs but nuclear weapons. Iran was breaching its obligations and had 60% enriched uranium which serves no civilian purposes AFAIK, it is for military purposes.

    There is only one solution, and the late, great John McCain put it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7s5pT3Rris
    Bibi has been saying Iran has had nukes since 1993. He may not be wrong now, but he has been for the last 32 years.

    This is Bibi keeping himself out of jail and a little bit of fun for Trump.
    Sure, but international observers are also saying it now.

    Besides, Iraq *did* have WMD. We know that because they used them against the Kurds and Iran and we also know they were trying to develop nukes. What we didn't know in 2003 was whether they still had them because Saddam had done everything in his power to keep that question uncertain and provide no evidence either way.

    BTW, I don't think this is remotely fun for Trump even now: he still doesn't like using force even if Netanyahu has convinced him that he needs to do it this time. It will get worse for Trump when the Regime doesn't fall like a pack of cards.
    Yes, Trump is going to find bombing Iran a bit Shi’ite.
    Tim Marshall's latest book (I think it's called The Power of Geography) has an interesting section on the history of Persia/Iran. Basically the regime is insane, but the country is almost invulnerable militarily due its geography.
    Fake news.

    We conquered Iran during WWII.
    The lesson is that we can achieve anything when we're on the same side as the Russians.
    It’s hard to believe the Vanilla spambot checker thinks you’re likely to be a Russian troll.
    Indeed.

    Most of us don't think it merely 'likely.'
    Really.

    I’m always wary of such things especially as some brain donor here has made a similar accusation of me.
    I was not being entirely serious. Apart from anything else, he can spell and punctuate.

    However, William does seem to like a good troll. He reminds me a bit of contrarian or possibly Hyufd in that way, with the important difference that he doesn't seem to altogether believe what he says.
    There's a big difference between a troll and a zealot.

    HYUFD is the latter, he is a true believer in what he says and nobody and no evidence will convince him otherwise.

    William I suspect is the former. Hard to tell sometimes though.
    Irony overload here.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,969
    kinabalu said:

    TOPPING said:

    On topic, top Cons are uttering the B-Word but I don't think seriously with a view to his return, but just in despair as in he couldn't be any worse (they expect Kemi out shortly).

    Plus Boris does appeal to a large number of people - not People Like US off of PB but the masses. You know, those people who you step over on your way out of the opera.

    KB exit: What do you think they meant by "shortly"?
    In the same way that people knew Truss was eventually going to be found out. A matter of time but can't call it exactly.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 45,754
    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    TOPPING said:

    On topic, top Cons are uttering the B-Word but I don't think seriously with a view to his return, but just in despair as in he couldn't be any worse (they expect Kemi out shortly).

    Plus Boris does appeal to a large number of people - not People Like US off of PB but the masses. You know, those people who you step over on your way out of the opera.

    KB exit: What do you think they meant by "shortly"?
    In the same way that people knew Truss was eventually going to be found out. A matter of time but can't call it exactly.
    Ah ok. I'm interested in timings because I've laid her to go this year at 2.7 (excellent value imo). She'll be out next year, I think, bar a miracle turnaround.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,928
    Taz said:

    I see former weather girl and tv star, Wincey Willis, has gone to join nana and the angles.

    RIP

    That's a shame.

    Wincey was the original and best "weather girl"... Before those upstarts Ulrika and Lucy V came on the scene.

    RIP.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 35,744
    "Human rights law should not prevent foreign criminals from being deported, the justice secretary has said. In a speech Shabana Mahmood said that too often the law "protects those who break the rules", and the government was "clarifying" how such laws operate."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd978x4pvjxo
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 35,744

    A summary of the Spanish power outage, in English:

    https://x.com/simoncgallagher/status/1935157920905187410

    It ends with the summary: "Basically, the system operator got it very wrong in terms of voltage control."

    It's also interesting that there were problems with the grid in the hours up to the outage.

    System operator? Just one person making the decisions for the electricity supply for 55 million people. You'd think there would be a team so that if one person gets it wrong the others would take a different view.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 32,452
    Taz said:

    I see former weather girl and tv star, Wincey Willis, has gone to join nana and the angles.

    RIP

    Again?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,969
    kinabalu said:

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    TOPPING said:

    On topic, top Cons are uttering the B-Word but I don't think seriously with a view to his return, but just in despair as in he couldn't be any worse (they expect Kemi out shortly).

    Plus Boris does appeal to a large number of people - not People Like US off of PB but the masses. You know, those people who you step over on your way out of the opera.

    KB exit: What do you think they meant by "shortly"?
    In the same way that people knew Truss was eventually going to be found out. A matter of time but can't call it exactly.
    Ah ok. I'm interested in timings because I've laid her to go this year at 2.7 (excellent value imo). She'll be out next year, I think, bar a miracle turnaround.
    Can't think of a particular catalyst plus these things take so long over the starting gun has been fired - seems a sensible bet.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 27,855
    edited June 18
    Ratters said:

    geoffw said:

    Telegraph
    Spain’s disastrous national blackout was triggered by solar farms switching off in response to plummeting power prices, an official investigation has found.

    A government report into Europe’s biggest power cut found that Spain’s solar farms were generating so much power on April 28, a particularly sunny day, that prices became “negative” – meaning there were no profits to be made in operating them.

    Plunging prices triggered a mass switch-off, which sent voltage and frequency fluctuations cascading across the national grids of both Spain and Portugal. Back-up systems meant to guard against such fluctuations were not in effect.

    Sounds like primarily a failure of their national grid operator rather than any individual power supplier.
    Does Spain not have a special solar power tax, and does that apply to power stations as well as individual installations?

    If it does, that would also encourage them to switch off rapidly when the price drops close to zero - depending on exactly how it works.

    I concur that it sounds like poor network management.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 35,744
    Dr Anthony Daniels writes about his experience of immigration.

    "It is many years since I retired from medical practice, but even in those days I had many illegal immigrants among my patients. They had claimed asylum, and most of them were indeed fleeing from personal situations, not usually of political persecution, that were deeply unpleasant. In my view they were all illegal immigrants rather than true asylum seekers because they had not claimed such asylum in the first safe country in which they had arrived. They preferred to go somewhere else; mere safety was therefore not their first consideration."

    https://www.takimag.com/article/immigration-nation/
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 84,669
    edited June 18
    Donald Trump says "I may do it, I may not do it", when asked about whether the US will join Israeli strikes on Iran

    I actually have some sympathy with Starmer when having to try and deal with this kind of thing.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 27,855
    Listening to PMQ, I quite like Rayner's phrase for having a go at Chris Philp:

    "Mr Speaker - one million pounds a day spivved up the wall, because they were so incompetent ..." .
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 84,669
    edited June 18
    Boris is never coming back...firstly because he is done deal, we have seen him try and run the country and it was a shitshow and secondly he now has how many kids with Carrie? 4? What with VAT on private schools, being an MP, even PM doesn't pay enough, whereas it seems people are still falling over themselves to give him money to write half arsed columns....did he ever do his GB News show he was supposedly getting a load of dosh for?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 55,774
    Tucker Carlson gets the better of Ted Cruz:

    https://x.com/tcnetwork/status/1935362461843992720
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,292
    MattW said:

    Listening to PMQ, I quite like Rayner's phrase for having a go at Chris Philp:

    "Mr Speaker - one million pounds a day spivved up the wall, because they were so incompetent ..." .

    What has Rayner shown competence at?


  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,944

    Don't tell @HYUFD !!!

    There's a substantial portion of people still in Boris love mode.
Sign In or Register to comment.