Skip to content

Now I saw when the lamb opened one of the seals.. – politicalbetting.com

12346

Comments

  • If there’s a ceasefire the Iranian regime comes out of this pretty well. They can claim they fought the US and won.

    I don’t care who claims they have won. Everyone has lost. The global economy has been threatened. The USA has lost global support. Iran has suffered major damage to its infrastructure. Lebanon has been invaded. Israel has lost the respect of many of its allies. What a mess!
    I dunno. A war in which Israel, America and Iran all lose seems quite enticing a prospect, to me, right now
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 8,090

    geoffw said:

    Talking about Vance, where's Carlotta of that ilk these days?

    Not been seen much for years.

    I also wonder what happened to Moniker DiCanio.
    It’s 26 years since he scored his wonder goal for the Hammers. Oh, not that DiCanio!
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 32,342
    Take the ceasefire. But understand. America is over.

    Smashed. Wrecked. Gone.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,181
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:



    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    To cheer you all up, my firm is predicting major fuel shortages within a few weeks, and a de facto lockdown for the UK starting in May.

    We're running out of worst case scenarios.

    Is that before or after you go on holiday?
    Touch and go, the break is less than a week.
    Why on earth would we need to go into lockdown?
    'de facto' - no fuel, no travel.
    Eabhal will enjoy cycling the empty roads of Edinburgh.
    In May 2020 I ran the entire length of Princes Street, onto the Pentlands and back, all in the middle of the road. Glorious. Terrible for STLs, tartan tat, pubs and commercial property.

    Ultimately a large proportion of fossil fuel consumption is avoidable - WFH should be encouraged, and in cities like Edinburgh a large majority of commutes can be walked, cycled or use public transport (now largely electric). Gas consumption will fall dramatically as we enter the spring.

    A big hit to the economy but life will go on.
    Here's a Question

    We stayed in the Princess Street Premier Inn recently and the taxi from Waverly dropped us off outside on Princess Street

    In order to be certain of a taxi the following morning I booked one on line

    When the time came there wasn't any sign of the taxi though it text me to say it was waiting

    Shortly after the driver walked into the Premier Inn and said he was not allowed on Princes Street and had parked in a side road

    Having mobility issues I struggled to walk to his taxi

    Why would the private taxis be banned from Princess Srreet ?
    Because said taxi would block or delay thousands of people using buses and trams while it waited for you.

    It’s a big issue, particularly outside the Balmoral/Waverley Steps, where the buses often can’t get close enough to the pavement to deploy their ramp to allow disabled access due to illegally parked taxis.

    One question though - did you book a PHV or taxi? Taxis only can access Princes Street, but I don’t think they can stop to collect fares.
    It was a PHV but the whole experience at Waverley despite having passenger assist was a nightmare including for my wife

    The taxi's are not allowed close to the station making it very difficult for those with mobility issues

    And the taxi would not affect the trams and if it is ok for the black cabs why isnt it for other taxis ?
    One problem is the taxis can’t go into the station anymore - Market Street is your best bet. There is something of a campaign to change this.

    I think it’s right not to allow PHV, and to restrict tax pick up on Princes Street. Something like 70% of bus passengers use a route that runs along Princes Street, about 250,000 journeys per day. Any delay to allow private transport is going to affect 10s of thousands of people, including thousands of disabled people.
    Market Street is far too far away from the platforms with elevator queues

    I was taken from the train in a wheelchair to Market Street and it was most unpleasant and unacceptable for my 86 year old wife

    Sadly having lived and worked in Edinburgh in the early 1960's we did not recognise it and will not return
    I’d definitely send an email in to Network Rail (or whoever is responsible) to point this out - you’re not the only people struggling with it.

    On Princes Street, I’d just ask you to reflect on the thousands of disabled Edinburgh people who rely on our bus service to get around. Having two free lanes open is essential to allow buses to stop and to keep trams etc flowing.
    The trams are separate and there are two lanes for buses

    It seems that this could unlawful under disability rights but frankly we have given up on our previously lovely City
    No, the trams share a lane with the buses. Your taxi would have reduced capacity on Princes Street by 50% while it waited for you.

    Over 5 minutes, that’s thousands of people delayed (10s of thousands at rush hour) and a conservative estimate would put around 20% of those as disabled. Even if that’s only 10 seconds each, the total delay across everyone is several hours.

    I appreciate how difficult this makes life for you but blocking the most important transport corridor in a major city is not what anyone would describe as a balanced policy.
    I am disabled but can get in and out of a taxi unaided

    You do come over as trying to set the disabled v the disabled
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 5,983
    Foxy said:

    Monkeys said:

    rcs1000 said:

    To cheer you all up, my firm is predicting major fuel shortages within a few weeks, and a de facto lockdown for the UK starting in May.

    We're running out of worst case scenarios.

    Is that before or after you go on holiday?
    Touch and go, the break is less than a week.
    Why on earth would we need to go into lockdown?
    It's a de facto lockdown.

    If you've not got an EV then you're not going to be able to go anywhere due to the lack of fuel.

    The government will have to ration/priortise fuel for things like ambulances and delivery vehicles.
    And for essential services like doctors and lawyers.
    What's so essential about doctors? Now we all have ChatGPT, we don't need doctors.
    it's just biological IT support
    I tried switching them off then on again.

    It doesn't work.
    Defib? Definitely a reset button, if not technically off.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 59,879
    https://x.com/ryangrim/status/2041622790298616241

    Oh, this is unbelievable. The edit history on this tweet shows that Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif originally copied and pasted everything he was sent, including:

    "*Draft - Pakistan's PM Message on X*"

    Now, obviously, Sharif's own staff don't call him "Pakistan's PM," they would just call him prime minister. The U.S. and Israel, of course, would call him "Pakistan's PM."

    Would be funny if the fate of the world wasn't hanging in the balance.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,287

    Eabhal said:

    Disabled people in Scotland are much more likely to use the bus than the general population - nearly double the proportion of journeys.

    Disabled people tend to be poor and thus *have* to use the bus because they have no other option. Also, being disabled and having reduced mobility are not necessarily the same thing, lots of disabled people walk just fine.

    But I can't walk to the bus stop right now; every journey, short or long has to be done by private vehicle. And I'm rapidly finding out how hard it can be to go many places if you struggle to walk.
    I appreciate that. I just think it’s important to remind people that not everyone has a car, or can afford taxis, and bus services like Lothian do a great job of accommodating wheelchairs and mobility scooters.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,225
    rcs1000 said:

    https://x.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/2041598405470814235

    It is unfortunate that the UN Security Council has once again failed to demonstrate effectiveness and act decisively in the face of such a global threat as the Iranian regime's blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.

    No one should be allowed to block such globally significant sea lanes or undermine the security of dozens of nations through terrorist attacks against the freedom of navigation.

    We faced a similar challenge in the Black Sea when the Russians attempted to block our ports and civilian shipping—Russia was trying to suffocate our economy. And we found a way to solve that problem through decisive action, not inaction.

    Now, we see a similar problem on a global scale. The Strait of Hormuz must remain open to all vessels that sustain vital economy lifelines and maintain normal international trade.

    Countries in the region have spoken clearly on this, and we support the aspirations of the people of the Middle East and the Gulf for peace.

    Peace and security in this region directly impact stability, market predictability, and the cost of living in every single country.

    Such problems and this war must not be prolonged. The world needs a functional UNSC that acts more decisively to resolve acute security challenges of global magnitude.

    He can suck up to Trump all he likes, it won't make a blind bit of difference.
    It's as much making nice with his new friends that he's recently signed defence cooperation agreements with, from whom I guess he's hoping to make a few quid and get hold of some patriot interceptors to defend Ukraine with.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 8,090

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:



    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    To cheer you all up, my firm is predicting major fuel shortages within a few weeks, and a de facto lockdown for the UK starting in May.

    We're running out of worst case scenarios.

    Is that before or after you go on holiday?
    Touch and go, the break is less than a week.
    Why on earth would we need to go into lockdown?
    'de facto' - no fuel, no travel.
    Eabhal will enjoy cycling the empty roads of Edinburgh.
    In May 2020 I ran the entire length of Princes Street, onto the Pentlands and back, all in the middle of the road. Glorious. Terrible for STLs, tartan tat, pubs and commercial property.

    Ultimately a large proportion of fossil fuel consumption is avoidable - WFH should be encouraged, and in cities like Edinburgh a large majority of commutes can be walked, cycled or use public transport (now largely electric). Gas consumption will fall dramatically as we enter the spring.

    A big hit to the economy but life will go on.
    Here's a Question

    We stayed in the Princess Street Premier Inn recently and the taxi from Waverly dropped us off outside on Princess Street

    In order to be certain of a taxi the following morning I booked one on line

    When the time came there wasn't any sign of the taxi though it text me to say it was waiting

    Shortly after the driver walked into the Premier Inn and said he was not allowed on Princes Street and had parked in a side road

    Having mobility issues I struggled to walk to his taxi

    Why would the private taxis be banned from Princess Srreet ?
    Because said taxi would block or delay thousands of people using buses and trams while it waited for you.

    It’s a big issue, particularly outside the Balmoral/Waverley Steps, where the buses often can’t get close enough to the pavement to deploy their ramp to allow disabled access due to illegally parked taxis.

    One question though - did you book a PHV or taxi? Taxis only can access Princes Street, but I don’t think they can stop to collect fares.
    It was a PHV but the whole experience at Waverley despite having passenger assist was a nightmare including for my wife

    The taxi's are not allowed close to the station making it very difficult for those with mobility issues

    And the taxi would not affect the trams and if it is ok for the black cabs why isnt it for other taxis ?
    One problem is the taxis can’t go into the station anymore - Market Street is your best bet. There is something of a campaign to change this.

    I think it’s right not to allow PHV, and to restrict tax pick up on Princes Street. Something like 70% of bus passengers use a route that runs along Princes Street, about 250,000 journeys per day. Any delay to allow private transport is going to affect 10s of thousands of people, including thousands of disabled people.
    Market Street is far too far away from the platforms with elevator queues

    I was taken from the train in a wheelchair to Market Street and it was most unpleasant and unacceptable for my 86 year old wife

    Sadly having lived and worked in Edinburgh in the early 1960's we did not recognise it and will not return
    I’d definitely send an email in to Network Rail (or whoever is responsible) to point this out - you’re not the only people struggling with it.

    On Princes Street, I’d just ask you to reflect on the thousands of disabled Edinburgh people who rely on our bus service to get around. Having two free lanes open is essential to allow buses to stop and to keep trams etc flowing.
    The trams are separate and there are two lanes for buses

    It seems that this could unlawful under disability rights but frankly we have given up on our previously lovely City
    No, the trams share a lane with the buses. Your taxi would have reduced capacity on Princes Street by 50% while it waited for you.

    Over 5 minutes, that’s thousands of people delayed (10s of thousands at rush hour) and a conservative estimate would put around 20% of those as disabled. Even if that’s only 10 seconds each, the total delay across everyone is several hours.

    I appreciate how difficult this makes life for you but blocking the most important transport corridor in a major city is not what anyone would describe as a balanced policy.
    I am disabled but can get in and out of a taxi unaided

    You do come over as trying to set the disabled v the disabled
    The best solution is to avoid Edinburgh and come to Glasgow instead, where you will be welcome.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,287

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:



    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    To cheer you all up, my firm is predicting major fuel shortages within a few weeks, and a de facto lockdown for the UK starting in May.

    We're running out of worst case scenarios.

    Is that before or after you go on holiday?
    Touch and go, the break is less than a week.
    Why on earth would we need to go into lockdown?
    'de facto' - no fuel, no travel.
    Eabhal will enjoy cycling the empty roads of Edinburgh.
    In May 2020 I ran the entire length of Princes Street, onto the Pentlands and back, all in the middle of the road. Glorious. Terrible for STLs, tartan tat, pubs and commercial property.

    Ultimately a large proportion of fossil fuel consumption is avoidable - WFH should be encouraged, and in cities like Edinburgh a large majority of commutes can be walked, cycled or use public transport (now largely electric). Gas consumption will fall dramatically as we enter the spring.

    A big hit to the economy but life will go on.
    Here's a Question

    We stayed in the Princess Street Premier Inn recently and the taxi from Waverly dropped us off outside on Princess Street

    In order to be certain of a taxi the following morning I booked one on line

    When the time came there wasn't any sign of the taxi though it text me to say it was waiting

    Shortly after the driver walked into the Premier Inn and said he was not allowed on Princes Street and had parked in a side road

    Having mobility issues I struggled to walk to his taxi

    Why would the private taxis be banned from Princess Srreet ?
    Because said taxi would block or delay thousands of people using buses and trams while it waited for you.

    It’s a big issue, particularly outside the Balmoral/Waverley Steps, where the buses often can’t get close enough to the pavement to deploy their ramp to allow disabled access due to illegally parked taxis.

    One question though - did you book a PHV or taxi? Taxis only can access Princes Street, but I don’t think they can stop to collect fares.
    It was a PHV but the whole experience at Waverley despite having passenger assist was a nightmare including for my wife

    The taxi's are not allowed close to the station making it very difficult for those with mobility issues

    And the taxi would not affect the trams and if it is ok for the black cabs why isnt it for other taxis ?
    One problem is the taxis can’t go into the station anymore - Market Street is your best bet. There is something of a campaign to change this.

    I think it’s right not to allow PHV, and to restrict tax pick up on Princes Street. Something like 70% of bus passengers use a route that runs along Princes Street, about 250,000 journeys per day. Any delay to allow private transport is going to affect 10s of thousands of people, including thousands of disabled people.
    Market Street is far too far away from the platforms with elevator queues

    I was taken from the train in a wheelchair to Market Street and it was most unpleasant and unacceptable for my 86 year old wife

    Sadly having lived and worked in Edinburgh in the early 1960's we did not recognise it and will not return
    I’d definitely send an email in to Network Rail (or whoever is responsible) to point this out - you’re not the only people struggling with it.

    On Princes Street, I’d just ask you to reflect on the thousands of disabled Edinburgh people who rely on our bus service to get around. Having two free lanes open is essential to allow buses to stop and to keep trams etc flowing.
    The trams are separate and there are two lanes for buses

    It seems that this could unlawful under disability rights but frankly we have given up on our previously lovely City
    No, the trams share a lane with the buses. Your taxi would have reduced capacity on Princes Street by 50% while it waited for you.

    Over 5 minutes, that’s thousands of people delayed (10s of thousands at rush hour) and a conservative estimate would put around 20% of those as disabled. Even if that’s only 10 seconds each, the total delay across everyone is several hours.

    I appreciate how difficult this makes life for you but blocking the most important transport corridor in a major city is not what anyone would describe as a balanced policy.
    I am disabled but can get in and out of a taxi unaided

    You do come over as trying to set the disabled v the disabled
    No, I'm just pointing out the kind of impact blocking off half of Princes Street would have, even for a very short period. Multiply your taxi by hundreds and we jam up the whole city.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,181

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:



    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    To cheer you all up, my firm is predicting major fuel shortages within a few weeks, and a de facto lockdown for the UK starting in May.

    We're running out of worst case scenarios.

    Is that before or after you go on holiday?
    Touch and go, the break is less than a week.
    Why on earth would we need to go into lockdown?
    'de facto' - no fuel, no travel.
    Eabhal will enjoy cycling the empty roads of Edinburgh.
    In May 2020 I ran the entire length of Princes Street, onto the Pentlands and back, all in the middle of the road. Glorious. Terrible for STLs, tartan tat, pubs and commercial property.

    Ultimately a large proportion of fossil fuel consumption is avoidable - WFH should be encouraged, and in cities like Edinburgh a large majority of commutes can be walked, cycled or use public transport (now largely electric). Gas consumption will fall dramatically as we enter the spring.

    A big hit to the economy but life will go on.
    Here's a Question

    We stayed in the Princess Street Premier Inn recently and the taxi from Waverly dropped us off outside on Princess Street

    In order to be certain of a taxi the following morning I booked one on line

    When the time came there wasn't any sign of the taxi though it text me to say it was waiting

    Shortly after the driver walked into the Premier Inn and said he was not allowed on Princes Street and had parked in a side road

    Having mobility issues I struggled to walk to his taxi

    Why would the private taxis be banned from Princess Srreet ?
    Because said taxi would block or delay thousands of people using buses and trams while it waited for you.

    It’s a big issue, particularly outside the Balmoral/Waverley Steps, where the buses often can’t get close enough to the pavement to deploy their ramp to allow disabled access due to illegally parked taxis.

    One question though - did you book a PHV or taxi? Taxis only can access Princes Street, but I don’t think they can stop to collect fares.
    It was a PHV but the whole experience at Waverley despite having passenger assist was a nightmare including for my wife

    The taxi's are not allowed close to the station making it very difficult for those with mobility issues

    And the taxi would not affect the trams and if it is ok for the black cabs why isnt it for other taxis ?
    One problem is the taxis can’t go into the station anymore - Market Street is your best bet. There is something of a campaign to change this.

    I think it’s right not to allow PHV, and to restrict tax pick up on Princes Street. Something like 70% of bus passengers use a route that runs along Princes Street, about 250,000 journeys per day. Any delay to allow private transport is going to affect 10s of thousands of people, including thousands of disabled people.
    Market Street is far too far away from the platforms with elevator queues

    I was taken from the train in a wheelchair to Market Street and it was most unpleasant and unacceptable for my 86 year old wife

    Sadly having lived and worked in Edinburgh in the early 1960's we did not recognise it and will not return
    I’d definitely send an email in to Network Rail (or whoever is responsible) to point this out - you’re not the only people struggling with it.

    On Princes Street, I’d just ask you to reflect on the thousands of disabled Edinburgh people who rely on our bus service to get around. Having two free lanes open is essential to allow buses to stop and to keep trams etc flowing.
    The trams are separate and there are two lanes for buses

    It seems that this could unlawful under disability rights but frankly we have given up on our previously lovely City
    No, the trams share a lane with the buses. Your taxi would have reduced capacity on Princes Street by 50% while it waited for you.

    Over 5 minutes, that’s thousands of people delayed (10s of thousands at rush hour) and a conservative estimate would put around 20% of those as disabled. Even if that’s only 10 seconds each, the total delay across everyone is several hours.

    I appreciate how difficult this makes life for you but blocking the most important transport corridor in a major city is not what anyone would describe as a balanced policy.
    I am disabled but can get in and out of a taxi unaided

    You do come over as trying to set the disabled v the disabled
    The best solution is to avoid Edinburgh and come to Glasgow instead, where you will be welcome.
    We were so disappointed in the city we once loved and work in, and yes we used to travel to work on the no 4 bus

    We will not return and thank you for your kind invite
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,181
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Disabled people in Scotland are much more likely to use the bus than the general population - nearly double the proportion of journeys.

    Disabled people tend to be poor and thus *have* to use the bus because they have no other option. Also, being disabled and having reduced mobility are not necessarily the same thing, lots of disabled people walk just fine.

    But I can't walk to the bus stop right now; every journey, short or long has to be done by private vehicle. And I'm rapidly finding out how hard it can be to go many places if you struggle to walk.
    I appreciate that. I just think it’s important to remind people that not everyone has a car, or can afford taxis, and bus services like Lothian do a great job of accommodating wheelchairs and mobility scooters.
    You do seem to have a divisive attitude to disability, because if you are disabled it is a struggle whether you use buses, taxis, cars or mobility scooters and wealth does not come into it
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 5,983
    If this is a deal, lets hope Slim Pickens is able to be recalled.
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 3,860
    Ratters said:

    Leon said:

    BREAKING: A source has told CNN that a deal is expected to be closed between the US and Iran tonight.

    Thank fuck.

    I don't even care about the details at this point.
    The 'details' have never changed. Iran can have peace if:

    They stop developing an atom bomb;
    They stop funding Hamas and Hezbollah;
    They stop fantasising about wiping Isreal off the map;
    They accept their status as a normal ME state at peace with their neighbours.

    I'm certainly not a supporter of Trump or Netanyahu in this context, but Iranian malevolence predates both of them.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 17,563

    Take the ceasefire. But understand. America is over.

    Smashed. Wrecked. Gone.

    How does America come out of this less badly than the rest of the world? My view is that they do fine in their western hemisphere fastness and it's the rest of the world who suffer. But interested in your view.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,225
    Leon said:

    In all honesty, I think the BEST result for the world now is if Trump nukes the fuck out of Iran, they surrender immediately, and the Straits are reopened in a a few days, and Iran is prevented from wreaking more destruction of MENA infra

    There are no more good options. There are no more bad options. There are only varying degrees of disaster, and the above MIGHT be the least disastrous, if you're not one of the poor people who get melted

    I say this not as a joke, and not to provoke, but as a candid assessment of where we are. It is not good

    I think there's a loe probability scenario where a US special forces + marines operation is able to retrieve Iran's enriched Uranium. Then Trump makes a deal with Iran on the basis that the Americans have stopped them from making a bomb and can go home. The US is happy that Iran doesn't have a nuclear bomb. Iran is happy that the US closes its middle east bases. MAGA are happy that the US will no longer get involved in the middle east.

    It's not a very likely scenario, but I don't think it's impossible.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,287
    edited April 7

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Disabled people in Scotland are much more likely to use the bus than the general population - nearly double the proportion of journeys.

    Disabled people tend to be poor and thus *have* to use the bus because they have no other option. Also, being disabled and having reduced mobility are not necessarily the same thing, lots of disabled people walk just fine.

    But I can't walk to the bus stop right now; every journey, short or long has to be done by private vehicle. And I'm rapidly finding out how hard it can be to go many places if you struggle to walk.
    I appreciate that. I just think it’s important to remind people that not everyone has a car, or can afford taxis, and bus services like Lothian do a great job of accommodating wheelchairs and mobility scooters.
    You do seem to have a divisive attitude to disability, because if you are disabled it is a struggle whether you use buses, taxis, cars or mobility scooters and wealth does not come into it
    Wealth absolutely does come into it, because it seriously restricts the extent to which you can get around if you have mobility issues. I'm proud that I live in a city that invests in a (profitable) public transport system that extends accessibility to as many people as possible, not just those wealthy enough to drive or use taxis.

    We should resist any attempt to undermine it, like those campaigning to get rid of bus lanes or allow PHVs onto Princes Street. We should also try and get better access to Waverley because it's a nightmare for everyone who can't walk.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,225

    To cheer you all up, my firm is predicting major fuel shortages within a few weeks, and a de facto lockdown for the UK starting in May.

    We're running out of worst case scenarios.

    Is that before or after you go on holiday?
    Touch and go, the break is less than a week.
    Why on earth would we need to go into lockdown?
    It's a de facto lockdown.

    If you've not got an EV then you're not going to be able to go anywhere due to the lack of fuel.

    The government will have to ration/priortise fuel for things like ambulances and delivery vehicles.
    I don’t think a lockdown is a good analogy for fuel rationing. There would be no restrictions on large gatherings.
    More like a rapid introduction of 15-minute cities.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 56,858

    Foxy said:

    Monkeys said:

    rcs1000 said:

    To cheer you all up, my firm is predicting major fuel shortages within a few weeks, and a de facto lockdown for the UK starting in May.

    We're running out of worst case scenarios.

    Is that before or after you go on holiday?
    Touch and go, the break is less than a week.
    Why on earth would we need to go into lockdown?
    It's a de facto lockdown.

    If you've not got an EV then you're not going to be able to go anywhere due to the lack of fuel.

    The government will have to ration/priortise fuel for things like ambulances and delivery vehicles.
    And for essential services like doctors and lawyers.
    What's so essential about doctors? Now we all have ChatGPT, we don't need doctors.
    it's just biological IT support
    I tried switching them off then on again.

    It doesn't work.
    Defib? Definitely a reset button, if not technically off.
    Back in the day "insulin coma therapy" was a core treatment in psychiatry, with patients made unconscious as a way of treating schizophrenia. That probably is the closest.

  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,287

    To cheer you all up, my firm is predicting major fuel shortages within a few weeks, and a de facto lockdown for the UK starting in May.

    We're running out of worst case scenarios.

    Is that before or after you go on holiday?
    Touch and go, the break is less than a week.
    Why on earth would we need to go into lockdown?
    It's a de facto lockdown.

    If you've not got an EV then you're not going to be able to go anywhere due to the lack of fuel.

    The government will have to ration/priortise fuel for things like ambulances and delivery vehicles.
    I don’t think a lockdown is a good analogy for fuel rationing. There would be no restrictions on large gatherings.
    More like a rapid introduction of 15-minute cities.
    Facebook is going to be wild.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 32,342
    Cookie said:

    Take the ceasefire. But understand. America is over.

    Smashed. Wrecked. Gone.

    How does America come out of this less badly than the rest of the world? My view is that they do fine in their western hemisphere fastness and it's the rest of the world who suffer. But interested in your view.
    Petrodollar is done. Euro and Yuan trades ramp heavily after this.
    Which means US treasuries not needed to be held as dollar not needed.
    As Europe and the Middle East spend significant amounts of cash on defence and none of it with America.

    Don’t you get it? They’re done.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 22,035

    Cookie said:

    Take the ceasefire. But understand. America is over.

    Smashed. Wrecked. Gone.

    How does America come out of this less badly than the rest of the world? My view is that they do fine in their western hemisphere fastness and it's the rest of the world who suffer. But interested in your view.
    Petrodollar is done. Euro and Yuan trades ramp heavily after this.
    Which means US treasuries not needed to be held as dollar not needed.
    As Europe and the Middle East spend significant amounts of cash on defence and none of it with America.

    Don’t you get it? They’re done.
    America’s suez?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,181
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Disabled people in Scotland are much more likely to use the bus than the general population - nearly double the proportion of journeys.

    Disabled people tend to be poor and thus *have* to use the bus because they have no other option. Also, being disabled and having reduced mobility are not necessarily the same thing, lots of disabled people walk just fine.

    But I can't walk to the bus stop right now; every journey, short or long has to be done by private vehicle. And I'm rapidly finding out how hard it can be to go many places if you struggle to walk.
    I appreciate that. I just think it’s important to remind people that not everyone has a car, or can afford taxis, and bus services like Lothian do a great job of accommodating wheelchairs and mobility scooters.
    You do seem to have a divisive attitude to disability, because if you are disabled it is a struggle whether you use buses, taxis, cars or mobility scooters and wealth does not come into it
    Wealth absolutely does come into it, because it seriously restricts the extent to which you can get around if you have mobility issues. I'm proud that I live in a city that invests in a (profitable) public transport system that extends accessibility to as many people as possible, not just those wealthy enough to drive or use taxis.

    We should resist any attempt to undermine it, like those campaigning to get rid of bus lanes or allow PHVs onto Princes Street. We should also try and get better access to Waverley because it's a nightmare for everyone who can't walk.
    I have experienced this utopia for disabled people in Edinburgh and it was just not acceptable so much so I will not return

    And the way you refer to taxi users as wealthy shows an ignorance beyond believe - for many reasons they have no other choice unless you would prefer to keep us away as an inconvenience
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,923
    Brent crude falling
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,225

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    In all honesty, I think the BEST result for the world now is if Trump nukes the fuck out of Iran, they surrender immediately, and the Straits are reopened in a a few days, and Iran is prevented from wreaking more destruction of MENA infra

    There are no more good options. There are no more bad options. There are only varying degrees of disaster, and the above MIGHT be the least disastrous, if you're not one of the poor people who get melted

    I say this not as a joke, and not to provoke, but as a candid assessment of where we are. It is not good

    You should add "I say this not as a joke" to all of your fuckwit ideas, so you can't pretend later you were just joking.

    If you think dropping nuclear bombs on Iran is going to lead to the rapid opening of Hormuz you are even dimmer than I thought.
    I have tried to see a way out of this mess, within the bounds of rational expectations of the various crazy actors involved, that does not end with the world in famined turmoil

    You scoff and laugh

    So, OK, you have a go
    Either:

    1. Trump does his usual TACO act, delays, prevaricates, then randomly declares victory (again), the Straits remain shut for a few weeks but gradually return to normal.
    Or
    2. He bombs Iran with all the conventional forces he can muster, all to not much avail, but Iran's ability to control the Strait is weakened and other gulf states find a way to protect shipping and resume their oil exports.

    Neither option is great but both are a lot better than using nuclear weapons.

    Just think about it for a nanosecond: the US uses nukes in an unprovoked attack, what's to stop Russia launching a few at Ukraine, then North Korea lobbing one on Japan.... then Pakistan and India trading nukes.

    You proposal is the worst-worst option by a long margin.
    The thing is, (1) isn't a realistic option because Iran is mad at hell that the Ayatollah was assassinated, and so they want something in return for peace. The US can declare an end to the way, but what do they do when Iran drops another missile or bunch of drones on one of their bases?

    And (2) isn't a realistic option because it's really damn hard, possibly impossible, as we saw with the experience with the Houthis and their campaign against shipping in the Red Sea.

    Just like then, there will have to be a deal, but the sides are (apparently) very far away from agreeing to a deal. So what changes things to make a deal happen? I think Leon is wrong about nukes, but I think enriched Iranian in return for closed bases might possibly work, as in my earlier comment.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 43,520

    Leon said:

    In all honesty, I think the BEST result for the world now is if Trump nukes the fuck out of Iran, they surrender immediately, and the Straits are reopened in a a few days, and Iran is prevented from wreaking more destruction of MENA infra

    There are no more good options. There are no more bad options. There are only varying degrees of disaster, and the above MIGHT be the least disastrous, if you're not one of the poor people who get melted

    I say this not as a joke, and not to provoke, but as a candid assessment of where we are. It is not good

    I think there's a loe probability scenario where a US special forces + marines operation is able to retrieve Iran's enriched Uranium. Then Trump makes a deal with Iran on the basis that the Americans have stopped them from making a bomb and can go home. The US is happy that Iran doesn't have a nuclear bomb. Iran is happy that the US closes its middle east bases. MAGA are happy that the US will no longer get involved in the middle east.

    It's not a very likely scenario, but I don't think it's impossible.
    There is a theory circulating on TwiX (perhaps Yokes has a view on this) that the "rescue of the WSO" was in fact a large force that had already landed in that area to retrieve the Uranium, and making it out with the guy was about the only thing they managed, leaving millions of dollars or burning kit behind
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 43,520
    rcs1000 said:
    People are going to vote, not because they don't like Orban but because they hate Vance
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 64,491

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    In all honesty, I think the BEST result for the world now is if Trump nukes the fuck out of Iran, they surrender immediately, and the Straits are reopened in a a few days, and Iran is prevented from wreaking more destruction of MENA infra

    There are no more good options. There are no more bad options. There are only varying degrees of disaster, and the above MIGHT be the least disastrous, if you're not one of the poor people who get melted

    I say this not as a joke, and not to provoke, but as a candid assessment of where we are. It is not good

    You should add "I say this not as a joke" to all of your fuckwit ideas, so you can't pretend later you were just joking.

    If you think dropping nuclear bombs on Iran is going to lead to the rapid opening of Hormuz you are even dimmer than I thought.
    I have tried to see a way out of this mess, within the bounds of rational expectations of the various crazy actors involved, that does not end with the world in famined turmoil

    You scoff and laugh

    So, OK, you have a go
    Either:

    1. Trump does his usual TACO act, delays, prevaricates, then randomly declares victory (again), the Straits remain shut for a few weeks but gradually return to normal.
    Or
    2. He bombs Iran with all the conventional forces he can muster, all to not much avail, but Iran's ability to control the Strait is weakened and other gulf states find a way to protect shipping and resume their oil exports.

    Neither option is great but both are a lot better than using nuclear weapons.

    Just think about it for a nanosecond: the US uses nukes in an unprovoked attack, what's to stop Russia launching a few at Ukraine, then North Korea lobbing one on Japan.... then Pakistan and India trading nukes.

    You proposal is the worst-worst option by a long margin.
    The thing is, (1) isn't a realistic option because Iran is mad at hell that the Ayatollah was assassinated, and so they want something in return for peace. The US can declare an end to the way, but what do they do when Iran drops another missile or bunch of drones on one of their bases?

    And (2) isn't a realistic option because it's really damn hard, possibly impossible, as we saw with the experience with the Houthis and their campaign against shipping in the Red Sea.

    Just like then, there will have to be a deal, but the sides are (apparently) very far away from agreeing to a deal. So what changes things to make a deal happen? I think Leon is wrong about nukes, but I think enriched Iranian in return for closed bases might possibly work, as in my earlier comment.
    Surely, what happens is that two weeks stretches out because everything is going so well, and the Iranians like not getting bombed, and the world likes oil (and gas) prices falling.

    Trump says that any day now they'll annouce the greatest deal, and that they won. And then things continue pretty much as before.

    Except now Iran is fully committed to getting a nuclear weapon, so this doesn't happen again. But that will be a problem for the next US President.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 17,563

    Cookie said:

    Take the ceasefire. But understand. America is over.

    Smashed. Wrecked. Gone.

    How does America come out of this less badly than the rest of the world? My view is that they do fine in their western hemisphere fastness and it's the rest of the world who suffer. But interested in your view.
    Petrodollar is done. Euro and Yuan trades ramp heavily after this.
    Which means US treasuries not needed to be held as dollar not needed.
    As Europe and the Middle East spend significant amounts of cash on defence and none of it with America.

    Don’t you get it? They’re done.
    Politely, no, I don't. This stuff seems marginal compared to the much greater challenges ROW faces.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,923
    Ftse 100 futures now up over 1% . Market confidence in deal
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,287

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Disabled people in Scotland are much more likely to use the bus than the general population - nearly double the proportion of journeys.

    Disabled people tend to be poor and thus *have* to use the bus because they have no other option. Also, being disabled and having reduced mobility are not necessarily the same thing, lots of disabled people walk just fine.

    But I can't walk to the bus stop right now; every journey, short or long has to be done by private vehicle. And I'm rapidly finding out how hard it can be to go many places if you struggle to walk.
    I appreciate that. I just think it’s important to remind people that not everyone has a car, or can afford taxis, and bus services like Lothian do a great job of accommodating wheelchairs and mobility scooters.
    You do seem to have a divisive attitude to disability, because if you are disabled it is a struggle whether you use buses, taxis, cars or mobility scooters and wealth does not come into it
    Wealth absolutely does come into it, because it seriously restricts the extent to which you can get around if you have mobility issues. I'm proud that I live in a city that invests in a (profitable) public transport system that extends accessibility to as many people as possible, not just those wealthy enough to drive or use taxis.

    We should resist any attempt to undermine it, like those campaigning to get rid of bus lanes or allow PHVs onto Princes Street. We should also try and get better access to Waverley because it's a nightmare for everyone who can't walk.
    I have experienced this utopia for disabled people in Edinburgh and it was just not acceptable so much so I will not return

    And the way you refer to taxi users as wealthy shows an ignorance beyond believe - for many reasons they have no other choice unless you would prefer to keep us away as an inconvenience
    That’s your decision BigG. Edinburgh is an exceptionally compact city with an extensive public transport system - it simply wouldn’t work if it allowed private transport access in the way you describe - allowing waiting on Princes Street is absurd.

    I am actually going to send an email off describing your experience at Waverley though - there does need to be a fix for that, though the geography makes it a particular challenge.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 72,380
    Hilarious. The Cabinet and PM had to be dragged kicking and screaming into this policy u-turn.

    Now they are delighted.



    Bridget Phillipson
    @bphillipsonMP

    Yesterday in Newcastle, I met with families set to benefit from the scrapping of the two child limit. Parents will have more money in their pockets, children will have better life chances.

    That’s the difference a Labour government makes.

    My interview with @ChronicleLive


    https://x.com/bphillipsonMP/status/2041585208172982414
  • RattersRatters Posts: 2,027
    edited April 7
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    In all honesty, I think the BEST result for the world now is if Trump nukes the fuck out of Iran, they surrender immediately, and the Straits are reopened in a a few days, and Iran is prevented from wreaking more destruction of MENA infra

    There are no more good options. There are no more bad options. There are only varying degrees of disaster, and the above MIGHT be the least disastrous, if you're not one of the poor people who get melted

    I say this not as a joke, and not to provoke, but as a candid assessment of where we are. It is not good

    You should add "I say this not as a joke" to all of your fuckwit ideas, so you can't pretend later you were just joking.

    If you think dropping nuclear bombs on Iran is going to lead to the rapid opening of Hormuz you are even dimmer than I thought.
    I have tried to see a way out of this mess, within the bounds of rational expectations of the various crazy actors involved, that does not end with the world in famined turmoil

    You scoff and laugh

    So, OK, you have a go
    Either:

    1. Trump does his usual TACO act, delays, prevaricates, then randomly declares victory (again), the Straits remain shut for a few weeks but gradually return to normal.
    Or
    2. He bombs Iran with all the conventional forces he can muster, all to not much avail, but Iran's ability to control the Strait is weakened and other gulf states find a way to protect shipping and resume their oil exports.

    Neither option is great but both are a lot better than using nuclear weapons.

    Just think about it for a nanosecond: the US uses nukes in an unprovoked attack, what's to stop Russia launching a few at Ukraine, then North Korea lobbing one on Japan.... then Pakistan and India trading nukes.

    You proposal is the worst-worst option by a long margin.
    The thing is, (1) isn't a realistic option because Iran is mad at hell that the Ayatollah was assassinated, and so they want something in return for peace. The US can declare an end to the way, but what do they do when Iran drops another missile or bunch of drones on one of their bases?

    And (2) isn't a realistic option because it's really damn hard, possibly impossible, as we saw with the experience with the Houthis and their campaign against shipping in the Red Sea.

    Just like then, there will have to be a deal, but the sides are (apparently) very far away from agreeing to a deal. So what changes things to make a deal happen? I think Leon is wrong about nukes, but I think enriched Iranian in return for closed bases might possibly work, as in my earlier comment.
    Surely, what happens is that two weeks stretches out because everything is going so well, and the Iranians like not getting bombed, and the world likes oil (and gas) prices falling.

    Trump says that any day now they'll annouce the greatest deal, and that they won. And then things continue pretty much as before.

    Except now Iran is fully committed to getting a nuclear weapon, so this doesn't happen again. But that will be a problem for the next US President.
    If the GCC doesn't start building pipeline and alternative port capacity they'd be mad.

    Even if it means selling second-tier premier league teams to fund it...
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,181
    edited April 7
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Disabled people in Scotland are much more likely to use the bus than the general population - nearly double the proportion of journeys.

    Disabled people tend to be poor and thus *have* to use the bus because they have no other option. Also, being disabled and having reduced mobility are not necessarily the same thing, lots of disabled people walk just fine.

    But I can't walk to the bus stop right now; every journey, short or long has to be done by private vehicle. And I'm rapidly finding out how hard it can be to go many places if you struggle to walk.
    I appreciate that. I just think it’s important to remind people that not everyone has a car, or can afford taxis, and bus services like Lothian do a great job of accommodating wheelchairs and mobility scooters.
    You do seem to have a divisive attitude to disability, because if you are disabled it is a struggle whether you use buses, taxis, cars or mobility scooters and wealth does not come into it
    Wealth absolutely does come into it, because it seriously restricts the extent to which you can get around if you have mobility issues. I'm proud that I live in a city that invests in a (profitable) public transport system that extends accessibility to as many people as possible, not just those wealthy enough to drive or use taxis.

    We should resist any attempt to undermine it, like those campaigning to get rid of bus lanes or allow PHVs onto Princes Street. We should also try and get better access to Waverley because it's a nightmare for everyone who can't walk.
    I have experienced this utopia for disabled people in Edinburgh and it was just not acceptable so much so I will not return

    And the way you refer to taxi users as wealthy shows an ignorance beyond believe - for many reasons they have no other choice unless you would prefer to keep us away as an inconvenience
    That’s your decision BigG. Edinburgh is an exceptionally compact city with an extensive public transport system - it simply wouldn’t work if it allowed private transport access in the way you describe - allowing waiting on Princes Street is absurd.

    I am actually going to send an email off describing your experience at Waverley though - there does need to be a fix for that, though the geography makes it a particular challenge.
    I do not see why a black cab can stop but not a private taxi as black cabs were stopping as we left

    As far as Waverley is concerned it is shocking and there should be somewhere near the platforms passenger assist can get to a cab
  • GaussianGaussian Posts: 916

    https://x.com/ryangrim/status/2041622790298616241

    Oh, this is unbelievable. The edit history on this tweet shows that Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif originally copied and pasted everything he was sent, including:

    "*Draft - Pakistan's PM Message on X*"

    Now, obviously, Sharif's own staff don't call him "Pakistan's PM," they would just call him prime minister. The U.S. and Israel, of course, would call him "Pakistan's PM."

    Would be funny if the fate of the world wasn't hanging in the balance.

    US/Israel?!? It's obviously Starmer quietly pulling all the strings!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,398

    If there’s a ceasefire the Iranian regime comes out of this pretty well. They can claim they fought the US and won.

    It depends if they open the Strait
    They may open the Straits - subject to tariffs being required.

    They will argue they have to rebuild their country. Need the money.

    Is that a win for Trump?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,181

    If there’s a ceasefire the Iranian regime comes out of this pretty well. They can claim they fought the US and won.

    It depends if they open the Strait
    They may open the Straits - subject to tariffs being required.

    They will argue they have to rebuild their country. Need the money.

    Is that a win for Trump?
    No
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 20,965

    Ratters said:

    Leon said:

    BREAKING: A source has told CNN that a deal is expected to be closed between the US and Iran tonight.

    Thank fuck.

    I don't even care about the details at this point.
    The 'details' have never changed. Iran can have peace if:

    They stop developing an atom bomb;
    They stop funding Hamas and Hezbollah;
    They stop fantasising about wiping Isreal off the map;
    They accept their status as a normal ME state at peace with their neighbours.

    I'm certainly not a supporter of Trump or Netanyahu in this context, but Iranian malevolence predates both of them.
    Trump was born in 1946, so I think he predates Iranian malevolence.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,181
    Bill Gates to testify to Congress on Epstein
  • GaussianGaussian Posts: 916

    If there’s a ceasefire the Iranian regime comes out of this pretty well. They can claim they fought the US and won.

    It depends if they open the Strait
    They may open the Straits - subject to tariffs being required.

    They will argue they have to rebuild their country. Need the money.

    Is that a win for Trump?
    It's the greatest deal ever and he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize for it!
  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,502
    Scott_xP said:

    Leon said:

    In all honesty, I think the BEST result for the world now is if Trump nukes the fuck out of Iran, they surrender immediately, and the Straits are reopened in a a few days, and Iran is prevented from wreaking more destruction of MENA infra

    There are no more good options. There are no more bad options. There are only varying degrees of disaster, and the above MIGHT be the least disastrous, if you're not one of the poor people who get melted

    I say this not as a joke, and not to provoke, but as a candid assessment of where we are. It is not good

    I think there's a loe probability scenario where a US special forces + marines operation is able to retrieve Iran's enriched Uranium. Then Trump makes a deal with Iran on the basis that the Americans have stopped them from making a bomb and can go home. The US is happy that Iran doesn't have a nuclear bomb. Iran is happy that the US closes its middle east bases. MAGA are happy that the US will no longer get involved in the middle east.

    It's not a very likely scenario, but I don't think it's impossible.
    There is a theory circulating on TwiX (perhaps Yokes has a view on this) that the "rescue of the WSO" was in fact a large force that had already landed in that area to retrieve the Uranium, and making it out with the guy was about the only thing they managed, leaving millions of dollars or burning kit behind
    Theyd likely need JCBs. Rumour has it that facilities have restricted entry due to surface bombing. In addition if the Iranians had all the stuff in one place theyd be as thick as two planks and Im not sure they are.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 2,027

    If there’s a ceasefire the Iranian regime comes out of this pretty well. They can claim they fought the US and won.

    It depends if they open the Strait
    They may open the Straits - subject to tariffs being required.

    They will argue they have to rebuild their country. Need the money.

    Is that a win for Trump?
    Supreme Leader Khameni in power? Check.

    Strait of Humurz open? Check.

    Iran free to pursue nuclear weapons with no UN monitors? Check.

    Oil prices 50% higher and Iran charging levies on ships passing? Well, I suppose that's a new check.

    I'd struggle to sell it as a strategic victory...
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 40,178

    If there’s a ceasefire the Iranian regime comes out of this pretty well. They can claim they fought the US and won.

    No they wouldn't, they won't "come out well" wrt anything.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,181
    Trump agrees to 2 week delay
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,225
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    In all honesty, I think the BEST result for the world now is if Trump nukes the fuck out of Iran, they surrender immediately, and the Straits are reopened in a a few days, and Iran is prevented from wreaking more destruction of MENA infra

    There are no more good options. There are no more bad options. There are only varying degrees of disaster, and the above MIGHT be the least disastrous, if you're not one of the poor people who get melted

    I say this not as a joke, and not to provoke, but as a candid assessment of where we are. It is not good

    You should add "I say this not as a joke" to all of your fuckwit ideas, so you can't pretend later you were just joking.

    If you think dropping nuclear bombs on Iran is going to lead to the rapid opening of Hormuz you are even dimmer than I thought.
    I have tried to see a way out of this mess, within the bounds of rational expectations of the various crazy actors involved, that does not end with the world in famined turmoil

    You scoff and laugh

    So, OK, you have a go
    Either:

    1. Trump does his usual TACO act, delays, prevaricates, then randomly declares victory (again), the Straits remain shut for a few weeks but gradually return to normal.
    Or
    2. He bombs Iran with all the conventional forces he can muster, all to not much avail, but Iran's ability to control the Strait is weakened and other gulf states find a way to protect shipping and resume their oil exports.

    Neither option is great but both are a lot better than using nuclear weapons.

    Just think about it for a nanosecond: the US uses nukes in an unprovoked attack, what's to stop Russia launching a few at Ukraine, then North Korea lobbing one on Japan.... then Pakistan and India trading nukes.

    You proposal is the worst-worst option by a long margin.
    The thing is, (1) isn't a realistic option because Iran is mad at hell that the Ayatollah was assassinated, and so they want something in return for peace. The US can declare an end to the way, but what do they do when Iran drops another missile or bunch of drones on one of their bases?

    And (2) isn't a realistic option because it's really damn hard, possibly impossible, as we saw with the experience with the Houthis and their campaign against shipping in the Red Sea.

    Just like then, there will have to be a deal, but the sides are (apparently) very far away from agreeing to a deal. So what changes things to make a deal happen? I think Leon is wrong about nukes, but I think enriched Iranian in return for closed bases might possibly work, as in my earlier comment.
    Surely, what happens is that two weeks stretches out because everything is going so well, and the Iranians like not getting bombed, and the world likes oil (and gas) prices falling.

    Trump says that any day now they'll annouce the greatest deal, and that they won. And then things continue pretty much as before.

    Except now Iran is fully committed to getting a nuclear weapon, so this doesn't happen again. But that will be a problem for the next US President.
    Yeah, possibly. I wrote my comment before I was up-to-date on the latest news.

    Also the suggestion by Yokes that Iran is under pressure from China and Pakistan makes it more likely that they would agree to a deal that didn't give them anything in particular.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 32,591
    Very disappointed not to be fucking a young Joan Baez tonight.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 72,380

    Trump agrees to 2 week delay

    Two weeks?

    You don't say.

  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 22,035
    Andy_JS said:

    If there’s a ceasefire the Iranian regime comes out of this pretty well. They can claim they fought the US and won.

    No they wouldn't, they won't "come out well" wrt anything.
    Whatever you say pal
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 72,380
    Trump blinks yet again.

    Thank the gods.

  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 22,035
    And Iran has just launched more missiles at Israel lol
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,181
    edited April 7
    Sky saying Iran has not conceded yet to the agreement

    TACO
  • GaussianGaussian Posts: 916

    Trump blinks yet again.

    Thank the gods.

    Allah coming up trumps again.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 72,380

    Reuters
    @Reuters
    ·
    2m
    Trump said the suspension was subject to Iran agreeing to the ‘complete, immediate and safe opening’ of the Strait of Hormuz
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 72,380

    Sky saying Iran has not conceded yet to the agreement

    Yep. Twitter saying same.

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 72,380
    Visegrád 24
    @visegrad24
    ·
    50s
    BREAKING:

    Oil prices are crashing down as Trump announces a two-week ceasefire with Iran.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 72,380
    TACO Tuesday.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,809

    Visegrád 24
    @visegrad24
    ·
    50s
    BREAKING:

    Oil prices are crashing down as Trump announces a two-week ceasefire with Iran.

    You'd think it would take at least an hour, as people wait to see what happens.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,996
    Both the quarterly and annual Starmer exit markets are moving strongly in direction of Starmer remaining PM.

    Annual market: 2026 exit now 1.79/1.82. Was around 1.4 less than one month ago.

    Quarterly market: Q2 out to 25. Q3 out to 3. Q4 has shortened somewhat to 5.2. But huge shortening is in 2027 or later now 2.1/2.28.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 32,591
    So Trump has announced the end of the War.
    But Iran disagrees.
    Was anyone in any doubt that was where we'd end up?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 72,380
    kle4 said:

    Visegrád 24
    @visegrad24
    ·
    50s
    BREAKING:

    Oil prices are crashing down as Trump announces a two-week ceasefire with Iran.

    You'd think it would take at least an hour, as people wait to see what happens.
    See you all next week kids!!!
  • eekeek Posts: 33,922
    kle4 said:

    Visegrád 24
    @visegrad24
    ·
    50s
    BREAKING:

    Oil prices are crashing down as Trump announces a two-week ceasefire with Iran.

    You'd think it would take at least an hour, as people wait to see what happens.
    Markets are irrational and definitely overcompensate for good / bad news.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 59,879

    TACO Tuesday.

    Trump should embrace the TACO nickname and open a fast food chain.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 72,380
    A sceptic writes...


    Tim Miller
    @Timodc

    Congrats to Pakistan and Trump on their self-deal. Excited to see how Pakistan executes the hard part - opening the straight. Hoping for success from our friends in Islamabad who totally are looking out for our best interests and would never hide the ball with us.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 9,241
    dixiedean said:

    So Trump has announced the end of the War.
    But Iran disagrees.
    Was anyone in any doubt that was where we'd end up?

    Most of PB, throwing a massive tantrum all day?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,398
    Ratters said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    In all honesty, I think the BEST result for the world now is if Trump nukes the fuck out of Iran, they surrender immediately, and the Straits are reopened in a a few days, and Iran is prevented from wreaking more destruction of MENA infra

    There are no more good options. There are no more bad options. There are only varying degrees of disaster, and the above MIGHT be the least disastrous, if you're not one of the poor people who get melted

    I say this not as a joke, and not to provoke, but as a candid assessment of where we are. It is not good

    You should add "I say this not as a joke" to all of your fuckwit ideas, so you can't pretend later you were just joking.

    If you think dropping nuclear bombs on Iran is going to lead to the rapid opening of Hormuz you are even dimmer than I thought.
    I have tried to see a way out of this mess, within the bounds of rational expectations of the various crazy actors involved, that does not end with the world in famined turmoil

    You scoff and laugh

    So, OK, you have a go
    Either:

    1. Trump does his usual TACO act, delays, prevaricates, then randomly declares victory (again), the Straits remain shut for a few weeks but gradually return to normal.
    Or
    2. He bombs Iran with all the conventional forces he can muster, all to not much avail, but Iran's ability to control the Strait is weakened and other gulf states find a way to protect shipping and resume their oil exports.

    Neither option is great but both are a lot better than using nuclear weapons.

    Just think about it for a nanosecond: the US uses nukes in an unprovoked attack, what's to stop Russia launching a few at Ukraine, then North Korea lobbing one on Japan.... then Pakistan and India trading nukes.

    You proposal is the worst-worst option by a long margin.
    The thing is, (1) isn't a realistic option because Iran is mad at hell that the Ayatollah was assassinated, and so they want something in return for peace. The US can declare an end to the way, but what do they do when Iran drops another missile or bunch of drones on one of their bases?

    And (2) isn't a realistic option because it's really damn hard, possibly impossible, as we saw with the experience with the Houthis and their campaign against shipping in the Red Sea.

    Just like then, there will have to be a deal, but the sides are (apparently) very far away from agreeing to a deal. So what changes things to make a deal happen? I think Leon is wrong about nukes, but I think enriched Iranian in return for closed bases might possibly work, as in my earlier comment.
    Surely, what happens is that two weeks stretches out because everything is going so well, and the Iranians like not getting bombed, and the world likes oil (and gas) prices falling.

    Trump says that any day now they'll annouce the greatest deal, and that they won. And then things continue pretty much as before.

    Except now Iran is fully committed to getting a nuclear weapon, so this doesn't happen again. But that will be a problem for the next US President.
    If the GCC doesn't start building pipeline and alternative port capacity they'd be mad.

    Even if it means selling second-tier premier league teams to fund it...
    Oh, they have enough money without that.

    They have Iran's money.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,809
    carnforth said:

    dixiedean said:

    So Trump has announced the end of the War.
    But Iran disagrees.
    Was anyone in any doubt that was where we'd end up?

    Most of PB, throwing a massive tantrum all day?
    How dare people react to a real possibility that is being threatened in a way which, the actors involved assure us, could definitely occur?
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 9,241
    kle4 said:

    carnforth said:

    dixiedean said:

    So Trump has announced the end of the War.
    But Iran disagrees.
    Was anyone in any doubt that was where we'd end up?

    Most of PB, throwing a massive tantrum all day?
    How dare people react to a real possibility that is being threatened in a way which, the actors involved assure us, could definitely occur?
    Depends how often they've posted about TACO in the past :smile:
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,809

    Bill Gates to testify to Congress on Epstein

    Saw nothing, did nothing, knew nothing, yet for some reason despite all his opportunities and billions he chose to hang around with a despicable criminal because, I guess, he was such a fantastic good time not even the world's richest man could find (legal) enjoyment elsewhere?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 72,380

    Faytuks News
    @Faytuks
    ·
    12m
    Israel has also agreed to a temporary ceasefire with Iran and will suspend its bombing campaign, a senior White House official says -CNN
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,809
    I have lots of meetings on Tuesdays and Wednesdays, it would be convenient for me if Trump saved up big announcements for Thursdays so I can properly immerse myself in the moment.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 22,035
    “ Iran confirms that it has agreed to the ceasefire agreement-Fars

    Iran adds that the US accepted its 10-point proposal as the basis for negotiations, including Iranian control of Hormuz, full compensation for war damages, and the withdrawal of American forces from the region.”

    :D
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,809


    Faytuks News
    @Faytuks
    ·
    12m
    Israel has also agreed to a temporary ceasefire with Iran and will suspend its bombing campaign, a senior White House official says -CNN

    Ah, they need time to rearm?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,809

    “ Iran confirms that it has agreed to the ceasefire agreement-Fars

    Iran adds that the US accepted its 10-point proposal as the basis for negotiations, including Iranian control of Hormuz, full compensation for war damages, and the withdrawal of American forces from the region.”

    :D

    Well, if it takes each side claiming the other has conceded to sell it to their own sides, then all is good I suppose.

    Damn globalism makes it harder to pull off now though.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,809
    So when does the Ayatollah show his face above ground?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,398
    edited April 7

    TACO Tuesday.

    Trump should embrace the TACO nickname and open a fast food chain.
    Except, it would fail. Like all his other ventures.

    He'd claim he was owed $100 fees for each taco sold.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,398
    kle4 said:

    So when does the Ayatollah show his face above ground?

    About 12 seconds before Israel ends the ceasefire.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 40,178
    Looks like a win for Trump as Iran agrees to open the strait.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 9,241
    Andy_JS said:

    Looks like a win for Trump as Iran agrees to open the strait.

    In the very short term. Big loss overall.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,225
    Andy_JS said:

    Looks like a win for Trump as Iran agrees to open the strait.

    Sounds as though Iran gets to charge tolls on passage through the Strait, as they say it will be under their military administration.

    So for the next few years Iran gets to tax 20% of the world's oil and gas, until pipelines are built to new terminals bypassing the Strait.

    That's a massive loss for everyone except Iran compared to the situation before the war.

    And nothing about Iran's nuclear programme, or its missiles, or any of the things that the US went to war to achieve. How can it be a win for Trump when he achieves none of his war aims, and the enemy gains control of a vital global shipping lane?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 61,138
    edited April 7

    Andy_JS said:

    Looks like a win for Trump as Iran agrees to open the strait.

    Sounds as though Iran gets to charge tolls on passage through the Strait, as they say it will be under their military administration.

    So for the next few years Iran gets to tax 20% of the world's oil and gas, until pipelines are built to new terminals bypassing the Strait.

    That's a massive loss for everyone except Iran compared to the situation before the war.

    And nothing about Iran's nuclear programme, or its missiles, or any of the things that the US went to war to achieve. How can it be a win for Trump when he achieves none of his war aims, and the enemy gains control of a vital global shipping lane?
    The US will also have to pay reparations to Iran, lol.

    Edit: your point on the nuclear program is incorrect. “10. Iran fully commits to not seeking possession of any nuclear weapons”
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,225
    The Iranians are saying that one of the points of the 10-point peace plan would allow Iran to continue to enrich uranium. Trump has described this plan as, quote, "a workable basis on which to negotiate."

    This from the guy who withdrew from Obama's nuclear deal with Iran.

    What a complete shambles. I'm kinda relieved that it looks like the immediate point of crisis is passed, and we can get on with recovering from the damage inflicted. But this is also a massive defeat for the US. It is another step into a much more dangerous world.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 59,879
    https://x.com/CMShehbaz/status/2041665043423752651

    With the greatest humility, I am pleased to announce that the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, along with their allies, have agreed to an immediate ceasefire everywhere including Lebanon and elsewhere, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.
    I warmly welcome the sagacious gesture and extend deepest gratitude to the leadership of both the countries and invite their delegations to Islamabad on Friday, 10th April 2026, to further negotiate for a conclusive agreement to settle all disputes.
    Both parties have displayed remarkable wisdom and understanding and have remained constructively engaged in furthering the cause of peace and stability. We earnestly hope, that the ‘Islamabad Talks’ succeed in achieving sustainable peace and wish to share more good news in coming days!
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 28,785
    edited April 8
    TACO loser.

    Just as I forecast, sadly.

    25th now.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,225
    RobD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Looks like a win for Trump as Iran agrees to open the strait.

    Sounds as though Iran gets to charge tolls on passage through the Strait, as they say it will be under their military administration.

    So for the next few years Iran gets to tax 20% of the world's oil and gas, until pipelines are built to new terminals bypassing the Strait.

    That's a massive loss for everyone except Iran compared to the situation before the war.

    And nothing about Iran's nuclear programme, or its missiles, or any of the things that the US went to war to achieve. How can it be a win for Trump when he achieves none of his war aims, and the enemy gains control of a vital global shipping lane?
    The US will also have to pay reparations to Iran, lol.

    Edit: your point on the nuclear program is incorrect. “10. Iran fully commits to not seeking possession of any nuclear weapons”
    Do you have a link?

    I've only seen comments about it indirectly.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,225

    TACO loser.

    Just as I forecast, sadly.

    25th now.

    Would you say the situation is now better than it was before this war started, or worse?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,225
    Brent for June delivery is down to $93. So there's that.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 28,785

    TACO loser.

    Just as I forecast, sadly.

    25th now.

    Would you say the situation is now better than it was before this war started, or worse?
    Too early to tell.

    Does not help that Trump has fought the conflict so badly, refusing to hit key Iranian targets.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 13,450

    I might do a thread on Scottish subsamples now for the morning thread.

    Are you allowed to do that under the terms of the ceasefire?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 59,879
    When is a ceasefire not a ceasefire?

    https://x.com/WarMonitor3/status/2041674461158457353

    BREAKING: IDF has launched strike campaign against Iran due to repeated ceasefire violations.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 13,450

    https://x.com/ryangrim/status/2041622790298616241

    Oh, this is unbelievable. The edit history on this tweet shows that Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif originally copied and pasted everything he was sent, including:

    "*Draft - Pakistan's PM Message on X*"

    Now, obviously, Sharif's own staff don't call him "Pakistan's PM," they would just call him prime minister. The U.S. and Israel, of course, would call him "Pakistan's PM."

    Would be funny if the fate of the world wasn't hanging in the balance.

    Entirely sensible. Trump shows the danger of allowing leaders to actually write their own tweets
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 13,450
    Ratters said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    In all honesty, I think the BEST result for the world now is if Trump nukes the fuck out of Iran, they surrender immediately, and the Straits are reopened in a a few days, and Iran is prevented from wreaking more destruction of MENA infra

    There are no more good options. There are no more bad options. There are only varying degrees of disaster, and the above MIGHT be the least disastrous, if you're not one of the poor people who get melted

    I say this not as a joke, and not to provoke, but as a candid assessment of where we are. It is not good

    You should add "I say this not as a joke" to all of your fuckwit ideas, so you can't pretend later you were just joking.

    If you think dropping nuclear bombs on Iran is going to lead to the rapid opening of Hormuz you are even dimmer than I thought.
    I have tried to see a way out of this mess, within the bounds of rational expectations of the various crazy actors involved, that does not end with the world in famined turmoil

    You scoff and laugh

    So, OK, you have a go
    Either:

    1. Trump does his usual TACO act, delays, prevaricates, then randomly declares victory (again), the Straits remain shut for a few weeks but gradually return to normal.
    Or
    2. He bombs Iran with all the conventional forces he can muster, all to not much avail, but Iran's ability to control the Strait is weakened and other gulf states find a way to protect shipping and resume their oil exports.

    Neither option is great but both are a lot better than using nuclear weapons.

    Just think about it for a nanosecond: the US uses nukes in an unprovoked attack, what's to stop Russia launching a few at Ukraine, then North Korea lobbing one on Japan.... then Pakistan and India trading nukes.

    You proposal is the worst-worst option by a long margin.
    The thing is, (1) isn't a realistic option because Iran is mad at hell that the Ayatollah was assassinated, and so they want something in return for peace. The US can declare an end to the way, but what do they do when Iran drops another missile or bunch of drones on one of their bases?

    And (2) isn't a realistic option because it's really damn hard, possibly impossible, as we saw with the experience with the Houthis and their campaign against shipping in the Red Sea.

    Just like then, there will have to be a deal, but the sides are (apparently) very far away from agreeing to a deal. So what changes things to make a deal happen? I think Leon is wrong about nukes, but I think enriched Iranian in return for closed bases might possibly work, as in my earlier comment.
    Surely, what happens is that two weeks stretches out because everything is going so well, and the Iranians like not getting bombed, and the world likes oil (and gas) prices falling.

    Trump says that any day now they'll annouce the greatest deal, and that they won. And then things continue pretty much as before.

    Except now Iran is fully committed to getting a nuclear weapon, so this doesn't happen again. But that will be a problem for the next US President.
    If the GCC doesn't start building pipeline and alternative port capacity they'd be mad.

    Even if it means selling second-tier premier league teams to fund it...
    I didn’t realise they owned Spurs?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 89,670

    Leon said:

    Is this the closest we’ve come to nukes since Cuba?

    Depends how close it was with Putin a couple of years ago, I guess. The Biden admin certainly thought he was close

    Able Archer in 1983.

    Although that was due to a misunderstanding and American stealth technology deployed for the first time.

    https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-1983-military-drill-that-nearly-sparked-nuclear-war-with-the-soviets-180979980/
    For years I thought 99 Red Balloons (or luftballons) was a song about Able Archer - both out in around the same time and the song deals with a nuclear war sparked by a misunderstanding etc. But that useless fact was ruined when someone told me the German version of the song came out before Able Archer. I hate it when a bit of trivia that you like is ruined by facts.
    Neunundneunzig was released the same year, but six months earlier (and written the previous year).

    It certainly reflected the same Cold War paranoia - German kids were super sceptical about the US back then too (I spent most of my gap year there), so in a way it was.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 89,670

    Andy_JS said:

    Looks like a win for Trump as Iran agrees to open the strait.

    Sounds as though Iran gets to charge tolls on passage through the Strait, as they say it will be under their military administration.

    So for the next few years Iran gets to tax 20% of the world's oil and gas, until pipelines are built to new terminals bypassing the Strait.

    That's a massive loss for everyone except Iran compared to the situation before the war.

    And nothing about Iran's nuclear programme, or its missiles, or any of the things that the US went to war to achieve. How can it be a win for Trump when he achieves none of his war aims, and the enemy gains control of a vital global shipping lane?
    It's a ceasefire, not a peace agreement, so it's unsurprising that the terms claimed by each side are different. Hopefully, it will morph into a longer peace, with both sides pretending they've won.

    Everyone knows it's a disaster of sorts for both, but relief af nuclear war postponed outweighs that - unless you're Barty who seems to have been looking forward to it.
    (It would take many, many years for Iran to begin to recoup its losses from any tariffs it might try to impose.)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 89,670
    kle4 said:


    Faytuks News
    @Faytuks
    ·
    12m
    Israel has also agreed to a temporary ceasefire with Iran and will suspend its bombing campaign, a senior White House official says -CNN

    Ah, they need time to rearm?
    They need the US to rearm.
    If America were genuinely determined not to allow Israel to have another go, they could calibrate a reduction in a military aid (without much damaging Israel's security) to make it a lot harder to contemplate.
This discussion has been closed.