International law is less relevant now in the era of Trump .
It’s really more about norms that countries used to prescribe to in case it came back to bite them later . Things you shouldn’t do in case someone else did them to you in the future .
We’re living now in an era where might is all that matters .
The UN Security Council is now a complete joke , indeed one wonders what the point is of the UN itself .
We get constant vetoes in the former and the latter is a talking shop where resolutions are simply ignored .
International law has never mattered.
The UN Security Council has always been a joke.
There has never been much point to the UN itself.
The only thing that has changed is the scales are falling from your eyes and you are realising that truth.
Vetoes in the former and the latter being a talking shop has been the case for the past ~80 years.
International law should never have developed beyond fundamentals of rules of engagement, banning chemical weapons and treating PoWs etc.
Might is not right, but might is might. If you want right, you need the might to enforce it. Or someone else will enforce what they want.
The problem is might is often used for less laudable endeavours. This morning a good point was raised that countries tend to care about international law when it suits them and they ignore it when it doesn’t .
Having a sneaking suspicion that the US is randomly raining death on foreigners because there are domestic stories they would like to sideline makes it hard to cheer enthusiastically.
A short exploration of the complexity of possibilities for a future Iran. Deep link to a conversation in yesterday's The Rest is Politics, starting with a quote:
"And so it begins. You recall my concern that starting a war is easy, and controlling and ending much harder if at all possible. The Iranian regime is evil, yet I am taken aback at the hubris and ease of the decision to attack ... "
Having a sneaking suspicion that the US is randomly raining death on foreigners because there are domestic stories they would like to sideline makes it hard to cheer enthusiastically.
The Iranian regime has been wishing death on America (and us) for almost 50 years so it's not entirely random.
That is true, although the question "why now?" is a pertinent one.
The Telegraph and NYT have the same story on “why now” so I suspect it’s true
1. There were fears Iran was preparing its own unilateral attack on Israel
2. Trump decided the Iranians really weren’t interested in serious talks on nukes
3. The Israelis said - “we have an incredible opportunity coming up, may not happen again, the entire Iranian leadership is gathering in one place, on this one day”
So they seized the moment. However twits like @DavidL think Trump should have gone to Congress, the UN, left wing British judges, Sky News TV and Lily Allen and her mum to get their “permission” before killing the most evil regime on earth
A random thought. Is it not illegal in the US for the President to declare war; has to be done by Congress?
What are the chances of Congress getting VERY cross with Trump? Even allowing for the Republican majorities in both houses. Especially if US troops start coming home in body bags or US investments in the Gulf losing money?
I was watching Rick Wilson last night and he says it is illegal, but my interpretation is being as both Congress and the Supreme Court are irrelevant, unless they concur with Trump, the Executive branch can do what it likes.
The Epstein news was getting very close to revealing compelling evidence applying the "p" word to Trump. This couldn't have been better timed.
A random thought. Is it not illegal in the US for the President to declare war; has to be done by Congress?
What are the chances of Congress getting VERY cross with Trump? Even allowing for the Republican majorities in both houses. Especially if US troops start coming home in body bags or US investments in the Gulf losing money?
No doubt congress has been told this isn't war. It's a special military operation etc.
How long that holds out is anyone's guess given most of them seem to want to be in office but not in power.
A random thought. Is it not illegal in the US for the President to declare war; has to be done by Congress?
What are the chances of Congress getting VERY cross with Trump? Even allowing for the Republican majorities in both houses. Especially if US troops start coming home in body bags or US investments in the Gulf losing money?
No.
The US has not declared war, officially, IIRC since WWII. Not even Vietnam.
The War Powers Act grants POTUS as commander in chief the right to act, and POTUS can launch missiles and even send troops without Congressional approval but needs to inform Congress within 48 hours or recall the troops. However since no troops were sent, there's nothing to recall.
All Presidents in the modern era have sent missiles somewhere. They don't need Congressional approval.
John Healey says that the "increasingly indiscriminate bombing" by Iran is a threat to British personnel and civilians in the region on Kuenssberg this morning. This to a background of missile attacks around Tehran and the murder of their deeply, deeply unpleasant religious leader.
I am just bewildered that anyone can say this sort of nonsense with a straight face. We have had a completely unprovoked attack by the US and Israel on Iran. No one has even bothered to find a vestige of a legal justification for this attack. No UN resolutions, not even any attempt at negotiations and discussions. Just a US President who is desperate to change the news agenda in his country. The man is a war criminal as, of course, is Netanyahu .
I find it shocking (if not surprising) that the US are not being called out for this criminal conduct. Instead we have SKS wittering about UK planes being "in the air" to protect allies from retaliation and this nonsense this morning. The hypocrisy is rank. We should be ashamed.
I've yet to hear a journalist, pundit, expert, politician, or indeed pretty much anyone who can actually explain what the "regime change" is meant to change into. It's completely open-ended, and even the justifications for the attack are a smorgasbord of past greivances and hypotheticals, many of them directly contradicting the official US position of whole weeks ago.
This makes the Iraq War on the back of the WMD threat look well thought out. Trump's lit a match, thrown it on the firewood and we are simply left to see what happens.
This isn't just Trump, of course. This is Netanyahu's war. Netanyahu has pursued a very aggressive foreign policy, bombing, attacking and invading neighbours, as he thinks that helps his political survival.... sorry, I mean, he thinks that's the best approach for Israel.
He's right, in both instances.
I hope he loses the next election, but his successor is just as aggressive.
Having a sneaking suspicion that the US is randomly raining death on foreigners because there are domestic stories they would like to sideline makes it hard to cheer enthusiastically.
The Iranian regime has been wishing death on America (and us) for almost 50 years so it's not entirely random.
That is true, although the question "why now?" is a pertinent one.
Six very good reasons I can think of, all off the top of my head.
1: Because of the uranium-enrichment that Iran was found to have done, and which they have not co-operated with international authorities on even after the last set of attacks. 2: Because of the attacks on civilians in recent weeks. 3: Because the regime has never looked weaker. 4: Because the proxies that Iran has fought via have never been weaker (the proxies also being a valid justification for attacking). 5: Because the air defences etc have never been weaker. 6: Because an opportunity arose.
Going back to G&D for a moment. The lesson for Labour isn’t “move left”. Reform aren’t left, and they beat Labour.
It’s umph. People know the country is broken and want politicians who tell them what can be done to fix it.
Left. Right. Matters less than old school partisans think. Haven’t we learned this already? Blair won two landslides by occupying the right. Johnson won a substantial majority by occupying the left.
Both offered hope - with a simple plan for what is wrong and what can be done.
Finding the right level of coercive force is tricky. It isn't unreasonable to be worried. The norm against the use of force to settle international disputes is an important achievement. But if every international lawyer's reaction to scenes such as this is to sourly lecture people to not be happy about scenes such as this, international law will be held in contempt. https://nitter.poast.org/yuanyi_z/status/2027896809784303719#m
Just on this - international law experts questioning the legality of it all and wondering whether things will work out well have my respect because it’s their role to point out these issues.
But with human rights law experts condemning this unequivocally without thinking through the nuances involving an oppressed people yearning for someone to take out their oppressor and then lecturing them on how it’s bad to rely on evil US and the like, the most polite thing I can say is that I am profoundly disappointed. Their attitudes will inevitably feed the perception that some human rights experts only talk about human rights from the ivory tower but have zero understanding of how those facing oppression on the front lines have to think of and respond to situations. https://nitter.poast.org/kevinkfyam/status/2027921952992858408#m
Having a sneaking suspicion that the US is randomly raining death on foreigners because there are domestic stories they would like to sideline makes it hard to cheer enthusiastically.
The Iranian regime has been wishing death on America (and us) for almost 50 years so it's not entirely random.
That is true, although the question "why now?" is a pertinent one.
The Telegraph and NYT have the same story on “why now” so I suspect it’s true
1. There were fears Iran was preparing its own unilateral attack on Israel
2. Trump decided the Iranians really weren’t interested in serious talks on nukes
3. The Israelis said - “we have an incredible opportunity coming up, may not happen again, the entire Iranian leadership is gathering in one place, on this one day”
So they seized the moment. However twits like @DavidL think Trump should have gone to Congress, the UN, left wing British judges, Sky News TV and Lily Allen and her mum to get their “permission” before killing the most evil regime on earth
Why do you think it will kill it?
One of Trump's starting positions is that he will not send in soldiers to put boots on the ground, which is pretty much a guarantee of it not succeeding.
The British government does not care about whether the attacks on Iran are morally justified, excessively risky, or will make the lives of Iranians & those of other countries safer, freer & spiritually healthier. It cares only about whether they comply with "international law".
International law is less relevant now in the era of Trump .
It’s really more about norms that countries used to prescribe to in case it came back to bite them later . Things you shouldn’t do in case someone else did them to you in the future .
We’re living now in an era where might is all that matters .
The UN Security Council is now a complete joke , indeed one wonders what the point is of the UN itself .
We get constant vetoes in the former and the latter is a talking shop where resolutions are simply ignored .
International law has never mattered.
The UN Security Council has always been a joke.
There has never been much point to the UN itself.
The only thing that has changed is the scales are falling from your eyes and you are realising that truth.
Vetoes in the former and the latter being a talking shop has been the case for the past ~80 years.
International law should never have developed beyond fundamentals of rules of engagement, banning chemical weapons and treating PoWs etc.
Might is not right, but might is might. If you want right, you need the might to enforce it. Or someone else will enforce what they want.
The problem is might is often used for less laudable endeavours. This morning a good point was raised that countries tend to care about international law when it suits them and they ignore it when it doesn’t .
Absolutely agreed.
Which is why it is important to have our own might and use that to ward off adversaries.
It is why investment in Defence, and alliances like NATO, matter.
And why Trump is a dangerous fool not for his actions on international law, but for his actions threatening NATO and allies like Greenland.
Going back to G&D for a moment. The lesson for Labour isn’t “move left”. Reform aren’t left, and they beat Labour.
It’s umph. People know the country is broken and want politicians who tell them what can be done to fix it.
Left. Right. Matters less than old school partisans think. Haven’t we learned this already? Blair won two landslides by occupying the right. Johnson won a substantial majority by occupying the left.
Both offered hope - with a simple plan for what is wrong and what can be done.
That’s all Labour need. A plan.
They need a radical but centrist plan and a new leader to deliver it.
A random thought. Is it not illegal in the US for the President to declare war; has to be done by Congress?
What are the chances of Congress getting VERY cross with Trump? Even allowing for the Republican majorities in both houses. Especially if US troops start coming home in body bags or US investments in the Gulf losing money?
No doubt congress has been told this isn't war. It's a special military operation etc.
How long that holds out is anyone's guess given most of them seem to want to be in office but not in power.
Congress appears to actively hate governing, they'd much rather things be done by Executive Order or the Courts.
Christ, even some of the most enthusiastic politicians out there - those on the Supreme Court - are a little tired of Congress always getting them to make the decisions, not that it bothers the Court most of the time.
Gorsuch:'...most major decisions affecting the rights and responsibilities of the American People...are funneled through the legislative process for a reason. Yes, legislating can be hard and take time. And, yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some pressing problem arises. But the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design. Through that process, the Nation can tap the combined wisdom of the people's elected representatives, not just that of one faction or man'
A random thought. Is it not illegal in the US for the President to declare war; has to be done by Congress?
What are the chances of Congress getting VERY cross with Trump? Even allowing for the Republican majorities in both houses. Especially if US troops start coming home in body bags or US investments in the Gulf losing money?
Only Congress can declare war, but the President has the authority to launch military action for a limited period in an emergency situation, before going to Congress for authorisation to continue that action if necessary, under the War Powers Act of 1973.
So the relevant questions would be: Is this an emergency situation? Will it be complete before the end of 60 days?
Every President, from Ford onwards, has used this act as the legal basis for taking military action without Congressional approval. Some members of Congress have questioned whether an emergency existed, but I would be very surprised if it became a problem for the President.
I missed my flight home. Yep. I hear you all wisely sighing: “that’s war for you”
Actually, it was food poisoning. Woke up with weird shivers and chills then vomited for an hour
Unideal for a 15 hour flight
Make sure you replace electrolytes before flying.
Thanks. It was most unpleasant - and quite expensive - no refund on my flight
But I’m already feeling a bit better and, actually, a few more days in Shanghai is not a great burden. The city is compelling and the hotels remain absurdly cheap
A random thought. Is it not illegal in the US for the President to declare war; has to be done by Congress?
What are the chances of Congress getting VERY cross with Trump? Even allowing for the Republican majorities in both houses. Especially if US troops start coming home in body bags or US investments in the Gulf losing money?
A random thought. Is it not illegal in the US for the President to declare war; has to be done by Congress?
What are the chances of Congress getting VERY cross with Trump? Even allowing for the Republican majorities in both houses. Especially if US troops start coming home in body bags or US investments in the Gulf losing money?
No.
The US has not declared war, officially, IIRC since WWII. Not even Vietnam.
The War Powers Act grants POTUS as commander in chief the right to act, and POTUS can launch missiles and even send troops without Congressional approval but needs to inform Congress within 48 hours or recall the troops. However since no troops were sent, there's nothing to recall.
All Presidents in the modern era have sent missiles somewhere. They don't need Congressional approval.
You are wrong about the legality. Trump on the other hand is not the only recent President who has started wars without Congressional approval.
I am not mourning the demise of the Ayatollah, but if Middle Eastern geopolitics were as simple as you suggest, Blair would been enjoying his seventh term as PM.
But I have family in Iran. My dad is there right now. And I'm not celebrating yet. Here's why.
Iran built the most layered contingency plan on Earth for this exact moment. Four levels of succession for every key position. Pre-authorized military strikes. Regional commanders who don't need orders from Tehran to act.
As you read this, there is already a new Supreme Leader. We just don't know who.
This isn't Maduro. The government didn't get overthrown. The system absorbed the hit. That's what it was designed to do.
Every credible intel assessment says the same thing: a post-Khamenei Iran is more likely to get harder, not softer. More IRGC. More dangerous. Potentially worse for the Iranian people than Khamenei himself.
I'm not sure about what happens next, if he's right about the regime's resilience. How long in practical terms can the US sustain a bombing campaign ?
The basic fact that Trump and Netanyahu fail to consider is this.
There is one of them. If they go, via the ballot box or via other means, what follows will be a totally different policy or a clone policy but never quite the same.
The Ayatollah is a multi headed Hydra, chop one head off and another emerges, it might be as venomous, more venomous, it's always going to be venomous enough to be very poisonous.
It can and will out live it's slayer one way or another, it may have tens of thousands of lives yet.
Trump believes in a strong man theory of government. He thinks countries are run like personal companies. That's why he keeps acting as if he is above the law. He believes in "L'État, c'est moi".
That means he believes that if you take out the leader, you've won. Maduro captured. Khamenei dead. That means Trump has won, like a game of chess.
However, nation states are not like personal companies. They are complex structures. They have rules and systems. The leader dies, the country goes on. The government goes on. The regime goes on. It's not clear whether Trump understands this.
I think this a very perceptive point.
Trump is so narcisstic that he thinks every regime is like his own, a personal fiefdom where the rulers whim is law, with complete ideological flexibility.
It explains his approach to "Dealmaking" with foreign leaders on an individual basis, and a liking for people like Putin who do fit his model of personalised corrupt government.
Having a sneaking suspicion that the US is randomly raining death on foreigners because there are domestic stories they would like to sideline makes it hard to cheer enthusiastically.
The Iranian regime has been wishing death on America (and us) for almost 50 years so it's not entirely random.
That is true, although the question "why now?" is a pertinent one.
Six very good reasons I can think of, all off the top of my head.
1: Because of the uranium-enrichment that Iran was found to have done, and which they have not co-operated with international authorities on even after the last set of attacks. 2: Because of the attacks on civilians in recent weeks. 3: Because the regime has never looked weaker. 4: Because the proxies that Iran has fought via have never been weaker (the proxies also being a valid justification for attacking). 5: Because the air defences etc have never been weaker. 6: Because an opportunity arose.
The possibility of Iran developing and using nuclear weapons is serious enough for knee-jerk opposition to be unserious. But it's not clear to me that Trump has an actual gameplan - "bomb a bunch of Iranian sites and hope for the best" seems to be the "plan". Trump's liking to be on the front page is not irrelevant either. If the bombing actually puts off Iranian nuclear weapon capability by 10 years, that would be positive, but it seems more random than that, and I think that other countries, including the UK, are wise not to get involved, andI'd argue that we shouldn't even be lending bases.
Having a sneaking suspicion that the US is randomly raining death on foreigners because there are domestic stories they would like to sideline makes it hard to cheer enthusiastically.
The Iranian regime has been wishing death on America (and us) for almost 50 years so it's not entirely random.
That is true, although the question "why now?" is a pertinent one.
Six very good reasons I can think of, all off the top of my head.
1: Because of the uranium-enrichment that Iran was found to have done, and which they have not co-operated with international authorities on even after the last set of attacks. 2: Because of the attacks on civilians in recent weeks. 3: Because the regime has never looked weaker. 4: Because the proxies that Iran has fought via have never been weaker (the proxies also being a valid justification for attacking). 5: Because the air defences etc have never been weaker. 6: Because an opportunity arose.
A random thought. Is it not illegal in the US for the President to declare war; has to be done by Congress?
What are the chances of Congress getting VERY cross with Trump? Even allowing for the Republican majorities in both houses. Especially if US troops start coming home in body bags or US investments in the Gulf losing money?
1) Yes 2) this Congress ? lol
Yes - Republican Congress are a collection of cowed "boot lickers for Trump". It has partly to do with Trump taking over the structures of the Republican Party 2 years ago, and being able to force despatch of people who were non-compliant.
It was the same control that allowed him to signficantly loot the party to fund his personal legal bills.
John Healey says that the "increasingly indiscriminate bombing" by Iran is a threat to British personnel and civilians in the region on Kuenssberg this morning. This to a background of missile attacks around Tehran and the murder of their deeply, deeply unpleasant religious leader.
I am just bewildered that anyone can say this sort of nonsense with a straight face. We have had a completely unprovoked attack by the US and Israel on Iran. No one has even bothered to find a vestige of a legal justification for this attack. No UN resolutions, not even any attempt at negotiations and discussions. Just a US President who is desperate to change the news agenda in his country. The man is a war criminal as, of course, is Netanyahu .
I find it shocking (if not surprising) that the US are not being called out for this criminal conduct. Instead we have SKS wittering about UK planes being "in the air" to protect allies from retaliation and this nonsense this morning. The hypocrisy is rank. We should be ashamed.
I've yet to hear a journalist, pundit, expert, politician, or indeed pretty much anyone who can actually explain what the "regime change" is meant to change into. It's completely open-ended, and even the justifications for the attack are a smorgasbord of past greivances and hypotheticals, many of them directly contradicting the official US position of whole weeks ago.
This makes the Iraq War on the back of the WMD threat look well thought out. Trump's lit a match, thrown it on the firewood and we are simply left to see what happens.
This isn't just Trump, of course. This is Netanyahu's war. Netanyahu has pursued a very aggressive foreign policy, bombing, attacking and invading neighbours, as he thinks that helps his political survival.... sorry, I mean, he thinks that's the best approach for Israel.
Domestic as well, there'll be increased attacks on the inhabitants of the West bank and Gaza by settlers and the IDF while attention is on Iran.
I missed my flight home. Yep. I hear you all wisely sighing: “that’s war for you”
Actually, it was food poisoning. Woke up with weird shivers and chills then vomited for an hour
Unideal for a 15 hour flight
Make sure you replace electrolytes before flying.
Thanks. It was most unpleasant - and quite expensive - no refund on my flight
But I’m already feeling a bit better and, actually, a few more days in Shanghai is not a great burden. The city is compelling and the hotels remain absurdly cheap
Have you been to Suzhou, Wuxi, or Huzhou on the bullet train? Or closer (end of the metro) Zhuijaijaio?
The killing of Khamenei was certainly unexpected and by their actions the US and Israel have finally forced the middle east to confront the disruptiive nature of this murderous regime and sponsor of terror
It was interesting that at the UN, Iran only received support from Russia and China whilst being universally condemned by it's neighbours
Many on here praised Carney in standing upto Trump, but don't seem so happy that he pledged Canada's support for the US and Israel action as did Australia
In normal circumstances the UK PM would have done the same but he is so powerless he no choice but to sit on the fence
Anyway, we are involved in actively protecting our allies in the region and our base in Cyprus and hopefully Iran will come to it's senses and seek a deal with Trump
Nobody can know how long the airspace will be closed for, or the effect on oil prices, but let's hope it is not too long
Having a sneaking suspicion that the US is randomly raining death on foreigners because there are domestic stories they would like to sideline makes it hard to cheer enthusiastically.
The Iranian regime has been wishing death on America (and us) for almost 50 years so it's not entirely random.
That is true, although the question "why now?" is a pertinent one.
The Telegraph and NYT have the same story on “why now” so I suspect it’s true
1. There were fears Iran was preparing its own unilateral attack on Israel
2. Trump decided the Iranians really weren’t interested in serious talks on nukes
3. The Israelis said - “we have an incredible opportunity coming up, may not happen again, the entire Iranian leadership is gathering in one place, on this one day”
So they seized the moment. However twits like @DavidL think Trump should have gone to Congress, the UN, left wing British judges, Sky News TV and Lily Allen and her mum to get their “permission” before killing the most evil regime on earth
Why do you think it will kill it?
One of Trump's starting positions is that he will not send in soldiers to put boots on the ground, which is pretty much a guarantee of it not succeeding.
Well they did literally slaughter almost all the upper echelon of the regime. In one day
An incredible military success, whatever your thoughts on Trump, Bibi etc (and they are both odious - but then recall we supported Stalin over Hitler)
Will this overthrow the regime in toto? It MIGHT. If America says “we will keep killing your leaders until you free your people” it could actually work
A more moderate group might emerge, perhaps in the Iranian army, against the IRGC. Polls show that tens of millions of Iranians LOATHE the mullahs, so they wouldn’t lack support
Having a sneaking suspicion that the US is randomly raining death on foreigners because there are domestic stories they would like to sideline makes it hard to cheer enthusiastically.
The Iranian regime has been wishing death on America (and us) for almost 50 years so it's not entirely random.
That is true, although the question "why now?" is a pertinent one.
Six very good reasons I can think of, all off the top of my head.
1: Because of the uranium-enrichment that Iran was found to have done, and which they have not co-operated with international authorities on even after the last set of attacks. 2: Because of the attacks on civilians in recent weeks. 3: Because the regime has never looked weaker. 4: Because the proxies that Iran has fought via have never been weaker (the proxies also being a valid justification for attacking). 5: Because the air defences etc have never been weaker. 6: Because an opportunity arose.
7. Epstein
8. Keep Bibi out of stir
In November, Bibi asked for a pardon from the President of Israel on the grounds of Israel’s difficult security situation. (Trump supported the request.) I imagine Israel’s security situation would improve significantly were Netanyahu to get that pardon.
I missed my flight home. Yep. I hear you all wisely sighing: “that’s war for you”
Actually, it was food poisoning. Woke up with weird shivers and chills then vomited for an hour
Unideal for a 15 hour flight
Make sure you replace electrolytes before flying.
Thanks. It was most unpleasant - and quite expensive - no refund on my flight
But I’m already feeling a bit better and, actually, a few more days in Shanghai is not a great burden. The city is compelling and the hotels remain absurdly cheap
Have you been to Suzhou, Wuxi, or Huzhou on the bullet train? Or closer (end of the metro) Zhuijaijaio?
I haven’t. Would you recommend? I have 7 days left on my visa if I stay
Having a sneaking suspicion that the US is randomly raining death on foreigners because there are domestic stories they would like to sideline makes it hard to cheer enthusiastically.
The Iranian regime has been wishing death on America (and us) for almost 50 years so it's not entirely random.
That is true, although the question "why now?" is a pertinent one.
The Telegraph and NYT have the same story on “why now” so I suspect it’s true
1. There were fears Iran was preparing its own unilateral attack on Israel
2. Trump decided the Iranians really weren’t interested in serious talks on nukes
3. The Israelis said - “we have an incredible opportunity coming up, may not happen again, the entire Iranian leadership is gathering in one place, on this one day”
So they seized the moment. However twits like @DavidL think Trump should have gone to Congress, the UN, left wing British judges, Sky News TV and Lily Allen and her mum to get their “permission” before killing the most evil regime on earth
Why do you think it will kill it?
One of Trump's starting positions is that he will not send in soldiers to put boots on the ground, which is pretty much a guarantee of it not succeeding.
Well they did literally slaughter almost all the upper echelon of the regime. In one day
An incredible military success, whatever your thoughts on Trump, Bibi etc (and they are both odious - but then recall we supported Stalin over Hitler)
Will this overthrow the regime in toto? It MIGHT. If America says “we will keep killing your leaders until you free your people” it could actually work
A more moderate group might emerge, perhaps in the Iranian army, against the IRGC. Polls show that tens of millions of Iranians LOATHE the mullahs, so they wouldn’t lack support
I don't think anyone has ever doubted the capabilities of the US Military when it puts its mind to something (even if running a nation after conquering it is a step beyond even them). If Trump wants them to do a specific thing there's a good chance they can do it, for better and worse.
A random thought. Is it not illegal in the US for the President to declare war; has to be done by Congress?
What are the chances of Congress getting VERY cross with Trump? Even allowing for the Republican majorities in both houses. Especially if US troops start coming home in body bags or US investments in the Gulf losing money?
No doubt congress has been told this isn't war. It's a special military operation etc.
How long that holds out is anyone's guess given most of them seem to want to be in office but not in power.
Congress appears to actively hate governing, they'd much rather things be done by Executive Order or the Courts.
Christ, even some of the most enthusiastic politicians out there - those on the Supreme Court - are a little tired of Congress always getting them to make the decisions, not that it bothers the Court most of the time.
Gorsuch:'...most major decisions affecting the rights and responsibilities of the American People...are funneled through the legislative process for a reason. Yes, legislating can be hard and take time. And, yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some pressing problem arises. But the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design. Through that process, the Nation can tap the combined wisdom of the people's elected representatives, not just that of one faction or man'
Yep, it seems as if the US "Checks and Balances" "Seperation of Powers" and its beloved "Constitution" are worth nothing.
I missed my flight home. Yep. I hear you all wisely sighing: “that’s war for you”
Actually, it was food poisoning. Woke up with weird shivers and chills then vomited for an hour
Unideal for a 15 hour flight
Make sure you replace electrolytes before flying.
Thanks. It was most unpleasant - and quite expensive - no refund on my flight
But I’m already feeling a bit better and, actually, a few more days in Shanghai is not a great burden. The city is compelling and the hotels remain absurdly cheap
Have you been to Suzhou, Wuxi, or Huzhou on the bullet train? Or closer (end of the metro) Zhuijaijaio?
I haven’t. Would you recommend? I have 7 days left on my visa if I stay
Suzhou is only 20 mins on the bullet train, Wuxi I think about an hour. Zhuijaijaio takes a little bit over an hour on the metro from the centre.
Suzhou is famed for Humble Administrator's Garden, thought it was fine, it was very busy. Depends how much you like ancient Chinese gardens. I was more impreseed by Tiger Hill and Jinji Lake scenic area. I had a nice day out there. I didn't go to Wuxi as its famed for Cherry Blossom around Yuantouzhu Island Park, it might still be a few week early, worth checking. Zhuijaijaio, is worth an afternoon visit, ancient waterways / bridges.
A random thought. Is it not illegal in the US for the President to declare war; has to be done by Congress?
What are the chances of Congress getting VERY cross with Trump? Even allowing for the Republican majorities in both houses. Especially if US troops start coming home in body bags or US investments in the Gulf losing money?
No doubt congress has been told this isn't war. It's a special military operation etc.
How long that holds out is anyone's guess given most of them seem to want to be in office but not in power.
Congress appears to actively hate governing, they'd much rather things be done by Executive Order or the Courts.
Christ, even some of the most enthusiastic politicians out there - those on the Supreme Court - are a little tired of Congress always getting them to make the decisions, not that it bothers the Court most of the time.
Gorsuch:'...most major decisions affecting the rights and responsibilities of the American People...are funneled through the legislative process for a reason. Yes, legislating can be hard and take time. And, yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some pressing problem arises. But the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design. Through that process, the Nation can tap the combined wisdom of the people's elected representatives, not just that of one faction or man'
Yep, it seems as if the US "Checks and Balances" "Seperation of Powers" and its beloved "Constitution" are worth nothing.
All systems, those with very clear written safeguards and those operating more openly on informal conventions, ultimately rely on people choosing to operate to particular standards. Think of all the nice words on many an authoritarian regime's constitution. When leaders decide to discard the unspoken nicities and the spirit of the rules, with enthusiastic support from the public and often their own judges in many cases, it hollows out the whole political edifice. The US system has not collapsed, but it is being tested and is creaking.
Having a sneaking suspicion that the US is randomly raining death on foreigners because there are domestic stories they would like to sideline makes it hard to cheer enthusiastically.
The Iranian regime has been wishing death on America (and us) for almost 50 years so it's not entirely random.
That is true, although the question "why now?" is a pertinent one.
The Telegraph and NYT have the same story on “why now” so I suspect it’s true
1. There were fears Iran was preparing its own unilateral attack on Israel
2. Trump decided the Iranians really weren’t interested in serious talks on nukes
3. The Israelis said - “we have an incredible opportunity coming up, may not happen again, the entire Iranian leadership is gathering in one place, on this one day”
So they seized the moment. However twits like @DavidL think Trump should have gone to Congress, the UN, left wing British judges, Sky News TV and Lily Allen and her mum to get their “permission” before killing the most evil regime on earth
Why do you think it will kill it?
One of Trump's starting positions is that he will not send in soldiers to put boots on the ground, which is pretty much a guarantee of it not succeeding.
Well they did literally slaughter almost all the upper echelon of the regime. In one day
An incredible military success, whatever your thoughts on Trump, Bibi etc (and they are both odious - but then recall we supported Stalin over Hitler)
Will this overthrow the regime in toto? It MIGHT. If America says “we will keep killing your leaders until you free your people” it could actually work
A more moderate group might emerge, perhaps in the Iranian army, against the IRGC. Polls show that tens of millions of Iranians LOATHE the mullahs, so they wouldn’t lack support
I don't know - those may be decent reasons. But my understanding is that they are organisationally dug in with 3 or 4 levels of deputies for everything.
I think that there's a strong element of playing roulette hoping for a zero, here.
I can't help wondering if the USA is actually as strong as Trump thinks it is - without reaching for my heavy skepticism on Trump, the US armed forces are thin in many respects. I am not sure that they cannot be reached to be given a bloody nose.
I also wonder about attacks on the US mainland, but that depends if the Iranian regime has sleepers. We all know what a seismic event 9/11 turned out to be, and the last serious war events on US soil were 150 years ago.
I missed my flight home. Yep. I hear you all wisely sighing: “that’s war for you”
Actually, it was food poisoning. Woke up with weird shivers and chills then vomited for an hour
Unideal for a 15 hour flight
Make sure you replace electrolytes before flying.
Thanks. It was most unpleasant - and quite expensive - no refund on my flight
But I’m already feeling a bit better and, actually, a few more days in Shanghai is not a great burden. The city is compelling and the hotels remain absurdly cheap
Have you been to Suzhou, Wuxi, or Huzhou on the bullet train? Or closer (end of the metro) Zhuijaijaio?
I haven’t. Would you recommend? I have 7 days left on my visa if I stay
Suzhou is only 20 mins on the bullet train, Wuxi I think about an hour. Zhuijaijaio takes a little bit over an hour on the metro from the centre.
Suzhou is famed for Humble Administrator's Garden, thought it was fine, it was very busy. Depends how much you like ancient Chinese gardens. I was more impreseed by Tiger Hill and Jinji Lake scenic area. I had a nice day out there. I didn't go to Wuxi as its famed for Cherry Blossom around Yuantouzhu Island Park, it might still be a few week early, worth checking. Zhuijaijaio, is worth an afternoon visit, ancient waterways / bridges.
The killing of Khamenei was certainly unexpected and by their actions the US and Israel have finally forced the middle east to confront the disruptiive nature of this murderous regime and sponsor of terror
It was interesting that at the UN, Iran only received support from Russia and China whilst being universally condemned by it's neighbours
Many on here praised Carney in standing upto Trump, but don't seem so happy that he pledged Canada's support for the US and Israel action as did Australia
In normal circumstances the UK PM would have done the same but he is so powerless he no choice but to sit on the fence
Anyway, we are involved in actively protecting our allies in the region and our base in Cyprus and hopefully Iran will come to it's senses and seek a deal with Trump
Nobody can know how long the airspace will be closed for, or the effect on oil prices, but let's hope it is not too long
Once again by choice or by not being fully briefed you misrepresent the position of Canada and Australia in a desperate attempt to attack Stsrmer
For the avoidance of any doubt
Canada supports the actions on Iran Australia welcomes the actions on Iran The UK welcome the actions on Iran
All 3 offer defensive support of their own citizens and bases
All 3 CATEGORICALLY oppose and w ill not at this time engage in direct aggressive action.
This is the position too of all European Countries with the exception of Spain who oppose the action.
ALL refer to the breaking of international law.
Starmer is once again totally aligned with the majority with the backbone to stand up to Trump and Netanyahu.
Meanwhile we all know what the right wing war mongering right wing leaders Farage and Badenoch want.
War against Islam Total blind support for Netanyahu brand of Zionism Ass kicking of Trump and MAGA
No doubt a bit of paki bashing in the UK and a bit of anti semitism would be most welcome.
Neither are fit to lead. Neither has any gravitas on the World stage and both would massively increase the risk to the UK and to UK citizens here and abroad.
The right want to fight anybody anywhere and have a pauciry of ideas other than division and confrontation
Having a sneaking suspicion that the US is randomly raining death on foreigners because there are domestic stories they would like to sideline makes it hard to cheer enthusiastically.
The Iranian regime has been wishing death on America (and us) for almost 50 years so it's not entirely random.
That is true, although the question "why now?" is a pertinent one.
Six very good reasons I can think of, all off the top of my head.
1: Because of the uranium-enrichment that Iran was found to have done, and which they have not co-operated with international authorities on even after the last set of attacks. 2: Because of the attacks on civilians in recent weeks. 3: Because the regime has never looked weaker. 4: Because the proxies that Iran has fought via have never been weaker (the proxies also being a valid justification for attacking). 5: Because the air defences etc have never been weaker. 6: Because an opportunity arose.
7. Epstein
8. Keep Bibi out of stir
In November, Bibi asked for a pardon from the President of Israel on the grounds of Israel’s difficult security situation. (Trump supported the request.) I imagine Israel’s security situation would improve significantly were Netanyahu to get that pardon.
The World will be a far better place when he is in a Court in the Hague facing chargesbif mass murder and war crimes together with Hamas.
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Indeed
In the end it will destroy them. The eco left LGBTQ types are in bed with horrible ultra-sectarian Islamists who will happily and violently take over if and when they’re given the chance
With proper scrutiny I expect the Greens to fall badly away. Eventually
It’s a shame because there’s a need for a genuinely left wing party with real redistributive purpose. I don’t remotely agree with all that but many do and it needs representation
What they don’t need is a supposed Green party tainted with vile Islamism which apparently no longer has any Green policies
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Polanski saw an opportunity to absorb the 2019 Corbyn coalition and took it. In that sense he’s a skilled politician.
However this is the danger of Labour going after this lot, it is completely toxic to the rest of the electorate.
Labour needs to change something and be radical. But going to the left is not it.
In that sense Rayner would not be a bad option because she’s not very left wing despite people pretending she is. However I just cannot take her seriously as a candidate.
The killing of Khamenei was certainly unexpected and by their actions the US and Israel have finally forced the middle east to confront the disruptiive nature of this murderous regime and sponsor of terror
It was interesting that at the UN, Iran only received support from Russia and China whilst being universally condemned by it's neighbours
Many on here praised Carney in standing upto Trump, but don't seem so happy that he pledged Canada's support for the US and Israel action as did Australia
In normal circumstances the UK PM would have done the same but he is so powerless he no choice but to sit on the fence
Anyway, we are involved in actively protecting our allies in the region and our base in Cyprus and hopefully Iran will come to it's senses and seek a deal with Trump
Nobody can know how long the airspace will be closed for, or the effect on oil prices, but let's hope it is not too long
Once again by choice or by not being fully briefed you misrepresent the position of Canada and Australia in a desperate attempt to attack Stsrmer
For the avoidance of any doubt
Canada supports the actions on Iran Australia welcomes the actions on Iran The UK welcome the actions on Iran
All 3 offer defensive support of their own citizens and bases
All 3 CATEGORICALLY oppose and w ill not at this time engage in direct aggressive action.
This is the position too of all European Countries with the exception of Spain who oppose the action.
ALL refer to the breaking of international law.
Starmer is once again totally aligned with the majority with the backbone to stand up to Trump and Netanyahu.
Meanwhile we all know what the right wing war mongering right wing leaders Farage and Badenoch want.
War against Islam Total blind support for Netanyahu brand of Zionism Ass kicking of Trump and MAGA
No doubt a bit of paki bashing in the UK and a bit of anti semitism would be most welcome.
Neither are fit to lead. Neither has any gravitas on the World stage and both would massively increase the risk to the UK and to UK citizens here and abroad.
The right want to fight anybody anywhere and have a pauciry of ideas other than division and confrontation
Having a sneaking suspicion that the US is randomly raining death on foreigners because there are domestic stories they would like to sideline makes it hard to cheer enthusiastically.
The Iranian regime has been wishing death on America (and us) for almost 50 years so it's not entirely random.
That is true, although the question "why now?" is a pertinent one.
The Telegraph and NYT have the same story on “why now” so I suspect it’s true
1. There were fears Iran was preparing its own unilateral attack on Israel
2. Trump decided the Iranians really weren’t interested in serious talks on nukes
3. The Israelis said - “we have an incredible opportunity coming up, may not happen again, the entire Iranian leadership is gathering in one place, on this one day”
So they seized the moment. However twits like @DavidL think Trump should have gone to Congress, the UN, left wing British judges, Sky News TV and Lily Allen and her mum to get their “permission” before killing the most evil regime on earth
Why do you think it will kill it?
One of Trump's starting positions is that he will not send in soldiers to put boots on the ground, which is pretty much a guarantee of it not succeeding.
Well they did literally slaughter almost all the upper echelon of the regime. In one day
An incredible military success, whatever your thoughts on Trump, Bibi etc (and they are both odious - but then recall we supported Stalin over Hitler)
Will this overthrow the regime in toto? It MIGHT. If America says “we will keep killing your leaders until you free your people” it could actually work
A more moderate group might emerge, perhaps in the Iranian army, against the IRGC. Polls show that tens of millions of Iranians LOATHE the mullahs, so they wouldn’t lack support
I don't know - those may be decent reasons. But my understanding is that they are organisationally dug in with 3 or 4 levels of deputies for everything.
I think that there's a strong element of playing roulette hoping for a zero, here.
I can't help wondering if the USA is actually as strong as Trump thinks it is - without reaching for my heavy skepticism on Trump, the US armed forces are thin in many respects. I am not sure that they cannot be reached to be given a bloody nose.
I also wonder about attacks on the US mainland, but that depends if the Iranian regime has sleepers. We all know what a seismic event 9/11 turned out to be, and the last serious war events on US soil were 150 years ago.
I guess we will find out.
Is having 3 or 4 levels of deputies even particularly unusual? The US Presidential line of succession has 18 levels. The line of succession for the UK's head of state has 7 people ready to go before we hit any problems.
Zack Polanski yet to apologise for his deputy leader’s actions. Greens are not fit.
Too many progressives/hard left have had their brains addled and now seem to support the Iranian regime because it's "not Trump" despite the tens of thousands of protesters they murdered just weeks ago - I mean you can see it here. Until that changed they are at no risk of splitting their voter alliance of Islamists and progressives. If anything I think their voters will very much agree with the actions of the Green leadership.
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Indeed
In the end it will destroy them. The eco left LGBTQ types are in bed with horrible ultra-sectarian Islamists who will happily and violently take over if and when they’re given the chance
With proper scrutiny I expect the Greens to fall badly away. Eventually
It’s a shame because there’s a need for a genuinely left wing party with real redistributive purpose. I don’t remotely agree with all that but many do and it needs representation
What they don’t need is a supposed Green party tainted with vile Islamism which apparently no longer has any Green policies
Id hope Ramsay, Chowns and Denyer would run a mile from the new 'Greens'. Berry, not so much, she appears utterly devoid of principles
The killing of Khamenei was certainly unexpected and by their actions the US and Israel have finally forced the middle east to confront the disruptiive nature of this murderous regime and sponsor of terror
It was interesting that at the UN, Iran only received support from Russia and China whilst being universally condemned by it's neighbours
Many on here praised Carney in standing upto Trump, but don't seem so happy that he pledged Canada's support for the US and Israel action as did Australia
In normal circumstances the UK PM would have done the same but he is so powerless he no choice but to sit on the fence
Anyway, we are involved in actively protecting our allies in the region and our base in Cyprus and hopefully Iran will come to it's senses and seek a deal with Trump
Nobody can know how long the airspace will be closed for, or the effect on oil prices, but let's hope it is not too long
Once again by choice or by not being fully briefed you misrepresent the position of Canada and Australia in a desperate attempt to attack Stsrmer
For the avoidance of any doubt
Canada supports the actions on Iran Australia welcomes the actions on Iran The UK welcome the actions on Iran
All 3 offer defensive support of their own citizens and bases
All 3 CATEGORICALLY oppose and w ill not at this time engage in direct aggressive action.
This is the position too of all European Countries with the exception of Spain who oppose the action.
ALL refer to the breaking of international law.
Starmer is once again totally aligned with the majority with the backbone to stand up to Trump and Netanyahu.
Meanwhile we all know what the right wing war mongering right wing leaders Farage and Badenoch want.
War against Islam Total blind support for Netanyahu brand of Zionism Ass kicking of Trump and MAGA
No doubt a bit of paki bashing in the UK and a bit of anti semitism would be most welcome.
Neither are fit to lead. Neither has any gravitas on the World stage and both would massively increase the risk to the UK and to UK citizens here and abroad.
The right want to fight anybody anywhere and have a pauciry of ideas other than division and confrontation
I’m sorry, are you complaining about anti-Semitism??!
In the last few days you’ve accused Labour of being run by a “Zionist clique”, “their Zionist bosses”, and a “Zionist cabal”
One is perhaps forgivable. Two is deeply suspicious. The full house says you hate Jews
I missed my flight home. Yep. I hear you all wisely sighing: “that’s war for you”
Actually, it was food poisoning. Woke up with weird shivers and chills then vomited for an hour
Unideal for a 15 hour flight
Make sure you replace electrolytes before flying.
Thanks. It was most unpleasant - and quite expensive - no refund on my flight
But I’m already feeling a bit better and, actually, a few more days in Shanghai is not a great burden. The city is compelling and the hotels remain absurdly cheap
Have you been to Shanghai 1933 Slaughterhouse (Old Millfun) Not sure if brutalism is your thing (maybe it's technically not brutalism since it's so early) but it's one of my favourite buildings in the entire world, I love it so much.
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Polanski saw an opportunity to absorb the 2019 Corbyn coalition and took it. In that sense he’s a skilled politician.
However this is the danger of Labour going after this lot, it is completely toxic to the rest of the electorate.
Labour needs to change something and be radical. But going to the left is not it.
In that sense Rayner would not be a bad option because she’s not very left wing despite people pretending she is. However I just cannot take her seriously as a candidate.
Corbyn won more votes than Starmer, which suggests that the Corbynites aren't "completely toxic to the rest of the electorate".
Having a sneaking suspicion that the US is randomly raining death on foreigners because there are domestic stories they would like to sideline makes it hard to cheer enthusiastically.
The Iranian regime has been wishing death on America (and us) for almost 50 years so it's not entirely random.
That is true, although the question "why now?" is a pertinent one.
The Telegraph and NYT have the same story on “why now” so I suspect it’s true
1. There were fears Iran was preparing its own unilateral attack on Israel
2. Trump decided the Iranians really weren’t interested in serious talks on nukes
3. The Israelis said - “we have an incredible opportunity coming up, may not happen again, the entire Iranian leadership is gathering in one place, on this one day”
So they seized the moment. However twits like @DavidL think Trump should have gone to Congress, the UN, left wing British judges, Sky News TV and Lily Allen and her mum to get their “permission” before killing the most evil regime on earth
Why do you think it will kill it?
One of Trump's starting positions is that he will not send in soldiers to put boots on the ground, which is pretty much a guarantee of it not succeeding.
Well they did literally slaughter almost all the upper echelon of the regime. In one day
An incredible military success, whatever your thoughts on Trump, Bibi etc (and they are both odious - but then recall we supported Stalin over Hitler)
Will this overthrow the regime in toto? It MIGHT. If America says “we will keep killing your leaders until you free your people” it could actually work
A more moderate group might emerge, perhaps in the Iranian army, against the IRGC. Polls show that tens of millions of Iranians LOATHE the mullahs, so they wouldn’t lack support
I don't know - those may be decent reasons. But my understanding is that they are organisationally dug in with 3 or 4 levels of deputies for everything.
I think that there's a strong element of playing roulette hoping for a zero, here.
I can't help wondering if the USA is actually as strong as Trump thinks it is - without reaching for my heavy skepticism on Trump, the US armed forces are thin in many respects. I am not sure that they cannot be reached to be given a bloody nose.
I also wonder about attacks on the US mainland, but that depends if the Iranian regime has sleepers. We all know what a seismic event 9/11 turned out to be, and the last serious war events on US soil were 150 years ago.
I guess we will find out.
Is having 3 or 4 levels of deputies even particularly unusual? The US Presidential line of succession has 18 levels. The line of succession for the UK's head of state has 7 people ready to go before we hit any problems.
That's from people who make their living watching Iran.
The structure is very complex, with multiple segments and stakeholders. There was some interesting commentary in the link I posted.
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Indeed
In the end it will destroy them. The eco left LGBTQ types are in bed with horrible ultra-sectarian Islamists who will happily and violently take over if and when they’re given the chance
With proper scrutiny I expect the Greens to fall badly away. Eventually
It’s a shame because there’s a need for a genuinely left wing party with real redistributive purpose. I don’t remotely agree with all that but many do and it needs representation
What they don’t need is a supposed Green party tainted with vile Islamism which apparently no longer has any Green policies
Id hope Ramsay, Chowns and Denyer would run a mile from the new 'Greens'. Berry, not so much, she appears utterly devoid of principles
It's difficult to see how the first two keep their seats to be honest.
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Indeed
In the end it will destroy them. The eco left LGBTQ types are in bed with horrible ultra-sectarian Islamists who will happily and violently take over if and when they’re given the chance
With proper scrutiny I expect the Greens to fall badly away. Eventually
It’s a shame because there’s a need for a genuinely left wing party with real redistributive purpose. I don’t remotely agree with all that but many do and it needs representation
What they don’t need is a supposed Green party tainted with vile Islamism which apparently no longer has any Green policies
It will turn out that the progressive/hard left are Islam's useful idiots, not the other way around. Each side thinks they are using the other to advance their agenda, in the end only one side is willing to behead people to achieve their aims.
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Polanski saw an opportunity to absorb the 2019 Corbyn coalition and took it. In that sense he’s a skilled politician.
However this is the danger of Labour going after this lot, it is completely toxic to the rest of the electorate.
Labour needs to change something and be radical. But going to the left is not it.
In that sense Rayner would not be a bad option because she’s not very left wing despite people pretending she is. However I just cannot take her seriously as a candidate.
Corbyn won more votes than Starmer, which suggests that the Corbynites aren't "completely toxic to the rest of the electorate".
He piled up votes in the wrong places. So yes he piled up votes in Gorton and Denton but wasn’t able to win seats like Basingstoke (only saying that seat because I know it).
So yes Labour is fine to go for that strategy again but it surely is one that accepts they’ve lost the election before it started and they’re giving up.
Going back to G&D for a moment. The lesson for Labour isn’t “move left”. Reform aren’t left, and they beat Labour.
It’s umph. People know the country is broken and want politicians who tell them what can be done to fix it.
Left. Right. Matters less than old school partisans think. Haven’t we learned this already? Blair won two landslides by occupying the right. Johnson won a substantial majority by occupying the left.
Both offered hope - with a simple plan for what is wrong and what can be done.
That’s all Labour need. A plan.
What is that plan, though?
The nearest to a plan that might work is "release funds for investment by covering current spending through broad-based tax rises".
Imagine a left-wing Peter Mannion saying it in the "Yes and Ho" scene from The Thick Of It.
Blair and Johnson could offer a popular plan with lots of upside and minimal downside. In Blair's case, thanks to a good fiscal situation (it's just that the public realm was shit), in Johnson's, thanks to a near-psychopathic degree of dishonesty.
The killing of Khamenei was certainly unexpected and by their actions the US and Israel have finally forced the middle east to confront the disruptiive nature of this murderous regime and sponsor of terror
It was interesting that at the UN, Iran only received support from Russia and China whilst being universally condemned by it's neighbours
Many on here praised Carney in standing upto Trump, but don't seem so happy that he pledged Canada's support for the US and Israel action as did Australia
In normal circumstances the UK PM would have done the same but he is so powerless he no choice but to sit on the fence
Anyway, we are involved in actively protecting our allies in the region and our base in Cyprus and hopefully Iran will come to it's senses and seek a deal with Trump
Nobody can know how long the airspace will be closed for, or the effect on oil prices, but let's hope it is not too long
Once again by choice or by not being fully briefed you misrepresent the position of Canada and Australia in a desperate attempt to attack Stsrmer
For the avoidance of any doubt
Canada supports the actions on Iran Australia welcomes the actions on Iran The UK welcome the actions on Iran
All 3 offer defensive support of their own citizens and bases
All 3 CATEGORICALLY oppose and w ill not at this time engage in direct aggressive action.
This is the position too of all European Countries with the exception of Spain who oppose the action.
ALL refer to the breaking of international law.
Starmer is once again totally aligned with the majority with the backbone to stand up to Trump and Netanyahu.
Meanwhile we all know what the right wing war mongering right wing leaders Farage and Badenoch want.
War against Islam Total blind support for Netanyahu brand of Zionism Ass kicking of Trump and MAGA
No doubt a bit of paki bashing in the UK and a bit of anti semitism would be most welcome.
Neither are fit to lead. Neither has any gravitas on the World stage and both would massively increase the risk to the UK and to UK citizens here and abroad.
The right want to fight anybody anywhere and have a pauciry of ideas other than division and confrontation
I’m sorry, are you complaining about anti-Semitism??!
In the last few days you’ve accused Labour of being run by a “Zionist clique”, “their Zionist bosses”, and a “Zionist cabal”
One is perhaps forgivable. Two is deeply suspicious. The full house says you hate Jews
I come from Jewish blood you fucking muppet
I fully understand the difference between anti semitism which I abhor and anti zionism which I fully endorse.
You are not fucking stupid you know the difference.
You typically seek like all Zionists to confuse the two.
Your ilk have the fucking brass neck to label Jews as anti semitic to excuse your zionist bloodlust.
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Polanski saw an opportunity to absorb the 2019 Corbyn coalition and took it. In that sense he’s a skilled politician.
However this is the danger of Labour going after this lot, it is completely toxic to the rest of the electorate.
Labour needs to change something and be radical. But going to the left is not it.
In that sense Rayner would not be a bad option because she’s not very left wing despite people pretending she is. However I just cannot take her seriously as a candidate.
Corbyn won more votes than Starmer, which suggests that the Corbynites aren't "completely toxic to the rest of the electorate".
He piled up votes in the wrong places. So yes he piled up votes in Gorton and Denton but wasn’t able to win seats like Basingstoke (only saying that seat because I know it).
So yes Labour is fine to go for that strategy again but it surely is one that accepts they’ve lost the election before it started and they’re giving up.
I won’t be voting for them in that case.
Yes, Corbyn lost. I wasn't disputing that, I wasn't disputing whether Corbynism is a sensible strategy for the Greens or Labour. I was just disputing your suggestion that it was "completely toxic".
The killing of Khamenei was certainly unexpected and by their actions the US and Israel have finally forced the middle east to confront the disruptiive nature of this murderous regime and sponsor of terror
It was interesting that at the UN, Iran only received support from Russia and China whilst being universally condemned by it's neighbours
Many on here praised Carney in standing upto Trump, but don't seem so happy that he pledged Canada's support for the US and Israel action as did Australia
In normal circumstances the UK PM would have done the same but he is so powerless he no choice but to sit on the fence
Anyway, we are involved in actively protecting our allies in the region and our base in Cyprus and hopefully Iran will come to it's senses and seek a deal with Trump
Nobody can know how long the airspace will be closed for, or the effect on oil prices, but let's hope it is not too long
Once again by choice or by not being fully briefed you misrepresent the position of Canada and Australia in a desperate attempt to attack Stsrmer
For the avoidance of any doubt
Canada supports the actions on Iran Australia welcomes the actions on Iran The UK welcome the actions on Iran
All 3 offer defensive support of their own citizens and bases
All 3 CATEGORICALLY oppose and w ill not at this time engage in direct aggressive action.
This is the position too of all European Countries with the exception of Spain who oppose the action.
ALL refer to the breaking of international law.
Starmer is once again totally aligned with the majority with the backbone to stand up to Trump and Netanyahu.
Meanwhile we all know what the right wing war mongering right wing leaders Farage and Badenoch want.
War against Islam Total blind support for Netanyahu brand of Zionism Ass kicking of Trump and MAGA
No doubt a bit of paki bashing in the UK and a bit of anti semitism would be most welcome.
Neither are fit to lead. Neither has any gravitas on the World stage and both would massively increase the risk to the UK and to UK citizens here and abroad.
The right want to fight anybody anywhere and have a pauciry of ideas other than division and confrontation
I’m sorry, are you complaining about anti-Semitism??!
In the last few days you’ve accused Labour of being run by a “Zionist clique”, “their Zionist bosses”, and a “Zionist cabal”
One is perhaps forgivable. Two is deeply suspicious. The full house says you hate Jews
You may as well have produced a pin and put Saturday Night Fever on
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Indeed
In the end it will destroy them. The eco left LGBTQ types are in bed with horrible ultra-sectarian Islamists who will happily and violently take over if and when they’re given the chance
With proper scrutiny I expect the Greens to fall badly away. Eventually
It’s a shame because there’s a need for a genuinely left wing party with real redistributive purpose. I don’t remotely agree with all that but many do and it needs representation
What they don’t need is a supposed Green party tainted with vile Islamism which apparently no longer has any Green policies
Id hope Ramsay, Chowns and Denyer would run a mile from the new 'Greens'. Berry, not so much, she appears utterly devoid of principles
It's difficult to see how the first two keep their seats to be honest.
Waveney Valley is not too far from me. Its certainy not Gorton and Denton. Arts and Craftsy rural East Anglia with some 'hotel' issues in Diss and a fairly decent Tory base that might be tempted by Reform or rally round the evict the Greens effort. Greens have decent council presence though (subject to May!)
Going back to G&D for a moment. The lesson for Labour isn’t “move left”. Reform aren’t left, and they beat Labour.
It’s umph. People know the country is broken and want politicians who tell them what can be done to fix it.
Left. Right. Matters less than old school partisans think. Haven’t we learned this already? Blair won two landslides by occupying the right. Johnson won a substantial majority by occupying the left.
Both offered hope - with a simple plan for what is wrong and what can be done.
That’s all Labour need. A plan.
Hope and a plan. That is where Farage has gone wrong. He's handed over Reform to a bunch of tired old Tories who, crucially, learned negative campaigning at the knee of David Cameron. Brexit offered hope and a plan. Last Thursday, Reform didn't.
The killing of Khamenei was certainly unexpected and by their actions the US and Israel have finally forced the middle east to confront the disruptiive nature of this murderous regime and sponsor of terror
It was interesting that at the UN, Iran only received support from Russia and China whilst being universally condemned by it's neighbours
Many on here praised Carney in standing upto Trump, but don't seem so happy that he pledged Canada's support for the US and Israel action as did Australia
In normal circumstances the UK PM would have done the same but he is so powerless he no choice but to sit on the fence
Anyway, we are involved in actively protecting our allies in the region and our base in Cyprus and hopefully Iran will come to it's senses and seek a deal with Trump
Nobody can know how long the airspace will be closed for, or the effect on oil prices, but let's hope it is not too long
Once again by choice or by not being fully briefed you misrepresent the position of Canada and Australia in a desperate attempt to attack Stsrmer
For the avoidance of any doubt
Canada supports the actions on Iran Australia welcomes the actions on Iran The UK welcome the actions on Iran
All 3 offer defensive support of their own citizens and bases
All 3 CATEGORICALLY oppose and w ill not at this time engage in direct aggressive action.
This is the position too of all European Countries with the exception of Spain who oppose the action.
ALL refer to the breaking of international law.
Starmer is once again totally aligned with the majority with the backbone to stand up to Trump and Netanyahu.
Meanwhile we all know what the right wing war mongering right wing leaders Farage and Badenoch want.
War against Islam Total blind support for Netanyahu brand of Zionism Ass kicking of Trump and MAGA
No doubt a bit of paki bashing in the UK and a bit of anti semitism would be most welcome.
Neither are fit to lead. Neither has any gravitas on the World stage and both would massively increase the risk to the UK and to UK citizens here and abroad.
The right want to fight anybody anywhere and have a pauciry of ideas other than division and confrontation
I’m sorry, are you complaining about anti-Semitism??!
In the last few days you’ve accused Labour of being run by a “Zionist clique”, “their Zionist bosses”, and a “Zionist cabal”
One is perhaps forgivable. Two is deeply suspicious. The full house says you hate Jews
You may as well have produced a pin and put Saturday Night Fever on
Going back to G&D for a moment. The lesson for Labour isn’t “move left”. Reform aren’t left, and they beat Labour.
It’s umph. People know the country is broken and want politicians who tell them what can be done to fix it.
Left. Right. Matters less than old school partisans think. Haven’t we learned this already? Blair won two landslides by occupying the right. Johnson won a substantial majority by occupying the left.
Both offered hope - with a simple plan for what is wrong and what can be done.
That’s all Labour need. A plan.
What is that plan, though?
The nearest to a plan that might work is "release funds for investment by covering current spending through broad-based tax rises".
Imagine a left-wing Peter Mannion saying it in the "Yes and Ho" scene from The Thick Of It.
Blair and Johnson could offer a popular plan with lots of upside and minimal downside. In Blair's case, thanks to a good fiscal situation (it's just that the public realm was shit), in Johnson's, thanks to a near-psychopathic degree of dishonesty.
Well here’s where rarely (on this board) I have some sympathy for Starmer. I think if there was lots of money to throw around he’d be happily doing his basically 2017-lite manifesto.
The issue is that there isn’t. And beyond Burnham who seems to think we can just ignore it, no potential candidate is really doing anything.
I do think Labour’s fundamental view to grow the economy is the right one. However nothing has convinced me they actually have a good idea of how.
It will be interesting to see what the next leader immediately dumps.
Going back to G&D for a moment. The lesson for Labour isn’t “move left”. Reform aren’t left, and they beat Labour.
It’s umph. People know the country is broken and want politicians who tell them what can be done to fix it.
Left. Right. Matters less than old school partisans think. Haven’t we learned this already? Blair won two landslides by occupying the right. Johnson won a substantial majority by occupying the left.
Both offered hope - with a simple plan for what is wrong and what can be done.
That’s all Labour need. A plan.
Hope and a plan. That is where Farage has gone wrong. He's handed over Reform to a bunch of tired old Tories who, crucially, learned negative campaigning at the knee of David Cameron. Brexit offered hope and a plan. Last Thursday, Reform didn't.
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Indeed
In the end it will destroy them. The eco left LGBTQ types are in bed with horrible ultra-sectarian Islamists who will happily and violently take over if and when they’re given the chance
With proper scrutiny I expect the Greens to fall badly away. Eventually
It’s a shame because there’s a need for a genuinely left wing party with real redistributive purpose. I don’t remotely agree with all that but many do and it needs representation
What they don’t need is a supposed Green party tainted with vile Islamism which apparently no longer has any Green policies
Surely Corbyn and the Islamic Independents will end up merging with the Greens.
I quite like environmentalism, it would be great if it were incorporated into politics without having to turn turn the country into an Islamic Republic. They'd fuck all that green shit off anyway
The killing of Khamenei was certainly unexpected and by their actions the US and Israel have finally forced the middle east to confront the disruptiive nature of this murderous regime and sponsor of terror
It was interesting that at the UN, Iran only received support from Russia and China whilst being universally condemned by it's neighbours
Many on here praised Carney in standing upto Trump, but don't seem so happy that he pledged Canada's support for the US and Israel action as did Australia
In normal circumstances the UK PM would have done the same but he is so powerless he no choice but to sit on the fence
Anyway, we are involved in actively protecting our allies in the region and our base in Cyprus and hopefully Iran will come to it's senses and seek a deal with Trump
Nobody can know how long the airspace will be closed for, or the effect on oil prices, but let's hope it is not too long
Once again by choice or by not being fully briefed you misrepresent the position of Canada and Australia in a desperate attempt to attack Stsrmer
For the avoidance of any doubt
Canada supports the actions on Iran Australia welcomes the actions on Iran The UK welcome the actions on Iran
All 3 offer defensive support of their own citizens and bases
All 3 CATEGORICALLY oppose and w ill not at this time engage in direct aggressive action.
This is the position too of all European Countries with the exception of Spain who oppose the action.
ALL refer to the breaking of international law.
Starmer is once again totally aligned with the majority with the backbone to stand up to Trump and Netanyahu.
Meanwhile we all know what the right wing war mongering right wing leaders Farage and Badenoch want.
War against Islam Total blind support for Netanyahu brand of Zionism Ass kicking of Trump and MAGA
No doubt a bit of paki bashing in the UK and a bit of anti semitism would be most welcome.
Neither are fit to lead. Neither has any gravitas on the World stage and both would massively increase the risk to the UK and to UK citizens here and abroad.
The right want to fight anybody anywhere and have a pauciry of ideas other than division and confrontation
I’m sorry, are you complaining about anti-Semitism??!
In the last few days you’ve accused Labour of being run by a “Zionist clique”, “their Zionist bosses”, and a “Zionist cabal”
One is perhaps forgivable. Two is deeply suspicious. The full house says you hate Jews
You may as well have produced a pin and put Saturday Night Fever on
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Indeed
In the end it will destroy them. The eco left LGBTQ types are in bed with horrible ultra-sectarian Islamists who will happily and violently take over if and when they’re given the chance
With proper scrutiny I expect the Greens to fall badly away. Eventually
It’s a shame because there’s a need for a genuinely left wing party with real redistributive purpose. I don’t remotely agree with all that but many do and it needs representation
What they don’t need is a supposed Green party tainted with vile Islamism which apparently no longer has any Green policies
And I see no need for a right wing populist party tainted with racism so I'm hoping they (Reform) explode under scrutiny. But I'm afraid once the populism train gets rolling you don't know where it will end up because it's down to the electorate and the electoral system.
You've been happy enough when it was all going in the direction you want. If there's now a touch of consternation that it might go in the opposite direction, well that's the nature of the beast and thems the breaks. You should have behaved yourself.
The killing of Khamenei was certainly unexpected and by their actions the US and Israel have finally forced the middle east to confront the disruptiive nature of this murderous regime and sponsor of terror
It was interesting that at the UN, Iran only received support from Russia and China whilst being universally condemned by it's neighbours
Many on here praised Carney in standing upto Trump, but don't seem so happy that he pledged Canada's support for the US and Israel action as did Australia
In normal circumstances the UK PM would have done the same but he is so powerless he no choice but to sit on the fence
Anyway, we are involved in actively protecting our allies in the region and our base in Cyprus and hopefully Iran will come to it's senses and seek a deal with Trump
Nobody can know how long the airspace will be closed for, or the effect on oil prices, but let's hope it is not too long
Once again by choice or by not being fully briefed you misrepresent the position of Canada and Australia in a desperate attempt to attack Stsrmer
For the avoidance of any doubt
Canada supports the actions on Iran Australia welcomes the actions on Iran The UK welcome the actions on Iran
All 3 offer defensive support of their own citizens and bases
All 3 CATEGORICALLY oppose and w ill not at this time engage in direct aggressive action.
This is the position too of all European Countries with the exception of Spain who oppose the action.
ALL refer to the breaking of international law.
Starmer is once again totally aligned with the majority with the backbone to stand up to Trump and Netanyahu.
Meanwhile we all know what the right wing war mongering right wing leaders Farage and Badenoch want.
War against Islam Total blind support for Netanyahu brand of Zionism Ass kicking of Trump and MAGA
No doubt a bit of paki bashing in the UK and a bit of anti semitism would be most welcome.
Neither are fit to lead. Neither has any gravitas on the World stage and both would massively increase the risk to the UK and to UK citizens here and abroad.
The right want to fight anybody anywhere and have a pauciry of ideas other than division and confrontation
I’m sorry, are you complaining about anti-Semitism??!
In the last few days you’ve accused Labour of being run by a “Zionist clique”, “their Zionist bosses”, and a “Zionist cabal”
One is perhaps forgivable. Two is deeply suspicious. The full house says you hate Jews
I come from Jewish blood you fucking muppet
I fully understand the difference between anti semitism which I abhor and anti zionism which I fully endorse.
You are not fucking stupid you know the difference.
You typically seek like all Zionists to confuse the two.
Your ilk have the fucking brass neck to label Jews as anti semitic to excuse your zionist bloodlust.
Foul language directed at your fellow posters is a no no
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Polanski saw an opportunity to absorb the 2019 Corbyn coalition and took it. In that sense he’s a skilled politician.
However this is the danger of Labour going after this lot, it is completely toxic to the rest of the electorate.
Labour needs to change something and be radical. But going to the left is not it.
In that sense Rayner would not be a bad option because she’s not very left wing despite people pretending she is. However I just cannot take her seriously as a candidate.
Corbyn won more votes than Starmer, which suggests that the Corbynites aren't "completely toxic to the rest of the electorate".
He piled up votes in the wrong places. So yes he piled up votes in Gorton and Denton but wasn’t able to win seats like Basingstoke (only saying that seat because I know it).
So yes Labour is fine to go for that strategy again but it surely is one that accepts they’ve lost the election before it started and they’re giving up.
I won’t be voting for them in that case.
Yes, Corbyn lost. I wasn't disputing that, I wasn't disputing whether Corbynism is a sensible strategy for the Greens or Labour. I was just disputing your suggestion that it was "completely toxic".
How does not losing in a landslide suggest it’s not completely toxic?
Is your point that in a very split electorate Corbyn could have won in 2019?
@RochdalePioneers we often agree and I find your insight useful as always.
Genuinely don’t know who I’ll vote for when Starmer goes. There just does not seem to be an obvious option. Burnham by default who I utterly despise however he’s clearly got something that I don’t understand.
I missed my flight home. Yep. I hear you all wisely sighing: “that’s war for you”
Actually, it was food poisoning. Woke up with weird shivers and chills then vomited for an hour
Unideal for a 15 hour flight
Make sure you replace electrolytes before flying.
Thanks. It was most unpleasant - and quite expensive - no refund on my flight
But I’m already feeling a bit better and, actually, a few more days in Shanghai is not a great burden. The city is compelling and the hotels remain absurdly cheap
Have you been to Shanghai 1933 Slaughterhouse (Old Millfun) Not sure if brutalism is your thing (maybe it's technically not brutalism since it's so early) but it's one of my favourite buildings in the entire world, I love it so much.
I haven’t but I shall. I may as well exploit my time here
Thanks for the suggestion. I will definitely give it a look
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Polanski saw an opportunity to absorb the 2019 Corbyn coalition and took it. In that sense he’s a skilled politician.
However this is the danger of Labour going after this lot, it is completely toxic to the rest of the electorate.
Labour needs to change something and be radical. But going to the left is not it.
In that sense Rayner would not be a bad option because she’s not very left wing despite people pretending she is. However I just cannot take her seriously as a candidate.
Corbyn won more votes than Starmer, which suggests that the Corbynites aren't "completely toxic to the rest of the electorate".
He piled up votes in the wrong places. So yes he piled up votes in Gorton and Denton but wasn’t able to win seats like Basingstoke (only saying that seat because I know it).
So yes Labour is fine to go for that strategy again but it surely is one that accepts they’ve lost the election before it started and they’re giving up.
I won’t be voting for them in that case.
Yes, Corbyn lost. I wasn't disputing that, I wasn't disputing whether Corbynism is a sensible strategy for the Greens or Labour. I was just disputing your suggestion that it was "completely toxic".
How does not losing in a landslide suggest it’s not completely toxic?
Is your point that in a very split electorate Corbyn could have won in 2019?
Getting 32% of the vote is not completely toxic. The BNP peaked at 2% of the vote. They were completely toxic! I'm mainly just objecting to the hyperbole of "completely toxic".
Labour under Corbyn got 32%, which is more than any of the parties are currently polling. What happened in 2019 happened, but a party that re-builds the Corbyn coalition would be leading the polling today.
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Indeed
In the end it will destroy them. The eco left LGBTQ types are in bed with horrible ultra-sectarian Islamists who will happily and violently take over if and when they’re given the chance
With proper scrutiny I expect the Greens to fall badly away. Eventually
It’s a shame because there’s a need for a genuinely left wing party with real redistributive purpose. I don’t remotely agree with all that but many do and it needs representation
What they don’t need is a supposed Green party tainted with vile Islamism which apparently no longer has any Green policies
And I see no need for a right wing populist party tainted with racism so I'm hoping they (Reform) explode under scrutiny. But I'm afraid once the populism train gets rolling you don't know where it will end up because it's down to the electorate and the electoral system.
You've been happy enough when it was all going in the direction you want. If there's now a touch of consternation that it might go in the opposite direction, well that's the nature of the beast and thems the breaks. You should have behaved yourself.
Ludicrous, silly, incoherent piffle. And you know it
Zack Polanski yet to apologise for his deputy leader’s actions. Greens are not fit.
Too many progressives/hard left have had their brains addled and now seem to support the Iranian regime because it's "not Trump" despite the tens of thousands of protesters they murdered just weeks ago - I mean you can see it here. Until that changed they are at no risk of splitting their voter alliance of Islamists and progressives. If anything I think their voters will very much agree with the actions of the Green leadership.
Too often the adage 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' applies. Sometimes it works, for a while at any rate; Stalin's Soviet Union (after Hitler's attack anyway) is an example. Having watched Iranian politics, as much as any other dedicated follower of politics over the last seventy or so years, I would say that didn't apply to the mullahs; under them Iran wasn't anyone's friend except possibly other Shia dominated countries. They would trade with anyone, if necessary and weren't particularly scrupulous about with whom they traded. Putin's Russia doesn't strike me as particularly pro-Moslem for example. Rather their foreign policy was about identifying those they disliked (?hated) most and doing whatever they could to harm those they hated most. And they bore (?bear) grudges; we and the Americans did our level best to assist the late Shah, and we tried to cheat them out a considerable sum of money...... see Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe. The mullahs ran a peculiarly unpleasant regime, behind a facade of democracy, and I won't be sorry to see it go, always assuming that it'll be replaced by something more akin to democracy.
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Indeed
In the end it will destroy them. The eco left LGBTQ types are in bed with horrible ultra-sectarian Islamists who will happily and violently take over if and when they’re given the chance
With proper scrutiny I expect the Greens to fall badly away. Eventually
It’s a shame because there’s a need for a genuinely left wing party with real redistributive purpose. I don’t remotely agree with all that but many do and it needs representation
What they don’t need is a supposed Green party tainted with vile Islamism which apparently no longer has any Green policies
Surely Corbyn and the Islamic Independents will end up merging with the Greens.
I quite like environmentalism, it would be great if it were incorporated into politics without having to turn turn the country into an Islamic Republic. They'd fuck all that green shit off anyway
The other parties all have varying levels of Green policies. It's not the sole preserve of the Greens, so it isn't neccessary to go islamist or woke or marxist or whatever to get that.
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Polanski saw an opportunity to absorb the 2019 Corbyn coalition and took it. In that sense he’s a skilled politician.
However this is the danger of Labour going after this lot, it is completely toxic to the rest of the electorate.
Labour needs to change something and be radical. But going to the left is not it.
In that sense Rayner would not be a bad option because she’s not very left wing despite people pretending she is. However I just cannot take her seriously as a candidate.
Corbyn won more votes than Starmer, which suggests that the Corbynites aren't "completely toxic to the rest of the electorate".
He piled up votes in the wrong places. So yes he piled up votes in Gorton and Denton but wasn’t able to win seats like Basingstoke (only saying that seat because I know it).
So yes Labour is fine to go for that strategy again but it surely is one that accepts they’ve lost the election before it started and they’re giving up.
I won’t be voting for them in that case.
Yes, Corbyn lost. I wasn't disputing that, I wasn't disputing whether Corbynism is a sensible strategy for the Greens or Labour. I was just disputing your suggestion that it was "completely toxic".
How does not losing in a landslide suggest it’s not completely toxic?
Is your point that in a very split electorate Corbyn could have won in 2019?
Getting 32% of the vote is not completely toxic. The BNP peaked at 2% of the vote. They were completely toxic! I'm mainly just objecting to the hyperbole of "completely toxic".
Labour under Corbyn got 32%, which is more than any of the parties are currently polling. What happened in 2019 happened, but a party that re-builds the Corbyn coalition would be leading the polling today.
Would it? Polanski has rebuilt the Corbyn core vote on the new Ashcroft poll but the Greens are still third behind Reform and the Tories and only 2% ahead of Starmer Labour
The killing of Khamenei was certainly unexpected and by their actions the US and Israel have finally forced the middle east to confront the disruptiive nature of this murderous regime and sponsor of terror
It was interesting that at the UN, Iran only received support from Russia and China whilst being universally condemned by it's neighbours
Many on here praised Carney in standing upto Trump, but don't seem so happy that he pledged Canada's support for the US and Israel action as did Australia
In normal circumstances the UK PM would have done the same but he is so powerless he no choice but to sit on the fence
Anyway, we are involved in actively protecting our allies in the region and our base in Cyprus and hopefully Iran will come to it's senses and seek a deal with Trump
Nobody can know how long the airspace will be closed for, or the effect on oil prices, but let's hope it is not too long
Russia and China both have vetoes on the UN Security Council though, so there won't be any clear condemnation from the UN of Iran's actions and even the General Assembly is likely to be split
The killing of Khamenei was certainly unexpected and by their actions the US and Israel have finally forced the middle east to confront the disruptiive nature of this murderous regime and sponsor of terror
It was interesting that at the UN, Iran only received support from Russia and China whilst being universally condemned by it's neighbours
Many on here praised Carney in standing upto Trump, but don't seem so happy that he pledged Canada's support for the US and Israel action as did Australia
In normal circumstances the UK PM would have done the same but he is so powerless he no choice but to sit on the fence
Anyway, we are involved in actively protecting our allies in the region and our base in Cyprus and hopefully Iran will come to it's senses and seek a deal with Trump
Nobody can know how long the airspace will be closed for, or the effect on oil prices, but let's hope it is not too long
Russia and China both have vetoes on the UN Security Council though
Yes but it is irrelevant not least because Trump is ambivolent to it
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Polanski saw an opportunity to absorb the 2019 Corbyn coalition and took it. In that sense he’s a skilled politician.
However this is the danger of Labour going after this lot, it is completely toxic to the rest of the electorate.
Labour needs to change something and be radical. But going to the left is not it.
In that sense Rayner would not be a bad option because she’s not very left wing despite people pretending she is. However I just cannot take her seriously as a candidate.
Corbyn won more votes than Starmer, which suggests that the Corbynites aren't "completely toxic to the rest of the electorate".
He piled up votes in the wrong places. So yes he piled up votes in Gorton and Denton but wasn’t able to win seats like Basingstoke (only saying that seat because I know it).
So yes Labour is fine to go for that strategy again but it surely is one that accepts they’ve lost the election before it started and they’re giving up.
I won’t be voting for them in that case.
Yes, Corbyn lost. I wasn't disputing that, I wasn't disputing whether Corbynism is a sensible strategy for the Greens or Labour. I was just disputing your suggestion that it was "completely toxic".
How does not losing in a landslide suggest it’s not completely toxic?
Is your point that in a very split electorate Corbyn could have won in 2019?
Getting 32% of the vote is not completely toxic. The BNP peaked at 2% of the vote. They were completely toxic! I'm mainly just objecting to the hyperbole of "completely toxic".
Labour under Corbyn got 32%, which is more than any of the parties are currently polling. What happened in 2019 happened, but a party that re-builds the Corbyn coalition would be leading the polling today.
The Corbyn coalition frightened the horses. If the Greens were polling 32%, the lead right wing party would be polling 32%+.
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Polanski saw an opportunity to absorb the 2019 Corbyn coalition and took it. In that sense he’s a skilled politician.
However this is the danger of Labour going after this lot, it is completely toxic to the rest of the electorate.
Labour needs to change something and be radical. But going to the left is not it.
In that sense Rayner would not be a bad option because she’s not very left wing despite people pretending she is. However I just cannot take her seriously as a candidate.
Corbyn won more votes than Starmer, which suggests that the Corbynites aren't "completely toxic to the rest of the electorate".
He piled up votes in the wrong places. So yes he piled up votes in Gorton and Denton but wasn’t able to win seats like Basingstoke (only saying that seat because I know it).
So yes Labour is fine to go for that strategy again but it surely is one that accepts they’ve lost the election before it started and they’re giving up.
I won’t be voting for them in that case.
Yes, Corbyn lost. I wasn't disputing that, I wasn't disputing whether Corbynism is a sensible strategy for the Greens or Labour. I was just disputing your suggestion that it was "completely toxic".
How does not losing in a landslide suggest it’s not completely toxic?
Is your point that in a very split electorate Corbyn could have won in 2019?
Getting 32% of the vote is not completely toxic. The BNP peaked at 2% of the vote. They were completely toxic! I'm mainly just objecting to the hyperbole of "completely toxic".
Labour under Corbyn got 32%, which is more than any of the parties are currently polling. What happened in 2019 happened, but a party that re-builds the Corbyn coalition would be leading the polling today.
Would it? Polanski has rebuilt the Corbyn core vote on the new Ashcroft poll but the Greens are still third behind Reform and the Tories and only 2% ahead of Starmer Labour
That's begging the question. You claim that Polanski has rebuilt the Corbyn core vote. Maybe he hasn't? I suspect he's rebuilt some of the Corbyn core vote, combined with the older Green vote, and he's taken the party to new electoral successes. He could yet attract more support.
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
This is a real problem for Polanski. Would be better if the Corbynites fucked off and joined Your Party.
Indeed
In the end it will destroy them. The eco left LGBTQ types are in bed with horrible ultra-sectarian Islamists who will happily and violently take over if and when they’re given the chance
With proper scrutiny I expect the Greens to fall badly away. Eventually
It’s a shame because there’s a need for a genuinely left wing party with real redistributive purpose. I don’t remotely agree with all that but many do and it needs representation
What they don’t need is a supposed Green party tainted with vile Islamism which apparently no longer has any Green policies
Surely Corbyn and the Islamic Independents will end up merging with the Greens.
I quite like environmentalism, it would be great if it were incorporated into politics without having to turn turn the country into an Islamic Republic. They'd fuck all that green shit off anyway
The other parties all have varying levels of Green policies. It's not the sole preserve of the Greens, so it isn't neccessary to go islamist or woke or marxist or whatever to get that.
So the Iranian regime is hated by the Iranians, hated by all the Arabs, hated by everyone in the region, hated from London to the Lebanon, from Damascus to Los Angeles, indeed its hated by literally everyone else in the world - apart from Vladimir Putin - plus thousands and thousands of left wing morons in the West who hate Jews so much they support Tehran. And the British Green Party
Comments
Its raining death on very specific foreigners.
"And so it begins. You recall my concern that starting a war is easy, and controlling and ending much harder if at all possible. The Iranian regime is evil, yet I am taken aback at the hubris and ease of the decision to attack ... "
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Nc9R-NqEmM&t=1525s
1. There were fears Iran was preparing its own unilateral attack on Israel
2. Trump decided the Iranians really weren’t interested in serious talks on nukes
3. The Israelis said - “we have an incredible opportunity coming up, may not happen again, the entire Iranian leadership is gathering in one place, on this one day”
So they seized the moment. However twits like @DavidL think Trump should have gone to Congress, the UN, left wing British judges, Sky News TV and Lily Allen and her mum to get their “permission” before killing the most evil regime on earth
The Epstein news was getting very close to revealing compelling evidence applying the "p" word to Trump. This couldn't have been better timed.
How long that holds out is anyone's guess given most of them seem to want to be in office but not in power.
The US has not declared war, officially, IIRC since WWII. Not even Vietnam.
The War Powers Act grants POTUS as commander in chief the right to act, and POTUS can launch missiles and even send troops without Congressional approval but needs to inform Congress within 48 hours or recall the troops. However since no troops were sent, there's nothing to recall.
All Presidents in the modern era have sent missiles somewhere. They don't need Congressional approval.
I hope he loses the next election, but his successor is just as aggressive.
It’s umph. People know the country is broken and want politicians who tell them what can be done to fix it.
Left. Right. Matters less than old school partisans think. Haven’t we learned this already? Blair won two landslides by occupying the right. Johnson won a substantial majority by occupying the left.
Both offered hope - with a simple plan for what is wrong and what can be done.
That’s all Labour need. A plan.
The norm against the use of force to settle international disputes is an important achievement. But if every international lawyer's reaction to scenes such as this is to sourly lecture people to not be happy about scenes such as this, international law will be held in contempt.
https://nitter.poast.org/yuanyi_z/status/2027896809784303719#m
Just on this - international law experts questioning the legality of it all and wondering whether things will work out well have my respect because it’s their role to point out these issues.
But with human rights law experts condemning this unequivocally without thinking through the nuances involving an oppressed people yearning for someone to take out their oppressor and then lecturing them on how it’s bad to rely on evil US and the like, the most polite thing I can say is that I am profoundly disappointed. Their attitudes will inevitably feed the perception that some human rights experts only talk about human rights from the ivory tower but have zero understanding of how those facing oppression on the front lines have to think of and respond to situations.
https://nitter.poast.org/kevinkfyam/status/2027921952992858408#m
One of Trump's starting positions is that he will not send in soldiers to put boots on the ground, which is pretty much a guarantee of it not succeeding.
@andrew_lilico
The British government does not care about whether the attacks on Iran are morally justified, excessively risky, or will make the lives of Iranians & those of other countries safer, freer & spiritually healthier. It cares only about whether they comply with "international law".
https://x.com/andrew_lilico/status/2028058109688602753
Which is why it is important to have our own might and use that to ward off adversaries.
It is why investment in Defence, and alliances like NATO, matter.
And why Trump is a dangerous fool not for his actions on international law, but for his actions threatening NATO and allies like Greenland.
Christ, even some of the most enthusiastic politicians out there - those on the Supreme Court - are a little tired of Congress always getting them to make the decisions, not that it bothers the Court most of the time.
Gorsuch:'...most major decisions affecting the rights and responsibilities of the American People...are funneled through the legislative process for a reason. Yes, legislating can be hard and take time. And, yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some pressing problem arises. But the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design. Through that process, the Nation can tap the combined wisdom of the people's elected representatives, not just that of one faction or man'
So the relevant questions would be: Is this an emergency situation? Will it be complete before the end of 60 days?
Every President, from Ford onwards, has used this act as the legal basis for taking military action without Congressional approval. Some members of Congress have questioned whether an emergency existed, but I would be very surprised if it became a problem for the President.
But I’m already feeling a bit better and, actually, a few more days in Shanghai is not a great burden. The city is compelling and the hotels remain absurdly cheap
2) this Congress ? lol
I am not mourning the demise of the Ayatollah, but if Middle Eastern geopolitics were as simple as you suggest, Blair would been enjoying his seventh term as PM.
Trump is so narcisstic that he thinks every regime is like his own, a personal fiefdom where the rulers whim is law, with complete ideological flexibility.
It explains his approach to "Dealmaking" with foreign leaders on an individual basis, and a liking for people like Putin who do fit his model of personalised corrupt government.
It was the same control that allowed him to signficantly loot the party to fund his personal legal bills.
It was interesting that at the UN, Iran only received support from Russia and China whilst being universally condemned by it's neighbours
Many on here praised Carney in standing upto Trump, but don't seem so happy that he pledged Canada's support for the US and Israel action as did Australia
In normal circumstances the UK PM would have done the same but he is so powerless he no choice but to sit on the fence
Anyway, we are involved in actively protecting our allies in the region and our base in Cyprus and hopefully Iran will come to it's senses and seek a deal with Trump
Nobody can know how long the airspace will be closed for, or the effect on oil prices, but let's hope it is not too long
An incredible military success, whatever your thoughts on Trump, Bibi etc (and they are both odious - but then recall we supported Stalin over Hitler)
Will this overthrow the regime in toto? It MIGHT. If America says “we will keep killing your leaders until you free your people” it could actually work
A more moderate group might emerge, perhaps in the Iranian army, against the IRGC. Polls show that tens of millions of Iranians LOATHE the mullahs, so they wouldn’t lack support
So far they seem to have done a good job in protecting their military personnel.
Ashok Kumar | 🇵🇸
@broseph_stalin
*Spy thriller music* Years of deep-cover assets. Sleeper cells activated. Satellites locked on. Analysts whispering about “movement patterns.” Billions spent. They confirmed the Ayatollah’s precise location.
He was… at his house
https://x.com/broseph_stalin/status/2028060205301502114?s=20
It's possible to overplay the wow factor of intelligence gathering, but it's not nothing either.
“BREAKING
Deputy leader of the Green Party Motrin Ali and National Election organiser Fiaaz Hasan at pro Iran regime demonstration”
https://x.com/uprising_1/status/2027799723453673539?s=46
I see the utterly insane Piers Corbyn is there, a raging and unrepentant anti-Semite
Former politician? Say it ain't so!
Suzhou is famed for Humble Administrator's Garden, thought it was fine, it was very busy. Depends how much you like ancient Chinese gardens. I was more impreseed by Tiger Hill and Jinji Lake scenic area. I had a nice day out there. I didn't go to Wuxi as its famed for Cherry Blossom around Yuantouzhu Island Park, it might still be a few week early, worth checking. Zhuijaijaio, is worth an afternoon visit, ancient waterways / bridges.
I think that there's a strong element of playing roulette hoping for a zero, here.
I can't help wondering if the USA is actually as strong as Trump thinks it is - without reaching for my heavy skepticism on Trump, the US armed forces are thin in many respects. I am not sure that they cannot be reached to be given a bloody nose.
I also wonder about attacks on the US mainland, but that depends if the Iranian regime has sleepers. We all know what a seismic event 9/11 turned out to be, and the last serious war events on US soil were 150 years ago.
I guess we will find out.
👍🫡
For the avoidance of any doubt
Canada supports the actions on Iran
Australia welcomes the actions on Iran
The UK welcome the actions on Iran
All 3 offer defensive support of their own citizens and bases
All 3 CATEGORICALLY oppose and w
ill not at this time engage in direct aggressive action.
This is the position too of all European Countries with the exception of Spain who oppose the action.
ALL refer to the breaking of international law.
Starmer is once again totally aligned with the majority with the backbone to stand up to Trump and Netanyahu.
Meanwhile we all know what the right wing war mongering right wing leaders Farage and Badenoch want.
War against Islam
Total blind support for Netanyahu brand of Zionism
Ass kicking of Trump and MAGA
No doubt a bit of paki bashing in the UK and a bit of anti semitism would be most welcome.
Neither are fit to lead. Neither has any gravitas on the World stage and both would massively increase the risk to the UK and to UK citizens here and abroad.
The right want to fight anybody anywhere and have a pauciry of ideas other than division and confrontation
In the end it will destroy them. The eco left LGBTQ types are in bed with horrible ultra-sectarian Islamists who will happily and violently take over if and when they’re given the chance
With proper scrutiny I expect the Greens to fall badly away. Eventually
It’s a shame because there’s a need for a genuinely left wing party with real redistributive purpose. I don’t remotely agree with all that but many do and it needs representation
What they don’t need is a supposed Green party tainted with vile Islamism which apparently no longer has any Green policies
However this is the danger of Labour going after this lot, it is completely toxic to the rest of the electorate.
Labour needs to change something and be radical. But going to the left is not it.
In that sense Rayner would not be a bad option because she’s not very left wing despite people pretending she is. However I just cannot take her seriously as a candidate.
In the last few days you’ve accused Labour of being run by a “Zionist clique”, “their Zionist bosses”, and a “Zionist cabal”
One is perhaps forgivable. Two is deeply suspicious. The full house says you hate Jews
Not sure if brutalism is your thing (maybe it's technically not brutalism since it's so early) but it's one of my favourite buildings in the entire world, I love it so much.
The structure is very complex, with multiple segments and stakeholders. There was some interesting commentary in the link I posted.
It's ... in Deep Thought terms ... tricky.
So yes Labour is fine to go for that strategy again but it surely is one that accepts they’ve lost the election before it started and they’re giving up.
I won’t be voting for them in that case.
The nearest to a plan that might work is "release funds for investment by covering current spending through broad-based tax rises".
Imagine a left-wing Peter Mannion saying it in the "Yes and Ho" scene from The Thick Of It.
Blair and Johnson could offer a popular plan with lots of upside and minimal downside. In Blair's case, thanks to a good fiscal situation (it's just that the public realm was shit), in Johnson's, thanks to a near-psychopathic degree of dishonesty.
I fully understand the difference between anti semitism which I abhor and anti zionism which I fully endorse.
You are not fucking stupid you know the difference.
You typically seek like all Zionists to confuse the two.
Your ilk have the fucking brass neck to label Jews as anti semitic to excuse your zionist bloodlust.
Greens have decent council presence though (subject to May!)
The issue is that there isn’t. And beyond Burnham who seems to think we can just ignore it, no potential candidate is really doing anything.
I do think Labour’s fundamental view to grow the economy is the right one. However nothing has convinced me they actually have a good idea of how.
It will be interesting to see what the next leader immediately dumps.
I quite like environmentalism, it would be great if it were incorporated into politics without having to turn turn the country into an Islamic Republic. They'd fuck all that green shit off anyway
That I did not expect
You've been happy enough when it was all going in the direction you want. If there's now a touch of consternation that it might go in the opposite direction, well that's the nature of the beast and thems the breaks. You should have behaved yourself.
Is your point that in a very split electorate Corbyn could have won in 2019?
Genuinely don’t know who I’ll vote for when Starmer goes. There just does not seem to be an obvious option. Burnham by default who I utterly despise however he’s clearly got something that I don’t understand.
Thanks for the suggestion. I will definitely give it a look
Trump may - MAY - have done a very good thing while being a very bad man. It’s confusing
Labour under Corbyn got 32%, which is more than any of the parties are currently polling. What happened in 2019 happened, but a party that re-builds the Corbyn coalition would be leading the polling today.
You just felt you should say *something*
Having watched Iranian politics, as much as any other dedicated follower of politics over the last seventy or so years, I would say that didn't apply to the mullahs; under them Iran wasn't anyone's friend except possibly other Shia dominated countries. They would trade with anyone, if necessary and weren't particularly scrupulous about with whom they traded. Putin's Russia doesn't strike me as particularly pro-Moslem for example. Rather their foreign policy was about identifying those they disliked (?hated) most and doing whatever they could to harm those they hated most.
And they bore (?bear) grudges; we and the Americans did our level best to assist the late Shah, and we tried to cheat them out a considerable sum of money...... see Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe.
The mullahs ran a peculiarly unpleasant regime, behind a facade of democracy, and I won't be sorry to see it go, always assuming that it'll be replaced by something more akin to democracy.
Iran seems to spread itself thin though.