Trump will say he's thinking of taking US out of NATO but the National Defense Authorization Act of 2024 prohibits a President from widrawing from a treaty alliance without the consent of Congress - and he doesnt have the votes - not that that will stop him from saying it
If he says they are out of NATO that de facto makes them out of NATO (at least for the duration of his term) regardless of Congress. The whole point of NATO is confidence that countries support each other if attacked, and it is the President who makes that call.
Some would say they are effectively already checked out of NATO and have been for some time.
The only reason the rest of NATO is still bothering with NATO is the presumption that the next US administration will see sense.
Are we underestimating Harris's chances of getting the nomination ?
Nancy Pelosi credits Kamala Harris for saving the Democratic Party
“She ran a great campaign. She turned out so many more people than who would have voted….she doesn’t deserve enough credit…we would have probably lost 14 (House) seats…if she had not been the candidate.” https://x.com/AnneSmi34268702/status/2038975049361703077
Harris led the Democrats to their worst electoral college defeat since Dukakis, the fact she did slightly better than a dementia ridden Biden might have done does not alter that
She had a smaller popular vote deficit than Dukakis or Kerry, and indeed a smaller one than any Republican loser ever. When considering the House vote, the popular vote matters more than the electoral college. She did pretty well. She lost, but not by that much.
But that doesn’t mean she should be the candidate next time.
Trump will say he's thinking of taking US out of NATO but the National Defense Authorization Act of 2024 prohibits a President from widrawing from a treaty alliance without the consent of Congress - and he doesnt have the votes - not that that will stop him from saying it
If he says they are out of NATO that de facto makes them out of NATO (at least for the duration of his term) regardless of Congress. The whole point of NATO is confidence that countries support each other if attacked, and it is the President who makes that call.
Some would say they are effectively already checked out of NATO and have been for some time.
The only reason the rest of NATO is still bothering with NATO is the presumption that the next US administration will see sense.
That's right. NATO is either dead or on pause depending on where the US goes after Trump.
The earth moved for me today in Tokyo... quite disconcerting, although as this is the second one I've experienced in three visits to the country I suspect it's quite an everyday thing here.
And Greece. It's odd the first time round, sounding like a large (ghost) lorry going past.
We’d flown into San Francisco in the afternoon. That night, I woke up in the early hours. I thought with jet lag, but it was probably because I’d felt something. I went to the en suite bathroom of the hotel room when the big shaking started. My then girlfriend called out sleepily from the bed, “Stop shaking the bed, bondegezou.” She was surprised to hear my voice from the other side of the room reply that it wasn’t me doing the shaking.
Anyway, the shaking stopped and the news the next morning was full of excitement at the earthquake. No-one had been injured, but there was lots of footage of things having fallen off shelves. One excited mother explained how her baby had nearly been injured. A lamp had fallen over. On her baby? No, but she explained it might have fallen on her baby.
➡️ REF UK 30% (+3) 🌳 CON 21% (+1) 🌹 LAB 19% (nc) 🌍 GREEN 12% (nc) 🔶 LIB DEM 11% (-3) ❓OTH 4% (nc) 🟡 SNP 2% (-1)
N = 2,003 | 28-30/3| Change w 25/03
This country is losing its mind !
Have you seen what’s happening in Clapham?
Yes absolutely disgraceful. That doesn’t mean Reform is the answer to the UKs problems .
I didn’t say it was. However you can understand why such scenes will push a few voters towards Reform
Incidentally there are rumours this mass looting stuff nearly spread to north london last night. The Met and Khan need to get it squashed NOW before it dangerously spreads
Bored teenagers + social media = trouble. Clapham is a shithole anyway.
Like the recent Red/Blue School Wars thing, which I think was traced back to a bored windup merchant on TikTok.
Yeah, we got some comms from the school warning us about that... so much BS they have to deal with. I hate social media, it is the absolute worst and seems to have facilitated every kind of mindless idiocy that exists in human nature. (PB is not social media, that's my line and I'm sticking to it).
The red/blue school wars turn red out to be nearly all panicked grown up rather than any actual events.
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
A Trump administration official tells Axios: "This isn't 3D chess — it's 12-dimensional. He contradicts himself regularly, so nobody knows what he's thinking. It's on purpose."
You do have to make the extrapolation that Labour's further decline is Starmer having an absolutely shocking war. Trump pretty much declaring war on Starmer is a bad look for Labour.
Plaid would still likely need Labour support to form a government in Wales though on the Beaufort poll
Plaid Green government and SNP Green in Scotland
Your worse nightmare is just a few week away
Nope, as I pointed out to you last night the SNP are forecast their worst result since 2007 on the new Holyrood Survation with the SNP projected to lose 8 MSPs.
In Wales as I also pointed out earlier the new Beaufort poll has Plaid and the Greens combined well short of a Senedd majority, only with Labour support could Plaid form a government in Wales.
You just cannot accept the idea independence majority goverments are a very real possibility in Scotland and Wales
They are not. SNP and the Greens combined are forecast to be down on 2021 on the new Survation poll and so Starmer will easily refuse indyref2 even if Swinney requests it.
In the Senedd Plaid are likely to need Labour to govern and Labour would block independence referendum talk in Wales but in any case Plaid unlike the SNP have not even included pushing for independence in their manifesto, at least not for a first time Plaid government
You constantly quote polls so read the one I posted that debunks your claim about Wales
As I said and you ignored, Plaid have NOT included independence in their manifesto, so even if Plaid won 100% of Senedd seats, which they won't, they could not push for a Welsh independence referendum as they would have no mandate for one
You are so naive
No you are the naive one, if you do not have a manifesto pledge for something you have no mandate for it, even if you win the election
And you believe that
I doubt Independence would win in Wales but if Plaid Green do win a majority it will not go away because you want it to
I don't see that leading for a campaign for independence in the short term, not least because there are divisions within Plaid on the subject. Rather I suspect the Salmond approach would be taken of trying to differentiate Wales from England and sabotage relations with Westminster at every term so it becomes a viable option in the longer term (indeed, I think the referendum happened somewhat before Salmond wanted it - I suspect his goal was for around 2020-25).
The snag is, Wales needs a hell of a lot more work than Scotland to be even considering independence as an option. And I see nothing from any party that they're ready to do that.
Wales also voted for Brexit like England so rejoining the EU would not be an option for them either
Plaid Green it is
Given Welsh independence cannot happen without Westminster consent and given Westminster is more likely to support the UK rejoining the EU than allow Welsh independence it is all hypothetical anyway
While latest Beaufort poll indicates that a Plaid government would need Labour support, the previous poll (with 4 times as many polled) indicates that they would not. I suggest that it is 50:50 at the moment.
In any case Plaid have clearly stated that Indy is not on the agenda in this Senedd. Maybe next time.
Previous vote on Brexit is irrelevant - but what is to stop a future Welsh Government calling for a two stage referendum - firstly a preliminary 'advisory' referendum on a future independent Wales rejoining the EU, with multiple options including joining the Euro, Schengen etc. Then once direction is established calling for an independence referendum.
The simple fact the UK government would refuse both and given Wales voted Leave more than the UK voted Leave percentage wise if Wales was really pushing rejoin we would likely be heading back in as one UK anyway
A Green government might give both Scotland and Wales an Independence Referendum.
A Green government would probably also send the UK bankrupt and wreck our economy so badly it would take generations to recover.
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Well, tonight they find out it is all Biden's fault so that MAGA support will probably shoot up.
The earth moved for me today in Tokyo... quite disconcerting, although as this is the second one I've experienced in three visits to the country I suspect it's quite an everyday thing here.
And Greece. It's odd the first time round, sounding like a large (ghost) lorry going past.
We’d flown into San Francisco in the afternoon. That night, I woke up in the early hours. I thought with jet lag, but it was probably because I’d felt something. I went to the en suite bathroom of the hotel room when the big shaking started. My then girlfriend called out sleepily from the bed, “Stop shaking the bed, bondegezou.” She was surprised to hear my voice from the other side of the room reply that it wasn’t me doing the shaking.
Anyway, the shaking stopped and the news the next morning was full of excitement at the earthquake. No-one had been injured, but there was lots of footage of things having fallen off shelves. One excited mother explained how her baby had nearly been injured. A lamp had fallen over. On her baby? No, but she explained it might have fallen on her baby.
If only he had explained what he was doing then his support might jump.
He's using the US military to strong arm nations with resources to hand over control of the resources for nothing or very little. Similar to post-USSR regimes using the state apparatus to steal resources for the few well connected people.
I can understand Farage supporting such an individual but other UK politicians doing it just shows naïveté and simple mindedness.
Are we underestimating Harris's chances of getting the nomination ?
Nancy Pelosi credits Kamala Harris for saving the Democratic Party
“She ran a great campaign. She turned out so many more people than who would have voted….she doesn’t deserve enough credit…we would have probably lost 14 (House) seats…if she had not been the candidate.” https://x.com/AnneSmi34268702/status/2038975049361703077
Harris led the Democrats to their worst electoral college defeat since Dukakis, the fact she did slightly better than a dementia ridden Biden might have done does not alter that
She had a smaller popular vote deficit than Dukakis or Kerry, and indeed a smaller one than any Republican loser ever. When considering the House vote, the popular vote matters more than the electoral college. She did pretty well. She lost, but not by that much.
But that doesn’t mean she should be the candidate next time.
Popular vote margin is irrelevant it is EC that matters and Kerry won more Midwest and rustbelt swing states like Michigan and Pennsylvania than Harris did.
She won't be the candidate either, it will probably be Buttigieg or Newsom and if the Democrats really want to go left AOC
Vladimir Putin is currently so scared that he has cut the internet off in Moscow. Yet he still feels at liberty to help Iranians kill Americans because the one person he certainly doesn't fear is Donald Trump.
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
A Trump administration official tells Axios: "This isn't 3D chess — it's 12-dimensional. He contradicts himself regularly, so nobody knows what he's thinking. It's on purpose."
Trump will say he's thinking of taking US out of NATO but the National Defense Authorization Act of 2024 prohibits a President from widrawing from a treaty alliance without the consent of Congress - and he doesnt have the votes - not that that will stop him from saying it
There are still people who think Trump is constrained by the law? I've lost count of the number of laws his administration has broken.
If Trump says the US is leaving NATO, if he orders American soldiers to return home from European bases, if he pulls American officers and personnel from NATO headquarters, what is Congress going to do to stop him?
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
A Trump administration official tells Axios: "This isn't 3D chess — it's 12-dimensional. He contradicts himself regularly, so nobody knows what he's thinking. It's on purpose."
What we need to establish is this: would the world look any different if Trump really was a rambling and incontinent moron instead of just pretending to be one?
Trump will say he's thinking of taking US out of NATO but the National Defense Authorization Act of 2024 prohibits a President from widrawing from a treaty alliance without the consent of Congress - and he doesnt have the votes - not that that will stop him from saying it
If he says they are out of NATO that de facto makes them out of NATO (at least for the duration of his term) regardless of Congress. The whole point of NATO is confidence that countries support each other if attacked, and it is the President who makes that call.
Some would say they are effectively already checked out of NATO and have been for some time.
The only reason the rest of NATO is still bothering with NATO is the presumption that the next US administration will see sense.
There's more to it than that. The structure and systems would be very hard to replace even if the US actually left (unlikely or not).
It would in that event be far more effective just to carry on with NATO (and persuade France to join).
Otherwise there's the problem of creating an effective EU structure and somehow accommodating Canada, the UK and Norway.
Both tasks would be problematic, but one more so than the other, I think ?
You do have to make the extrapolation that Labour's further decline is Starmer having an absolutely shocking war. Trump pretty much declaring war on Starmer is a bad look for Labour.
Plaid would still likely need Labour support to form a government in Wales though on the Beaufort poll
Plaid Green government and SNP Green in Scotland
Your worse nightmare is just a few week away
Nope, as I pointed out to you last night the SNP are forecast their worst result since 2007 on the new Holyrood Survation with the SNP projected to lose 8 MSPs.
In Wales as I also pointed out earlier the new Beaufort poll has Plaid and the Greens combined well short of a Senedd majority, only with Labour support could Plaid form a government in Wales.
You just cannot accept the idea independence majority goverments are a very real possibility in Scotland and Wales
They are not. SNP and the Greens combined are forecast to be down on 2021 on the new Survation poll and so Starmer will easily refuse indyref2 even if Swinney requests it.
In the Senedd Plaid are likely to need Labour to govern and Labour would block independence referendum talk in Wales but in any case Plaid unlike the SNP have not even included pushing for independence in their manifesto, at least not for a first time Plaid government
You constantly quote polls so read the one I posted that debunks your claim about Wales
As I said and you ignored, Plaid have NOT included independence in their manifesto, so even if Plaid won 100% of Senedd seats, which they won't, they could not push for a Welsh independence referendum as they would have no mandate for one
You are so naive
No you are the naive one, if you do not have a manifesto pledge for something you have no mandate for it, even if you win the election
And you believe that
I doubt Independence would win in Wales but if Plaid Green do win a majority it will not go away because you want it to
I don't see that leading for a campaign for independence in the short term, not least because there are divisions within Plaid on the subject. Rather I suspect the Salmond approach would be taken of trying to differentiate Wales from England and sabotage relations with Westminster at every term so it becomes a viable option in the longer term (indeed, I think the referendum happened somewhat before Salmond wanted it - I suspect his goal was for around 2020-25).
The snag is, Wales needs a hell of a lot more work than Scotland to be even considering independence as an option. And I see nothing from any party that they're ready to do that.
Wales also voted for Brexit like England so rejoining the EU would not be an option for them either
Plaid Green it is
Given Welsh independence cannot happen without Westminster consent and given Westminster is more likely to support the UK rejoining the EU than allow Welsh independence it is all hypothetical anyway
While latest Beaufort poll indicates that a Plaid government would need Labour support, the previous poll (with 4 times as many polled) indicates that they would not. I suggest that it is 50:50 at the moment.
In any case Plaid have clearly stated that Indy is not on the agenda in this Senedd. Maybe next time.
Previous vote on Brexit is irrelevant - but what is to stop a future Welsh Government calling for a two stage referendum - firstly a preliminary 'advisory' referendum on a future independent Wales rejoining the EU, with multiple options including joining the Euro, Schengen etc. Then once direction is established calling for an independence referendum.
The simple fact the UK government would refuse both and given Wales voted Leave more than the UK voted Leave percentage wise if Wales was really pushing rejoin we would likely be heading back in as one UK anyway
A Green government might give both Scotland and Wales an Independence Referendum.
A Green government would probably also send the UK bankrupt and wreck our economy so badly it would take generations to recover.
Trump will say he's thinking of taking US out of NATO but the National Defense Authorization Act of 2024 prohibits a President from widrawing from a treaty alliance without the consent of Congress - and he doesnt have the votes - not that that will stop him from saying it
If he says they are out of NATO that de facto makes them out of NATO (at least for the duration of his term) regardless of Congress. The whole point of NATO is confidence that countries support each other if attacked, and it is the President who makes that call.
Some would say they are effectively already checked out of NATO and have been for some time.
The only reason the rest of NATO is still bothering with NATO is the presumption that the next US administration will see sense.
In the short term, I think it's more to try and play for time for the sake of Ukraine. But long term, basing European security on the outcome of a flip of a coin in US presidential elections is no longer credible.
Are we underestimating Harris's chances of getting the nomination ?
Nancy Pelosi credits Kamala Harris for saving the Democratic Party
“She ran a great campaign. She turned out so many more people than who would have voted….she doesn’t deserve enough credit…we would have probably lost 14 (House) seats…if she had not been the candidate.” https://x.com/AnneSmi34268702/status/2038975049361703077
Harris led the Democrats to their worst electoral college defeat since Dukakis, the fact she did slightly better than a dementia ridden Biden might have done does not alter that
She had a smaller popular vote deficit than Dukakis or Kerry, and indeed a smaller one than any Republican loser ever. When considering the House vote, the popular vote matters more than the electoral college. She did pretty well. She lost, but not by that much.
But that doesn’t mean she should be the candidate next time.
It's pointless arguing about who "should" be the candidate for now. I'm just wondering if she's a decent trading bet.
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
Vladimir Putin is currently so scared that he has cut the internet off in Moscow. Yet he still feels at liberty to help Iranians kill Americans because the one person he certainly doesn't fear is Donald Trump.
A Trump administration official tells Axios: "This isn't 3D chess — it's 12-dimensional. He contradicts himself regularly, so nobody knows what he's thinking. It's on purpose."
No, on Iran he's just wildly and pointlessly thrashing around as he realises that there's no way out of the situation he finds himself in, much as the (bad) Terminator did at the end of Terminator 2.
Trump will say he's thinking of taking US out of NATO but the National Defense Authorization Act of 2024 prohibits a President from widrawing from a treaty alliance without the consent of Congress - and he doesnt have the votes - not that that will stop him from saying it
If he says they are out of NATO that de facto makes them out of NATO (at least for the duration of his term) regardless of Congress. The whole point of NATO is confidence that countries support each other if attacked, and it is the President who makes that call.
Some would say they are effectively already checked out of NATO and have been for some time.
The only reason the rest of NATO is still bothering with NATO is the presumption that the next US administration will see sense.
There's more to it than that. The structure and systems would be very hard to replace even if the US actually left (unlikely or not).
It would in that event be far more effective just to carry on with NATO (and persuade France to join).
Otherwise there's the problem of creating an effective EU structure and somehow accommodating Canada, the UK and Norway.
Both tasks would be problematic, but one more so than the other, I think ?
You kinda can't just carry on with NATO, because a new member only becomes a member when they've lodged their form with the US Congress.
I'm sure a lot of copy-pasting could be done to stand up the same sort of structure in the same building with the same people (Americans excepted) but you'd legally need a whole new treaty.
A colleague of mine, a millennial, said last year that he was really looking forward to Trump's second term as it would bring about 'world peace'. What O what am I supposed to say to him?
A colleague of mine, a millennial, said last year that he was really looking forward to Trump's second term as it would bring about 'world peace'. What O what am I supposed to say to him?
You do have to make the extrapolation that Labour's further decline is Starmer having an absolutely shocking war. Trump pretty much declaring war on Starmer is a bad look for Labour.
Plaid would still likely need Labour support to form a government in Wales though on the Beaufort poll
Plaid Green government and SNP Green in Scotland
Your worse nightmare is just a few week away
Nope, as I pointed out to you last night the SNP are forecast their worst result since 2007 on the new Holyrood Survation with the SNP projected to lose 8 MSPs.
In Wales as I also pointed out earlier the new Beaufort poll has Plaid and the Greens combined well short of a Senedd majority, only with Labour support could Plaid form a government in Wales.
You just cannot accept the idea independence majority goverments are a very real possibility in Scotland and Wales
They are not. SNP and the Greens combined are forecast to be down on 2021 on the new Survation poll and so Starmer will easily refuse indyref2 even if Swinney requests it.
In the Senedd Plaid are likely to need Labour to govern and Labour would block independence referendum talk in Wales but in any case Plaid unlike the SNP have not even included pushing for independence in their manifesto, at least not for a first time Plaid government
You constantly quote polls so read the one I posted that debunks your claim about Wales
As I said and you ignored, Plaid have NOT included independence in their manifesto, so even if Plaid won 100% of Senedd seats, which they won't, they could not push for a Welsh independence referendum as they would have no mandate for one
You are so naive
No you are the naive one, if you do not have a manifesto pledge for something you have no mandate for it, even if you win the election
And you believe that
I doubt Independence would win in Wales but if Plaid Green do win a majority it will not go away because you want it to
I don't see that leading for a campaign for independence in the short term, not least because there are divisions within Plaid on the subject. Rather I suspect the Salmond approach would be taken of trying to differentiate Wales from England and sabotage relations with Westminster at every term so it becomes a viable option in the longer term (indeed, I think the referendum happened somewhat before Salmond wanted it - I suspect his goal was for around 2020-25).
The snag is, Wales needs a hell of a lot more work than Scotland to be even considering independence as an option. And I see nothing from any party that they're ready to do that.
Wales also voted for Brexit like England so rejoining the EU would not be an option for them either
Plaid Green it is
Given Welsh independence cannot happen without Westminster consent and given Westminster is more likely to support the UK rejoining the EU than allow Welsh independence it is all hypothetical anyway
While latest Beaufort poll indicates that a Plaid government would need Labour support, the previous poll (with 4 times as many polled) indicates that they would not. I suggest that it is 50:50 at the moment.
In any case Plaid have clearly stated that Indy is not on the agenda in this Senedd. Maybe next time.
Previous vote on Brexit is irrelevant - but what is to stop a future Welsh Government calling for a two stage referendum - firstly a preliminary 'advisory' referendum on a future independent Wales rejoining the EU, with multiple options including joining the Euro, Schengen etc. Then once direction is established calling for an independence referendum.
The simple fact the UK government would refuse both and given Wales voted Leave more than the UK voted Leave percentage wise if Wales was really pushing rejoin we would likely be heading back in as one UK anyway
A Green government might give both Scotland and Wales an Independence Referendum.
A Green government would probably also send the UK bankrupt and wreck our economy so badly it would take generations to recover.
Hence we don't want a Green government
So, not Green as they might bankrupt the UK. Not Tory because they almost did. Not Reform as they'll go even further. Not Labour as they are so uninspired. Would that be the Lib Dems or are they ruled out too?
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
A colleague of mine, a millennial, said last year that he was really looking forward to Trump's second term as it would bring about 'world peace'. What O what am I supposed to say to him?
"If you would just sign, "here", "here" and "here" and put on this really snug white jacket that would be great."
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
They will indeed. It won't be complimentary.
His legacy will be hideous and a stain on US history unlike no other
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
That's all true, but never waste a crisis and all that, and if you repeat a lie often enough the truth doesn't matter.
But hopefully the government is also addressing the major issue of energy security in a meaningful way behind the scenes, while doing something different in the political foreground.
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
The problem with his post is in the first paragraph. “The key problem at present” might be energy as a result of the Iran war, but that is not the entirety of the problems with the US relationship.
Are we underestimating Harris's chances of getting the nomination ?
Nancy Pelosi credits Kamala Harris for saving the Democratic Party
“She ran a great campaign. She turned out so many more people than who would have voted….she doesn’t deserve enough credit…we would have probably lost 14 (House) seats…if she had not been the candidate.” https://x.com/AnneSmi34268702/status/2038975049361703077
Harris led the Democrats to their worst electoral college defeat since Dukakis, the fact she did slightly better than a dementia ridden Biden might have done does not alter that
She had a smaller popular vote deficit than Dukakis or Kerry, and indeed a smaller one than any Republican loser ever. When considering the House vote, the popular vote matters more than the electoral college. She did pretty well. She lost, but not by that much.
But that doesn’t mean she should be the candidate next time.
Popular vote margin is irrelevant it is EC that matters and Kerry won more Midwest and rustbelt swing states like Michigan and Pennsylvania than Harris did.
She won't be the candidate either, it will probably be Buttigieg or Newsom and if the Democrats really want to go left AOC
If you’re looking at the impact on the House vote, as Pelosi was, then popular vote absolutely matters.
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I've long thought that Europe would need to go back to Russian energy as part of the mix. Just make sure it's a cowed Russia that's learned it's lesson. As for the middle east it's somewhat bizarre that a country as decimated as Iran currently has control of the strait of Hormuz.
That said the Ukrainians won the war in the Black Sea without a navy.
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
The problem with his post is in the first paragraph. “The key problem at present” might be energy as a result of the Iran war, but that is not the entirety of the problems with the US relationship.
The problem is dependency.
Those who wish to swap a dependency on Washington with a dependency on Brussels have just swapped one problem for another.
Out of the frying pan and into the fire.
On energy we need to be able to be self sufficient.
On defence we need to be able to work independently, with like minded allies, and without a single point of failure . . . Either on this continent or any other.
Are we underestimating Harris's chances of getting the nomination ?
Nancy Pelosi credits Kamala Harris for saving the Democratic Party
“She ran a great campaign. She turned out so many more people than who would have voted….she doesn’t deserve enough credit…we would have probably lost 14 (House) seats…if she had not been the candidate.” https://x.com/AnneSmi34268702/status/2038975049361703077
Harris led the Democrats to their worst electoral college defeat since Dukakis, the fact she did slightly better than a dementia ridden Biden might have done does not alter that
She had a smaller popular vote deficit than Dukakis or Kerry, and indeed a smaller one than any Republican loser ever. When considering the House vote, the popular vote matters more than the electoral college. She did pretty well. She lost, but not by that much.
But that doesn’t mean she should be the candidate next time.
Popular vote margin is irrelevant it is EC that matters and Kerry won more Midwest and rustbelt swing states like Michigan and Pennsylvania than Harris did.
She won't be the candidate either, it will probably be Buttigieg or Newsom and if the Democrats really want to go left AOC
If you’re looking at the impact on the House vote, as Pelosi was, then popular vote absolutely matters.
The Democrats lost the House too, they just saved maybe a handful of seats they would have lost had dementia ridden Biden been nominee
You do have to make the extrapolation that Labour's further decline is Starmer having an absolutely shocking war. Trump pretty much declaring war on Starmer is a bad look for Labour.
Plaid would still likely need Labour support to form a government in Wales though on the Beaufort poll
Plaid Green government and SNP Green in Scotland
Your worse nightmare is just a few week away
Nope, as I pointed out to you last night the SNP are forecast their worst result since 2007 on the new Holyrood Survation with the SNP projected to lose 8 MSPs.
In Wales as I also pointed out earlier the new Beaufort poll has Plaid and the Greens combined well short of a Senedd majority, only with Labour support could Plaid form a government in Wales.
You just cannot accept the idea independence majority goverments are a very real possibility in Scotland and Wales
They are not. SNP and the Greens combined are forecast to be down on 2021 on the new Survation poll and so Starmer will easily refuse indyref2 even if Swinney requests it.
In the Senedd Plaid are likely to need Labour to govern and Labour would block independence referendum talk in Wales but in any case Plaid unlike the SNP have not even included pushing for independence in their manifesto, at least not for a first time Plaid government
You constantly quote polls so read the one I posted that debunks your claim about Wales
As I said and you ignored, Plaid have NOT included independence in their manifesto, so even if Plaid won 100% of Senedd seats, which they won't, they could not push for a Welsh independence referendum as they would have no mandate for one
You are so naive
No you are the naive one, if you do not have a manifesto pledge for something you have no mandate for it, even if you win the election
And you believe that
I doubt Independence would win in Wales but if Plaid Green do win a majority it will not go away because you want it to
I don't see that leading for a campaign for independence in the short term, not least because there are divisions within Plaid on the subject. Rather I suspect the Salmond approach would be taken of trying to differentiate Wales from England and sabotage relations with Westminster at every term so it becomes a viable option in the longer term (indeed, I think the referendum happened somewhat before Salmond wanted it - I suspect his goal was for around 2020-25).
The snag is, Wales needs a hell of a lot more work than Scotland to be even considering independence as an option. And I see nothing from any party that they're ready to do that.
Wales also voted for Brexit like England so rejoining the EU would not be an option for them either
Plaid Green it is
Given Welsh independence cannot happen without Westminster consent and given Westminster is more likely to support the UK rejoining the EU than allow Welsh independence it is all hypothetical anyway
While latest Beaufort poll indicates that a Plaid government would need Labour support, the previous poll (with 4 times as many polled) indicates that they would not. I suggest that it is 50:50 at the moment.
In any case Plaid have clearly stated that Indy is not on the agenda in this Senedd. Maybe next time.
Previous vote on Brexit is irrelevant - but what is to stop a future Welsh Government calling for a two stage referendum - firstly a preliminary 'advisory' referendum on a future independent Wales rejoining the EU, with multiple options including joining the Euro, Schengen etc. Then once direction is established calling for an independence referendum.
The simple fact the UK government would refuse both and given Wales voted Leave more than the UK voted Leave percentage wise if Wales was really pushing rejoin we would likely be heading back in as one UK anyway
A Green government might give both Scotland and Wales an Independence Referendum.
A Green government would probably also send the UK bankrupt and wreck our economy so badly it would take generations to recover.
Hence we don't want a Green government
So, not Green as they might bankrupt the UK. Not Tory because they almost did. Not Reform as they'll go even further. Not Labour as they are so uninspired. Would that be the Lib Dems or are they ruled out too?
The LDs are at least more fiscally conservative than the Greens, as they showed when in government with the Tories from 2010-15
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I've long thought that Europe would need to go back to Russian energy as part of the mix. Just make sure it's a cowed Russia that's learned it's lesson. As for the middle east it's somewhat bizarre that a country as decimated as Iran currently has control of the strait of Hormuz.
That said the Ukrainians won the war in the Black Sea without a navy.
I don't think the Iranians could force navigation of the Strait if the US decided to close it to Iranian shipping, so I wouldn't say that they have control of it, but it's easier to deny freedom of navigation than it is to secure it.
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
Then Trump’s legacy is f***ed!
Yes, he needs to change course and get serious about regime change. Stop dicking about.
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
Then Trump’s legacy is f***ed!
Yes, he needs to change course and get serious about regime change. Stop dicking about.
Being serious has never been his strong point.
Getting serious about regime change might mean switching his attentions to Cuba.
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I've long thought that Europe would need to go back to Russian energy as part of the mix. Just make sure it's a cowed Russia that's learned it's lesson. As for the middle east it's somewhat bizarre that a country as decimated as Iran currently has control of the strait of Hormuz.
That said the Ukrainians won the war in the Black Sea without a navy.
Drones may well make a Navy an expensive unnecessary hobby from a different era.
They are also why Iran can easily block the Straits and why no sane government is going to help unblock it because unless Iran and co want to unblock the Strait it’s not difficult or expensive to attack ships that refuse to pay
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I've long thought that Europe would need to go back to Russian energy as part of the mix. Just make sure it's a cowed Russia that's learned it's lesson. As for the middle east it's somewhat bizarre that a country as decimated as Iran currently has control of the strait of Hormuz.
That said the Ukrainians won the war in the Black Sea without a navy.
I don't think the Iranians could force navigation of the Strait if the US decided to close it to Iranian shipping, so I wouldn't say that they have control of it, but it's easier to deny freedom of navigation than it is to secure it.
This seems to be the one thing Trump is ruling out yet it's what is most likely to collapse the regime.
I'd love to know what the Arab countries are advising Trump in private.
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
Then Trump’s legacy is f***ed!
Yes, he needs to change course and get serious about regime change. Stop dicking about.
Being serious has never been his strong point.
Trump has always taken self-enrichment and self-aggrandisement very seriously.
He simply doesn't care about the things you care about and he isn't going to start doing so.
Regime change in Iran would be too much effort for too little personal reward for Trump to commit to. You should never have allowed yourself to be fooled into supporting something because it looked a little like what you wanted to happen, when it was never going to be what you wanted to happen.
I haven't been following this story, but is that the case that she is an alleged Chinese spy, and now she's been doing honey-trap stuff with a Trident submariner?
And the Government thinks this country is our ally and we need to be 'working in close consultation' with them.
Her husband was the spy, apparently.
The RN concern seems to have been blackmail.
There is a John Winton novel called 'Polaris' on a similar subject - where a submarine commander starts an affair with a CND activist and is blackmailed over it.
Don’t they train officers on this stuff any more?
If some random hottie chats you up in a bar, possibly someone who looks like she might be Chinese or Russian, or a CND activist, then guess what…
American officers seem to have a really bad record at failing for Chinese spies in recent years. Guess what, that 10/10 Asian girl is way more interested in what’s on your phone than what’s in your pants - God gave men a brain and a penis, but only enough blood to operate one at a time!
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I think renewables as a share of energy production in Europe is up 6 percentage points between 2022 and 2025. That’s the other side of this equation. If Europe, including the UK, can keep pushing that number up, and accelerate the increase, then we solve the problem. Big international cooperative projects, like the one to support offshore wind power in the North Sea, are part of that and are helped by that closer relationships between the UK and EU. The unreliable nature of much renewable power is also helped by pan-European cooperation.
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
Then Trump’s legacy is f***ed!
Yes, he needs to change course and get serious about regime change. Stop dicking about.
Being serious has never been his strong point.
He’s announced that he has achieved regime change in Iran. Job done!
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I think renewables as a share of energy production in Europe is up 6 percentage points between 2022 and 2025. That’s the other side of this equation. If Europe, including the UK, can keep pushing that number up, and accelerate the increase, then we solve the problem. Big international cooperative projects, like the one to support offshore wind power in the North Sea, are part of that and are helped by that closer relationships between the UK and EU. The unreliable nature of much renewable power is also helped by pan-European cooperation.
We still will need oil to fuel that transition.
Many of the products used in renewable manufacture, supply and maintenance are oils based and until scalable alternatives are available that’s the way it’s going to be. So we need oils and gas too
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I've long thought that Europe would need to go back to Russian energy as part of the mix. Just make sure it's a cowed Russia that's learned it's lesson. As for the middle east it's somewhat bizarre that a country as decimated as Iran currently has control of the strait of Hormuz.
That said the Ukrainians won the war in the Black Sea without a navy.
I don't think the Iranians could force navigation of the Strait if the US decided to close it to Iranian shipping, so I wouldn't say that they have control of it, but it's easier to deny freedom of navigation than it is to secure it.
This seems to be the one thing Trump is ruling out yet it's what is most likely to collapse the regime.
I'd love to know what the Arab countries are advising Trump in private.
Remember it costs them one luxury jet if they want to advise Trump.
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I think renewables as a share of energy production in Europe is up 6 percentage points between 2022 and 2025. That’s the other side of this equation. If Europe, including the UK, can keep pushing that number up, and accelerate the increase, then we solve the problem. Big international cooperative projects, like the one to support offshore wind power in the North Sea, are part of that and are helped by that closer relationships between the UK and EU. The unreliable nature of much renewable power is also helped by pan-European cooperation.
Or we could just drill the North Sea and subsidise everyone's bills by cancelling green investment.
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I think renewables as a share of energy production in Europe is up 6 percentage points between 2022 and 2025. That’s the other side of this equation. If Europe, including the UK, can keep pushing that number up, and accelerate the increase, then we solve the problem. Big international cooperative projects, like the one to support offshore wind power in the North Sea, are part of that and are helped by that closer relationships between the UK and EU. The unreliable nature of much renewable power is also helped by pan-European cooperation.
Or we could just drill the North Sea and subsidise everyone's bills by cancelling green investment.
A tap in to French solar and wind via EDF wouls light and heat millions
I haven't been following this story, but is that the case that she is an alleged Chinese spy, and now she's been doing honey-trap stuff with a Trident submariner?
And the Government thinks this country is our ally and we need to be 'working in close consultation' with them.
Tbf (and I am not a fan of Ms Reid) she appears to have got pished and then touchy freely with one submariner and done a bit of sexting with another. She’s a very silly person but not I think John Profumo or Mata McHari. I don’t foresee her being shot or doing charitable good works in any subsequent career, if she has one.
Sundodgers will fuck any living thing including each other. She should have been, and perhaps was, counselled on this before getting on the turps with them.
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I think renewables as a share of energy production in Europe is up 6 percentage points between 2022 and 2025. That’s the other side of this equation. If Europe, including the UK, can keep pushing that number up, and accelerate the increase, then we solve the problem. Big international cooperative projects, like the one to support offshore wind power in the North Sea, are part of that and are helped by that closer relationships between the UK and EU. The unreliable nature of much renewable power is also helped by pan-European cooperation.
Or we could just drill the North Sea and subsidise everyone's bills by cancelling green investment.
We could. That would be very stupid (as a solution to the immediate problem), but we could. It would take a while to significantly increase drilling and it would have zero effect on global prices. We can more quickly rush in more solar power.
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
The problem with his post is in the first paragraph. “The key problem at present” might be energy as a result of the Iran war, but that is not the entirety of the problems with the US relationship.
The problem is dependency.
Those who wish to swap a dependency on Washington with a dependency on Brussels have just swapped one problem for another.
Out of the frying pan and into the fire.
On energy we need to be able to be self sufficient.
On defence we need to be able to work independently, with like minded allies, and without a single point of failure . . . Either on this continent or any other.
Swiss cheese model of risk.
Being self sufficient and NIMBYS is sadly an impossible situation.
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
If such a relationship helps with energy security via interconnector/pipeline development then I think you could make an argument. But I would have thought that would be possible anyway.
Like many of these arguments, it really depends on what you mean by “security”. Autarky or reduced exposure to global markets?
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
They will indeed. It won't be complimentary.
His legacy will be hideous and a stain on US history unlike no other
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
They will indeed. It won't be complimentary.
His legacy will be hideous and a stain on US history unlike no other
But Kemi wants to join him at war
Planespotters are having a field day thanks to Starmer turning us into Trump's Airstrip One.
A colleague of mine, a millennial, said last year that he was really looking forward to Trump's second term as it would bring about 'world peace'. What O what am I supposed to say to him?
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
Then Trump’s legacy is f***ed!
Yes, he needs to change course and get serious about regime change. Stop dicking about.
Being serious has never been his strong point.
But who should he replace Starmer with? Farage, Tiny Tom or Andrew Tate.
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
They will indeed. It won't be complimentary.
His legacy will be hideous and a stain on US history unlike no other
But Kemi wants to join him at war
Why not? She's getting all the big calls right on PB.
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I've long thought that Europe would need to go back to Russian energy as part of the mix. Just make sure it's a cowed Russia that's learned it's lesson. As for the middle east it's somewhat bizarre that a country as decimated as Iran currently has control of the strait of Hormuz.
That said the Ukrainians won the war in the Black Sea without a navy.
A postwar Ukraine would be a gas exporter. They also have very large storage facilities.
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
They will indeed. It won't be complimentary.
His legacy will be hideous and a stain on US history unlike no other
But Kemi wants to join him at war
Planespotters are having a field day thanks to Starmer turning us into Trump's Airstrip One.
79% of MAGA identifying Republicans still back the war with Iran though and by a +14% margin MAGA Republicans even back sending in ground troops to Iran. Though Trump seems to be trying to bring the conflict to an end in the next few weeks
Perhaps even Trump has realised he’s not going to win purely on the votes of MAGA Republicans.
He doesn't need to win again, he is term limited. In historical terms what is going to give Trump a real legacy? Removing the Iranian regime and restoring the son of the Shah. Will historians in decades to come care about this year's midterms or that Vance might have scraped a win in 2028 in terms of Trump's legacy? No. They will assess what happened in Iran though
Then Trump’s legacy is f***ed!
Yes, he needs to change course and get serious about regime change. Stop dicking about.
Being serious has never been his strong point.
Trump has always taken self-enrichment and self-aggrandisement very seriously.
He simply doesn't care about the things you care about and he isn't going to start doing so.
Regime change in Iran would be too much effort for too little personal reward for Trump to commit to. You should never have allowed yourself to be fooled into supporting something because it looked a little like what you wanted to happen, when it was never going to be what you wanted to happen.
There is no alternative President who would have pursued the kind of action for regime change that Barty is advocating. He's indulging in neocon fantasy.
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I've long thought that Europe would need to go back to Russian energy as part of the mix. Just make sure it's a cowed Russia that's learned it's lesson. As for the middle east it's somewhat bizarre that a country as decimated as Iran currently has control of the strait of Hormuz.
That said the Ukrainians won the war in the Black Sea without a navy.
I don't think the Iranians could force navigation of the Strait if the US decided to close it to Iranian shipping, so I wouldn't say that they have control of it, but it's easier to deny freedom of navigation than it is to secure it.
This seems to be the one thing Trump is ruling out yet it's what is most likely to collapse the regime.
I'd love to know what the Arab countries are advising Trump in private.
Remember it costs them one luxury jet if they want to advise Trump.
That didn't work out for Qatar. They've suffered a good two orders of magnitude more economic damage than the 747 cost.
What does self-driving insurance look like in actuality, and can you you adjust premiums based on users primarily using self-driving software?
Isn't the crucial metric "number of journeys" instead of "number of miles travelled"?
Two points: 1. Lemonade are only in a few states 2. Lemonade's 50% off for FSD discount reported to cost more than the non-discounted for FSD rate offered by anyone else...
Including Russia getting richer and Ukraine running short of Patriot missiles.
It's a mark of US incompetence that they've burned through around three times more Patriots in a month than Ukraine has used in total.
It’s not incompetence, as much as it’s a failure to learn to adapt doctrine from an actual live ground war that’s going on at the moment.
Meanwhile Zelenskyy is trading a thousand small intercept drones for a Patriot missile, at scale.
The GCC states need mostly drone interceptors, and Ukraine is short of Patriots.
I think it's fair to describe, "..a failure to learn to adapt doctrine from an actual live ground war that's going on at the moment," as incompetence, particularly when the Ukrainians are keen to teach.
➡️ REF UK 30% (+3) 🌳 CON 21% (+1) 🌹 LAB 19% (nc) 🌍 GREEN 12% (nc) 🔶 LIB DEM 11% (-3) ❓OTH 4% (nc) 🟡 SNP 2% (-1)
N = 2,003 | 28-30/3| Change w 25/03
That 3% LibDem to Reform shift is interesting!
Tories on 20%+ will help in May. As will a 2% lead over Labour - Labour led them by 5% in 2022...
On those MiC numbers Tory vote is still down 9% on the 30% they got under Boris even in 2022 so plenty of Tory councillors will still be losing their seats to Reform and the LDs sadly. Even if Labour who were on 35% NEV in 2022 lose even more councillors to Reform and the Greens
The LibDems are only up 1% against the Tories on 2022.
Against Reform, it will depend on tactical voting.
The Tories main threat is Reform in May more than the LDs yes though a few seats in Hampshire and Sussex for example the Tories held against the LDs in 2021 may now fall.
Without anti Reform tactical voting Tory councillors face a massacre by Reform on the MiC numbers certainly, as do Labour councillors in Leave voting areas
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I've long thought that Europe would need to go back to Russian energy as part of the mix. Just make sure it's a cowed Russia that's learned it's lesson. As for the middle east it's somewhat bizarre that a country as decimated as Iran currently has control of the strait of Hormuz.
That said the Ukrainians won the war in the Black Sea without a navy.
I don't think the Iranians could force navigation of the Strait if the US decided to close it to Iranian shipping, so I wouldn't say that they have control of it, but it's easier to deny freedom of navigation than it is to secure it.
This seems to be the one thing Trump is ruling out yet it's what is most likely to collapse the regime.
I'd love to know what the Arab countries are advising Trump in private.
Remember it costs them one luxury jet if they want to advise Trump.
That didn't work out for Qatar. They've suffered a good two orders of magnitude more economic damage than the 747 cost.
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point. The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY. Europe has an energy deficit. Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia. Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East. It swapped one dependency for another. We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago. Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble. A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
I think renewables as a share of energy production in Europe is up 6 percentage points between 2022 and 2025. That’s the other side of this equation. If Europe, including the UK, can keep pushing that number up, and accelerate the increase, then we solve the problem. Big international cooperative projects, like the one to support offshore wind power in the North Sea, are part of that and are helped by that closer relationships between the UK and EU. The unreliable nature of much renewable power is also helped by pan-European cooperation.
Bollocks. Doing that only bakes in higher energy costs. There is no country with a high level of penetration of wind and solar in its energy mix that does not have higher than average energy costs. If I'm lying, find one.
Europe isn't just a non-starter energy-wise, it's also overregulated, not growing economically, and has a severe migration problem. It would like to offset those issues by sharing them with the UK. We would be utterly foolish to enter into any further agreement, which is why Sir Philby wants to do it.
Starmer announces plans for a new UK/EU summit to push closer economic and security partnership with the bloc, saying Brexit did lasting damage to British economy.
Starmer is getting his Ode To Joy tattooed cock out to shore up support for the May locals.
Feels like 18 years after the GFC that zombie companies are finally going to start going bust in significant numbers. Interest rates, energy, minimum wage.
I'm far from being a mad Thatcherite but it needs to happen. Will boost productivity in the long run.
Comments
But that doesn’t mean she should be the candidate next time.
Anyway, the shaking stopped and the news the next morning was full of excitement at the earthquake. No-one had been injured, but there was lots of footage of things having fallen off shelves. One excited mother explained how her baby had nearly been injured. A lamp had fallen over. On her baby? No, but she explained it might have fallen on her baby.
Gregg Carlstrom
@glcarlstrom
In our latest @TheEconomist/@YouGovAmerica poll, signs that even Republicans are starting to sour on the Iran war. Compared to two weeks ago:
- support for the war has fallen from 73% of Republicans to 62%;
- approval of how Trump is handling the war has dropped from 81% of Republicans to 68%;
https://x.com/glcarlstrom/status/2039293958421934582
A Trump administration official tells Axios: "This isn't 3D chess — it's 12-dimensional. He contradicts himself regularly, so nobody knows what he's thinking. It's on purpose."
Sarah Deech ☕️
@londonette
🚨BREAKING: Primrose Hill residents are furious after Camden Council approved a licence for huge cafe chain Costa Coffee to open inside the park.
The Council says it wants to attract more visitors to the area and offer lower-priced cafe options in the exclusive neighbourhood.
Local resident Ivor Moka said: "After years of hassle with people ruining our beautiful park, this really takes the biscuit.”
https://x.com/londonette/status/2039271200254222460
Hence we don't want a Green government
He's using the US military to strong arm nations with resources to hand over control of the resources for nothing or very little. Similar to post-USSR regimes using the state apparatus to steal resources for the few well connected people.
I can understand Farage supporting such an individual but other UK politicians doing it just shows naïveté and simple mindedness.
She won't be the candidate either, it will probably be Buttigieg or Newsom and if the Democrats really want to go left AOC
Vladimir Putin is currently so scared that he has cut the internet off in Moscow. Yet he still feels at liberty to help Iranians kill Americans because the one person he certainly doesn't fear is Donald Trump.
If Trump says the US is leaving NATO, if he orders American soldiers to return home from European bases, if he pulls American officers and personnel from NATO headquarters, what is Congress going to do to stop him?
The structure and systems would be very hard to replace even if the US actually left (unlikely or not).
It would in that event be far more effective just to carry on with NATO (and persuade France to join).
Otherwise there's the problem of creating an effective EU structure and somehow accommodating Canada, the UK and Norway.
Both tasks would be problematic, but one more so than the other, I think ?
I'm just wondering if she's a decent trading bet.
It won't be complimentary.
I'm sure a lot of copy-pasting could be done to stand up the same sort of structure in the same building with the same people (Americans excepted) but you'd legally need a whole new treaty.
@EdConwaySky
The problem with casting a closer relationship with Europe as the solution to the world's current economic malaise is that it kind of misses the point.
The key problem at present is a shortage of ENERGY.
Europe has an energy deficit.
Up until 2022 it filled that gap with gas from Russia.
Now it fills that gap with gas (and oil) from the US and Middle East.
It swapped one dependency for another.
We can debate whether that dependency is inevitable, the extent to which it's a function of geology and/or political decisions taken years ago.
Regardless, right now Europe is highly exposed to the problems in the Gulf. And without US energy imports it is in BIG trouble.
A closer relationship between the UK and the EU does not solve this conundrum.
https://x.com/EdConwaySky/status/2039301881613218107
I don't know more than that.
But hopefully the government is also addressing the major issue of energy security in a meaningful way behind the scenes, while doing something different in the political foreground.
That said the Ukrainians won the war in the Black Sea without a navy.
Those who wish to swap a dependency on Washington with a dependency on Brussels have just swapped one problem for another.
Out of the frying pan and into the fire.
On energy we need to be able to be self sufficient.
On defence we need to be able to work independently, with like minded allies, and without a single point of failure . . . Either on this continent or any other.
Swiss cheese model of risk.
Being serious has never been his strong point.
They are also why Iran can easily block the Straits and why no sane government is going to help unblock it because unless Iran and co want to unblock the Strait it’s not difficult or expensive to attack ships that refuse to pay
I'd love to know what the Arab countries are advising Trump in private.
He simply doesn't care about the things you care about and he isn't going to start doing so.
Regime change in Iran would be too much effort for too little personal reward for Trump to commit to. You should never have allowed yourself to be fooled into supporting something because it looked a little like what you wanted to happen, when it was never going to be what you wanted to happen.
If some random hottie chats you up in a bar, possibly someone who looks like she might be Chinese or Russian, or a CND activist, then guess what…
American officers seem to have a really bad record at failing for Chinese spies in recent years. Guess what, that 10/10 Asian girl is way more interested in what’s on your phone than what’s in your pants - God gave men a brain and a penis, but only enough blood to operate one at a time!
Many of the products used in renewable manufacture, supply and maintenance are oils based and until scalable alternatives are available that’s the way it’s going to be. So we need oils and gas too
https://www.racingpost.com/news/britain/chelmsford-fixtures-cancelled-throwing-racecourses-future-into-huge-doubt-awMZR9i3VAK3/
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2039294972973957455
What does self-driving insurance look like in actuality, and can you you adjust premiums based on users primarily using self-driving software?
Tidal booms as an example
Like many of these arguments, it really depends on what you mean by “security”. Autarky or reduced exposure to global markets?
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british-flagship-found-in-dock-with-no-engine/
Another shocking report on the state of the Royal Navy…
https://x.com/Osinttechnical/status/2039227012242366747
I clicked on it
I am a bad person.
☹️
So why the flag?
They also have very large storage facilities.
Meanwhile Zelenskyy is trading a thousand small intercept drones for a Patriot missile, at scale.
The GCC states need mostly drone interceptors, and Ukraine is short of Patriots.
He's indulging in neocon fantasy.
They've suffered a good two orders of magnitude more economic damage than the 747 cost.
1. Lemonade are only in a few states
2. Lemonade's 50% off for FSD discount reported to cost more than the non-discounted for FSD rate offered by anyone else...
Apollo 7-8 rather than 13, hopefully!
“We’re dealing with a President who is a narcissist and a bully… a rebuke of some kind is necessary”
Broadcaster and journalist David Dimbleby says a US State Visit by King Charles “is a misuse of the King” and the UK is “giving Trump more than he deserves”.
https://x.com/BBCNewsnight/status/2039102261884764511
Europe isn't just a non-starter energy-wise, it's also overregulated, not growing economically, and has a severe migration problem. It would like to offset those issues by sharing them with the UK. We would be utterly foolish to enter into any further agreement, which is why Sir Philby wants to do it.
You have to kow-tow to the hyper-sensitive Quebecois to hold the country together.
It will absolutely work with people like you.
Interest rates, energy, minimum wage.
I'm far from being a mad Thatcherite but it needs to happen.
Will boost productivity in the long run.
Whole film had a heck of a cast.