Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
The Russian invasion of Ukraine seems to be a fairly simplistic black-and-white good-vs-evil thing to me. One side has started a war of conquest, and is carrying out rape, torture and genocide to achieve its ends. The other is defending itself.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
Gee, thanks Roger!
"simplistic black and white tones"
The Ukraine war is as near black and white in such matters as you can get. Or, if you prefer, right and wrong. Good and evil. It is far more clear-cut in terms of "right and wrong" than (say) the situation in the Middle east with Israel versus Hamas.
Our country's interests are also fairly clear-cut: support Ukraine, oppose Russia.
It's amazing how many lefties are against imperialism and fascism - except when it comes to Russia, in which case it's a-okay. I'd have hoped you weren't one of them.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Voting for Militant Tendency proved less than optimal.
Ministers have “lost track” of more than 150,000 migrants who have come to the UK on social care visas, The Telegraph can disclose.
The Government has admitted it has no idea how many foreign workers hired to plug gaps in Britain’s crisis-hit social care system are still working in the industry. It is not even known if they remain in the UK, as there is no official data directly linking visa status with ongoing residence in Britain.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
Pots and kettles.
You see the Middle East in purely simplistic terms.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Eh? My post supported reinforcing the guarantees to the Baltics, and I don't think that invading them would have any justification. Putin needs to be clear that a threat to the Baltic States is a threat to NATO. We simply don't need to refer back to the complex politics of the 1940s, filled with crimes that used each other as justification. History is rarely clear-cut, but the current position needs to be clear - an invasion of a NATO country will bring in the whole of NATO. Some things are simpler than they look.
That's fair.
But the NATO 'guarantee' is no such thing with Trump in power. And it's a fair question how many European members would pitch in.
So not really very simple. Especially when you consider past guarantees which proved no such thing.
The reality is that the Baltics might be an easier proposition than Ukraine, everything else being equal. Abandoning the latter is very much a gamble not in our interests.
Standing with Ukraine actively reinforces the credibility of NATO deterrence; abandoning it does precisely the opposite.
So far I don't think the war has reinforced the credibility of NATO. But so far NATO countries have neither properly stood with Ukraine, nor properly abandoned Ukraine.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
Gee, thanks Roger!
"simplistic black and white tones"
The Ukraine war is as near black and white in such matters as you can get. Or, if you prefer, right and wrong. Good and evil. It is far more clear-cut in terms of "right and wrong" than (say) the situation in the Middle east with Israel versus Hamas.
Our country's interests are also fairly clear-cut: support Ukraine, oppose Russia.
It's amazing how many lefties are against imperialism and fascism - except when it comes to Russia, in which case it's a-okay. I'd have hoped you weren't one of them.
Many “anti-imperialists” turn out to be very much in favour of imperialism, when carried out by those they approve of.
Post-colonial discourse tends to prioritise between imperialists.
Well, the pyroclastic flow coming off Arthur's Seat has made this afternoon's run a bit more exciting than usual. Extinct - yeah right!
I'm heading SW to avoid wrecking my lungs any further.
This was too flippant. It's now very significant from my vantage point and there are likely hundreds if not thousands of tourists up there.
At this point I would like to point anyone to my favourite novel, which is Stephen Baxter's Moonseed.
Alien nanobug destroys planet, starting at Arthur's Seat (via Moon and Venus).
Arthur's seat has fond memories for my wife and I in our courting days in 1962 !!!
If a bit cold
Arthur's Seat was the last 'hill' of my coastal walk (I started and ended the walk at Edinburgh Castle). I headed inland from Leith and climbed Calton Hill, then Arthur's Seat, before descending and having ponies accompany me for the last quarter-mile to the castle.
Edinburgh really is a truly magical city. My original intention was to start the walk from London, but I am so happy I started from Edinburgh instead. It seems like a city tailor-made to start and end an adventure. I'm sad I don't get to go up there very often. I miss Scotland.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
The Russian invasion of Ukraine seems to be a fairly simplistic black-and-white good-vs-evil thing to me. One side has started a war of conquest, and is carrying out rape, torture and genocide to achieve its ends. The other is defending itself.
That is true, but attacking Nick is both unfair and counterproductive. Challenge his arguments, not his motives.
As far as the reliability of US commitments is concerned, this spells it out.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
Gee, thanks Roger!
"simplistic black and white tones"
The Ukraine war is as near black and white in such matters as you can get. Or, if you prefer, right and wrong. Good and evil. It is far more clear-cut in terms of "right and wrong" than (say) the situation in the Middle east with Israel versus Hamas.
Our country's interests are also fairly clear-cut: support Ukraine, oppose Russia.
It's amazing how many lefties are against imperialism and fascism - except when it comes to Russia, in which case it's a-okay. I'd have hoped you weren't one of them.
The philosopher of Putin’s party preaches literal Russian Fascism. As in - he calls it fascism.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Eh? My post supported reinforcing the guarantees to the Baltics, and I don't think that invading them would have any justification. Putin needs to be clear that a threat to the Baltic States is a threat to NATO. We simply don't need to refer back to the complex politics of the 1940s, filled with crimes that used each other as justification. History is rarely clear-cut, but the current position needs to be clear - an invasion of a NATO country will bring in the whole of NATO. Some things are simpler than they look.
That's fair.
But the NATO 'guarantee' is no such thing with Trump in power. And it's a fair question how many European members would pitch in.
So not really very simple. Especially when you consider past guarantees which proved no such thing.
The reality is that the Baltics might be an easier proposition than Ukraine, everything else being equal. Abandoning the latter is very much a gamble not in our interests.
Standing with Ukraine actively reinforces the credibility of NATO deterrence; abandoning it does precisely the opposite.
So far I don't think the war has reinforced the credibility of NATO. But so far NATO countries have neither properly stood with Ukraine, nor properly abandoned Ukraine.
It has to be said that it has however fatally undermined the military, diplomatic and economic credibility of Russia. The only people who still take Putin seriously are his fellow mass murderers like Xi and Kim and fellow criminal weirdos like Trump, Khamanei and a few others who have yet to be convicted.
It is unfortunate that these people wield significant power, but Russia right now looks more hollow than an Elon Musk erection.
If not optimal at least that's one positive of the whole sorry saga.
Not sure about air pollution benefits. What about all the smoke from the burning at the protests?
I'm more annoyed by the ancient Rule 4. Every single time I win on the horses I seem to be cut by at least 20%.
I feel sorry for Brown, tries to make his mission reducing child poverty, hated. Clegg paid millions for encouraging teen suicide etc, people like him.
Do they? The 2015 election rather suggests otherwise
World's longest wind blade (153m), heaviest nacelle (>500t) arrived in Shandong recently. They are designed for world's 1st 26MW offshore turbine by Dongfang electric w/ turbine hub center height of 185m. Each turbine can generate 100GWh of electricity/yr & cut > 80kt CO2. Transporting such long blade & heavy nacelle is extremely difficult & they are finding ways to overcome such challenges to bring them to port & ship them. 500t nacelle also exceeds typical port crane lifting ability, so new solutions need to be developed to put them on cargo ships. https://x.com/tphuang/status/1954360989207687179
That’s 340m tall, which is taller than any structure in the UK and taller than all but about half a dozen skyscrapers in Dubai. (For reference, the Shard building in London is 310m, 1,016’, tall).
Those parts are going to be almost impossible to move, the factory will have to be in the shipyard and the installation offshore.
Indivisible parts that are 500’ long or weigh 500t just don’t exist anywhere else. They’re going to have to start making the blades in sections and hubs in pieces that can be assembled on site.
In the oil industry, 500 tons is a flea bite. Some parts of rigs lifted into place at sea weighed into 5 figures. 153m would require a moderately large ship - nothing incredible to carry it.
Good point.
Once you’re at sea, those weights are easy enough with the cranes available. The difficulty is getting them there in the first place.
They've had floating cranes or shearleg barges to lift heavy cargo on ports for decades, 500t is nothing. They'll assemble the blades, nacelle and top section of the mast to install on the foundation in a single lift. Weight wont be an issue, hook height for the lift and the height of the centre of gravity will be challenging.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
I know we are expected to treat Liverpool fans as poor little angels, taken too soon at Hillsborough. But Liverpool fans were always the worst. Not alone, but the worst.
As a teenage steward, I saw them first hand. Large numbers travelled without tickets. They had one aim: to get into the ground, regardless. They would just jump through the turnstiles. If they were unlucky and got stopped by a copper, they'd just get chucked out - and start it all again. At one of the Christmas/New Year games at Forest, the ground capacity of 40k was likely 10k over the limit. People were hanging on up the floodlights to a stupid height.
Hillsborough was going to happen, somewhere. I'm bloody glad it didn't happen on my watch. But nobody ever remembers the traumatised Forest fans at Hillsborough, having to watch the Liverpool fans laid out on the pitch.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
The Russian invasion of Ukraine seems to be a fairly simplistic black-and-white good-vs-evil thing to me. One side has started a war of conquest, and is carrying out rape, torture and genocide to achieve its ends. The other is defending itself.
That is true, but attacking Nick is both unfair and counterproductive. Challenge his arguments, not his motives.
As far as the reliability of US commitments is concerned, this spells it out.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
The Russian invasion of Ukraine seems to be a fairly simplistic black-and-white good-vs-evil thing to me. One side has started a war of conquest, and is carrying out rape, torture and genocide to achieve its ends. The other is defending itself.
That is true, but attacking Nick is both unfair and counterproductive. Challenge his arguments, not his motives.
As far as the reliability of US commitments is concerned, this spells it out.
I just bought a handsome William IV mahogany table for £129
wtf. A friend tells me “antique prices have collapsed”. “Especially for old brown stuff”
Is this true? It seems true from this deal
OTOH I might get it and find it collapses on arrival
Yes, for quite a long time.
It's also driven by large furniture and houses getting smaller, and fashion.
Mum and dad were in a 5000sqft former manor house for their last 40 years, of which restoration took 25 years. They had at least 3 full size (8 person) dining tables from relatives, and had amassed a collection of Guy Rogers 1960s Manhattan teak furniture of 3 full size double bed converting sofas, and about 9 chairs, as old friends moved to smaller houses - different period, same principle.
Estate sales of boomers (OK: former boomers) are one place to be.
Big and brown has been difficult to give away for a long time.
When the LAB LEAKED covid killed my mother I burned most of her antique furniture in the paddock of her house in North Yorks because getting rid of it was such a tiresome pain in the dick. There is literally no way to get rid of a massive 300kg 18th C. Flemish oak wardrobe other than burning it.
We've been clearing my late MIL's house most of the year, it seems never ending. Most of the furniture has gone to charity. Attempts to sell stuff online have not really been worth the hassle. Problems like the 4 piece suite which doesn't have fire certificates on it (meaning charities will not trust it) have had us pulling our hair out. . Dinning room table with 6 matching chairs, crockery sideboards, glass cabinets, we literally cannot give them away.
We did ours via an auction house - they took all the stuff we did not want as a package, sold the good and the rest went to a charity they worked with for the purpose.
We ended up with about 3k, but it was 3 decent sized vans of furniture - so low prices.
And there was a gorgeous 1880s mirror backed sideboard which was about 8ft long and 8ft high, with arts and crafts decoration, but which just would not fit in a modern house and would need to go to the type of house for which it was made.
Most people will come across this problem sometime. The game ought to have rules.
Rule 1: Price is what you can get.There is no other measure. Madness follows if you overlook this. Rule 2: It is massively in the public interest that Local Authorities have a statutory duty to collect and dispose of otherwise impossible items from domestic premises at no or small charge. (This prevents fly tipping). Rule 3: What you can get depends on whether you want to make getting maximum price your full time job for an indefinite period. This especially applies to books. Rule 4: The piano should never have been invented. It should be a criminal offence to try to own a grand piano. Rule 5: No-one ever moves house/clears a house without leaving behind at least one piece of unfinished business.
I have had several friends say that they were reduced almost to tears when doing house clearance for their late parents, items of furniture and china that their parents really treasured and were convinced were worth a lot went for peanuts at auction because currently they are not fashionable.
When my old dad finally died his house on S.Harris was full of brown furniture from my then recently deceased gran. Out of sentimental attachment we spent quite a lot on transporting it back to the mainland, even then we were aware it wasn’t really financially sensible. Ironically there was quite a lot of modular Ercol furniture bought from the previous owner (widow of the retired head of SOE as it happens) which we left for the new owner, it would be worth a handy chunk of money now.
Ercol is definitely popular, including with younger generation. Has a bit of that Scandi design shtick abiut it. And it fits!
OTOH you simply cannot give away pianos, as am discovering with a perfectly nice upright that I'm trying to find a home for. Depressing really.
Aren't you near Portsmouth? The RN like to have old pianos to catapult off their aircraft carriers. Or used to.
Well, that would be a diverting way of saying Godspeed to the old Joanna. Sadly at the wrong end of the country. Wonder if the RAF could help out - they are somewhat more proximate.
You could phone the RN and ask them when a carrier is next visiting Rosyth.
Surely the correct way to dispose of a piano is to dangle it over a pavement and place a banana skin beneath it. The gods of slapstick will handle the rest
Full it full of petrol, set on fire and throw it with a trebuchet.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Ministers have “lost track” of more than 150,000 migrants who have come to the UK on social care visas, The Telegraph can disclose.
The Government has admitted it has no idea how many foreign workers hired to plug gaps in Britain’s crisis-hit social care system are still working in the industry. It is not even known if they remain in the UK, as there is no official data directly linking visa status with ongoing residence in Britain.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
The Russian invasion of Ukraine seems to be a fairly simplistic black-and-white good-vs-evil thing to me. One side has started a war of conquest, and is carrying out rape, torture and genocide to achieve its ends. The other is defending itself.
That is true, but attacking Nick is both unfair and counterproductive. Challenge his arguments, not his motives.
As far as the reliability of US commitments is concerned, this spells it out.
I just bought a handsome William IV mahogany table for £129
wtf. A friend tells me “antique prices have collapsed”. “Especially for old brown stuff”
Is this true? It seems true from this deal
OTOH I might get it and find it collapses on arrival
Yes, for quite a long time.
It's also driven by large furniture and houses getting smaller, and fashion.
Mum and dad were in a 5000sqft former manor house for their last 40 years, of which restoration took 25 years. They had at least 3 full size (8 person) dining tables from relatives, and had amassed a collection of Guy Rogers 1960s Manhattan teak furniture of 3 full size double bed converting sofas, and about 9 chairs, as old friends moved to smaller houses - different period, same principle.
Estate sales of boomers (OK: former boomers) are one place to be.
Big and brown has been difficult to give away for a long time.
When the LAB LEAKED covid killed my mother I burned most of her antique furniture in the paddock of her house in North Yorks because getting rid of it was such a tiresome pain in the dick. There is literally no way to get rid of a massive 300kg 18th C. Flemish oak wardrobe other than burning it.
We've been clearing my late MIL's house most of the year, it seems never ending. Most of the furniture has gone to charity. Attempts to sell stuff online have not really been worth the hassle. Problems like the 4 piece suite which doesn't have fire certificates on it (meaning charities will not trust it) have had us pulling our hair out. . Dinning room table with 6 matching chairs, crockery sideboards, glass cabinets, we literally cannot give them away.
We did ours via an auction house - they took all the stuff we did not want as a package, sold the good and the rest went to a charity they worked with for the purpose.
We ended up with about 3k, but it was 3 decent sized vans of furniture - so low prices.
And there was a gorgeous 1880s mirror backed sideboard which was about 8ft long and 8ft high, with arts and crafts decoration, but which just would not fit in a modern house and would need to go to the type of house for which it was made.
Most people will come across this problem sometime. The game ought to have rules.
Rule 1: Price is what you can get.There is no other measure. Madness follows if you overlook this. Rule 2: It is massively in the public interest that Local Authorities have a statutory duty to collect and dispose of otherwise impossible items from domestic premises at no or small charge. (This prevents fly tipping). Rule 3: What you can get depends on whether you want to make getting maximum price your full time job for an indefinite period. This especially applies to books. Rule 4: The piano should never have been invented. It should be a criminal offence to try to own a grand piano. Rule 5: No-one ever moves house/clears a house without leaving behind at least one piece of unfinished business.
I have had several friends say that they were reduced almost to tears when doing house clearance for their late parents, items of furniture and china that their parents really treasured and were convinced were worth a lot went for peanuts at auction because currently they are not fashionable.
When my old dad finally died his house on S.Harris was full of brown furniture from my then recently deceased gran. Out of sentimental attachment we spent quite a lot on transporting it back to the mainland, even then we were aware it wasn’t really financially sensible. Ironically there was quite a lot of modular Ercol furniture bought from the previous owner (widow of the retired head of SOE as it happens) which we left for the new owner, it would be worth a handy chunk of money now.
Ercol is definitely popular, including with younger generation. Has a bit of that Scandi design shtick abiut it. And it fits!
OTOH you simply cannot give away pianos, as am discovering with a perfectly nice upright that I'm trying to find a home for. Depressing really.
I know someone who has had many dealings with pianos over the years and lives in a remote house in the middle of nowhere. Quite a number of pianos are buried in his garden. (I am not making this up.)
Ministers have “lost track” of more than 150,000 migrants who have come to the UK on social care visas, The Telegraph can disclose.
The Government has admitted it has no idea how many foreign workers hired to plug gaps in Britain’s crisis-hit social care system are still working in the industry. It is not even known if they remain in the UK, as there is no official data directly linking visa status with ongoing residence in Britain.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Voting for Militant Tendency proved less than optimal.
I think the infamous article Boris ran in the Spectator in 2004 about Liverpool was substantially correct.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
Gee, thanks Roger!
"simplistic black and white tones"
The Ukraine war is as near black and white in such matters as you can get. Or, if you prefer, right and wrong. Good and evil. It is far more clear-cut in terms of "right and wrong" than (say) the situation in the Middle east with Israel versus Hamas.
Our country's interests are also fairly clear-cut: support Ukraine, oppose Russia.
It's amazing how many lefties are against imperialism and fascism - except when it comes to Russia, in which case it's a-okay. I'd have hoped you weren't one of them.
The philosopher of Putin’s party preaches literal Russian Fascism. As in - he calls it fascism.
Unbelievable that many "right on" types like @Dura_Ace think Putin's some kind of progressive!
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
A "muscular approach to trade and economic growth" is an odd way to describe an incoherent and damaging tariff policy and a US economy performing more poorly than before his election. His approval ratings are through the floor, so I think the American electorate have concluded he isn't delivering what they wanted. Even his approval ratings on individual policies, including immigration, are all negative now: https://www.gelliottmorris.com/p/all-the-polls-on-the-la-protests
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Eh? My post supported reinforcing the guarantees to the Baltics, and I don't think that invading them would have any justification. Putin needs to be clear that a threat to the Baltic States is a threat to NATO. We simply don't need to refer back to the complex politics of the 1940s, filled with crimes that used each other as justification. History is rarely clear-cut, but the current position needs to be clear - an invasion of a NATO country will bring in the whole of NATO. Some things are simpler than they look.
That's fair.
But the NATO 'guarantee' is no such thing with Trump in power. And it's a fair question how many European members would pitch in.
So not really very simple. Especially when you consider past guarantees which proved no such thing.
The reality is that the Baltics might be an easier proposition than Ukraine, everything else being equal. Abandoning the latter is very much a gamble not in our interests.
Standing with Ukraine actively reinforces the credibility of NATO deterrence; abandoning it does precisely the opposite.
So far I don't think the war has reinforced the credibility of NATO. But so far NATO countries have neither properly stood with Ukraine, nor properly abandoned Ukraine.
It has to be said that it has however fatally undermined the military, diplomatic and economic credibility of Russia. The only people who still take Putin seriously are his fellow mass murderers like Xi and Kim and fellow criminal weirdos like Trump, Khamanei and a few others who have yet to be convicted.
It is unfortunate that these people wield significant power, but Russia right now looks more hollow than an Elon Musk erection.
If not optimal at least that's one positive of the whole sorry saga.
Maybe, but as you say, China and others are supportive of Russia.
A Chinese friend who was teaching in the UK moved to Moscow to teach at an international school two years ago, saying the pay and conditions are far better there. I spoke to her last week. She thinks Moscow is a fantastic and exciting city, and she barely notices the war at all. She seems to think it's some local squabble within Ukraine, something like a civil war, which is nothing to do with anyone else, the rest of the world should just leave them to it. I find this kind of attitude is quite common among people from outside Europe.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Eh? My post supported reinforcing the guarantees to the Baltics, and I don't think that invading them would have any justification. Putin needs to be clear that a threat to the Baltic States is a threat to NATO. We simply don't need to refer back to the complex politics of the 1940s, filled with crimes that used each other as justification. History is rarely clear-cut, but the current position needs to be clear - an invasion of a NATO country will bring in the whole of NATO. Some things are simpler than they look.
That's fair.
But the NATO 'guarantee' is no such thing with Trump in power. And it's a fair question how many European members would pitch in.
So not really very simple. Especially when you consider past guarantees which proved no such thing.
The reality is that the Baltics might be an easier proposition than Ukraine, everything else being equal. Abandoning the latter is very much a gamble not in our interests.
Standing with Ukraine actively reinforces the credibility of NATO deterrence; abandoning it does precisely the opposite.
So far I don't think the war has reinforced the credibility of NATO. But so far NATO countries have neither properly stood with Ukraine, nor properly abandoned Ukraine.
NATO has done ok in Ukraine - it doesn’t have a remit but has been a part of the coalition of the willing discussions.
And more countries have joined as a result of Russian’s invasion
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
Gee, thanks Roger!
"simplistic black and white tones"
The Ukraine war is as near black and white in such matters as you can get. Or, if you prefer, right and wrong. Good and evil. It is far more clear-cut in terms of "right and wrong" than (say) the situation in the Middle east with Israel versus Hamas.
Our country's interests are also fairly clear-cut: support Ukraine, oppose Russia.
It's amazing how many lefties are against imperialism and fascism - except when it comes to Russia, in which case it's a-okay. I'd have hoped you weren't one of them.
The philosopher of Putin’s party preaches literal Russian Fascism. As in - he calls it fascism.
Unbelievable that many "right on" types like @Dura_Ace think Putin's some kind of progressive!
I think we can now conclude that all Russians are rather dismal, and clearly Putin is dismal-in-chief.
It's very disappointing. There were hints of civilisation, but no, we have to judge them by their actions.
Well, the pyroclastic flow coming off Arthur's Seat has made this afternoon's run a bit more exciting than usual. Extinct - yeah right!
I'm heading SW to avoid wrecking my lungs any further.
This was too flippant. It's now very significant from my vantage point and there are likely hundreds if not thousands of tourists up there.
At this point I would like to point anyone to my favourite novel, which is Stephen Baxter's Moonseed.
Alien nanobug destroys planet, starting at Arthur's Seat (via Moon and Venus).
Great quote from the Express here:
"The blaze is reportedly a gorse fire - a wildfire involving the plant of the same name"
I do hope people don't get trapped. It's easy to make mistakes like going uphill or whatever is not a good idea in the specific context.
The SG really is going to have to think about buying or hiring in a CL-415 or similar water bomber for future incidents around Scotland, and loaned to North England etc., though I don't suppose Duddingston Loch is big enough - you'd need a helicopter for a lift from that.
There were plenty of helicopters helping with the Dava fire. I found a detailed article somewhere explaining how that was all funded and organised, will see if I can fish it out.
I spoke with a fire officer a few years ago and I think there were nascent plans to have the military support them (Pumas, but they have now been retired). But actually from his perspective the helicopters would be more useful to get kit and staff to remote fires, car crashes etc before the vehicles managed to get there.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
Gee, thanks Roger!
"simplistic black and white tones"
The Ukraine war is as near black and white in such matters as you can get. Or, if you prefer, right and wrong. Good and evil. It is far more clear-cut in terms of "right and wrong" than (say) the situation in the Middle east with Israel versus Hamas.
Our country's interests are also fairly clear-cut: support Ukraine, oppose Russia.
It's amazing how many lefties are against imperialism and fascism - except when it comes to Russia, in which case it's a-okay. I'd have hoped you weren't one of them.
The philosopher of Putin’s party preaches literal Russian Fascism. As in - he calls it fascism.
Unbelievable that many "right on" types like @Dura_Ace think Putin's some kind of progressive!
@Dura_Ace role here is to wind people up. The same as @Leon, but far more effective as he does it with a few well timed posts rather inundation.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
I just bought a handsome William IV mahogany table for £129
wtf. A friend tells me “antique prices have collapsed”. “Especially for old brown stuff”
Is this true? It seems true from this deal
OTOH I might get it and find it collapses on arrival
Yes, for quite a long time.
It's also driven by large furniture and houses getting smaller, and fashion.
Mum and dad were in a 5000sqft former manor house for their last 40 years, of which restoration took 25 years. They had at least 3 full size (8 person) dining tables from relatives, and had amassed a collection of Guy Rogers 1960s Manhattan teak furniture of 3 full size double bed converting sofas, and about 9 chairs, as old friends moved to smaller houses - different period, same principle.
Estate sales of boomers (OK: former boomers) are one place to be.
Big and brown has been difficult to give away for a long time.
When the LAB LEAKED covid killed my mother I burned most of her antique furniture in the paddock of her house in North Yorks because getting rid of it was such a tiresome pain in the dick. There is literally no way to get rid of a massive 300kg 18th C. Flemish oak wardrobe other than burning it.
We've been clearing my late MIL's house most of the year, it seems never ending. Most of the furniture has gone to charity. Attempts to sell stuff online have not really been worth the hassle. Problems like the 4 piece suite which doesn't have fire certificates on it (meaning charities will not trust it) have had us pulling our hair out. . Dinning room table with 6 matching chairs, crockery sideboards, glass cabinets, we literally cannot give them away.
We did ours via an auction house - they took all the stuff we did not want as a package, sold the good and the rest went to a charity they worked with for the purpose.
We ended up with about 3k, but it was 3 decent sized vans of furniture - so low prices.
And there was a gorgeous 1880s mirror backed sideboard which was about 8ft long and 8ft high, with arts and crafts decoration, but which just would not fit in a modern house and would need to go to the type of house for which it was made.
Most people will come across this problem sometime. The game ought to have rules.
Rule 1: Price is what you can get.There is no other measure. Madness follows if you overlook this. Rule 2: It is massively in the public interest that Local Authorities have a statutory duty to collect and dispose of otherwise impossible items from domestic premises at no or small charge. (This prevents fly tipping). Rule 3: What you can get depends on whether you want to make getting maximum price your full time job for an indefinite period. This especially applies to books. Rule 4: The piano should never have been invented. It should be a criminal offence to try to own a grand piano. Rule 5: No-one ever moves house/clears a house without leaving behind at least one piece of unfinished business.
I have had several friends say that they were reduced almost to tears when doing house clearance for their late parents, items of furniture and china that their parents really treasured and were convinced were worth a lot went for peanuts at auction because currently they are not fashionable.
When my old dad finally died his house on S.Harris was full of brown furniture from my then recently deceased gran. Out of sentimental attachment we spent quite a lot on transporting it back to the mainland, even then we were aware it wasn’t really financially sensible. Ironically there was quite a lot of modular Ercol furniture bought from the previous owner (widow of the retired head of SOE as it happens) which we left for the new owner, it would be worth a handy chunk of money now.
Ercol is definitely popular, including with younger generation. Has a bit of that Scandi design shtick abiut it. And it fits!
OTOH you simply cannot give away pianos, as am discovering with a perfectly nice upright that I'm trying to find a home for. Depressing really.
I think charity shops refuse to take exercise bikes.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
Gee, thanks Roger!
"simplistic black and white tones"
The Ukraine war is as near black and white in such matters as you can get. Or, if you prefer, right and wrong. Good and evil. It is far more clear-cut in terms of "right and wrong" than (say) the situation in the Middle east with Israel versus Hamas.
Our country's interests are also fairly clear-cut: support Ukraine, oppose Russia.
It's amazing how many lefties are against imperialism and fascism - except when it comes to Russia, in which case it's a-okay. I'd have hoped you weren't one of them.
The philosopher of Putin’s party preaches literal Russian Fascism. As in - he calls it fascism.
Unbelievable that many "right on" types like @Dura_Ace think Putin's some kind of progressive!
Well, fascists are progressive. They believe in better wages, conditions and homes for the *in* groups, more holidays and goodies generally.
The downside is for the *out* groups.
If you have a dark sense of humour, Reinhard Heydrich* increased unemployment benefit in occupied Czechoslovakia. While running mandatory (aka slave) labour…..
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
If Trump's handling of the issues is so great, why is his polling going the way it is?
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
Gee, thanks Roger!
"simplistic black and white tones"
The Ukraine war is as near black and white in such matters as you can get. Or, if you prefer, right and wrong. Good and evil. It is far more clear-cut in terms of "right and wrong" than (say) the situation in the Middle east with Israel versus Hamas.
Our country's interests are also fairly clear-cut: support Ukraine, oppose Russia.
It's amazing how many lefties are against imperialism and fascism - except when it comes to Russia, in which case it's a-okay. I'd have hoped you weren't one of them.
The philosopher of Putin’s party preaches literal Russian Fascism. As in - he calls it fascism.
Unbelievable that many "right on" types like @Dura_Ace think Putin's some kind of progressive!
Russia is the "home" of Communism, so it's not surprising many Corbynists have a soft spot for it.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
I know we are expected to treat Liverpool fans as poor little angels, taken too soon at Hillsborough. But Liverpool fans were always the worst. Not alone, but the worst.
As a teenage steward, I saw them first hand. Large numbers travelled without tickets. They had one aim: to get into the ground, regardless. They would just jump through the turnstiles. If they were unlucky and got stopped by a copper, they'd just get chucked out - and start it all again. At one of the Christmas/New Year games at Forest, the ground capacity of 40k was likely 10k over the limit. People were hanging on up the floodlights to a stupid height.
Hillsborough was going to happen, somewhere. I'm bloody glad it didn't happen on my watch. But nobody ever remembers the traumatised Forest fans at Hillsborough, having to watch the Liverpool fans laid out on the pitch.
All Liverpool fans, mind.
I've often wondered how many Liverpool fans were among those rioting at Heysel and and Hillsborough. We forget how bad football fan behaviour was. Why did we need fences? Football hooligans. Why did fans die at Hillsborough? Fences.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Eh? My post supported reinforcing the guarantees to the Baltics, and I don't think that invading them would have any justification. Putin needs to be clear that a threat to the Baltic States is a threat to NATO. We simply don't need to refer back to the complex politics of the 1940s, filled with crimes that used each other as justification. History is rarely clear-cut, but the current position needs to be clear - an invasion of a NATO country will bring in the whole of NATO. Some things are simpler than they look.
That's fair.
But the NATO 'guarantee' is no such thing with Trump in power. And it's a fair question how many European members would pitch in.
So not really very simple. Especially when you consider past guarantees which proved no such thing.
The reality is that the Baltics might be an easier proposition than Ukraine, everything else being equal. Abandoning the latter is very much a gamble not in our interests.
Standing with Ukraine actively reinforces the credibility of NATO deterrence; abandoning it does precisely the opposite.
So far I don't think the war has reinforced the credibility of NATO. But so far NATO countries have neither properly stood with Ukraine, nor properly abandoned Ukraine.
It has to be said that it has however fatally undermined the military, diplomatic and economic credibility of Russia. The only people who still take Putin seriously are his fellow mass murderers like Xi and Kim and fellow criminal weirdos like Trump, Khamanei and a few others who have yet to be convicted.
It is unfortunate that these people wield significant power, but Russia right now looks more hollow than an Elon Musk erection.
If not optimal at least that's one positive of the whole sorry saga.
Maybe, but as you say, China and others are supportive of Russia.
A Chinese friend who was teaching in the UK moved to Moscow to teach at an international school two years ago, saying the pay and conditions are far better there. I spoke to her last week. She thinks Moscow is a fantastic and exciting city, and she barely notices the war at all. She seems to think it's some local squabble within Ukraine, something like a civil war, which is nothing to do with anyone else, the rest of the world should just leave them to it. I find this kind of attitude is quite common among people from outside Europe.
Many years ago when I was a post doc in NZ I met a Romanian who was convinced that Britain had recently invaded northern Ireland and was there as an occupying force. Could not convince her otherwise.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
The Dow is lower than its peak under Biden.
You see, whenever you post something like that I know you're scratching around the barrel.
Trump could deliver the Moon On A Stick and you'd still argue it's not as good as the major step forward in civil service reform delivered by Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.
You simply cannot accept any statement other than he's a dismal failure, and this is why you keep losing and will continue to lose.
I just bought a handsome William IV mahogany table for £129
wtf. A friend tells me “antique prices have collapsed”. “Especially for old brown stuff”
Is this true? It seems true from this deal
OTOH I might get it and find it collapses on arrival
Yes, for quite a long time.
It's also driven by large furniture and houses getting smaller, and fashion.
Mum and dad were in a 5000sqft former manor house for their last 40 years, of which restoration took 25 years. They had at least 3 full size (8 person) dining tables from relatives, and had amassed a collection of Guy Rogers 1960s Manhattan teak furniture of 3 full size double bed converting sofas, and about 9 chairs, as old friends moved to smaller houses - different period, same principle.
Estate sales of boomers (OK: former boomers) are one place to be.
Big and brown has been difficult to give away for a long time.
When the LAB LEAKED covid killed my mother I burned most of her antique furniture in the paddock of her house in North Yorks because getting rid of it was such a tiresome pain in the dick. There is literally no way to get rid of a massive 300kg 18th C. Flemish oak wardrobe other than burning it.
We've been clearing my late MIL's house most of the year, it seems never ending. Most of the furniture has gone to charity. Attempts to sell stuff online have not really been worth the hassle. Problems like the 4 piece suite which doesn't have fire certificates on it (meaning charities will not trust it) have had us pulling our hair out. . Dinning room table with 6 matching chairs, crockery sideboards, glass cabinets, we literally cannot give them away.
We did ours via an auction house - they took all the stuff we did not want as a package, sold the good and the rest went to a charity they worked with for the purpose.
We ended up with about 3k, but it was 3 decent sized vans of furniture - so low prices.
And there was a gorgeous 1880s mirror backed sideboard which was about 8ft long and 8ft high, with arts and crafts decoration, but which just would not fit in a modern house and would need to go to the type of house for which it was made.
Most people will come across this problem sometime. The game ought to have rules.
Rule 1: Price is what you can get.There is no other measure. Madness follows if you overlook this. Rule 2: It is massively in the public interest that Local Authorities have a statutory duty to collect and dispose of otherwise impossible items from domestic premises at no or small charge. (This prevents fly tipping). Rule 3: What you can get depends on whether you want to make getting maximum price your full time job for an indefinite period. This especially applies to books. Rule 4: The piano should never have been invented. It should be a criminal offence to try to own a grand piano. Rule 5: No-one ever moves house/clears a house without leaving behind at least one piece of unfinished business.
I have had several friends say that they were reduced almost to tears when doing house clearance for their late parents, items of furniture and china that their parents really treasured and were convinced were worth a lot went for peanuts at auction because currently they are not fashionable.
When my old dad finally died his house on S.Harris was full of brown furniture from my then recently deceased gran. Out of sentimental attachment we spent quite a lot on transporting it back to the mainland, even then we were aware it wasn’t really financially sensible. Ironically there was quite a lot of modular Ercol furniture bought from the previous owner (widow of the retired head of SOE as it happens) which we left for the new owner, it would be worth a handy chunk of money now.
Ercol is definitely popular, including with younger generation. Has a bit of that Scandi design shtick abiut it. And it fits!
OTOH you simply cannot give away pianos, as am discovering with a perfectly nice upright that I'm trying to find a home for. Depressing really.
I know someone who has had many dealings with pianos over the years and lives in a remote house in the middle of nowhere. Quite a number of pianos are buried in his garden. (I am not making this up.)
What will archaeologists think?
"Ritual significance" is the usual cop-out for anything they don't understand
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
The Dow is lower than its peak under Biden.
You see, whenever you post something like that I know you're scratching around the barrel.
Trump could deliver the Moon On A Stick and you'd still argue it's not as good as the major step forward in civil service reform delivered by Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.
You simply cannot accept any statement other than he's a dismal failure, and this is why you keep losing and will continue to lose.
And you are perhaps similarly blinded by you woke-o-phobia.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
Because it's not happening.
The Dow is at the same level as when Trump took office, having been up and down like Clinton's trousers in the meanwhile. Down when Trump dreams up a new economic policy, up when he reverse ferrets. The Nasdaq is up but that's due to tech stocks, which look like the South Sea Bubble on acid.
Any fall at the border is due to Trump implementing Biden's policies, which he had been blocking, but is much more likely to be due to fraudulent reporting by the government.
And 'Wokery' as you call it may be being discouraged in federal government (with mixed success due to the extraordinary incompetence of the people trying to implement it) looks to be storming ahead elsewhere as everyone who hates him sees an easy way of annoying the fat old pervert and getting him to rant like the senile old smackhead he is on Twitter.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Eh? My post supported reinforcing the guarantees to the Baltics, and I don't think that invading them would have any justification. Putin needs to be clear that a threat to the Baltic States is a threat to NATO. We simply don't need to refer back to the complex politics of the 1940s, filled with crimes that used each other as justification. History is rarely clear-cut, but the current position needs to be clear - an invasion of a NATO country will bring in the whole of NATO. Some things are simpler than they look.
That's fair.
But the NATO 'guarantee' is no such thing with Trump in power. And it's a fair question how many European members would pitch in.
So not really very simple. Especially when you consider past guarantees which proved no such thing.
The reality is that the Baltics might be an easier proposition than Ukraine, everything else being equal. Abandoning the latter is very much a gamble not in our interests.
Standing with Ukraine actively reinforces the credibility of NATO deterrence; abandoning it does precisely the opposite.
So far I don't think the war has reinforced the credibility of NATO. But so far NATO countries have neither properly stood with Ukraine, nor properly abandoned Ukraine.
It has to be said that it has however fatally undermined the military, diplomatic and economic credibility of Russia. The only people who still take Putin seriously are his fellow mass murderers like Xi and Kim and fellow criminal weirdos like Trump, Khamanei and a few others who have yet to be convicted.
It is unfortunate that these people wield significant power, but Russia right now looks more hollow than an Elon Musk erection.
If not optimal at least that's one positive of the whole sorry saga.
Maybe, but as you say, China and others are supportive of Russia.
A Chinese friend who was teaching in the UK moved to Moscow to teach at an international school two years ago, saying the pay and conditions are far better there. I spoke to her last week. She thinks Moscow is a fantastic and exciting city, and she barely notices the war at all. She seems to think it's some local squabble within Ukraine, something like a civil war, which is nothing to do with anyone else, the rest of the world should just leave them to it. I find this kind of attitude is quite common among people from outside Europe.
Many years ago when I was a post doc in NZ I met a Romanian who was convinced that Britain had recently invaded northern Ireland and was there as an occupying force. Could not convince her otherwise.
I guess you could call it recently if you take the long view of history.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Eh? My post supported reinforcing the guarantees to the Baltics, and I don't think that invading them would have any justification. Putin needs to be clear that a threat to the Baltic States is a threat to NATO. We simply don't need to refer back to the complex politics of the 1940s, filled with crimes that used each other as justification. History is rarely clear-cut, but the current position needs to be clear - an invasion of a NATO country will bring in the whole of NATO. Some things are simpler than they look.
That's fair.
But the NATO 'guarantee' is no such thing with Trump in power. And it's a fair question how many European members would pitch in.
So not really very simple. Especially when you consider past guarantees which proved no such thing.
The reality is that the Baltics might be an easier proposition than Ukraine, everything else being equal. Abandoning the latter is very much a gamble not in our interests.
Standing with Ukraine actively reinforces the credibility of NATO deterrence; abandoning it does precisely the opposite.
So far I don't think the war has reinforced the credibility of NATO. But so far NATO countries have neither properly stood with Ukraine, nor properly abandoned Ukraine.
It has to be said that it has however fatally undermined the military, diplomatic and economic credibility of Russia. The only people who still take Putin seriously are his fellow mass murderers like Xi and Kim and fellow criminal weirdos like Trump, Khamanei and a few others who have yet to be convicted.
It is unfortunate that these people wield significant power, but Russia right now looks more hollow than an Elon Musk erection.
If not optimal at least that's one positive of the whole sorry saga.
Maybe, but as you say, China and others are supportive of Russia.
A Chinese friend who was teaching in the UK moved to Moscow to teach at an international school two years ago, saying the pay and conditions are far better there. I spoke to her last week. She thinks Moscow is a fantastic and exciting city, and she barely notices the war at all. She seems to think it's some local squabble within Ukraine, something like a civil war, which is nothing to do with anyone else, the rest of the world should just leave them to it. I find this kind of attitude is quite common among people from outside Europe.
Many years ago when I was a post doc in NZ I met a Romanian who was convinced that Britain had recently invaded northern Ireland and was there as an occupying force. Could not convince her otherwise.
I guess you could call it recently if you take the long view of history.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
The Dow is lower than its peak under Biden.
You see, whenever you post something like that I know you're scratching around the barrel.
Trump could deliver the Moon On A Stick and you'd still argue it's not as good as the major step forward in civil service reform delivered by Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.
You simply cannot accept any statement other than he's a dismal failure, and this is why you keep losing and will continue to lose.
And you are perhaps similarly blinded by you woke-o-phobia.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Eh? My post supported reinforcing the guarantees to the Baltics, and I don't think that invading them would have any justification. Putin needs to be clear that a threat to the Baltic States is a threat to NATO. We simply don't need to refer back to the complex politics of the 1940s, filled with crimes that used each other as justification. History is rarely clear-cut, but the current position needs to be clear - an invasion of a NATO country will bring in the whole of NATO. Some things are simpler than they look.
That's fair.
But the NATO 'guarantee' is no such thing with Trump in power. And it's a fair question how many European members would pitch in.
So not really very simple. Especially when you consider past guarantees which proved no such thing.
The reality is that the Baltics might be an easier proposition than Ukraine, everything else being equal. Abandoning the latter is very much a gamble not in our interests.
Standing with Ukraine actively reinforces the credibility of NATO deterrence; abandoning it does precisely the opposite.
So far I don't think the war has reinforced the credibility of NATO. But so far NATO countries have neither properly stood with Ukraine, nor properly abandoned Ukraine.
It has to be said that it has however fatally undermined the military, diplomatic and economic credibility of Russia. The only people who still take Putin seriously are his fellow mass murderers like Xi and Kim and fellow criminal weirdos like Trump, Khamanei and a few others who have yet to be convicted.
It is unfortunate that these people wield significant power, but Russia right now looks more hollow than an Elon Musk erection.
If not optimal at least that's one positive of the whole sorry saga.
Maybe, but as you say, China and others are supportive of Russia.
A Chinese friend who was teaching in the UK moved to Moscow to teach at an international school two years ago, saying the pay and conditions are far better there. I spoke to her last week. She thinks Moscow is a fantastic and exciting city, and she barely notices the war at all. She seems to think it's some local squabble within Ukraine, something like a civil war, which is nothing to do with anyone else, the rest of the world should just leave them to it. I find this kind of attitude is quite common among people from outside Europe.
Many years ago when I was a post doc in NZ I met a Romanian who was convinced that Britain had recently invaded northern Ireland and was there as an occupying force. Could not convince her otherwise.
I guess you could call it recently if you take the long view of history.
Back in my uni days, an American turned up in the pub with her own ideas about Northern Ireland. I thought it a bit OTT when the Irish guys in the pub took her (unknowingly) to a bar with a UVF collecting tin. Fucking weird place that was.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
The Dow is lower than its peak under Biden.
You see, whenever you post something like that I know you're scratching around the barrel.
Trump could deliver the Moon On A Stick and you'd still argue it's not as good as the major step forward in civil service reform delivered by Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.
You simply cannot accept any statement other than he's a dismal failure, and this is why you keep losing and will continue to lose.
The stock market is high because he has pumped the economy full of debt to fund current spending. This is good for equities but terrible for the long term economy.
Well, the pyroclastic flow coming off Arthur's Seat has made this afternoon's run a bit more exciting than usual. Extinct - yeah right!
I'm heading SW to avoid wrecking my lungs any further.
This was too flippant. It's now very significant from my vantage point and there are likely hundreds if not thousands of tourists up there.
At this point I would like to point anyone to my favourite novel, which is Stephen Baxter's Moonseed.
Alien nanobug destroys planet, starting at Arthur's Seat (via Moon and Venus).
Part of his "NASA Trilogy" - Titan, Moonseed, Voyage - written in the 1990s? He's gone off recently when he started rewriting the Xeelee sequence via time travel, but I still like him.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?
Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.
I just bought a handsome William IV mahogany table for £129
wtf. A friend tells me “antique prices have collapsed”. “Especially for old brown stuff”
Is this true? It seems true from this deal
OTOH I might get it and find it collapses on arrival
Yes, for quite a long time.
It's also driven by large furniture and houses getting smaller, and fashion.
Mum and dad were in a 5000sqft former manor house for their last 40 years, of which restoration took 25 years. They had at least 3 full size (8 person) dining tables from relatives, and had amassed a collection of Guy Rogers 1960s Manhattan teak furniture of 3 full size double bed converting sofas, and about 9 chairs, as old friends moved to smaller houses - different period, same principle.
Estate sales of boomers (OK: former boomers) are one place to be.
Big and brown has been difficult to give away for a long time.
When the LAB LEAKED covid killed my mother I burned most of her antique furniture in the paddock of her house in North Yorks because getting rid of it was such a tiresome pain in the dick. There is literally no way to get rid of a massive 300kg 18th C. Flemish oak wardrobe other than burning it.
We've been clearing my late MIL's house most of the year, it seems never ending. Most of the furniture has gone to charity. Attempts to sell stuff online have not really been worth the hassle. Problems like the 4 piece suite which doesn't have fire certificates on it (meaning charities will not trust it) have had us pulling our hair out. . Dinning room table with 6 matching chairs, crockery sideboards, glass cabinets, we literally cannot give them away.
We did ours via an auction house - they took all the stuff we did not want as a package, sold the good and the rest went to a charity they worked with for the purpose.
We ended up with about 3k, but it was 3 decent sized vans of furniture - so low prices.
And there was a gorgeous 1880s mirror backed sideboard which was about 8ft long and 8ft high, with arts and crafts decoration, but which just would not fit in a modern house and would need to go to the type of house for which it was made.
Most people will come across this problem sometime. The game ought to have rules.
Rule 1: Price is what you can get.There is no other measure. Madness follows if you overlook this. Rule 2: It is massively in the public interest that Local Authorities have a statutory duty to collect and dispose of otherwise impossible items from domestic premises at no or small charge. (This prevents fly tipping). Rule 3: What you can get depends on whether you want to make getting maximum price your full time job for an indefinite period. This especially applies to books. Rule 4: The piano should never have been invented. It should be a criminal offence to try to own a grand piano. Rule 5: No-one ever moves house/clears a house without leaving behind at least one piece of unfinished business.
I have had several friends say that they were reduced almost to tears when doing house clearance for their late parents, items of furniture and china that their parents really treasured and were convinced were worth a lot went for peanuts at auction because currently they are not fashionable.
When my old dad finally died his house on S.Harris was full of brown furniture from my then recently deceased gran. Out of sentimental attachment we spent quite a lot on transporting it back to the mainland, even then we were aware it wasn’t really financially sensible. Ironically there was quite a lot of modular Ercol furniture bought from the previous owner (widow of the retired head of SOE as it happens) which we left for the new owner, it would be worth a handy chunk of money now.
Ercol is definitely popular, including with younger generation. Has a bit of that Scandi design shtick abiut it. And it fits!
OTOH you simply cannot give away pianos, as am discovering with a perfectly nice upright that I'm trying to find a home for. Depressing really.
Aren't you near Portsmouth? The RN like to have old pianos to catapult off their aircraft carriers. Or used to.
Well, that would be a diverting way of saying Godspeed to the old Joanna. Sadly at the wrong end of the country. Wonder if the RAF could help out - they are somewhat more proximate.
You could phone the RN and ask them when a carrier is next visiting Rosyth.
Surely the correct way to dispose of a piano is to dangle it over a pavement and place a banana skin beneath it. The gods of slapstick will handle the rest
What you need is a fat man and a thin man in bowler hats moving it down a flight of steps.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
The Dow is lower than its peak under Biden.
You see, whenever you post something like that I know you're scratching around the barrel.
Trump could deliver the Moon On A Stick and you'd still argue it's not as good as the major step forward in civil service reform delivered by Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.
You simply cannot accept any statement other than he's a dismal failure, and this is why you keep losing and will continue to lose.
And you are perhaps similarly blinded by you woke-o-phobia.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?
Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.
JD Vance: "We know that Jeffrey Epstein had a lot of connections with left-wing politicians and left-wing billionaires. And now, President Trump has demanded full transparency from this. And yet the Democrats somehow are attacking him…” https://x.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1954552539090743610
Well, the pyroclastic flow coming off Arthur's Seat has made this afternoon's run a bit more exciting than usual. Extinct - yeah right!
I'm heading SW to avoid wrecking my lungs any further.
This was too flippant. It's now very significant from my vantage point and there are likely hundreds if not thousands of tourists up there.
At this point I would like to point anyone to my favourite novel, which is Stephen Baxter's Moonseed.
Alien nanobug destroys planet, starting at Arthur's Seat (via Moon and Venus).
Part of his "NASA Trilogy" - Titan, Moonseed, Voyage - written in the 1990s? He's gone off recently when he started rewriting the Xeelee sequence via time travel, but I still like him.
I have a weird relationship with Stephen Baxter novels - I often come away with a feeling they didn't really reach the potential of teh story, yet am never really discouraged from picking up another one. I found Proxima and Ultima to be very batty but absorbing.
I am curious how his authorised sequels to The Time Machine and War of the Worlds stack up.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?
Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
The Dow is lower than its peak under Biden.
You see, whenever you post something like that I know you're scratching around the barrel.
Trump could deliver the Moon On A Stick and you'd still argue it's not as good as the major step forward in civil service reform delivered by Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.
You simply cannot accept any statement other than he's a dismal failure, and this is why you keep losing and will continue to lose.
The stock market is high because he has pumped the economy full of debt to fund current spending. This is good for equities but terrible for the long term economy.
Indeed, but he is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want.
It's does no good to say "we can't rely" on the US because they won't vote the way we might want them to - none of us actually living there, of course - if that alternative doesn't provide what its electorate want it to.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Because he doesn't see the world in your simplistic black and white tones doesn't make him a liar. I'm not surprised he posts so lrarely when faced with your dribbling ignorance
Gee, thanks Roger!
"simplistic black and white tones"
The Ukraine war is as near black and white in such matters as you can get. Or, if you prefer, right and wrong. Good and evil. It is far more clear-cut in terms of "right and wrong" than (say) the situation in the Middle east with Israel versus Hamas.
Our country's interests are also fairly clear-cut: support Ukraine, oppose Russia.
It's amazing how many lefties are against imperialism and fascism - except when it comes to Russia, in which case it's a-okay. I'd have hoped you weren't one of them.
The philosopher of Putin’s party preaches literal Russian Fascism. As in - he calls it fascism.
Unbelievable that many "right on" types like @Dura_Ace think Putin's some kind of progressive!
@Dura_Ace role here is to wind people up. The same as @Leon, but far more effective as he does it with a few well timed posts rather inundation.
Eh, bit too obviously performatively 'edgy' though, so hard to know what is truly believed and this react to.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?
Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal..
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
The Dow is lower than its peak under Biden.
You see, whenever you post something like that I know you're scratching around the barrel.
Trump could deliver the Moon On A Stick and you'd still argue it's not as good as the major step forward in civil service reform delivered by Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.
You simply cannot accept any statement other than he's a dismal failure, and this is why you keep losing and will continue to lose.
And you are perhaps similarly blinded by you woke-o-phobia.
Well a non lazy word from CR anyway - "progressivism".
That's a refreshing change from Woke and I'm banking it. A good development.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?
Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
The Dow is lower than its peak under Biden.
You see, whenever you post something like that I know you're scratching around the barrel.
Trump could deliver the Moon On A Stick and you'd still argue it's not as good as the major step forward in civil service reform delivered by Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.
You simply cannot accept any statement other than he's a dismal failure, and this is why you keep losing and will continue to lose.
You made a claim. I pointed out a problem with the claim.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?
Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.
Acyn @Acyn · 4h Vance: The second thing the tariffs are doing is it's bringing in a lot of additional revenue which, of course, we're using to give tax relief to the American people and make it easier for average Americans to get by.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
The Dow is lower than its peak under Biden.
You see, whenever you post something like that I know you're scratching around the barrel.
Trump could deliver the Moon On A Stick and you'd still argue it's not as good as the major step forward in civil service reform delivered by Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.
You simply cannot accept any statement other than he's a dismal failure, and this is why you keep losing and will continue to lose.
And you are perhaps similarly blinded by you woke-o-phobia.
Nah.
That's not how being blinded works.
Took you three minutes to correct your spelling there.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Eh? My post supported reinforcing the guarantees to the Baltics, and I don't think that invading them would have any justification. Putin needs to be clear that a threat to the Baltic States is a threat to NATO. We simply don't need to refer back to the complex politics of the 1940s, filled with crimes that used each other as justification. History is rarely clear-cut, but the current position needs to be clear - an invasion of a NATO country will bring in the whole of NATO. Some things are simpler than they look.
That's fair.
But the NATO 'guarantee' is no such thing with Trump in power. And it's a fair question how many European members would pitch in.
So not really very simple. Especially when you consider past guarantees which proved no such thing.
The reality is that the Baltics might be an easier proposition than Ukraine, everything else being equal. Abandoning the latter is very much a gamble not in our interests.
Standing with Ukraine actively reinforces the credibility of NATO deterrence; abandoning it does precisely the opposite.
So far I don't think the war has reinforced the credibility of NATO. But so far NATO countries have neither properly stood with Ukraine, nor properly abandoned Ukraine.
NATO has done ok in Ukraine - it doesn’t have a remit but has been a part of the coalition of the willing discussions.
And more countries have joined as a result of Russian’s invasion
The accession of Sweden and Finland is hugely significant, as they have abandoned their decades-old policy of neutrality. Russian sabre-rattling ignored. Both possess capable militaries. Entirely shifted the balance in the Baltic Sea. It has significantly upped the risk for Putin if he tries his luck in the Baltics.
Well, the pyroclastic flow coming off Arthur's Seat has made this afternoon's run a bit more exciting than usual. Extinct - yeah right!
I'm heading SW to avoid wrecking my lungs any further.
This was too flippant. It's now very significant from my vantage point and there are likely hundreds if not thousands of tourists up there.
At this point I would like to point anyone to my favourite novel, which is Stephen Baxter's Moonseed.
Alien nanobug destroys planet, starting at Arthur's Seat (via Moon and Venus).
Part of his "NASA Trilogy" - Titan, Moonseed, Voyage - written in the 1990s? He's gone off recently when he started rewriting the Xeelee sequence via time travel, but I still like him.
I have a weird relationship with Stephen Baxter novels - I often come away with a feeling they didn't really reach the potential of teh story, yet am never really discouraged from picking up another one. I found Proxima and Ultima to be very batty but absorbing.
I am curious how his authorised sequels to The Time Machine and War of the Worlds stack up.
I couldn't finish The Massacre Of Mankind. However the following are still worthwhile
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Eh? My post supported reinforcing the guarantees to the Baltics, and I don't think that invading them would have any justification. Putin needs to be clear that a threat to the Baltic States is a threat to NATO. We simply don't need to refer back to the complex politics of the 1940s, filled with crimes that used each other as justification. History is rarely clear-cut, but the current position needs to be clear - an invasion of a NATO country will bring in the whole of NATO. Some things are simpler than they look.
That's fair.
But the NATO 'guarantee' is no such thing with Trump in power. And it's a fair question how many European members would pitch in.
So not really very simple. Especially when you consider past guarantees which proved no such thing.
The reality is that the Baltics might be an easier proposition than Ukraine, everything else being equal. Abandoning the latter is very much a gamble not in our interests.
Standing with Ukraine actively reinforces the credibility of NATO deterrence; abandoning it does precisely the opposite.
So far I don't think the war has reinforced the credibility of NATO. But so far NATO countries have neither properly stood with Ukraine, nor properly abandoned Ukraine.
NATO has done ok in Ukraine - it doesn’t have a remit but has been a part of the coalition of the willing discussions.
And more countries have joined as a result of Russian’s invasion
The accession of Sweden and Finland is hugely significant, as they have abandoned their decades-old policy of neutrality. Russian sabre-rattling ignored. Both possess capable militaries. Entirely shifted the balance in the Baltic Sea. It has significantly upped the risk for Putin if he tries his luck in the Baltics.
Putin has obtained new territory (I don't think there's any realistic prospect of it coming back), if less then he will have wanted, whether that was worth the changing situation in the Baltic I guess he will have to decide before he unfortunately dies peacefully as a rich, horrible old man.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?
Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.
Well, the pyroclastic flow coming off Arthur's Seat has made this afternoon's run a bit more exciting than usual. Extinct - yeah right!
I'm heading SW to avoid wrecking my lungs any further.
This was too flippant. It's now very significant from my vantage point and there are likely hundreds if not thousands of tourists up there.
At this point I would like to point anyone to my favourite novel, which is Stephen Baxter's Moonseed.
Alien nanobug destroys planet, starting at Arthur's Seat (via Moon and Venus).
Part of his "NASA Trilogy" - Titan, Moonseed, Voyage - written in the 1990s? He's gone off recently when he started rewriting the Xeelee sequence via time travel, but I still like him.
I have a weird relationship with Stephen Baxter novels - I often come away with a feeling they didn't really reach the potential of teh story, yet am never really discouraged from picking up another one. I found Proxima and Ultima to be very batty but absorbing.
I am curious how his authorised sequels to The Time Machine and War of the Worlds stack up.
I couldn't finish The Massacre Of Mankind. However the following are still worthwhile
Acyn @Acyn · 4h Vance: The second thing the tariffs are doing is it's bringing in a lot of additional revenue which, of course, we're using to give tax relief to the American people and make it easier for average Americans to get by.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
The Dow is lower than its peak under Biden.
You see, whenever you post something like that I know you're scratching around the barrel.
Trump could deliver the Moon On A Stick and you'd still argue it's not as good as the major step forward in civil service reform delivered by Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.
You simply cannot accept any statement other than he's a dismal failure, and this is why you keep losing and will continue to lose.
You made a claim. I pointed out a problem with the claim.
Your shtick on here is to use select and frame the evidence that best suits the argument you want to make. If that doesn't work you'll try an shift the goalposts of the argument and, as a last resort, ad hom instead, laced with pomposity.
The Nasdaq has hit a record high and the S&P500 was almost there on Friday.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Eh? My post supported reinforcing the guarantees to the Baltics, and I don't think that invading them would have any justification. Putin needs to be clear that a threat to the Baltic States is a threat to NATO. We simply don't need to refer back to the complex politics of the 1940s, filled with crimes that used each other as justification. History is rarely clear-cut, but the current position needs to be clear - an invasion of a NATO country will bring in the whole of NATO. Some things are simpler than they look.
That's fair.
But the NATO 'guarantee' is no such thing with Trump in power. And it's a fair question how many European members would pitch in.
So not really very simple. Especially when you consider past guarantees which proved no such thing.
The reality is that the Baltics might be an easier proposition than Ukraine, everything else being equal. Abandoning the latter is very much a gamble not in our interests.
Standing with Ukraine actively reinforces the credibility of NATO deterrence; abandoning it does precisely the opposite.
So far I don't think the war has reinforced the credibility of NATO. But so far NATO countries have neither properly stood with Ukraine, nor properly abandoned Ukraine.
NATO has done ok in Ukraine - it doesn’t have a remit but has been a part of the coalition of the willing discussions.
And more countries have joined as a result of Russian’s invasion
The accession of Sweden and Finland is hugely significant, as they have abandoned their decades-old policy of neutrality. Russian sabre-rattling ignored. Both possess capable militaries. Entirely shifted the balance in the Baltic Sea. It has significantly upped the risk for Putin if he tries his luck in the Baltics.
Putin has obtained new territory (I don't think there's any realistic prospect of it coming back), if less then he will have wanted, whether that was worth the changing situation in the Baltic I guess he will have to decide before he unfortunately dies peacefully as a rich, horrible old man.
Far too many "rich horrible old men" running countries if you ask me. It seems to be what you get if you dispense with democracy and sometimes (eg the USA) even if you don't.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?
Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.
To his credit Michael Heseltine refused to countenance managed decline for Liverpool & has been, I think, proven right in the long term.
To her credit, so did Thatcher.
"She was urged" doesn't mean "she decided".
She was quite good at figuring out when the “experts” were being fuckwits.
In the aftermath of the Brighton Bombing, they advocated all kinds of idiocy. Most of which would have made things 1000x worse - reintroduction of internment?!!. Thatcher, with the dust on her from the bombing, initiated the twin track policy. Track one - peace process, Track Two - infiltrate and destroy the paramilitaries from within. Which culminated in double agents in the PIRA killing off those opposed to the peace process.
On the flip side, she went against her personal instincts to go with the highly effective socio-medical campaign against AIDS - because the medical advice was coherent and cogent.
Well, the pyroclastic flow coming off Arthur's Seat has made this afternoon's run a bit more exciting than usual. Extinct - yeah right!
I'm heading SW to avoid wrecking my lungs any further.
This was too flippant. It's now very significant from my vantage point and there are likely hundreds if not thousands of tourists up there.
At this point I would like to point anyone to my favourite novel, which is Stephen Baxter's Moonseed.
Alien nanobug destroys planet, starting at Arthur's Seat (via Moon and Venus).
Part of his "NASA Trilogy" - Titan, Moonseed, Voyage - written in the 1990s? He's gone off recently when he started rewriting the Xeelee sequence via time travel, but I still like him.
I have a weird relationship with Stephen Baxter novels - I often come away with a feeling they didn't really reach the potential of teh story, yet am never really discouraged from picking up another one. I found Proxima and Ultima to be very batty but absorbing.
I am curious how his authorised sequels to The Time Machine and War of the Worlds stack up.
I couldn't finish The Massacre Of Mankind. However the following are still worthwhile
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Eh? My post supported reinforcing the guarantees to the Baltics, and I don't think that invading them would have any justification. Putin needs to be clear that a threat to the Baltic States is a threat to NATO. We simply don't need to refer back to the complex politics of the 1940s, filled with crimes that used each other as justification. History is rarely clear-cut, but the current position needs to be clear - an invasion of a NATO country will bring in the whole of NATO. Some things are simpler than they look.
That's fair.
But the NATO 'guarantee' is no such thing with Trump in power. And it's a fair question how many European members would pitch in.
So not really very simple. Especially when you consider past guarantees which proved no such thing.
The reality is that the Baltics might be an easier proposition than Ukraine, everything else being equal. Abandoning the latter is very much a gamble not in our interests.
Standing with Ukraine actively reinforces the credibility of NATO deterrence; abandoning it does precisely the opposite.
So far I don't think the war has reinforced the credibility of NATO. But so far NATO countries have neither properly stood with Ukraine, nor properly abandoned Ukraine.
NATO has done ok in Ukraine - it doesn’t have a remit but has been a part of the coalition of the willing discussions.
And more countries have joined as a result of Russian’s invasion
The accession of Sweden and Finland is hugely significant, as they have abandoned their decades-old policy of neutrality. Russian sabre-rattling ignored. Both possess capable militaries. Entirely shifted the balance in the Baltic Sea. It has significantly upped the risk for Putin if he tries his luck in the Baltics.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.
When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.
I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.
Eh? My post supported reinforcing the guarantees to the Baltics, and I don't think that invading them would have any justification. Putin needs to be clear that a threat to the Baltic States is a threat to NATO. We simply don't need to refer back to the complex politics of the 1940s, filled with crimes that used each other as justification. History is rarely clear-cut, but the current position needs to be clear - an invasion of a NATO country will bring in the whole of NATO. Some things are simpler than they look.
That's fair.
But the NATO 'guarantee' is no such thing with Trump in power. And it's a fair question how many European members would pitch in.
So not really very simple. Especially when you consider past guarantees which proved no such thing.
The reality is that the Baltics might be an easier proposition than Ukraine, everything else being equal. Abandoning the latter is very much a gamble not in our interests.
Standing with Ukraine actively reinforces the credibility of NATO deterrence; abandoning it does precisely the opposite.
So far I don't think the war has reinforced the credibility of NATO. But so far NATO countries have neither properly stood with Ukraine, nor properly abandoned Ukraine.
It has to be said that it has however fatally undermined the military, diplomatic and economic credibility of Russia. The only people who still take Putin seriously are his fellow mass murderers like Xi and Kim and fellow criminal weirdos like Trump, Khamanei and a few others who have yet to be convicted.
It is unfortunate that these people wield significant power, but Russia right now looks more hollow than an Elon Musk erection.
If not optimal at least that's one positive of the whole sorry saga.
Maybe, but as you say, China and others are supportive of Russia.
A Chinese friend who was teaching in the UK moved to Moscow to teach at an international school two years ago, saying the pay and conditions are far better there. I spoke to her last week. She thinks Moscow is a fantastic and exciting city, and she barely notices the war at all. She seems to think it's some local squabble within Ukraine, something like a civil war, which is nothing to do with anyone else, the rest of the world should just leave them to it. I find this kind of attitude is quite common among people from outside Europe.
That kind of attitude is quite common among people within Moscow.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?
Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.
To his credit Michael Heseltine refused to countenance managed decline for Liverpool & has been, I think, proven right in the long term.
To her credit, so did Thatcher.
"She was urged" doesn't mean "she decided".
She was quite good at figuring out when the “experts” were being fuckwits.
In the aftermath of the Brighton Bombing, they advocated all kinds of idiocy. Most of which would have made things 1000x worse - reintroduction of internment?!!. Thatcher, with the dust on her from the bombing, initiated the twin track policy. Track one - peace process, Track Two - infiltrate and destroy the paramilitaries from within. Which culminated in double agents in the PIRA killing off those opposed to the peace process.
On the flip side, she went against her personal instincts to go with the highly effective socio-medical campaign against AIDS - because the medical advice was coherent and cogent.
This is why she was such a brilliant PM.
She's possibly the most intelligent one we've ever had.
This must now be one of the sunniest and maybe warmest summers on record? And spring was remarkably nice
Not 1976 but very pleasant
On Starmer's watch.
Feels like almost every day is “nice” or “really nice”
Not “nice but a bit fucking hot” like Italy or Spain or indeed Nice
Just highly agreeable. 25C and a few clouds
Anecdatish, but it doesn't feel it. It's nice - today was nice - but the last six weeks have been warm but not that sunny. Not unsunny - just no better than average for the time of year. And after a remarkably sunny Mar-Jun, it feels a bit hohum. My solar generatiom for May this year was my biggest month ever - better than any June. And there were very few days' play lost in the T20 Blast, and almost none before midsummer.
But today was a perfect summer's day. Oldest daughter has been to the park to meet friends and indulge in the teen summer pasttime of letting a chocolate bar belt and dipping strawberries in it. Younger two daughters have been off to the Mersey Valley to pick blackberries. The wifeand I did some gardening then relaxed in the afterglow of our exertions with a ginger beer. We are, today, living in an idealised 1950s England.
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
The Dow is lower than its peak under Biden.
You see, whenever you post something like that I know you're scratching around the barrel.
Trump could deliver the Moon On A Stick and you'd still argue it's not as good as the major step forward in civil service reform delivered by Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.
You simply cannot accept any statement other than he's a dismal failure, and this is why you keep losing and will continue to lose.
You made a claim. I pointed out a problem with the claim.
Your shtick on here is to use select and frame the evidence that best suits the argument you want to make. If that doesn't work you'll try an shift the goalposts of the argument and, as a last resort, ad hom instead, laced with pomposity.
The Nasdaq has hit a record high and the S&P500 was almost there on Friday.
You were selective in the markets you picked too. Let's agree it's a mixed picture. (The Nasdaq is doing particularly well, but that arguably is much more to do with the AI boom than anything Trump has done.) The national economic indicators, which arguably matter more, all look bad. As I said in another post, Trump's approval ratings are down across the board, including on the economy.
Have I made any comment about your character, your person, an "ad hom", today? This week? This month? The only one lobbing ad homs around appears to be you.
This must now be one of the sunniest and maybe warmest summers on record? And spring was remarkably nice
Not 1976 but very pleasant
On Starmer's watch.
Feels like almost every day is “nice” or “really nice”
Not “nice but a bit fucking hot” like Italy or Spain or indeed Nice
Just highly agreeable. 25C and a few clouds
Anecdatish, but it doesn't feel it. It's nice - today was nice - but the last six weeks have been warm but not that sunny. Not unsunny - just no better than average for the time of year. And after a remarkably sunny Mar-Jun, it feels a bit hohum. My solar generatiom for May this year was my biggest month ever - better than any June. And there were very few days' play lost in the T20 Blast, and almost none before midsummer.
But today was a perfect summer's day. Oldest daughter has been to the park to meet friends and indulge in the teen summer pasttime of letting a chocolate bar belt and dipping strawberries in it. Younger two daughters have been off to the Mersey Valley to pick blackberries. The wifeand I did some gardening then relaxed in the afterglow of our exertions with a ginger beer. We are, today, living in an idealised 1950s England.
When Farage is PM every day will be like 1950s England.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?
Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.
To his credit Michael Heseltine refused to countenance managed decline for Liverpool & has been, I think, proven right in the long term.
To her credit, so did Thatcher.
"She was urged" doesn't mean "she decided".
She was quite good at figuring out when the “experts” were being fuckwits.
In the aftermath of the Brighton Bombing, they advocated all kinds of idiocy. Most of which would have made things 1000x worse - reintroduction of internment?!!. Thatcher, with the dust on her from the bombing, initiated the twin track policy. Track one - peace process, Track Two - infiltrate and destroy the paramilitaries from within. Which culminated in double agents in the PIRA killing off those opposed to the peace process.
On the flip side, she went against her personal instincts to go with the highly effective socio-medical campaign against AIDS - because the medical advice was coherent and cogent.
Fiona Fowler deserves massive credit for that. Norman told her that he planned to reject it. She convinced him otherwise.
This must now be one of the sunniest and maybe warmest summers on record? And spring was remarkably nice
Not 1976 but very pleasant
On Starmer's watch.
Feels like almost every day is “nice” or “really nice”
Not “nice but a bit fucking hot” like Italy or Spain or indeed Nice
Just highly agreeable. 25C and a few clouds
Anecdatish, but it doesn't feel it. It's nice - today was nice - but the last six weeks have been warm but not that sunny. Not unsunny - just no better than average for the time of year. And after a remarkably sunny Mar-Jun, it feels a bit hohum. My solar generatiom for May this year was my biggest month ever - better than any June. And there were very few days' play lost in the T20 Blast, and almost none before midsummer.
But today was a perfect summer's day. Oldest daughter has been to the park to meet friends and indulge in the teen summer pasttime of letting a chocolate bar belt and dipping strawberries in it. Younger two daughters have been off to the Mersey Valley to pick blackberries. The wifeand I did some gardening then relaxed in the afterglow of our exertions with a ginger beer. We are, today, living in an idealised 1950s England.
Sweet
But there is quite a climatic difference between Lancashire and london. So maybe it’s just that
It certainly feels like a very nice summer to me. Almost every day is above “the average temp” - and there’s been very few of those miserable rainy weeks when it’s like autumn again
Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII. It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.
Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865
It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)
The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.
Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans). Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).
Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.
The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.
Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.
Is NATO meaningful now, though, with this new America? Eg if Russia were to attack the Baltics the US might intervene but it wouldn't be because of a treaty obligation (which Trump laughs at) it would be because he feels personally slighted, or just likes the idea for some reason or other. Conversely if he doesn't they won't.
Never mind the US all other NATO nations would have to send troops and jets to the Baltics and intervene militarily if a NATO member state was invaded, which was not the case with non NATO Ukraine
Yes but without the US we're looking at something different - a Common European Defence Obligation. CEDO.
That would have to be backed up by capability and it will take a decade, even if the money and political will is there, to build that to a level which fills the hole left by the Americans.
Which is why, galling though it is, Trump can't be just told to eff off. And why if he does (from Ukraine) it will create a massive crisis.
A Common European and Canadian and Turkish Defence Obligation but yes your point is valid, though if a Democrat wins the Presidency next time it may not be needed long term anyway
I think we need to remember that Trump has been elected twice. We can no longer rely on the United States
Trump is delivering what a large chunk of the American electorate want: strict immigration control, an end to Progressivism & a muscular approach to trade and economic growth.
Errrr...he *says* he is delivering those things.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Crossings at the border have plummeted, stock markets are reaching record highs, and Wokery has gone into full reverse in the US.
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
The Dow is lower than its peak under Biden.
You see, whenever you post something like that I know you're scratching around the barrel.
Trump could deliver the Moon On A Stick and you'd still argue it's not as good as the major step forward in civil service reform delivered by Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.
You simply cannot accept any statement other than he's a dismal failure, and this is why you keep losing and will continue to lose.
You made a claim. I pointed out a problem with the claim.
Your shtick on here is to use select and frame the evidence that best suits the argument you want to make. If that doesn't work you'll try an shift the goalposts of the argument and, as a last resort, ad hom instead, laced with pomposity.
The Nasdaq has hit a record high and the S&P500 was almost there on Friday.
You were selective in the markets you picked too. Let's agree it's a mixed picture. (The Nasdaq is doing particularly well, but that arguably is much more to do with the AI boom than anything Trump has done.) The national economic indicators, which arguably matter more, all look bad. As I said in another post, Trump's approval ratings are down across the board, including on the economy.
Have I made any comment about your character, your person, an "ad hom", today? This week? This month? The only one lobbing ad homs around appears to be you.
My original statement was correct: stock markets are reaching record highs.
Of course, we can all debate whether it's real, sustainable and if Trump had anything to do with it - but nevertheless the facts are that's happening on his watch.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?
Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.
To his credit Michael Heseltine refused to countenance managed decline for Liverpool & has been, I think, proven right in the long term.
To her credit, so did Thatcher.
"She was urged" doesn't mean "she decided".
She was quite good at figuring out when the “experts” were being fuckwits.
In the aftermath of the Brighton Bombing, they advocated all kinds of idiocy. Most of which would have made things 1000x worse - reintroduction of internment?!!. Thatcher, with the dust on her from the bombing, initiated the twin track policy. Track one - peace process, Track Two - infiltrate and destroy the paramilitaries from within. Which culminated in double agents in the PIRA killing off those opposed to the peace process.
On the flip side, she went against her personal instincts to go with the highly effective socio-medical campaign against AIDS - because the medical advice was coherent and cogent.
My impression is that she was pretty forensic and advisers/ministers/experts realised they had to be on top of their game - or else it would not be a pleasant experience. OTOH, they mostly respected her, and had confidence in her judgement. Plus, she wasn't all that bothered about personal popularity - though, important qualification - never, until near the end when she lost touch, forgot that you need votes to be PM.
This must now be one of the sunniest and maybe warmest summers on record? And spring was remarkably nice
Not 1976 but very pleasant
On Starmer's watch.
Feels like almost every day is “nice” or “really nice”
Not “nice but a bit fucking hot” like Italy or Spain or indeed Nice
Just highly agreeable. 25C and a few clouds
Anecdatish, but it doesn't feel it. It's nice - today was nice - but the last six weeks have been warm but not that sunny. Not unsunny - just no better than average for the time of year. And after a remarkably sunny Mar-Jun, it feels a bit hohum. My solar generatiom for May this year was my biggest month ever - better than any June. And there were very few days' play lost in the T20 Blast, and almost none before midsummer.
But today was a perfect summer's day. Oldest daughter has been to the park to meet friends and indulge in the teen summer pasttime of letting a chocolate bar belt and dipping strawberries in it. Younger two daughters have been off to the Mersey Valley to pick blackberries. The wifeand I did some gardening then relaxed in the afterglow of our exertions with a ginger beer. We are, today, living in an idealised 1950s England.
I've just been off blackberry picking with my daughter.
I then had a swift one, and am now cooking fish fingers for the kids and will shortly put on David Attenborough.
This must now be one of the sunniest and maybe warmest summers on record? And spring was remarkably nice
Not 1976 but very pleasant
On Starmer's watch.
Feels like almost every day is “nice” or “really nice”
Not “nice but a bit fucking hot” like Italy or Spain or indeed Nice
Just highly agreeable. 25C and a few clouds
Anecdatish, but it doesn't feel it. It's nice - today was nice - but the last six weeks have been warm but not that sunny. Not unsunny - just no better than average for the time of year. And after a remarkably sunny Mar-Jun, it feels a bit hohum. My solar generatiom for May this year was my biggest month ever - better than any June. And there were very few days' play lost in the T20 Blast, and almost none before midsummer.
But today was a perfect summer's day. Oldest daughter has been to the park to meet friends and indulge in the teen summer pasttime of letting a chocolate bar belt and dipping strawberries in it. Younger two daughters have been off to the Mersey Valley to pick blackberries. The wifeand I did some gardening then relaxed in the afterglow of our exertions with a ginger beer. We are, today, living in an idealised 1950s England.
When Farage is PM every day will be like 1950s England.
Rationing, smog, hangings, power cuts, conscription. Looking forward to it.
This must now be one of the sunniest and maybe warmest summers on record? And spring was remarkably nice
Not 1976 but very pleasant
On Starmer's watch.
Feels like almost every day is “nice” or “really nice”
Not “nice but a bit fucking hot” like Italy or Spain or indeed Nice
Just highly agreeable. 25C and a few clouds
Anecdatish, but it doesn't feel it. It's nice - today was nice - but the last six weeks have been warm but not that sunny. Not unsunny - just no better than average for the time of year. And after a remarkably sunny Mar-Jun, it feels a bit hohum. My solar generatiom for May this year was my biggest month ever - better than any June. And there were very few days' play lost in the T20 Blast, and almost none before midsummer.
But today was a perfect summer's day. Oldest daughter has been to the park to meet friends and indulge in the teen summer pasttime of letting a chocolate bar belt and dipping strawberries in it. Younger two daughters have been off to the Mersey Valley to pick blackberries. The wifeand I did some gardening then relaxed in the afterglow of our exertions with a ginger beer. We are, today, living in an idealised 1950s England.
I've just been off blackberry picking with my daughter.
I then had a swift one, and am now cooking fish fingers for the kids and will shortly put on David Attenborough.
Perfect.
Poor David. I am sure the fish fingers would have been enough.
I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.
Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,
Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?
Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.
To his credit Michael Heseltine refused to countenance managed decline for Liverpool & has been, I think, proven right in the long term.
To her credit, so did Thatcher.
"She was urged" doesn't mean "she decided".
She was quite good at figuring out when the “experts” were being fuckwits.
In the aftermath of the Brighton Bombing, they advocated all kinds of idiocy. Most of which would have made things 1000x worse - reintroduction of internment?!!. Thatcher, with the dust on her from the bombing, initiated the twin track policy. Track one - peace process, Track Two - infiltrate and destroy the paramilitaries from within. Which culminated in double agents in the PIRA killing off those opposed to the peace process.
On the flip side, she went against her personal instincts to go with the highly effective socio-medical campaign against AIDS - because the medical advice was coherent and cogent.
This is why she was such a brilliant PM.
She's possibly the most intelligent one we've ever had.
I would quibble slightly.
Harold Wilson, one of the youngest Oxford dons of the century at the age of 21, a lecturer in Economic History at New College from 1937, and a research fellow at University College, was probably more intelligent academically.
But he had terrible judgement, and consigned Britain to managed decline.
Mrs Thatcher had a good, upper-second class mind. But great judgement, self-confidence and perseverance, so the country flourished.
Judgement and intelligence are no more than loosely associated, as Noam Chomsky and all the rest of the Commie intelligensia show all the time.
This must now be one of the sunniest and maybe warmest summers on record? And spring was remarkably nice
Not 1976 but very pleasant
On Starmer's watch.
Feels like almost every day is “nice” or “really nice”
Not “nice but a bit fucking hot” like Italy or Spain or indeed Nice
Just highly agreeable. 25C and a few clouds
Anecdatish, but it doesn't feel it. It's nice - today was nice - but the last six weeks have been warm but not that sunny. Not unsunny - just no better than average for the time of year. And after a remarkably sunny Mar-Jun, it feels a bit hohum. My solar generatiom for May this year was my biggest month ever - better than any June. And there were very few days' play lost in the T20 Blast, and almost none before midsummer.
But today was a perfect summer's day. Oldest daughter has been to the park to meet friends and indulge in the teen summer pasttime of letting a chocolate bar belt and dipping strawberries in it. Younger two daughters have been off to the Mersey Valley to pick blackberries. The wifeand I did some gardening then relaxed in the afterglow of our exertions with a ginger beer. We are, today, living in an idealised 1950s England.
When Farage is PM every day will be like 1950s England.
Rationing, smog, hangings, power cuts, conscription. Looking forward to it.
How you've got the warped idea into your head that it's Farage's way that leads to power cuts is almost a masterpiece of self-deception.
Comments
"simplistic black and white tones"
The Ukraine war is as near black and white in such matters as you can get. Or, if you prefer, right and wrong. Good and evil. It is far more clear-cut in terms of "right and wrong" than (say) the situation in the Middle east with Israel versus Hamas.
Our country's interests are also fairly clear-cut: support Ukraine, oppose Russia.
It's amazing how many lefties are against imperialism and fascism - except when it comes to Russia, in which case it's a-okay. I'd have hoped you weren't one of them.
You see the Middle East in purely simplistic terms.
Post-colonial discourse tends to prioritise between imperialists.
Edinburgh really is a truly magical city. My original intention was to start the walk from London, but I am so happy I started from Edinburgh instead. It seems like a city tailor-made to start and end an adventure. I'm sad I don't get to go up there very often. I miss Scotland.
Challenge his arguments, not his motives.
As far as the reliability of US commitments is concerned, this spells it out.
JD Vance: "We're done with the funding of the Ukraine war business. We want to bring about a peaceful settlement to this thing."
https://x.com/atrupar/status/1954546744210915596
It is unfortunate that these people wield significant power, but Russia right now looks more hollow than an Elon Musk erection.
If not optimal at least that's one positive of the whole sorry saga.
Good point.Once you’re at sea, those weights are easy enough with the cranes available. The difficulty is getting them there in the first place.
They've had floating cranes or shearleg barges to lift heavy cargo on ports for decades, 500t is nothing. They'll assemble the blades, nacelle and top section of the mast to install on the foundation in a single lift. Weight wont be an issue, hook height for the lift and the height of the centre of gravity will be challenging.
As a teenage steward, I saw them first hand. Large numbers travelled without tickets. They had one aim: to get into the ground, regardless. They would just jump through the turnstiles. If they were unlucky and got stopped by a copper, they'd just get chucked out - and start it all again. At one of the Christmas/New Year games at Forest, the ground capacity of 40k was likely 10k over the limit. People were hanging on up the floodlights to a stupid height.
Hillsborough was going to happen, somewhere. I'm bloody glad it didn't happen on my watch. But nobody ever remembers the traumatised Forest fans at Hillsborough, having to watch the Liverpool fans laid out on the pitch.
All Liverpool fans, mind.
I think it very, very unlikely that he will deliver economic growth.
As for immigration control, so far he's just beaten up random brown people rather than getting a grip on the border.
I suppose taken on the penguins of the Heard Islands is muscular, but it looks a bit silly. Where tariffs might make a difference, he caves faster than Prince Andrew on being shown a [MODERATED]
Plus, he'll let the Europeans get a HUGE leap ahead of the US in drone warfare manufacture and deployment techniques.
They were selling visa (illegal by itself) for jobs that didn’t exist. Thousands of pounds a time.
In some cases the care home companies recruited multiple hundred percent of their actual staff numbers.
Wallowing in victimhood is part of the culture.
A Chinese friend who was teaching in the UK moved to Moscow to teach at an international school two years ago, saying the pay and conditions are far better there. I spoke to her last week. She thinks Moscow is a fantastic and exciting city, and she barely notices the war at all. She seems to think it's some local squabble within Ukraine, something like a civil war, which is nothing to do with anyone else, the rest of the world should just leave them to it. I find this kind of attitude is quite common among people from outside Europe.
And more countries have joined as a result of Russian’s invasion
We might personally not want any of that to be true because he's a reprehensible human being, but why deny it?
It's very disappointing. There were hints of civilisation, but no, we have to judge them by their actions.
I spoke with a fire officer a few years ago and I think there were nascent plans to have the military support them (Pumas, but they have now been retired). But actually from his perspective the helicopters would be more useful to get kit and staff to remote fires, car crashes etc before the vehicles managed to get there.
The downside is for the *out* groups.
If you have a dark sense of humour, Reinhard Heydrich* increased unemployment benefit in occupied Czechoslovakia. While running mandatory (aka slave) labour…..
*Yes, that guy.
Trump could deliver the Moon On A Stick and you'd still argue it's not as good as the major step forward in civil service reform delivered by Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.
You simply cannot accept any statement other than he's a dismal failure, and this is why you keep losing and will continue to lose.
Not 1976 but very pleasant
The Dow is at the same level as when Trump took office, having been up and down like Clinton's trousers in the meanwhile. Down when Trump dreams up a new economic policy, up when he reverse ferrets. The Nasdaq is up but that's due to tech stocks, which look like the South Sea Bubble on acid.
Any fall at the border is due to Trump implementing Biden's policies, which he had been blocking, but is much more likely to be due to fraudulent reporting by the government.
And 'Wokery' as you call it may be being discouraged in federal government (with mixed success due to the extraordinary incompetence of the people trying to implement it) looks to be storming ahead elsewhere as everyone who hates him sees an easy way of annoying the fat old pervert and getting him to rant like the senile old smackhead he is on Twitter.
Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16361170
https://x.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1954552539090743610
lol.
I am curious how his authorised sequels to The Time Machine and War of the Worlds stack up.
On evenings like this it is probably the nicest place to live in the world
It's does no good to say "we can't rely" on the US because they won't vote the way we might want them to - none of us actually living there, of course - if that alternative doesn't provide what its electorate want it to.
I'd also add Liverpudlians were the victims of one the most grievous injustices in British history in that period.
That's a refreshing change from Woke and I'm banking it. A good development.
(He did intend to remove the population first, I should add.)
"She was urged" doesn't mean "she decided".
Acyn
@Acyn
·
4h
Vance: The second thing the tariffs are doing is it's bringing in a lot of additional revenue which, of course, we're using to give tax relief to the American people and make it easier for average Americans to get by.
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1954549117369405824
Slipping.
- Flood/Ark (Flood, Ark)
- Time Odyssey (Time's Eye, Sunstorm, Firstborn)
- Time's Tapestry (Emperor, Conqueror, Navigator, Weaver)
- Manifold (Time, Space, Origin, Phase Space)
- Destiny's Children (Coalescent, Exultant, Transcendent, Resplendent)
- Dr Who (The Wheel of Ice)
...and some othersNot “nice but a bit fucking hot” like Italy or Spain or indeed Nice
Just highly agreeable. 25C and a few clouds
It's an odd complaint, but some authors just have so many books out it can feel tough to get into them.
The Nasdaq has hit a record high and the S&P500 was almost there on Friday.
Funny you didn't mention either of those:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/live/stock-market-today-nasdaq-hits-fresh-record-sp-500-dow-rise-as-wall-street-closes-winning-week-on-high-note-200211215.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAMOffg2fQ2gJln6E15lxaP0zgxekrat4nRuAdXxigBKa4NSce-7GQhS-dVVLrm3CzOvUlrBtWFahob5hoG0BsDyRmb_284Hvr_3pb794oKA1QSq6Hq-gMr7h_o4Uw9c0_PYnaqcKP24sZazDFqsYWMC5h3aSlSSz0I5_CLtMjWB7
https://rollingout.com/2025/08/09/stock-market-record-highs-apple/
Sorry, Scotland
In the aftermath of the Brighton Bombing, they advocated all kinds of idiocy. Most of which would have made things 1000x worse - reintroduction of internment?!!. Thatcher, with the dust on her from the bombing, initiated the twin track policy. Track one - peace process, Track Two - infiltrate and destroy the paramilitaries from within. Which culminated in double agents in the PIRA killing off those opposed to the peace process.
On the flip side, she went against her personal instincts to go with the highly effective socio-medical campaign against AIDS - because the medical advice was coherent and cogent.
TWATS
She's possibly the most intelligent one we've ever had.
My solar generatiom for May this year was my biggest month ever - better than any June.
And there were very few days' play lost in the T20 Blast, and almost none before midsummer.
But today was a perfect summer's day. Oldest daughter has been to the park to meet friends and indulge in the teen summer pasttime of letting a chocolate bar belt and dipping strawberries in it. Younger two daughters have been off to the Mersey Valley to pick blackberries. The wifeand I did some gardening then relaxed in the afterglow of our exertions with a ginger beer. We are, today, living in an idealised 1950s England.
Have I made any comment about your character, your person, an "ad hom", today? This week? This month? The only one lobbing ad homs around appears to be you.
But there is quite a climatic difference between Lancashire and london. So maybe it’s just that
It certainly feels like a very nice summer to me. Almost every day is above “the average temp” - and there’s been very few of those miserable rainy weeks when it’s like autumn again
I chose the right summer to stay home. For once
Of course, we can all debate whether it's real, sustainable and if Trump had anything to do with it - but nevertheless the facts are that's happening on his watch.
Politics. Thems the breaks.
Plus, she wasn't all that bothered about personal popularity - though, important qualification - never, until near the end when she lost touch, forgot that you need votes to be PM.
I then had a swift one, and am now cooking fish fingers for the kids and will shortly put on David Attenborough.
Perfect.
Harold Wilson, one of the youngest Oxford dons of the century at the age of 21, a lecturer in Economic History at New College from 1937, and a research fellow at University College, was probably more intelligent academically.
But he had terrible judgement, and consigned Britain to managed decline.
Mrs Thatcher had a good, upper-second class mind. But great judgement, self-confidence and perseverance, so the country flourished.
Judgement and intelligence are no more than loosely associated, as Noam Chomsky and all the rest of the Commie intelligensia show all the time.