Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
Hasn’t Labour proposed to implement the nuclear power review in full?
Promised at national level. So far.
The enquiry industrial complex is strong in this country. See the continuing anger that offshore wind projects were given a sensible planning route - basically, that if the sensible list of questions is answers the project is something close to unstoppable.
Another area of fury is that power storage below 30MWh is not considered a full power station. So doesn’t get a decade of legal challenges.
So with the nuclear thing, the legislation will get drawn up. Then a long series of legal representations will be made to “improve it”. Then the legislation will be challenged in the courts.
On the other hand, the plan is for nuclear to go on the existing sites, which generally doesn’t have much local opposition. On the third hand, opposition to nuclear at national level is well organised.
On balance, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
I think NIMBYism is probably our biggest problem as a country.
We really need to allow people to build whatever and wherever they want. As long as it's not dangerous (like it's going to fall down), I'd be extremely permissive especially in urban areas.
I know people tire of me talking about phone masts but it's an area I can relate. Really these should be allowed by default in cities, there's no actual reason to reject them.
And this is the flaw in Malmesbury’s analysis. It’s not an “enquiry industrial complex” that’s the problem; it’s the underlying NIMBYism that’s driving it.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
Hasn’t Labour proposed to implement the nuclear power review in full?
Promised at national level. So far.
The enquiry industrial complex is strong in this country. See the continuing anger that offshore wind projects were given a sensible planning route - basically, that if the sensible list of questions is answers the project is something close to unstoppable.
Another area of fury is that power storage below 30MWh is not considered a full power station. So doesn’t get a decade of legal challenges.
So with the nuclear thing, the legislation will get drawn up. Then a long series of legal representations will be made to “improve it”. Then the legislation will be challenged in the courts.
On the other hand, the plan is for nuclear to go on the existing sites, which generally doesn’t have much local opposition. On the third hand, opposition to nuclear at national level is well organised.
On balance, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
I think NIMBYism is probably our biggest problem as a country.
We really need to allow people to build whatever and wherever they want. As long as it's not dangerous (like it's going to fall down), I'd be extremely permissive especially in urban areas.
I know people tire of me talking about phone masts but it's an area I can relate. Really these should be allowed by default in cities, there's no actual reason to reject them.
The restrictions on possessing fissile material in a domestic setting are ridiculous.
My plans to build a version of SNAP-10A to run the house are on hold until that nonsense is sorted out
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
On topic, I assume all those strongly in favour of the incremental ban on smoking are also in favour of similar efforts to reduce the harmful effects of pollution on children and others from motor vehicles, and therefore support fully the London Mayor's ULEZ policy and other initiatives.
Quite an apocalyptic vsion from the excellent Jeremy Bowen this morning on radio 4. Well worth listening to. He's already mentioning Suez. This is not a done deal. Quite chilling.
His comparison with China does not hold though as China has no real interest in the Middle East as the US did in overtaking the UK and French influence there
Considering how much of their oil and gas comes from the region, that's a very odd claim.
Have China ever shown any interest in military intervention in the Middle East? No
In the Guardian today "Forget birdwatching, I’m into moth-watching: they’re fascinating and misunderstood insects" by Helen Pilcher
I'd always assumed our friend from Devon was male!
Not a bad article, that. Hoping to fire up my moth trap before too long. It's quite revelatory seeing all that otherwise hidden life skulking amid the egg cartons at the bottom of the box in the morning. The hawk moths really are a revelation - insect spectaculars.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
Hasn’t Labour proposed to implement the nuclear power review in full?
Promised at national level. So far.
The enquiry industrial complex is strong in this country. See the continuing anger that offshore wind projects were given a sensible planning route - basically, that if the sensible list of questions is answers the project is something close to unstoppable.
Another area of fury is that power storage below 30MWh is not considered a full power station. So doesn’t get a decade of legal challenges.
So with the nuclear thing, the legislation will get drawn up. Then a long series of legal representations will be made to “improve it”. Then the legislation will be challenged in the courts.
On the other hand, the plan is for nuclear to go on the existing sites, which generally doesn’t have much local opposition. On the third hand, opposition to nuclear at national level is well organised.
On balance, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
I think NIMBYism is probably our biggest problem as a country.
We really need to allow people to build whatever and wherever they want. As long as it's not dangerous (like it's going to fall down), I'd be extremely permissive especially in urban areas.
I know people tire of me talking about phone masts but it's an area I can relate. Really these should be allowed by default in cities, there's no actual reason to reject them.
And this is the flaw in Malmesbury’s analysis. It’s not an “enquiry industrial complex” that’s the problem; it’s the underlying NIMBYism that’s driving it.
They enable each other. The EIC creates and protects the legal process that enables small groups or even individuals to block infrastructure for decades.
It’s a bit like crime - you need Motive *and* Capability.
Without the EIC, you will have local protests and challenges, obviously.
I guess this means Swalwell is the front runner for governor.
FBI Director Kash Patel is pressing to release a decade-old investigative file involving Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-California) and a suspected Chinese intelligence operative, according to people familiar with the effort. https://x.com/washingtonpost/status/2037930234301829486
(Swalwell cooperated with the investigation back then and was entirely exonerated.)
The Dems need to get behind one of the candidates or they could hand the governorship to the GOP. The jungle primary means only the top two go through to the run off and currently that’s the two GOP .
There are 8 Dems running and only 2 GOP. Some of the Dems who have zero chance of advancing have refused to leave the race . Utterly self indulgent and it could become a catastrophic decision unless some at least withdraw .
California Dem turnout in November could be hit if 2 GOP end up on the ballot and having a Trump stooge as governor would be a big problem !
Cameron's former adviser Steve Hilton leads the polling of Republican candidates for governor, so Hilton could end up Governor with a split Dem vote. He would do a great job in my view
On topic, I assume all those strongly in favour of the incremental ban on smoking are also in favour of similar efforts to reduce the harmful effects of pollution on children and others from motor vehicles, and therefore support fully the London Mayor's ULEZ policy and other initiatives.
Yep - I would also fully support the Parisian approach of banning heavy SUVs from the centre...
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
Hasn’t Labour proposed to implement the nuclear power review in full?
Promised at national level. So far.
The enquiry industrial complex is strong in this country. See the continuing anger that offshore wind projects were given a sensible planning route - basically, that if the sensible list of questions is answers the project is something close to unstoppable.
Another area of fury is that power storage below 30MWh is not considered a full power station. So doesn’t get a decade of legal challenges.
So with the nuclear thing, the legislation will get drawn up. Then a long series of legal representations will be made to “improve it”. Then the legislation will be challenged in the courts.
On the other hand, the plan is for nuclear to go on the existing sites, which generally doesn’t have much local opposition. On the third hand, opposition to nuclear at national level is well organised.
On balance, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
I think NIMBYism is probably our biggest problem as a country.
We really need to allow people to build whatever and wherever they want. As long as it's not dangerous (like it's going to fall down), I'd be extremely permissive especially in urban areas.
I know people tire of me talking about phone masts but it's an area I can relate. Really these should be allowed by default in cities, there's no actual reason to reject them.
And this is the flaw in Malmesbury’s analysis. It’s not an “enquiry industrial complex” that’s the problem; it’s the underlying NIMBYism that’s driving it.
They enable each other. The EIC creates and protects the legal process that enables small groups or even individuals to block infrastructure for decades.
It’s a bit like crime - you need Motive *and* Capability.
Without the EIC, you will have local protests and challenges, obviously.
That’s just capitalism. If there’s demand, people will provide a service.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
In terms of their 2024 voters yes Labour are most YIMBY, 68% of Labour voters back mandatory targets by government for the number of new homes councils must build, then 63% of LDs and 56% of Green voters agree.
Tories most opposed, just 39% in favour and only 42% of Reform voters back housing targets.
Went to see a dying friend yesterday. He’s been a long time a-dying - as he says himself. But he is slowly getting there. He’s now in a bed, with a nappy, 24/7 - and has been for months
I asked him if he gets bored. He said no, and made a chirpy joke (that’s his way). But he did say “it’s like seeing life through a keyhole”
Carpe fucking diem PB. Indeed, Carpe fucking Horan
A very good friend died of cancer this week. She was conducting choir only a month ago.
Jesus. Sorry to hear that
I don't know if the swiftness is worse or better. Worse?
A lot of PBers are ducking down sniper's alley
She'd had this (incurable) cancer for some time, but got on with life, punctuated by palliative chemo.
As cheerful as your friend, but a bit better I think.
@Brixian59's assertion that Verstappen is the 'Greatest Of All Time second only to Senna' (?) has got me thinking. Who is the F1 GOAT?
I'd plump for Fangio: five world championships for four different manufacturers and he didn't start until he was in his late 30s.
If he hadn't been killed at Hockenheim by Colin Chapman's incredibly dangerous Lotus 48 in a Formula 2 race, Jimmy Clark would undoubtedly have won more World Championships. He was no one trick pony. Winning F1 titles one week and riding his Lotus Cortina on three wheels around every Brands Hatch corner the next.
Jim Clark was the best. I remember hearing on the World at One aged six that he had been killed. It was the first death that registered for me. Jimmy died 58 years ago on April 7th. In a personal coincidence my dad died exactly 50 years later.
On NIMBYism, the other part (after dealing with the enquiry comedy) is mitigating the problems with current development.
1) build the infrastructure first. Schools, hospitals, roads and train stations. Then the houses. 2) multiple developers on each site. One Big Developer sounds nice and makes for a cosiness for the planning department, but creates a local monopoly. 3) quality of what is built. This feeds from 2), I think
Note that the Victorian and Edwardian expansion of towns did all of the above. The houses that drive modern architects into a fury - because people love them - and the suburbs they were built in.
On topic, I assume all those strongly in favour of the incremental ban on smoking are also in favour of similar efforts to reduce the harmful effects of pollution on children and others from motor vehicles, and therefore support fully the London Mayor's ULEZ policy and other initiatives.
Yep - I would also fully support the Parisian approach of banning heavy SUVs from the centre...
Vehicle pollution and smoking are two different things, of at least they are now that smoking in indoor public places has been banned. The former is an example of an environmental externality: it harms the general public as much as the user. Smoking, so long as outdoors and not in work settings, harms only the user. Caveat emptor.
There’s an argument for banning smoking in enclosed private places in the presence of a child, but by and large the externalities of the habit have now been dealt with.
That’s also why silly comparisons of net zero policies with smoking bans as if both are cases of “Puritanism”, rather than one being a case of societal survival in the face of an apocalyptic threat, are, well, silly.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
Hasn’t Labour proposed to implement the nuclear power review in full?
Promised at national level. So far.
The enquiry industrial complex is strong in this country. See the continuing anger that offshore wind projects were given a sensible planning route - basically, that if the sensible list of questions is answers the project is something close to unstoppable.
Another area of fury is that power storage below 30MWh is not considered a full power station. So doesn’t get a decade of legal challenges.
So with the nuclear thing, the legislation will get drawn up. Then a long series of legal representations will be made to “improve it”. Then the legislation will be challenged in the courts.
On the other hand, the plan is for nuclear to go on the existing sites, which generally doesn’t have much local opposition. On the third hand, opposition to nuclear at national level is well organised.
On balance, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
I think NIMBYism is probably our biggest problem as a country.
We really need to allow people to build whatever and wherever they want. As long as it's not dangerous (like it's going to fall down), I'd be extremely permissive especially in urban areas.
I know people tire of me talking about phone masts but it's an area I can relate. Really these should be allowed by default in cities, there's no actual reason to reject them.
And this is the flaw in Malmesbury’s analysis. It’s not an “enquiry industrial complex” that’s the problem; it’s the underlying NIMBYism that’s driving it.
They enable each other. The EIC creates and protects the legal process that enables small groups or even individuals to block infrastructure for decades.
It’s a bit like crime - you need Motive *and* Capability.
Without the EIC, you will have local protests and challenges, obviously.
That’s just capitalism. If there’s demand, people will provide a service.
Other countries don’t provide that service - because they balance the right to infrastructure and housing vs the right for nothing to be built next to you, differently.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
On topic, I assume all those strongly in favour of the incremental ban on smoking are also in favour of similar efforts to reduce the harmful effects of pollution on children and others from motor vehicles, and therefore support fully the London Mayor's ULEZ policy and other initiatives.
ULEZ is brilliant. People do not by and large need to drive in London.
American policies to reduce smoking tobacco have been a great success; American policies to reduce smoking marijuana have been a great failure in recent decades. You may be able to learn from both our success and our failure.
Two related stories: One of the area's Indian casinos is advertising that it is completely smoke free.
Recently, in the WaPo, Leanna Wen, said that there is evidence that marijuana can cause birth defects -- and far too many young women are using it, most of them unaware of the hazards. https://drleanawen.com/
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
Went to see a dying friend yesterday. He’s been a long time a-dying - as he says himself. But he is slowly getting there. He’s now in a bed, with a nappy, 24/7 - and has been for months
I asked him if he gets bored. He said no, and made a chirpy joke (that’s his way). But he did say “it’s like seeing life through a keyhole”
Carpe fucking diem PB. Indeed, Carpe fucking Horan
A very good friend died of cancer this week. She was conducting choir only a month ago.
Jesus. Sorry to hear that
I don't know if the swiftness is worse or better. Worse?
A lot of PBers are ducking down sniper's alley
She'd had this (incurable) cancer for some time, but got on with life, punctuated by palliative chemo.
As cheerful as your friend, but a bit better I think.
The annoying thing is that medical technology is arguably closing in on life extension: we are not far from adding decades to the human life span. And a bit further down the line is age reversal and functional immortality
So if we can all hang in there for another 10-15 years we might make it to the year 3000, when the Lib Dems finally take office
It would be deeply irritating to die JUST before this medical leap. Like being the last soldier shot before the Armistics on November 11, 1918, at 11am
Trying to watch “One battle after another” and I can’t work out if I like it or hate it. It’s an unusual film and feels beautifully made but so far I really don’t like any of the characters which makes it hard to care. Also can’t work out if Sean Pen is brilliant in it or just acting the clown like an aged Forrest Gump.
Imagine a car manufacturer came along and wanted to launch a new car. But, oh, they say about half of the people who go on using this new car type will die in crashes because of a design flaw, and they’ll take a few bystanders out with them. Few, I think, would feel it wrong to forbid that.
Or imagine a tech company launches a new app. What does it do, we ask? Nothing, it’s just very addictive. So addictive people will stay on it for decades… and half of them die from using the app. Most would think there was a problem with that.
@Brixian59's assertion that Verstappen is the 'Greatest Of All Time second only to Senna' (?) has got me thinking. Who is the F1 GOAT?
I'd plump for Fangio: five world championships for four different manufacturers and he didn't start until he was in his late 30s.
If he hadn't been killed at Hockenheim by Colin Chapman's incredibly dangerous Lotus 48 in a Formula 2 race, Jimmy Clark would undoubtedly have won more World Championships. He was no one trick pony. Winning F1 titles one week and riding his Lotus Cortina on three wheels around every Brands Hatch corner the next.
Jim Clark was the best. I remember hearing on the World at One aged six that he had been killed. It was the first death that registered for me. Jimmy died 58 years ago on April 7th. In a personal coincidence my dad died exactly 50 years later.
It's almost impossible to compare across generations, but Clark was certainly on of the half dozen best drivers in history, and by far the best of his generation.
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
On the other hand, the North Vietnamese ground offensive that ended the war was predicated on the withdrawal of military support.
Many South Vietnamese units fought until they ran out of ammunition.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
There's a proposal for a new 'development' of 5000 houses locally. On what is, currently, farmland.
Quite a row boiling up!
I'm in favour of sufficient and affordable housing but it's not a free ride as far as the environment is concerned. There is an ancient church just to the north of Canterbury standing in glorious isolation. The plan is to surround it with housing* so a landscape that has existed for many centuries disappears forever. You might say, build somewhere else, but if you want housing where it's needed that's the place to put it.
Trying to watch “One battle after another” and I can’t work out if I like it or hate it. It’s an unusual film and feels beautifully made but so far I really don’t like any of the characters which makes it hard to care. Also can’t work out if Sean Pen is brilliant in it or just acting the clown like an aged Forrest Gump.
I felt exactly the same. I'm still ambivalent now. I didn't much care about any of them, except De Caprio, a bit, because his performance is excellent
Sean Penn was objectionably over the top. I get it is in part a comedy but he just irritated me
And yet the movie entertained me, and I remember moments. It's quite good. I'd give it 7/10 if I'm feeling generous
It's a measure of the decline in movie making that it swept the Oscars
I've gone down the rabbit hole of researching "the last man to die in the Great War". It seems that a Yank is the likeliest candidate - Private Henry Gunther, killed by machine gun fire at 10:59
These two are also poignant:
France: Private Augustin Trébuchon was shot at 10:45 a.m. while carrying a message to his fellow soldiers that hot soup would be served after the ceasefire.
Canada: Private George Lawrence Price was killed by a sniper at 10:58 a.m.
I mean, what kind of luck is that
Why didn't they make the Armistice at 10:30? Or maybe even "just before breakfast". Or perhaps early 1915. Lives could have been saved
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
There's a proposal for a new 'development' of 5000 houses locally. On what is, currently, farmland.
Quite a row boiling up!
I'm in favour of sufficient and affordable housing but it's not a free ride as far as the environment is concerned. There is an ancient church just to the north of Canterbury standing in glorious isolation. The plan is to surround it with housing* so a landscape that has existed for many centuries disappears forever. You might say, build somewhere else, but if you want housing where it's needed that's the place to put it.
* As of a couple of years ago.
And if those homes provide a community to make the church viable as a continuing institution, that might be a good thing.
In previous centuries, it wouldn't have been a question. Now many of us have a home we're happy with, so building more is an unambiguous loss to us.
That throws up moral questions we haven't really had before.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
Hasn’t Labour proposed to implement the nuclear power review in full?
Promised at national level. So far.
The enquiry industrial complex is strong in this country. See the continuing anger that offshore wind projects were given a sensible planning route - basically, that if the sensible list of questions is answers the project is something close to unstoppable.
Another area of fury is that power storage below 30MWh is not considered a full power station. So doesn’t get a decade of legal challenges.
So with the nuclear thing, the legislation will get drawn up. Then a long series of legal representations will be made to “improve it”. Then the legislation will be challenged in the courts.
On the other hand, the plan is for nuclear to go on the existing sites, which generally doesn’t have much local opposition. On the third hand, opposition to nuclear at national level is well organised.
On balance, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
I think NIMBYism is probably our biggest problem as a country.
We really need to allow people to build whatever and wherever they want. As long as it's not dangerous (like it's going to fall down), I'd be extremely permissive especially in urban areas.
I know people tire of me talking about phone masts but it's an area I can relate. Really these should be allowed by default in cities, there's no actual reason to reject them.
And this is the flaw in Malmesbury’s analysis. It’s not an “enquiry industrial complex” that’s the problem; it’s the underlying NIMBYism that’s driving it.
They enable each other. The EIC creates and protects the legal process that enables small groups or even individuals to block infrastructure for decades.
It’s a bit like crime - you need Motive *and* Capability.
Without the EIC, you will have local protests and challenges, obviously.
That’s just capitalism. If there’s demand, people will provide a service.
Other countries don’t provide that service - because they balance the right to infrastructure and housing vs the right for nothing to be built next to you, differently.
Off topic: It is curious that so many lists of monsters omit Mao and Pol Pot.
Mao holds the death toll championship. One easy way to remember this is to recognize that Stalin was reponsible for about as many deaths as WW I, Mao for about as many deaths as WW II. (And Pol Pot is the best auto-genocide example I know of.)
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
On the other hand, the North Vietnamese ground offensive that ended the war was predicated on the withdrawal of military support.
Many South Vietnamese units fought until they ran out of ammunition.
The war killed maybe a tenth of the entire Vietnamese population; it came close to bankrupting the US, and ended at least one presidency.
U.S. efforts only increased the number of VC in the South. They recruited as many as they killed.
Off topic: It is curious that so many lists of monsters omit Mao and Pol Pot.
Mao holds the death toll championship. One easy way to remember this is to recognize that Stalin was reponsible for about as many deaths as WW I, Mao for about as many deaths as WW II. (And Pol Pot is the best auto-genocide example I know of.)
Some have argued that the focus on genocide above other "democides" has led to this.
Netanyahu is scum, but comparing him to Hitler is the mark of an unhinged mind.
Or a lateral thinker
You can't classify evil
Evil is evil
Genocide is genocide
Netanyahu right now is as great a threat to the world as Hitler ever was.
You absolutely can classify evil.
Genocide is genocide, yes. Fighting in war is not genocide, sending people into gas chambers is genocide.
Netanyahu is nothing like Hitler.
After 7th October, where over a thousand innocent people were murdered and others raped, kidnapped etc. Israel responded with war on Hamas, with collateral casualties running into tens of thousands. Whilst most of us think it’s gone too far, I’m not sure what alternatives people had in mind for an Israeli response.
Does that include those in the West Bank, Syria and Lebanon killed or dispossessed - the latter category including a fifth of Lebanon's population ?
When do they declare this response concluded ?
West Bank and Syria, no. Lebanon, yes.
Lebanon is a war against Hezbollah, whom are fighting alongside Iran and Hamas.
Responses/wars are generally concluded once the war is concluded because the threat has been eliminated or surrendered.
That kinda overlooks the Israeli politicians saying they should stay in the occupied Lebanese (and Syrian) territories indefinitely.
Because its not affecting what I wrote at all.
Yes, some in Israel seek "Greater Israel".
Giving them a casus belli by attacking Israel and giving Israel just cause to attack might not be the most rational move by Hezbollah therefore. But its whay they have done, repeatedly.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
@Richard_Tyndall who is in the industry comprehensively debunked your comments on this
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
@Brixian59's assertion that Verstappen is the 'Greatest Of All Time second only to Senna' (?) has got me thinking. Who is the F1 GOAT?
I'd plump for Fangio: five world championships for four different manufacturers and he didn't start until he was in his late 30s.
If he hadn't been killed at Hockenheim by Colin Chapman's incredibly dangerous Lotus 48 in a Formula 2 race, Jimmy Clark would undoubtedly have won more World Championships. He was no one trick pony. Winning F1 titles one week and riding his Lotus Cortina on three wheels around every Brands Hatch corner the next.
Jim Clark was the best. I remember hearing on the World at One aged six that he had been killed. It was the first death that registered for me. Jimmy died 58 years ago on April 7th. In a personal coincidence my dad died exactly 50 years later.
It's almost impossible to compare across generations, but Clark was certainly on of the half dozen best drivers in history, and by far the best of his generation.
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
On the other hand, the North Vietnamese ground offensive that ended the war was predicated on the withdrawal of military support.
Many South Vietnamese units fought until they ran out of ammunition.
The war killed maybe a tenth of the entire Vietnamese population; it came close to bankrupting the US, and ended at least one presidency.
U.S. efforts only increased the number of VC in the South. They recruited as many as they killed.
And an attempt to conquer and hold Tehran, to change the regime, would be 20 times worse. It's much bigger, it's all mountains, it has a large sophisticated army, they don't live in huts
I've gone down the rabbit hole of researching "the last man to die in the Great War". It seems that a Yank is the likeliest candidate - Private Henry Gunther, killed by machine gun fire at 10:59
These two are also poignant:
France: Private Augustin Trébuchon was shot at 10:45 a.m. while carrying a message to his fellow soldiers that hot soup would be served after the ceasefire.
Canada: Private George Lawrence Price was killed by a sniper at 10:58 a.m.
I mean, what kind of luck is that
Why didn't they make the Armistice at 10:30? Or maybe even "just before breakfast". Or perhaps early 1915. Lives could have been saved
If I haven't misremembered, at least one general when told earlier in the morning the ceasefire was to take effect on the eleventh hour decided the killing had gone on long enough and they wouldn't countenance guns firing a moment longer. Lloyd George was so furious he stopped their bounties, which were enormous in those days.
Reason for Lloyd George being furious was news management. Her was due to make a public announcement at 11 but the news had already leaked from France.
I've gone down the rabbit hole of researching "the last man to die in the Great War". It seems that a Yank is the likeliest candidate - Private Henry Gunther, killed by machine gun fire at 10:59
These two are also poignant:
France: Private Augustin Trébuchon was shot at 10:45 a.m. while carrying a message to his fellow soldiers that hot soup would be served after the ceasefire.
Canada: Private George Lawrence Price was killed by a sniper at 10:58 a.m.
I mean, what kind of luck is that
Why didn't they make the Armistice at 10:30? Or maybe even "just before breakfast". Or perhaps early 1915. Lives could have been saved
If I haven't misremembered, at least one general when told earlier in the morning the ceasefire was to take effect on the eleventh hour decided the killing had gone on long enough and they wouldn't countenance guns firing a moment longer. Lloyd George was so furious he stopped their bounties, which were enormous in those days.
Lloyd George was a bit of a c*nt, wasn't he?
If they all knew the Armistice was coming, why didn't everyone,. on all sides, simply stop firing. Indeed why didn't they stop firing as soon as it was signed? Cui bono? Madness
I've gone down the rabbit hole of researching "the last man to die in the Great War". It seems that a Yank is the likeliest candidate - Private Henry Gunther, killed by machine gun fire at 10:59
These two are also poignant:
France: Private Augustin Trébuchon was shot at 10:45 a.m. while carrying a message to his fellow soldiers that hot soup would be served after the ceasefire.
Canada: Private George Lawrence Price was killed by a sniper at 10:58 a.m.
I mean, what kind of luck is that
Why didn't they make the Armistice at 10:30? Or maybe even "just before breakfast". Or perhaps early 1915. Lives could have been saved
Didn’t quite a few die after the armistice where news hadn’t reached. I seem to recall something about the war in East Africa going on a bit after in some remote parts but could be wrong, unlikely obviously but maybe just this once.
Netanyahu is scum, but comparing him to Hitler is the mark of an unhinged mind.
Or a lateral thinker
You can't classify evil
Evil is evil
Genocide is genocide
Netanyahu right now is as great a threat to the world as Hitler ever was.
You absolutely can classify evil.
Genocide is genocide, yes. Fighting in war is not genocide, sending people into gas chambers is genocide.
Netanyahu is nothing like Hitler.
After 7th October, where over a thousand innocent people were murdered and others raped, kidnapped etc. Israel responded with war on Hamas, with collateral casualties running into tens of thousands. Whilst most of us think it’s gone too far, I’m not sure what alternatives people had in mind for an Israeli response.
Does that include those in the West Bank, Syria and Lebanon killed or dispossessed - the latter category including a fifth of Lebanon's population ?
When do they declare this response concluded ?
West Bank and Syria, no. Lebanon, yes.
Lebanon is a war against Hezbollah, whom are fighting alongside Iran and Hamas.
Responses/wars are generally concluded once the war is concluded because the threat has been eliminated or surrendered.
That kinda overlooks the Israeli politicians saying they should stay in the occupied Lebanese (and Syrian) territories indefinitely.
Because its not affecting what I wrote at all.
Yes, some in Israel seek "Greater Israel".
Giving them a casus belli by attacking Israel and giving Israel just cause to attack might not be the most rational move by Hezbollah therefore. But its whay they have done, repeatedly.
Hezbollah attacked Israel after Israel attacked Iran. Obviously there's a long history between them before that, but if it's irrational to give others a casus belli by attacking, then why aren't you criticising the Israeli government? They attacked Iran. They invaded Syria.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
@Richard_Tyndall who is in the industry comprehensively debunked your comments on this
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
Others who are experts within the industry and with billions invested within the industry do not agree with Richard Tindall.
Thats a fact
As for Kemi, her shadow energy secretary had a polar opposite view in Government to Kemi now
Kemi is Kemi
A foghorn, she's well suited to the North Sea is is simply irrelevant.
I understand she's staying at Trumps Golf Course near Aberdeen
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
On the other hand, the North Vietnamese ground offensive that ended the war was predicated on the withdrawal of military support.
Many South Vietnamese units fought until they ran out of ammunition.
The war killed maybe a tenth of the entire Vietnamese population; it came close to bankrupting the US, and ended at least one presidency.
U.S. efforts only increased the number of VC in the South. They recruited as many as they killed.
North Vietnam started the war when it invaded Laos and attacked South Vietnam in the Tet offensive.
The US should never have withdrawn troops from South Vietnam as I said
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
On the other hand, the North Vietnamese ground offensive that ended the war was predicated on the withdrawal of military support.
Many South Vietnamese units fought until they ran out of ammunition.
The war killed maybe a tenth of the entire Vietnamese population; it came close to bankrupting the US, and ended at least one presidency.
U.S. efforts only increased the number of VC in the South. They recruited as many as they killed.
And an attempt to conquer and hold Tehran, to change the regime, would be 20 times worse. It's much bigger, it's all mountains, it has a large sophisticated army, they don't live in huts
Even Trump isn't that mad. One hopes
He should have launched the strikes when the student protests were at their height but if Trump wants a legacy for the ages removing the Tehran regime with ground troops and restoring the Shah would be it
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
@Richard_Tyndall who is in the industry comprehensively debunked your comments on this
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
Others who are experts within the industry and with billions invested within the industry do not agree with Richard Tindall.
Thats a fact
As for Kemi, her shadow energy secretary had a polar opposite view in Government to Kemi now
Kemi is Kemi
A foghorn, she's well suited to the North Sea is is simply irrelevant.
You will find the pressure on the government will become so intense Miliband will approve the Jackdaw and Rosebank fields
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
There's a proposal for a new 'development' of 5000 houses locally. On what is, currently, farmland.
Quite a row boiling up!
I'm in favour of sufficient and affordable housing but it's not a free ride as far as the environment is concerned. There is an ancient church just to the north of Canterbury standing in glorious isolation. The plan is to surround it with housing* so a landscape that has existed for many centuries disappears forever. You might say, build somewhere else, but if you want housing where it's needed that's the place to put it.
* As of a couple of years ago.
That sounds beautiful but a church having new people around it, even if they don't believe, sounds fine too. It's what it's for.
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
It was the Democrats ending funding for the war that forced the US to withdraw troops, if the Republicans had held Congress in the early 1970s then neither Nixon nor Ford would have withdrawn troops. There were still US troops in Vietnam when Ford replaced Nixon as President
Went to see a dying friend yesterday. He’s been a long time a-dying - as he says himself. But he is slowly getting there. He’s now in a bed, with a nappy, 24/7 - and has been for months
I asked him if he gets bored. He said no, and made a chirpy joke (that’s his way). But he did say “it’s like seeing life through a keyhole”
Carpe fucking diem PB. Indeed, Carpe fucking Horan
A very good friend died of cancer this week. She was conducting choir only a month ago.
I visited my terminally ill suicidal friend in hospital on Friday. Sitting up in bed chatting to people (but watched by hospital staff sitting by her bed 24/7), you wouldn’t think she’d fallen three and a half storeys onto a paved patio, just a week before. Another friend pointed out to me that, had she succeeded one day earlier, when I had managed to forcibly stop her jumping from that same window, I’d have been arrested on suspicion of murder or attempted murder when the police arrived, and would have spent at least a night or two in police cells until, hopefully, they had gathered enough evidence to believe my story. With the worst case scenarios being very much worse (I’d hope PB’ers would then be helping to crowdfund my appeal against a miscarriage of justice?). And, having flown out of that window with much more force, having struggled free, she’d have almost certainly been more seriously injured, or worse, rather than bouncing off the balcony below as she did the day after. Moments like that bring home that life is more fragile than we think, and full of sliding doors moments that could have played out very differently.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
@Richard_Tyndall who is in the industry comprehensively debunked your comments on this
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
Others who are experts within the industry and with billions invested within the industry do not agree with Richard Tindall.
Thats a fact
As for Kemi, her shadow energy secretary had a polar opposite view in Government to Kemi now
Kemi is Kemi
A foghorn, she's well suited to the North Sea is is simply irrelevant.
You will find the pressure on the government will become so intense Miliband will approve the Jackdaw and Rosebank fields
Greg Jackson CEO Ocyppus very much disagrees with Richard Tindall
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
On the other hand, the North Vietnamese ground offensive that ended the war was predicated on the withdrawal of military support.
Many South Vietnamese units fought until they ran out of ammunition.
The war killed maybe a tenth of the entire Vietnamese population; it came close to bankrupting the US, and ended at least one presidency.
U.S. efforts only increased the number of VC in the South. They recruited as many as they killed.
And an attempt to conquer and hold Tehran, to change the regime, would be 20 times worse. It's much bigger, it's all mountains, it has a large sophisticated army, they don't live in huts
Even Trump isn't that mad. One hopes
Actually, the Vietcong were pretty massively reduced by the end of the US involvement. The Tet Offensive, some believe, was planned by the North as much to wipe out a worrying power base in a potentially unified Vietnam (the VC) as to push the Americans into leaving.
The invasion and conquest of the South was nearly entirely undertaken by the North Vietnamese regular army - thousands of tanks, artillery etc.
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
On the other hand, the North Vietnamese ground offensive that ended the war was predicated on the withdrawal of military support.
Many South Vietnamese units fought until they ran out of ammunition.
The war killed maybe a tenth of the entire Vietnamese population; it came close to bankrupting the US, and ended at least one presidency.
U.S. efforts only increased the number of VC in the South. They recruited as many as they killed.
And an attempt to conquer and hold Tehran, to change the regime, would be 20 times worse. It's much bigger, it's all mountains, it has a large sophisticated army, they don't live in huts
Even Trump isn't that mad. One hopes
He should have launched the strikes when the student protests were at their height but if Trump wants a legacy for the ages removing the Tehran regime with ground troops and restoring the Shah would be it
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
@Richard_Tyndall who is in the industry comprehensively debunked your comments on this
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
Others who are experts within the industry and with billions invested within the industry do not agree with Richard Tindall.
Thats a fact
As for Kemi, her shadow energy secretary had a polar opposite view in Government to Kemi now
Kemi is Kemi
A foghorn, she's well suited to the North Sea is is simply irrelevant.
You will find the pressure on the government will become so intense Miliband will approve the Jackdaw and Rosebank fields
Greg Jackson CEO Ocyppus very much disagrees with Richard Tindall
You will not win this one in public opinion
It is so obvious that only closed minds would want to prevent upto 25 billion more tax readily available to the economy over the next 10 plus years
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
@Richard_Tyndall who is in the industry comprehensively debunked your comments on this
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
Others who are experts within the industry and with billions invested within the industry do not agree with Richard Tindall.
Thats a fact
As for Kemi, her shadow energy secretary had a polar opposite view in Government to Kemi now
Kemi is Kemi
A foghorn, she's well suited to the North Sea is is simply irrelevant.
I understand she's staying at Trumps Golf Course near Aberdeen
I hope she remembers to declare that.
I've looked up Richard Tyndall
With respect
He's made his living working on Oil Rigs
Drill baby Drill
Respect the knowledge but he's hardly likely to advocate as stopping drilling
It a bit like the guy who pulls the guillotine being pro capital punishment.
I've gone down the rabbit hole of researching "the last man to die in the Great War". It seems that a Yank is the likeliest candidate - Private Henry Gunther, killed by machine gun fire at 10:59
These two are also poignant:
France: Private Augustin Trébuchon was shot at 10:45 a.m. while carrying a message to his fellow soldiers that hot soup would be served after the ceasefire.
Canada: Private George Lawrence Price was killed by a sniper at 10:58 a.m.
I mean, what kind of luck is that
Why didn't they make the Armistice at 10:30? Or maybe even "just before breakfast". Or perhaps early 1915. Lives could have been saved
If I haven't misremembered, at least one general when told earlier in the morning the ceasefire was to take effect on the eleventh hour decided the killing had gone on long enough and they wouldn't countenance guns firing a moment longer. Lloyd George was so furious he stopped their bounties, which were enormous in those days.
Lloyd George was a bit of a c*nt, wasn't he?
If they all knew the Armistice was coming, why didn't everyone,. on all sides, simply stop firing. Indeed why didn't they stop firing as soon as it was signed? Cui bono? Madness
Some on the allied side figured that the Germans hadn't actually surrendered (it was an Armistice, not a peace) and that they wanted to push forward as far as possible to create truth on the ground.
An interesting counterfactual. This piece of fake history....
Captain Renault: We musn't underestimate "American blundering". I was with them when they "blundered" into Berlin in 1918.
If the Allies had actually carried on until they got to Berlin, would WWII have happened?
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
There's a proposal for a new 'development' of 5000 houses locally. On what is, currently, farmland.
Quite a row boiling up!
I'm in favour of sufficient and affordable housing but it's not a free ride as far as the environment is concerned. There is an ancient church just to the north of Canterbury standing in glorious isolation. The plan is to surround it with housing* so a landscape that has existed for many centuries disappears forever. You might say, build somewhere else, but if you want housing where it's needed that's the place to put it.
* As of a couple of years ago.
That sounds beautiful but a church having new people around it, even if they don't believe, sounds fine too. It's what it's for.
Building the church caused change to a landscape that existed for many centuries before that.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
@Richard_Tyndall who is in the industry comprehensively debunked your comments on this
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
Others who are experts within the industry and with billions invested within the industry do not agree with Richard Tindall.
Thats a fact
As for Kemi, her shadow energy secretary had a polar opposite view in Government to Kemi now
Kemi is Kemi
A foghorn, she's well suited to the North Sea is is simply irrelevant.
I understand she's staying at Trumps Golf Course near Aberdeen
I hope she remembers to declare that.
I've looked up Richard Tyndall
With respect
He's made his living working on Oil Rigs
Drill baby Drill
Respect the knowledge but he's hardly likely to advocate as stopping drilling
It a bit like the guy who pulls the guillotine being pro capital punishment.
He has far more knowledge than you and his views are very well respected on this forum
It is a bit rich to try to discredit one of our posters when you produce some of the most ridiculous nonsense
@Brixian59's assertion that Verstappen is the 'Greatest Of All Time second only to Senna' (?) has got me thinking. Who is the F1 GOAT?
I'd plump for Fangio: five world championships for four different manufacturers and he didn't start until he was in his late 30s.
It would be Fangio. Clark would be worth an honourable mention, as he won around a third of his races in an even tougher era than Fangio while usually driving less good cars.
Goodwin doubling down on his race baiting dishonesty.
In more than 2,000 schools in England today a majority of children no longer speak English as their main language. My critics might not think that tells us something important about what is happening to our country. But I do. And I will not change my view https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2037792677266162089
He has become the country's leading stand up philosophers.
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
On the other hand, the North Vietnamese ground offensive that ended the war was predicated on the withdrawal of military support.
Many South Vietnamese units fought until they ran out of ammunition.
The war killed maybe a tenth of the entire Vietnamese population; it came close to bankrupting the US, and ended at least one presidency.
U.S. efforts only increased the number of VC in the South. They recruited as many as they killed.
And an attempt to conquer and hold Tehran, to change the regime, would be 20 times worse. It's much bigger, it's all mountains, it has a large sophisticated army, they don't live in huts
Even Trump isn't that mad. One hopes
Apparently what's more likely is him trying to 'do a number' on Kharg Island.
Of all his countless defects it's his out-of-his-depthness that is probably the most concerning right now.
I've gone down the rabbit hole of researching "the last man to die in the Great War". It seems that a Yank is the likeliest candidate - Private Henry Gunther, killed by machine gun fire at 10:59
These two are also poignant:
France: Private Augustin Trébuchon was shot at 10:45 a.m. while carrying a message to his fellow soldiers that hot soup would be served after the ceasefire.
Canada: Private George Lawrence Price was killed by a sniper at 10:58 a.m.
I mean, what kind of luck is that
Why didn't they make the Armistice at 10:30? Or maybe even "just before breakfast". Or perhaps early 1915. Lives could have been saved
If I haven't misremembered, at least one general when told earlier in the morning the ceasefire was to take effect on the eleventh hour decided the killing had gone on long enough and they wouldn't countenance guns firing a moment longer. Lloyd George was so furious he stopped their bounties, which were enormous in those days.
Lloyd George was a bit of a c*nt, wasn't he?
If they all knew the Armistice was coming, why didn't everyone,. on all sides, simply stop firing. Indeed why didn't they stop firing as soon as it was signed? Cui bono? Madness
A lot of them did. However a number of Allied commanders thought the Germans would be allowed to keep any land they held at the time of the ceasefire, not realising how badly broken Germany was, so were pushing forward as hard as possible to recapture as much land as they could. Mons is of course the classic example.
And rather a lot of Germans, thinking the same, resisted.
In other areas, commanders did effectively freeze fighting when they got the news, but it was not universal.
In answer to 'why not just stop shooting?' it was because communications were unreliable and it was going to take time to get the news out. There was no eagerness to see one side hearing about the armistice and being attacked by the other side who hadn't heard.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
There's a proposal for a new 'development' of 5000 houses locally. On what is, currently, farmland.
Quite a row boiling up!
I'm in favour of sufficient and affordable housing but it's not a free ride as far as the environment is concerned. There is an ancient church just to the north of Canterbury standing in glorious isolation. The plan is to surround it with housing* so a landscape that has existed for many centuries disappears forever. You might say, build somewhere else, but if you want housing where it's needed that's the place to put it.
* As of a couple of years ago.
That sounds beautiful but a church having new people around it, even if they don't believe, sounds fine too. It's what it's for.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
@Richard_Tyndall who is in the industry comprehensively debunked your comments on this
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
Others who are experts within the industry and with billions invested within the industry do not agree with Richard Tindall.
Thats a fact
As for Kemi, her shadow energy secretary had a polar opposite view in Government to Kemi now
Kemi is Kemi
A foghorn, she's well suited to the North Sea is is simply irrelevant.
You will find the pressure on the government will become so intense Miliband will approve the Jackdaw and Rosebank fields
Greg Jackson CEO Ocyppus very much disagrees with Richard Tindall
You will not win this one in public opinion
It is so obvious that only closed minds would want to prevent upto 25 billion more tax readily available to the economy over the next 10 plus years
Goodwin doubling down on his race baiting dishonesty.
In more than 2,000 schools in England today a majority of children no longer speak English as their main language. My critics might not think that tells us something important about what is happening to our country. But I do. And I will not change my view https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2037792677266162089
He has become the country's leading stand up philosophers.
Goodwin doubling down on his race baiting dishonesty.
In more than 2,000 schools in England today a majority of children no longer speak English as their main language. My critics might not think that tells us something important about what is happening to our country. But I do. And I will not change my view https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2037792677266162089
He has become the country's leading stand up philosophers.
The study states that they included "maintained, mainstream schools"
Included, or only included?
Edit - incidentally that would in theory at least exclude 85% of secondary schools as they are academies, although I doubt if that's what's meant. Doesn't inspire confidence though that they're unaware that a maintained school has a definite legal meaning.
Goodwin doubling down on his race baiting dishonesty.
In more than 2,000 schools in England today a majority of children no longer speak English as their main language. My critics might not think that tells us something important about what is happening to our country. But I do. And I will not change my view https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2037792677266162089
He has become the country's leading stand up philosophers.
The study states that they included "maintained, mainstream schools"
Included, or only included?
From page 25
"We used the School Level Database (SLD) from the ASC January 2013 to examine the variation in the proportion of EAL students at the school level. We selected all maintained, mainstream schools in England. Additionally we eliminated 32 very small maintained schools (10 or fewer students on roll). The resulting population contained 20,033 schools."
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
@Richard_Tyndall who is in the industry comprehensively debunked your comments on this
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
Others who are experts within the industry and with billions invested within the industry do not agree with Richard Tindall.
Thats a fact
As for Kemi, her shadow energy secretary had a polar opposite view in Government to Kemi now
Kemi is Kemi
A foghorn, she's well suited to the North Sea is is simply irrelevant.
You will find the pressure on the government will become so intense Miliband will approve the Jackdaw and Rosebank fields
Greg Jackson CEO Ocyppus very much disagrees with Richard Tindall
You will not win this one in public opinion
It is so obvious that only closed minds would want to prevent upto 25 billion more tax readily available to the economy over the next 10 plus years
Goodwin doubling down on his race baiting dishonesty.
In more than 2,000 schools in England today a majority of children no longer speak English as their main language. My critics might not think that tells us something important about what is happening to our country. But I do. And I will not change my view https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2037792677266162089
He has become the country's leading stand up philosophers.
The study states that they included "maintained, mainstream schools"
Included, or only included?
From page 25
"We used the School Level Database (SLD) from the ASC January 2013 to examine the variation in the proportion of EAL students at the school level. We selected all maintained, mainstream schools in England. Additionally we eliminated 32 very small maintained schools (10 or fewer students on roll). The resulting population contained 20,033 schools."
Ok, thanks. So they don't know the difference between maintained schools and academies. That's a rocky start in terms of their credibility.
@Brixian59's assertion that Verstappen is the 'Greatest Of All Time second only to Senna' (?) has got me thinking. Who is the F1 GOAT?
I'd plump for Fangio: five world championships for four different manufacturers and he didn't start until he was in his late 30s.
If he hadn't been killed at Hockenheim by Colin Chapman's incredibly dangerous Lotus 48 in a Formula 2 race, Jimmy Clark would undoubtedly have won more World Championships. He was no one trick pony. Winning F1 titles one week and riding his Lotus Cortina on three wheels around every Brands Hatch corner the next.
Jim Clark was the best. I remember hearing on the World at One aged six that he had been killed. It was the first death that registered for me. Jimmy died 58 years ago on April 7th. In a personal coincidence my dad died exactly 50 years later.
It's almost impossible to compare across generations, but Clark was certainly on of the half dozen best drivers in history, and by far the best of his generation.
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
On the other hand, the North Vietnamese ground offensive that ended the war was predicated on the withdrawal of military support.
Many South Vietnamese units fought until they ran out of ammunition.
The war killed maybe a tenth of the entire Vietnamese population; it came close to bankrupting the US, and ended at least one presidency.
U.S. efforts only increased the number of VC in the South. They recruited as many as they killed.
And an attempt to conquer and hold Tehran, to change the regime, would be 20 times worse. It's much bigger, it's all mountains, it has a large sophisticated army, they don't live in huts
Even Trump isn't that mad. One hopes
Apparently what's more likely is him trying to 'do a number' on Kharg Island.
Of all his countless defects it's his out-of-his-depthness that is probably the most concerning right now.
Actually, I think seizing Kharg Island makes sense IF you have decided to escalate. It's risky but it's an obvious pressure point, from what I've read. America can then strangle Iranian oil exports and also get a base for actions on the mainland. Unfortunately, to my amateur mind, it only makes sense if Trump is prepared to go all in: to combine this with extreme bombing of Iran, pulverising them into surrender. And yes, nukes, maybe
Goodwin doubling down on his race baiting dishonesty.
In more than 2,000 schools in England today a majority of children no longer speak English as their main language. My critics might not think that tells us something important about what is happening to our country. But I do. And I will not change my view https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2037792677266162089
He has become the country's leading stand up philosophers.
The study states that they included "maintained, mainstream schools"
Included, or only included?
From page 25
"We used the School Level Database (SLD) from the ASC January 2013 to examine the variation in the proportion of EAL students at the school level. We selected all maintained, mainstream schools in England. Additionally we eliminated 32 very small maintained schools (10 or fewer students on roll). The resulting population contained 20,033 schools."
Ok, thanks. So they don't know the difference between maintained schools and academies. That's a rocky start in terms of their credibility.
From a quick googling around, there were a couple of thousand academies in 2013.
Edit : the report is from 2015 and doesn't seem to have an axe to grind over immigration. More about identifying areas where support is required.
Further Edit: they say - "Almost a quarter of all schools (22.1%) have less than 1% EAL, and over half (54%) have less than 5% of student with EAL. However at the other extreme 1,681 schools (8.4%) have a majority of students with EAL. This does not support headlines such as that in the Daily Telegraph (31/01/14) that "English is no longer the first language for the majority of pupils at one in nine schools"
Netanyahu is scum, but comparing him to Hitler is the mark of an unhinged mind.
Or a lateral thinker
You can't classify evil
Evil is evil
Genocide is genocide
Netanyahu right now is as great a threat to the world as Hitler ever was.
You absolutely can classify evil.
Genocide is genocide, yes. Fighting in war is not genocide, sending people into gas chambers is genocide.
Netanyahu is nothing like Hitler.
After 7th October, where over a thousand innocent people were murdered and others raped, kidnapped etc. Israel responded with war on Hamas, with collateral casualties running into tens of thousands. Whilst most of us think it’s gone too far, I’m not sure what alternatives people had in mind for an Israeli response.
Does that include those in the West Bank, Syria and Lebanon killed or dispossessed - the latter category including a fifth of Lebanon's population ?
When do they declare this response concluded ?
West Bank and Syria, no. Lebanon, yes.
Lebanon is a war against Hezbollah, whom are fighting alongside Iran and Hamas.
Responses/wars are generally concluded once the war is concluded because the threat has been eliminated or surrendered.
That kinda overlooks the Israeli politicians saying they should stay in the occupied Lebanese (and Syrian) territories indefinitely.
Because its not affecting what I wrote at all.
Yes, some in Israel seek "Greater Israel".
Giving them a casus belli by attacking Israel and giving Israel just cause to attack might not be the most rational move by Hezbollah therefore. But its whay they have done, repeatedly.
Hezbollah attacked Israel after Israel attacked Iran. Obviously there's a long history between them before that, but if it's irrational to give others a casus belli by attacking, then why aren't you criticising the Israeli government? They attacked Iran. They invaded Syria.
Iran because they are the root of the trouble, behind Hamas, behind Hezbollah, with an open goal of wiping Israel off the map and openly seeking nuclear weapons to do so as verified by the IAEA.
Israel is fully entitled to tackle Iran and I have advocated for years that they should, so would be hypocritical to attack them for doing what I think is a good idea, as well as what is their rational self defence.
Syria because Syria and Israel are at war, and have been for a long time. Furthermore Syria has just been taken over by Islamist terrorists, whom the UK Government prohibited as Islamist terrorists.
Would be hypocritical to criticise Israel for taking measures against a country they are at war with that has just been taken over by Islamic terrorists who are so dangerous the British Government prohibited them.
@Brixian59's assertion that Verstappen is the 'Greatest Of All Time second only to Senna' (?) has got me thinking. Who is the F1 GOAT?
I'd plump for Fangio: five world championships for four different manufacturers and he didn't start until he was in his late 30s.
If he hadn't been killed at Hockenheim by Colin Chapman's incredibly dangerous Lotus 48 in a Formula 2 race, Jimmy Clark would undoubtedly have won more World Championships. He was no one trick pony. Winning F1 titles one week and riding his Lotus Cortina on three wheels around every Brands Hatch corner the next.
Jim Clark was the best. I remember hearing on the World at One aged six that he had been killed. It was the first death that registered for me. Jimmy died 58 years ago on April 7th. In a personal coincidence my dad died exactly 50 years later.
It's almost impossible to compare across generations, but Clark was certainly on of the half dozen best drivers in history, and by far the best of his generation.
And the nicest guy out of all of them.
My late father knew him quite well
Did he think well of him ?
Yes - my father was in insurance and especially the border farming industry and it was through this he knew him
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
On the other hand, the North Vietnamese ground offensive that ended the war was predicated on the withdrawal of military support.
Many South Vietnamese units fought until they ran out of ammunition.
The war killed maybe a tenth of the entire Vietnamese population; it came close to bankrupting the US, and ended at least one presidency.
U.S. efforts only increased the number of VC in the South. They recruited as many as they killed.
And an attempt to conquer and hold Tehran, to change the regime, would be 20 times worse. It's much bigger, it's all mountains, it has a large sophisticated army, they don't live in huts
Even Trump isn't that mad. One hopes
Apparently what's more likely is him trying to 'do a number' on Kharg Island.
Of all his countless defects it's his out-of-his-depthness that is probably the most concerning right now.
Actually, I think seizing Kharg Island makes sense IF you have decided to escalate. It's risky but it's an obvious pressure point, from what I've read. America can then strangle Iranian oil exports and also get a base for actions on the mainland. Unfortunately, to my amateur mind, it only makes sense if Trump is prepared to go all in: to combine this with extreme bombing of Iran, pulverising them into surrender. And yes, nukes, maybe
Iranian oil exports could be stopped immediately and without any risk by mining, or just saying you're mining, the Iranian side of Hormuz.
That though would lead to another increase in oil prices.
Goodwin doubling down on his race baiting dishonesty.
In more than 2,000 schools in England today a majority of children no longer speak English as their main language. My critics might not think that tells us something important about what is happening to our country. But I do. And I will not change my view https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2037792677266162089
He has become the country's leading stand up philosophers.
Goodwin doubling down on his race baiting dishonesty.
In more than 2,000 schools in England today a majority of children no longer speak English as their main language. My critics might not think that tells us something important about what is happening to our country. But I do. And I will not change my view https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2037792677266162089
He has become the country's leading stand up philosophers.
The study states that they included "maintained, mainstream schools"
Thanks.
That gives 1,681. Goodwin says "more than 2,000".
The study was from 2015, using data from 2013. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if the number has increased by that much, given the amount if immigration in the last 13 years.
Netanyahu is scum, but comparing him to Hitler is the mark of an unhinged mind.
Or a lateral thinker
You can't classify evil
Evil is evil
Genocide is genocide
Netanyahu right now is as great a threat to the world as Hitler ever was.
You absolutely can classify evil.
Genocide is genocide, yes. Fighting in war is not genocide, sending people into gas chambers is genocide.
Netanyahu is nothing like Hitler.
After 7th October, where over a thousand innocent people were murdered and others raped, kidnapped etc. Israel responded with war on Hamas, with collateral casualties running into tens of thousands. Whilst most of us think it’s gone too far, I’m not sure what alternatives people had in mind for an Israeli response.
Does that include those in the West Bank, Syria and Lebanon killed or dispossessed - the latter category including a fifth of Lebanon's population ?
When do they declare this response concluded ?
West Bank and Syria, no. Lebanon, yes.
Lebanon is a war against Hezbollah, whom are fighting alongside Iran and Hamas.
Responses/wars are generally concluded once the war is concluded because the threat has been eliminated or surrendered.
That kinda overlooks the Israeli politicians saying they should stay in the occupied Lebanese (and Syrian) territories indefinitely.
Because its not affecting what I wrote at all.
Yes, some in Israel seek "Greater Israel".
Giving them a casus belli by attacking Israel and giving Israel just cause to attack might not be the most rational move by Hezbollah therefore. But its whay they have done, repeatedly.
Hezbollah attacked Israel after Israel attacked Iran. Obviously there's a long history between them before that, but if it's irrational to give others a casus belli by attacking, then why aren't you criticising the Israeli government? They attacked Iran. They invaded Syria.
Iran because they are the root of the trouble, behind Hamas, behind Hezbollah, with an open goal of wiping Israel off the map and openly seeking nuclear weapons to do so as verified by the IAEA.
Israel is fully entitled to tackle Iran and I have advocated for years that they should, so would be hypocritical to attack them for doing what I think is a good idea, as well as what is their rational self defence.
Syria because Syria and Israel are at war, and have been for a long time. Furthermore Syria has just been taken over by Islamist terrorists, whom the UK Government prohibited as Islamist terrorists.
Would be hypocritical to criticise Israel for taking measures against a country they are at war with that has just been taken over by Islamic terrorists who are so dangerous the British Government prohibited them.
In October 2025, the UK formally removed the dominant group in the new Syrian government, Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), from its list of banned groups under the Terrorism Act 2000. This decision followed a similar move by the United States earlier last year.
Netanyahu is scum, but comparing him to Hitler is the mark of an unhinged mind.
Or a lateral thinker
You can't classify evil
Evil is evil
Genocide is genocide
Netanyahu right now is as great a threat to the world as Hitler ever was.
You absolutely can classify evil.
Genocide is genocide, yes. Fighting in war is not genocide, sending people into gas chambers is genocide.
Netanyahu is nothing like Hitler.
After 7th October, where over a thousand innocent people were murdered and others raped, kidnapped etc. Israel responded with war on Hamas, with collateral casualties running into tens of thousands. Whilst most of us think it’s gone too far, I’m not sure what alternatives people had in mind for an Israeli response.
Does that include those in the West Bank, Syria and Lebanon killed or dispossessed - the latter category including a fifth of Lebanon's population ?
When do they declare this response concluded ?
West Bank and Syria, no. Lebanon, yes.
Lebanon is a war against Hezbollah, whom are fighting alongside Iran and Hamas.
Responses/wars are generally concluded once the war is concluded because the threat has been eliminated or surrendered.
That kinda overlooks the Israeli politicians saying they should stay in the occupied Lebanese (and Syrian) territories indefinitely.
Because its not affecting what I wrote at all.
Yes, some in Israel seek "Greater Israel".
Giving them a casus belli by attacking Israel and giving Israel just cause to attack might not be the most rational move by Hezbollah therefore. But its whay they have done, repeatedly.
Hezbollah attacked Israel after Israel attacked Iran. Obviously there's a long history between them before that, but if it's irrational to give others a casus belli by attacking, then why aren't you criticising the Israeli government? They attacked Iran. They invaded Syria.
Iran because they are the root of the trouble, behind Hamas, behind Hezbollah, with an open goal of wiping Israel off the map and openly seeking nuclear weapons to do so as verified by the IAEA.
Israel is fully entitled to tackle Iran and I have advocated for years that they should, so would be hypocritical to attack them for doing what I think is a good idea, as well as what is their rational self defence.
Syria because Syria and Israel are at war, and have been for a long time. Furthermore Syria has just been taken over by Islamist terrorists, whom the UK Government prohibited as Islamist terrorists.
Would be hypocritical to criticise Israel for taking measures against a country they are at war with that has just been taken over by Islamic terrorists who are so dangerous the British Government prohibited them.
So, Syria and Israel being at war for a long time justifies Israel attacking. But Hezbollah or Hamas or Iran and Israel being at war for a long time doesn't justify them attacking. Gotcha.
Oh, and Iran seeking nuclear weapons is bad, but Israel having obtained nuclear weapons is fine. Gotcha.
Goodwin doubling down on his race baiting dishonesty.
In more than 2,000 schools in England today a majority of children no longer speak English as their main language. My critics might not think that tells us something important about what is happening to our country. But I do. And I will not change my view https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2037792677266162089
442 of them are Welsh-speaking schools presumably.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
@Richard_Tyndall who is in the industry comprehensively debunked your comments on this
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
Others who are experts within the industry and with billions invested within the industry do not agree with Richard Tindall.
Thats a fact
As for Kemi, her shadow energy secretary had a polar opposite view in Government to Kemi now
Kemi is Kemi
A foghorn, she's well suited to the North Sea is is simply irrelevant.
You will find the pressure on the government will become so intense Miliband will approve the Jackdaw and Rosebank fields
Greg Jackson CEO Ocyppus very much disagrees with Richard Tindall
You will not win this one in public opinion
It is so obvious that only closed minds would want to prevent upto 25 billion more tax readily available to the economy over the next 10 plus years
Goodwin doubling down on his race baiting dishonesty.
In more than 2,000 schools in England today a majority of children no longer speak English as their main language. My critics might not think that tells us something important about what is happening to our country. But I do. And I will not change my view https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2037792677266162089
He has become the country's leading stand up philosophers.
The study states that they included "maintained, mainstream schools"
Included, or only included?
From page 25
"We used the School Level Database (SLD) from the ASC January 2013 to examine the variation in the proportion of EAL students at the school level. We selected all maintained, mainstream schools in England. Additionally we eliminated 32 very small maintained schools (10 or fewer students on roll). The resulting population contained 20,033 schools."
Ok, thanks. So they don't know the difference between maintained schools and academies. That's a rocky start in terms of their credibility.
From a quick googling around, there were a couple of thousand academies in 2013.
Edit : the report is from 2015 and doesn't seem to have an axe to grind over immigration. More about identifying areas where support is required.
Further Edit: they say - "Almost a quarter of all schools (22.1%) have less than 1% EAL, and over half (54%) have less than 5% of student with EAL. However at the other extreme 1,681 schools (8.4%) have a majority of students with EAL. This does not support headlines such as that in the Daily Telegraph (31/01/14) that "English is no longer the first language for the majority of pupils at one in nine schools"
Right, so it's not the survey, it's Goodwin misusing it by presenting out of date material. I withdraw my slur on their credibility.
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
On the other hand, the North Vietnamese ground offensive that ended the war was predicated on the withdrawal of military support.
Many South Vietnamese units fought until they ran out of ammunition.
The war killed maybe a tenth of the entire Vietnamese population; it came close to bankrupting the US, and ended at least one presidency.
U.S. efforts only increased the number of VC in the South. They recruited as many as they killed.
North Vietnam started the war when it invaded Laos and attacked South Vietnam in the Tet offensive.
The US should never have withdrawn troops from South Vietnam as I said
That was half way through the war.
You're just arguing dogma without any historical knowledge at all.
Goodwin doubling down on his race baiting dishonesty.
In more than 2,000 schools in England today a majority of children no longer speak English as their main language. My critics might not think that tells us something important about what is happening to our country. But I do. And I will not change my view https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2037792677266162089
He has become the country's leading stand up philosophers.
The study states that they included "maintained, mainstream schools"
Thanks.
That gives 1,681. Goodwin says "more than 2,000".
The study was from 2015, using data from 2013. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if the number has increased by that much, given the amount if immigration in the last 13 years.
OK, and we can trust Goodwin has this data and has checked it?
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
@Richard_Tyndall who is in the industry comprehensively debunked your comments on this
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
Others who are experts within the industry and with billions invested within the industry do not agree with Richard Tindall.
Thats a fact
As for Kemi, her shadow energy secretary had a polar opposite view in Government to Kemi now
Kemi is Kemi
A foghorn, she's well suited to the North Sea is is simply irrelevant.
You will find the pressure on the government will become so intense Miliband will approve the Jackdaw and Rosebank fields
Greg Jackson CEO Ocyppus very much disagrees with Richard Tindall
You will not win this one in public opinion
It is so obvious that only closed minds would want to prevent upto 25 billion more tax readily available to the economy over the next 10 plus years
Goodwin doubling down on his race baiting dishonesty.
In more than 2,000 schools in England today a majority of children no longer speak English as their main language. My critics might not think that tells us something important about what is happening to our country. But I do. And I will not change my view https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/2037792677266162089
He has become the country's leading stand up philosophers.
The study states that they included "maintained, mainstream schools"
Included, or only included?
From page 25
"We used the School Level Database (SLD) from the ASC January 2013 to examine the variation in the proportion of EAL students at the school level. We selected all maintained, mainstream schools in England. Additionally we eliminated 32 very small maintained schools (10 or fewer students on roll). The resulting population contained 20,033 schools."
Ok, thanks. So they don't know the difference between maintained schools and academies. That's a rocky start in terms of their credibility.
From a quick googling around, there were a couple of thousand academies in 2013.
Edit : the report is from 2015 and doesn't seem to have an axe to grind over immigration. More about identifying areas where support is required.
Further Edit: they say - "Almost a quarter of all schools (22.1%) have less than 1% EAL, and over half (54%) have less than 5% of student with EAL. However at the other extreme 1,681 schools (8.4%) have a majority of students with EAL. This does not support headlines such as that in the Daily Telegraph (31/01/14) that "English is no longer the first language for the majority of pupils at one in nine schools"
Right, so it's not the survey, it's Goodwin misusing it by presenting out of date material. I withdraw my slur on their credibility.
I think it entirely possible that if a study found 1681 schools were found to have a majority on non-english speakers in 2013, that in 2026 the number is higher.
Given that we have had lots of immigration in the last 13 year, probably inevitable. If you import lots of furriners, then you'll get lots of people talkiin' the furrin.
So we just need to make sure we put enough resources into getting them up to speed in English. Which, according to the report has a direct, definite and completely unsurprising effect on educational attainment.
Netanyahu is scum, but comparing him to Hitler is the mark of an unhinged mind.
Or a lateral thinker
You can't classify evil
Evil is evil
Genocide is genocide
Netanyahu right now is as great a threat to the world as Hitler ever was.
You absolutely can classify evil.
Genocide is genocide, yes. Fighting in war is not genocide, sending people into gas chambers is genocide.
Netanyahu is nothing like Hitler.
After 7th October, where over a thousand innocent people were murdered and others raped, kidnapped etc. Israel responded with war on Hamas, with collateral casualties running into tens of thousands. Whilst most of us think it’s gone too far, I’m not sure what alternatives people had in mind for an Israeli response.
Does that include those in the West Bank, Syria and Lebanon killed or dispossessed - the latter category including a fifth of Lebanon's population ?
When do they declare this response concluded ?
West Bank and Syria, no. Lebanon, yes.
Lebanon is a war against Hezbollah, whom are fighting alongside Iran and Hamas.
Responses/wars are generally concluded once the war is concluded because the threat has been eliminated or surrendered.
That kinda overlooks the Israeli politicians saying they should stay in the occupied Lebanese (and Syrian) territories indefinitely.
Because its not affecting what I wrote at all.
Yes, some in Israel seek "Greater Israel".
Giving them a casus belli by attacking Israel and giving Israel just cause to attack might not be the most rational move by Hezbollah therefore. But its whay they have done, repeatedly.
Hezbollah attacked Israel after Israel attacked Iran. Obviously there's a long history between them before that, but if it's irrational to give others a casus belli by attacking, then why aren't you criticising the Israeli government? They attacked Iran. They invaded Syria.
Iran because they are the root of the trouble, behind Hamas, behind Hezbollah, with an open goal of wiping Israel off the map and openly seeking nuclear weapons to do so as verified by the IAEA.
Israel is fully entitled to tackle Iran and I have advocated for years that they should, so would be hypocritical to attack them for doing what I think is a good idea, as well as what is their rational self defence.
Syria because Syria and Israel are at war, and have been for a long time. Furthermore Syria has just been taken over by Islamist terrorists, whom the UK Government prohibited as Islamist terrorists.
Would be hypocritical to criticise Israel for taking measures against a country they are at war with that has just been taken over by Islamic terrorists who are so dangerous the British Government prohibited them.
In October 2025, the UK formally removed the dominant group in the new Syrian government, Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), from its list of banned groups under the Terrorism Act 2000. This decision followed a similar move by the United States earlier last year.
So that would be after HTS took over Syria and after Israel took action against them?
Ie at the time they took over, and Israel acted in her self defence, the British Government did indeed class HTS as terrorists?
As well as the fact Syria and Israel are legally at war.
Netanyahu is scum, but comparing him to Hitler is the mark of an unhinged mind.
Or a lateral thinker
You can't classify evil
Evil is evil
Genocide is genocide
Netanyahu right now is as great a threat to the world as Hitler ever was.
You absolutely can classify evil.
Genocide is genocide, yes. Fighting in war is not genocide, sending people into gas chambers is genocide.
Netanyahu is nothing like Hitler.
After 7th October, where over a thousand innocent people were murdered and others raped, kidnapped etc. Israel responded with war on Hamas, with collateral casualties running into tens of thousands. Whilst most of us think it’s gone too far, I’m not sure what alternatives people had in mind for an Israeli response.
Does that include those in the West Bank, Syria and Lebanon killed or dispossessed - the latter category including a fifth of Lebanon's population ?
When do they declare this response concluded ?
West Bank and Syria, no. Lebanon, yes.
Lebanon is a war against Hezbollah, whom are fighting alongside Iran and Hamas.
Responses/wars are generally concluded once the war is concluded because the threat has been eliminated or surrendered.
That kinda overlooks the Israeli politicians saying they should stay in the occupied Lebanese (and Syrian) territories indefinitely.
Because its not affecting what I wrote at all.
Yes, some in Israel seek "Greater Israel".
Giving them a casus belli by attacking Israel and giving Israel just cause to attack might not be the most rational move by Hezbollah therefore. But its whay they have done, repeatedly.
Hezbollah attacked Israel after Israel attacked Iran. Obviously there's a long history between them before that, but if it's irrational to give others a casus belli by attacking, then why aren't you criticising the Israeli government? They attacked Iran. They invaded Syria.
Iran because they are the root of the trouble, behind Hamas, behind Hezbollah, with an open goal of wiping Israel off the map and openly seeking nuclear weapons to do so as verified by the IAEA.
Israel is fully entitled to tackle Iran and I have advocated for years that they should, so would be hypocritical to attack them for doing what I think is a good idea, as well as what is their rational self defence.
Syria because Syria and Israel are at war, and have been for a long time. Furthermore Syria has just been taken over by Islamist terrorists, whom the UK Government prohibited as Islamist terrorists.
Would be hypocritical to criticise Israel for taking measures against a country they are at war with that has just been taken over by Islamic terrorists who are so dangerous the British Government prohibited them.
In October 2025, the UK formally removed the dominant group in the new Syrian government, Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), from its list of banned groups under the Terrorism Act 2000. This decision followed a similar move by the United States earlier last year.
So that would be after HTS took over Syria and after Israel took action against them?
Ie at the time they took over, and Israel acted in her self defence, the British Government did indeed class HTS as terrorists?
As well as the fact Syria and Israel are legally at war.
Had the new Syrian government taken any offensive action against Israel?
Oh, and given Israel also invaded the area occupied by UN peacekeepers, had the UN taken any offensive action against Israel?
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
@Richard_Tyndall who is in the industry comprehensively debunked your comments on this
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
Others who are experts within the industry and with billions invested within the industry do not agree with Richard Tindall.
Thats a fact
As for Kemi, her shadow energy secretary had a polar opposite view in Government to Kemi now
Kemi is Kemi
A foghorn, she's well suited to the North Sea is is simply irrelevant.
I understand she's staying at Trumps Golf Course near Aberdeen
I hope she remembers to declare that.
More lies from Brixian. I don't know of anyone I have seen who is inside the industry who contradicts what I have written about North Sea reserves and the stupidity of importing gas and oil when we could be using our own. Hell, even many of those who are heavily promoting renewables disagree with the North Sea drilling ban.
For reference, we pay £1.5 billion a year over and above the international gas price just in tariffs to Norway for importing their gas. We pay another half a billion for processing and transport costs for US LNG. A fair bit of that is wasted money because we have decided not to use our own gas under the North Sea.
Your views are based solely on you dislike for Badenoch (a dislike I happen to share) and they have no basis on fact or reality.
Every party is the NIMBY party. They talk a game at national level. But then…
Which is why I predict that the attempts at increasing house building from Starmer will be u-turned after May.
One of the squares the Green will need to make into a circle is their strong NIMBYism locally, with the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.
'...the massive support for house building and infrastructure among the young.' 50% of voters aged 18-24 and 62% of voters aged 25-49 oppose building new housing on 'green belt land' not massively lower than the 76% of over 65s who oppose building new homes on the greenbelt. 64% of 2024 Green voters and 59% of 2024 Labour voters oppose building new homes on the greenbelt.
Labour's core vote is about as YIMBY as you can get- if they can't get housebuilding happening, we really are stuffed.
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Yimby and environmentally conscious
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
@Richard_Tyndall who is in the industry comprehensively debunked your comments on this
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
Others who are experts within the industry and with billions invested within the industry do not agree with Richard Tindall.
Thats a fact
As for Kemi, her shadow energy secretary had a polar opposite view in Government to Kemi now
Kemi is Kemi
A foghorn, she's well suited to the North Sea is is simply irrelevant.
I understand she's staying at Trumps Golf Course near Aberdeen
I hope she remembers to declare that.
More lies from Brixian. I don't know of anyone I have seen who is inside the industry who contradicts what I have written about North Sea reserves and the stupidity of importing gas and oil when we could be using our own. Hell, even many of those who are heavily promoting renewables disagree with the North Sea drilling ban.
For reference, we pay £1.5 billion a year over and above the international gas price just in tariffs to Norway for importing their gas. We pay another half a billion for processing and transport costs for US LNG. A fair bit of that is wasted money because we have decided not to use our own gas under the North Sea.
Your views are based solely on you dislike for Badenoch (a dislike I happen to share) and they have no basis on fact or reality.
There is a certain irony that Brixian is demanding Big G cite his views while making completely unsupported claims of his/her own.
“Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn't working”
The first few paragraphs talk about plans, planning etc.
The BBC are sanewashing again. Trump didn't have a plan. It was just 'bomb because we can' and assume the Iranians would surrender and install Trump as the new Supreme leader. It really didn't go further than that.
The US continue NOT to have a plan. Are they going to launch a ground invasion? If so, where? What's the aim, what's the objective?
Well without a ground invasion it is unlikely to be able to remove the Iranian regime
How do you envisage a ground invasion removing the Iranian regime?
Well US and Israeli troops enter Tehran and literally remove the regime and Revolutionary Guard
What level of forces are required for that, and how many are in theatre?
10,000 US troops and marines are now in the region with more on the way. Israel would also send troops
2.7 million US military served in Vietnam between 1955 - 1975 and 58,279 died
They kept South Vietnam free of the Communists. The mistake was withdrawing them
You are a fool and/or deeply ignorant of the history.
I am not, the Democrat Congress pulled funding for the war forcing Ford to withdraw troops, had the US troops stayed Saigon would never have fallen to the Vietcong
Nixon started withdrawing troops in 69; signed a ceasefire in73, and withdrew all US troops that year. Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
On the other hand, the North Vietnamese ground offensive that ended the war was predicated on the withdrawal of military support.
Many South Vietnamese units fought until they ran out of ammunition.
The war killed maybe a tenth of the entire Vietnamese population; it came close to bankrupting the US, and ended at least one presidency.
U.S. efforts only increased the number of VC in the South. They recruited as many as they killed.
North Vietnam started the war when it invaded Laos and attacked South Vietnam in the Tet offensive.
The US should never have withdrawn troops from South Vietnam as I said
That was half way through the war.
You're just arguing dogma without any historical knowledge at all.
No North Vietnam originally invaded Laos in 1958 and it was as a result of that the US got more deeply involved in the region, clearly it is you who need to brush up your historical facts! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Vietnamese_invasion_of_Laos
Comments
(Meanwhile, of course Reform are NIMBY. Older homeowners, many of them via RTB, whose main asset is their house which was way cheaper when they bought it.)
Quite a row boiling up!
My plans to build a version of SNAP-10A to run the house are on hold until that nonsense is sorted out
It’s a bit like crime - you need Motive *and* Capability.
Without the EIC, you will have local protests and challenges, obviously.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_California_gubernatorial_election#Primary_election
My top 5 after watching since 1965
Senna
Verstappen
Schumacher
K Rosberg
R Petersen
The first 3 on speed and results
Rosberg on pure one lap speed, Frank Williams summed him up, no engine could ever match Kekes right foot
Ronnie P on pure emotion. An unfulfilled talent sadly taken
Next 2
James Hunt
John Surtees
Tories most opposed, just 39% in favour and only 42% of Reform voters back housing targets.
On support for a large increase in the number of new homes being built even Tories are +3% in favour, Reform voters though 49% opposed just ahead of the 48% in support
https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/documents/Copy_of_Internal_HouseBuilding_240709.pdf
As cheerful as your friend, but a bit better I think.
Jim Clark was the best. I remember hearing on the World at One aged six that he had been killed. It was the first death that registered for me. Jimmy died 58 years ago on April 7th. In a personal coincidence my dad died exactly 50 years later.
1) build the infrastructure first. Schools, hospitals, roads and train stations. Then the houses.
2) multiple developers on each site. One Big Developer sounds nice and makes for a cosiness for the planning department, but creates a local monopoly.
3) quality of what is built. This feeds from 2), I think
Note that the Victorian and Edwardian expansion of towns did all of the above. The houses that drive modern architects into a fury - because people love them - and the suburbs they were built in.
There’s an argument for banning smoking in enclosed private places in the presence of a child, but by and large the externalities of the habit have now been dealt with.
That’s also why silly comparisons of net zero policies with smoking bans as if both are cases of “Puritanism”, rather than one being a case of societal survival in the face of an apocalyptic threat, are, well, silly.
Which is why the Tory energy policy to be launched tomorrow is fundamentally dangerius, pointless, built on false logic and from a Party who utterly spaffed up and wasted the golden bonus from the peak North Sea days and then exacerbated their utter ineptitude by doing nothing in 14 years in power worthwhile to secure our energy future.
Two related stories: One of the area's Indian casinos is advertising that it is completely smoke free.
Recently, in the WaPo, Leanna Wen, said that there is evidence that marijuana can cause birth defects -- and far too many young women are using it, most of them unaware of the hazards.
https://drleanawen.com/
Basically in response to the impossibility of winning, the massive unpopularity and unaffordability of the war, and the collapse of morale in the US army.
You have no knowledge of the history.
So if we can all hang in there for another 10-15 years we might make it to the year 3000, when the Lib Dems finally take office
It would be deeply irritating to die JUST before this medical leap. Like being the last soldier shot before the Armistics on November 11, 1918, at 11am
Or imagine a tech company launches a new app. What does it do, we ask? Nothing, it’s just very addictive. So addictive people will stay on it for decades… and half of them die from using the app. Most would think there was a problem with that.
Do I need to spell out the analogy?
And the nicest guy out of all of them.
Many South Vietnamese units fought until they ran out of ammunition.
* As of a couple of years ago.
Sean Penn was objectionably over the top. I get it is in part a comedy but he just irritated me
And yet the movie entertained me, and I remember moments. It's quite good. I'd give it 7/10 if I'm feeling generous
It's a measure of the decline in movie making that it swept the Oscars
These two are also poignant:
France: Private Augustin Trébuchon was shot at 10:45 a.m. while carrying a message to his fellow soldiers that hot soup would be served after the ceasefire.
Canada: Private George Lawrence Price was killed by a sniper at 10:58 a.m.
I mean, what kind of luck is that
Why didn't they make the Armistice at 10:30? Or maybe even "just before breakfast". Or perhaps early 1915. Lives could have been saved
In previous centuries, it wouldn't have been a question. Now many of us have a home we're happy with, so building more is an unambiguous loss to us.
That throws up moral questions we haven't really had before.
Or one could look at Switzerland: https://www.ft.com/content/062ae877-66c8-4782-8838-3a57b3873a1b
Mao holds the death toll championship. One easy way to remember this is to recognize that Stalin was reponsible for about as many deaths as WW I, Mao for about as many deaths as WW II. (And Pol Pot is the best auto-genocide example I know of.)
U.S. efforts only increased the number of VC in the South. They recruited as many as they killed.
Yes, some in Israel seek "Greater Israel".
Giving them a casus belli by attacking Israel and giving Israel just cause to attack might not be the most rational move by Hezbollah therefore. But its whay they have done, repeatedly.
Kemi is leading on this with the support of the unions,SNP, upto 40 labour mps and others
Your anti Kemi views are well known but repeating fake news is sadly, your modus operandi
Even Trump isn't that mad. One hopes
Reason for Lloyd George being furious was news management. Her was due to make a public announcement at 11 but the news had already leaked from France.
If they all knew the Armistice was coming, why didn't everyone,. on all sides, simply stop firing. Indeed why didn't they stop firing as soon as it was signed? Cui bono? Madness
Thats a fact
As for Kemi, her shadow energy secretary had a polar opposite view in Government to Kemi now
Kemi is Kemi
A foghorn, she's well suited to the North Sea is is simply irrelevant.
I understand she's staying at Trumps Golf Course near Aberdeen
I hope she remembers to declare that.
Possibly Verstappen if he doesn't rage quit this year.
No particular order.
The US should never have withdrawn troops from South Vietnam as I said
The invasion and conquest of the South was nearly entirely undertaken by the North Vietnamese regular army - thousands of tanks, artillery etc.
It is so obvious that only closed minds would want to prevent upto 25 billion more tax readily available to the economy over the next 10 plus years
BBC News - UK must back North Sea oil and gas drilling, says trade body - BBC News
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g8x7q4l8go?app-referrer=deep-link
With respect
He's made his living working on Oil Rigs
Drill baby Drill
Respect the knowledge but he's hardly likely to advocate as stopping drilling
It a bit like the guy who pulls the guillotine being pro capital punishment.
An interesting counterfactual. This piece of fake history....
Captain Renault: We musn't underestimate "American blundering". I was with them when they "blundered" into Berlin in 1918.
If the Allies had actually carried on until they got to Berlin, would WWII have happened?
It is a bit rich to try to discredit one of our posters when you produce some of the most ridiculous nonsense
In a car third or fourth fastest bang average.
I was remiss not to mention Jim Clark
And on names (very important):
Vittorio Brambilla
Emerson Fittipaldi
Clay Regazzoni
All conjuring up the days when the spectators were almost on track and the petrol swilled around in the pit lane.
https://youtu.be/tl4VD8uvgec?si=-zeqAGOvHiABpLhw
Incidentally I wonder whether he has checked to remove private international schools from that list?
Of all his countless defects it's his out-of-his-depthness that is probably the most concerning right now.
And rather a lot of Germans, thinking the same, resisted.
In other areas, commanders did effectively freeze fighting when they got the news, but it was not universal.
In answer to 'why not just stop shooting?' it was because communications were unreliable and it was going to take time to get the news out. There was no eagerness to see one side hearing about the armistice and being attacked by the other side who hadn't heard.
The study states that they included "maintained, mainstream schools"
Edit - incidentally that would in theory at least exclude 85% of secondary schools as they are academies, although I doubt if that's what's meant. Doesn't inspire confidence though that they're unaware that a maintained school has a definite legal meaning.
"We used the School Level Database (SLD) from the ASC January 2013 to examine the
variation in the proportion of EAL students at the school level. We selected all maintained,
mainstream schools in England. Additionally we eliminated 32 very small maintained schools
(10 or fewer students on roll). The resulting population contained 20,033 schools."
We need renewables and the tax revenue from oil and gas at the same time, anything else is economic vandalism
The unions, SNP and upto 40 labour mps are supporting it and why not ?
Edit : the report is from 2015 and doesn't seem to have an axe to grind over immigration. More about identifying areas where support is required.
Further Edit: they say - "Almost a quarter of all schools (22.1%) have less than 1% EAL, and over half (54%) have less than 5% of student with EAL. However at the other extreme 1,681 schools (8.4%) have a majority of students with EAL. This does not support headlines such as that in the Daily Telegraph (31/01/14) that "English is no longer the first language for the majority of pupils at one in nine schools"
Israel is fully entitled to tackle Iran and I have advocated for years that they should, so would be hypocritical to attack them for doing what I think is a good idea, as well as what is their rational self defence.
Syria because Syria and Israel are at war, and have been for a long time. Furthermore Syria has just been taken over by Islamist terrorists, whom the UK Government prohibited as Islamist terrorists.
Would be hypocritical to criticise Israel for taking measures against a country they are at war with that has just been taken over by Islamic terrorists who are so dangerous the British Government prohibited them.
That though would lead to another increase in oil prices.
That gives 1,681. Goodwin says "more than 2,000".
Oh, and Iran seeking nuclear weapons is bad, but Israel having obtained nuclear weapons is fine. Gotcha.
You're just arguing dogma without any historical knowledge at all.
Given that we have had lots of immigration in the last 13 year, probably inevitable. If you import lots of furriners, then you'll get lots of people talkiin' the furrin.
So we just need to make sure we put enough resources into getting them up to speed in English. Which, according to the report has a direct, definite and completely unsurprising effect on educational attainment.
Edit: Goodwin is still Badfail, of course.
Ie at the time they took over, and Israel acted in her self defence, the British Government did indeed class HTS as terrorists?
As well as the fact Syria and Israel are legally at war.
Save the date: celebrate St George’s Day in the heart of London.
Join us in Trafalgar Square for a free, family-friendly festival celebrating the best of English culture with live music and performances.
When: Sunday 19 April
Location: Trafalgar Square
Time: 12pm–6pm
london.gov.uk/events/st-geor…
https://x.com/mayoroflondon/status/2038198767174779287?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
Oh, and given Israel also invaded the area occupied by UN peacekeepers, had the UN taken any offensive action against Israel?
For reference, we pay £1.5 billion a year over and above the international gas price just in tariffs to Norway for importing their gas. We pay another half a billion for processing and transport costs for US LNG. A fair bit of that is wasted money because we have decided not to use our own gas under the North Sea.
Your views are based solely on you dislike for Badenoch (a dislike I happen to share) and they have no basis on fact or reality.
Ascari; Moss; Villeneuve; Stewart; Hill; Lauda; Prost; Alonso etc
But much fewer acknowledged best of their generation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Vietnamese_invasion_of_Laos