The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
They thought the GCC would go running to the US and tell them to stop? I wouldn't underestimate a sense of anti Arab racism among the Mullahs who probably think they're dealing with a bunch of fake countries that they could dominate if the US was forced out of the middle east.
Any Labour 'no bases/leave oor Keir alone' bounce' wont survive beyond about £1.60/litre Cost of living trumps Trump
What would replacing Keir do beyond tarring the next person with the same brush.
It would be better for SKS to weather the pain and when prices starting falling you bring in someone else and take advantage of the bounce.
My view is that the next Labour leader would be very wise to not dump much of the fundamental policy platform of the government because it hasn't been given enough time to bed in yet.
If the next leader wants to be successful they'll come in just as things are starting to improve. IMHO that is why nobody has yet moved against him.
I’m still completely lost as to what the end game of this Iran action is.
It's quite possible that no end game is in sight right now. which would be sad. The only one (ignore all bombast on all sides) that makes any sense at all is to end as and when Iran's external firepower is limited to the extent it is not a major threat, backed up by intermittent lawn maintenance to keep it that way.
So the question is: Does this one make sense, is it possible?
In modern warfare/international trouble it appears that cheap weaponry - drones - are easy to make, import and use and expensive to stop. In that context, is disarming possible?
IANAE (that's obvious) but to me that is an important question, as I see no other even slightly rational endgame.
In the Atlantic: If "Vance promised one thing during the 2024 presidential campaign, it was that America would not enter into a war with Iran of the kind that is currently raging,” Kahloon writes. “These arguments look farcical now that President Trump has chosen—months after bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities and pronouncing its enrichment efforts ‘completely and totally obliterated’—to join Israel in launching a war on the Islamic Republic.”
When Vance became vice president, his ideas included “a more modest place for the United States in world affairs; a new, worker-friendly version of Republican economics; and aggressive, Teddy Roosevelt–style regulation of Big Business,” Kahloon writes. But “little Vanceism is discernible in the administration’s actions” on economics, foreign policy, and other issues.
“This is a major comedown from the role he once seemed likely to fill. Vance’s nomination as vice president was not a concession to the Republican Party of old, but a promise of the Republican Party to come, of Trumpism after Trump. Instead, he has receded in importance in the past year
Vance, and the GOP generally, requires the removal of Trump after the mid terms.
Its amazing that the political situation is repeating in consecutive presidencies.
We will see if the GOP manage the situation better than the Dems did with Biden.
There’s precisely zero chance of the GOP putting Trump up for re-election.
Agreed, although I wouldn't discount the possibility of Trump trying to get one of his brats nominated as GOP candidate.
But two more years of a steadily declining, steadily more irrational Trump as President is not going to do the GOP's chances any good in 2028.
I’m still completely lost as to what the end game of this Iran action is.
It's quite possible that no end game is in sight right now. which would be sad. The only one (ignore all bombast on all sides) that makes any sense at all is to end as and when Iran's external firepower is limited to the extent it is not a major threat, backed up by intermittent lawn maintenance to keep it that way.
So the question is: Does this one make sense, is it possible?
In modern warfare/international trouble it appears that cheap weaponry - drones - are easy to make, import and use and expensive to stop. In that context, is disarming possible?
IANAE (that's obvious) but to me that is an important question, as I see no other even slightly rational endgame.
Take out Iran's oil infrastructure and will it be able to afford the billions it spends on the IRGC and Hamas and Hezbollah?
"Israel's military has issued a warning to Iran that it will continue pursuing every successor of the country's deceased supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei."
Trump wants to appoint him, then Israel will try to kill him.
That was their strategy for Hezbollah as well
Netanyahu’s policy of bomb/invade/settle everyone (Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, West Bank), I think we can ask whether it’s going better or worse at delivering security to Israel than, say, Yitzhak Rabin’s approach.
Rabin's policy outlived him and lasted until 2000 when Arafat rejected Clinton's peace proposal and started the second Intifada instead.
Israel pulled out of Gaza under Sharon.
Problem is that backed by Iran, Hamas then took over.
I don't think Israel would have elected Netanyahu had their peace proposals not been rejected.
And have Bibi’s policies since then yielded positive results? Because it appears to me that Tel Aviv is under missile fire and young Israelis are dying in Lebanon.
(Oh, yes, and it was Netanyahu who also encouraged Hamas to take over in Gaza.)
It's such a crime what the Israelis are doing to Lebanon.It is one of the nicest places in the world with a really beautiful gentle population They deserve so much better than their grotesque belligerent neighbours and their American allies. It makes me so angry. Just watch some of the interviews with the young population. They use three languages often in a single conversation. They go from English to french to Arabic. The f***ing Israelis have just bombed the Ramada Hotel which is in the Christian area. They are gung-ho morons.
It is not a crime to fight Hezbollah.
If you want peace for Lebanon then regime change in Iran, so that Lebanon can finally rid itself of Hezbollah, is the best way of achieving that.
I really don't want to engage with you at all. You sometimes make me feel physically sick. But Hezbollah are not what you think they are. In rough figures Lebanon is 60 ;40 Moslem Christian. There are sub groups and sub groups of sub groups all going back to the civil war which went on for about 20 years.
The barbarism and devastation that went on during that time has been explained to me many times. I have found myself working in a studio with active members of up to 4 different factions. All now friends again.
The executives and producers I worked with spent the war years at Universities in Paris Canada or London so the fighting didn't touch them. It is NOT a classless society. But for many it was an incredibly brutal affair. ......
It started with roadblocks set up by the Palestinians which led to the blowing up of a school bus by a Christian Militia which killed 42 children. ....And then it began.....Hezbollah was set up at that time to look after their communities and wipe out corruption
They set up schools and housed the homeless and when the Israelis joined in it was Hezbollah the communities looked towards to protect them. ...................
So when the civil war was over and a recognised government took over they were given seats in the new multi party parliament and given ministries.
My producer who is a Lebanese Christian does not consider Hezbollah to be terrorists and to describe them as such just shows a lack of understanding
Who murdered a judge and some journalists when the official Lebanese government enquiry into the port explosion started asking about Hezbollah’s involvement with importing the fertiliser/explosives that went bang.
For example.
I think my explanation was inadequate but their purpose was essentially charitable and not to be confused with Hamas. Certainly when they were founded their intentions were not belligerent
"Israel's military has issued a warning to Iran that it will continue pursuing every successor of the country's deceased supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei."
Trump wants to appoint him, then Israel will try to kill him.
That was their strategy for Hezbollah as well
Netanyahu’s policy of bomb/invade/settle everyone (Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, West Bank), I think we can ask whether it’s going better or worse at delivering security to Israel than, say, Yitzhak Rabin’s approach.
Rabin's policy outlived him and lasted until 2000 when Arafat rejected Clinton's peace proposal and started the second Intifada instead.
Israel pulled out of Gaza under Sharon.
Problem is that backed by Iran, Hamas then took over.
I don't think Israel would have elected Netanyahu had their peace proposals not been rejected.
And have Bibi’s policies since then yielded positive results? Because it appears to me that Tel Aviv is under missile fire and young Israelis are dying in Lebanon.
(Oh, yes, and it was Netanyahu who also encouraged Hamas to take over in Gaza.)
Netanyahu was wrong to do the latter, I despise him for that.
He is cleaning up his mess a bit though.
Have his policies since then yielded positive results? Yes. Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran are all much diminished.
Which would be why the Opposition supports this conflict too.
Any Labour 'no bases/leave oor Keir alone' bounce' wont survive beyond about £1.60/litre Cost of living trumps Trump
What would replacing Keir do beyond tarring the next person with the same brush.
It would be better for SKS to weather the pain and when prices starting falling you bring in someone else and take advantage of the bounce.
My view is that the next Labour leader would be very wise to not dump much of the fundamental policy platform of the government because it hasn't been given enough time to bed in yet.
If the next leader wants to be successful they'll come in just as things are starting to improve. IMHO that is why nobody has yet moved against him.
With $200 a barrel, they could be waiting the other side of the election.
I would very much like to disagree with this, but I am struggling.
Look folks, reality can sometimes be hard to accept.
We all want freedom for Iran. The regime was a horrible, nasty pack of religious zealots for whom terrorism & murder was always the first option. Their revolution started by killing 400 people in a theater with arson & chained exit doors. They sent thousand of kids to their deaths with toy keys around their necks promising entry to heaven if they just walk in to Iraqi minefields.
I’ve tracked IRGC terrorism across Iraq, Lebanon, Syria & Yemen and even fought them in the PG, They almost killed me in 1988. The Islamic regime needed/still needs to be destroyed … that said:
People are getting upset with why I assess this war will likely fail to topple the regime.
Because it is a fantasy based in Trump’s head using lethal tools we prepared for 47 years for the right moment. That moment likely has passed.
Trump has no idea what he’s doing. Because he has contempt for the people who know what they’re doing & the history of what came before him.
If Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires then Iran is the funeral home of empires. It dresses you up and lays you into the coffin neatly. Then closes the lid.
Trump cannot understand why Iran hasn’t surrendered … “Lookit all them bombs,” he shouts “They should all love Trump!”
That’s it. That’s the Iran-War strategy. He does not care about the people of Iran. It a score settling grudge match egged on by Netanyahu’s 40 years of promises that war will change the regime if we just drop enough bombs & assassinate its leaders.
So If you want to live in a fantasy world where we are suddenly being greeted as liberators by the 93 million Iranians … feel free.
You are now set up for earth shattering disappointment.
You have to account for the fact that Trump could have attacked in support of the protesters in January. He didn’t & he let them be killed. He was completely indifferent. The 30k dead were a one-day talking point.
Right now, none of these attacks will liberate Iran without a populist uprising or invading ground forces. Worse case is a sectarian Civil war. If that happens the only outcome is that it will kill a lot of people, splinter the country & take down the global economy. Trump will sleep soundly & demand he be made Ayatollah.
This is literally his mental illness masked as foreign policy
This war may give some Iranians hope but it’s a false one. Gird for a horrible chain of dramatic events but rest assured Trump doesn’t care about the people of Iran.
He only want its oil. He said so.
I’m sorry folks, but my job is to deliver reality based assessments, not promise you sunshine in a swirling hurricane of flying bullets, bombs, excrement & razor wire. https://x.com/MalcolmNance/status/2030572269898998102
He's not even Iranian. just a semi literate American. Unless you live in a country you don't know the people or even have a sense of them.It feels like that with this man. He could be right but when you start with dramatic openings like that you seldom are. Iran is one of the few places I haven't worked in in that region so my only knowledge is from Iranians abroad and they're not homogenous. I know ones I like and ones I don't. By contrast I know lots of Israelis nearly all English ex pats. I would be interested to know how they would fare if faced with the treatment their government meet out to their enemies? The answer I suspect is they would be back to their motherland before you could say Shabbat shalom
The murderous thuggery of the Iranian regime has been detailed for many decades. The regime gets off on violence and their narrow, vicious, interpretation of Islam.
There’s a reason they need to use such violence to keep control - you don’t turn every mosque in to a secret police station because the people love you.
Nearly all Iranians abroad are refugees from that or descendants of refugees from that. A diaspora of millions.
As the chap says, Trump is just making a murderous mess.
At university we had good fun with the Iranian Society being run by exiles - and regime supporters who were sponsored to do degrees in London getting violently angry that the anti-regime types weren’t suppressed by the university.
It rather reminded me of stories of the East bloc exiles in London and the various interactions with their regime supporters. There was that story from the 70s about a minor Polish government “trade envoy” guy who hung around a Polish exile club. Still missing, they say.
The single biggest problem in the MENA region is Iran.
Everything else is relatively easy once Iran is contained.
UAE sources suggesting that the next step in their own escalation could be freezing of Iranian bank accounts - which would have a similar effect to the EU’s freezing of Russian funds.
I don’t think the problems in the MENA region stop at Iran, however. Syria is delicate, and Israeli forces are deep into Syria. The Palestine question remains unanswered, although plenty in Israel think the answer is ethnic cleansing. Kurdistan still wants an existence. The UAE is still funding a brutal civil war in Sudan. Yemen! Saudi Arabia remains a totalitarian regime that’s happy to kill and chop up journalists, and promotes radical Islamism around the world.
Oh, yes, and if you’re saying MENA, that includes North Africa and therefore the Libyan civil war, in which the UAE and Turkey funded opposite sides.
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
They thought the GCC would go running to the US and tell them to stop? I wouldn't underestimate a sense of anti Arab racism among the Mullahs who probably think they're dealing with a bunch of fake countries that they could dominate if the US was forced out of the middle east.
Pretty much that.
To say it backfired massively, would be quite the understatement.
It's such a crime what the Israelis are doing to Lebanon.It is one of the nicest places in the world with a really beautiful gentle population They deserve so much better than their grotesque belligerent neighbours and their American allies. It makes me so angry. Just watch some of the interviews with the young population. They use three languages often in a single conversation. They go from English to french to Arabic. The f***ing Israelis have just bombed the Ramada Hotel which is in the Christian area. They are gung-ho morons.
It is not a crime to fight Hezbollah.
If you want peace for Lebanon then regime change in Iran, so that Lebanon can finally rid itself of Hezbollah, is the best way of achieving that.
I really don't want to engage with you at all. You sometimes make me feel physically sick. But Hezbollah are not what you think they are. In rough figures Lebanon is 60 ;40 Moslem Christian. There are sub groups and sub groups of sub groups all going back to the civil war which went on for about 20 years.
The barbarism and devastation that went on during that time has been explained to me many times. I have found myself working in a studio with active members of up to 4 different factions. All now friends again.
The executives and producers I worked with spent the war years at Universities in Paris Canada or London so the fighting didn't touch them. It is NOT a classless society. But for many it was an incredibly brutal affair. ......
It started with roadblocks set up by the Palestinians which led to the blowing up of a school bus by a Christian Militia which killed 42 children. ....And then it began.....Hezbollah was set up at that time to look after their communities and wipe out corruption
They set up schools and housed the homeless and when the Israelis joined in it was Hezbollah the communities looked towards to protect them. ...................
So when the civil war was over and a recognised government took over they were given seats in the new multi party parliament and given ministries.
My producer who is a Lebanese Christian does not consider Hezbollah to be terrorists and to describe them as such just shows a lack of understanding
Who murdered a judge and some journalists when the official Lebanese government enquiry into the port explosion started asking about Hezbollah’s involvement with importing the fertiliser/explosives that went bang.
For example.
I think my explanation was inadequate but their purpose was essentially charitable and not to be confused with Hamas. Certainly when they were founded their intentions were not belligerent
They sure like murdering political opponents now.
They were also founded using money and materials, including weapons, provided by the IRGC. The intention was to part stabilise, part colonise Lebanon.
As with the Muslim Brotherhood and indeed Hamas, who also began the same way, the intention was always to go for hearts and minds first through community projects and only then tighten the grip on power - in which all three have been very successful, Hizbollah more than the others. But it's simply naive to assume they weren't proxies for the Iranians from the off and the intention was ultimately violence.
Can anyone ground the language of "before times, the year when everything changed"?
It's from a provocative quote I heard this morning about Trump and 2016:
"That was 2016, the last year of the before times - the year when everything changed for so many of us."
To me it sounds a bit John Wyndam or maybe Ray Bradbury, anyhow pre- and post-apocalyptic.
September 2008.
Yes, 2008 is the year. Not only the financial crisis, but two defining moments in August. The Beijing olympics, which ushered in the era of China as a superpower, and that fateful day (08/08/08) when Russian tanks rolled across the border into Georgia.
The first invasion of a country with a McDonald’s by a country with a McDonald’s since Thomas Freedman made his grand, and now clearly over optimistic, statement.
In the Atlantic: If "Vance promised one thing during the 2024 presidential campaign, it was that America would not enter into a war with Iran of the kind that is currently raging,” Kahloon writes. “These arguments look farcical now that President Trump has chosen—months after bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities and pronouncing its enrichment efforts ‘completely and totally obliterated’—to join Israel in launching a war on the Islamic Republic.”
When Vance became vice president, his ideas included “a more modest place for the United States in world affairs; a new, worker-friendly version of Republican economics; and aggressive, Teddy Roosevelt–style regulation of Big Business,” Kahloon writes. But “little Vanceism is discernible in the administration’s actions” on economics, foreign policy, and other issues.
“This is a major comedown from the role he once seemed likely to fill. Vance’s nomination as vice president was not a concession to the Republican Party of old, but a promise of the Republican Party to come, of Trumpism after Trump. Instead, he has receded in importance in the past year
Vance, and the GOP generally, requires the removal of Trump after the mid terms.
Its amazing that the political situation is repeating in consecutive presidencies.
We will see if the GOP manage the situation better than the Dems did with Biden.
If the Democrats win a landslide in the midterms as the GOP didn't manage in 2022 then impeachment comes on the cards again for Trump and Vance will bide his time and keep his head down as heir apparent. The Gerald Ford or Rishi Sunak to Trump's Nixon or Boris
I’m still completely lost as to what the end game of this Iran action is.
It's quite possible that no end game is in sight right now. which would be sad. The only one (ignore all bombast on all sides) that makes any sense at all is to end as and when Iran's external firepower is limited to the extent it is not a major threat, backed up by intermittent lawn maintenance to keep it that way.
So the question is: Does this one make sense, is it possible?
In modern warfare/international trouble it appears that cheap weaponry - drones - are easy to make, import and use and expensive to stop. In that context, is disarming possible?
IANAE (that's obvious) but to me that is an important question, as I see no other even slightly rational endgame.
I'm loving the idea of 'intermittent lawn maintenance'. Sounds like suburban England.
I’m still completely lost as to what the end game of this Iran action is.
You need to consider the journey as well as the destination.
With the journey involving the steady destruction of Iran's current and future military capabilities.
Also, what would have been the end game of not taking this action ?
Inaction is often easy but has its own risks and costs.
When non-democratic regimes fall, it's either to external pressure or when the mechanisms of internal repression fail. As we saw in Poland and Czechoslovakia in 1989, if it reaches a point when no one will stand up to defend a regime, it will fall.
It's clear in Iran there are still those who support the Government and while we may find that incomprehensible (much as some on here do when finding out there are still people willing to vote Labour it seems), it's a truth and as long as there are those able and willing to fight for the regime, it endures absent any external pressure.
I'm not wholly comfortable with the notion liberal democracies have some moral duty to overthrow tyrannies in the name of freedom but I understand it and had we gone into Africa and cleared out the various strongmen who had seized power (including Mugabe), I'd recognise the coherence though the history of trying to make liberal democracy work where it has no roots (as happened in post WW1 central and eastern Europe) doesn't inspire confidence.
The problem is you and I both know the current American administration isn't fighting that war but a war for control of oil and gas. Having the Persian Gulf oil supply under its control is where this is leading and ensuring security of supply for America and its allies is what the current action is about, not the freedom of the Iranian people any more than going into Venezuela was about securing freedom for their people.
It's not even about controlling Islamic fundamentalism - look at Saudi Arabia which carries on with its own brand but is on "our" side - had the Royal Family been overthrown and a fundamentalist regime taken over in Riyadh, you'd better believe we'd have got involved and IF the Iraqis in 1990 had moved, as they could have, down the road into Saudi in the immediate aftermath of the Kuwait invasion and seized the coastal oil terminals around Bahrain, the Gulf War would have looked very different.
It's such a crime what the Israelis are doing to Lebanon.It is one of the nicest places in the world with a really beautiful gentle population They deserve so much better than their grotesque belligerent neighbours and their American allies. It makes me so angry. Just watch some of the interviews with the young population. They use three languages often in a single conversation. They go from English to french to Arabic. The f***ing Israelis have just bombed the Ramada Hotel which is in the Christian area. They are gung-ho morons.
It is not a crime to fight Hezbollah.
If you want peace for Lebanon then regime change in Iran, so that Lebanon can finally rid itself of Hezbollah, is the best way of achieving that.
I really don't want to engage with you at all. You sometimes make me feel physically sick. But Hezbollah are not what you think they are. In rough figures Lebanon is 60 ;40 Moslem Christian. There are sub groups and sub groups of sub groups all going back to the civil war which went on for about 20 years.
The barbarism and devastation that went on during that time has been explained to me many times. I have found myself working in a studio with active members of up to 4 different factions. All now friends again.
The executives and producers I worked with spent the war years at Universities in Paris Canada or London so the fighting didn't touch them. It is NOT a classless society. But for many it was an incredibly brutal affair. ......
It started with roadblocks set up by the Palestinians which led to the blowing up of a school bus by a Christian Militia which killed 42 children. ....And then it began.....Hezbollah was set up at that time to look after their communities and wipe out corruption
They set up schools and housed the homeless and when the Israelis joined in it was Hezbollah the communities looked towards to protect them. ...................
So when the civil war was over and a recognised government took over they were given seats in the new multi party parliament and given ministries.
My producer who is a Lebanese Christian does not consider Hezbollah to be terrorists and to describe them as such just shows a lack of understanding
Who murdered a judge and some journalists when the official Lebanese government enquiry into the port explosion started asking about Hezbollah’s involvement with importing the fertiliser/explosives that went bang.
For example.
I think my explanation was inadequate but their purpose was essentially charitable and not to be confused with Hamas. Certainly when they were founded their intentions were not belligerent
They sure like murdering political opponents now.
Don Corleone started off very much focused on charity.
In the Atlantic: If "Vance promised one thing during the 2024 presidential campaign, it was that America would not enter into a war with Iran of the kind that is currently raging,” Kahloon writes. “These arguments look farcical now that President Trump has chosen—months after bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities and pronouncing its enrichment efforts ‘completely and totally obliterated’—to join Israel in launching a war on the Islamic Republic.”
When Vance became vice president, his ideas included “a more modest place for the United States in world affairs; a new, worker-friendly version of Republican economics; and aggressive, Teddy Roosevelt–style regulation of Big Business,” Kahloon writes. But “little Vanceism is discernible in the administration’s actions” on economics, foreign policy, and other issues.
“This is a major comedown from the role he once seemed likely to fill. Vance’s nomination as vice president was not a concession to the Republican Party of old, but a promise of the Republican Party to come, of Trumpism after Trump. Instead, he has receded in importance in the past year
Vance, and the GOP generally, requires the removal of Trump after the mid terms.
Its amazing that the political situation is repeating in consecutive presidencies.
We will see if the GOP manage the situation better than the Dems did with Biden.
If the Democrats win a landslide in the midterms as the GOP didn't manage in 2022 then impeachment comes on the cards again for Trump and Vance will bide his time and keep his head down as heir apparent. The Gerald Ford or Rishi Sunak to Trump's Nixon or Boris
For impeachment to be a realistic chance the Dems have to win every single Republican seat up for grabs in the Senate. Including Oklahoma.
I will file that under 'not happening.'
The best case scenario is getting enough votes to make it impossible for Trump to appoint any new Supreme Court justices and tying him in procedural knots so he can't enact his agenda. That requires four net gains.
I’m still completely lost as to what the end game of this Iran action is.
It's quite possible that no end game is in sight right now. which would be sad. The only one (ignore all bombast on all sides) that makes any sense at all is to end as and when Iran's external firepower is limited to the extent it is not a major threat, backed up by intermittent lawn maintenance to keep it that way.
So the question is: Does this one make sense, is it possible?
In modern warfare/international trouble it appears that cheap weaponry - drones - are easy to make, import and use and expensive to stop. In that context, is disarming possible?
IANAE (that's obvious) but to me that is an important question, as I see no other even slightly rational endgame.
I'm loving the idea of 'intermittent lawn maintenance'. Sounds like suburban England.
My lawn will need cutting again in a few days, if we get a dry spell. It's as long as a Trump tweet.
It's such a crime what the Israelis are doing to Lebanon.It is one of the nicest places in the world with a really beautiful gentle population They deserve so much better than their grotesque belligerent neighbours and their American allies. It makes me so angry. Just watch some of the interviews with the young population. They use three languages often in a single conversation. They go from English to french to Arabic. The f***ing Israelis have just bombed the Ramada Hotel which is in the Christian area. They are gung-ho morons.
It is not a crime to fight Hezbollah.
If you want peace for Lebanon then regime change in Iran, so that Lebanon can finally rid itself of Hezbollah, is the best way of achieving that.
I really don't want to engage with you at all. You sometimes make me feel physically sick. But Hezbollah are not what you think they are. In rough figures Lebanon is 60 ;40 Moslem Christian. There are sub groups and sub groups of sub groups all going back to the civil war which went on for about 20 years.
The barbarism and devastation that went on during that time has been explained to me many times. I have found myself working in a studio with active members of up to 4 different factions. All now friends again.
The executives and producers I worked with spent the war years at Universities in Paris Canada or London so the fighting didn't touch them. It is NOT a classless society. But for many it was an incredibly brutal affair. ......
It started with roadblocks set up by the Palestinians which led to the blowing up of a school bus by a Christian Militia which killed 42 children. ....And then it began.....Hezbollah was set up at that time to look after their communities and wipe out corruption
They set up schools and housed the homeless and when the Israelis joined in it was Hezbollah the communities looked towards to protect them. ...................
So when the civil war was over and a recognised government took over they were given seats in the new multi party parliament and given ministries.
My producer who is a Lebanese Christian does not consider Hezbollah to be terrorists and to describe them as such just shows a lack of understanding
Who murdered a judge and some journalists when the official Lebanese government enquiry into the port explosion started asking about Hezbollah’s involvement with importing the fertiliser/explosives that went bang.
For example.
I think my explanation was inadequate but their purpose was essentially charitable and not to be confused with Hamas. Certainly when they were founded their intentions were not belligerent
They sure like murdering political opponents now.
Don Corleone started off very much focused on charity.
I read some research on organised crime groups. Many started as community protection/policing in a genuine sense. Absent/hostile government. All turned full criminal in a generation.
Any Labour 'no bases/leave oor Keir alone' bounce' wont survive beyond about £1.60/litre Cost of living trumps Trump
What would replacing Keir do beyond tarring the next person with the same brush.
It would be better for SKS to weather the pain and when prices starting falling you bring in someone else and take advantage of the bounce.
My view is that the next Labour leader would be very wise to not dump much of the fundamental policy platform of the government because it hasn't been given enough time to bed in yet.
If the next leader wants to be successful they'll come in just as things are starting to improve. IMHO that is why nobody has yet moved against him.
With $200 a barrel, they could be waiting the other side of the election.
If they save their seat.
If it is $200 a barrel they tell everyone every day who's to blame
I’m still completely lost as to what the end game of this Iran action is.
It's quite possible that no end game is in sight right now. which would be sad. The only one (ignore all bombast on all sides) that makes any sense at all is to end as and when Iran's external firepower is limited to the extent it is not a major threat, backed up by intermittent lawn maintenance to keep it that way.
So the question is: Does this one make sense, is it possible?
In modern warfare/international trouble it appears that cheap weaponry - drones - are easy to make, import and use and expensive to stop. In that context, is disarming possible?
IANAE (that's obvious) but to me that is an important question, as I see no other even slightly rational endgame.
Take out Iran's oil infrastructure and will it be able to afford the billions it spends on the IRGC and Hamas and Hezbollah?
Hard for regimes to survive without money.
If Trump is to put boots on the ground anywhere in Iran, it probably only needs to put them in Kharg Island.
Coupled with losing their access to money in the GCC states, Iran quickly runs out of cash.
I’m still completely lost as to what the end game of this Iran action is.
It's quite possible that no end game is in sight right now. which would be sad. The only one (ignore all bombast on all sides) that makes any sense at all is to end as and when Iran's external firepower is limited to the extent it is not a major threat, backed up by intermittent lawn maintenance to keep it that way.
So the question is: Does this one make sense, is it possible?
In modern warfare/international trouble it appears that cheap weaponry - drones - are easy to make, import and use and expensive to stop. In that context, is disarming possible?
IANAE (that's obvious) but to me that is an important question, as I see no other even slightly rational endgame.
There have been a lot of proxy wars in the region: Libya, Yemen, Syria, Sudan (and less so, Lebanon and Iraq). Iran has been involved in most of these, as other regional powers have also been involved, like the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel. But the main source of involvement is money, I think, not weaponry. Disarming doesn’t stop money being funnelled to rival groups in civil wars, militias and terrorist groups.
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
Further good news for SKS with gold standard Survation following on from Labour's gains with Opinium yesterday as Reform's lead narrows. Labour up and now a clear second and Reform, the Tories and LDs down and the Greens unchanged and well back in 4th and barely ahead of the LDs.
Looks like distancing himself from Trump on the Iran strikes has helped Starmer shore up the Labour vote a bit
"Israel's military has issued a warning to Iran that it will continue pursuing every successor of the country's deceased supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei."
Trump wants to appoint him, then Israel will try to kill him.
That was their strategy for Hezbollah as well
Netanyahu’s policy of bomb/invade/settle everyone (Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, West Bank), I think we can ask whether it’s going better or worse at delivering security to Israel than, say, Yitzhak Rabin’s approach.
Rabin's policy outlived him and lasted until 2000 when Arafat rejected Clinton's peace proposal and started the second Intifada instead.
Israel pulled out of Gaza under Sharon.
Problem is that backed by Iran, Hamas then took over.
I don't think Israel would have elected Netanyahu had their peace proposals not been rejected.
And have Bibi’s policies since then yielded positive results? Because it appears to me that Tel Aviv is under missile fire and young Israelis are dying in Lebanon.
(Oh, yes, and it was Netanyahu who also encouraged Hamas to take over in Gaza.)
Netanyahu was wrong to do the latter, I despise him for that.
He is cleaning up his mess a bit though.
Have his policies since then yielded positive results? Yes. Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran are all much diminished.
Which would be why the Opposition supports this conflict too.
If I lived in Tel Aviv, I think I’d rather Rabin’s peace than to be sheltering in a bomb shelter from the missiles launched by a diminished Iran.
It's such a crime what the Israelis are doing to Lebanon.It is one of the nicest places in the world with a really beautiful gentle population They deserve so much better than their grotesque belligerent neighbours and their American allies. It makes me so angry. Just watch some of the interviews with the young population. They use three languages often in a single conversation. They go from English to french to Arabic. The f***ing Israelis have just bombed the Ramada Hotel which is in the Christian area. They are gung-ho morons.
It is not a crime to fight Hezbollah.
If you want peace for Lebanon then regime change in Iran, so that Lebanon can finally rid itself of Hezbollah, is the best way of achieving that.
I really don't want to engage with you at all. You sometimes make me feel physically sick. But Hezbollah are not what you think they are. In rough figures Lebanon is 60 ;40 Moslem Christian. There are sub groups and sub groups of sub groups all going back to the civil war which went on for about 20 years.
The barbarism and devastation that went on during that time has been explained to me many times. I have found myself working in a studio with active members of up to 4 different factions. All now friends again.
The executives and producers I worked with spent the war years at Universities in Paris Canada or London so the fighting didn't touch them. It is NOT a classless society. But for many it was an incredibly brutal affair. ......
It started with roadblocks set up by the Palestinians which led to the blowing up of a school bus by a Christian Militia which killed 42 children. ....And then it began.....Hezbollah was set up at that time to look after their communities and wipe out corruption
They set up schools and housed the homeless and when the Israelis joined in it was Hezbollah the communities looked towards to protect them. ...................
So when the civil war was over and a recognised government took over they were given seats in the new multi party parliament and given ministries.
My producer who is a Lebanese Christian does not consider Hezbollah to be terrorists and to describe them as such just shows a lack of understanding
Who murdered a judge and some journalists when the official Lebanese government enquiry into the port explosion started asking about Hezbollah’s involvement with importing the fertiliser/explosives that went bang.
For example.
I think my explanation was inadequate but their purpose was essentially charitable and not to be confused with Hamas. Certainly when they were founded their intentions were not belligerent
They sure like murdering political opponents now.
Don Corleone started off very much focused on charity.
I read some research on organised crime groups. Many started as community protection/policing in a genuine sense. Absent/hostile government. All turned full criminal in a generation.
Is that "all the organized crime groups we researched became so in one generation", or "all the community protection groups we researched became organized crime in one generation"?
In the Atlantic: If "Vance promised one thing during the 2024 presidential campaign, it was that America would not enter into a war with Iran of the kind that is currently raging,” Kahloon writes. “These arguments look farcical now that President Trump has chosen—months after bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities and pronouncing its enrichment efforts ‘completely and totally obliterated’—to join Israel in launching a war on the Islamic Republic.”
When Vance became vice president, his ideas included “a more modest place for the United States in world affairs; a new, worker-friendly version of Republican economics; and aggressive, Teddy Roosevelt–style regulation of Big Business,” Kahloon writes. But “little Vanceism is discernible in the administration’s actions” on economics, foreign policy, and other issues.
“This is a major comedown from the role he once seemed likely to fill. Vance’s nomination as vice president was not a concession to the Republican Party of old, but a promise of the Republican Party to come, of Trumpism after Trump. Instead, he has receded in importance in the past year
Vance, and the GOP generally, requires the removal of Trump after the mid terms.
Its amazing that the political situation is repeating in consecutive presidencies.
We will see if the GOP manage the situation better than the Dems did with Biden.
The big difference is Biden was damaging only his party.
Although indirectly him hanging on did damage the wider world since it helped Trump's election win.
I’m still completely lost as to what the end game of this Iran action is.
It's quite possible that no end game is in sight right now. which would be sad. The only one (ignore all bombast on all sides) that makes any sense at all is to end as and when Iran's external firepower is limited to the extent it is not a major threat, backed up by intermittent lawn maintenance to keep it that way.
So the question is: Does this one make sense, is it possible?
In modern warfare/international trouble it appears that cheap weaponry - drones - are easy to make, import and use and expensive to stop. In that context, is disarming possible?
IANAE (that's obvious) but to me that is an important question, as I see no other even slightly rational endgame.
Take out Iran's oil infrastructure and will it be able to afford the billions it spends on the IRGC and Hamas and Hezbollah?
Hard for regimes to survive without money.
If you take out Iran’s oil infrastructure, how do they pay Trump the bribes he wants? We know from Venezuela that Trump wants the wells to keep pumping, just as long as he gets his cut.
(And Hamas will make do with just Qatari funding.)
I’m still completely lost as to what the end game of this Iran action is.
It's quite possible that no end game is in sight right now. which would be sad. The only one (ignore all bombast on all sides) that makes any sense at all is to end as and when Iran's external firepower is limited to the extent it is not a major threat, backed up by intermittent lawn maintenance to keep it that way.
So the question is: Does this one make sense, is it possible?
In modern warfare/international trouble it appears that cheap weaponry - drones - are easy to make, import and use and expensive to stop. In that context, is disarming possible?
IANAE (that's obvious) but to me that is an important question, as I see no other even slightly rational endgame.
I'm loving the idea of 'intermittent lawn maintenance'. Sounds like suburban England.
My lawn will need cutting again in a few days, if we get a dry spell. It's as long as a Trump tweet.
What is this "dry spell" of which you speak?
Totnes recently noted its 68th day of continuously recording rain.
I’m still completely lost as to what the end game of this Iran action is.
It's quite possible that no end game is in sight right now. which would be sad. The only one (ignore all bombast on all sides) that makes any sense at all is to end as and when Iran's external firepower is limited to the extent it is not a major threat, backed up by intermittent lawn maintenance to keep it that way.
So the question is: Does this one make sense, is it possible?
In modern warfare/international trouble it appears that cheap weaponry - drones - are easy to make, import and use and expensive to stop. In that context, is disarming possible?
IANAE (that's obvious) but to me that is an important question, as I see no other even slightly rational endgame.
Take out Iran's oil infrastructure and will it be able to afford the billions it spends on the IRGC and Hamas and Hezbollah?
Hard for regimes to survive without money.
If Trump is to put boots on the ground anywhere in Iran, it probably only needs to put them in Kharg Island.
Coupled with losing their access to money in the GCC states, Iran quickly runs out of cash.
The warmongers of PB were talking a lot about Iranian Kurdish forces being the boots on the ground. How’s that going?
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
I’m still completely lost as to what the end game of this Iran action is.
It's quite possible that no end game is in sight right now. which would be sad. The only one (ignore all bombast on all sides) that makes any sense at all is to end as and when Iran's external firepower is limited to the extent it is not a major threat, backed up by intermittent lawn maintenance to keep it that way.
So the question is: Does this one make sense, is it possible?
In modern warfare/international trouble it appears that cheap weaponry - drones - are easy to make, import and use and expensive to stop. In that context, is disarming possible?
IANAE (that's obvious) but to me that is an important question, as I see no other even slightly rational endgame.
Take out Iran's oil infrastructure and will it be able to afford the billions it spends on the IRGC and Hamas and Hezbollah?
Hard for regimes to survive without money.
If Trump is to put boots on the ground anywhere in Iran, it probably only needs to put them in Kharg Island.
Coupled with losing their access to money in the GCC states, Iran quickly runs out of cash.
The warmongers of PB were talking a lot about Iranian Kurdish forces being the boots on the ground. How’s that going?
"Israel's military has issued a warning to Iran that it will continue pursuing every successor of the country's deceased supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei."
Trump wants to appoint him, then Israel will try to kill him.
That was their strategy for Hezbollah as well
Netanyahu’s policy of bomb/invade/settle everyone (Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, West Bank), I think we can ask whether it’s going better or worse at delivering security to Israel than, say, Yitzhak Rabin’s approach.
Rabin's policy outlived him and lasted until 2000 when Arafat rejected Clinton's peace proposal and started the second Intifada instead.
Israel pulled out of Gaza under Sharon.
Problem is that backed by Iran, Hamas then took over.
I don't think Israel would have elected Netanyahu had their peace proposals not been rejected.
And have Bibi’s policies since then yielded positive results? Because it appears to me that Tel Aviv is under missile fire and young Israelis are dying in Lebanon.
(Oh, yes, and it was Netanyahu who also encouraged Hamas to take over in Gaza.)
Netanyahu was wrong to do the latter, I despise him for that.
He is cleaning up his mess a bit though.
Have his policies since then yielded positive results? Yes. Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran are all much diminished.
Which would be why the Opposition supports this conflict too.
If I lived in Tel Aviv, I think I’d rather Rabin’s peace than to be sheltering in a bomb shelter from the missiles launched by a diminished Iran.
So would I.
But Rabin's peace died when Arafat rejected it. 26 years ago.
I’m still completely lost as to what the end game of this Iran action is.
It's quite possible that no end game is in sight right now. which would be sad. The only one (ignore all bombast on all sides) that makes any sense at all is to end as and when Iran's external firepower is limited to the extent it is not a major threat, backed up by intermittent lawn maintenance to keep it that way.
So the question is: Does this one make sense, is it possible?
In modern warfare/international trouble it appears that cheap weaponry - drones - are easy to make, import and use and expensive to stop. In that context, is disarming possible?
IANAE (that's obvious) but to me that is an important question, as I see no other even slightly rational endgame.
Take out Iran's oil infrastructure and will it be able to afford the billions it spends on the IRGC and Hamas and Hezbollah?
Hard for regimes to survive without money.
If Trump is to put boots on the ground anywhere in Iran, it probably only needs to put them in Kharg Island.
Coupled with losing their access to money in the GCC states, Iran quickly runs out of cash.
The warmongers of PB were talking a lot about Iranian Kurdish forces being the boots on the ground. How’s that going?
The PB Kumbaya crew talked them out of it We are an influential site
An Aussie loser who choked last year and lost the F1 title and crashed out this morning.
Aha.
I'm still struggling with the concept of a Cadillac that can go round corners.
What? Cadillac have won shitloads of races in GT3 with the ATS-V.R and in IMSA with the V-Series.R.
They know how to build a winning race car.
Indeed, but most people’s impressions of the brand are either some massive 1950s thing, or a modern Escalade.
Which is of course precisely why they’ve invested in the IMSA and F1 projects.
The recent CTS-V is a remarkably good car, damn close to the Germans for quite a bit less money.
Indeedy. It's either a pink 1950s bulbous wobbly convertible with fins - Barbie's Batmobile, or an attempt to use a tiny rebadged Daewoo to give Cadillac some street cred.
"Israel's military has issued a warning to Iran that it will continue pursuing every successor of the country's deceased supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei."
Trump wants to appoint him, then Israel will try to kill him.
That was their strategy for Hezbollah as well
Netanyahu’s policy of bomb/invade/settle everyone (Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, West Bank), I think we can ask whether it’s going better or worse at delivering security to Israel than, say, Yitzhak Rabin’s approach.
Rabin's policy outlived him and lasted until 2000 when Arafat rejected Clinton's peace proposal and started the second Intifada instead.
Israel pulled out of Gaza under Sharon.
Problem is that backed by Iran, Hamas then took over.
I don't think Israel would have elected Netanyahu had their peace proposals not been rejected.
And have Bibi’s policies since then yielded positive results? Because it appears to me that Tel Aviv is under missile fire and young Israelis are dying in Lebanon.
(Oh, yes, and it was Netanyahu who also encouraged Hamas to take over in Gaza.)
Netanyahu was wrong to do the latter, I despise him for that.
He is cleaning up his mess a bit though.
Have his policies since then yielded positive results? Yes. Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran are all much diminished.
Which would be why the Opposition supports this conflict too.
If I lived in Tel Aviv, I think I’d rather Rabin’s peace than to be sheltering in a bomb shelter from the missiles launched by a diminished Iran.
So would I.
But Rabin's peace died when Arafat rejected it. 26 years ago.
I think Rabin’s peace died when Yigal Amir assassinated him.
I was speaking to the local septic tank man the other day, came to do annual check.
He got round to chatting about his famous clients, Ade Edmonson and Jennifer Saunders are his favourites just mental as you'd expect but very friendly. Second favourite Neil Warnock.
Lead singer from Muse, Kate Bush, Damian Albarn all fine to contract for and friendly
There's just one nob he said, Richard Madeley, rude and arrogant and apparently hates Susanna Reid and Ed Balls.
Made me think about Ed in No 10 in the Dennis Thatcher or Phillip May role.
Stranger things have happened, Yvette has held most major roles very much a dark horse, if relatively short term. 1a
"Israel's military has issued a warning to Iran that it will continue pursuing every successor of the country's deceased supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei."
Trump wants to appoint him, then Israel will try to kill him.
That was their strategy for Hezbollah as well
Netanyahu’s policy of bomb/invade/settle everyone (Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, West Bank), I think we can ask whether it’s going better or worse at delivering security to Israel than, say, Yitzhak Rabin’s approach.
Rabin's policy outlived him and lasted until 2000 when Arafat rejected Clinton's peace proposal and started the second Intifada instead.
Israel pulled out of Gaza under Sharon.
Problem is that backed by Iran, Hamas then took over.
I don't think Israel would have elected Netanyahu had their peace proposals not been rejected.
And have Bibi’s policies since then yielded positive results? Because it appears to me that Tel Aviv is under missile fire and young Israelis are dying in Lebanon.
(Oh, yes, and it was Netanyahu who also encouraged Hamas to take over in Gaza.)
Netanyahu was wrong to do the latter, I despise him for that.
He is cleaning up his mess a bit though.
Have his policies since then yielded positive results? Yes. Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran are all much diminished.
Which would be why the Opposition supports this conflict too.
If I lived in Tel Aviv, I think I’d rather Rabin’s peace than to be sheltering in a bomb shelter from the missiles launched by a diminished Iran.
So would I.
But Rabin's peace died when Arafat rejected it. 26 years ago.
I think Rabin’s peace died when Yigal Amir assassinated him.
But it did not.
His peace process outlived him and lasted almost all of Clinton's presidency, until Barak.
In the Atlantic: If "Vance promised one thing during the 2024 presidential campaign, it was that America would not enter into a war with Iran of the kind that is currently raging,” Kahloon writes. “These arguments look farcical now that President Trump has chosen—months after bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities and pronouncing its enrichment efforts ‘completely and totally obliterated’—to join Israel in launching a war on the Islamic Republic.”
When Vance became vice president, his ideas included “a more modest place for the United States in world affairs; a new, worker-friendly version of Republican economics; and aggressive, Teddy Roosevelt–style regulation of Big Business,” Kahloon writes. But “little Vanceism is discernible in the administration’s actions” on economics, foreign policy, and other issues.
“This is a major comedown from the role he once seemed likely to fill. Vance’s nomination as vice president was not a concession to the Republican Party of old, but a promise of the Republican Party to come, of Trumpism after Trump. Instead, he has receded in importance in the past year
Vance, and the GOP generally, requires the removal of Trump after the mid terms.
Its amazing that the political situation is repeating in consecutive presidencies.
We will see if the GOP manage the situation better than the Dems did with Biden.
If the Democrats win a landslide in the midterms as the GOP didn't manage in 2022 then impeachment comes on the cards again for Trump and Vance will bide his time and keep his head down as heir apparent. The Gerald Ford or Rishi Sunak to Trump's Nixon or Boris
For impeachment to be a realistic chance the Dems have to win every single Republican seat up for grabs in the Senate. Including Oklahoma.
I will file that under 'not happening.'
The best case scenario is getting enough votes to make it impossible for Trump to appoint any new Supreme Court justices and tying him in procedural knots so he can't enact his agenda. That requires four net gains.
Impeachment can occur with a simple majority vote of Congress, so if the Democrats win back the House in November Trump will definitely be impeached again.
To convict after trial in the Senate though it requires a 2/3 majority of Congress, which as you say is very unlikely even if the Democrats won back the Senate without some Republican Senators voted to convict as well. A Democrat majority of Congress would as you also say nonetheless block Trump's legislative and economic agenda and stop more conservative SC justices being appointed, though after he lost the ruling on keeping his tariffs even the SC is not entirely in support of Trump now
Further good news for SKS with gold standard Survation following on from Labour's gains with Opinium yesterday as Reform's lead narrows. Labour up and now a clear second and Reform, the Tories and LDs down and the Greens unchanged and well back in 4th and barely ahead of the LDs.
Looks like distancing himself from Trump on the Iran strikes has helped Starmer shore up the Labour vote a bit
But otoh just as the economy was (maybe) looking a bit more promising along comes MaxiMoron to create another bout of inflation and instability.
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
"We have never seen Israel or America launching missiles at Gulf capitals. Iran is the one that did that.
Defending Iran because it raises the banner of Palestine while ignoring what it did to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Gulf is a grave insult to the Arab countries that bore the cost for four decades."
The decision to go for desalination plants may not be a good strategy. Iran has aiui proportionally far more natural water supply than the Gulf States.
Further good news for SKS with gold standard Survation following on from Labour's gains with Opinium yesterday as Reform's lead narrows. Labour up and now a clear second and Reform, the Tories and LDs down and the Greens unchanged and well back in 4th and barely ahead of the LDs.
Looks like distancing himself from Trump on the Iran strikes has helped Starmer shore up the Labour vote a bit
But otoh just as the economy was (maybe) looking a bit more promising along comes MaxiMoron to create another bout of inflation and instability.
The economy wasn't looking that promising, unemployment is up, prices still high and growth and wage rises slow on the latest figures
"Israel's military has issued a warning to Iran that it will continue pursuing every successor of the country's deceased supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei."
Trump wants to appoint him, then Israel will try to kill him.
That was their strategy for Hezbollah as well
Netanyahu’s policy of bomb/invade/settle everyone (Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, West Bank), I think we can ask whether it’s going better or worse at delivering security to Israel than, say, Yitzhak Rabin’s approach.
Rabin's policy outlived him and lasted until 2000 when Arafat rejected Clinton's peace proposal and started the second Intifada instead.
Israel pulled out of Gaza under Sharon.
Problem is that backed by Iran, Hamas then took over.
I don't think Israel would have elected Netanyahu had their peace proposals not been rejected.
And have Bibi’s policies since then yielded positive results? Because it appears to me that Tel Aviv is under missile fire and young Israelis are dying in Lebanon.
(Oh, yes, and it was Netanyahu who also encouraged Hamas to take over in Gaza.)
Netanyahu was wrong to do the latter, I despise him for that.
He is cleaning up his mess a bit though.
Have his policies since then yielded positive results? Yes. Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran are all much diminished.
Which would be why the Opposition supports this conflict too.
If I lived in Tel Aviv, I think I’d rather Rabin’s peace than to be sheltering in a bomb shelter from the missiles launched by a diminished Iran.
So would I.
But Rabin's peace died when Arafat rejected it. 26 years ago.
I think Rabin’s peace died when Yigal Amir assassinated him.
"Israel's military has issued a warning to Iran that it will continue pursuing every successor of the country's deceased supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei."
Trump wants to appoint him, then Israel will try to kill him.
That was their strategy for Hezbollah as well
Netanyahu’s policy of bomb/invade/settle everyone (Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, West Bank), I think we can ask whether it’s going better or worse at delivering security to Israel than, say, Yitzhak Rabin’s approach.
Rabin's policy outlived him and lasted until 2000 when Arafat rejected Clinton's peace proposal and started the second Intifada instead.
Israel pulled out of Gaza under Sharon.
Problem is that backed by Iran, Hamas then took over.
I don't think Israel would have elected Netanyahu had their peace proposals not been rejected.
And have Bibi’s policies since then yielded positive results? Because it appears to me that Tel Aviv is under missile fire and young Israelis are dying in Lebanon.
(Oh, yes, and it was Netanyahu who also encouraged Hamas to take over in Gaza.)
Netanyahu was wrong to do the latter, I despise him for that.
He is cleaning up his mess a bit though.
Have his policies since then yielded positive results? Yes. Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran are all much diminished.
Which would be why the Opposition supports this conflict too.
If I lived in Tel Aviv, I think I’d rather Rabin’s peace than to be sheltering in a bomb shelter from the missiles launched by a diminished Iran.
So would I.
But Rabin's peace died when Arafat rejected it. 26 years ago.
I think Rabin’s peace died when Yigal Amir assassinated him.
But it did not.
His peace process outlived him and lasted almost all of Clinton's presidency, until Barak.
It was Arafat, not Amir, that killed it.
I think you'll find the trigger was actually the actions of Ariel Sharon.
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
"We have never seen Israel or America launching missiles at Gulf capitals. Iran is the one that did that.
Defending Iran because it raises the banner of Palestine while ignoring what it did to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Gulf is a grave insult to the Arab countries that bore the cost for four decades."
The decision to go for desalination plants may not be a good strategy. Iran has aiui proportionally far more natural water supply than the Gulf States.
Any Labour 'no bases/leave oor Keir alone' bounce' wont survive beyond about £1.60/litre Cost of living trumps Trump
What would replacing Keir do beyond tarring the next person with the same brush.
It would be better for SKS to weather the pain and when prices starting falling you bring in someone else and take advantage of the bounce.
My view is that the next Labour leader would be very wise to not dump much of the fundamental policy platform of the government because it hasn't been given enough time to bed in yet.
If the next leader wants to be successful they'll come in just as things are starting to improve. IMHO that is why nobody has yet moved against him.
With $200 a barrel, they could be waiting the other side of the election.
"Israel's military has issued a warning to Iran that it will continue pursuing every successor of the country's deceased supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei."
Trump wants to appoint him, then Israel will try to kill him.
That was their strategy for Hezbollah as well
Netanyahu’s policy of bomb/invade/settle everyone (Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, West Bank), I think we can ask whether it’s going better or worse at delivering security to Israel than, say, Yitzhak Rabin’s approach.
Rabin's policy outlived him and lasted until 2000 when Arafat rejected Clinton's peace proposal and started the second Intifada instead.
Israel pulled out of Gaza under Sharon.
Problem is that backed by Iran, Hamas then took over.
I don't think Israel would have elected Netanyahu had their peace proposals not been rejected.
And have Bibi’s policies since then yielded positive results? Because it appears to me that Tel Aviv is under missile fire and young Israelis are dying in Lebanon.
(Oh, yes, and it was Netanyahu who also encouraged Hamas to take over in Gaza.)
Netanyahu was wrong to do the latter, I despise him for that.
He is cleaning up his mess a bit though.
Have his policies since then yielded positive results? Yes. Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran are all much diminished.
Which would be why the Opposition supports this conflict too.
If I lived in Tel Aviv, I think I’d rather Rabin’s peace than to be sheltering in a bomb shelter from the missiles launched by a diminished Iran.
So would I.
But Rabin's peace died when Arafat rejected it. 26 years ago.
I think Rabin’s peace died when Yigal Amir assassinated him.
But it did not.
His peace process outlived him and lasted almost all of Clinton's presidency, until Barak.
It was Arafat, not Amir, that killed it.
Nope. What killed it was the Israeli Right (including Netenyahu after 1996) who ignored key parts of the Oslo Accords almost as soon as they were signed by massively increasing Israeli settlement in the West Bank even though this was explicitly banned by the Accords. In the 7 years following the signing of the Accords the Israeli settler population in the West Bank doubled.
Nor was the first violence after the signing of the Accords the fault of the Palestinians. It was the Cave of the Patriarchs Massacre carried out by an extremist Right Wing Israeli.
The Right Wing in Israel never wanted the peace process and they made damn sure it failed.
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
"We have never seen Israel or America launching missiles at Gulf capitals. Iran is the one that did that.
Defending Iran because it raises the banner of Palestine while ignoring what it did to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Gulf is a grave insult to the Arab countries that bore the cost for four decades."
'what it did to Iraq'? Someone needds to teach that man some history. It was Iraq, with US encouragement and backing, that launched the war against Iran in 1980 that lead to a million or more deaths.
It's such a crime what the Israelis are doing to Lebanon.It is one of the nicest places in the world with a really beautiful gentle population They deserve so much better than their grotesque belligerent neighbours and their American allies. It makes me so angry. Just watch some of the interviews with the young population. They use three languages often in a single conversation. They go from English to french to Arabic. The f***ing Israelis have just bombed the Ramada Hotel which is in the Christian area. They are gung-ho morons.
It is not a crime to fight Hezbollah.
If you want peace for Lebanon then regime change in Iran, so that Lebanon can finally rid itself of Hezbollah, is the best way of achieving that.
I really don't want to engage with you at all. You sometimes make me feel physically sick. But Hezbollah are not what you think they are. In rough figures Lebanon is 60 ;40 Moslem Christian. There are sub groups and sub groups of sub groups all going back to the civil war which went on for about 20 years.
The barbarism and devastation that went on during that time has been explained to me many times. I have found myself working in a studio with active members of up to 4 different factions. All now friends again.
The executives and producers I worked with spent the war years at Universities in Paris Canada or London so the fighting didn't touch them. It is NOT a classless society. But for many it was an incredibly brutal affair. ......
It started with roadblocks set up by the Palestinians which led to the blowing up of a school bus by a Christian Militia which killed 42 children. ....And then it began.....Hezbollah was set up at that time to look after their communities and wipe out corruption
They set up schools and housed the homeless and when the Israelis joined in it was Hezbollah the communities looked towards to protect them. ...................
So when the civil war was over and a recognised government took over they were given seats in the new multi party parliament and given ministries.
My producer who is a Lebanese Christian does not consider Hezbollah to be terrorists and to describe them as such just shows a lack of understanding
Who murdered a judge and some journalists when the official Lebanese government enquiry into the port explosion started asking about Hezbollah’s involvement with importing the fertiliser/explosives that went bang.
For example.
I think my explanation was inadequate but their purpose was essentially charitable and not to be confused with Hamas. Certainly when they were founded their intentions were not belligerent
They sure like murdering political opponents now.
Don Corleone started off very much focused on charity.
I read some research on organised crime groups. Many started as community protection/policing in a genuine sense. Absent/hostile government. All turned full criminal in a generation.
Is that "all the organized crime groups we researched became so in one generation", or "all the community protection groups we researched became organized crime in one generation"?
As I recall, they covered about a dozen over various cultures. My guess is that they tended towards studying more recent ones, where there is some evidence.
Ref 29% + 1 Lab 21% + 3 Con 16% - 2 Green 14% + 1 LD 10% -2
Fieldwork 4th to 6th March
Badenoch working her magic touch.
She's been too gungho, especially given Trump's latest nonsense. Why send an aircraft carrier with all the cost and risk involved? Let him fight his own war.
Nonsense. We should have sent in our carrier right from the start.
We'd have a sunker Carrier and Body Bags returning home now if we had and who would YOU have been blaming.
NOT OUR WAR!
Stay Out!
Our ex pats in the region are exactly that ex-pats , many of them there to slag off our Country , how great they are and how crap the UK is, they made their bed, tough shit. The genuine majority should be helped and supported and it;s up to Gulf States to protect them. We should offer support no more. NON aggressive support.
Holidaymakers should and are being helped and slowly getting out!
Lets remind everyone of one FACT!
One drone has fallen on a soverign UK air base. The most accurate reports suggest it was Russian made, fired by Hezbollah probably from remote Labanon area!
RAF and others are now intercepting drone, you CANNOT stop every drone and Badenoch and Farage cannot be allowed to ghoulishly cheer any drone that falls as some sort of sick excuse for their desperation to go to war!
Every drone that stops another Kuwait City tower from burning is a win - that will be appreciated in the region.
We didn't start the war. But we shouldn't sit on our hands either if we can help prevent damage.
Personally, I'd extend that to hunting down the launch sites within Iran too. But I appreciate that is further than some would go. Happy for that subject to be debated in Parliament.
If Kuwait wants to stop drones being launched at Kuwait, then Kuwait can bomb the launch sites. Likewise UAE, Qatar and Bahrain. We can sell them the hardware.
So, you'd let the shaheed drones slam into civilian infrastructure? Even though we could help stop that?
Noted.
The Gulf States have plenty of armed forces to do that already. What do they need HMS PoW in the Eastern Mediterranean for?
If you want expertise in anti-shahed warfare speak to the Ukranians. They have the expertise and kit.
The only reason I can see is to fill the hole left by the USA carrier that just transferred to The Red Sea.
Replacing USA carriers in a NATO task force was one reason the UK ones were made that size.
Fortunately Trump does not need it, so it can go to Greenland.
Any Labour 'no bases/leave oor Keir alone' bounce' wont survive beyond about £1.60/litre Cost of living trumps Trump
What would replacing Keir do beyond tarring the next person with the same brush.
It would be better for SKS to weather the pain and when prices starting falling you bring in someone else and take advantage of the bounce.
My view is that the next Labour leader would be very wise to not dump much of the fundamental policy platform of the government because it hasn't been given enough time to bed in yet.
If the next leader wants to be successful they'll come in just as things are starting to improve. IMHO that is why nobody has yet moved against him.
With $200 a barrel, they could be waiting the other side of the election.
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
"We have never seen Israel or America launching missiles at Gulf capitals. Iran is the one that did that.
Defending Iran because it raises the banner of Palestine while ignoring what it did to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Gulf is a grave insult to the Arab countries that bore the cost for four decades."
The decision to go for desalination plants may not be a good strategy. Iran has aiui proportionally far more natural water supply than the Gulf States.
With its reservoirs at 10% that seems improbable.
Apparently the mullahs did for the Iranian water supply what the Venezuelan regime did for oil production - fucked it up with graft, favouritism, outright theft and hefty dollop of plain fuckwittery.
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
"We have never seen Israel or America launching missiles at Gulf capitals. Iran is the one that did that.
Defending Iran because it raises the banner of Palestine while ignoring what it did to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Gulf is a grave insult to the Arab countries that bore the cost for four decades."
'what it did to Iraq'? Someone needds to teach that man some history. It was Iraq, with US encouragement and backing, that launched the war against Iran in 1980 that lead to a million or more deaths.
Further good news for SKS with gold standard Survation following on from Labour's gains with Opinium yesterday as Reform's lead narrows. Labour up and now a clear second and Reform, the Tories and LDs down and the Greens unchanged and well back in 4th and barely ahead of the LDs.
Looks like distancing himself from Trump on the Iran strikes has helped Starmer shore up the Labour vote a bit
But otoh just as the economy was (maybe) looking a bit more promising along comes MaxiMoron to create another bout of inflation and instability.
The economy wasn't looking that promising, unemployment is up, prices still high and growth and wage rises slow on the latest figures
But some other metrics looking better. And now this. Negative on all fronts esp interest rates and cost of living. It's SKS who should be pissed off with Trump not the other way round. Of course he will be although he feels he can't say so.
Further good news for SKS with gold standard Survation following on from Labour's gains with Opinium yesterday as Reform's lead narrows. Labour up and now a clear second and Reform, the Tories and LDs down and the Greens unchanged and well back in 4th and barely ahead of the LDs.
Looks like distancing himself from Trump on the Iran strikes has helped Starmer shore up the Labour vote a bit
If Gorton had been delayed Labour could have n been 24 to 25 now.
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
"We have never seen Israel or America launching missiles at Gulf capitals. Iran is the one that did that.
Defending Iran because it raises the banner of Palestine while ignoring what it did to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Gulf is a grave insult to the Arab countries that bore the cost for four decades."
The decision to go for desalination plants may not be a good strategy. Iran has aiui proportionally far more natural water supply than the Gulf States.
With its reservoirs at 10% that seems improbable.
Apparently the mullahs did for the Iranian water supply what the Venezuelan regime did for oil production - fucked it up with graft, favouritism, outright theft and hefty dollop of plain fuckwittery.
I do remember it was only a few months ago they were talking about perhaps having to abandon Tehran entirely for a new capital because of the water shortages
Any Labour 'no bases/leave oor Keir alone' bounce' wont survive beyond about £1.60/litre Cost of living trumps Trump
What would replacing Keir do beyond tarring the next person with the same brush.
It would be better for SKS to weather the pain and when prices starting falling you bring in someone else and take advantage of the bounce.
My view is that the next Labour leader would be very wise to not dump much of the fundamental policy platform of the government because it hasn't been given enough time to bed in yet.
If the next leader wants to be successful they'll come in just as things are starting to improve. IMHO that is why nobody has yet moved against him.
With $200 a barrel, they could be waiting the other side of the election.
If they save their seat.
At $200 a barrel, Scotland goes independent.
Doesn't matter what the price per barrel is when the Government have made sure there are bugger all barrels being produced.
Any Labour 'no bases/leave oor Keir alone' bounce' wont survive beyond about £1.60/litre Cost of living trumps Trump
What would replacing Keir do beyond tarring the next person with the same brush.
It would be better for SKS to weather the pain and when prices starting falling you bring in someone else and take advantage of the bounce.
My view is that the next Labour leader would be very wise to not dump much of the fundamental policy platform of the government because it hasn't been given enough time to bed in yet.
If the next leader wants to be successful they'll come in just as things are starting to improve. IMHO that is why nobody has yet moved against him.
With $200 a barrel, they could be waiting the other side of the election.
Further good news for SKS with gold standard Survation following on from Labour's gains with Opinium yesterday as Reform's lead narrows. Labour up and now a clear second and Reform, the Tories and LDs down and the Greens unchanged and well back in 4th and barely ahead of the LDs.
Looks like distancing himself from Trump on the Iran strikes has helped Starmer shore up the Labour vote a bit
But otoh just as the economy was (maybe) looking a bit more promising along comes MaxiMoron to create another bout of inflation and instability.
The economy wasn't looking that promising, unemployment is up, prices still high and growth and wage rises slow on the latest figures
But some other metrics looking better. And now this. Negative on all fronts esp interest rates and cost of living. It's SKS who should be pissed off with Trump not the other way round. Of course he will be although he feels he can't say so.
It’s been a funny few months of economic data. PMI was well up, gilt yields were going down, stock market soaring, productivity growing finally after over a decade. But GDP very sluggish and unemployment up, and inflation stubborn.
I’m inclined to agree the forward looking stats were good even as the backward looking ones were stalling.
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
"We have never seen Israel or America launching missiles at Gulf capitals. Iran is the one that did that.
Defending Iran because it raises the banner of Palestine while ignoring what it did to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Gulf is a grave insult to the Arab countries that bore the cost for four decades."
The decision to go for desalination plants may not be a good strategy. Iran has aiui proportionally far more natural water supply than the Gulf States.
With its reservoirs at 10% that seems improbable.
Drinking water is mainly groundwater.
But in the aquifer stakes they are running them down at pace.
Further good news for SKS with gold standard Survation following on from Labour's gains with Opinium yesterday as Reform's lead narrows. Labour up and now a clear second and Reform, the Tories and LDs down and the Greens unchanged and well back in 4th and barely ahead of the LDs.
Looks like distancing himself from Trump on the Iran strikes has helped Starmer shore up the Labour vote a bit
But otoh just as the economy was (maybe) looking a bit more promising along comes MaxiMoron to create another bout of inflation and instability.
The economy wasn't looking that promising, unemployment is up, prices still high and growth and wage rises slow on the latest figures
But some other metrics looking better. And now this. Negative on all fronts esp interest rates and cost of living. It's SKS who should be pissed off with Trump not the other way round. Of course he will be although he feels he can't say so.
No he shouldn't, the economy is in a poor state due to Starmer and Reeves' tax rises and failure to control spending and a minimum wage so high now it is too costly to hire for many businesses. Yet thanks to Trump's strikes on Iran which he has deliberately refused to fully support Starmer has managed to get a small bounce in the polls on both the weekend polls
Serious point, if you know anyone stuck in the Middle East then pass on links such as this.
Would you recommend people to stay or leave?
Residents are 99% staying, including me.
Most of those leaving are multinational companies executing longstanding plans for unrest in the region, and the ‘influencer’ community for whom war generates clicks and likes.
There are however thousands of tourists, who haven’t quite had the holiday they expected and are supposed to be back home right now; and thousands more transit passengers who were just trying to get from A to B but ended up stuck in C when the airspace closed.
Any Labour 'no bases/leave oor Keir alone' bounce' wont survive beyond about £1.60/litre Cost of living trumps Trump
What would replacing Keir do beyond tarring the next person with the same brush.
It would be better for SKS to weather the pain and when prices starting falling you bring in someone else and take advantage of the bounce.
My view is that the next Labour leader would be very wise to not dump much of the fundamental policy platform of the government because it hasn't been given enough time to bed in yet.
If the next leader wants to be successful they'll come in just as things are starting to improve. IMHO that is why nobody has yet moved against him.
With $200 a barrel, they could be waiting the other side of the election.
If they save their seat.
At $200 a barrel, Scotland goes independent.
Given the SNP doesn't want to drill for anymore oil anymore than Ed Miliband does and are equally as net zero obsessed it doesn't
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
"We have never seen Israel or America launching missiles at Gulf capitals. Iran is the one that did that.
Defending Iran because it raises the banner of Palestine while ignoring what it did to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Gulf is a grave insult to the Arab countries that bore the cost for four decades."
The decision to go for desalination plants may not be a good strategy. Iran has aiui proportionally far more natural water supply than the Gulf States.
With its reservoirs at 10% that seems improbable.
Drinking water is mainly groundwater.
But in the aquifer stakes they are running them down at pace.
(Updated to remove derogatory reference to Kent.)
Apparently the Iranian issue with water is a growing population, existing sources running down (as you say) and a refusal to invest in capacity (reservoirs and water treatment plants)
This reminds me of something. Can’t quite put my finger on it.
Any Labour 'no bases/leave oor Keir alone' bounce' wont survive beyond about £1.60/litre Cost of living trumps Trump
What would replacing Keir do beyond tarring the next person with the same brush.
It would be better for SKS to weather the pain and when prices starting falling you bring in someone else and take advantage of the bounce.
My view is that the next Labour leader would be very wise to not dump much of the fundamental policy platform of the government because it hasn't been given enough time to bed in yet.
If the next leader wants to be successful they'll come in just as things are starting to improve. IMHO that is why nobody has yet moved against him.
With $200 a barrel, they could be waiting the other side of the election.
If they save their seat.
At $200 a barrel, Scotland goes independent.
By what mechanism? UDI?
You wouldn't know this Sir Keir, he went to a different school.
'Sir Keir Starmer stands by claim SNP would have mandate for indyref2 if they win Holyrood elections'
Further good news for SKS with gold standard Survation following on from Labour's gains with Opinium yesterday as Reform's lead narrows. Labour up and now a clear second and Reform, the Tories and LDs down and the Greens unchanged and well back in 4th and barely ahead of the LDs.
Looks like distancing himself from Trump on the Iran strikes has helped Starmer shore up the Labour vote a bit
But otoh just as the economy was (maybe) looking a bit more promising along comes MaxiMoron to create another bout of inflation and instability.
The economy wasn't looking that promising, unemployment is up, prices still high and growth and wage rises slow on the latest figures
But some other metrics looking better. And now this. Negative on all fronts esp interest rates and cost of living. It's SKS who should be pissed off with Trump not the other way round. Of course he will be although he feels he can't say so.
No he shouldn't, the economy is in a poor state due to Starmer and Reeves' tax rises and failure to control spending and a minimum wage so high now it is too costly to hire for many businesses. Yet thanks to Trump's strikes on Iran which he has deliberately refused to fully support Starmer has managed to get a small bounce in the polls on both the weekend polls
Bit of tory story there. Fair enough. But my point is that the domestic political damage from this war causing inflation and recession will likely outweigh any small polling bounce from his initial response to it.
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
"We have never seen Israel or America launching missiles at Gulf capitals. Iran is the one that did that.
Defending Iran because it raises the banner of Palestine while ignoring what it did to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Gulf is a grave insult to the Arab countries that bore the cost for four decades."
The decision to go for desalination plants may not be a good strategy. Iran has aiui proportionally far more natural water supply than the Gulf States.
With its reservoirs at 10% that seems improbable.
Drinking water is mainly groundwater.
But in the aquifer stakes they are running them down at pace.
(Updated to remove derogatory reference to Kent.)
Apparently the Iranian issue with water is a growing population, existing sources running down (as you say) and a refusal to invest in capacity (reservoirs and water treatment plants)
This reminds me of something. Can’t quite put my finger on it.
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
"We have never seen Israel or America launching missiles at Gulf capitals. Iran is the one that did that.
Defending Iran because it raises the banner of Palestine while ignoring what it did to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Gulf is a grave insult to the Arab countries that bore the cost for four decades."
The decision to go for desalination plants may not be a good strategy. Iran has aiui proportionally far more natural water supply than the Gulf States.
With its reservoirs at 10% that seems improbable.
Drinking water is mainly groundwater.
But in the aquifer stakes they are running them down at pace.
(Updated to remove derogatory reference to Kent.)
Apparently the Iranian issue with water is a growing population, existing sources running down (as you say) and a refusal to invest in capacity (reservoirs and water treatment plants)
This reminds me of something. Can’t quite put my finger on it.
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
"We have never seen Israel or America launching missiles at Gulf capitals. Iran is the one that did that.
Defending Iran because it raises the banner of Palestine while ignoring what it did to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Gulf is a grave insult to the Arab countries that bore the cost for four decades."
The decision to go for desalination plants may not be a good strategy. Iran has aiui proportionally far more natural water supply than the Gulf States.
With its reservoirs at 10% that seems improbable.
Drinking water is mainly groundwater.
But in the aquifer stakes they are running them down at pace.
(Updated to remove derogatory reference to Kent.)
Apparently the Iranian issue with water is a growing population, existing sources running down (as you say) and a refusal to invest in capacity (reservoirs and water treatment plants)
This reminds me of something. Can’t quite put my finger on it.
The UAE has struck a desalination plant in Iran -Israeli Media
Would be the first confirmed UAE strike on Iran, and follows a pattern of escalating strikes against critical water infrastructure in the Gulf region
I thought you hawks were doing this to unshackle the Iranian people, not for them to die of thirst.
I think that annoucement is quite extraordinary in that a gulf state on it's own decision and with its military attacks Iranian infrastructure
This is an escalation directly as a result of Iran firing drones and missiles at and over friendly states
The GCC isn’t particularly friendly to Iran even before the last couple of weeks
I don't think the Iranians banked on GCC retaliation.
Well what the fuck did they expect in return for 1,500 drones and missiles aimed at the UAE, plus a thousand more aimed at a dozen more countries in the region?
Did they expect them all to say “muslims good and Jews bad, let’s all bomb Israel”?
"We have never seen Israel or America launching missiles at Gulf capitals. Iran is the one that did that.
Defending Iran because it raises the banner of Palestine while ignoring what it did to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and the Gulf is a grave insult to the Arab countries that bore the cost for four decades."
The decision to go for desalination plants may not be a good strategy. Iran has aiui proportionally far more natural water supply than the Gulf States.
With its reservoirs at 10% that seems improbable.
Drinking water is mainly groundwater.
But in the aquifer stakes they are running them down at pace.
(Updated to remove derogatory reference to Kent.)
Apparently the Iranian issue with water is a growing population, existing sources running down (as you say) and a refusal to invest in capacity (reservoirs and water treatment plants)
This reminds me of something. Can’t quite put my finger on it.
Any Labour 'no bases/leave oor Keir alone' bounce' wont survive beyond about £1.60/litre Cost of living trumps Trump
What would replacing Keir do beyond tarring the next person with the same brush.
It would be better for SKS to weather the pain and when prices starting falling you bring in someone else and take advantage of the bounce.
My view is that the next Labour leader would be very wise to not dump much of the fundamental policy platform of the government because it hasn't been given enough time to bed in yet.
If the next leader wants to be successful they'll come in just as things are starting to improve. IMHO that is why nobody has yet moved against him.
With $200 a barrel, they could be waiting the other side of the election.
If they save their seat.
At $200 a barrel, Scotland goes independent.
By what mechanism? UDI?
The past couple of weeks have shown that Scotland has nothing to fear from the British Navy. 😄
Comments
If the next leader wants to be successful they'll come in just as things are starting to improve. IMHO that is why nobody has yet moved against him.
So the question is: Does this one make sense, is it possible?
In modern warfare/international trouble it appears that cheap weaponry - drones - are easy to make, import and use and expensive to stop. In that context, is disarming possible?
IANAE (that's obvious) but to me that is an important question, as I see no other even slightly rational endgame.
https://x.com/ggreenwald/status/2027716602838274433?s=20
But two more years of a steadily declining, steadily more irrational Trump as President is not going to do the GOP's chances any good in 2028.
Hard for regimes to survive without money.
(Oh, yes, and it was Netanyahu who also encouraged Hamas to take over in Gaza.)
He is cleaning up his mess a bit though.
Have his policies since then yielded positive results? Yes. Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran are all much diminished.
Which would be why the Opposition supports this conflict too.
If they save their seat.
To say it backfired massively, would be quite the understatement.
As with the Muslim Brotherhood and indeed Hamas, who also began the same way, the intention was always to go for hearts and minds first through community projects and only then tighten the grip on power - in which all three have been very successful, Hizbollah more than the others. But it's simply naive to assume they weren't proxies for the Iranians from the off and the intention was ultimately violence.
The first invasion of a country with a McDonald’s by a country with a McDonald’s since Thomas Freedman made his grand, and now clearly over optimistic, statement.
2008 marked the end of the long 1990s.
It's clear in Iran there are still those who support the Government and while we may find that incomprehensible (much as some on here do when finding out there are still people willing to vote Labour it seems), it's a truth and as long as there are those able and willing to fight for the regime, it endures absent any external pressure.
I'm not wholly comfortable with the notion liberal democracies have some moral duty to overthrow tyrannies in the name of freedom but I understand it and had we gone into Africa and cleared out the various strongmen who had seized power (including Mugabe), I'd recognise the coherence though the history of trying to make liberal democracy work where it has no roots (as happened in post WW1 central and eastern Europe) doesn't inspire confidence.
The problem is you and I both know the current American administration isn't fighting that war but a war for control of oil and gas. Having the Persian Gulf oil supply under its control is where this is leading and ensuring security of supply for America and its allies is what the current action is about, not the freedom of the Iranian people any more than going into Venezuela was about securing freedom for their people.
It's not even about controlling Islamic fundamentalism - look at Saudi Arabia which carries on with its own brand but is on "our" side - had the Royal Family been overthrown and a fundamentalist regime taken over in Riyadh, you'd better believe we'd have got involved and IF the Iraqis in 1990 had moved, as they could have, down the road into Saudi in the immediate aftermath of the Kuwait invasion and seized the coastal oil terminals around Bahrain, the Gulf War would have looked very different.
I will file that under 'not happening.'
The best case scenario is getting enough votes to make it impossible for Trump to appoint any new Supreme Court justices and tying him in procedural knots so he can't enact his agenda. That requires four net gains.
https://x.com/bellacaledonia/status/2030624843612266989?s=20
Trump
Farage
Badenoch
Coupled with losing their access to money in the GCC states, Iran quickly runs out of cash.
What would be achievable is détente.
Looks like distancing himself from Trump on the Iran strikes has helped Starmer shore up the Labour vote a bit
Although indirectly him hanging on did damage the wider world since it helped Trump's election win.
(And Hamas will make do with just Qatari funding.)
Totnes recently noted its 68th day of continuously recording rain.
https://x.com/modgovae/status/2030596754287247788
Although that was very targeted, rather than just lobbed at Doha.
But Rabin's peace died when Arafat rejected it. 26 years ago.
We are an influential site
I may have missed some.
He got round to chatting about his famous clients, Ade Edmonson and Jennifer Saunders are his favourites just mental as you'd expect but very friendly. Second favourite Neil Warnock.
Lead singer from Muse, Kate Bush, Damian Albarn all fine to contract for and friendly
There's just one nob he said, Richard Madeley, rude and arrogant and apparently hates Susanna Reid and Ed Balls.
Made me think about Ed in No 10 in the Dennis Thatcher or Phillip May role.
Stranger things have happened, Yvette has held most major roles very much a dark horse, if relatively short term. 1a
His peace process outlived him and lasted almost all of Clinton's presidency, until Barak.
It was Arafat, not Amir, that killed it.
Impeachment can occur with a simple majority vote of Congress, so if the Democrats win back the House in November Trump will definitely be impeached again.
To convict after trial in the Senate though it requires a 2/3 majority of Congress, which as you say is very unlikely even if the Democrats won back the Senate without some Republican Senators voted to convict as well. A Democrat majority of Congress would as you also say nonetheless block Trump's legislative and economic agenda and stop more conservative SC justices being appointed, though after he lost the ruling on keeping his tariffs even the SC is not entirely in support of Trump now
https://x.com/fcdogovuk/status/2030590126338802075
Serious point, if you know anyone stuck in the Middle East then pass on links such as this.
Nor was the first violence after the signing of the Accords the fault of the Palestinians. It was the Cave of the Patriarchs Massacre carried out by an extremist Right Wing Israeli.
The Right Wing in Israel never wanted the peace process and they made damn sure it failed.
Open goal there
Someone might shoot Farages ear off soon to shotre up the Reform vote for Locals.
That or another milkshake
Replacing USA carriers in a NATO task force was one reason the UK ones were made that size.
Fortunately Trump does not need it, so it can go to Greenland.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVHnekuI2b8
I’m inclined to agree the forward looking stats were good even as the backward looking ones were stalling.
But in the aquifer stakes they are running them down at pace.
(Updated to remove derogatory reference to Kent.)
(Though in the words of Abba Eban Starmer is famous for never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity.)
Most of those leaving are multinational companies executing longstanding plans for unrest in the region, and the ‘influencer’ community for whom war generates clicks and likes.
There are however thousands of tourists, who haven’t quite had the holiday they expected and are supposed to be back home right now; and thousands more transit passengers who were just trying to get from A to B but ended up stuck in C when the airspace closed.
This reminds me of something. Can’t quite put my finger on it.
I wonder how different our politics would have been if that had had a fatal outcome? Would somebody else have filled Farage's boots?
You wouldn't know this Sir Keir, he went to a different school.
'Sir Keir Starmer stands by claim SNP would have mandate for indyref2 if they win Holyrood elections'
https://news.sky.com/story/sir-keir-starmer-stands-by-claim-snp-would-have-mandate-for-indyref2-if-they-win-holyrood-elections-12079692
2% is SNP
7% is 'other' - 1% of which is likely PC.
7% other matches early Jan although late Jan it dipped to 4. It was mainly 5 and occasionally 6 since LE 25
No evidence of people flocking to Rupert - 'maybe' hes getting 1 to 3%
RFM: 29% (-2)
LAB: 21% (+2)
CON: 18% (-2)
GRN: 12% (=)
LDM: 10% (-2)
Via @Survation, 5 Mar.
Changes w/ 28-28 Jan.
https://x.com/electionmapsuk/status/2030591642793545769
If this is anything like what the situation is actually at the moment, the Labour will surely be a hot favourite for a 2029 win.