Driverless cars will make journeys safer, halt road rage and combat drink-driving, the transport secretary has said.
Outlining her plans for the future of travel, Heidi Alexander said Britain should ‘embrace technology’ and will run self-driving vehicle pilot projects across the country in 2026.
Something Trump sycophant/whisperers like Starmer and Rutte don't appear to have grasped is that the senile old guy in the White House is unlikely to make it to the end if his term.
And those surrounding him are far less susceptible to flattery. And are driven by very specific agendas severely detrimental to our interests, rather than random whim.
The hope surely is that Dems win and normalcy is restored. The polls suggest Trump is unpopular. But will it be a fair election?
She’s seen as a unifying candidate, and not beholden to the sectarian politics which has become a problem in the State.
Klobuchar is perennially hyped as a Democrat presidential contender, not least on pb.
Indeed so. She’s probably a lay for the ‘28 Presidential contest, if she’s likely to be a newly-elected Governor.
It’s difficult to imagine MN as a swing state in the mid-terms, and the rumour is that the GOP are running an unconvential candidate in Mike Lindell (MyPillow guy).
That said, the fraud story could really blow up and we see a high turnout specific to MN, the Feds are going to be all over it between now and the elections.
I wonder whether an EU wide nuclear deterrent will now become a priority. If it existed now, that would probably be very reassuring to Denmark/Greenland.
I wonder whether an EU wide nuclear deterrent will now become a priority. If it existed now, that would probably be very reassuring to Denmark/Greenland.
Would it? Would its use be a credible threat?
If Denmark itself had nukes, perhaps.
Hard to say.
I'd argue the EU cares more about Greenland than the US cares about Estonia.
Something Trump sycophant/whisperers like Starmer and Rutte don't appear to have grasped is that the senile old guy in the White House is unlikely to make it to the end if his term.
And those surrounding him are far less susceptible to flattery. And are driven by very specific agendas severely detrimental to our interests, rather than random whim.
The hope surely is that Dems win and normalcy is restored. The polls suggest Trump is unpopular. But will it be a fair election?
Impossible to say. We'll know better by next November.
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
She’s seen as a unifying candidate, and not beholden to the sectarian politics which has become a problem in the State.
Klobuchar is perennially hyped as a Democrat presidential contender, not least on pb.
Indeed so. She’s probably a lay for the ‘28 Presidential contest, if she’s likely to be a newly-elected Governor.
It’s difficult to imagine MN as a swing state in the mid-terms, and the rumour is that the GOP are running an unconvential candidate in Mike Lindell (MyPillow guy).
That said, the fraud story could really blow up and we see a high turnout specific to MN, the Feds are going to be all over it between now and the elections.
"Unconventional candidate" is the new term for raving idiot ?
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
We apparently now assess that as a 30% chance. I'd say it's more like 50/50.
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
I don't want it to happen, but I have thought for a while that 2026-28 (I thought 2027 likeliest) could well see China have a crack at Taiwan. Militarily, that window is probably the now or never period, for demographic reasons and due to the USA having its current joyous leadership.
Trump is if anything more pro Taiwan than most US Presidents have been, certainly since Nixon
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
I dont have much faith in Congress restraining Trump I'm afraid.
They would if they think they will lose their seats without doing so, if even most Republicans are opposed it wouldn't even need the Democrats to win the midterms
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
I don't want it to happen, but I have thought for a while that 2026-28 (I thought 2027 likeliest) could well see China have a crack at Taiwan. Militarily, that window is probably the now or never period, for demographic reasons and due to the USA having its current joyous leadership.
Trump is if anything more pro Taiwan than most US Presidents have been, certainly since Nixon
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
Something Trump sycophant/whisperers like Starmer and Rutte don't appear to have grasped is that the senile old guy in the White House is unlikely to make it to the end if his term.
And those surrounding him are far less susceptible to flattery. And are driven by very specific agendas severely detrimental to our interests, rather than random whim.
The hope surely is that Dems win and normalcy is restored. The polls suggest Trump is unpopular. But will it be a fair election?
How do you rebuild normalcy on top of a salted desert that is the now-USA?
He should do a bit of research about which country was the biggest driver of countries such as Britain and France giving up their colonies after WW2. Also which country did things to stop Britain and France trying to keep control globally such as, for example, Suez.
But, people will stop buying US goods, funding US government debt, and hosting US bases. This is all so stupid, and self-defeating.
Of course. Americans remain very welcome in Europe and rightly so but they would be persona non grata after an invasion of Greenland, which would be devastating for US business and security. It is an absurd notion.
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
Europe and the UK are strategically extremely vulnerable without the US as an ally.
We are not only highly dependent on them militarily and technologically, but also for energy supplies.
With hindsight, the risk was always there, but we've squandered the last decade in favour of dismantling European unity rather than making an effort to create strategic resilience.
We might get bailed out by a Democratic win in the US, but being dependent on the whim of a handful of swing states in another continent is not a great place to be.
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
Europe and the UK are strategically extremely vulnerable without the US as an ally.
We are not only highly dependent on them militarily and technologically, but also for energy supplies.
With hindsight, the risk was always there, but we've squandered the last decade in favour of dismantling European unity rather than making an effort to create strategic resilience.
We might get bailed out by a Democratic win in the US, but being dependent on the whim of a handful of swing states in another continent is not a great place to be.
Thank you Nigel.
Whilst I have had plenty of good company here over the years in my support for the EU I have nevertheless been correctly regarded as something of an extremist in favoring a Federal Europe.
She did that at the time of receiving the prize. The chat is that if Machado had refused the prize and said that there was only one fitting recipient, Donald J Trump, she would now be prez of Venezuela.
He should do a bit of research about which country was the biggest driver of countries such as Britain and France giving up their colonies after WW2. Also which country did things to stop Britain and France trying to keep control globally such as, for example, Suez.
Reinventing the future also involves reinventing the past. Miller has studied the masters in that field.
She did that at the time of receiving the prize. The chat is that if Machado had refused the prize and said that there was only of fitting recipient, Donald J Trump, she would now be prez of Venezuela.
She should offer to change the country’s name to Trumpia. Like Bolivia is named after its great Venezuelan born liberator Bolivar, Venezuela could be named after its great American liberator, the King of Peace, Trump.
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
Europe and the UK are strategically extremely vulnerable without the US as an ally.
We are not only highly dependent on them militarily and technologically, but also for energy supplies.
With hindsight, the risk was always there, but we've squandered the last decade in favour of dismantling European unity rather than making an effort to create strategic resilience.
We might get bailed out by a Democratic win in the US, but being dependent on the whim of a handful of swing states in another continent is not a great place to be.
Which is why we need to get our own oil and gas out, and have cheap, plentiful, British-produced energy.
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
I dont have much faith in Congress restraining Trump I'm afraid.
They would if they think they will lose their seats without doing so, if even most Republicans are opposed it wouldn't even need the Democrats to win the midterms
They didn’t even do so after Trump had tried to have several of them murdered. A mere trifle like losing their seats will scarcely register by comparison.
But, people will stop buying US goods, funding US government debt, and hosting US bases. This is all so stupid, and self-defeating.
Of course. Americans remain very welcome in Europe and rightly so but they would be persona non grata after an invasion of Greenland, which would be devastating for US business and security. It is an absurd notion.
They are extrapolating from the apparent ease of the Venezuela venture, and the very muted response of European leaders to it, I think.
That a notion is absurd hasn't exactly deterred the Trump administration from grasping it with both hands, has it ?
And I'm fairly sure that for some in the administration, bringing about the dismantling of NATO would actually be a positive.
Will the US need to invade ? They've already got de facto military control of Greenland through their base.
I don't see what the US gains from annexing Greenland. As you say, they've already got a base there, can control it militarily v. easily, it has a small population, and most of it is ice.
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
Europe and the UK are strategically extremely vulnerable without the US as an ally.
We are not only highly dependent on them militarily and technologically, but also for energy supplies.
With hindsight, the risk was always there, but we've squandered the last decade in favour of dismantling European unity rather than making an effort to create strategic resilience.
We might get bailed out by a Democratic win in the US, but being dependent on the whim of a handful of swing states in another continent is not a great place to be.
Which is why we need to get our own oil and gas out, and have cheap, plentiful, British-produced energy.
The oil and gas from the North Sea is neither cheap nor plentiful.
The cost of renewables continues to drop. And offer real energy independence.
A problem in the U.K. is the taxation of business on existence/turnover rather than profits.
The counter to purely profit based taxation is that many large businesses structure themselves not to have profits, often internationally. Which makes tax changes fraught.
How about using the market?
Offer two taxation regimes - if you have a company structure that HMRC classes as “simple”, you can have profit based taxation.
If you want to have a nest of international companies that offshore the profits to WhereTheFuckistan, equally fine. But then you are on the “complex” tax setup. Pretty much what we have now.
Make the “simple” structure taxes on profits significantly lower overall.
Will the US need to invade ? They've already got de facto military control of Greenland through their base.
I don't see what the US gains from annexing Greenland. As you say, they've already got a base there, can control it militarily v. easily, it has a small population, and most of it is ice.
Territorial aggrandisement, I suppose?
When this is all over, it will make an excellent question on the entrance exam at College College, Oxbridge;
The Greenland War and breakup of NATO was caused by the adoption of the Mercator Projection.
Discuss.
(No matter what disasters happen, College College Oxbridge will still survive.)
Will the US need to invade ? They've already got de facto military control of Greenland through their base.
I don't see what the US gains from annexing Greenland. As you say, they've already got a base there, can control it militarily v. easily, it has a small population, and most of it is ice.
Territorial aggrandisement, I suppose?
The US gets to colour it in US colours on an atlas. They get to call it Red White and Blue Land. And, they get to issue stamps, with polar bears on them.
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
Europe and the UK are strategically extremely vulnerable without the US as an ally.
We are not only highly dependent on them militarily and technologically, but also for energy supplies.
With hindsight, the risk was always there, but we've squandered the last decade in favour of dismantling European unity rather than making an effort to create strategic resilience.
We might get bailed out by a Democratic win in the US, but being dependent on the whim of a handful of swing states in another continent is not a great place to be.
Thank you Nigel.
Whilst I have had plenty of good company here over the years in my support for the EU I have nevertheless been correctly regarded as something of an extremist in favoring a Federal Europe.
I don't want it to happen, but I have thought for a while that 2026-28 (I thought 2027 likeliest) could well see China have a crack at Taiwan. Militarily, that window is probably the now or never period, for demographic reasons and due to the USA having its current joyous leadership.
Trump is if anything more pro Taiwan than most US Presidents have been, certainly since Nixon
Sir Keir Starmer routinely describes his friendly relations with Donald Trump as a great asset to the UK. Trump himself though is a living nightmare for the British prime minister and his ambitions to revive his and his party’s fortunes.
One reason is that every time Trump executes one of his “I-can’t-believe-he-just-did-that” policies, nothing that Starmer says or does is heard by anyone.
Starmer was for example hoping to usher in the new year by advertising all the ways he is bringing down the cost of living. But did you notice him in Reading this morning when he boasted about his railway fairs freeze and discounts?
I’d be surprised.
Because anything Starmer wants to say about pretty much anything is being drowned out by Trump’s seizure of the Venezuelan president, in just the latest manifestation of what you might call a new American exceptionalism - which is a euphemism for Trump sticking two fingers up at allies like the UK who think the United Nations and international law are worth cherishing and preserving.
There's about five thousand more words if you feel the need for more Pestographics.
Yes, I've been thinking this also.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
Given 72% of Americans and even 57% of Republicans oppose taking Greenland by military force, Trump would likely be impeached and convicted and removed from office by Congress if he tried anyway
Europe and the UK are strategically extremely vulnerable without the US as an ally.
We are not only highly dependent on them militarily and technologically, but also for energy supplies.
With hindsight, the risk was always there, but we've squandered the last decade in favour of dismantling European unity rather than making an effort to create strategic resilience.
We might get bailed out by a Democratic win in the US, but being dependent on the whim of a handful of swing states in another continent is not a great place to be.
Thank you Nigel.
Whilst I have had plenty of good company here over the years in my support for the EU I have nevertheless been correctly regarded as something of an extremist in favoring a Federal Europe.
You know the saying "we are only three meals from barbarism"? Similarly, people react to the use of naked no-excuses force in certain ways, and one of them is sucking up to the bad guy. There's a great deal of power in the stance "I am going to kill them because they annoy me, but you I like...providing you behave". For a guide to people's behaviour around Trump, see the Krays.
Will the US need to invade ? They've already got de facto military control of Greenland through their base.
I don't see what the US gains from annexing Greenland. As you say, they've already got a base there, can control it militarily v. easily, it has a small population, and most of it is ice.
Territorial aggrandisement, I suppose?
Trump is very focused on raw materials - oil, minerals and the like. Historically they've been much easier for authoritarian leaders to skim off a percentage from the profits of their extraction, so it makes sense from that angle. I think that's his interest in Greenland.
Will the US need to invade ? They've already got de facto military control of Greenland through their base.
I don't see what the US gains from annexing Greenland. As you say, they've already got a base there, can control it militarily v. easily, it has a small population, and most of it is ice.
Territorial aggrandisement, I suppose?
Climate change is melting the Arctic ice: not all of it, but enough to enable transit from the Atlantic to the Pacific possible via the top of Canada. Trump wants it: hence his assertive/aggressive/passive-aggressive behaviour towards both Greenland and Canada. So yes, territorial aggrandizement, but there's an actual reason.
Comments
We'll see how the game of poker works out
It’s difficult to imagine MN as a swing state in the mid-terms, and the rumour is that the GOP are running an unconvential candidate in Mike Lindell (MyPillow guy).
That said, the fraud story could really blow up and we see a high turnout specific to MN, the Feds are going to be all over it between now and the elections.
If Denmark itself had nukes, perhaps.
I'd argue the EU cares more about Greenland than the US cares about Estonia.
https://x.com/bbcsportscot/status/2008214814481412101?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
We'll know better by next November.
If US invades Greenland, I suspect it will be difficult for Starmer to continue as leader. His strategy of making nice will look awful, and Labour MPs (and the country) will want something more forceful.
I'd say it's more like 50/50.
https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/52879-few-americans-want-to-take-over-greenland-most-oppose-covert-operations-military-action-poll
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/taiwan-cheered-china-upset-after-trump-signs-new-taiwan-legislation-into-law-2025-12-03/
Trump is not going to be impeached
One chef/publican on LBC yesterday, saying that rates will be doubling with the recently announced changes.
https://x.com/lbc/status/2008305413012205901
60% of Republicans back the capture of Maduro and only 41% of Americans overall were opposed to it
https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/52879-few-americans-want-to-take-over-greenland-most-oppose-covert-operations-military-action-poll
Russian and Chinese air defences in Venezuela turned out to be totally useless against an effective enemy. See also recent strikes on Iran.
The level of craziness in the White House is off the scale.
We need to be preparing proper sanctions on America and to close their UK bases. We cannot allow enemy troops on our soil.
Meanwhile we are handing over our military to Palantir. Starmer is a surrendrr monkey.
https://www.politico.eu/article/palantir-lands-biggest-ever-uk-defense-deal/
Venezuelan opposition leader dedicates her peace prize to Trump.
Another one kissing the ring.
It’s nuts.
https://x.com/theglobal_index/status/2008398404091879439?s=61
Europe and the UK are strategically extremely vulnerable without the US as an ally.
We are not only highly dependent on them militarily and technologically, but also for energy supplies.
With hindsight, the risk was always there, but we've squandered the last decade in favour of dismantling European unity rather than making an effort to create strategic resilience.
We might get bailed out by a Democratic win in the US, but being dependent on the whim of a handful of swing states in another continent is not a great place to be.
Very pro labour in the run up to the 24 election.
He’s at the FO stage of FAFO.
Whilst I have had plenty of good company here over the years in my support for the EU I have nevertheless been correctly regarded as something of an extremist in favoring a Federal Europe.
Has my time come?
Miller has studied the masters in that field.
NEW THREAD
That a notion is absurd hasn't exactly deterred the Trump administration from grasping it with both hands, has it ?
And I'm fairly sure that for some in the administration, bringing about the dismantling of NATO would actually be a positive.
Territorial aggrandisement, I suppose?
The cost of renewables continues to drop. And offer real energy independence.
A problem in the U.K. is the taxation of business on existence/turnover rather than profits.
The counter to purely profit based taxation is that many large businesses structure themselves not to have profits, often internationally. Which makes tax changes fraught.
How about using the market?
Offer two taxation regimes - if you have a company structure that HMRC classes as “simple”, you can have profit based taxation.
If you want to have a nest of international companies that offshore the profits to WhereTheFuckistan, equally fine. But then you are on the “complex” tax setup. Pretty much what we have now.
Make the “simple” structure taxes on profits significantly lower overall.
This gives an advantage to being onshore etc.
Thoughts?
The Greenland War and breakup of NATO was caused by the adoption of the Mercator Projection.
Discuss.
(No matter what disasters happen, College College Oxbridge will still survive.)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jan/30/world-order-start-arctic-trump-thin-ice-greenland-northwest-passage
https://geopolitique.eu/en/2025/02/21/president-trump-hemispheric-security-and-the-greenland-connection/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45527531