FPT - I would favour imperial federation of the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
Strangely, I can see a world where South Africa draws closer too, if we get the geopolitics right.
I went there recently and was struck by how much more British it was than I was expecting, despite not really being British at all.
Perhaps Durban and the Cape aren't representative but it didn't feel foreign.
As a NZer, I have no political opposition to this, although the word “imperial” kind of kills it at birth.
Rather, as I said last thread, adding Australia and NZ doesn’t follow geopolitical logic.
UK-C could be a very powerful player in the North Atlantic and Arctic fields, and ironically a more valuable partner for both the U.S. and EU thereby.
The trick is how to move practically toward a UK-C. Monnet had his coal and steel community - we need an analagous projet.
Culturally the UK is closer to New Zealand than Canada. Having a block with Canada, Australia and New Zealand in it along with the UK would cover Europe, North America and a gateway to Asia
Closest culturally to the UK in my opinion:
Ireland Australia NZ Norway Denmark Canada
I’ve not visited Aus/NZ, but of the rest, I’d say…
On the subject of the BBC, Dimbleby Major isn’t pulling many punches in his documentary series What’s the Monarchy For? Far less emollient to Charles and his brood than his wee brother.
DD looking somewhat etiolated, and I’m a bit worried about that dark blemish on his lip.
It's melanomas you can't see, not the moles you can that are the problem. Ask Shula.
On topic, one of the most depressing experiences of being an adult is coming (slowly) to the realisation that people decide what they believe first - and often adopt those beliefs from those they identify with or admire, however loosely - and then select, interpret or reject the evidence to suit to fit it. Not the other way round.
It happens in politics, sure, but it also happens in my professional line of work too, and in my family and in interpersonal relationships of friends.
I suppose we need to accept it as a fundamental part of being human and work with it accordingly. But I don't know how.
However, individually, we are all confident that we never do this ourselves.
I'm happy to admit that I have many opinions that are informed by belief at least as much as by evidence, though I suppose I would still hold that I don't hold a belief that is directly and irrefutably contradicted by the evidence.
FPT - I would favour imperial federation of the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
Strangely, I can see a world where South Africa draws closer too, if we get the geopolitics right.
I went there recently and was struck by how much more British it was than I was expecting, despite not really being British at all.
Perhaps Durban and the Cape aren't representative but it didn't feel foreign.
As a NZer, I have no political opposition to this, although the word “imperial” kind of kills it at birth.
Rather, as I said last thread, adding Australia and NZ doesn’t follow geopolitical logic.
UK-C could be a very powerful player in the North Atlantic and Arctic fields, and ironically a more valuable partner for both the U.S. and EU thereby.
The trick is how to move practically toward a UK-C. Monnet had his coal and steel community - we need an analagous projet.
Culturally the UK is closer to New Zealand than Canada. Having a block with Canada, Australia and New Zealand in it along with the UK would cover Europe, North America and a gateway to Asia
Closest culturally to the UK in my opinion:
Ireland Australia NZ Norway Denmark Canada
I’ve not visited Aus/NZ, but of the rest, I’d say…
Ireland Canada - big gap - Denmark Norway
From who I’ve worked with or been friends with,
Aussies Kiwis Irish Danes Canadians Americans Dutch White South Africans Swedes Norwegians Finns Swiss (German) German Swiss (French) Flemish Belgian French French Belgian
Not enough experience of enough people from other countries to properly judge.
My best mate today on the idea of masks making a comeback "they can get absolutely fucked" have to agree with him.
If the NHS can't handle a few extra sick people then maybe sack a few thousand managers and hire extra nurses and doctors.
Oh and the most common thing I hear from very senior clinical staff in NHS trusts about the "extra money" from the government is "if there's extra money then we're not seeing any of it" it's almost as if the corrupt managers are just giving their mates a bunch of non jobs and stealing the extra funds for themselves.
Masks were seemingly quite effective against flu during the Covid pandemic. I think I can tolerate a modest amount of mask-wearing for the worst flu season every 5-10 years.
But if we'd spent the last few years improving ventilation and filtration in public buildings and transport, then it could have been a moot question. The current wave of influenza infections might have been much reduced.
My best mate today on the idea of masks making a comeback "they can get absolutely fucked" have to agree with him.
If the NHS can't handle a few extra sick people then maybe sack a few thousand managers and hire extra nurses and doctors.
Oh and the most common thing I hear from very senior clinical staff in NHS trusts about the "extra money" from the government is "if there's extra money then we're not seeing any of it" it's almost as if the corrupt managers are just giving their mates a bunch of non jobs and stealing the extra funds for themselves.
The speed with which you jumped to a conspiracy theory there, we should get you in the Olympics.
FPT - I would favour imperial federation of the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
Strangely, I can see a world where South Africa draws closer too, if we get the geopolitics right.
I went there recently and was struck by how much more British it was than I was expecting, despite not really being British at all.
Perhaps Durban and the Cape aren't representative but it didn't feel foreign.
As a NZer, I have no political opposition to this, although the word “imperial” kind of kills it at birth.
Rather, as I said last thread, adding Australia and NZ doesn’t follow geopolitical logic.
UK-C could be a very powerful player in the North Atlantic and Arctic fields, and ironically a more valuable partner for both the U.S. and EU thereby.
The trick is how to move practically toward a UK-C. Monnet had his coal and steel community - we need an analagous projet.
Culturally the UK is closer to New Zealand than Canada. Having a block with Canada, Australia and New Zealand in it along with the UK would cover Europe, North America and a gateway to Asia
Closest culturally to the UK in my opinion:
Ireland Australia NZ Norway Denmark Canada
Quota:
I'd certainly rate Great Britain and Germany as cultural neighbours, but the USA and Belgium??
On the subject of the BBC, Dimbleby Major isn’t pulling many punches in his documentary series What’s the Monarchy For? Far less emollient to Charles and his brood than his wee brother.
DD looking somewhat etiolated, and I’m a bit worried about that dark blemish on his lip.
And I have just submitted my first ever complaint to the BBC as a licence fee payer in response and I suspect thousands more will be doing so.
Appalling republican bias from near beginning to end with barely lip service given to any pro monarchy arguments, a disgraceful piece of pro republic propaganda. I do NOT pay my licence fee for this!!
I suggest all PB monarchists do likewise, we cannot let the BBC get away with this! David Dimbleby's father will be ashamed of him and turning in his grave tonight!
Net immigration has fallen very substantially in the last two years, yet British Future in polling from this summer note that “a worrying 1 in 5 people (21%) simply refused to believe the numbers had fallen by that much. […] 37% of Reform UK voters refused to believe that immigration had fallen, even when presented with the numbers from the Office for National Statistics.”
Which is because the total number of immigrants has increased.
A reduction in net immigration is still an ongoing net immigration not a net emigration.
On the subject of the BBC, Dimbleby Major isn’t pulling many punches in his documentary series What’s the Monarchy For? Far less emollient to Charles and his brood than his wee brother.
DD looking somewhat etiolated, and I’m a bit worried about that dark blemish on his lip.
And I have just submitted my first ever complaint to the BBC as a licence fee payer in response and I suspect thousands more will be doing so.
Appalling republican bias from near beginning to end with barely lip service given to any pro monarchy arguments, a disgraceful piece of pro republic propaganda. I do NOT pay my licence fee for this!!
I suggest all PB monarchists do likewise, we cannot let the BBC get away with this! David Dimbleby's father will be ashamed of him and turning in his grave tonight!
I’m on the Windrush line. Everyone, and I mean everyone (including me) is staring at a phone. And not just as a means of ignoring the man walking through the carriage raising money for shelter. It’s a sort of epiphany: these things are deeply, deeply problematic. It goes well beyond children and social media.
If a politician just asked us: “If I promised to legislate against screen time, for your own collective good, would you support me?” what would public opinion say?
Net immigration has fallen very substantially in the last two years, yet British Future in polling from this summer note that “a worrying 1 in 5 people (21%) simply refused to believe the numbers had fallen by that much. […] 37% of Reform UK voters refused to believe that immigration had fallen, even when presented with the numbers from the Office for National Statistics.”
Which is because the total number of immigrants has increased.
A reduction in net immigration is still an ongoing net immigration not a net emigration.
Even net zero migration can mean dramatic demographic change.
On the subject of the BBC, Dimbleby Major isn’t pulling many punches in his documentary series What’s the Monarchy For? Far less emollient to Charles and his brood than his wee brother.
DD looking somewhat etiolated, and I’m a bit worried about that dark blemish on his lip.
And I have just submitted my first ever complaint to the BBC as a licence fee payer in response and I suspect thousands more will be doing so.
Appalling republican bias from near beginning to end with barely lip service given to any pro monarchy arguments, a disgraceful piece of pro republic propaganda. I do NOT pay my licence fee for this!!
I suggest all PB monarchists do likewise, we cannot let the BBC get away with this! David Dimbleby's father will be ashamed of him and turning in his grave tonight!
I enjoyed the first episode. I liked the bit where one of the interviewees pointed out Dimbleby’s own inherited position — good on him for keeping that in!
More people should remember Richard Dimbleby and the important work he did on changing societal attitudes to cancer.
My best mate today on the idea of masks making a comeback "they can get absolutely fucked" have to agree with him.
If the NHS can't handle a few extra sick people then maybe sack a few thousand managers and hire extra nurses and doctors.
Oh and the most common thing I hear from very senior clinical staff in NHS trusts about the "extra money" from the government is "if there's extra money then we're not seeing any of it" it's almost as if the corrupt managers are just giving their mates a bunch of non jobs and stealing the extra funds for themselves.
The speed with which you jumped to a conspiracy theory there, we should get you in the Olympics.
Oh look the lanyard wearer comes out to defend the other lanyard wearers. Time to sack a million public sector wasters and save £60bn in spending. Get rid of all the losers and leeches stealing a living from hardworking taxpayers.
FPT - I would favour imperial federation of the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
Strangely, I can see a world where South Africa draws closer too, if we get the geopolitics right.
I went there recently and was struck by how much more British it was than I was expecting, despite not really being British at all.
Perhaps Durban and the Cape aren't representative but it didn't feel foreign.
As a NZer, I have no political opposition to this, although the word “imperial” kind of kills it at birth.
Rather, as I said last thread, adding Australia and NZ doesn’t follow geopolitical logic.
UK-C could be a very powerful player in the North Atlantic and Arctic fields, and ironically a more valuable partner for both the U.S. and EU thereby.
The trick is how to move practically toward a UK-C. Monnet had his coal and steel community - we need an analagous projet.
Culturally the UK is closer to New Zealand than Canada. Having a block with Canada, Australia and New Zealand in it along with the UK would cover Europe, North America and a gateway to Asia
Closest culturally to the UK in my opinion:
Ireland Australia NZ Norway Denmark Canada
Quota:
Indeed, Ireland is a Roman Catholic majority republic, NZ and maybe even Australia too are closer to the UK than Ireland, maybe parts of Eastern Canada as well. Northern Ireland is closer probably in the Protestant bits than all of them but it is still in the UK
Net immigration has fallen very substantially in the last two years, yet British Future in polling from this summer note that “a worrying 1 in 5 people (21%) simply refused to believe the numbers had fallen by that much. […] 37% of Reform UK voters refused to believe that immigration had fallen, even when presented with the numbers from the Office for National Statistics.”
Which is because the total number of immigrants has increased.
A reduction in net immigration is still an ongoing net immigration not a net emigration.
Year 1 net immigration 10 Year 2 net immigration 9 Year 3 net immigration 8 Year 4 net immigration 7 Year 5 net immigration 6 Year 6 net immigration 5 Year 7 net immigration 4 Year 8 net immigration 3 Year 9 net immigration 2 Year 10 net immigration 1
That would be 9 years of falling net immigration but the number of immigrants has increased from 10 to 55.
The proportion is increasing in an almost straight line by between 2% and 3% per year.
At this rate it will be over 50% in 3 years time.
When it goes over 50%, can they still be described as "special"? Surely at that point they become the norm and every child should then receive the same benefits? Why should a minority then get penalised?
I’m on the Windrush line. Everyone, and I mean everyone (including me) is staring at a phone. And not just as a means of ignoring the man walking through the carriage raising money for shelter. It’s a sort of epiphany: these things are deeply, deeply problematic. It goes well beyond children and social media.
If a politician just asked us: “If I promised to legislate against screen time, for your own collective good, would you support me?” what would public opinion say?
Smartphones have taken the (physical) place that cigarettes used to have in people's lives. At one time most people used to have a cigarette in their hand no matter what they were doing, now it's phones.
My best mate today on the idea of masks making a comeback "they can get absolutely fucked" have to agree with him.
If the NHS can't handle a few extra sick people then maybe sack a few thousand managers and hire extra nurses and doctors.
Oh and the most common thing I hear from very senior clinical staff in NHS trusts about the "extra money" from the government is "if there's extra money then we're not seeing any of it" it's almost as if the corrupt managers are just giving their mates a bunch of non jobs and stealing the extra funds for themselves.
The speed with which you jumped to a conspiracy theory there, we should get you in the Olympics.
Oh look the lanyard wearer comes out to defend the other lanyard wearers. Time to sack a million public sector wasters and save £60bn in spending. Get rid of all the losers and leeches stealing a living from hardworking taxpayers.
Nice combo there, of “Why can’t we just” and “we should stop spending money on this so we can spend it on this”.
On the subject of the BBC, Dimbleby Major isn’t pulling many punches in his documentary series What’s the Monarchy For? Far less emollient to Charles and his brood than his wee brother.
DD looking somewhat etiolated, and I’m a bit worried about that dark blemish on his lip.
And I have just submitted my first ever complaint to the BBC as a licence fee payer in response and I suspect thousands more will be doing so.
Appalling republican bias from near beginning to end with barely lip service given to any pro monarchy arguments, a disgraceful piece of pro republic propaganda. I do NOT pay my licence fee for this!!
I suggest all PB monarchists do likewise, we cannot let the BBC get away with this! David Dimbleby's father will be ashamed of him and turning in his grave tonight!
I enjoyed the first episode. I liked the bit where one of the interviewees pointed out Dimbleby’s own inherited position — good on him for keeping that in!
More people should remember Richard Dimbleby and the important work he did on changing societal attitudes to cancer.
The first episode was just about balanced, tonight though was a republican hatchet job on the royal family from near beginning to end.
Yes Richard Dimbleby was a great man who did great thing like on cancer and he would never have stooped so low with toilet journalism like his son did tonight
Net immigration has fallen very substantially in the last two years, yet British Future in polling from this summer note that “a worrying 1 in 5 people (21%) simply refused to believe the numbers had fallen by that much. […] 37% of Reform UK voters refused to believe that immigration had fallen, even when presented with the numbers from the Office for National Statistics.”
Which is because the total number of immigrants has increased.
A reduction in net immigration is still an ongoing net immigration not a net emigration.
A reduction in net immigration is, yes, still ongoing net immigration. But the point here is that 21% of people refused to believe the numbers presented to them were correct. This isn’t just people thinking immigration is higher than it is, or people thinking immigration is still too high, it is people being presented with reliable figures and saying they are a lie.
FPT - I would favour imperial federation of the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
Strangely, I can see a world where South Africa draws closer too, if we get the geopolitics right.
I went there recently and was struck by how much more British it was than I was expecting, despite not really being British at all.
Perhaps Durban and the Cape aren't representative but it didn't feel foreign.
As a NZer, I have no political opposition to this, although the word “imperial” kind of kills it at birth.
Rather, as I said last thread, adding Australia and NZ doesn’t follow geopolitical logic.
UK-C could be a very powerful player in the North Atlantic and Arctic fields, and ironically a more valuable partner for both the U.S. and EU thereby.
The trick is how to move practically toward a UK-C. Monnet had his coal and steel community - we need an analagous projet.
Culturally the UK is closer to New Zealand than Canada. Having a block with Canada, Australia and New Zealand in it along with the UK would cover Europe, North America and a gateway to Asia
Closest culturally to the UK in my opinion:
Ireland Australia NZ Norway Denmark Canada
I’ve not visited Aus/NZ, but of the rest, I’d say…
Ireland Canada - big gap - Denmark Norway
From who I’ve worked with or been friends with,
Aussies Kiwis Irish Danes Canadians Americans Dutch White South Africans Swedes Norwegians Finns Swiss (German) German Swiss (French) Flemish Belgian French French Belgian
Not enough experience of enough people from other countries to properly judge.
I think that language barriers tend to obscure cultural similarities. When I was an exchange student in Germany (for a year, a long time ago), it was interesting that the students began by associating according to language but later by continent. It seemed to me that the superficial similarities between Brits and Americans in particular masked deeply different worldviews which became more apparent over the course of the year. In the end, the Americans, with just a few exceptions, pretty much stuck with their own countryfolk while the Brits got on better with their fellow Europeans (and, slightly strangely, the Japanese).
On the subject of the BBC, Dimbleby Major isn’t pulling many punches in his documentary series What’s the Monarchy For? Far less emollient to Charles and his brood than his wee brother.
DD looking somewhat etiolated, and I’m a bit worried about that dark blemish on his lip.
And I have just submitted my first ever complaint to the BBC as a licence fee payer in response and I suspect thousands more will be doing so.
Appalling republican bias from near beginning to end with barely lip service given to any pro monarchy arguments, a disgraceful piece of pro republic propaganda. I do NOT pay my licence fee for this!!
I suggest all PB monarchists do likewise, we cannot let the BBC get away with this! David Dimbleby's father will be ashamed of him and turning in his grave tonight!
Net immigration has fallen very substantially in the last two years, yet British Future in polling from this summer note that “a worrying 1 in 5 people (21%) simply refused to believe the numbers had fallen by that much. […] 37% of Reform UK voters refused to believe that immigration had fallen, even when presented with the numbers from the Office for National Statistics.”
Which is because the total number of immigrants has increased.
A reduction in net immigration is still an ongoing net immigration not a net emigration.
People won't be happy until net migration is back to the tens of thousands that it always used to be in recent times until 1997.
The proportion is increasing in an almost straight line by between 2% and 3% per year.
At this rate it will be over 50% in 3 years time.
When it goes over 50%, can they still be described as "special"? Surely at that point they become the norm and every child should then receive the same benefits? Why should a minority then get penalised?
Look on the bright side: they could go to Stanford:
The proportion is increasing in an almost straight line by between 2% and 3% per year.
At this rate it will be over 50% in 3 years time.
When it goes over 50%, can they still be described as "special"? Surely at that point they become the norm and every child should then receive the same benefits? Why should a minority then get penalised?
More likely is that the special needs majority get even more as they have become a voting block which must be pandered to.
Leading to a feedback loop of everyone claiming to have special needs and the system collapsing.
On the subject of the BBC, Dimbleby Major isn’t pulling many punches in his documentary series What’s the Monarchy For? Far less emollient to Charles and his brood than his wee brother.
DD looking somewhat etiolated, and I’m a bit worried about that dark blemish on his lip.
And I have just submitted my first ever complaint to the BBC as a licence fee payer in response and I suspect thousands more will be doing so.
Appalling republican bias from near beginning to end with barely lip service given to any pro monarchy arguments, a disgraceful piece of pro republic propaganda. I do NOT pay my licence fee for this!!
I suggest all PB monarchists do likewise, we cannot let the BBC get away with this! David Dimbleby's father will be ashamed of him and turning in his grave tonight!
I enjoyed the first episode. I liked the bit where one of the interviewees pointed out Dimbleby’s own inherited position — good on him for keeping that in!
More people should remember Richard Dimbleby and the important work he did on changing societal attitudes to cancer.
The first episode was just about balanced, tonight though was a republican hatchet job on the royal family from near beginning to end.
Yes Richard Dimbleby was a great man who did great thing like on cancer and he would never have stooped so low with toilet journalism like his son did tonight
Net immigration has fallen very substantially in the last two years, yet British Future in polling from this summer note that “a worrying 1 in 5 people (21%) simply refused to believe the numbers had fallen by that much. […] 37% of Reform UK voters refused to believe that immigration had fallen, even when presented with the numbers from the Office for National Statistics.”
Which is because the total number of immigrants has increased.
A reduction in net immigration is still an ongoing net immigration not a net emigration.
A reduction in net immigration is, yes, still ongoing net immigration. But the point here is that 21% of people refused to believe the numbers presented to them were correct. This isn’t just people thinking immigration is higher than it is, or people thinking immigration is still too high, it is people being presented with reliable figures and saying they are a lie.
My best mate today on the idea of masks making a comeback "they can get absolutely fucked" have to agree with him.
If the NHS can't handle a few extra sick people then maybe sack a few thousand managers and hire extra nurses and doctors.
Oh and the most common thing I hear from very senior clinical staff in NHS trusts about the "extra money" from the government is "if there's extra money then we're not seeing any of it" it's almost as if the corrupt managers are just giving their mates a bunch of non jobs and stealing the extra funds for themselves.
The speed with which you jumped to a conspiracy theory there, we should get you in the Olympics.
Oh look the lanyard wearer comes out to defend the other lanyard wearers. Time to sack a million public sector wasters and save £60bn in spending. Get rid of all the losers and leeches stealing a living from hardworking taxpayers.
You have just claimed a large number of NHS managers are corrupt, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. That’s a they’re-eating-the-cats level of prejudiced mendacity. NHS managers are hardworking people too and your inability to understand what they do is no reason for such a vicious attack.
On the subject of the BBC, Dimbleby Major isn’t pulling many punches in his documentary series What’s the Monarchy For? Far less emollient to Charles and his brood than his wee brother.
DD looking somewhat etiolated, and I’m a bit worried about that dark blemish on his lip.
And I have just submitted my first ever complaint to the BBC as a licence fee payer in response and I suspect thousands more will be doing so.
Appalling republican bias from near beginning to end with barely lip service given to any pro monarchy arguments, a disgraceful piece of pro republic propaganda. I do NOT pay my licence fee for this!!
I suggest all PB monarchists do likewise, we cannot let the BBC get away with this! David Dimbleby's father will be ashamed of him and turning in his grave tonight!
Nobody should have to pay the BBC tax in these days of media subscription and advertising
On the subject of the BBC, Dimbleby Major isn’t pulling many punches in his documentary series What’s the Monarchy For? Far less emollient to Charles and his brood than his wee brother.
DD looking somewhat etiolated, and I’m a bit worried about that dark blemish on his lip.
And I have just submitted my first ever complaint to the BBC as a licence fee payer in response and I suspect thousands more will be doing so.
Appalling republican bias from near beginning to end with barely lip service given to any pro monarchy arguments, a disgraceful piece of pro republic propaganda. I do NOT pay my licence fee for this!!
I suggest all PB monarchists do likewise, we cannot let the BBC get away with this! David Dimbleby's father will be ashamed of him and turning in his grave tonight!
MONARCHY = SOCIALISM!
No, STATE CONTROL OF THE ECONOMY = SOCIALISM
You are a Monarchist, which makes you a Socialist!
On the subject of the BBC, Dimbleby Major isn’t pulling many punches in his documentary series What’s the Monarchy For? Far less emollient to Charles and his brood than his wee brother.
DD looking somewhat etiolated, and I’m a bit worried about that dark blemish on his lip.
And I have just submitted my first ever complaint to the BBC as a licence fee payer in response and I suspect thousands more will be doing so.
Appalling republican bias from near beginning to end with barely lip service given to any pro monarchy arguments, a disgraceful piece of pro republic propaganda. I do NOT pay my licence fee for this!!
I suggest all PB monarchists do likewise, we cannot let the BBC get away with this! David Dimbleby's father will be ashamed of him and turning in his grave tonight!
The BBC has been broadcasting pro-monarchy content for decades now, so I can’t find myself getting too upset about one programme that dares to be a little critical.
I would consider myself a monarchist, and I think it does more good than harm, and I think we would regret losing it. But that doesn’t mean the system isn’t beyond reproach. In particular serious consideration needs to be had in relation to whether the funding model is a fair one. And how the “working vs non-working royal” system works (once you start dictating who can and can’t have jobs/outside interests and how you fund all this, it gets pretty murky). There’s also the question of the royal duchies and how they are run. None of these issues are insurmountable nor would any sensible reform prevent the royal family from living a very privileged life - but there is a question of optics and focus.
Continuing the discussion from the previous thread: In 1939, Clarence Streit's Union Now was published:
Union Now is a book by journalist Clarence Streit calling for a federal union of fifteen of the world's major democracies.[1] The first edition of the book was published in 1939. The book attracted public attention to world federalist and Atlanticist ideas and helped lay the groundwork for the efforts of Streit's organization Federal Union, Inc. (which later became the Association to Unite the Democracies).
Net immigration has fallen very substantially in the last two years, yet British Future in polling from this summer note that “a worrying 1 in 5 people (21%) simply refused to believe the numbers had fallen by that much. […] 37% of Reform UK voters refused to believe that immigration had fallen, even when presented with the numbers from the Office for National Statistics.”
Which is because the total number of immigrants has increased.
A reduction in net immigration is still an ongoing net immigration not a net emigration.
A reduction in net immigration is, yes, still ongoing net immigration. But the point here is that 21% of people refused to believe the numbers presented to them were correct. This isn’t just people thinking immigration is higher than it is, or people thinking immigration is still too high, it is people being presented with reliable figures and saying they are a lie.
People have had twenty plus years of immigration being higher than predicted - its natural that they are doubtful when told that net immigration is falling.
Secondly people are confused between immigration and net immigration, often thinking that falling immigration should mean fewer immigrants.
On the subject of the BBC, Dimbleby Major isn’t pulling many punches in his documentary series What’s the Monarchy For? Far less emollient to Charles and his brood than his wee brother.
DD looking somewhat etiolated, and I’m a bit worried about that dark blemish on his lip.
And I have just submitted my first ever complaint to the BBC as a licence fee payer in response and I suspect thousands more will be doing so.
Appalling republican bias from near beginning to end with barely lip service given to any pro monarchy arguments, a disgraceful piece of pro republic propaganda. I do NOT pay my licence fee for this!!
I suggest all PB monarchists do likewise, we cannot let the BBC get away with this! David Dimbleby's father will be ashamed of him and turning in his grave tonight!
I enjoyed the first episode. I liked the bit where one of the interviewees pointed out Dimbleby’s own inherited position — good on him for keeping that in!
More people should remember Richard Dimbleby and the important work he did on changing societal attitudes to cancer.
The first episode was just about balanced, tonight though was a republican hatchet job on the royal family from near beginning to end.
Yes Richard Dimbleby was a great man who did great thing like on cancer and he would never have stooped so low with toilet journalism like his son did tonight
I will watch the second episode with interest and bear your comments in mind!
(I may watch the second episode of “The War Between the Land and the Sea” first, however.)
Net immigration has fallen very substantially in the last two years, yet British Future in polling from this summer note that “a worrying 1 in 5 people (21%) simply refused to believe the numbers had fallen by that much. […] 37% of Reform UK voters refused to believe that immigration had fallen, even when presented with the numbers from the Office for National Statistics.”
Which is because the total number of immigrants has increased.
A reduction in net immigration is still an ongoing net immigration not a net emigration.
People won't be happy until net migration is back to the tens of thousands that it always used to be in recent times until 1997.
It’s getting closer to that. It will be below 200,000 next year, but probably still above 100,000, so not quite “tens of thousands”.
My best mate today on the idea of masks making a comeback "they can get absolutely fucked" have to agree with him.
If the NHS can't handle a few extra sick people then maybe sack a few thousand managers and hire extra nurses and doctors.
Oh and the most common thing I hear from very senior clinical staff in NHS trusts about the "extra money" from the government is "if there's extra money then we're not seeing any of it" it's almost as if the corrupt managers are just giving their mates a bunch of non jobs and stealing the extra funds for themselves.
The speed with which you jumped to a conspiracy theory there, we should get you in the Olympics.
Oh look the lanyard wearer comes out to defend the other lanyard wearers. Time to sack a million public sector wasters and save £60bn in spending. Get rid of all the losers and leeches stealing a living from hardworking taxpayers.
You have just claimed a large number of NHS managers are corrupt, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. That’s a they’re-eating-the-cats level of prejudiced mendacity. NHS managers are hardworking people too and your inability to understand what they do is no reason for such a vicious attack.
Also coming out with tinfoil hat shite like lanyards.
And discouraging people from taking responsibility for not only their health but that of others.
Net immigration has fallen very substantially in the last two years, yet British Future in polling from this summer note that “a worrying 1 in 5 people (21%) simply refused to believe the numbers had fallen by that much. […] 37% of Reform UK voters refused to believe that immigration had fallen, even when presented with the numbers from the Office for National Statistics.”
Which is because the total number of immigrants has increased.
A reduction in net immigration is still an ongoing net immigration not a net emigration.
A reduction in net immigration is, yes, still ongoing net immigration. But the point here is that 21% of people refused to believe the numbers presented to them were correct. This isn’t just people thinking immigration is higher than it is, or people thinking immigration is still too high, it is people being presented with reliable figures and saying they are a lie.
In partial answer to the question about Chromebooks: I found mine much easier to use after I plugged in a standard Windows mouse. If there is a Chromebook with a good keyboard, I haven't encountered it -- but I haven't done an extensive search, either.
If possible, be sure to get one with extra USB ports.
I’m on the Windrush line. Everyone, and I mean everyone (including me) is staring at a phone. And not just as a means of ignoring the man walking through the carriage raising money for shelter. It’s a sort of epiphany: these things are deeply, deeply problematic. It goes well beyond children and social media.
If a politician just asked us: “If I promised to legislate against screen time, for your own collective good, would you support me?” what would public opinion say?
Smartphones have taken the (physical) place that cigarettes used to have in people's lives. At one time most people used to have a cigarette in their hand no matter what they were doing, now it's phones.
Transplant smartphones back a few decades, and I can imagine the tobacco industry sponsoring research to prove that, and hence that cigarettes are a public health benefit.
Net immigration has fallen very substantially in the last two years, yet British Future in polling from this summer note that “a worrying 1 in 5 people (21%) simply refused to believe the numbers had fallen by that much. […] 37% of Reform UK voters refused to believe that immigration had fallen, even when presented with the numbers from the Office for National Statistics.”
Which is because the total number of immigrants has increased.
A reduction in net immigration is still an ongoing net immigration not a net emigration.
People won't be happy until net migration is back to the tens of thousands that it always used to be in recent times until 1997.
People didn't seem to mind for quite some time when it was very high - they didn't even punish governments for it for some time - so it would not surprise me if even when it does go back to tens of thousands that people don't get mollified or reward the government for it.
In partial answer to the question about Chromebooks: I found mine much easier to use after I plugged in a standard Windows mouse. If there is a Chromebook with a good keyboard, I haven't encountered it -- but I haven't done an extensive search, either.
If possible, be sure to get one with extra USB ports.
I concur. The keys tended to fall off with use too. Or maybe that was my kids.
My best mate today on the idea of masks making a comeback "they can get absolutely fucked" have to agree with him.
If the NHS can't handle a few extra sick people then maybe sack a few thousand managers and hire extra nurses and doctors.
Oh and the most common thing I hear from very senior clinical staff in NHS trusts about the "extra money" from the government is "if there's extra money then we're not seeing any of it" it's almost as if the corrupt managers are just giving their mates a bunch of non jobs and stealing the extra funds for themselves.
On the subject of the BBC, Dimbleby Major isn’t pulling many punches in his documentary series What’s the Monarchy For? Far less emollient to Charles and his brood than his wee brother.
DD looking somewhat etiolated, and I’m a bit worried about that dark blemish on his lip.
And I have just submitted my first ever complaint to the BBC as a licence fee payer in response and I suspect thousands more will be doing so.
Appalling republican bias from near beginning to end with barely lip service given to any pro monarchy arguments, a disgraceful piece of pro republic propaganda. I do NOT pay my licence fee for this!!
I suggest all PB monarchists do likewise, we cannot let the BBC get away with this! David Dimbleby's father will be ashamed of him and turning in his grave tonight!
I'm a monarchist, and it's a position that would need to be defended as republicanism has a compelling case and so we'll default to it in time without defending a system which, I think, works pretty well, but I'm not about to lose my rag and start putting in complaints. Especially when the likes iof Republic typically have moaned about the opposite for yonks.
Net immigration has fallen very substantially in the last two years, yet British Future in polling from this summer note that “a worrying 1 in 5 people (21%) simply refused to believe the numbers had fallen by that much. […] 37% of Reform UK voters refused to believe that immigration had fallen, even when presented with the numbers from the Office for National Statistics.”
Which is because the total number of immigrants has increased.
A reduction in net immigration is still an ongoing net immigration not a net emigration.
Even net zero migration can mean dramatic demographic change.
Indeed.
A million Britons emigrating alongside a million foreigners immigrating is net zero migration but a huge demographic change.
And then you can start splitting immigrant communities into their own ethnic and religious demographics.
Net immigration has fallen very substantially in the last two years, yet British Future in polling from this summer note that “a worrying 1 in 5 people (21%) simply refused to believe the numbers had fallen by that much. […] 37% of Reform UK voters refused to believe that immigration had fallen, even when presented with the numbers from the Office for National Statistics.”
Which is because the total number of immigrants has increased.
A reduction in net immigration is still an ongoing net immigration not a net emigration.
People won't be happy until net migration is back to the tens of thousands that it always used to be in recent times until 1997.
People didn't seem to mind for quite some time when it was very high - they didn't even punish governments for it for some time - so it would not surprise me if even when it does go back to tens of thousands that people don't get mollified or reward the government for it.
And in the 1970s, people weren't happy about immigration, even though there was net emigration.
Some things are visceral, not rational. That doesn't make them wrong, but it constrains the sorts of debate that can be had about them.
My best mate today on the idea of masks making a comeback "they can get absolutely fucked" have to agree with him.
If the NHS can't handle a few extra sick people then maybe sack a few thousand managers and hire extra nurses and doctors.
Oh and the most common thing I hear from very senior clinical staff in NHS trusts about the "extra money" from the government is "if there's extra money then we're not seeing any of it" it's almost as if the corrupt managers are just giving their mates a bunch of non jobs and stealing the extra funds for themselves.
Masks were seemingly quite effective against flu during the Covid pandemic. I think I can tolerate a modest amount of mask-wearing for the worst flu season every 5-10 years.
But if we'd spent the last few years improving ventilation and filtration in public buildings and transport, then it could have been a moot question. The current wave of influenza infections might have been much reduced.
The story I've seen is that the NHS wants masks in hospitals.
I'd add that if anyone comes into my workplace with a respiratory virus, and isn't wearing a mask, then they can "get absolutely fucked", as Max's mate charmingly puts it.
There's otherwise no need, unless you're immune compromised.
I may watch the second episode of “The War Between the Land and the Sea” first, however...
I've seen it. It was better than the first. But I still think Russel Tovey's acting choices are a bit off. And the yoof are a bit pissed off by Kate and Captain Sexy getting it on.
The proportion is increasing in an almost straight line by between 2% and 3% per year.
At this rate it will be over 50% in 3 years time.
When it goes over 50%, can they still be described as "special"? Surely at that point they become the norm and every child should then receive the same benefits? Why should a minority then get penalised?
I think a lot of it is behavioural. Teachers in our enlightened age can no longer control their classes. Disruptors must have "special needs". Also you get more resources if you have special needs kids. The system can be gamed - saw this happen in the primary my kids went to (in Scotland) some years ago.
My best mate today on the idea of masks making a comeback "they can get absolutely fucked" have to agree with him.
If the NHS can't handle a few extra sick people then maybe sack a few thousand managers and hire extra nurses and doctors.
Oh and the most common thing I hear from very senior clinical staff in NHS trusts about the "extra money" from the government is "if there's extra money then we're not seeing any of it" it's almost as if the corrupt managers are just giving their mates a bunch of non jobs and stealing the extra funds for themselves.
The speed with which you jumped to a conspiracy theory there, we should get you in the Olympics.
Oh look the lanyard wearer comes out to defend the other lanyard wearers. Time to sack a million public sector wasters and save £60bn in spending. Get rid of all the losers and leeches stealing a living from hardworking taxpayers.
Korea secures landmark Latin American deal to sell 195 combat vehicles to Peru
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/southkorea/defense/20251210/korea-secures-landmark-latin-american-deal-to-sell-195-combat-vehicles-to-peru ..According to the presidential office, the deal covers Peru’s plan to acquire 54 K2 main battle tanks and 141 wheeled armored vehicles, a package to be produced through cooperation between Korean defense companies and Peru’s state-owned manufacturer. Officials said the arrangement is designed not only to modernize the Peruvian Army but also to strengthen long-term industrial ties between the two countries.
Officials noted that the deal is especially significant because it sets out a clear road map for concluding the implementation contracts by next year. Once those agreements are finalized, the K2 tank will make its debut in the Latin American market, extending its reach beyond Europe for the first time...
We'd probably have saved the odd billion if we'd built the K2 under license, rather than trying to kludge a new turret onto old Challenger hulls, which appear to suffer from the Nimrod (no two examples have the same dimensions) problem.
My best mate today on the idea of masks making a comeback "they can get absolutely fucked" have to agree with him.
If the NHS can't handle a few extra sick people then maybe sack a few thousand managers and hire extra nurses and doctors.
Oh and the most common thing I hear from very senior clinical staff in NHS trusts about the "extra money" from the government is "if there's extra money then we're not seeing any of it" it's almost as if the corrupt managers are just giving their mates a bunch of non jobs and stealing the extra funds for themselves.
The speed with which you jumped to a conspiracy theory there, we should get you in the Olympics.
Oh look the lanyard wearer comes out to defend the other lanyard wearers. Time to sack a million public sector wasters and save £60bn in spending. Get rid of all the losers and leeches stealing a living from hardworking taxpayers.
My best mate today on the idea of masks making a comeback "they can get absolutely fucked" have to agree with him.
If the NHS can't handle a few extra sick people then maybe sack a few thousand managers and hire extra nurses and doctors.
Oh and the most common thing I hear from very senior clinical staff in NHS trusts about the "extra money" from the government is "if there's extra money then we're not seeing any of it" it's almost as if the corrupt managers are just giving their mates a bunch of non jobs and stealing the extra funds for themselves.
The speed with which you jumped to a conspiracy theory there, we should get you in the Olympics.
Oh look the lanyard wearer comes out to defend the other lanyard wearers. Time to sack a million public sector wasters and save £60bn in spending. Get rid of all the losers and leeches stealing a living from hardworking taxpayers.
What is a lanyard wearer?
Someone that works in an environment where building security and possibly safeguarding, have relevance, generally.
Reform don’t do themselves any favours with posts like Zia Yusuf’s here. I don’t get why politicians say things which are so easily rebutted; Farage is in favour of accepting the Afghan interpreters, they’re not small boat people, it undermines their whole agenda to just attack everything
You were standing right next to Farage when he confirmed the Afghan resettlement scheme will continue. The deception is already so evident with these c****
They might become profitable before they deliver a single supersonic business jet.
A natural gas turbine is almost identical to a jet engine, so the symergies are pretty obvious. (It's also interesting that GE is in both the natural gas turbines and the jet engines businesses, while Rolls Royce is not.)
They might become profitable before they deliver a single supersonic business jet.
A natural gas turbine is almost identical to a jet engine, so the symergies are pretty obvious. (It's also interesting that GE is in both the natural gas turbines and the jet engines businesses, while Rolls Royce is not.)
Reform don’t do themselves any favours with posts like Zia Yusuf’s here. I don’t get why politicians say things which are so easily rebutted; Farage is in favour of accepting the Afghan interpreters, they’re not small boat people, it undermines their whole agenda to just attack everything
You were standing right next to Farage when he confirmed the Afghan resettlement scheme will continue. The deception is already so evident with these c****
That clip highlights two things: Farage fundamentally still has the instincts of the liberal British establishment, and events continue to push him towards a harder line on immigration.
Since that clip we've gone from Starmer calling it far-right to question the role of the ECHR to questioning its role himself.
My best mate today on the idea of masks making a comeback "they can get absolutely fucked" have to agree with him.
If the NHS can't handle a few extra sick people then maybe sack a few thousand managers and hire extra nurses and doctors.
Oh and the most common thing I hear from very senior clinical staff in NHS trusts about the "extra money" from the government is "if there's extra money then we're not seeing any of it" it's almost as if the corrupt managers are just giving their mates a bunch of non jobs and stealing the extra funds for themselves.
I agree. If you've got flu, the place to be is in bed.
Reform don’t do themselves any favours with posts like Zia Yusuf’s here. I don’t get why politicians say things which are so easily rebutted; Farage is in favour of accepting the Afghan interpreters, they’re not small boat people, it undermines their whole agenda to just attack everything
You were standing right next to Farage when he confirmed the Afghan resettlement scheme will continue. The deception is already so evident with these c****
That clip highlights two things: Farage fundamentally still has the instincts of the liberal British establishment, and events continue to push him towards a harder line on immigration.
Since that clip we've gone from Starmer calling it far-right to question the role of the ECHR to questioning its role himself.
But surely most people don’t mind giving asylum to people that have helped us in a war effort? The small boat problem is absolute insanity, but that doesn’t mean genuine asylum seekers should be banned.
Anyway, my point was that Yusuf is attacking Philp for saying something Farage agreed with, which I think is a mistake
"The people who govern us have no conception of national culture or identity outside of a veneer of sentimentality and a code of liberal “values” with little relationship to our own political tradition. Their morality is niceness and their religion is individualism. The incredible gift of a culture defined by peaceable cooperation, and not riven by ethnic or religious conflict, is not seen as the fragile inheritance of generations of national effort, but as the product of the human rights and equalities laws of the past decades. The fact — the incontrovertible fact — that dizzyingly rapid migration undermines this situation is simply outside of their imaginative universe."
Zelenskyy, clearly irritated by Trump’s intervention, said that “this is a question for the people of Ukraine, not people from other states, with all due respect to our partners”.
However, he promised to explore avenues for holding a vote in the coming months. “Since this question is raised today by the president of the United States of America, our partners, I will answer very briefly: look, I am ready for elections,” Zelenskyy said on Tuesday evening.
“Moreover, I am asking … the United States to help me, possibly together with European colleagues, to ensure security for the elections, and then in the next 60 to 90 days Ukraine will be ready to hold the elections. I personally have the will and readiness for this,” he added...
The proportion is increasing in an almost straight line by between 2% and 3% per year.
At this rate it will be over 50% in 3 years time.
When it goes over 50%, can they still be described as "special"? Surely at that point they become the norm and every child should then receive the same benefits? Why should a minority then get penalised?
More likely is that the special needs majority get even more as they have become a voting block which must be pandered to.
Leading to a feedback loop of everyone claiming to have special needs and the system collapsing.
Reportedly there's an unpublished version of the US Nat Sec document.
This report says there is a longer internal version of the NSS that gets into more detail on weakening the EU. It also proposes a new grouping of countries called the C5— US, China, Russia, Japan, and India— that’s not hemmed in by G7 rules. No Euro representation unless you count Russia. https://x.com/thomaswright08/status/1998499602220425474
If the US administration were run by Russian agents, it could not be doing a better job.
Reportedly there's an unpublished version of the US Nat Sec document.
This report says there is a longer internal version of the NSS that gets into more detail on weakening the EU. It also proposes a new grouping of countries called the C5— US, China, Russia, Japan, and India— that’s not hemmed in by G7 rules. No Euro representation unless you count Russia. https://x.com/thomaswright08/status/1998499602220425474
If the US administration were run by Russian agents, it could not be doing a better job.
(I hope this report is untrue. We'll see.)
I note that the UK is excluded, and Russia (with an economy a fraction the size of the UK) is excluded.
Fuck 'em.
The best way to make sure that this withers on the vine is for the Europeans (including the UK) Ukraine, and to ensure that Russia is defeated.
My best mate today on the idea of masks making a comeback "they can get absolutely fucked" have to agree with him.
If the NHS can't handle a few extra sick people then maybe sack a few thousand managers and hire extra nurses and doctors.
Oh and the most common thing I hear from very senior clinical staff in NHS trusts about the "extra money" from the government is "if there's extra money then we're not seeing any of it" it's almost as if the corrupt managers are just giving their mates a bunch of non jobs and stealing the extra funds for themselves.
I recently did a check on my salary (soz - public sector leech) and found to just be equivalent to my ~2010 salary I'd need a 17.5% pay rise. Current offer is 1.4%. My 'big boss' was on about 6x the average salary when I started - now they are on 9x. It's hard not to get a little jaded.
Reform don’t do themselves any favours with posts like Zia Yusuf’s here. I don’t get why politicians say things which are so easily rebutted; Farage is in favour of accepting the Afghan interpreters, they’re not small boat people, it undermines their whole agenda to just attack everything
You were standing right next to Farage when he confirmed the Afghan resettlement scheme will continue. The deception is already so evident with these c****
That clip highlights two things: Farage fundamentally still has the instincts of the liberal British establishment, and events continue to push him towards a harder line on immigration.
Since that clip we've gone from Starmer calling it far-right to question the role of the ECHR to questioning its role himself.
But surely most people don’t mind giving asylum to people that have helped us in a war effort? The small boat problem is absolute insanity, but that doesn’t mean genuine asylum seekers should be banned.
Anyway, my point was that Yusuf is attacking Philp for saying something Farage agreed with, which I think is a mistake
Wrong way round.
Afghans weren't helping Britain.
Britain was helping Afghans.
And it turned out that the Afghans actually preferred the side they were supposed to fighting against.
Reform don’t do themselves any favours with posts like Zia Yusuf’s here. I don’t get why politicians say things which are so easily rebutted; Farage is in favour of accepting the Afghan interpreters, they’re not small boat people, it undermines their whole agenda to just attack everything
You were standing right next to Farage when he confirmed the Afghan resettlement scheme will continue. The deception is already so evident with these c****
That clip highlights two things: Farage fundamentally still has the instincts of the liberal British establishment, and events continue to push him towards a harder line on immigration.
Since that clip we've gone from Starmer calling it far-right to question the role of the ECHR to questioning its role himself.
But surely most people don’t mind giving asylum to people that have helped us in a war effort? The small boat problem is absolute insanity, but that doesn’t mean genuine asylum seekers should be banned.
Anyway, my point was that Yusuf is attacking Philp for saying something Farage agreed with, which I think is a mistake
Wrong way round.
Afghans weren't helping Britain.
Britain was helping Afghans.
And it turned out that the Afghans actually preferred the side they were supposed to fighting against.
Oh is that right? So the interpreters weren’t really deserving of asylum? I don’t know, I just assumed they were good guys
Reportedly there's an unpublished version of the US Nat Sec document.
This report says there is a longer internal version of the NSS that gets into more detail on weakening the EU. It also proposes a new grouping of countries called the C5— US, China, Russia, Japan, and India— that’s not hemmed in by G7 rules. No Euro representation unless you count Russia. https://x.com/thomaswright08/status/1998499602220425474
If the US administration were run by Russian agents, it could not be doing a better job.
(I hope this report is untrue. We'll see.)
I note that the UK is excluded, and Russia (with an economy a fraction the size of the UK) is excluded.
Fuck 'em.
The best way to make sure that this withers on the vine is for the Europeans (including the UK) Ukraine, and to ensure that Russia is defeated.
With the exception of Japan (perhaps US policy makers still see Japan as a US puppet), it's basically the four largest dictatorships in the world at the moment.
Reform don’t do themselves any favours with posts like Zia Yusuf’s here. I don’t get why politicians say things which are so easily rebutted; Farage is in favour of accepting the Afghan interpreters, they’re not small boat people, it undermines their whole agenda to just attack everything
You were standing right next to Farage when he confirmed the Afghan resettlement scheme will continue. The deception is already so evident with these c****
That clip highlights two things: Farage fundamentally still has the instincts of the liberal British establishment, and events continue to push him towards a harder line on immigration.
Since that clip we've gone from Starmer calling it far-right to question the role of the ECHR to questioning its role himself.
But surely most people don’t mind giving asylum to people that have helped us in a war effort? The small boat problem is absolute insanity, but that doesn’t mean genuine asylum seekers should be banned.
Anyway, my point was that Yusuf is attacking Philp for saying something Farage agreed with, which I think is a mistake
No because Farage can always say that he never imagaing that they were bringing over unvetted people who posed a risk to us (even if that was obvious from the beginning).
On the subject of the BBC, Dimbleby Major isn’t pulling many punches in his documentary series What’s the Monarchy For? Far less emollient to Charles and his brood than his wee brother.
DD looking somewhat etiolated, and I’m a bit worried about that dark blemish on his lip.
And I have just submitted my first ever complaint to the BBC as a licence fee payer in response and I suspect thousands more will be doing so.
Appalling republican bias from near beginning to end with barely lip service given to any pro monarchy arguments, a disgraceful piece of pro republic propaganda. I do NOT pay my licence fee for this!!
I suggest all PB monarchists do likewise, we cannot let the BBC get away with this! David Dimbleby's father will be ashamed of him and turning in his grave tonight!
I'm a monarchist, and it's a position that would need to be defended as republicanism has a compelling case and so we'll default to it in time without defending a system which, I think, works pretty well, but I'm not about to lose my rag and start putting in complaints. Especially when the likes iof Republic typically have moaned about the opposite for yonks.
It was an entirely republican argument dominated programme virtually, I don't want a politician head of state either and the BBC must do better than this
Reportedly there's an unpublished version of the US Nat Sec document.
This report says there is a longer internal version of the NSS that gets into more detail on weakening the EU. It also proposes a new grouping of countries called the C5— US, China, Russia, Japan, and India— that’s not hemmed in by G7 rules. No Euro representation unless you count Russia. https://x.com/thomaswright08/status/1998499602220425474
If the US administration were run by Russian agents, it could not be doing a better job.
(I hope this report is untrue. We'll see.)
I note that the UK is excluded, and Russia (with an economy a fraction the size of the UK) is excluded.
Fuck 'em.
The best way to make sure that this withers on the vine is for the Europeans (including the UK) Ukraine, and to ensure that Russia is defeated.
That would require European leaders to show some leadership.
And you're never going to get that from Starmer, Macron and Tusk.
Their successors will likely be even less willing to stand up to Trump or Putin.
Reportedly there's an unpublished version of the US Nat Sec document.
This report says there is a longer internal version of the NSS that gets into more detail on weakening the EU. It also proposes a new grouping of countries called the C5— US, China, Russia, Japan, and India— that’s not hemmed in by G7 rules. No Euro representation unless you count Russia. https://x.com/thomaswright08/status/1998499602220425474
If the US administration were run by Russian agents, it could not be doing a better job.
(I hope this report is untrue. We'll see.)
I note that the UK is excluded, and Russia (with an economy a fraction the size of the UK) is excluded.
Fuck 'em.
The best way to make sure that this withers on the vine is for the Europeans (including the UK) Ukraine, and to ensure that Russia is defeated.
But how would you define defeat? It would have to mean either ejecting them entirely from Ukraine and Crimea, or the downfall of Putin and his replacement with a new leader who is willing to withdraw. Neither of those things currently looks achievable.
Reform don’t do themselves any favours with posts like Zia Yusuf’s here. I don’t get why politicians say things which are so easily rebutted; Farage is in favour of accepting the Afghan interpreters, they’re not small boat people, it undermines their whole agenda to just attack everything
You were standing right next to Farage when he confirmed the Afghan resettlement scheme will continue. The deception is already so evident with these c****
That clip highlights two things: Farage fundamentally still has the instincts of the liberal British establishment, and events continue to push him towards a harder line on immigration.
Since that clip we've gone from Starmer calling it far-right to question the role of the ECHR to questioning its role himself.
But surely most people don’t mind giving asylum to people that have helped us in a war effort? The small boat problem is absolute insanity, but that doesn’t mean genuine asylum seekers should be banned.
Anyway, my point was that Yusuf is attacking Philp for saying something Farage agreed with, which I think is a mistake
Wrong way round.
Afghans weren't helping Britain.
Britain was helping Afghans.
And it turned out that the Afghans actually preferred the side they were supposed to fighting against.
Oh is that right? So the interpreters weren’t really deserving of asylum? I don’t know, I just assumed they were good guys
You might not have noticed at the time but back in 2021 the Afghan military either defected to the Taliban or deserted with hardly a shot being fired.
The same Afghan military which the western world had been funding, training and arming for nearly twenty years.
The subsequent babbling about helping Afghan interpreters and Afghan special forces is merely because people aren't willing to admit that it had been a total waste of British lives and money.
If anybody wants to remember what American leadership of the free world was like at its best, roughly from 1941 to 1992, I recommend reading Roosevelt's speech declaring an Unlimited National Emergency in May 1941 to mobilise American industry to outbuild the Nazis and the Japanese. The triumphs of 1944 and 1945 would have been very much more difficult to achieve had that effort been delayed or not undertaken at all.
Reform don’t do themselves any favours with posts like Zia Yusuf’s here. I don’t get why politicians say things which are so easily rebutted; Farage is in favour of accepting the Afghan interpreters, they’re not small boat people, it undermines their whole agenda to just attack everything
You were standing right next to Farage when he confirmed the Afghan resettlement scheme will continue. The deception is already so evident with these c****
That clip highlights two things: Farage fundamentally still has the instincts of the liberal British establishment, and events continue to push him towards a harder line on immigration.
Since that clip we've gone from Starmer calling it far-right to question the role of the ECHR to questioning its role himself.
But surely most people don’t mind giving asylum to people that have helped us in a war effort? The small boat problem is absolute insanity, but that doesn’t mean genuine asylum seekers should be banned.
Anyway, my point was that Yusuf is attacking Philp for saying something Farage agreed with, which I think is a mistake
Wrong way round.
Afghans weren't helping Britain.
Britain was helping Afghans.
And it turned out that the Afghans actually preferred the side they were supposed to fighting against.
Oh is that right? So the interpreters weren’t really deserving of asylum? I don’t know, I just assumed they were good guys
You might not have noticed at the time but back in 2021 the Afghan military either defected to the Taliban or deserted with hardly a shot being fired.
The same Afghan military which the western world had been funding, training and arming for nearly twenty years.
The subsequent babbling about helping Afghan interpreters and Afghan special forces is merely because people aren't willing to admit that it had been a total waste of British lives and money.
To put the collapse of the Afghan government into context.
It took over two years from the withdrawal of the US military from South Vietnam for the government to be toppled and even then that took an outside invasion plus the stopping of US funding.
In Afghanistan the government collapsed before the US was able to withdraw its military and it collapsed to some blokes in pick up trucks armed mostly with beards.
Zelenskyy, clearly irritated by Trump’s intervention, said that “this is a question for the people of Ukraine, not people from other states, with all due respect to our partners”.
However, he promised to explore avenues for holding a vote in the coming months. “Since this question is raised today by the president of the United States of America, our partners, I will answer very briefly: look, I am ready for elections,” Zelenskyy said on Tuesday evening.
“Moreover, I am asking … the United States to help me, possibly together with European colleagues, to ensure security for the elections, and then in the next 60 to 90 days Ukraine will be ready to hold the elections. I personally have the will and readiness for this,” he added...
You are far too optimistic.
Elections are held. Zelenskky wins. Trump calls the elections rigged.
Zelenskyy, clearly irritated by Trump’s intervention, said that “this is a question for the people of Ukraine, not people from other states, with all due respect to our partners”.
However, he promised to explore avenues for holding a vote in the coming months. “Since this question is raised today by the president of the United States of America, our partners, I will answer very briefly: look, I am ready for elections,” Zelenskyy said on Tuesday evening.
“Moreover, I am asking … the United States to help me, possibly together with European colleagues, to ensure security for the elections, and then in the next 60 to 90 days Ukraine will be ready to hold the elections. I personally have the will and readiness for this,” he added...
You are far too optimistic.
Elections are held. Zelenskky wins. Trump calls the elections rigged.
You are far too optimistic.
Elections are held. They are rigged. Zelenskyy loses and a Russian puppet state follows.
Getting increasingly annoyed by YouTubers who put the word "tragic" in the title of videos about famous people just in order to get clicks, even when there's nothing remotely tragic about the person in question's life. This is the sort of thing that happens when you have few regulations and a total free-for-all.
Reportedly there's an unpublished version of the US Nat Sec document.
This report says there is a longer internal version of the NSS that gets into more detail on weakening the EU. It also proposes a new grouping of countries called the C5— US, China, Russia, Japan, and India— that’s not hemmed in by G7 rules. No Euro representation unless you count Russia. https://x.com/thomaswright08/status/1998499602220425474
If the US administration were run by Russian agents, it could not be doing a better job.
(I hope this report is untrue. We'll see.)
I note that the UK is excluded, and Russia (with an economy a fraction the size of the UK) is excluded.
Fuck 'em.
The best way to make sure that this withers on the vine is for the Europeans (including the UK) Ukraine, and to ensure that Russia is defeated.
But how would you define defeat? It would have to mean either ejecting them entirely from Ukraine and Crimea, or the downfall of Putin and his replacement with a new leader who is willing to withdraw. Neither of those things currently looks achievable.
The massacre of Russians currently happening in the Donbas suggests you may be wrong. Putin is in an extremely fragile situation.
However, it seems many will finally concede an economic cost, even if they pooh-pooh academic attempts to quantify it.
This is important though. Because an unwillingness to concede any cost prohibits a frank appraisal of how to move forward from here. Denialism has been a major block on British prosperity, as much as the actual economic deficiencies that are often rehearsed on here.
You’ve just made this up. Plenty of Brexiteers - @rcs1000 a few posts ago - have said there’s been a cost.
Your denial of the facts prohibits a frank appraisal of how to move forward
FPT - I would favour imperial federation of the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
Strangely, I can see a world where South Africa draws closer too, if we get the geopolitics right.
I went there recently and was struck by how much more British it was than I was expecting, despite not really being British at all.
Perhaps Durban and the Cape aren't representative but it didn't feel foreign.
As a NZer, I have no political opposition to this, although the word “imperial” kind of kills it at birth.
Rather, as I said last thread, adding Australia and NZ doesn’t follow geopolitical logic.
UK-C could be a very powerful player in the North Atlantic and Arctic fields, and ironically a more valuable partner for both the U.S. and EU thereby.
The trick is how to move practically toward a UK-C. Monnet had his coal and steel community - we need an analagous projet.
Culturally the UK is closer to New Zealand than Canada. Having a block with Canada, Australia and New Zealand in it along with the UK would cover Europe, North America and a gateway to Asia
Closest culturally to the UK in my opinion:
Ireland Australia NZ Norway Denmark Canada
I’ve not visited Aus/NZ, but of the rest, I’d say…
Ireland Canada - big gap - Denmark Norway
From who I’ve worked with or been friends with,
Aussies Kiwis Irish Danes Canadians Americans Dutch White South Africans Swedes Norwegians Finns Swiss (German) German Swiss (French) Flemish Belgian French French Belgian
Not enough experience of enough people from other countries to properly judge.
I think that language barriers tend to obscure cultural similarities. When I was an exchange student in Germany (for a year, a long time ago), it was interesting that the students began by associating according to language but later by continent. It seemed to me that the superficial similarities between Brits and Americans in particular masked deeply different worldviews which became more apparent over the course of the year. In the end, the Americans, with just a few exceptions, pretty much stuck with their own countryfolk while the Brits got on better with their fellow Europeans (and, slightly strangely, the Japanese).
I spent a year training with other branches of an American bank in New York. The Brits and Japanese ended up forming quite a tight friendship group as did Italians and South Americans. The Americans did their own thing, except Afrocan Americans who tended to avoid the frat boy crowd, and with a couple of exceptions, the Frenc did their own thing. The others mostly went for the UK/Jap group or the Latin group. Few went for the US groups.
I see Badenoch has listed Brexit as one of the negative economic shocks experienced by the British economy in recent times.
That will come as a surprise to the “PB Tories” on here, who represent perhaps the final platoons of Brexity Hiroo Onodas, or Comical Alis.
No, it won’t. Of course it came at a near term cost (but also opened up a potential future upside with a capable government). It’s just that some people believe that’s all that matters (hence the tedious rendition of “Brexit is bad” related ad nauseum) and others believe that the political freedoms were worth the cost
Your compadres refuse to concede any cost. That’s the issue.
I’m glad you do.
I don't know which compadres you refer to, but I don't know any PB Brexit supporters who don't acknowledge a cost. Of course there was a cost. There was moderate to significant trade disruption with the EU, and British people lost some of their privileges in getting around the Continent easily.
By contrast, many, I would say a plurality of remoaners here cannot being themselves to acknowledge equally true benefits, not future aspirations, just basic prosaic facts like: 1. We no longer pay significant sums into the EU's coffers 2. We are no longer liable for additional EU debt
There are plenty more, but let's start with those two basic facts. When ScottP, Foxy, FF43, Cicero, Roger and *many* more, have the ability to acknowledge those simple facts without requiring medical assistance, come back to us for an informed debate. If anything, I'd say the less foamy contributors on the remain side here are in the minority.
Of course we no longer pay into the EU budget. But a lot of that was to cover the costs of regulatory functions that we are now responsible for ourselves at greater cost. Hence the growth in the civil service after Brexit.
The entire staff of the European Commission is only about 30,000 so even if we replicated their entire operation, it would only account for a fraction of the increase in the headcount of the civil service, which in any case takes us back to below the level of the Blair years.
Although that chart does raise the question about what was cut between 2004 and 2015?
I think it was a lot of functions that were spun off to government agencies that technically weren’t counted in the numbers
I see Badenoch has listed Brexit as one of the negative economic shocks experienced by the British economy in recent times.
That will come as a surprise to the “PB Tories” on here, who represent perhaps the final platoons of Brexity Hiroo Onodas, or Comical Alis.
No, it won’t. Of course it came at a near term cost (but also opened up a potential future upside with a capable government). It’s just that some people believe that’s all that matters (hence the tedious rendition of “Brexit is bad” related ad nauseum) and others believe that the political freedoms were worth the cost
Your compadres refuse to concede any cost. That’s the issue.
I’m glad you do.
If you are referring to the discussion yesterday that was about @Benpointer’s selective use of statistics. You can’t prove a counter factual. Personally I suspect that the economic effect was minimal - the main result was that the government was tied up doing Brexit stuff.
Some may see the fact that government didn’t implement any clever initiatives as being a positive…
The best arguments for leaving the EU were (and are) non-economic. It should enhance democratic accountability by meaning the people we elect are the ones making the decisions.
Of course, this cuts both ways...
If the people we elect should be the ones making the decisions why did we have a referendum?
Because the elected politicians have the freedom to act within certain limits and beyond that they need the blessing of their bosses
It's hard to keep up, is the covid lab leak theory a conspiracy again?
The only correct answer, bar from a handful of staff at the lab, is don't know. Both true and false will have been spun so many times by various intelligence agencies to a level at which even they don't know the answer, let alone us plebs.
COVID origins is different from the others because of the big gaps in knowledge. So if you are evidence led it is really an assessment of probabilities.
Personally I would say either Open Mind or Market are reasonable assessments on the evidence. Personally I would call it for Market because there is quite strong evidence for it, but this is not a situation where we must make decisions off the back of incomplete knowledge so we could decide to keep it completely open.
I think what the covid origins tale tells us is just how flagrantly we will be lied to for what others think are a good reason. Strip out the nuance and present confidently that which we barely know. Covid went a stage further and denounced those who had different views on the origins, wearing of masks, vaccines.
It's not a conspiracy to say that governments and scientists will bare face lie to us when it is convenient to do so.
Remember how crazy those who shouted the alarm at the rolling out of mrna vaccines, and the emergency use authorisation?
We have subsequently found the vaccine has had some dramatic and unexpected improvements in cancer survival periods. In this case we saw a positive and entirely unrelated side effect. But it could have just as easily been a catastrophic negative side effect.
Er.. nope
Because the vaccines were tested to detect *negative effects* just as every other vaccine is tested.
They compressed the schedule by doing stuff in parallel and not leaving gaps between steps. But they didn’t leave anything out.
They managed to miss out the component to stop transmission of the virus though..which is pretty much the point of a medication labelled a "vaccine"..💩
Good to see that complete ignorance of vaccines and what they do is still out there.
No vaccine ever produced is 100% effective at preventing illness or preventing transmission. Nor has anyone claimed that one is, who has anything approaching a clue.
80% beats 0%, every single time. Even 40% does.
I find it staggering how many people fail to understand that the world is full of slopes rather than steps.
The UK tax system being the exception that proves the rule…
I’m on the Windrush line. Everyone, and I mean everyone (including me) is staring at a phone. And not just as a means of ignoring the man walking through the carriage raising money for shelter. It’s a sort of epiphany: these things are deeply, deeply problematic. It goes well beyond children and social media.
If a politician just asked us: “If I promised to legislate against screen time, for your own collective good, would you support me?” what would public opinion say?
Smartphones have taken the (physical) place that cigarettes used to have in people's lives. At one time most people used to have a cigarette in their hand no matter what they were doing, now it's phones.
Reportedly there's an unpublished version of the US Nat Sec document.
This report says there is a longer internal version of the NSS that gets into more detail on weakening the EU. It also proposes a new grouping of countries called the C5— US, China, Russia, Japan, and India— that’s not hemmed in by G7 rules. No Euro representation unless you count Russia. https://x.com/thomaswright08/status/1998499602220425474
If the US administration were run by Russian agents, it could not be doing a better job.
(I hope this report is untrue. We'll see.)
I note that the UK is excluded, and Russia (with an economy a fraction the size of the UK) is excluded.
Fuck 'em.
The best way to make sure that this withers on the vine is for the Europeans (including the UK) Ukraine, and to ensure that Russia is defeated.
That would require European leaders to show some leadership.
And you're never going to get that from Starmer, Macron and Tusk.
Their successors will likely be even less willing to stand up to Trump or Putin.
This is balls. I hold no brief for Starmer, but the European leaders are absolutely working for a deal to get Ukraine what it needs, while trying to manage the senile old fascist in the White House. They are quite deliberately not grandstanding because that could provoke the cheeto faced rapist into some new outrage. It is necessarily a delicate and slow process, but the UK got 8 billion to Kyiv as a temporary measure and there is more beyond. The Europeans know that stopping Putin is existential but they have to work very carefully. Trump's dementia will get more insane before he is impeached from office after the Republicans are crushed at the midterms... we have another year if this shit to deal with, at least. Patience is needed.
Comments
Ireland
Canada
- big gap -
Denmark
Norway
Aussies
Kiwis
Irish
Danes
Canadians
Americans
Dutch
White South Africans
Swedes
Norwegians
Finns
Swiss (German)
German
Swiss (French)
Flemish Belgian
French
French Belgian
Not enough experience of enough people from other countries to properly judge.
But if we'd spent the last few years improving ventilation and filtration in public buildings and transport, then it could have been a moot question. The current wave of influenza infections might have been much reduced.
https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/french-power-supply-outpacing-demand-electrification-lags-grid-operator-says-2025-12-09/
Appalling republican bias from near beginning to end with barely lip service given to any pro monarchy arguments, a disgraceful piece of pro republic propaganda. I do NOT pay my licence fee for this!!
I suggest all PB monarchists do likewise, we cannot let the BBC get away with this! David Dimbleby's father will be ashamed of him and turning in his grave tonight!
If the overcapacity was because new electricity sources were being installed faster than expected then that would be good news.
Which is because the total number of immigrants has increased.
A reduction in net immigration is still an ongoing net immigration not a net emigration.
If a politician just asked us: “If I promised to legislate against screen time, for your own collective good, would you support me?” what would public opinion say?
More people should remember Richard Dimbleby and the important work he did on changing societal attitudes to cancer.
Year 2 net immigration 9
Year 3 net immigration 8
Year 4 net immigration 7
Year 5 net immigration 6
Year 6 net immigration 5
Year 7 net immigration 4
Year 8 net immigration 3
Year 9 net immigration 2
Year 10 net immigration 1
That would be 9 years of falling net immigration but the number of immigrants has increased from 10 to 55.
The proportion is increasing in an almost straight line by between 2% and 3% per year.
At this rate it will be over 50% in 3 years time.
When it goes over 50%, can they still be described as "special"? Surely at that point they become the norm and every child should then receive the same benefits? Why should a minority then get penalised?
Two of the seven basic political memes.
Yes Richard Dimbleby was a great man who did great thing like on cancer and he would never have stooped so low with toilet journalism like his son did tonight
https://reason.com/2025/12/04/why-are-38-percent-of-stanford-students-saying-theyre-disabled/
Leading to a feedback loop of everyone claiming to have special needs and the system collapsing.
I would consider myself a monarchist, and I think it does more good than harm, and I think we would regret losing it. But that doesn’t mean the system isn’t beyond reproach. In particular serious consideration needs to be had in relation to whether the funding model is a fair one. And how the “working vs non-working royal” system works (once you start dictating who can and can’t have jobs/outside interests and how you fund all this, it gets pretty murky). There’s also the question of the royal duchies and how they are run. None of these issues are insurmountable nor would any sensible reform prevent the royal family from living a very privileged life - but there is a question of optics and focus.
(Oddly, that Wikipedia article does not mention that -- on January 1st, 1941 -- Streit's follow-up was published: https://www.amazon.com/Union-Now-Britain-Clarence-Streit/dp/B0006D7F9A )
For its time, the book had considerable influence in the US -- though far less than the isolationists here.
(For the record: My family had copies of both, and I recall browsing in them, and thinking the ideas interesting, but probably impractical.)
Just seen an article on BBC Sport suggesting that Trump's FIFA peace prize award may have been in someway corrupt. And I am shocked to my core.
https://bsky.app/profile/samfr.bsky.social/post/3m7ll3hdykc2c
Secondly people are confused between immigration and net immigration, often thinking that falling immigration should mean fewer immigrants.
(I may watch the second episode of “The War Between the Land and the Sea” first, however.)
And discouraging people from taking responsibility for not only their health but that of others.
If possible, be sure to get one with extra USB ports.
What's more, they might not have been incorrect.
Or maybe that was my kids.
https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/insight-and-analysis/data-and-charts/nhs-workforce-nutshell
And as to where the money has gone…
https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/resource/exploring-the-earnings-of-nhs-doctors-in-england-2025-update
You’re welcome.
A million Britons emigrating alongside a million foreigners immigrating is net zero migration but a huge demographic change.
And then you can start splitting immigrant communities into their own ethnic and religious demographics.
Some things are visceral, not rational. That doesn't make them wrong, but it constrains the sorts of debate that can be had about them.
Masks to be worn in three hospitals as flu cases surge
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crmdekv8d48o
Sounds entirely sensible to me.
I'd add that if anyone comes into my workplace with a respiratory virus, and isn't wearing a mask, then they can "get absolutely fucked", as Max's mate charmingly puts it.
There's otherwise no need, unless you're immune compromised.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yhUG1LVXvs
Also you get more resources if you have special needs kids. The system can be gamed - saw this happen in the primary my kids went to (in Scotland) some years ago.
Korea secures landmark Latin American deal to sell 195 combat vehicles to Peru
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/southkorea/defense/20251210/korea-secures-landmark-latin-american-deal-to-sell-195-combat-vehicles-to-peru
..According to the presidential office, the deal covers Peru’s plan to acquire 54 K2 main battle tanks and 141 wheeled armored vehicles, a package to be produced through cooperation between Korean defense companies and Peru’s state-owned manufacturer. Officials said the arrangement is designed not only to modernize the Peruvian Army but also to strengthen long-term industrial ties between the two countries.
Officials noted that the deal is especially significant because it sets out a clear road map for concluding the implementation contracts by next year. Once those agreements are finalized, the K2 tank will make its debut in the Latin American market, extending its reach beyond Europe for the first time...
We'd probably have saved the odd billion if we'd built the K2 under license, rather than trying to kludge a new turret onto old Challenger hulls, which appear to suffer from the Nimrod (no two examples have the same dimensions) problem.
You were standing right next to Farage when he confirmed the Afghan resettlement scheme will continue. The deception is already so evident with these c****
https://x.com/yobnationalist/status/1998447350864560404?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
Introducing Superpower: a 42MW natural gas turbine optimized for AI datacenters, built on our supersonic technology. Superpower launches with a 1.21GW order from
@CrusoeAI
https://x.com/bscholl/status/1998372107215122910
They might become profitable before they deliver a single supersonic business jet.
Since that clip we've gone from Starmer calling it far-right to question the role of the ECHR to questioning its role himself.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2g03gv2z6o
Starmer doing things he previously claimed were far-right.
We'll see soon enough.
Anyway, my point was that Yusuf is attacking Philp for saying something Farage agreed with, which I think is a mistake
"The people who govern us have no conception of national culture or identity outside of a veneer of sentimentality and a code of liberal “values” with little relationship to our own political tradition. Their morality is niceness and their religion is individualism. The incredible gift of a culture defined by peaceable cooperation, and not riven by ethnic or religious conflict, is not seen as the fragile inheritance of generations of national effort, but as the product of the human rights and equalities laws of the past decades. The fact — the incontrovertible fact — that dizzyingly rapid migration undermines this situation is simply outside of their imaginative universe."
https://thecritic.co.uk/the-shame-of-britain/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/dec/09/zelenskyy-ready-for-elections-after-trump-questions-ukrainian-democracy
Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said he is ready to hold a wartime election within the next three months, if Ukraine’s parliament and foreign allies will allow it, after Donald Trump accused him of clinging on to power.
Zelenskyy, clearly irritated by Trump’s intervention, said that “this is a question for the people of Ukraine, not people from other states, with all due respect to our partners”.
However, he promised to explore avenues for holding a vote in the coming months. “Since this question is raised today by the president of the United States of America, our partners, I will answer very briefly: look, I am ready for elections,” Zelenskyy said on Tuesday evening.
“Moreover, I am asking … the United States to help me, possibly together with European colleagues, to ensure security for the elections, and then in the next 60 to 90 days Ukraine will be ready to hold the elections. I personally have the will and readiness for this,” he added...
Pandered?
This report says there is a longer internal version of the NSS that gets into more detail on weakening the EU. It also proposes a new grouping of countries called the C5— US, China, Russia, Japan, and India— that’s not hemmed in by G7 rules. No Euro representation unless you count Russia.
https://x.com/thomaswright08/status/1998499602220425474
If the US administration were run by Russian agents, it could not be doing a better job.
(I hope this report is untrue.
We'll see.)
Fuck 'em.
The best way to make sure that this withers on the vine is for the Europeans (including the UK) Ukraine, and to ensure that Russia is defeated.
Afghans weren't helping Britain.
Britain was helping Afghans.
And it turned out that the Afghans actually preferred the side they were supposed to fighting against.
And you're never going to get that from Starmer, Macron and Tusk.
Their successors will likely be even less willing to stand up to Trump or Putin.
The same Afghan military which the western world had been funding, training and arming for nearly twenty years.
The subsequent babbling about helping Afghan interpreters and Afghan special forces is merely because people aren't willing to admit that it had been a total waste of British lives and money.
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-announcing-unlimited-national-emergency
It is even more different from Trump's leadership than Starmer's is from Churchill's or Margaret Thatcher's.
That strand of American opinion still exists, and indeed has majority support in the opinion polls. Let's hope it returns asap.
It took over two years from the withdrawal of the US military from South Vietnam for the government to be toppled and even then that took an outside invasion plus the stopping of US funding.
In Afghanistan the government collapsed before the US was able to withdraw its military and it collapsed to some blokes in pick up trucks armed mostly with beards.
Elections are held. Zelenskky wins. Trump calls the elections rigged.
Elections are held. They are rigged. Zelenskyy loses and a Russian puppet state follows.
A 40% swing. In Florida...
Your denial of the facts prohibits a frank appraisal of how to move forward