4.187. Mr Johnson told the Inquiry that he thought it was “highly unlikely” that the imposition of earlier restrictions would have avoided a lockdown.442 However, had stringent restrictions short of a mandatory lockdown been introduced earlier than 16 March 2020 – when the number of Covid-19 cases was lower – the mandatory lockdown might have been shorter or, conceivably, avoided entirely. At the very least, there would have been time to establish what the effect of those restrictions on levels of incidence were and whether there was a sustained reduction in social contact. This would have enabled the governments to assess whether stringent restrictions short of a lockdown would suffice to prevent health services across the UK being overwhelmed and whether they were therefore a feasible policy option.
4.188. The reality is that the UK government and devolved administrations, through their slow responses in late February and early March 2020, denied themselves the possibility of being able to make that assessment. In effect, the likelihood of a mandatory lockdown significantly increased as a result of the failure to act more speedily before 16 March. That more stringent restrictions were not implemented before 16 March was the result of failures on the part of decision-makers, senior officials and scientific advisers.
I note that last sentence castigating "decision-makers, senior officials and scientific advisers". The report does not let anyone off.
Not really keeping up with the detail but that summary does make me wonder if it's essentially a product of hindsight.
By that metric, a man might be blamed for not picking winning lottery numbers.
Read the text in the preceding chapters leading up that point. The justification for the condemnation is given. This isn’t merely about hindsight.
4.187. Mr Johnson told the Inquiry that he thought it was “highly unlikely” that the imposition of earlier restrictions would have avoided a lockdown.442 However, had stringent restrictions short of a mandatory lockdown been introduced earlier than 16 March 2020 – when the number of Covid-19 cases was lower – the mandatory lockdown might have been shorter or, conceivably, avoided entirely. At the very least, there would have been time to establish what the effect of those restrictions on levels of incidence were and whether there was a sustained reduction in social contact. This would have enabled the governments to assess whether stringent restrictions short of a lockdown would suffice to prevent health services across the UK being overwhelmed and whether they were therefore a feasible policy option.
4.188. The reality is that the UK government and devolved administrations, through their slow responses in late February and early March 2020, denied themselves the possibility of being able to make that assessment. In effect, the likelihood of a mandatory lockdown significantly increased as a result of the failure to act more speedily before 16 March. That more stringent restrictions were not implemented before 16 March was the result of failures on the part of decision-makers, senior officials and scientific advisers.
I note that last sentence castigating "decision-makers, senior officials and scientific advisers". The report does not let anyone off.
Not really keeping up with the detail but that summary does make me wonder if it's essentially a product of hindsight.
By that metric, a man might be blamed for not picking winning lottery numbers.
Yes - an awful lot of hindsight around. Lots on here now claim we should never have locked down. They have forgotten the state of the country at the time and the crisis as it was. The counterfactual has the government imposing restrictions on peoples lives at a time when we didn't really have enough information. I also think that many, many people were already locking down prior to the official date, so I don't think we went from nothing to full lockdown.
The inquiry has been badly set up. Involving the covid justice groups has directly led to an adversarial approach and led to people perhaps not being fully honest with their testimony. Truth and reconcilliation it has NOT been.
I've started chapter 4 of the COVID-19 Inquiry report. There is plenty of criticism, but who comes out of it best so far...? Maybe Cummings and Drakeford?
Gove and Ben Warner perhaps too.
For all his many flaws, I do think Cummings was probably one of the ones who got it, early on. (And not just catching covid himself).
Long read response from Cummings:
I agree that he was undermined, and that governments need to bring more outsiders in occasionally.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
The reality is that we have borrowed £116.8bn in 7 months, more than any other year on record other than the Covid inflicted year of 2020. That is, if I have my zeros in the right place, £16,685 for every man, woman and child in the country assuming there are roughly 70m of us. This is despite record tax receipts on the back of the tax increases in the last budget. Our state is spending completely and utterly unsustainable sums of money to pay us what we somehow believe we are entitled to.
Reality on government spending makes England's batting look dull and predictable.
You’re out by a factor of 10, the deficit is only £1,700 per person per year.
Still horrifically bad though.
yeah, you're right. My phone was struggling with the number of zeros. As you say, still horrific and significantly worse than last year despite us having supposedly been put on a secure path at the last budget.
As noted below, borrowing is skewed towards the start of the FY this year. It remains highly likely to come in below the last few years by year end as borrowing will be lower later in the year. The central government spending and tax receipts outturns are tracking very close to the OBR's March forecast.
Translation of the so called Ukraine peace plan. Interesting for what Russia doesn't care about - eg Ukraine joining the EU; the complete disregard for NATO implied for the USA as well as Russia; and the desire that the USA should be seen to benefit from Russia's aggression.
10. U.S. security guarantees: a. The U.S. will receive compensation for providing guarantees. b. If Ukraine invades Russia, it will lose the guarantees. c. If Russia invades Ukraine (except for a rapid coordinated military response), all global sanctions will be restored and recognition of new territories will be revoked. d. If Ukraine unintentionally fires a missile at Moscow or St. Petersburg, the guarantees become invalid.
There's a sharpish walkthrough of this on the Ukraine Matters channel, run by a Danish chap who is married to a Ukrainian iirc, and has sharp and sometimes unvarnished opinions.
He goes through it with Red, Green and Brown (for sh*t) pens.
The idea that Ukraine will accept any of this is for the birds, surely? Yes, if they were losing on the battlefield, but slowly giving up ground against a grinding offensive is not losing (as anyone who understands their 20th century military history ought to know).
Frankly, if the Ukrainians thought they were losing on the battlefield, then Russia would (probably) know that too, and would be completely uninterested in signing a deal like this if they thought they could get a better outcome by continuing the war.
The only way this agreement gets implemented is if the US strong-arms Europe into implementing it. But the US has already pulled out of funding the war - the money is all coming from Europe now, even some of it is it’s buying US arms. Cutting off Europe from using their US supplied armaments in Ukraine would instantly kill any demand for US arms manufacture from Europe so it seems extremely unlikely that the US MIC will permit that to happen. What other leverage does the US have? Threatening to pull out of NATO maybe?
The US supplies a lot of intelligence and reconnaissance data to Ukraine. Starlink could be turned off. The US could unilaterally drop sanctions on Russia, thereby threatening Europe and Ukraine with the prospect of fighting Russia while Russia was able to trade freely with the US.
You'd hope there would be sufficient pushback against this in the US to prevent it happening, but one of the purposes of proposing this plan will be to influence US domestic opinion and cast Ukraine as the main impediment to peace.
All it requires is for the Nobel Peace Prize committee to say that Trump won’t win it with those surrender terms and watch Trump pivot
The only way this agreement gets implemented is if the US strong-arms Europe into implementing it. But the US has already pulled out of funding the war - the money is all coming from Europe now, even some of it is it’s buying US arms. Cutting off Europe from using their US supplied armaments in Ukraine would instantly kill any demand for US arms manufacture from Europe so it seems extremely unlikely that the US MIC will permit that to happen. What other leverage does the US have? Threatening to pull out of NATO maybe?
You can see all sorts of procurement now specifying that it should be ITAR free. i.e. The US can't restrict sales or use.
The US will find it increasingly difficult to sell weapons to Europe, once programmes in the pipeline are cleared it will be much rarer for a US company to win a bid.
Beyond that there are big projects underway to wholely replace capabilities that NATO currently relies entirely on the US for. It won't be quick but I do believe we are heading towards a NATO that doesn't need or include the US.
Isolationism works both ways. If the US wants to be isolationist, then that comes with consequences for European orders of US equipment.
Fantastic result for the Conservatives in Trafford. Looks like Altrincham and Sale at least will be a Conservative gain at the next general election
Perhaps. Hale is the sort of ward which ten years ago Con would have won at a canter. It's one of the mist affluent wards in the North West. It's not the sort of ward where the far left should be on 38%. I'm finding the current by-election climate quite depressing for the number of votes being garnered by the Greens.
Hale was a Green held seat, they have just lost 10% and the seat since electing Polanski
Macclesfield was a Lab held seat Greens just gained 20% and the seat since electing Polanski
The Tories thumped them in Hale.
Their brand of open door migration, trans women on women’s spaces, free Gaza now, tax the rich not going down well there.
Translation of the so called Ukraine peace plan. Interesting for what Russia doesn't care about - eg Ukraine joining the EU; the complete disregard for NATO implied for the USA as well as Russia; and the desire that the USA should be seen to benefit from Russia's aggression.
10. U.S. security guarantees: a. The U.S. will receive compensation for providing guarantees. b. If Ukraine invades Russia, it will lose the guarantees. c. If Russia invades Ukraine (except for a rapid coordinated military response), all global sanctions will be restored and recognition of new territories will be revoked. d. If Ukraine unintentionally fires a missile at Moscow or St. Petersburg, the guarantees become invalid.
There's a sharpish walkthrough of this on the Ukraine Matters channel, run by a Danish chap who is married to a Ukrainian iirc, and has sharp and sometimes unvarnished opinions.
He goes through it with Red, Green and Brown (for sh*t) pens.
The idea that Ukraine will accept any of this is for the birds, surely? Yes, if they were losing on the battlefield, but slowly giving up ground against a grinding offensive is not losing (as anyone who understands their 20th century military history ought to know).
Frankly, if the Ukrainians thought they were losing on the battlefield, then Russia would (probably) know that too, and would be completely uninterested in signing a deal like this if they thought they could get a better outcome by continuing the war.
The only way this agreement gets implemented is if the US strong-arms Europe into implementing it. But the US has already pulled out of funding the war - the money is all coming from Europe now, even some of it is it’s buying US arms. Cutting off Europe from using their US supplied armaments in Ukraine would instantly kill any demand for US arms manufacture from Europe so it seems extremely unlikely that the US MIC will permit that to happen. What other leverage does the US have? Threatening to pull out of NATO maybe?
The US supplies a lot of intelligence and reconnaissance data to Ukraine. Starlink could be turned off. The US could unilaterally drop sanctions on Russia, thereby threatening Europe and Ukraine with the prospect of fighting Russia while Russia was able to trade freely with the US.
You'd hope there would be sufficient pushback against this in the US to prevent it happening, but one of the purposes of proposing this plan will be to influence US domestic opinion and cast Ukraine as the main impediment to peace.
All it requires is for the Nobel Peace Prize committee to say that Trump won’t win it with those surrender terms and watch Trump pivot
The Nobel Peace Prize committee have generally been more concerned that a peace deal has been achieved than with how good or just that deal is.
But, also, the committee has generally given the prize to the signatories, not the outside parties who organised it. In other words, Putin has always been a more a likely recipient than Trump!
Translation of the so called Ukraine peace plan. Interesting for what Russia doesn't care about - eg Ukraine joining the EU; the complete disregard for NATO implied for the USA as well as Russia; and the desire that the USA should be seen to benefit from Russia's aggression.
10. U.S. security guarantees: a. The U.S. will receive compensation for providing guarantees. b. If Ukraine invades Russia, it will lose the guarantees. c. If Russia invades Ukraine (except for a rapid coordinated military response), all global sanctions will be restored and recognition of new territories will be revoked. d. If Ukraine unintentionally fires a missile at Moscow or St. Petersburg, the guarantees become invalid.
There's a sharpish walkthrough of this on the Ukraine Matters channel, run by a Danish chap who is married to a Ukrainian iirc, and has sharp and sometimes unvarnished opinions.
He goes through it with Red, Green and Brown (for sh*t) pens.
The idea that Ukraine will accept any of this is for the birds, surely? Yes, if they were losing on the battlefield, but slowly giving up ground against a grinding offensive is not losing (as anyone who understands their 20th century military history ought to know).
Frankly, if the Ukrainians thought they were losing on the battlefield, then Russia would (probably) know that too, and would be completely uninterested in signing a deal like this if they thought they could get a better outcome by continuing the war.
The only way this agreement gets implemented is if the US strong-arms Europe into implementing it. But the US has already pulled out of funding the war - the money is all coming from Europe now, even some of it is it’s buying US arms. Cutting off Europe from using their US supplied armaments in Ukraine would instantly kill any demand for US arms manufacture from Europe so it seems extremely unlikely that the US MIC will permit that to happen. What other leverage does the US have? Threatening to pull out of NATO maybe?
The US supplies a lot of intelligence and reconnaissance data to Ukraine. Starlink could be turned off. The US could unilaterally drop sanctions on Russia, thereby threatening Europe and Ukraine with the prospect of fighting Russia while Russia was able to trade freely with the US.
You'd hope there would be sufficient pushback against this in the US to prevent it happening, but one of the purposes of proposing this plan will be to influence US domestic opinion and cast Ukraine as the main impediment to peace.
All it requires is for the Nobel Peace Prize committee to say that Trump won’t win it with those surrender terms and watch Trump pivot
Trump may be content to win the new FIFA peace prize his bestie Infantino will give him.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
Europe has prioritised welfare over strength and independence. We've let the US guarantee our security while shovelling money at the old and lazy. Now we don't know how to get out of that without bleating from the old and lazy that they need to give up on a big portion of welfare spending so the nation can recover strength and independence.
Oh boo hoo. That's sovereignty, capitalism and the law right there. Which bit do you object to, that he can't google "pearl clutching"?
Mmm no. It's an assault on law, international law, by Trump & Co - which started in around Feb/March following the pattern of Trump's assaults on Court Staff in his various trials in 2024.
I'm interested if any UK parties have policies on this, and what my MP Lee Anderson would say (if he's heard of the ICC). Do the Tories have a defined view on the ICC?
Translation of the so called Ukraine peace plan. Interesting for what Russia doesn't care about - eg Ukraine joining the EU; the complete disregard for NATO implied for the USA as well as Russia; and the desire that the USA should be seen to benefit from Russia's aggression.
10. U.S. security guarantees: a. The U.S. will receive compensation for providing guarantees. b. If Ukraine invades Russia, it will lose the guarantees. c. If Russia invades Ukraine (except for a rapid coordinated military response), all global sanctions will be restored and recognition of new territories will be revoked. d. If Ukraine unintentionally fires a missile at Moscow or St. Petersburg, the guarantees become invalid.
There's a sharpish walkthrough of this on the Ukraine Matters channel, run by a Danish chap who is married to a Ukrainian iirc, and has sharp and sometimes unvarnished opinions.
He goes through it with Red, Green and Brown (for sh*t) pens.
The idea that Ukraine will accept any of this is for the birds, surely? Yes, if they were losing on the battlefield, but slowly giving up ground against a grinding offensive is not losing (as anyone who understands their 20th century military history ought to know).
Frankly, if the Ukrainians thought they were losing on the battlefield, then Russia would (probably) know that too, and would be completely uninterested in signing a deal like this if they thought they could get a better outcome by continuing the war.
The only way this agreement gets implemented is if the US strong-arms Europe into implementing it. But the US has already pulled out of funding the war - the money is all coming from Europe now, even some of it is it’s buying US arms. Cutting off Europe from using their US supplied armaments in Ukraine would instantly kill any demand for US arms manufacture from Europe so it seems extremely unlikely that the US MIC will permit that to happen. What other leverage does the US have? Threatening to pull out of NATO maybe?
The US supplies a lot of intelligence and reconnaissance data to Ukraine. Starlink could be turned off. The US could unilaterally drop sanctions on Russia, thereby threatening Europe and Ukraine with the prospect of fighting Russia while Russia was able to trade freely with the US.
You'd hope there would be sufficient pushback against this in the US to prevent it happening, but one of the purposes of proposing this plan will be to influence US domestic opinion and cast Ukraine as the main impediment to peace.
All it requires is for the Nobel Peace Prize committee to say that Trump won’t win it with those surrender terms and watch Trump pivot
Given the Nobel committee seems to have awarded the prize to a Trump groupie this year as a kind of second prize to the terrible people, I’m not entirely convinced that they’d have the spine to do that.
Translation of the so called Ukraine peace plan. Interesting for what Russia doesn't care about - eg Ukraine joining the EU; the complete disregard for NATO implied for the USA as well as Russia; and the desire that the USA should be seen to benefit from Russia's aggression.
10. U.S. security guarantees: a. The U.S. will receive compensation for providing guarantees. b. If Ukraine invades Russia, it will lose the guarantees. c. If Russia invades Ukraine (except for a rapid coordinated military response), all global sanctions will be restored and recognition of new territories will be revoked. d. If Ukraine unintentionally fires a missile at Moscow or St. Petersburg, the guarantees become invalid.
There's a sharpish walkthrough of this on the Ukraine Matters channel, run by a Danish chap who is married to a Ukrainian iirc, and has sharp and sometimes unvarnished opinions.
He goes through it with Red, Green and Brown (for sh*t) pens.
The idea that Ukraine will accept any of this is for the birds, surely? Yes, if they were losing on the battlefield, but slowly giving up ground against a grinding offensive is not losing (as anyone who understands their 20th century military history ought to know).
Frankly, if the Ukrainians thought they were losing on the battlefield, then Russia would (probably) know that too, and would be completely uninterested in signing a deal like this if they thought they could get a better outcome by continuing the war.
The only way this agreement gets implemented is if the US strong-arms Europe into implementing it. But the US has already pulled out of funding the war - the money is all coming from Europe now, even some of it is it’s buying US arms. Cutting off Europe from using their US supplied armaments in Ukraine would instantly kill any demand for US arms manufacture from Europe so it seems extremely unlikely that the US MIC will permit that to happen. What other leverage does the US have? Threatening to pull out of NATO maybe?
The US supplies a lot of intelligence and reconnaissance data to Ukraine. Starlink could be turned off. The US could unilaterally drop sanctions on Russia, thereby threatening Europe and Ukraine with the prospect of fighting Russia while Russia was able to trade freely with the US.
You'd hope there would be sufficient pushback against this in the US to prevent it happening, but one of the purposes of proposing this plan will be to influence US domestic opinion and cast Ukraine as the main impediment to peace.
All it requires is for the Nobel Peace Prize committee to say that Trump won’t win it with those surrender terms and watch Trump pivot
Have it shared between Trump and Zelenskyy, so long as they can agree on a deal acceptable to everyone in Europe.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Oh boo hoo. That's sovereignty, capitalism and the law right there. Which bit do you object to, that he can't google "pearl clutching"?
Mmm no. It's an assault on law, international law, by Trump & Co - which started in around Feb/March following the pattern of Trump's assaults on Court Staff in his various trials in 2024.
I'm interested if any UK parties have policies on this, and what my MP Lee Anderson would say (if he's heard of the ICC). Do the Tories have a defined view on the ICC?
Oh boo hoo. That's sovereignty, capitalism and the law right there. Which bit do you object to, that he can't google "pearl clutching"?
Mmm no. It's an assault on law, international law, by Trump & Co - which started in around Feb/March following the pattern of Trump's assaults on Court Staff in his various trials in 2024.
I'm interested if any UK parties have policies on this, and what my MP Lee Anderson would say (if he's heard of the ICC). Do the Tories have a defined view on the ICC?
No such thing as international law.
Radovan Karadžić says hello from HMP Parkhurst.
There is international law just as long as countries want to abide by international law. If they decide for any reason that they don't want to, then international law ceases to exist.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Everyone thought there was another US AWACS aircraft coming, and now they know there isn’t, because the US can fulfil that role with satellites.
The reality is that we have borrowed £116.8bn in 7 months, more than any other year on record other than the Covid inflicted year of 2020. That is, if I have my zeros in the right place, £16,685 for every man, woman and child in the country assuming there are roughly 70m of us. This is despite record tax receipts on the back of the tax increases in the last budget. Our state is spending completely and utterly unsustainable sums of money to pay us what we somehow believe we are entitled to.
Reality on government spending makes England's batting look dull and predictable.
You’re out by a factor of 10, the deficit is only £1,700 per person per year.
Still horrifically bad though.
yeah, you're right. My phone was struggling with the number of zeros. As you say, still horrific and significantly worse than last year despite us having supposedly been put on a secure path at the last budget.
As noted below, borrowing is skewed towards the start of the FY this year. It remains highly likely to come in below the last few years by year end as borrowing will be lower later in the year. The central government spending and tax receipts outturns are tracking very close to the OBR's March forecast.
The OBR forecast for the month was £14.4bn so they were £3bn out in October on a forecast made only 7 months ago. If you are right that borrowing was "skewed" at the start of the year surely the difference would have been the other way? I admire your optimism that their forecast will ultimately come out alright but I don't share it. Growth is coming in less than forecast and inflation is higher.
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Oh boo hoo. That's sovereignty, capitalism and the law right there. Which bit do you object to, that he can't google "pearl clutching"?
Mmm no. It's an assault on law, international law, by Trump & Co - which started in around Feb/March following the pattern of Trump's assaults on Court Staff in his various trials in 2024.
I'm interested if any UK parties have policies on this, and what my MP Lee Anderson would say (if he's heard of the ICC). Do the Tories have a defined view on the ICC?
No such thing as international law.
Radovan Karadžić says hello from HMP Parkhurst.
There is international law just as long as countries want to abide by international law. If they decide for any reason that they don't want to, then international law ceases to exist.
That's essentially the same basis on which all law exists. It's an entirely human-created construct that exists only so long as there are people and institutions willing to enforce it. So there's no distinction between international or domestic law in that respect.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Everyone thought there was another US AWACS aircraft coming, and now they know there isn’t, because the US can fulfil that role with satellites.
That lasts until the Chinese start to shoot down US surveillance satellites.
Fantastic result for the Conservatives in Trafford. Looks like Altrincham and Sale at least will be a Conservative gain at the next general election
Perhaps. Hale is the sort of ward which ten years ago Con would have won at a canter. It's one of the mist affluent wards in the North West. It's not the sort of ward where the far left should be on 38%. I'm finding the current by-election climate quite depressing for the number of votes being garnered by the Greens.
Hale was a Green held seat, they have just lost 10% and the seat since electing Polanski
I know, but it's still mad that the far left are on nearly 40% of the vote in Hale. This is very, very affluent territory. The Greens did well in Hale and Altrincham a few years back by getting the nimby vote out against the Timperley Wedge/Davenport Green proposals.
Not really given Trafford voted Remain
I'd say Leave/Remain affected this result almost not at all. I just find it worrying that in one of the least left wing wards in the country, the far left got 40% of the vote. Because if they can get that in Hale they can get that anywhere.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Well indeed, but as I was saying, a lot of the fault for this lies with those, mainly on the right, who though there was little point in Europe developing alternatives to US technology when we could rely on the US. Galileo was one of the few areas in which the naysayers were overcome.
The reality is that we have borrowed £116.8bn in 7 months, more than any other year on record other than the Covid inflicted year of 2020. That is, if I have my zeros in the right place, £16,685 for every man, woman and child in the country assuming there are roughly 70m of us. This is despite record tax receipts on the back of the tax increases in the last budget. Our state is spending completely and utterly unsustainable sums of money to pay us what we somehow believe we are entitled to.
Reality on government spending makes England's batting look dull and predictable.
If you continue to subsidise and support businesses that have low added value then you will never have an economy that is solvent.
If the country is bankrupt, it’s because of the pork barrel policies of previous governments in allowing underperforming or zombie companies to limp on. And are these ‘entrepreneurs’ grateful? No they just complain and ask for more. A good dose of saying no is needed.
Oh boo hoo. That's sovereignty, capitalism and the law right there. Which bit do you object to, that he can't google "pearl clutching"?
Mmm no. It's an assault on law, international law, by Trump & Co - which started in around Feb/March following the pattern of Trump's assaults on Court Staff in his various trials in 2024.
I'm interested if any UK parties have policies on this, and what my MP Lee Anderson would say (if he's heard of the ICC). Do the Tories have a defined view on the ICC?
Trump had clearly deteriorated both mentally and physically between 2016 and 2024.
It would have been an effective attack point for the Dems, if they hadn't run Biden as their own candidate.
They didn't run Biden as their own candidate.
Yes they did.
That they had to replace him doesn't alter that.
Damm, my swiss-cheese memory strikes again. Yes, you are correct. He was selected in the Dem Presidential primaries in the first half of 2024, then dropped out after the dribbling debate, then Kamala was chosen in the DNC in August 2024.
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
Oh boo hoo. That's sovereignty, capitalism and the law right there. Which bit do you object to, that he can't google "pearl clutching"?
Mmm no. It's an assault on law, international law, by Trump & Co - which started in around Feb/March following the pattern of Trump's assaults on Court Staff in his various trials in 2024.
I'm interested if any UK parties have policies on this, and what my MP Lee Anderson would say (if he's heard of the ICC). Do the Tories have a defined view on the ICC?
No such thing as international law.
Radovan Karadžić says hello from HMP Parkhurst.
There is international law just as long as countries want to abide by international law. If they decide for any reason that they don't want to, then international law ceases to exist.
That's essentially the same basis on which all law exists. It's an entirely human-created construct that exists only so long as there are people and institutions willing to enforce it. So there's no distinction between international or domestic law in that respect.
Yes and no. While there may be sanctions for breaking "international law" (or, more properly, for reneging on a previous agreement), they are not the same (they may be analogous) to me being banged up because I nicked all the vegan sausage rolls from Greggs at King's Cross station.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Everyone thought there was another US AWACS aircraft coming, and now they know there isn’t, because the US can fulfil that role with satellites.
That lasts until the Chinese start to shoot down US surveillance satellites.
Thanks to cheap launch combined with huge loads (See F9, F9H and New Glenn) the US can loft satellites that are *cheaper than AWACS`* in bulk. E7 is now in the $500-$750 million dollar range per aircraft.
An anti-sat weapon is expensive. If you have a handful of KHs costing about as much as an aircraft carrier each, that is a worry. When your satellite fleet is measured in the thousands....
In addition the satellite network is 24/366 and is global, without the need for specific deployment.
When you add in the proliferation of ultra-long range air to air missiles (sold by the Chinese as explicit AWACS killers) - which aren't that expensive - the choices become simpler.
Oh boo hoo. That's sovereignty, capitalism and the law right there. Which bit do you object to, that he can't google "pearl clutching"?
Mmm no. It's an assault on law, international law, by Trump & Co - which started in around Feb/March following the pattern of Trump's assaults on Court Staff in his various trials in 2024.
I'm interested if any UK parties have policies on this, and what my MP Lee Anderson would say (if he's heard of the ICC). Do the Tories have a defined view on the ICC?
No such thing as international law.
Radovan Karadžić says hello from HMP Parkhurst.
There is international law just as long as countries want to abide by international law. If they decide for any reason that they don't want to, then international law ceases to exist.
There have been tents on Park Lane, on and off, for a lot longer than a year. For example, you can see tents there on Streetview images from January 2021.
Oh boo hoo. That's sovereignty, capitalism and the law right there. Which bit do you object to, that he can't google "pearl clutching"?
Mmm no. It's an assault on law, international law, by Trump & Co - which started in around Feb/March following the pattern of Trump's assaults on Court Staff in his various trials in 2024.
I'm interested if any UK parties have policies on this, and what my MP Lee Anderson would say (if he's heard of the ICC). Do the Tories have a defined view on the ICC?
No such thing as international law.
Radovan Karadžić says hello from HMP Parkhurst.
There is international law just as long as countries want to abide by international law. If they decide for any reason that they don't want to, then international law ceases to exist.
That's essentially the same basis on which all law exists. It's an entirely human-created construct that exists only so long as there are people and institutions willing to enforce it. So there's no distinction between international or domestic law in that respect.
Yes and no. While there may be sanctions for breaking "international law" (or, more properly, for reneging on a previous agreement), they are not the same (they may be analogous) to me being banged up because I nicked all the vegan sausage rolls from Greggs at King's Cross station.
You are probably more likely to be prosecuted for breaking International Law than stealing from Greggs.
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
What happened? You used to be a reasonable poster from the right of the political spectrum, but now you've gone full Trump.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Not exactly.
There are European companies putting up radar satellites doing similar stuff. Where Europe is way behind is on launch capability (and also, of course, semiconductor manufacturing capacity).
And AWACS (or rather, cheaper alternatives like Saab's system) won't be obsolete for a decade or so. You can't yet do everything from 150 miles up. (Which is one reason the US is funding very low orbit 'air breathing' satellite development.)
The reality is that we have borrowed £116.8bn in 7 months, more than any other year on record other than the Covid inflicted year of 2020. That is, if I have my zeros in the right place, £16,685 for every man, woman and child in the country assuming there are roughly 70m of us. This is despite record tax receipts on the back of the tax increases in the last budget. Our state is spending completely and utterly unsustainable sums of money to pay us what we somehow believe we are entitled to.
Reality on government spending makes England's batting look dull and predictable.
You’re out by a factor of 10, the deficit is only £1,700 per person per year.
Still horrifically bad though.
yeah, you're right. My phone was struggling with the number of zeros. As you say, still horrific and significantly worse than last year despite us having supposedly been put on a secure path at the last budget.
As noted below, borrowing is skewed towards the start of the FY this year. It remains highly likely to come in below the last few years by year end as borrowing will be lower later in the year. The central government spending and tax receipts outturns are tracking very close to the OBR's March forecast.
The OBR forecast for the month was £14.4bn so they were £3bn out in October on a forecast made only 7 months ago. If you are right that borrowing was "skewed" at the start of the year surely the difference would have been the other way? I admire your optimism that their forecast will ultimately come out alright but I don't share it. Growth is coming in less than forecast and inflation is higher.
Borrowing will likely be higher than the OBR's March forecast for FY25 as a whole (by eg £13bn) but will still be lower than FY24 and probably lower than FY23 too. You have to remember the deficit is the difference between two large numbers, and the forecast errors on spending and taxation are actually extremely small. It's not really optimism on my part, it's just that I understand the dynamics of the borrowing trajectory over the fiscal year because I track these things for a living.
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
Maybe you should reply to my actual point.
..the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things..
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Everyone thought there was another US AWACS aircraft coming, and now they know there isn’t, because the US can fulfil that role with satellites.
That lasts until the Chinese start to shoot down US surveillance satellites.
Thanks to cheap launch combined with huge loads (See F9, F9H and New Glenn) the US can loft satellites that are *cheaper than AWACS`* in bulk. E7 is now in the $500-$750 million dollar range per aircraft.
An anti-sat weapon is expensive. If you have a handful of KHs costing about as much as an aircraft carrier each, that is a worry. When your satellite fleet is measured in the thousands....
In addition the satellite network is 24/366 and is global, without the need for specific deployment.
When you add in the proliferation of ultra-long range air to air missiles (sold by the Chinese as explicit AWACS killers) - which aren't that expensive - the choices become simpler.
If anyone starts to destroy surveillance satellites you have a cascade effect where debris from previously destroyed satellites destroys further satellites, and it becomes impossible for a satellite to survive at that altitude.
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
What happened? You used to be a reasonable poster from the right of the political spectrum, but now you've gone full Trump.
I don't believe that any of these international organisations have this country's best interests at heart. The ECHR, ICC etc... should be binned and international law can do one, they've all become tools of the liberal international order to impose their will on populations that they are not accountable to.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Everyone thought there was another US AWACS aircraft coming, and now they know there isn’t, because the US can fulfil that role with satellites.
That lasts until the Chinese start to shoot down US surveillance satellites.
Thanks to cheap launch combined with huge loads (See F9, F9H and New Glenn) the US can loft satellites that are *cheaper than AWACS`* in bulk. E7 is now in the $500-$750 million dollar range per aircraft.
An anti-sat weapon is expensive. If you have a handful of KHs costing about as much as an aircraft carrier each, that is a worry. When your satellite fleet is measured in the thousands....
In addition the satellite network is 24/366 and is global, without the need for specific deployment.
When you add in the proliferation of ultra-long range air to air missiles (sold by the Chinese as explicit AWACS killers) - which aren't that expensive - the choices become simpler.
If anyone starts to destroy surveillance satellites you have a cascade effect where debris from previously destroyed satellites destroys further satellites, and it becomes impossible for a satellite to survive at that altitude.
Another reason for the US to be developing very low earth orbit satellites...
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
Maybe you should reply to my actual point.
..the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things..
It's very relevant. Do you think the US would have put sanctions on this judge had he not decided to be a complete dick head and try and make a name for himself by targeting Israel?
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
What an extraordinary story. One for the BBC surely? The crazy thing is that there are votes in it. The worlds two most unpopular leaders and Starmer can't get his head out of either of their backsides!
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
Maybe you should reply to my actual point.
..the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things..
It's very relevant. Do you think the US would have put sanctions on this judge had he not decided to be a complete dick head and try and make a name for himself by targeting Israel?
So you're agreeing with me that we can only enforce our laws subject to approval of the US.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Not exactly.
There are European companies putting up radar satellites doing similar stuff. Where Europe is way behind is on launch capability (and also, of course, semiconductor manufacturing capacity).
And AWACS (or rather, cheaper alternatives like Saab's system) won't be obsolete for a decade or so. You can't yet do everything from 150 miles up. (Which is one reason the US is funding very low orbit 'air breathing' satellite development.)
.
And cheap launch is *everything*. It means you can use cheap satellites and just replace them.
To give a simple number. Last year, SpaceX launched 2,150 tons (approx) to orbit. Ariane launched 3.5 tons.
In the near future, SpaceX is planning on 10,000 tons to orbit, annually. Ariane is planning on 50 tons - once they get Ariane 6 rolling.
Blue Origin is not far behind the SpaceX numbers in their plans.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Not exactly.
There are European companies putting up radar satellites doing similar stuff. Where Europe is way behind is on launch capability (and also, of course, semiconductor manufacturing capacity).
And AWACS (or rather, cheaper alternatives like Saab's system) won't be obsolete for a decade or so. You can't yet do everything from 150 miles up. (Which is one reason the US is funding very low orbit 'air breathing' satellite development.)
.
And cheap launch is *everything*. It means you can use cheap satellites and just replace them.
To give a simple number. Last year, SpaceX launched 2,150 tons (approx) to orbit. Ariane launched 3.5 tons.
In the near future, SpaceX is planning on 10,000 tons to orbit, annually. Ariane is planning on 50 tons - once they get Ariane 6 rolling.
Blue Origin is not far behind the SpaceX numbers in their plans.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Everyone thought there was another US AWACS aircraft coming, and now they know there isn’t, because the US can fulfil that role with satellites.
That lasts until the Chinese start to shoot down US surveillance satellites.
Thanks to cheap launch combined with huge loads (See F9, F9H and New Glenn) the US can loft satellites that are *cheaper than AWACS`* in bulk. E7 is now in the $500-$750 million dollar range per aircraft.
An anti-sat weapon is expensive. If you have a handful of KHs costing about as much as an aircraft carrier each, that is a worry. When your satellite fleet is measured in the thousands....
In addition the satellite network is 24/366 and is global, without the need for specific deployment.
When you add in the proliferation of ultra-long range air to air missiles (sold by the Chinese as explicit AWACS killers) - which aren't that expensive - the choices become simpler.
If anyone starts to destroy surveillance satellites you have a cascade effect where debris from previously destroyed satellites destroys further satellites, and it becomes impossible for a satellite to survive at that altitude.
Another reason for the US to be developing very low earth orbit satellites...
Kessler syndrome may not work - the maths are not clear cut, except for geostationary, where the locations are limited.
It certainly can't work at low altitudes (where Stalink etc live).
This is because orbital drag pulls the debris down extremely fast.
Oh boo hoo. That's sovereignty, capitalism and the law right there. Which bit do you object to, that he can't google "pearl clutching"?
Mmm no. It's an assault on law, international law, by Trump & Co - which started in around Feb/March following the pattern of Trump's assaults on Court Staff in his various trials in 2024.
I'm interested if any UK parties have policies on this, and what my MP Lee Anderson would say (if he's heard of the ICC). Do the Tories have a defined view on the ICC?
No such thing as international law.
Radovan Karadžić says hello from HMP Parkhurst.
There is international law just as long as countries want to abide by international law. If they decide for any reason that they don't want to, then international law ceases to exist.
That's essentially the same basis on which all law exists. It's an entirely human-created construct that exists only so long as there are people and institutions willing to enforce it. So there's no distinction between international or domestic law in that respect.
Yes and no. While there may be sanctions for breaking "international law" (or, more properly, for reneging on a previous agreement), they are not the same (they may be analogous) to me being banged up because I nicked all the vegan sausage rolls from Greggs at King's Cross station.
The difference is surely that domestic law has a strongly (nearly universally) accepted means of enforcement, jurisdiction and interpretation/adjudication. Including an executive.
International law is more woolly. Some people accept it, others don’t. Nobody has really settled on how it is enforced and adjudicated. And there is nothing approaching an international executive branch to implement it.
(I should say some areas are a bit more advanced than others - eg shipping/laws of the sea).
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
Maybe you should reply to my actual point.
..the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things..
It's very relevant. Do you think the US would have put sanctions on this judge had he not decided to be a complete dick head and try and make a name for himself by targeting Israel?
So you're agreeing with me that we can only enforce our laws subject to approval of the US.
But it's not our law, it's the nebulous concept of "international law". Again, I'd remove the UK from the ICC and ECHR anyway.
Also, how is it different from when we put sanctions on Russians and Russian companies after Putin invaded Ukraine both times. Individuals in Russia are subject to our (and US) sanctions despite there being no jurisdiction. You just don't like it this time because the US has targeted one of your pet liberal projects.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Not exactly.
There are European companies putting up radar satellites doing similar stuff. Where Europe is way behind is on launch capability (and also, of course, semiconductor manufacturing capacity).
And AWACS (or rather, cheaper alternatives like Saab's system) won't be obsolete for a decade or so. You can't yet do everything from 150 miles up. (Which is one reason the US is funding very low orbit 'air breathing' satellite development.)
.
And cheap launch is *everything*. It means you can use cheap satellites and just replace them.
To give a simple number. Last year, SpaceX launched 2,150 tons (approx) to orbit. Ariane launched 3.5 tons.
In the near future, SpaceX is planning on 10,000 tons to orbit, annually. Ariane is planning on 50 tons - once they get Ariane 6 rolling.
Blue Origin is not far behind the SpaceX numbers in their plans.
Space Litterbugs!
Actually, in terms of demise of satellites, Europe is behind again. Because of the combination of low orbits, deployment mechanisms, sats designed for complete burn up etc, constellations like Starlink don't create much, if any debris.
OneWeb, at higher altitudes, will leave dead sats behind. And Ariane 6 persisted in using explosives in their deployment mechanism.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Everyone thought there was another US AWACS aircraft coming, and now they know there isn’t, because the US can fulfil that role with satellites.
That lasts until the Chinese start to shoot down US surveillance satellites.
Thanks to cheap launch combined with huge loads (See F9, F9H and New Glenn) the US can loft satellites that are *cheaper than AWACS`* in bulk. E7 is now in the $500-$750 million dollar range per aircraft.
An anti-sat weapon is expensive. If you have a handful of KHs costing about as much as an aircraft carrier each, that is a worry. When your satellite fleet is measured in the thousands....
In addition the satellite network is 24/366 and is global, without the need for specific deployment.
When you add in the proliferation of ultra-long range air to air missiles (sold by the Chinese as explicit AWACS killers) - which aren't that expensive - the choices become simpler.
If anyone starts to destroy surveillance satellites you have a cascade effect where debris from previously destroyed satellites destroys further satellites, and it becomes impossible for a satellite to survive at that altitude.
Kessler syndrome at some altitudes is probably unavoidable at some point anyway.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Everyone thought there was another US AWACS aircraft coming, and now they know there isn’t, because the US can fulfil that role with satellites.
That lasts until the Chinese start to shoot down US surveillance satellites.
Thanks to cheap launch combined with huge loads (See F9, F9H and New Glenn) the US can loft satellites that are *cheaper than AWACS`* in bulk. E7 is now in the $500-$750 million dollar range per aircraft.
An anti-sat weapon is expensive. If you have a handful of KHs costing about as much as an aircraft carrier each, that is a worry. When your satellite fleet is measured in the thousands....
In addition the satellite network is 24/366 and is global, without the need for specific deployment.
When you add in the proliferation of ultra-long range air to air missiles (sold by the Chinese as explicit AWACS killers) - which aren't that expensive - the choices become simpler.
If anyone starts to destroy surveillance satellites you have a cascade effect where debris from previously destroyed satellites destroys further satellites, and it becomes impossible for a satellite to survive at that altitude.
Kessler syndrome at some altitudes is probably unavoidable at some point anyway.
Not in ultra LEO - self clearing, due to atmospheric drag.
Meanwhile, what's with the Waitrose Christmas ads. Featuring British National Treasure Joe Wilkinson and Keira Knightley. Are they supposed to be funny or are they serious. If the former I'm struggling to find the humour, if the latter, super ick.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Not exactly.
There are European companies putting up radar satellites doing similar stuff. Where Europe is way behind is on launch capability (and also, of course, semiconductor manufacturing capacity).
And AWACS (or rather, cheaper alternatives like Saab's system) won't be obsolete for a decade or so. You can't yet do everything from 150 miles up. (Which is one reason the US is funding very low orbit 'air breathing' satellite development.)
.
And cheap launch is *everything*. It means you can use cheap satellites and just replace them.
To give a simple number. Last year, SpaceX launched 2,150 tons (approx) to orbit. Ariane launched 3.5 tons.
In the near future, SpaceX is planning on 10,000 tons to orbit, annually. Ariane is planning on 50 tons - once they get Ariane 6 rolling.
Blue Origin is not far behind the SpaceX numbers in their plans.
Japan and China will soon have similar capabilities. It's foolish that we don't (and not impossible that without Brexit, we/Europe might have finally got around to it).
Meanwhile, what's with the Waitrose Christmas ads. Featuring British National Treasure Joe Wilkinson and Keira Knightley. Are they supposed to be funny or are they serious. If the former I'm struggling to find the humour, if the latter, super ick.
Meanwhile, what's with the Waitrose Christmas ads. Featuring British National Treasure Joe Wilkinson and Keira Knightley. Are they supposed to be funny or are they serious. If the former I'm struggling to find the humour, if the latter, super ick.
Honestly, who gives a fuck?
Scything. Is it just geopolitics and the cricket for you, then.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Not exactly.
There are European companies putting up radar satellites doing similar stuff. Where Europe is way behind is on launch capability (and also, of course, semiconductor manufacturing capacity).
And AWACS (or rather, cheaper alternatives like Saab's system) won't be obsolete for a decade or so. You can't yet do everything from 150 miles up. (Which is one reason the US is funding very low orbit 'air breathing' satellite development.)
.
And cheap launch is *everything*. It means you can use cheap satellites and just replace them.
To give a simple number. Last year, SpaceX launched 2,150 tons (approx) to orbit. Ariane launched 3.5 tons.
In the near future, SpaceX is planning on 10,000 tons to orbit, annually. Ariane is planning on 50 tons - once they get Ariane 6 rolling.
Blue Origin is not far behind the SpaceX numbers in their plans.
Japan and China will soon have similar capabilities. It's foolish that we don't (and not impossible that without Brexit, we/Europe might have finally got around to it).
It's sadly ironic that those who have been busy sabotaging cooperation between European countries are now rueing the consequences of their efforts.
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
Maybe you should reply to my actual point.
..the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things..
It's very relevant. Do you think the US would have put sanctions on this judge had he not decided to be a complete dick head and try and make a name for himself by targeting Israel?
So you're agreeing with me that we can only enforce our laws subject to approval of the US.
But it's not our law, it's the nebulous concept of "international law". Again, I'd remove the UK from the ICC and ECHR anyway.
Also, how is it different from when we put sanctions on Russians and Russian companies after Putin invaded Ukraine both times. Individuals in Russia are subject to our (and US) sanctions despite there being no jurisdiction. You just don't like it this time because the US has targeted one of your pet liberal projects.
A ridiculous ad hominem from you. The principle at stake has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue of Israel. Or indeed the ECHR.
This is what I am alarmed about:
..He cannot: open or maintain accounts with Google, Amazon, Apple, or any US company; make hotel reservations (Expedia canceled his booking in France hours after he made it); conduct online commerce, since he can't know if the packaging is American; use any major credit card (Visa, Mastercard, Amex are all American); access normal banking services, even with non-American banks, as banks worldwide close sanctioned accounts; conduct virtually any financial transaction.
He describes it as being "economically banned across most of the planet," including in his own country, France, and where he works, the Netherlands.
That's the real shocking aspect of this: the Americans are: - punishing a European citizen - for doing his job in Europe - applying laws Europe officially supports - at an institution based in Europe - that Europe helped create and fund
and Europe is not only doing essentially nothing to protect him, they're actively enforcing America's sanctions against their own citizen - European banks closing his accounts, European companies refusing him service, European institutions standing by while Washington destroys a European judge's life on European soil...
That you can't appreciate that this is about practical sovereignty is a clear demonstration that you don't really care about our own sovereignty.
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
Maybe you should reply to my actual point.
..the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things..
It's very relevant. Do you think the US would have put sanctions on this judge had he not decided to be a complete dick head and try and make a name for himself by targeting Israel?
So you're agreeing with me that we can only enforce our laws subject to approval of the US.
But it's not our law, it's the nebulous concept of "international law". Again, I'd remove the UK from the ICC and ECHR anyway.
Also, how is it different from when we put sanctions on Russians and Russian companies after Putin invaded Ukraine both times. Individuals in Russia are subject to our (and US) sanctions despite there being no jurisdiction. You just don't like it this time because the US has targeted one of your pet liberal projects.
A ridiculous ad hominem from you. The principle at stake has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue of Israel. Or indeed the ECHR.
This is what I am alarmed about:
..He cannot: open or maintain accounts with Google, Amazon, Apple, or any US company; make hotel reservations (Expedia canceled his booking in France hours after he made it); conduct online commerce, since he can't know if the packaging is American; use any major credit card (Visa, Mastercard, Amex are all American); access normal banking services, even with non-American banks, as banks worldwide close sanctioned accounts; conduct virtually any financial transaction.
He describes it as being "economically banned across most of the planet," including in his own country, France, and where he works, the Netherlands.
That's the real shocking aspect of this: the Americans are: - punishing a European citizen - for doing his job in Europe - applying laws Europe officially supports - at an institution based in Europe - that Europe helped create and fund
and Europe is not only doing essentially nothing to protect him, they're actively enforcing America's sanctions against their own citizen - European banks closing his accounts, European companies refusing him service, European institutions standing by while Washington destroys a European judge's life on European soil...
That you can't appreciate that this is about practical sovereignty is a clear demonstration that you don't really care about our own sovereignty.
Doesn't it simply demonstrate the colossal power and reach of US institutions globally ?
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
Maybe you should reply to my actual point.
..the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things..
It's very relevant. Do you think the US would have put sanctions on this judge had he not decided to be a complete dick head and try and make a name for himself by targeting Israel?
So you're agreeing with me that we can only enforce our laws subject to approval of the US.
But it's not our law, it's the nebulous concept of "international law". Again, I'd remove the UK from the ICC and ECHR anyway.
Also, how is it different from when we put sanctions on Russians and Russian companies after Putin invaded Ukraine both times. Individuals in Russia are subject to our (and US) sanctions despite there being no jurisdiction. You just don't like it this time because the US has targeted one of your pet liberal projects.
A ridiculous ad hominem from you. The principle at stake has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue of Israel. Or indeed the ECHR.
This is what I am alarmed about:
..He cannot: open or maintain accounts with Google, Amazon, Apple, or any US company; make hotel reservations (Expedia canceled his booking in France hours after he made it); conduct online commerce, since he can't know if the packaging is American; use any major credit card (Visa, Mastercard, Amex are all American); access normal banking services, even with non-American banks, as banks worldwide close sanctioned accounts; conduct virtually any financial transaction.
He describes it as being "economically banned across most of the planet," including in his own country, France, and where he works, the Netherlands.
That's the real shocking aspect of this: the Americans are: - punishing a European citizen - for doing his job in Europe - applying laws Europe officially supports - at an institution based in Europe - that Europe helped create and fund
and Europe is not only doing essentially nothing to protect him, they're actively enforcing America's sanctions against their own citizen - European banks closing his accounts, European companies refusing him service, European institutions standing by while Washington destroys a European judge's life on European soil...
That you can't appreciate that this is about practical sovereignty is a clear demonstration that you don't really care about our own sovereignty.
Doesn't it simply demonstrate the colossal power and reach of US institutions globally ?
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
Maybe you should reply to my actual point.
..the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things..
It's very relevant. Do you think the US would have put sanctions on this judge had he not decided to be a complete dick head and try and make a name for himself by targeting Israel?
So you're agreeing with me that we can only enforce our laws subject to approval of the US.
But it's not our law, it's the nebulous concept of "international law". Again, I'd remove the UK from the ICC and ECHR anyway.
Also, how is it different from when we put sanctions on Russians and Russian companies after Putin invaded Ukraine both times. Individuals in Russia are subject to our (and US) sanctions despite there being no jurisdiction. You just don't like it this time because the US has targeted one of your pet liberal projects.
A ridiculous ad hominem from you. The principle at stake has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue of Israel. Or indeed the ECHR.
This is what I am alarmed about:
..He cannot: open or maintain accounts with Google, Amazon, Apple, or any US company; make hotel reservations (Expedia canceled his booking in France hours after he made it); conduct online commerce, since he can't know if the packaging is American; use any major credit card (Visa, Mastercard, Amex are all American); access normal banking services, even with non-American banks, as banks worldwide close sanctioned accounts; conduct virtually any financial transaction.
He describes it as being "economically banned across most of the planet," including in his own country, France, and where he works, the Netherlands.
That's the real shocking aspect of this: the Americans are: - punishing a European citizen - for doing his job in Europe - applying laws Europe officially supports - at an institution based in Europe - that Europe helped create and fund
and Europe is not only doing essentially nothing to protect him, they're actively enforcing America's sanctions against their own citizen - European banks closing his accounts, European companies refusing him service, European institutions standing by while Washington destroys a European judge's life on European soil...
That you can't appreciate that this is about practical sovereignty is a clear demonstration that you don't really care about our own sovereignty.
I thought it was PB's idea of heaven. Living your life having nothing to do with Trump's America.
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Not exactly.
There are European companies putting up radar satellites doing similar stuff. Where Europe is way behind is on launch capability (and also, of course, semiconductor manufacturing capacity).
And AWACS (or rather, cheaper alternatives like Saab's system) won't be obsolete for a decade or so. You can't yet do everything from 150 miles up. (Which is one reason the US is funding very low orbit 'air breathing' satellite development.)
.
And cheap launch is *everything*. It means you can use cheap satellites and just replace them.
To give a simple number. Last year, SpaceX launched 2,150 tons (approx) to orbit. Ariane launched 3.5 tons.
In the near future, SpaceX is planning on 10,000 tons to orbit, annually. Ariane is planning on 50 tons - once they get Ariane 6 rolling.
Blue Origin is not far behind the SpaceX numbers in their plans.
Japan and China will soon have similar capabilities. It's foolish that we don't (and not impossible that without Brexit, we/Europe might have finally got around to it).
Has there ever been a project where adding another client/stakeholder has resulted in that project being delivered quicker?
Combine that story with the story about the Dutch chipmaker and you have a picture of how Europe is at the mercy of both the US and China. And compared to those two, Russia should be easy, but Europe isn't really dealing with the war with Russia with much in the way of decisiveness and strength.
I find it hard to understand the timidity of European leaders (among which, I include my own country’s). When reading about the 1930’s, I used to ask myself “how could they be so cowardly and stupid?” The question still applies.
I'd say European leaders have, on the whole, done a pretty good job over my 60-year lifetime. Democracy has spread throughout most of the continent, we still have some of the best standards of living in the world, and very few of us have had to fight or die in wars.
Edit: Ah, I just read the tweet that started this thread. I agree, that is appaling.
And, SFAICS, Europe/EU/EuroNATO is sitting around taking for granted that it is the USA's job, not our job to fix a decent peace between Russia and Ukraine, when this is our continent's war and the USA bias is obvious.
If you were the leader of Europe, what would you be doing differently?
The list of things that the Judge is being locked out/banned from, for doing his appointed job would be a good indication of the level of dependence on other countries.
You could take that list and construct a multi decade program to encourage the creation of alternatives, on the ground of national (international?) security.
Well indeed, but I think it's fair to say that many of the people now calling for European independence from, in particular, the US are the same ones as those who used to decry European initiatives in this direction as a waste of money. For example, I well remember the scorn poured on the nascent Galileo satellite navigation system, mainly from the right of the political spectrum. What was the point, they said, when we already had the US GPS system?
The problem with Galileo was that it was a vastly expensive attempt to copy the US system. Rather than investigating the modern alternatives in spacecraft design. So it became a way to shovel money at the Usual Suspects, rather than developing something new and better.
In addition, there was the comic moment when some European politicians suggested that it could be paid for by jamming the free GPS signal in Europe.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Thanks to the persistence of those advocating it, Europe now has an independent satellite positioning system that is at least as accurate as any of the other currently operating systems.
Meanwhile, the US is moving to constant, staring surveillance from space. Along with data rates that are game changing. And multiple constellations that will provide navigation data as an accidental byproduct.
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
Not exactly.
There are European companies putting up radar satellites doing similar stuff. Where Europe is way behind is on launch capability (and also, of course, semiconductor manufacturing capacity).
And AWACS (or rather, cheaper alternatives like Saab's system) won't be obsolete for a decade or so. You can't yet do everything from 150 miles up. (Which is one reason the US is funding very low orbit 'air breathing' satellite development.)
.
And cheap launch is *everything*. It means you can use cheap satellites and just replace them.
To give a simple number. Last year, SpaceX launched 2,150 tons (approx) to orbit. Ariane launched 3.5 tons.
In the near future, SpaceX is planning on 10,000 tons to orbit, annually. Ariane is planning on 50 tons - once they get Ariane 6 rolling.
Blue Origin is not far behind the SpaceX numbers in their plans.
Japan and China will soon have similar capabilities. It's foolish that we don't (and not impossible that without Brexit, we/Europe might have finally got around to it).
Japan won’t have such a capability - European levels of progress on reuse of launchers.
China will have an F9 type launchers fairly soon.
There was no prospect of the U.K. or Europe developing cheap launch. The established policy was Ariane must be protected at all costs. See the shenanigans about sabotaging Beale.
Did you know that someone in the government actually asked BAe about doing an F9 copy? Their reply was that it would cost £20 Billion and they wouldn’t do it. Because it would upset the relationships with Ariane and the partner countries.
A friend lost her job at ESA for advocating a speed up for Themis.
That’s the level of gate keeping that is going on.
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
What happened? You used to be a reasonable poster from the right of the political spectrum, but now you've gone full Trump.
He’s never recovered from the embarrassment of proclaiming the shooting and murder of Dem politicians as committed by a woke lefty and part of a Dem civil war. Can’t blame him, that’s a wake up at 3am blushing in the darkness at the memory of it moment. Much easier to double down and get angry at the ‘enemy’ than take the opportunity for some self examination.
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
Maybe you should reply to my actual point.
..the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things..
It's very relevant. Do you think the US would have put sanctions on this judge had he not decided to be a complete dick head and try and make a name for himself by targeting Israel?
So you're agreeing with me that we can only enforce our laws subject to approval of the US.
But it's not our law, it's the nebulous concept of "international law". Again, I'd remove the UK from the ICC and ECHR anyway.
Also, how is it different from when we put sanctions on Russians and Russian companies after Putin invaded Ukraine both times. Individuals in Russia are subject to our (and US) sanctions despite there being no jurisdiction. You just don't like it this time because the US has targeted one of your pet liberal projects.
A ridiculous ad hominem from you. The principle at stake has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue of Israel. Or indeed the ECHR.
This is what I am alarmed about:
..He cannot: open or maintain accounts with Google, Amazon, Apple, or any US company; make hotel reservations (Expedia canceled his booking in France hours after he made it); conduct online commerce, since he can't know if the packaging is American; use any major credit card (Visa, Mastercard, Amex are all American); access normal banking services, even with non-American banks, as banks worldwide close sanctioned accounts; conduct virtually any financial transaction.
He describes it as being "economically banned across most of the planet," including in his own country, France, and where he works, the Netherlands.
That's the real shocking aspect of this: the Americans are: - punishing a European citizen - for doing his job in Europe - applying laws Europe officially supports - at an institution based in Europe - that Europe helped create and fund
and Europe is not only doing essentially nothing to protect him, they're actively enforcing America's sanctions against their own citizen - European banks closing his accounts, European companies refusing him service, European institutions standing by while Washington destroys a European judge's life on European soil...
That you can't appreciate that this is about practical sovereignty is a clear demonstration that you don't really care about our own sovereignty.
Doesn't it simply demonstrate the colossal power and reach of US institutions globally ?
Absolutely. But it also demonstrates what sovereignty actually means in practical terms - and puts into stark context the cosplay from Brexiteers over 'sovereignty'.
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
Meanwhile, what's with the Waitrose Christmas ads. Featuring British National Treasure Joe Wilkinson and Keira Knightley. Are they supposed to be funny or are they serious. If the former I'm struggling to find the humour, if the latter, super ick.
I still quite like the Trump Waitrose Christmas ad from 2016, which catches something - at least until he's behind bars.
Oh boo hoo. That's sovereignty, capitalism and the law right there. Which bit do you object to, that he can't google "pearl clutching"?
Mmm no. It's an assault on law, international law, by Trump & Co - which started in around Feb/March following the pattern of Trump's assaults on Court Staff in his various trials in 2024.
I'm interested if any UK parties have policies on this, and what my MP Lee Anderson would say (if he's heard of the ICC). Do the Tories have a defined view on the ICC?
No such thing as international law.
Radovan Karadžić says hello from HMP Parkhurst.
There is international law just as long as countries want to abide by international law. If they decide for any reason that they don't want to, then international law ceases to exist.
That's essentially the same basis on which all law exists. It's an entirely human-created construct that exists only so long as there are people and institutions willing to enforce it. So there's no distinction between international or domestic law in that respect.
Yes and no. While there may be sanctions for breaking "international law" (or, more properly, for reneging on a previous agreement), they are not the same (they may be analogous) to me being banged up because I nicked all the vegan sausage rolls from Greggs at King's Cross station.
The difference is surely that domestic law has a strongly (nearly universally) accepted means of enforcement, jurisdiction and interpretation/adjudication. Including an executive.
International law is more woolly. Some people accept it, others don’t. Nobody has really settled on how it is enforced and adjudicated. And there is nothing approaching an international executive branch to implement it.
(I should say some areas are a bit more advanced than others - eg shipping/laws of the sea).
A lot of international law is very advanced. That's how we manage to have international trade and communications!
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
Meanwhile, what's with the Waitrose Christmas ads. Featuring British National Treasure Joe Wilkinson and Keira Knightley. Are they supposed to be funny or are they serious. If the former I'm struggling to find the humour, if the latter, super ick.
Obviously, it's actually yet another spoof of Love Actually, obviously. I cannot believe anyone who has seen Love Actually (which must include >95% of Waitrose target audience) would not get that. Obviously.
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
Maybe you should reply to my actual point.
..the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things..
It's very relevant. Do you think the US would have put sanctions on this judge had he not decided to be a complete dick head and try and make a name for himself by targeting Israel?
So you're agreeing with me that we can only enforce our laws subject to approval of the US.
But it's not our law, it's the nebulous concept of "international law". Again, I'd remove the UK from the ICC and ECHR anyway.
Also, how is it different from when we put sanctions on Russians and Russian companies after Putin invaded Ukraine both times. Individuals in Russia are subject to our (and US) sanctions despite there being no jurisdiction. You just don't like it this time because the US has targeted one of your pet liberal projects.
A ridiculous ad hominem from you. The principle at stake has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue of Israel. Or indeed the ECHR.
This is what I am alarmed about:
..He cannot: open or maintain accounts with Google, Amazon, Apple, or any US company; make hotel reservations (Expedia canceled his booking in France hours after he made it); conduct online commerce, since he can't know if the packaging is American; use any major credit card (Visa, Mastercard, Amex are all American); access normal banking services, even with non-American banks, as banks worldwide close sanctioned accounts; conduct virtually any financial transaction.
He describes it as being "economically banned across most of the planet," including in his own country, France, and where he works, the Netherlands.
That's the real shocking aspect of this: the Americans are: - punishing a European citizen - for doing his job in Europe - applying laws Europe officially supports - at an institution based in Europe - that Europe helped create and fund
and Europe is not only doing essentially nothing to protect him, they're actively enforcing America's sanctions against their own citizen - European banks closing his accounts, European companies refusing him service, European institutions standing by while Washington destroys a European judge's life on European soil...
That you can't appreciate that this is about practical sovereignty is a clear demonstration that you don't really care about our own sovereignty.
Doesn't it simply demonstrate the colossal power and reach of US institutions globally ?
It's a misuse of sanctions by the United States. The individual concerned would not and could not be sanctioned in this way if they were a US citizen
Global institutions like banks etc automatically apply US sanctions (and normally also EU ones).
The only way for the EU to prevent malicious sanctioning is to ban all institutions that can be sanctioned by the other country and have alternative institutions and infrastructure under its control. Which is what China is doing. It would be a massive shift and I can't see it being warranted at this stage.
This is what happens when bandits and mafiosi like Trump and Netanyahu become political leaders. When is someone going to stand up to these criminals?
It goes well beyond that, though (and the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things.)
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
Maybe the idiot judge should have thought about the consequences of targeting a US ally before getting caught up in the hard left anti-Semitism that drives all the nonsense against Jews having their own state.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
Maybe you should reply to my actual point.
..the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things..
It's very relevant. Do you think the US would have put sanctions on this judge had he not decided to be a complete dick head and try and make a name for himself by targeting Israel?
So you're agreeing with me that we can only enforce our laws subject to approval of the US.
But it's not our law, it's the nebulous concept of "international law". Again, I'd remove the UK from the ICC and ECHR anyway.
Also, how is it different from when we put sanctions on Russians and Russian companies after Putin invaded Ukraine both times. Individuals in Russia are subject to our (and US) sanctions despite there being no jurisdiction. You just don't like it this time because the US has targeted one of your pet liberal projects.
A ridiculous ad hominem from you. The principle at stake has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue of Israel. Or indeed the ECHR.
This is what I am alarmed about:
..He cannot: open or maintain accounts with Google, Amazon, Apple, or any US company; make hotel reservations (Expedia canceled his booking in France hours after he made it); conduct online commerce, since he can't know if the packaging is American; use any major credit card (Visa, Mastercard, Amex are all American); access normal banking services, even with non-American banks, as banks worldwide close sanctioned accounts; conduct virtually any financial transaction.
He describes it as being "economically banned across most of the planet," including in his own country, France, and where he works, the Netherlands.
That's the real shocking aspect of this: the Americans are: - punishing a European citizen - for doing his job in Europe - applying laws Europe officially supports - at an institution based in Europe - that Europe helped create and fund
and Europe is not only doing essentially nothing to protect him, they're actively enforcing America's sanctions against their own citizen - European banks closing his accounts, European companies refusing him service, European institutions standing by while Washington destroys a European judge's life on European soil...
That you can't appreciate that this is about practical sovereignty is a clear demonstration that you don't really care about our own sovereignty.
It's a bizarrely broad brush conclusion.
Let's abolish UNCLOS and the Geneva Conventions. How would that go?
For those of us without a Daily Mail account, and who feel that our lives are the richer for not having one, what did it say?
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
It's a kind of modern Gin Lane account of walking through Kensington in the early hours of the morning, being scared of brown people, a random negative comment about the tube, seeing a prostitute buying some drugs, some obligatory hating on Sadiq Khan and contrasting it with the bucolic joy of the English countryside. She thinks American tourists must hate it here (weird how they keep coming) and takes a shot at the weather (also probably Khan's fault). A classic of the genre, basically.
Thanks. It seems to be the poshest areas that are best avoided. I gather Camden is the same!
These articles say far more about the person writing them (and reading them presumably) than reflect reality. That's not to deny the existence of problems, but they have always been there. My Mother in Law is a Mail reader and she imagines there is a rapist in hiding behind every bush!
Like all left wing ideologues Zack will deliver a Jenrick Conservative Government.
The blueprint was Corbyn.
It's not in Zack's hands but it is in Starmer's. Zack is hopefully pointing him in the right direction. Starmer has got to start separating himself from some of the despots he seems attracted to and then things should improve.
I am finding it very hard to get het up by the Covid report. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Yes we know that shagger was the worst possible leader in a time of crisis. But good men, better men, competent men are also just as capable of inaction when faced with "that can't be right" data.
I am more interested in what we can change next time than calling for vengeance against people who have long since been booted out of office.
I think most of us could have predicted most of that report about five years ago.
Politicians all crap, civil servants all wonderful, no lessons to learn, now write the nine-figure cheque for the lawyers writing the report please.
Now, if they could produce a report from the perspective of something like a transport accident investigation, going into detail about what led to the decisions that were made, what might be done differently next time, and with comparison of approaches taken in other countries, that one might be worth reading.
Yep - lessons can be learnt, doesn't help when you don't say what bits looking backwards could be used to implement restrictions earlier.
without that information and without knowing what else works we could well end up implement restrictions for 45 of the next 0 pandemics.
What restrictions, though ?
Face masks, for example, greatly lower the transmission rate for any respiratory virus.
Compared with even the shortest lockdown, they are a minor imposition - and in some countries just ordinary practice.
Better ventilation has similar health benefits for relatively minor costs.
The other lesson which ought to be learned was the benefit of cheap rapid tests for infection, once developed.
We wasted tens of billions on PCR 'gold standard' testing which was almost completely ineffective in changing outcomes. Cheap self-administered tests, widely adopted, could completely avoid the need for any lockdown in the future (and could have been far better used earlier in this pandemic).
I haven't read the report, but if it hasn't adopted a cost/benefit analysis as its fundamental framework, then it is a waste of time. (Apart from the necessary conformation of what a crap PM was Boris - though we didn't need to spend £200m to know that.)
The big dog that has not barked in the night time, although it might by Sunday, is the defence of Boris ‘he got the big calls right’ Johnson or the Conservative government in general – or the devolved governments. One less king across the water for Kemi to worry about.
Comments
The inquiry has been badly set up. Involving the covid justice groups has directly led to an adversarial approach and led to people perhaps not being fully honest with their testimony. Truth and reconcilliation it has NOT been.
I agree that he was undermined, and that governments need to bring more outsiders in occasionally.
https://x.com/dominic2306/status/1991527964836499672
Rubio appears to be the one who gets it.
Their brand of open door migration, trans women on women’s spaces, free Gaza now, tax the rich not going down well there.
But, also, the committee has generally given the prize to the signatories, not the outside parties who organised it. In other words, Putin has always been a more a likely recipient than Trump!
And, as the t-shirt says, Puck Futin.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c891403eddet
Which makes AWACS and conventional recon largely obsolete.
Europe is still stuck in about 1987 for space.
That they had to replace him doesn't alter that.
By Amanda Williams"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-15311313/london-societal-collapse-amanda-williams.html
It should be another wake up call for Europe (and that includes us) that depending on the US to the extent we do, both economically and militarily, involves a far greater loss of sovereignty than does (for example) membership of the EU.
That people like Farage will likely applaud this, rather than recognise it for what it is, will indicate that they have no real interest in British sovereignty.
If the country is bankrupt, it’s because of the pork barrel policies of previous governments in allowing underperforming or zombie companies to limp on. And are these ‘entrepreneurs’ grateful? No they just complain and ask for more. A good dose of saying no is needed.
It's about time these judges in their ivory towers faced consequences for their idiotic decisions.
An anti-sat weapon is expensive. If you have a handful of KHs costing about as much as an aircraft carrier each, that is a worry. When your satellite fleet is measured in the thousands....
In addition the satellite network is 24/366 and is global, without the need for specific deployment.
When you add in the proliferation of ultra-long range air to air missiles (sold by the Chinese as explicit AWACS killers) - which aren't that expensive - the choices become simpler.
Bring. On. May.
Lots more of this. Right across England & Wales.
There are European companies putting up radar satellites doing similar stuff. Where Europe is way behind is on launch capability (and also, of course, semiconductor manufacturing capacity).
And AWACS (or rather, cheaper alternatives like Saab's system) won't be obsolete for a decade or so. You can't yet do everything from 150 miles up.
(Which is one reason the US is funding very low orbit 'air breathing' satellite development.)
..the fact that it involves Israel isn't particularly relevant in the greater scheme of things..
But you can't rush the seasons.
And cheap launch is *everything*. It means you can use cheap satellites and just replace them.
To give a simple number. Last year, SpaceX launched 2,150 tons (approx) to orbit. Ariane launched 3.5 tons.
In the near future, SpaceX is planning on 10,000 tons to orbit, annually. Ariane is planning on 50 tons - once they get Ariane 6 rolling.
Blue Origin is not far behind the SpaceX numbers in their plans.
It certainly can't work at low altitudes (where Stalink etc live).
This is because orbital drag pulls the debris down extremely fast.
International law is more woolly. Some people accept it, others don’t. Nobody has really settled on how it is enforced and adjudicated. And there is nothing approaching an international executive branch to implement it.
(I should say some areas are a bit more advanced than others - eg shipping/laws of the sea).
Also, how is it different from when we put sanctions on Russians and Russian companies after Putin invaded Ukraine both times. Individuals in Russia are subject to our (and US) sanctions despite there being no jurisdiction. You just don't like it this time because the US has targeted one of your pet liberal projects.
OneWeb, at higher altitudes, will leave dead sats behind. And Ariane 6 persisted in using explosives in their deployment mechanism.
It's foolish that we don't (and not impossible that without Brexit, we/Europe might have finally got around to it).
The blueprint was Corbyn.
The principle at stake has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue of Israel. Or indeed the ECHR.
This is what I am alarmed about:
..He cannot: open or maintain accounts with Google, Amazon, Apple, or any US company; make hotel reservations (Expedia canceled his booking in France hours after he made it); conduct online commerce, since he can't know if the packaging is American; use any major credit card (Visa, Mastercard, Amex are all American); access normal banking services, even with non-American banks, as banks worldwide close sanctioned accounts; conduct virtually any financial transaction.
He describes it as being "economically banned across most of the planet," including in his own country, France, and where he works, the Netherlands.
That's the real shocking aspect of this: the Americans are:
- punishing a European citizen
- for doing his job in Europe
- applying laws Europe officially supports
- at an institution based in Europe
- that Europe helped create and fund
and Europe is not only doing essentially nothing to protect him, they're actively enforcing America's sanctions against their own citizen - European banks closing his accounts, European companies refusing him service, European institutions standing by while Washington destroys a European judge's life on European soil...
That you can't appreciate that this is about practical sovereignty is a clear demonstration that you don't really care about our own sovereignty.
Banking - Visa, Mastercard, AMEX
Online transactions - Amazon
Online "presence" - Google, Apple
Online bookings - Expedia etc...
China will have an F9 type launchers fairly soon.
There was no prospect of the U.K. or Europe developing cheap launch. The established policy was Ariane must be protected at all costs. See the shenanigans about sabotaging Beale.
Did you know that someone in the government actually asked BAe about doing an F9 copy? Their reply was that it would cost £20 Billion and they wouldn’t do it. Because it would upset the relationships with Ariane and the partner countries.
A friend lost her job at ESA for advocating a speed up for Themis.
That’s the level of gate keeping that is going on.
Can’t blame him, that’s a wake up at 3am blushing in the darkness at the memory of it moment. Much easier to double down and get angry at the ‘enemy’ than take the opportunity for some self examination.
But it also demonstrates what sovereignty actually means in practical terms - and puts into stark context the cosplay from Brexiteers over 'sovereignty'.
As someone who has lived in London for most of my life, and the same corner of it for the last 25 years, I don't recognise a lot of the descriptions I read, and certainly feel that much of London is far better than during most of my life, except for a general decline in the public realm over the past decade or so that I see everywhere else I visit too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNkniZU4VsA
Global institutions like banks etc automatically apply US sanctions (and normally also EU ones).
The only way for the EU to prevent malicious sanctioning is to ban all institutions that can be sanctioned by the other country and have alternative institutions and infrastructure under its control. Which is what China is doing. It would be a massive shift and I can't see it being warranted at this stage.
Let's abolish UNCLOS and the Geneva Conventions. How would that go?
These articles say far more about the person writing them (and reading them presumably) than reflect reality. That's not to deny the existence of problems, but they have always been there. My Mother in Law is a Mail reader and she imagines there is a rapist in hiding behind every bush!
Jog on.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgexdjp0qj8o
Of course the Trump peace plan involves several profiteering clauses for the US, and a "Peace Council" headed by DJT.
https://x.com/michaeldweiss/status/1991607955737776217