I think it’s fine for Burnham to U-turn before he’s elected.
But if it becomes a pattern he’s going to be right back where Sir Keir is now. My alarm bells are ringing that we’re going to open the cabinet and find it empty once again.
I don’t think he’d have done winter fuel or IHT changes though.
What Burnham's vacuous stupidity yesterday demonstrated is that he prefers to pander to anyone if he thinks it will make him popular and has sod all intention or capability either to do any detailed planning or form a coherent strategy.
Burnham's support for cutting VAT on hospitality to 10% is demolished by Dan Niedle today:
I think it’s fine for Burnham to U-turn before he’s elected.
But if it becomes a pattern he’s going to be right back where Sir Keir is now. My alarm bells are ringing that we’re going to open the cabinet and find it empty once again.
I don’t think he’d have done winter fuel or IHT changes though.
What Burnham's vacuous stupidity yesterday demonstrated is that he prefers to pander to anyone if he thinks it will make him popular and has sod all intention or capability either to do any detailed planning or form a coherent strategy.
Burnham's support for cutting VAT on hospitality to 10% is demolished by Dan Niedle today:
I think it’s fine for Burnham to U-turn before he’s elected.
But if it becomes a pattern he’s going to be right back where Sir Keir is now. My alarm bells are ringing that we’re going to open the cabinet and find it empty once again.
I don’t think he’d have done winter fuel or IHT changes though.
What Burnham's vacuous stupidity yesterday demonstrated is that he prefers to pander to anyone if he thinks it will make him popular and has sod all intention or capability either to do any detailed planning or form a coherent strategy.
Burnham's support for cutting VAT on hospitality to 10% is demolished by Dan Niedle today:
If as expected Burnham wins Makerfield and Restore take significant numbers of Reform votes, then you would expect Labour to move ahead in the most seats market in the expectation of a Burnham leadership. While Reform would be hit too by a split on its right with the rise of Restore
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
Presumably we can improve our military capabilities significantly by just buying a metric-tonne of whatever the latest Ukrainian drone technology is at the end of this war?
Not really. The drones Ukraine uses this month are improvements on those they used last month. It's all in a state of rapid evolution, somewhat analogous to the use of airplanes in WWI, except much larger scale and subject much more rapid change.
It's the domestic manufacturing capacity which we would do with building.
Aside from the issues with drones as a concept, there isa small fly in the ointment.
The cheap components for drones - motors etc - all come from China, or similar.
So if something goes wrong with imports, no drones.
So if you want a sovereign drone capability, you need either a vast stockpile of all the likely bits. Or a manufacturing capability for them.
Well, yes. Certainly Europe should have that capacity, and we should aim to be part of that.
The reality is that there isn't a vast amount the UK can do, purely on its own, in the technologies and industry essential to the future. But there's absolutely no reason Europe should not have sovereign capacity in everything from raw materials mining and production to advanced chip manufacturing and reusable space launch.
A sovereign capability on making small *cheap* electric motors is probably not sexy, though.
Or *cheap* compact, low power computer boards.
Or *cheap* small, light video cameras.
Edit: On space launch, the biggest problem is political. For decades, Government policy has been to support ESA/Ariane, and make sure that no UK firm attempts to compete with them. Variously small launcher schemes are given some minor support, but any attempt look at even the medium class is er... shot down.
Sovereign capacity doesn't mean autarky, but it does mean having sufficient capacity not to be held to ransom, as (for example) China has been able to do with rare earths (and might be about to do with solar) where they have an 80 or 90% market share.
I think it’s fine for Burnham to U-turn before he’s elected.
But if it becomes a pattern he’s going to be right back where Sir Keir is now. My alarm bells are ringing that we’re going to open the cabinet and find it empty once again.
I don’t think he’d have done winter fuel or IHT changes though.
What Burnham's vacuous stupidity yesterday demonstrated is that he prefers to pander to anyone if he thinks it will make him popular and has sod all intention or capability either to do any detailed planning or form a coherent strategy.
Burnham's support for cutting VAT on hospitality to 10% is demolished by Dan Niedle today:
Presumably we can improve our military capabilities significantly by just buying a metric-tonne of whatever the latest Ukrainian drone technology is at the end of this war?
Not really. The drones Ukraine uses this month are improvements on those they used last month. It's all in a state of rapid evolution, somewhat analogous to the use of airplanes in WWI, except much larger scale and subject much more rapid change.
It's the domestic manufacturing capacity which we would do with building.
Aside from the issues with drones as a concept, there isa small fly in the ointment.
The cheap components for drones - motors etc - all come from China, or similar.
So if something goes wrong with imports, no drones.
So if you want a sovereign drone capability, you need either a vast stockpile of all the likely bits. Or a manufacturing capability for them.
Well, yes. Certainly Europe should have that capacity, and we should aim to be part of that.
The reality is that there isn't a vast amount the UK can do, purely on its own, in the technologies and industry essential to the future. But there's absolutely no reason Europe should not have sovereign capacity in everything from raw materials mining and production to advanced chip manufacturing and reusable space launch.
A sovereign capability on making small *cheap* electric motors is probably not sexy, though.
Or *cheap* compact, low power computer boards.
Or *cheap* small, light video cameras.
Edit: On space launch, the biggest problem is political. For decades, Government policy has been to support ESA/Ariane, and make sure that no UK firm attempts to compete with them. Variously small launcher schemes are given some minor support, but any attempt look at even the medium class is er... shot down.
Sovereign capacity doesn't mean autarky, but it does mean having sufficient capacity not to be held to ransom, as (for example) China has been able to do with rare earths (and might be about to do with solar) where they have an 80 or 90% market share.
Well, if your military capability depends on manufacturing 10,000 drones a day, *to be expended within the week* , you are going to need 40,000 electric motors a day to be able to fight
This is very different from most modern military planning - where even the ammunition is expensive and slow to make. Ammunition production is always the first target for cuts, because it isn't an obvious political point. And people say "If we have the weapon system, the ammunition can always be bought later".
I think it’s fine for Burnham to U-turn before he’s elected.
But if it becomes a pattern he’s going to be right back where Sir Keir is now. My alarm bells are ringing that we’re going to open the cabinet and find it empty once again.
I don’t think he’d have done winter fuel or IHT changes though.
He has gone too early. What he is good at is listening and responding in a way people like. If he had taken over summer 2027 and called a GE in summer 2028 promising a shiny future and change he would have done well.
But taking over in 2026 will mean he can't be a change candidate in 2028/9. And with no money and no ideas he is hardly likely to deliver change in between.
The only change Burnham was/is going to deliver if and when he ever took over was higher taxes, more spending and nationalisations of utilities etc. At least it offers more of an ideological choice and alternative to Badenoch and Farage than Starmer is (as to be fair would Streeting with his rejoin the EU policy) but neither necessarily good for the nation
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Presumably we can improve our military capabilities significantly by just buying a metric-tonne of whatever the latest Ukrainian drone technology is at the end of this war?
Not really. The drones Ukraine uses this month are improvements on those they used last month. It's all in a state of rapid evolution, somewhat analogous to the use of airplanes in WWI, except much larger scale and subject much more rapid change.
It's the domestic manufacturing capacity which we would do with building.
Aside from the issues with drones as a concept, there isa small fly in the ointment.
The cheap components for drones - motors etc - all come from China, or similar.
So if something goes wrong with imports, no drones.
So if you want a sovereign drone capability, you need either a vast stockpile of all the likely bits. Or a manufacturing capability for them.
Well, yes. Certainly Europe should have that capacity, and we should aim to be part of that.
The reality is that there isn't a vast amount the UK can do, purely on its own, in the technologies and industry essential to the future. But there's absolutely no reason Europe should not have sovereign capacity in everything from raw materials mining and production to advanced chip manufacturing and reusable space launch.
A sovereign capability on making small *cheap* electric motors is probably not sexy, though.
Or *cheap* compact, low power computer boards.
Or *cheap* small, light video cameras.
Edit: On space launch, the biggest problem is political. For decades, Government policy has been to support ESA/Ariane, and make sure that no UK firm attempts to compete with them. Variously small launcher schemes are given some minor support, but any attempt look at even the medium class is er... shot down.
Sovereign capacity doesn't mean autarky, but it does mean having sufficient capacity not to be held to ransom, as (for example) China has been able to do with rare earths (and might be about to do with solar) where they have an 80 or 90% market share.
Well, if your military capability depends on manufacturing 10,000 drones a day, *to be expended within the week* , you are going to need 40,000 electric motors a day to be able to fight
This is very different from most modern military planning - where even the ammunition is expensive and slow to make. Ammunition production is always the first target for cuts, because it isn't an obvious political point. And people say "If we have the weapon system, the ammunition can always be bought later".
I read yesterday that Patriot missile production is 50-60 per month, but each missile takes two years. It’s like they’re building aeroplanes. They can’t ramp up quickly, despite demand for thousands of them from the Mid East and Ukraine.
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
St Petersburg is still possibly my favourite city for multiple reasons. I just loved it and would love to be able to go back regularly and hope one day things are changed so it’s not problematic to go there.
A table of four 20 and 30-somethings playing "Magic: The Gathering" for the whole evening. It seems they do it once a fortnight, like a Mahjong or Bridge in an Agatha Christie.
I'm quite surprised that that is still a thing.
I know lots of young people who are seriously into games like Magic: The Gathering, often online. In some cases parents worry that they do that to the exclusion of making new friends and drinking in pubs - having the whole world to find "friends" with almost identical interests wins out over actually meeting people. The table in the pub is probably seen by their families as a welcome alternative to that.
I do feel the appeal myself. Would I rather spend some time chatting here to people really interested in politics or meeting actual friends with divergent interests and simulating interest in their recent visit to the seaside? I'm not sure - in theory I need to broaden my mind but in practice??
If as expected Burnham wins Makerfield and Restore take significant numbers of Reform votes, then you would expect Labour to move ahead in the most seats market in the expectation of a Burnham leadership. While Reform would be hit too by a split on its right with the rise of Restore
It is going to be an absolutely extraordinary by-election result if Burnham does win.
It would normally be impossible for a government to win a by-election if the Defence Secretary just resigned saying the country isn't safe under the PM and he is unwilling to do anything about it.
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
I guess that, given your location, a week looking at rows of fir trees will be unbelievably interesting.
Pending it becoming safe, you could try driving through Finland?
Third rate government, failing to understand that defence of the Realm should be its first priority.
The problem is it's hard to see how the UK gets invaded. After all the only plausible enemy is Russia and they are not exactly next door.
So our defence is really about helping the rest of Europe which we left after Brexit so it could be argued we don't need to do much to help them.
So if I was a Reform voter why should we spend much money on defence...
(note not my real view) just going for a relatively simpliestic lets not spend money approach.
Defence is about interests, not necessarily about land.
Take the Straits of Hormouz as those are in the news. We have an interest in those being open and oil flowing freely from the Gulf States to the West. To be clear that is not advocating us getting involved in Trump’s stupidity, but more a current example of where our interests are wider than just machine gunning boats in the Channel as Restore would likely prioritise
Data from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) in Dublin, however, showed 16,600 people had sought asylum at an airport or port. Significant numbers in that cohort were thought to have travelled from Great Britain to Ireland via a flight or ferry to Belfast.
The CTA has come under renewed scrutiny this week after a knife attack in Belfast on Monday. The suspect, Hadi Alodid, a 30-year-old Sudanese refugee, has been charged with attempted murder.
The attack triggered two nights of violence after it emerged Alodid had travelled from Sudan to Paris and then Dublin before taking a bus to Belfast where he claimed asylum in 2023. Police reinforcements were sent from Great Britain to Northern Ireland on Thursday.
Before 2019, the number of people seeking asylum in Ireland was relatively small, about 5,000, commensurate with the experience of a small country on the farthest outreaches of Europe...
Oh dear.
Perhaps they should have insisted on a hard border !
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
I guess that, given your location, a week looking at rows of fir trees will be unbelievably interesting.
Pending it becoming safe, you could try driving through Finland?
I am thinking of the Trans-Canadian as an alternative. It is pretty good value for fans of endless landscapes, forests and lakes
Presumably we can improve our military capabilities significantly by just buying a metric-tonne of whatever the latest Ukrainian drone technology is at the end of this war?
Not really. The drones Ukraine uses this month are improvements on those they used last month. It's all in a state of rapid evolution, somewhat analogous to the use of airplanes in WWI, except much larger scale and subject much more rapid change.
It's the domestic manufacturing capacity which we would do with building.
Aside from the issues with drones as a concept, there isa small fly in the ointment.
The cheap components for drones - motors etc - all come from China, or similar.
So if something goes wrong with imports, no drones.
So if you want a sovereign drone capability, you need either a vast stockpile of all the likely bits. Or a manufacturing capability for them.
Well, yes. Certainly Europe should have that capacity, and we should aim to be part of that.
The reality is that there isn't a vast amount the UK can do, purely on its own, in the technologies and industry essential to the future. But there's absolutely no reason Europe should not have sovereign capacity in everything from raw materials mining and production to advanced chip manufacturing and reusable space launch.
A sovereign capability on making small *cheap* electric motors is probably not sexy, though.
Or *cheap* compact, low power computer boards.
Or *cheap* small, light video cameras.
Edit: On space launch, the biggest problem is political. For decades, Government policy has been to support ESA/Ariane, and make sure that no UK firm attempts to compete with them. Variously small launcher schemes are given some minor support, but any attempt look at even the medium class is er... shot down.
Sovereign capacity doesn't mean autarky, but it does mean having sufficient capacity not to be held to ransom, as (for example) China has been able to do with rare earths (and might be about to do with solar) where they have an 80 or 90% market share.
Well, if your military capability depends on manufacturing 10,000 drones a day, *to be expended within the week* , you are going to need 40,000 electric motors a day to be able to fight
This is very different from most modern military planning - where even the ammunition is expensive and slow to make. Ammunition production is always the first target for cuts, because it isn't an obvious political point. And people say "If we have the weapon system, the ammunition can always be bought later".
I read yesterday that Patriot missile production is 50-60 per month, but each missile takes two years. It’s like they’re building aeroplanes. They can’t ramp up quickly, despite demand for thousands of them from the Mid East and Ukraine.
The missile industry is next in line for the treatment that space launch got.
The traditional solid rocket motor manufacturers, in the US, are already squealing to Congress, because the military is placing larger and larger orders for larger and larger motor types with the new, cheaper entrants.
I think it’s fine for Burnham to U-turn before he’s elected.
But if it becomes a pattern he’s going to be right back where Sir Keir is now. My alarm bells are ringing that we’re going to open the cabinet and find it empty once again.
I don’t think he’d have done winter fuel or IHT changes though.
What Burnham's vacuous stupidity yesterday demonstrated is that he prefers to pander to anyone if he thinks it will make him popular and has sod all intention or capability either to do any detailed planning or form a coherent strategy.
Burnham's support for cutting VAT on hospitality to 10% is demolished by Dan Niedle today:
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
St Petersburg is still possibly my favourite city for multiple reasons. I just loved it and would love to be able to go back regularly and hope one day things are changed so it’s not problematic to go there.
My favourite news story of last week was the international conference there, and the Ukranians took out both the oil export terminal and a warship in the dry dock, a couple of hours before Putin spoke in front of hundreds of his invited guests from all over the world only a mile away.
Yes it does look like a wonderful city, hope to visit there too.
My favourite city, that I’ve visited, is probably SIngapore.
Presumably we can improve our military capabilities significantly by just buying a metric-tonne of whatever the latest Ukrainian drone technology is at the end of this war?
Not really. The drones Ukraine uses this month are improvements on those they used last month. It's all in a state of rapid evolution, somewhat analogous to the use of airplanes in WWI, except much larger scale and subject much more rapid change.
It's the domestic manufacturing capacity which we would do with building.
Aside from the issues with drones as a concept, there isa small fly in the ointment.
The cheap components for drones - motors etc - all come from China, or similar.
So if something goes wrong with imports, no drones.
So if you want a sovereign drone capability, you need either a vast stockpile of all the likely bits. Or a manufacturing capability for them.
Well, yes. Certainly Europe should have that capacity, and we should aim to be part of that.
The reality is that there isn't a vast amount the UK can do, purely on its own, in the technologies and industry essential to the future. But there's absolutely no reason Europe should not have sovereign capacity in everything from raw materials mining and production to advanced chip manufacturing and reusable space launch.
A sovereign capability on making small *cheap* electric motors is probably not sexy, though.
Or *cheap* compact, low power computer boards.
Or *cheap* small, light video cameras.
Edit: On space launch, the biggest problem is political. For decades, Government policy has been to support ESA/Ariane, and make sure that no UK firm attempts to compete with them. Variously small launcher schemes are given some minor support, but any attempt look at even the medium class is er... shot down.
Sovereign capacity doesn't mean autarky, but it does mean having sufficient capacity not to be held to ransom, as (for example) China has been able to do with rare earths (and might be about to do with solar) where they have an 80 or 90% market share.
Well, if your military capability depends on manufacturing 10,000 drones a day, *to be expended within the week* , you are going to need 40,000 electric motors a day to be able to fight
This is very different from most modern military planning - where even the ammunition is expensive and slow to make. Ammunition production is always the first target for cuts, because it isn't an obvious political point. And people say "If we have the weapon system, the ammunition can always be bought later".
I read yesterday that Patriot missile production is 50-60 per month, but each missile takes two years. It’s like they’re building aeroplanes. They can’t ramp up quickly, despite demand for thousands of them from the Mid East and Ukraine.
The missile industry is next in line for the treatment that space launch got.
The traditional solid rocket motor manufacturers, in the US, are already squealing to Congress, because the military is placing larger and larger orders for larger and larger motor types with the new, cheaper entrants.
I think it’s fine for Burnham to U-turn before he’s elected.
But if it becomes a pattern he’s going to be right back where Sir Keir is now. My alarm bells are ringing that we’re going to open the cabinet and find it empty once again.
I don’t think he’d have done winter fuel or IHT changes though.
What Burnham's vacuous stupidity yesterday demonstrated is that he prefers to pander to anyone if he thinks it will make him popular and has sod all intention or capability either to do any detailed planning or form a coherent strategy.
Burnham's support for cutting VAT on hospitality to 10% is demolished by Dan Niedle today:
I think it’s fine for Burnham to U-turn before he’s elected.
But if it becomes a pattern he’s going to be right back where Sir Keir is now. My alarm bells are ringing that we’re going to open the cabinet and find it empty once again.
I don’t think he’d have done winter fuel or IHT changes though.
What Burnham's vacuous stupidity yesterday demonstrated is that he prefers to pander to anyone if he thinks it will make him popular and has sod all intention or capability either to do any detailed planning or form a coherent strategy.
Burnham's support for cutting VAT on hospitality to 10% is demolished by Dan Niedle today:
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
I guess that, given your location, a week looking at rows of fir trees will be unbelievably interesting.
Pending it becoming safe, you could try driving through Finland?
I am thinking of the Trans-Canadian as an alternative. It is pretty good value for fans of endless landscapes, forests and lakes
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
I guess that, given your location, a week looking at rows of fir trees will be unbelievably interesting.
Pending it becoming safe, you could try driving through Finland?
I thought it was mostly birch with a bit of pine. So Finnish plantations don't cut it. Quebec, maybe?
I think it’s fine for Burnham to U-turn before he’s elected.
But if it becomes a pattern he’s going to be right back where Sir Keir is now. My alarm bells are ringing that we’re going to open the cabinet and find it empty once again.
I don’t think he’d have done winter fuel or IHT changes though.
What Burnham's vacuous stupidity yesterday demonstrated is that he prefers to pander to anyone if he thinks it will make him popular and has sod all intention or capability either to do any detailed planning or form a coherent strategy.
Burnham's support for cutting VAT on hospitality to 10% is demolished by Dan Niedle today:
That will be the poll that Restore will point to when they get more like 2% rather than the 12% indicated?
I did hear from a very deflated Tory canvasser that they comfortably found more Restore voters than Tory voters.
Their view is the Tories ain't ever winning again until GB News and social media are banned in the UK.
On the other hand, even Thatcher didn't win in Makerfield. Labour areas switching to a new party is an opportunity as much as a threat for Labour's traditional opposition.
Presumably we can improve our military capabilities significantly by just buying a metric-tonne of whatever the latest Ukrainian drone technology is at the end of this war?
Not really. The drones Ukraine uses this month are improvements on those they used last month. It's all in a state of rapid evolution, somewhat analogous to the use of airplanes in WWI, except much larger scale and subject much more rapid change.
It's the domestic manufacturing capacity which we would do with building.
Aside from the issues with drones as a concept, there isa small fly in the ointment.
The cheap components for drones - motors etc - all come from China, or similar.
So if something goes wrong with imports, no drones.
So if you want a sovereign drone capability, you need either a vast stockpile of all the likely bits. Or a manufacturing capability for them.
Well, yes. Certainly Europe should have that capacity, and we should aim to be part of that.
The reality is that there isn't a vast amount the UK can do, purely on its own, in the technologies and industry essential to the future. But there's absolutely no reason Europe should not have sovereign capacity in everything from raw materials mining and production to advanced chip manufacturing and reusable space launch.
A sovereign capability on making small *cheap* electric motors is probably not sexy, though.
Or *cheap* compact, low power computer boards.
Or *cheap* small, light video cameras.
Edit: On space launch, the biggest problem is political. For decades, Government policy has been to support ESA/Ariane, and make sure that no UK firm attempts to compete with them. Variously small launcher schemes are given some minor support, but any attempt look at even the medium class is er... shot down.
Sovereign capacity doesn't mean autarky, but it does mean having sufficient capacity not to be held to ransom, as (for example) China has been able to do with rare earths (and might be about to do with solar) where they have an 80 or 90% market share.
Well, if your military capability depends on manufacturing 10,000 drones a day, *to be expended within the week* , you are going to need 40,000 electric motors a day to be able to fight
This is very different from most modern military planning - where even the ammunition is expensive and slow to make. Ammunition production is always the first target for cuts, because it isn't an obvious political point. And people say "If we have the weapon system, the ammunition can always be bought later".
I read yesterday that Patriot missile production is 50-60 per month, but each missile takes two years. It’s like they’re building aeroplanes. They can’t ramp up quickly, despite demand for thousands of them from the Mid East and Ukraine.
What amazes me about all this is that there wasn't a plan in a drawer on how to scale up production rapidly. Frankly Patriot is useless if it's not possible to produce enough interceptor missiles to shoot down China's capability to produce missiles.
That will be the poll that Restore will point to when they get more like 2% rather than the 12% indicated?
I did hear from a very deflated Tory canvasser that they comfortably found more Restore voters than Tory voters.
Their view is the Tories ain't ever winning again until GB News and social media are banned in the UK.
They could of course try the old method of having a reasonable set of plans set within a well presented vision of where we are going and how we are going to get there alongside honestly about money, debt, deficit and tax, the limits of government, the responsibilities of the individual, previous Tory failings, and hard choices. And then spend three years communicating it brilliantly well.
Presumably we can improve our military capabilities significantly by just buying a metric-tonne of whatever the latest Ukrainian drone technology is at the end of this war?
Not really. The drones Ukraine uses this month are improvements on those they used last month. It's all in a state of rapid evolution, somewhat analogous to the use of airplanes in WWI, except much larger scale and subject much more rapid change.
It's the domestic manufacturing capacity which we would do with building.
Aside from the issues with drones as a concept, there isa small fly in the ointment.
The cheap components for drones - motors etc - all come from China, or similar.
So if something goes wrong with imports, no drones.
So if you want a sovereign drone capability, you need either a vast stockpile of all the likely bits. Or a manufacturing capability for them.
Which is what the Ukranians have done. They can now make quadcoptor drones from first principles, nothing Chinese in them.
We all have so much to learn from Ukraine once this war is over.
But if Russia wins, what have we learned?
The world needs to see Russia scampering back to its borders with its tail between its legs.
I think it’s fine for Burnham to U-turn before he’s elected.
But if it becomes a pattern he’s going to be right back where Sir Keir is now. My alarm bells are ringing that we’re going to open the cabinet and find it empty once again.
I don’t think he’d have done winter fuel or IHT changes though.
What Burnham's vacuous stupidity yesterday demonstrated is that he prefers to pander to anyone if he thinks it will make him popular and has sod all intention or capability either to do any detailed planning or form a coherent strategy.
Burnham's support for cutting VAT on hospitality to 10% is demolished by Dan Niedle today:
The largest beneficiary of such a VAT cut would be McDonalds.
To be fair, an awful lot of “McDonald’s” is small businesses franchises.
It’s said that McDonald’s has made more people millionaires than any other company in history.
Leave fast food and/or drive throughs out of it?
Just leave takeaways out of it entirely.
That has a problem that a lot of eg McDonalds etc are also eat-in.
That's back to the Osborne Pasty Tax problem.
Supposedly they manage this in many countries on the contient, how do they manage ?
I'm not sure why Britain should be subsidising hospitality as an industry by cutting VAT anyway. It's a consumption industry and one of Britain's economic problems is not enough production and too much consumption for the income produced.
If there's money for a tax cut then cut taxes for investment into manufacturing, or other industries with export potential.
I think it’s fine for Burnham to U-turn before he’s elected.
But if it becomes a pattern he’s going to be right back where Sir Keir is now. My alarm bells are ringing that we’re going to open the cabinet and find it empty once again.
I don’t think he’d have done winter fuel or IHT changes though.
What Burnham's vacuous stupidity yesterday demonstrated is that he prefers to pander to anyone if he thinks it will make him popular and has sod all intention or capability either to do any detailed planning or form a coherent strategy.
Burnham's support for cutting VAT on hospitality to 10% is demolished by Dan Niedle today:
The largest beneficiary of such a VAT cut would be McDonalds.
To be fair, an awful lot of “McDonald’s” is small businesses franchises.
It’s said that McDonald’s has made more people millionaires than any other company in history.
Leave fast food and/or drive throughs out of it?
Just leave takeaways out of it entirely.
That has a problem that a lot of eg McDonalds etc are also eat-in.
That's back to the Osborne Pasty Tax problem.
Supposedly they manage this in many countries on the contient, how do they manage ?
I'm not sure why Britain should be subsidising hospitality as an industry by cutting VAT anyway. It's a consumption industry and one of Britain's economic problems is not enough production and too much consumption for the income produced.
If there's money for a tax cut then cut taxes for investment into manufacturing, or other industries with export potential.
Easy.
People Who Lunch (mostly because they have time to Lunch, mostly because they don't need to work for a living) want lots of choice and cheap prices.
Presumably we can improve our military capabilities significantly by just buying a metric-tonne of whatever the latest Ukrainian drone technology is at the end of this war?
Not really. The drones Ukraine uses this month are improvements on those they used last month. It's all in a state of rapid evolution, somewhat analogous to the use of airplanes in WWI, except much larger scale and subject much more rapid change.
It's the domestic manufacturing capacity which we would do with building.
Aside from the issues with drones as a concept, there isa small fly in the ointment.
The cheap components for drones - motors etc - all come from China, or similar.
So if something goes wrong with imports, no drones.
So if you want a sovereign drone capability, you need either a vast stockpile of all the likely bits. Or a manufacturing capability for them.
Well, yes. Certainly Europe should have that capacity, and we should aim to be part of that.
The reality is that there isn't a vast amount the UK can do, purely on its own, in the technologies and industry essential to the future. But there's absolutely no reason Europe should not have sovereign capacity in everything from raw materials mining and production to advanced chip manufacturing and reusable space launch.
A sovereign capability on making small *cheap* electric motors is probably not sexy, though.
Or *cheap* compact, low power computer boards.
Or *cheap* small, light video cameras.
Edit: On space launch, the biggest problem is political. For decades, Government policy has been to support ESA/Ariane, and make sure that no UK firm attempts to compete with them. Variously small launcher schemes are given some minor support, but any attempt look at even the medium class is er... shot down.
Sovereign capacity doesn't mean autarky, but it does mean having sufficient capacity not to be held to ransom, as (for example) China has been able to do with rare earths (and might be about to do with solar) where they have an 80 or 90% market share.
Well, if your military capability depends on manufacturing 10,000 drones a day, *to be expended within the week* , you are going to need 40,000 electric motors a day to be able to fight
This is very different from most modern military planning - where even the ammunition is expensive and slow to make. Ammunition production is always the first target for cuts, because it isn't an obvious political point. And people say "If we have the weapon system, the ammunition can always be bought later".
I read yesterday that Patriot missile production is 50-60 per month, but each missile takes two years. It’s like they’re building aeroplanes. They can’t ramp up quickly, despite demand for thousands of them from the Mid East and Ukraine.
Plants to build solid rocket motors are very expensive; the motors themselves take well over a year to "cure"after they've been poured. The seeker heads require a radar set, which again isn't an easy thing to build, and again a new plant to build them can't be constructed overnight.
So yes, it is a bit like building military airplanes.
Presumably we can improve our military capabilities significantly by just buying a metric-tonne of whatever the latest Ukrainian drone technology is at the end of this war?
Not really. The drones Ukraine uses this month are improvements on those they used last month. It's all in a state of rapid evolution, somewhat analogous to the use of airplanes in WWI, except much larger scale and subject much more rapid change.
It's the domestic manufacturing capacity which we would do with building.
Aside from the issues with drones as a concept, there isa small fly in the ointment.
The cheap components for drones - motors etc - all come from China, or similar.
So if something goes wrong with imports, no drones.
So if you want a sovereign drone capability, you need either a vast stockpile of all the likely bits. Or a manufacturing capability for them.
Well, yes. Certainly Europe should have that capacity, and we should aim to be part of that.
The reality is that there isn't a vast amount the UK can do, purely on its own, in the technologies and industry essential to the future. But there's absolutely no reason Europe should not have sovereign capacity in everything from raw materials mining and production to advanced chip manufacturing and reusable space launch.
A sovereign capability on making small *cheap* electric motors is probably not sexy, though.
Or *cheap* compact, low power computer boards.
Or *cheap* small, light video cameras.
Edit: On space launch, the biggest problem is political. For decades, Government policy has been to support ESA/Ariane, and make sure that no UK firm attempts to compete with them. Variously small launcher schemes are given some minor support, but any attempt look at even the medium class is er... shot down.
Sovereign capacity doesn't mean autarky, but it does mean having sufficient capacity not to be held to ransom, as (for example) China has been able to do with rare earths (and might be about to do with solar) where they have an 80 or 90% market share.
Well, if your military capability depends on manufacturing 10,000 drones a day, *to be expended within the week* , you are going to need 40,000 electric motors a day to be able to fight
This is very different from most modern military planning - where even the ammunition is expensive and slow to make. Ammunition production is always the first target for cuts, because it isn't an obvious political point. And people say "If we have the weapon system, the ammunition can always be bought later".
I read yesterday that Patriot missile production is 50-60 per month, but each missile takes two years. It’s like they’re building aeroplanes. They can’t ramp up quickly, despite demand for thousands of them from the Mid East and Ukraine.
What amazes me about all this is that there wasn't a plan in a drawer on how to scale up production rapidly. Frankly Patriot is useless if it's not possible to produce enough interceptor missiles to shoot down China's capability to produce missiles.
Patriot is designed to deal with high performance, expensive targets - aircraft and advanced missiles.
You need tiered defences - Defences against drones, defences against aircraft and missiles, defences against ballistic missiles.
At the moment we actually lack very high end system to deal with ballistic missiles. The Type 45 Destroyers have some ABM capability, but it is limited by the missiles.
We have some drone defence systems and a fair number of smaller air defence systems.
Presumably we can improve our military capabilities significantly by just buying a metric-tonne of whatever the latest Ukrainian drone technology is at the end of this war?
Not really. The drones Ukraine uses this month are improvements on those they used last month. It's all in a state of rapid evolution, somewhat analogous to the use of airplanes in WWI, except much larger scale and subject much more rapid change.
It's the domestic manufacturing capacity which we would do with building.
Aside from the issues with drones as a concept, there isa small fly in the ointment.
The cheap components for drones - motors etc - all come from China, or similar.
So if something goes wrong with imports, no drones.
So if you want a sovereign drone capability, you need either a vast stockpile of all the likely bits. Or a manufacturing capability for them.
Well, yes. Certainly Europe should have that capacity, and we should aim to be part of that.
The reality is that there isn't a vast amount the UK can do, purely on its own, in the technologies and industry essential to the future. But there's absolutely no reason Europe should not have sovereign capacity in everything from raw materials mining and production to advanced chip manufacturing and reusable space launch.
A sovereign capability on making small *cheap* electric motors is probably not sexy, though.
Or *cheap* compact, low power computer boards.
Or *cheap* small, light video cameras.
Edit: On space launch, the biggest problem is political. For decades, Government policy has been to support ESA/Ariane, and make sure that no UK firm attempts to compete with them. Variously small launcher schemes are given some minor support, but any attempt look at even the medium class is er... shot down.
Sovereign capacity doesn't mean autarky, but it does mean having sufficient capacity not to be held to ransom, as (for example) China has been able to do with rare earths (and might be about to do with solar) where they have an 80 or 90% market share.
Well, if your military capability depends on manufacturing 10,000 drones a day, *to be expended within the week* , you are going to need 40,000 electric motors a day to be able to fight
This is very different from most modern military planning - where even the ammunition is expensive and slow to make. Ammunition production is always the first target for cuts, because it isn't an obvious political point. And people say "If we have the weapon system, the ammunition can always be bought later".
I read yesterday that Patriot missile production is 50-60 per month, but each missile takes two years. It’s like they’re building aeroplanes. They can’t ramp up quickly, despite demand for thousands of them from the Mid East and Ukraine.
Plants to build solid rocket motors are very expensive; the motors themselves take well over a year to "cure"after they've been poured. The seeker heads require a radar set, which again isn't an easy thing to build, and again a new plant to build them can't be constructed overnight.
So yes, it is a bit like building military airplanes.
The seeker head thing became a joke, when a certain company set up a factory to build a phased array active antenna for satellite communications and made it a mass market consumer good. The technologies are very similar.
Other people are working on solid rocket motors - among other things, new methods to cure the motors much faster.
Presumably we can improve our military capabilities significantly by just buying a metric-tonne of whatever the latest Ukrainian drone technology is at the end of this war?
Not really. The drones Ukraine uses this month are improvements on those they used last month. It's all in a state of rapid evolution, somewhat analogous to the use of airplanes in WWI, except much larger scale and subject much more rapid change.
It's the domestic manufacturing capacity which we would do with building.
Aside from the issues with drones as a concept, there isa small fly in the ointment.
The cheap components for drones - motors etc - all come from China, or similar.
So if something goes wrong with imports, no drones.
So if you want a sovereign drone capability, you need either a vast stockpile of all the likely bits. Or a manufacturing capability for them.
Well, yes. Certainly Europe should have that capacity, and we should aim to be part of that.
The reality is that there isn't a vast amount the UK can do, purely on its own, in the technologies and industry essential to the future. But there's absolutely no reason Europe should not have sovereign capacity in everything from raw materials mining and production to advanced chip manufacturing and reusable space launch.
A sovereign capability on making small *cheap* electric motors is probably not sexy, though.
Or *cheap* compact, low power computer boards.
Or *cheap* small, light video cameras.
Edit: On space launch, the biggest problem is political. For decades, Government policy has been to support ESA/Ariane, and make sure that no UK firm attempts to compete with them. Variously small launcher schemes are given some minor support, but any attempt look at even the medium class is er... shot down.
Sovereign capacity doesn't mean autarky, but it does mean having sufficient capacity not to be held to ransom, as (for example) China has been able to do with rare earths (and might be about to do with solar) where they have an 80 or 90% market share.
Well, if your military capability depends on manufacturing 10,000 drones a day, *to be expended within the week* , you are going to need 40,000 electric motors a day to be able to fight
This is very different from most modern military planning - where even the ammunition is expensive and slow to make. Ammunition production is always the first target for cuts, because it isn't an obvious political point. And people say "If we have the weapon system, the ammunition can always be bought later".
I read yesterday that Patriot missile production is 50-60 per month, but each missile takes two years. It’s like they’re building aeroplanes. They can’t ramp up quickly, despite demand for thousands of them from the Mid East and Ukraine.
Plants to build solid rocket motors are very expensive; the motors themselves take well over a year to "cure"after they've been poured. The seeker heads require a radar set, which again isn't an easy thing to build, and again a new plant to build them can't be constructed overnight.
So yes, it is a bit like building military airplanes.
The seeker head thing became a joke, when a certain company set up a factory to build a phased array active antenna for satellite communications and made it a mass market consumer good. The technologies are very similar.
Other people are working on solid rocket motors - among other things, new methods to cure the motors much faster.
But the reality is that there isn't an existing, significantly cheaper alternative with similar specifications, and scaling up Patriot production is non trivial.
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
My wife and I have been to Moscow and Vladivostok - but not the bit between !!!!!!!!!
I think it’s fine for Burnham to U-turn before he’s elected.
But if it becomes a pattern he’s going to be right back where Sir Keir is now. My alarm bells are ringing that we’re going to open the cabinet and find it empty once again.
I don’t think he’d have done winter fuel or IHT changes though.
What Burnham's vacuous stupidity yesterday demonstrated is that he prefers to pander to anyone if he thinks it will make him popular and has sod all intention or capability either to do any detailed planning or form a coherent strategy.
Burnham's support for cutting VAT on hospitality to 10% is demolished by Dan Niedle today:
The largest beneficiary of such a VAT cut would be McDonalds.
To be fair, an awful lot of “McDonald’s” is small businesses franchises.
It’s said that McDonald’s has made more people millionaires than any other company in history.
Leave fast food and/or drive throughs out of it?
Just leave takeaways out of it entirely.
That has a problem that a lot of eg McDonalds etc are also eat-in.
That's back to the Osborne Pasty Tax problem.
Supposedly they manage this in many countries on the contient, how do they manage ?
I'm not sure why Britain should be subsidising hospitality as an industry by cutting VAT anyway. It's a consumption industry and one of Britain's economic problems is not enough production and too much consumption for the income produced.
If there's money for a tax cut then cut taxes for investment into manufacturing, or other industries with export potential.
Easy.
People Who Lunch (mostly because they have time to Lunch, mostly because they don't need to work for a living) want lots of choice and cheap prices.
And they vote in huge numbers.
This is why it is necessary for political leaders to lead, rather than to follow focus groups.
That will be the poll that Restore will point to when they get more like 2% rather than the 12% indicated?
I did hear from a very deflated Tory canvasser that they comfortably found more Restore voters than Tory voters.
Their view is the Tories ain't ever winning again until GB News and social media are banned in the UK.
They could of course try the old method of having a reasonable set of plans set within a well presented vision of where we are going and how we are going to get there alongside honestly about money, debt, deficit and tax, the limits of government, the responsibilities of the individual, previous Tory failings, and hard choices. And then spend three years communicating it brilliantly well.
Far too many voters have been conditioned to believe the problems of the country are solely down to immigration and the problems will be fixed with mass deportartions.
Presumably we can improve our military capabilities significantly by just buying a metric-tonne of whatever the latest Ukrainian drone technology is at the end of this war?
Not really. The drones Ukraine uses this month are improvements on those they used last month. It's all in a state of rapid evolution, somewhat analogous to the use of airplanes in WWI, except much larger scale and subject much more rapid change.
It's the domestic manufacturing capacity which we would do with building.
Aside from the issues with drones as a concept, there isa small fly in the ointment.
The cheap components for drones - motors etc - all come from China, or similar.
So if something goes wrong with imports, no drones.
So if you want a sovereign drone capability, you need either a vast stockpile of all the likely bits. Or a manufacturing capability for them.
Which is what the Ukranians have done. They can now make quadcoptor drones from first principles, nothing Chinese in them.
We all have so much to learn from Ukraine once this war is over.
But if Russia wins, what have we learned?
The world needs to see Russia scampering back to its borders with its tail between its legs.
Then tailor defences to keeping them there.
Ukraine are doing their best to get the Russians out. Crimea in particular now looks pretty dodgy if you’re a civilian. There’s no fuel, and supermarket shelves are emptying quickly.
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
My wife and I have been to Moscow and Vladivostok - but not the bit between !!!!!!!!!
The thing is, the pool the Tories are currently swimming in is very small.
The sort of voters they'd have had between 2010 and 2020, are either with Labour, Lib Dems, or won't vote. I see little evidence the "Cameron types" are coming back, because Badenoch hasn't yet said anything to them.
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
My wife and I have been to Moscow and Vladivostok - but not the bit between !!!!!!!!!
How did you end up in Vladivostok?
We sailed on Princess cruises from Vancouver to Japan, then to Vladivostok, then South Korea, then ending up Tianjin before flying home from Beijing
Wholesome Twitter today, is all the European football fans doing a tour of the American South, discovering things they never knew existed, and the Americans welcoming them with open arms.
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
My wife and I have been to Moscow and Vladivostok - but not the bit between !!!!!!!!!
How did you end up in Vladivostok?
We sailed on Princess cruises from Vancouver to Japan, then to Vladivostok, then South Korea, then ending up Tianjin before flying home from Beijing
Ooh, very good. Can’t be many people who have crossed the date line backwards in a boat?
Britain is heading towards becoming a second-rate military power within Europe and the trajectory is such that it will become a third-rate power soon afterwards.
Maybe the British people are adopting a more insular worldview, shrinking back from the world and relying on others to protect it. Wouldn't be the first country to surrender control over its destiny in such a way.
The obvious counterpoint is No Ind compared to last time.
Local factors, there are always local factors.
Yes, we should focus on this one single result and ignore the the results of the May locals.
You and I campaigned for David Cameron, and I campaigned for the conservatives from the 1964 GE so I do not understand your animosity towards the conservative party of today so maybe it is fair to ask what do you want the conservative party to represent other than pro EU which is not on their agenda ?
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
My wife and I have been to Moscow and Vladivostok - but not the bit between !!!!!!!!!
How did you end up in Vladivostok?
We sailed on Princess cruises from Vancouver to Japan, then to Vladivostok, then South Korea, then ending up Tianjin before flying home from Beijing
Ooh, very good. Can’t be many people who have crossed the date line backwards in a boat?
The obvious counterpoint is No Ind compared to last time.
Local factors, there are always local factors.
Yes, we should focus on this one single result and ignore the the results of the May locals.
You and I campaigned for David Cameron, and I campaigned for the conservatives from the 1964 GE so I do not understand your animosity towards the conservative party of today so maybe it is fair to ask what do you want the conservative party to represent other than pro EU which is not on their agenda ?
I would suggest being liberal on social and cultural issues.
Social conservatism is almost always a euphemism for bigotry.
The obvious counterpoint is No Ind compared to last time.
Local factors, there are always local factors.
Yes, we should focus on this one single result and ignore the the results of the May locals.
You and I campaigned for David Cameron, and I campaigned for the conservatives from the 1964 GE so I do not understand your animosity towards the conservative party of today so maybe it is fair to ask what do you want the conservative party to represent other than pro EU which is not on their agenda ?
I would suggest being liberal on social and cultural issues.
Social conservatism is almost always a euphemism for bigotry.
The obvious counterpoint is No Ind compared to last time.
Local factors, there are always local factors.
Yes, we should focus on this one single result and ignore the the results of the May locals.
You and I campaigned for David Cameron, and I campaigned for the conservatives from the 1964 GE so I do not understand your animosity towards the conservative party of today so maybe it is fair to ask what do you want the conservative party to represent other than pro EU which is not on their agenda ?
I would suggest being liberal on social and cultural issues.
Social conservatism is almost always a euphemism for bigotry.
The problem then is the definition of social conservatism.
Polanski's suggested policy of banning a furrin' religious practise would be considered, by some, social conservatism.
That will be the poll that Restore will point to when they get more like 2% rather than the 12% indicated?
I did hear from a very deflated Tory canvasser that they comfortably found more Restore voters than Tory voters.
Their view is the Tories ain't ever winning again until GB News and social media are banned in the UK.
I think it's simpler than that. The Tories ain't ever winning again.
Far too many Tories confuse 'once upon a time the Tories got vote shares of 40%+' with 'once upon a time 40%+ of voters liked the Tories'. They didn't. People voted Tory because it was the best way of keeping Labour out. The number of voters keen on a Cameroon-style Tory party is pretty slim. Reform is representing a shade of right-wing opinion which was always there - it hasn't just been created by social media and GB News.
But if the Tories are no longer the obvious 'not Labour' party it is hard to see what their future is.
For balance, almost exactly the same thing in reverse could be said of Labour. Most of Labour's vote was unenthusiastic about the Labour Party and was there largely as a not-Tory vote.
FWIW, I'm currently in the 'would vote Tory tomorrow' category.
That will be the poll that Restore will point to when they get more like 2% rather than the 12% indicated?
I did hear from a very deflated Tory canvasser that they comfortably found more Restore voters than Tory voters.
Their view is the Tories ain't ever winning again until GB News and social media are banned in the UK.
They could of course try the old method of having a reasonable set of plans set within a well presented vision of where we are going and how we are going to get there alongside honestly about money, debt, deficit and tax, the limits of government, the responsibilities of the individual, previous Tory failings, and hard choices. And then spend three years communicating it brilliantly well.
Far too many voters have been conditioned to believe the problems of the country are solely down to immigration and the problems will be fixed with mass deportartions.
The old methods do not work.
Perhaps not, but at some point they will have to. Ignoring the constraints of reality (on the left), and believing in fantasy solutions (on the right) only makes things worse.
The rise of parties like Reform and Restore isn't fundamentally due to social media, Russia, etc. It's because successive British governments said they would reduce migration and did the opposite.
Philosopher John Gray explains at about 29 mins 16 secs.
The obvious counterpoint is No Ind compared to last time.
Local factors, there are always local factors.
Yes, we should focus on this one single result and ignore the the results of the May locals.
You and I campaigned for David Cameron, and I campaigned for the conservatives from the 1964 GE so I do not understand your animosity towards the conservative party of today so maybe it is fair to ask what do you want the conservative party to represent other than pro EU which is not on their agenda ?
The problems are that: a) Brexit was a deeply unserious policy that has cost the UK a significant proportion of its GDP- an estimated 140 billion directly and another 900 billion in the funds leaving the City, and with it 40,000 well paid city jobs. That is before we discuss the evisceration of our farmers and food processors and the regulatory drag for all trade with the EU- a cost that reduces our projected growth every single year. So Brexit is an economic mess, and the Uk economy is growing more fragile the longer we fail to address it. b) The advent of the Putin war and the Trump fiasco has left us militarily and strategically vulnerable, and the only viable way to maintain our strategic independence is to re-engage and indeed develop further our cooperation with NATO allies- which now includes all but 4 members of the EU- Ireland, Austria, Malta, Cyprus. Ireland,. Meanwhile Iceland is now likely to vote yes to the joining the EU in August, and this may trigger a Norwegian accession process. Even Canada is developing a much closer relationship than anything the Tories have proposed.
That will be the poll that Restore will point to when they get more like 2% rather than the 12% indicated?
I did hear from a very deflated Tory canvasser that they comfortably found more Restore voters than Tory voters.
Their view is the Tories ain't ever winning again until GB News and social media are banned in the UK.
I think it's simpler than that. The Tories ain't ever winning again.
Far too many Tories confuse 'once upon a time the Tories got vote shares of 40%+' with 'once upon a time 40%+ of voters liked the Tories'. They didn't. People voted Tory because it was the best way of keeping Labour out. The number of voters keen on a Cameroon-style Tory party is pretty slim. Reform is representing a shade of right-wing opinion which was always there - it hasn't just been created by social media and GB News.
But if the Tories are no longer the obvious 'not Labour' party it is hard to see what their future is.
For balance, almost exactly the same thing in reverse could be said of Labour. Most of Labour's vote was unenthusiastic about the Labour Party and was there largely as a not-Tory vote.
FWIW, I'm currently in the 'would vote Tory tomorrow' category.
We are in a period of multi party politics with huge discontentment and it is likely to remain so, but I do expect both Reform and the Greens to be found out by GE29 but who forms the next government is impossible to guess
The obvious counterpoint is No Ind compared to last time.
Local factors, there are always local factors.
Yes, we should focus on this one single result and ignore the the results of the May locals.
You and I campaigned for David Cameron, and I campaigned for the conservatives from the 1964 GE so I do not understand your animosity towards the conservative party of today so maybe it is fair to ask what do you want the conservative party to represent other than pro EU which is not on their agenda ?
You voted for Blair twice.
I want a fiscally sound, socially liberal policies, the rhetoric out of the mouths of Katie Lam and Nick Philip are the language out of Farage, the Tories will not win trying to out Reform Reform.
The obvious counterpoint is No Ind compared to last time.
Local factors, there are always local factors.
Yes, we should focus on this one single result and ignore the the results of the May locals.
You and I campaigned for David Cameron, and I campaigned for the conservatives from the 1964 GE so I do not understand your animosity towards the conservative party of today so maybe it is fair to ask what do you want the conservative party to represent other than pro EU which is not on their agenda ?
I would suggest being liberal on social and cultural issues.
Social conservatism is almost always a euphemism for bigotry.
The problem then is the definition of social conservatism.
Polanski's suggested policy of banning a furrin' religious practise would be considered, by some, social conservatism.
But is it?
I do not think it is Polanski's policy.
Greens have a very localist and democratic grass roots system for raising and debating policy and ideas. It has to pass conference to become policy and is unlikely to do so.
Italy is building two modern attack submarines for €500 million a piece, which as far as I know are on budget. The latest Astute class submarine is costing about £2 billion to build, or about five times as much. Astute, when it's available unlike now, is nuclear powered and more capable. Which is the better choice for their respective armed forces?
That will be the poll that Restore will point to when they get more like 2% rather than the 12% indicated?
I did hear from a very deflated Tory canvasser that they comfortably found more Restore voters than Tory voters.
Their view is the Tories ain't ever winning again until GB News and social media are banned in the UK.
I think it's simpler than that. The Tories ain't ever winning again.
Far too many Tories confuse 'once upon a time the Tories got vote shares of 40%+' with 'once upon a time 40%+ of voters liked the Tories'. They didn't. People voted Tory because it was the best way of keeping Labour out. The number of voters keen on a Cameroon-style Tory party is pretty slim. Reform is representing a shade of right-wing opinion which was always there - it hasn't just been created by social media and GB News.
But if the Tories are no longer the obvious 'not Labour' party it is hard to see what their future is.
For balance, almost exactly the same thing in reverse could be said of Labour. Most of Labour's vote was unenthusiastic about the Labour Party and was there largely as a not-Tory vote.
FWIW, I'm currently in the 'would vote Tory tomorrow' category.
But what happens if Reform under PM Nige suffers a similar catastrophic fall in popularity as befell Labour under PM Keir? Those voters have to go somewhere. Rupe's Restore is a possibility I suppose, but I suspect by then most would have tired of ultra-Right blazered posh boys.
That will be the poll that Restore will point to when they get more like 2% rather than the 12% indicated?
I did hear from a very deflated Tory canvasser that they comfortably found more Restore voters than Tory voters.
Their view is the Tories ain't ever winning again until GB News and social media are banned in the UK.
I think it's simpler than that. The Tories ain't ever winning again.
Far too many Tories confuse 'once upon a time the Tories got vote shares of 40%+' with 'once upon a time 40%+ of voters liked the Tories'. They didn't. People voted Tory because it was the best way of keeping Labour out. The number of voters keen on a Cameroon-style Tory party is pretty slim. Reform is representing a shade of right-wing opinion which was always there - it hasn't just been created by social media and GB News.
But if the Tories are no longer the obvious 'not Labour' party it is hard to see what their future is.
For balance, almost exactly the same thing in reverse could be said of Labour. Most of Labour's vote was unenthusiastic about the Labour Party and was there largely as a not-Tory vote.
FWIW, I'm currently in the 'would vote Tory tomorrow' category.
But what happens if Reform under PM Nige suffers a similar catastrophic fall in popularity as befell Labour under PM Keir? Those voters have to go somewhere. Rupe's Restore is a possibility I suppose, but I suspect by then most would have tired of ultra-Right blazered posh boys.
Yes, in the longer term the Tories are likely to recover, but they have a further bloodbath to survive first.
They need Reform to implode. A bad defeat in Makerfield could well be that catalyst.
Of the market in the header, I would see Tory most seats as the value bet.
The obvious counterpoint is No Ind compared to last time.
Local factors, there are always local factors.
Yes, we should focus on this one single result and ignore the the results of the May locals.
You and I campaigned for David Cameron, and I campaigned for the conservatives from the 1964 GE so I do not understand your animosity towards the conservative party of today so maybe it is fair to ask what do you want the conservative party to represent other than pro EU which is not on their agenda ?
You voted for Blair twice.
I want a fiscally sound, socially liberal policies, the rhetoric out of the mouths of Katie Lam and Nick Philip are the language out of Farage, the Tories will not win trying to out Reform Reform.
The best possible result for the Tories is for Burnham to become Labour leader and PM and shift Labour to the tax and spend left economically while Restore come a strong third in Makerfield. Then Kemi can offer a clearer contrast with Labour on economics than Reform can and appeal to middle class voters who don't want to pay more tax with Burnham and Farage also starts to leak white nationalist voters to Restore and has to go even harder to the nationalist right, sending some ex Tories who have flirted with Reform back home as they are more tolerant than the mass deporters are
The obvious counterpoint is No Ind compared to last time.
Local factors, there are always local factors.
Yes, we should focus on this one single result and ignore the the results of the May locals.
You and I campaigned for David Cameron, and I campaigned for the conservatives from the 1964 GE so I do not understand your animosity towards the conservative party of today so maybe it is fair to ask what do you want the conservative party to represent other than pro EU which is not on their agenda ?
You voted for Blair twice.
I want a fiscally sound, socially liberal policies, the rhetoric out of the mouths of Katie Lam and Nick Philip are the language out of Farage, the Tories will not win trying to out Reform Reform.
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
I guess that, given your location, a week looking at rows of fir trees will be unbelievably interesting.
Pending it becoming safe, you could try driving through Finland?
I am thinking of the Trans-Canadian as an alternative. It is pretty good value for fans of endless landscapes, forests and lakes
The Caledonian Sleeper is nice, well, it exists. It is impossible to sleep on it (it rattles and bumps) but you get some nice views of Scotland. It also has a dining car where you can get some food (if they don't run out) that may be heated (if the oven/microwave doesn't break down) on actual plates (if the dishwasher doesn't break down).
For the amount of money you would spend going to Siberia, you could spend about a week travelling up to Inverness, spend the day in Inverness, travel back to London, spend the day in London, then back up, and so on. There is a lounge in Euston where you can get a shower and catch up on the sleep you lost because it's impossible to sleep on the train. There is in theory also a lounge in Inverness, but it's usually shut "due to staff shortages".
The obvious counterpoint is No Ind compared to last time.
Local factors, there are always local factors.
Yes, we should focus on this one single result and ignore the the results of the May locals.
You and I campaigned for David Cameron, and I campaigned for the conservatives from the 1964 GE so I do not understand your animosity towards the conservative party of today so maybe it is fair to ask what do you want the conservative party to represent other than pro EU which is not on their agenda ?
The problems are that: a) Brexit was a deeply unserious policy that has cost the UK a significant proportion of its GDP- an estimated 140 billion directly and another 900 billion in the funds leaving the City, and with it 40,000 well paid city jobs. That is before we discuss the evisceration of our farmers and food processors and the regulatory drag for all trade with the EU- a cost that reduces our projected growth every single year. So Brexit is an economic mess, and the Uk economy is growing more fragile the longer we fail to address it. b) The advent of the Putin war and the Trump fiasco has left us militarily and strategically vulnerable, and the only viable way to maintain our strategic independence is to re-engage and indeed develop further our cooperation with NATO allies- which now includes all but 4 members of the EU- Ireland, Austria, Malta, Cyprus. Ireland,. Meanwhile Iceland is now likely to vote yes to the joining the EU in August, and this may trigger a Norwegian accession process. Even Canada is developing a much closer relationship than anything the Tories have proposed.
The obvious counterpoint is No Ind compared to last time.
Local factors, there are always local factors.
Yes, we should focus on this one single result and ignore the the results of the May locals.
You and I campaigned for David Cameron, and I campaigned for the conservatives from the 1964 GE so I do not understand your animosity towards the conservative party of today so maybe it is fair to ask what do you want the conservative party to represent other than pro EU which is not on their agenda ?
The problems are that: a) Brexit was a deeply unserious policy that has cost the UK a significant proportion of its GDP- an estimated 140 billion directly and another 900 billion in the funds leaving the City, and with it 40,000 well paid city jobs. That is before we discuss the evisceration of our farmers and food processors and the regulatory drag for all trade with the EU- a cost that reduces our projected growth every single year. So Brexit is an economic mess, and the Uk economy is growing more fragile the longer we fail to address it. b) The advent of the Putin war and the Trump fiasco has left us militarily and strategically vulnerable, and the only viable way to maintain our strategic independence is to re-engage and indeed develop further our cooperation with NATO allies- which now includes all but 4 members of the EU- Ireland, Austria, Malta, Cyprus. Ireland,. Meanwhile Iceland is now likely to vote yes to the joining the EU in August, and this may trigger a Norwegian accession process. Even Canada is developing a much closer relationship than anything the Tories have proposed.
Italy is building two modern attack submarines for €500 million a piece, which as far as I know are on budget. The latest Astute class submarine is costing about £2 billion to build, or about five times as much. Astute, when it's available unlike now, is nuclear powered and more capable. Which is the better choice for their respective armed forces?
Modern conventional attack submarines can stay under water for weeks at a time and are quieter than nuclear subs. They do not have the oceanic range of nuclear subs but in European waters such as the North sea, Baltic and Mediterranean are very capable.
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
My wife and I have the Trans-Siberian Express on our lifetime bucket list. The hope is that Russia becomes a friendly country by the time we retire.
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
I guess that, given your location, a week looking at rows of fir trees will be unbelievably interesting.
Pending it becoming safe, you could try driving through Finland?
I am thinking of the Trans-Canadian as an alternative. It is pretty good value for fans of endless landscapes, forests and lakes
The Caledonian Sleeper is nice, well, it exists. It is impossible to sleep on it (it rattles and bumps) but you get some nice views of Scotland. It also has a dining car where you can get some food (if they don't run out) that may be heated (if the oven/microwave doesn't break down) on actual plates (if the dishwasher doesn't break down).
For the amount of money you would spend going to Siberia, you could spend about a week travelling up to Inverness, spend the day in Inverness, travel back to London, spend the day in London, then back up, and so on. There is a lounge in Euston where you can get a shower and catch up on the sleep you lost because it's impossible to sleep on the train. There is in theory also a lounge in Inverness, but it's usually shut "due to staff shortages".
It’s also impossible to actually buy a ticket. I looked at it last summer, and checking in April it was already sold out through September for the 1st cabins.
It’s either breakfasts for poor kids or stopping the Russkis shooting them. At least Colonel Blimp was a sensitive, honourable man capable of change underneath the reactionary old fool, whereas this guy..
Lord Alan West: "Its all very well having nice spending for breakfast for children at school.. but if that means.. you have Russians stomping down your streets shooting the children who would have been having breakfast.."
Russians killing your kids. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT?
Comments
Burnham's support for cutting VAT on hospitality to 10% is demolished by Dan Niedle today:
https://www.thetimes.com/money/tax/article/this-tax-cut-would-be-incredibly-stupid-wkbd2b8fp
The largest beneficiary of such a VAT cut would be McDonalds.
It’s said that McDonald’s has made more people millionaires than any other company in history.
I had a great time in Russia when I was there for the World Cup and would love to go back to see some more of the sights. Being a Russophile doesn't mean being a Putinophile!
Russia's flaw is to be a country obsessed with the decline of its empire and also with its moment of glory in WW2. Very much a mirror to a certain country on the opposite end of Europe.
This is very different from most modern military planning - where even the ammunition is expensive and slow to make. Ammunition production is always the first target for cuts, because it isn't an obvious political point. And people say "If we have the weapon system, the ammunition can always be bought later".
Sadly this looks some way off at the moment.
Tom Tugendhat - Telegraph
Reform think if they can squeeze Restore then they have a chance.
I do feel the appeal myself. Would I rather spend some time chatting here to people really interested in politics or meeting actual friends with divergent interests and simulating interest in their recent visit to the seaside? I'm not sure - in theory I need to broaden my mind but in practice??
It would normally be impossible for a government to win a by-election if the Defence Secretary just resigned saying the country isn't safe under the PM and he is unwilling to do anything about it.
Their view is the Tories ain't ever winning again until GB News and social media are banned in the UK.
Pending it becoming safe, you could try driving through Finland?
Take the Straits of Hormouz as those are in the news. We have an interest in those being open and oil flowing freely from the Gulf States to the West. To be clear that is not advocating us getting involved in Trump’s stupidity, but more a current example of where our interests are wider than just machine gunning boats in the Channel as Restore would likely prioritise
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgzzndx780o
Perhaps they should have insisted on a hard border !
The traditional solid rocket motor manufacturers, in the US, are already squealing to Congress, because the military is placing larger and larger orders for larger and larger motor types with the new, cheaper entrants.
That's back to the Osborne Pasty Tax problem.
Yes it does look like a wonderful city, hope to visit there too.
My favourite city, that I’ve visited, is probably SIngapore.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/1943649#Comment_1943649
30+ years ago it was aspirational, now it deserves to go the same way as Pizza Hut.
The things that give her most life as a politician are the ones that are killing her chances of being PM.
The world needs to see Russia scampering back to its borders with its tail between its legs.
Then tailor defences to keeping them there.
If there's money for a tax cut then cut taxes for investment into manufacturing, or other industries with export potential.
People Who Lunch (mostly because they have time to Lunch, mostly because they don't need to work for a living) want lots of choice and cheap prices.
And they vote in huge numbers.
The seeker heads require a radar set, which again isn't an easy thing to build, and again a new plant to build them can't be constructed overnight.
So yes, it is a bit like building military airplanes.
You need tiered defences - Defences against drones, defences against aircraft and missiles, defences against ballistic missiles.
At the moment we actually lack very high end system to deal with ballistic missiles. The Type 45 Destroyers have some ABM capability, but it is limited by the missiles.
We have some drone defence systems and a fair number of smaller air defence systems.
Other people are working on solid rocket motors - among other things, new methods to cure the motors much faster.
Britain Elects
✅ Conservative HOLD
Christleton and Huntington (Cheshire West and Chester) council by-election result:
CON: 32.9% (+8.1)
GRN: 30.4% (+8.2)
REF: 17.2% (+17.2)
LAB: 10.5% (-8.1)
LDEM: 9.0% (-8.0)
No Ind (-17.4) as prev.
+/- 2023
Estimated turnout: ~44% (-3)
https://x.com/przemekshura/status/2065187498008232407
Make Russia out of fuel again, 2026!
Dacorum
LD 32.9% (-15.7)
RefUK 24.5% ( new)
Con 17.9% (-14.9)
Ind 9.5% ( new)
Green 8% ( new)
Lab 7.1 % (-11.5)
+/- 2023.
One more in Slough counting today.
Ukraine has its own program (in conjunction with Germany, France and Norway) to build a cheaper Patriot alternative.
https://www.twz.com/land/ukraine-tests-new-missile-in-hopes-of-leading-to-low-cost-patriot-interceptor-alternative
But the reality is that there isn't an existing, significantly cheaper alternative with similar specifications, and scaling up Patriot production is non trivial.
The obvious counterpoint is No Ind compared to last time.
Local factors, there are always local factors.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp98n1eg443o
The old methods do not work.
The sort of voters they'd have had between 2010 and 2020, are either with Labour, Lib Dems, or won't vote. I see little evidence the "Cameron types" are coming back, because Badenoch hasn't yet said anything to them.
🇬🇧 UK Defence Secretary resigns, because the Prime Minister refuses to fund the British Armed Forces
🇮🇹 Italy approves Armed Forces increase by 40,000 troops, adding a division to the Army
https://x.com/noclador/status/2065057426877956496
Have the Scots turning up at Buc-ee’s
https://x.com/shaunvlog_/status/2065160101514637776
Maybe the British people are adopting a more insular worldview, shrinking back from the world and relying on others to protect it. Wouldn't be the first country to surrender control over its destiny in such a way.
Social conservatism is almost always a euphemism for bigotry.
My favourite was in an interview about growing up that they had a colour telly with a control that made everything more fauvist
Nice bloke. No side to him, as we say round here.
Polanski's suggested policy of banning a furrin' religious practise would be considered, by some, social conservatism.
But is it?
Far too many Tories confuse 'once upon a time the Tories got vote shares of 40%+' with 'once upon a time 40%+ of voters liked the Tories'. They didn't. People voted Tory because it was the best way of keeping Labour out. The number of voters keen on a Cameroon-style Tory party is pretty slim. Reform is representing a shade of right-wing opinion which was always there - it hasn't just been created by social media and GB News.
But if the Tories are no longer the obvious 'not Labour' party it is hard to see what their future is.
For balance, almost exactly the same thing in reverse could be said of Labour. Most of Labour's vote was unenthusiastic about the Labour Party and was there largely as a not-Tory vote.
FWIW, I'm currently in the 'would vote Tory tomorrow' category.
Ignoring the constraints of reality (on the left), and believing in fantasy solutions (on the right) only makes things worse.
RFM: 27% (=)
LAB: 20% (=)
CON: 19% (=)
GRN: 13% (-2)
LDM: 12% (=)
SNP: 3% (+1)
Via
@GoodGrowthFdn
, 31 May - 7 Jun.
Changes w/ 27 Mar - 1 Apr.
https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2065036994774745316?s=20
Philosopher John Gray explains at about 29 mins 16 secs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hC5nXXJrV8&start=1756
a) Brexit was a deeply unserious policy that has cost the UK a significant proportion of its GDP- an estimated 140 billion directly and another 900 billion in the funds leaving the City, and with it 40,000 well paid city jobs. That is before we discuss the evisceration of our farmers and food processors and the regulatory drag for all trade with the EU- a cost that reduces our projected growth every single year. So Brexit is an economic mess, and the Uk economy is growing more fragile the longer we fail to address it.
b) The advent of the Putin war and the Trump fiasco has left us militarily and strategically vulnerable, and the only viable way to maintain our strategic independence is to re-engage and indeed develop further our cooperation with NATO allies- which now includes all but 4 members of the EU- Ireland, Austria, Malta, Cyprus. Ireland,. Meanwhile Iceland is now likely to vote yes to the joining the EU in August, and this may trigger a Norwegian accession process. Even Canada is developing a much closer relationship than anything the Tories have proposed.
So the Tories need to get serious. Now.
I want a fiscally sound, socially liberal policies, the rhetoric out of the mouths of Katie Lam and Nick Philip are the language out of Farage, the Tories will not win trying to out Reform Reform.
Greens have a very localist and democratic grass roots system for raising and debating policy and ideas. It has to pass conference to become policy and is unlikely to do so.
They need Reform to implode. A bad defeat in Makerfield could well be that catalyst.
Of the market in the header, I would see Tory most seats as the value bet.
TSE clearly keeps an archive of my posts
For the amount of money you would spend going to Siberia, you could spend about a week travelling up to Inverness, spend the day in Inverness, travel back to London, spend the day in London, then back up, and so on. There is a lounge in Euston where you can get a shower and catch up on the sleep you lost because it's impossible to sleep on the train. There is in theory also a lounge in Inverness, but it's usually shut "due to staff shortages".
https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Attraction_Review-g186338-d19121695-Reviews-Caledonian_Sleeper_Train-London_England.html
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/war-games-swedish-stealth-submarine-sank-us-aircraft-carrier-116216
At least Colonel Blimp was a sensitive, honourable man capable of change underneath the reactionary old fool, whereas this guy..
Lord Alan West: "Its all very well having nice spending for breakfast for children at school.. but if that means.. you have Russians stomping down your streets shooting the children who would have been having breakfast.."
Russians killing your kids. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT?
https://x.com/saulstaniforth/status/2065301442752070026?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q