Well who wudda thunk it?! The Starmer-Reeves defence spending plan assumes £10 billion in defence ‘efficiencies’/savings — and leaves Andy Burnham to find a further £5 billion for defence in the next Budget for the figures to add up. Starmer-Reeves — shysters til the very end.
Ronald Reagan: “You can go to live in France, but you cannot become a Frenchman…But Anyone, from any corner of the Earth, can come to live in America and become an American…This, I believe, is one of the most important sources of America's greatness.”🇺🇸
A great bit of oratory that appeals to the American sense of exceptionalism, but simply isn't true if you take a casual glance at France's football team for example, or indeed our own.
In fact, every American claim of their own exceptionalism I've ever heard breaks down the instant you start analysing it.
OK, maybe not school shootings or racially motivated lynchings, but I'm not quite sure that's what Reagan would have had in mind.
But Americans are brought up with this bullshit, know basically nothing about foreign countries and love to hear how amazing they are so they fall for it every time.
Well who wudda thunk it?! The Starmer-Reeves defence spending plan assumes £10 billion in defence ‘efficiencies’/savings — and leaves Andy Burnham to find a further £5 billion for defence in the next Budget for the figures to add up. Starmer-Reeves — shysters til the very end.
I was going to say he was good in the Star Wars films, but to my surprise he wasn't in any of them. Apparently he played Peter Guillam in "Smiley's People", which messes with my head because my head insists Peter Guillam is Peter Jayston or Benedict Cumberbatch. Weirdly the 2011 film pointlessly made Guillam gay, and I think the relentless heterosexuality of his appearance in 2017's "A Legacy Of Spies" was LeCarre's rebuff.
No, you silly bastards, it has been amended 18 times in US History. The first 10 Amendments were passed en bloc (although there were meant to be 12, but the first two failed to get through).
Ironically, what was meant to be the Second Amendment is the 27th amendment.
Arguably each of 1-10 were separate amendments to the constitution even if they were passed simultaneously. I’m sure you know the history better than I do but the fact that the first 2 failed to be passed meant that there were separate decisions made
Not exactly. They were voted on as individual bills in each legislature (hence why two did not pass at the time) but the ratification was conveyed simultaneously. So the constitution was only amended once for all ten.
Ah but pedantic betting while it was only amended once for all ten it was accomplished ten times, each of the times the ten of the 12 proposed amendments passed ratification processes was it being accomplished.
So it has been amended 18 times, but accomplished 27 times.
Aaron Rupar @atrupar · 1h Trump: "I would like to congratulate President Xi, and the Great Country of China, on their massive Birthright Citizenship WIN! President DONALD J. TRUMP"
Getting slightly bored of dead French towns - however beautiful - that have one bar open, maybe. And they close at 7.45pm except Fridays and the Feast of Saint Hilaire when they, obviously, close earlier
Getting slightly bored of dead French towns - however beautiful - that have one bar open, maybe. And they close at 7.45pm except Fridays and the Feast of Saint Hilaire when they, obviously, close earlier
Aaron Rupar @atrupar · 1h Trump: "I would like to congratulate President Xi, and the Great Country of China, on their massive Birthright Citizenship WIN! President DONALD J. TRUMP"
Eh???
100,000 Chinese "birth tourists" annually. Would have thought the trick is not to let pregnant Chinese (or any) women in, rather than get the SC to try to break the Constitution.
Getting slightly bored of dead French towns - however beautiful - that have one bar open, maybe. And they close at 7.45pm except Fridays and the Feast of Saint Hilaire when they, obviously, close earlier
Aaron Rupar @atrupar · 1h Trump: "I would like to congratulate President Xi, and the Great Country of China, on their massive Birthright Citizenship WIN! President DONALD J. TRUMP"
Eh???
100,000 Chinese "birth tourists" annually. Would have thought the trick is not to let pregnant Chinese (or any) women in, rather than get the SC to try to break the Constitution.
The slightly weird bit is that these birth tourists are getting US citizenship for their kids because they are worried about the Chinese government, not because they are instruments of it.
If Burnham did appoint Ed Miliband Chancellor that would be a clear shift left for Labour to a tax and spend agenda and while it would squeeze the Greens it could offer the Tories and LDs some opportunity to win over centrist swing voters. David Miliband back as Foreign Secretary would be a better move in my view, he may be a bit aloof but has excellent international contacts from his role at International Rescue and having done the job previously. He would also allow Burnham to focus more on domestic policy
David Miliband is like one of those footballers or other sports players who are out injured for ages and the longer they are out “the better they get” as people forget that they were pretty ordinary.
I honestly cannot remember anything special that he did as an MP, any great ideas or insights and frankly I think he came across as a bit of an awkward geek.
Maybe the years earning millions for an international charity have help him develop some great policies.
In many ways David Miliband is Labour's Liz Truss. A slightly odd think-tank adjacent figure promoted rapidly through the party while it was in a position of ascendency who eventually reached the position of foreign secretary. Their paths only diverged because Boris Johnson resigned whereas Gordon Brown lost an election.
Except David Miliband is far more centrist and less idological than Liz Truss
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
Aaron Rupar @atrupar · 1h Trump: "I would like to congratulate President Xi, and the Great Country of China, on their massive Birthright Citizenship WIN! President DONALD J. TRUMP"
Eh???
Just Trump being racist about US citizens of Chinese ancestry.
I was going to say he was good in the Star Wars films, but to my surprise he wasn't in any of them. Apparently he played Peter Guillam in "Smiley's People", which messes with my head because my head insists Peter Guillam is Peter Jayston or Benedict Cumberbatch. Weirdly the 2011 film pointlessly made Guillam gay, and I think the relentless heterosexuality of his appearance in 2017's "A Legacy Of Spies" was LeCarre's rebuff.
Digression off the point? Me? Never!
I hate to do this but it’s Michael Jayston, as in the Valeyadd.
I’d never watch the 2011 film
The BluRay of Tinker Tailor/Smileys People is banging
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
What are you smoking? Russia has no claim on Ukraine.
Getting slightly bored of dead French towns - however beautiful - that have one bar open, maybe. And they close at 7.45pm except Fridays and the Feast of Saint Hilaire when they, obviously, close earlier
Miliband as Chancellor is probably the only hope within the next decade of dealing with some of Britain's structural economic problems, and gaining some sustained, industrially-led growth.
Jim O' Neil, who is very far from the supposed deranged Marxists of fevered press imagination suoporting such a plan, understands very well that the image of his supposed 'incompetence' is just a function of Reeves and Starmer removing the industrial growth part of his programme, making it incoherent.
He's in fact one of the most competent of all the current crop of Labour MP's.
Ronald Reagan: “You can go to live in France, but you cannot become a Frenchman…But Anyone, from any corner of the Earth, can come to live in America and become an American…This, I believe, is one of the most important sources of America's greatness.”🇺🇸
A great bit of oratory that appeals to the American sense of exceptionalism, but simply isn't true if you take a casual glance at France's football team for example, or indeed our own.
In fact, every American claim of their own exceptionalism I've ever heard breaks down the instant you start analysing it.
OK, maybe not school shootings or racially motivated lynchings, but I'm not quite sure that's what Reagan would have had in mind.
But Americans are brought up with this bullshit, know basically nothing about foreign countries and love to hear how amazing they are so they fall for it every time.
This is not American exceptionalism. Well it is, but it misses the point. It is the opposite of Trump's nativism. That is why it is tweeted by Republicans Against Trump. It is America as the ‘shining city on a hill’. It is ‘give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses’.
Getting slightly bored of dead French towns - however beautiful - that have one bar open, maybe. And they close at 7.45pm except Fridays and the Feast of Saint Hilaire when they, obviously, close earlier
Miliband as Chancellor is probably the only hope within the next decade of dealing with some of Britain's structural economic problems, and gaining some sustained, industrially-led growth.
Jim O' Neil, who is very far from the supposed deranged Marxists of fevered press imagination suoporting such a plan, understands very well that the image of his supposed 'incompetence' is just a function of Reeves and Starmer removing the industrial growth part of his programme, making it incoherent.
He's in fact one of the most competent of all the current crop of Labour MP's.
Miliband as Chancellor is probably the only hope within the next decade of dealing with some of Britain's structural economic problems, and gaining some sustained, industrially-led growth.
Jim O' Neil, who is very far from the supposed deranged Marxists of fevered press imagination suoporting such a plan, understands very well that the image of his supposed 'incompetence' is just a function of Reeves and Starmer removing the industrial growth part of his programme, making it incoherent.
He's in fact one of the most competent of all the current crop of Labour MP's.
Dopey was the tallest of the Seven Dwarves.
Perhaps, but Dopey didn't come from an academic intellectual family background quite different from most of the others.
He may not have been the right fit as Labour leader, but he's certainly able and bright.
I was going to say he was good in the Star Wars films, but to my surprise he wasn't in any of them. Apparently he played Peter Guillam in "Smiley's People", which messes with my head because my head insists Peter Guillam is Peter Jayston or Benedict Cumberbatch. Weirdly the 2011 film pointlessly made Guillam gay, and I think the relentless heterosexuality of his appearance in 2017's "A Legacy Of Spies" was LeCarre's rebuff.
Digression off the point? Me? Never!
He wasn't in Star Wars but he was a Nazi in Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade with lots of other Star Wars actors.
The DNE looks like it's done the best out of the DIP, and that's really only properly funding what was previously committed to anyway. The RAF next best, as it's prioritised air defence and FCAS.
It's slim pickings for the Army, which should really be expanded to 85-90k personnel right now to permanently field a full mechanized division in Europe, and I'd be very worried if I were the Royal Navy - no real capability increase at all, just a gamble on autonomous platforms and a few cancellations. So that'll continue to be shit.
My take is the full £28bn was asked for a very good reason. This won't fix it, and isn't the end of it.
" There is also an expectation that the armed forces will find £10.7 billion in efficiency savings over the next four years."
So even that half-arsed DIP isn't fully funded then.
Of course it isn't; the increase in spending since the ministerial resignations falls way short of that.
What it does is to commit funding to a few specific things (£2bn a year towards GCAP, for example), and throw the rest of the fuzzy bundle at Burnham and his new cabinet to sort out.
Miliband as Chancellor is probably the only hope within the next decade of dealing with some of Britain's structural economic problems, and gaining some sustained, industrially-led growth.
Jim O' Neil, who is very far from the supposed deranged Marxists of fevered press imagination suoporting such a plan, understands very well that the image of his supposed 'incompetence' is just a function of Reeves and Starmer removing the industrial growth part of his programme, making it incoherent.
He's in fact one of the most competent of all the current crop of Labour MP's.
Dopey was the tallest of the Seven Dwarves.
Perhaps, but Dopey didn't come from an academic intellectual family background quite different from most of the others.
He may not have been the right fit as Labour leader, but he's certainly able and bright.
However, and I say this as someone who voted for him for party leader, his policy on oil & gas production is fecking bonkers.
'What’s happening on the battle for the right? Reform continue to hold a big lead on who people would pick as the main party of the right, but their lead has halved from 26pts over the Tories on that question in May to 12pts in June.
What impact is Restore having. In hypothetical polling Restore gets 6% of the vote of which the majority is taken from those who would otherwise vote Reform. This is comparison in same poll with last weeks voting intention.'
" There is also an expectation that the armed forces will find £10.7 billion in efficiency savings over the next four years."
So even that half-arsed DIP isn't fully funded then.
Of course it isn't; the increase in spending since the ministerial resignations falls way short of that.
What it does is to commit funding to a few specific things (£2bn a year towards GCAP, for example), and throw the rest of the fuzzy bundle at Burnham and his new cabinet to sort out.
Yes, it backs Tempest. And some drones and autonomous platforms, TBC.
Miliband as Chancellor is probably the only hope within the next decade of dealing with some of Britain's structural economic problems, and gaining some sustained, industrially-led growth.
Jim O' Neil, who is very far from the supposed deranged Marxists of fevered press imagination suoporting such a plan, understands very well that the image of his supposed 'incompetence' is just a function of Reeves and Starmer removing the industrial growth part of his programme, making it incoherent.
He's in fact one of the most competent of all the current crop of Labour MP's.
Dopey was the tallest of the Seven Dwarves.
Perhaps, but Dopey didn't come from an academic intellectual family background quite different from most of the others.
He may not have been the right fit as Labour leader, but he's certainly able and bright.
However, and I say this as someone who voted for him for party leader, his policy on oil & gas production is fecking bonkers.
Well, I woulf say it looks bonkers to a significant extent because of Starrmer and Reeves' odd decisions.
Miliband's pollcy would look a lot less bonkers in its original context, if Starmer, Reeves and McSweeney hadn't taken fright of Sunak's politicking on the subject in 2024, and then made the bizarre decision to axe half the plans.
What's extraordinary of the Thomas and Alito dissents is how guilty they are of doing what they claim to oppose: legislating from the bench.
They're not even legislating; they are purporting to rewrite the plain text of the constitution, something that the legislative process itself cannot on its own do. (And no, I don't buy the "reinterpreting" nonsense. This is settled law since the amendment was enacted, and there is no even vaguely convincing rationale for abandoning stare decisis.)
You could fairly describe Roe v Wade (for example) as legislating, since it found a right within the bounds of the then existing constitution - and that to a greater or lesser extent goes for many (most ?) SC decisions. What Thomas and Alito were attempting here was another thing again.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
What are you smoking? Russia has no claim on Ukraine.
Absolute cream crackers.
Not to mention the explicit threats to Eastern European allies.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Winnie the Pooh with dementia and one leg amputated but also that ursine from Cocaine Bear with coke psychosis; it’s all very confusing.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
It saves the powers-that-be from looking at the real threats.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Maybe what they're really worried about is being dictated to by a victorious Ukraine.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
How much ozempic and hip replacements could you buy to get people back to work for the cost of an instantly mothballed new naval ship?
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Let me introduce you the concept of asymmetrical warfare.
Let me remind you that Russia was behind the arson on the properties of the Prime Minister.
Let me remind you on more than one occasion Russia has used biological weapons on the streets of Britain and it it sheer luck that they didn't turn into massive casualty events.
The DNE looks like it's done the best out of the DIP, and that's really only properly funding what was previously committed to anyway. The RAF next best, as it's prioritised air defence and FCAS.
It's slim pickings for the Army, which should really be expanded to 85-90k personnel right now to permanently field a full mechanized division in Europe
"Right now" is completely unrealistic, I'm afraid.
There's both an awful lot of rebuilding to do, and also figuring out how our ground forces might fight future wars, before we could contemplate spending the billions that would require. Even if we could magic up the troop numbers, the vehicles don't exist, and would take years to assemble.
In the meantime the front line European states are rebuilding their ground forces far faster than us.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
It saves the powers-that-be from looking at the real threats.
Russia is a threat, but not in a conventional military sense. The threat comes from its influence on our politics and civil peace from its bots and troll farms, and from cyber attacks on our infrastructure.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Let me introduce you the concept of asymmetrical warfare.
Let me remind you that Russia was behind the arson on the properties of the Prime Minister.
Let me remind you on more than one occasion Russia has used chemical weapons on the streets of Britain and it it sheer luck that they didn't turn into massive casualties events.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Let me introduce you the concept of asymmetrical warfare.
Let me remind you that Russia was behind the arson on the properties of the Prime Minister.
Let me remind you on more than one occasion Russia has used chemical weapons on the streets of Britain and it it sheer luck that they didn't turn into massive casualties events.
Aaron Rupar @atrupar · 1h Trump: "I would like to congratulate President Xi, and the Great Country of China, on their massive Birthright Citizenship WIN! President DONALD J. TRUMP"
Eh???
100,000 Chinese "birth tourists" annually. Would have thought the trick is not to let pregnant Chinese (or any) women in, rather than get the SC to try to break the Constitution.
The slightly weird bit is that these birth tourists are getting US citizenship for their kids because they are worried about the Chinese government, not because they are instruments of it.
That's not really weird though. It's just standard MAGA shithousery to ignore the reality of the situation and see how they can twist it to fit their narrative of a country besieged by hostile immigrants.
I was going to say he was good in the Star Wars films, but to my surprise he wasn't in any of them. Apparently he played Peter Guillam in "Smiley's People", which messes with my head because my head insists Peter Guillam is Peter Jayston or Benedict Cumberbatch. Weirdly the 2011 film pointlessly made Guillam gay, and I think the relentless heterosexuality of his appearance in 2017's "A Legacy Of Spies" was LeCarre's rebuff.
Digression off the point? Me? Never!
I hate to do this but it’s Michael Jayston, as in the Valeyadd.
I’d never watch the 2011 film
The BluRay of Tinker Tailor/Smileys People is banging
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Let me introduce you the concept of asymmetrical warfare.
Let me remind you that Russia was behind the arson on the properties of the Prime Minister.
Let me remind you on more than one occasion Russia has used chemical weapons on the streets of Britain and it it sheer luck that they didn't turn into massive casualties events.
How do new ships and tanks protect us from that?
It is security theatre on a national scale.
Because the Russian fleets keeps on trying to attack our infrastructure.
I was going to say he was good in the Star Wars films, but to my surprise he wasn't in any of them. Apparently he played Peter Guillam in "Smiley's People", which messes with my head because my head insists Peter Guillam is Peter Jayston or Benedict Cumberbatch. Weirdly the 2011 film pointlessly made Guillam gay, and I think the relentless heterosexuality of his appearance in 2017's "A Legacy Of Spies" was LeCarre's rebuff.
Digression off the point? Me? Never!
I hate to do this but it’s Michael Jayston, as in the Valeyadd.
I’d never watch the 2011 film
The BluRay of Tinker Tailor/Smileys People is banging
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Let me introduce you the concept of asymmetrical warfare.
Let me remind you that Russia was behind the arson on the properties of the Prime Minister.
Let me remind you on more than one occasion Russia has used chemical weapons on the streets of Britain and it it sheer luck that they didn't turn into massive casualties events.
How do new ships and tanks protect us from that?
It is security theatre on a national scale.
Because the Russian fleets keeps on trying to attack our infrastructure.
How does that protect about Arson on Starmer or spies with chemical weapons?
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
It saves the powers-that-be from looking at the real threats.
Russia is a threat, but not in a conventional military sense. The threat comes from its influence on our politics and civil peace from its bots and troll farms, and from cyber attacks on our infrastructure.
And from Russia's (and China's) physical attacks on undersea cables carrying communications, internet and electricity. That's one reason we need more ships for the sodding navy.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Let me introduce you the concept of asymmetrical warfare.
Let me remind you that Russia was behind the arson on the properties of the Prime Minister.
Let me remind you on more than one occasion Russia has used chemical weapons on the streets of Britain and it it sheer luck that they didn't turn into massive casualties events.
How do new ships and tanks protect us from that?
It is security theatre on a national scale.
The new ships are intended primarily for air defence. Since we have little in the way of ground based air defence in the UK, they're potentially quite useful for national defence. "New tanks" don't really feature in the current DiP.
TSE's examples are evidence of Russian malign intent rather than something air defence would deal with, and of course you know that ?
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Let me introduce you the concept of asymmetrical warfare.
Let me remind you that Russia was behind the arson on the properties of the Prime Minister.
Let me remind you on more than one occasion Russia has used chemical weapons on the streets of Britain and it it sheer luck that they didn't turn into massive casualties events.
How do new ships and tanks protect us from that?
It is security theatre on a national scale.
It’s part of a structure of defence.
If we want to go down the root of “X doesn’t protect the country from attack Y” - NHS spending doesn’t help with cyber warfare. So we don’t need to spend on…
I was going to say he was good in the Star Wars films, but to my surprise he wasn't in any of them. Apparently he played Peter Guillam in "Smiley's People", which messes with my head because my head insists Peter Guillam is Peter Jayston or Benedict Cumberbatch. Weirdly the 2011 film pointlessly made Guillam gay, and I think the relentless heterosexuality of his appearance in 2017's "A Legacy Of Spies" was LeCarre's rebuff.
Digression off the point? Me? Never!
I hate to do this but it’s Michael Jayston, as in the Valeyadd.
I’d never watch the 2011 film
The BluRay of Tinker Tailor/Smileys People is banging
Related - I was re-listening to the BBC Radio version of 'The Quiet American' (starring Iain Holm) recently. It's on youtube (which I assume has passed googles ultra-strict copyright checks). Not sure if it's geo-locked mind you.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Let me introduce you the concept of asymmetrical warfare.
Let me remind you that Russia was behind the arson on the properties of the Prime Minister.
Let me remind you on more than one occasion Russia has used chemical weapons on the streets of Britain and it it sheer luck that they didn't turn into massive casualties events.
How do new ships and tanks protect us from that?
It is security theatre on a national scale.
Because the Russian fleets keeps on trying to attack our infrastructure.
How does that protect about Arson on Starmer or spies with chemical weapons?
Trump's attempt to remove Birthright citizenship rights has been rejected by the Supreme Court.
For more interesting than rumours regarding who will get a new job when Burnham is PM
At this point, anyone arguing that SCOTUS is a tool of Trump, or some equivalent, is disqualifying themselves from being taken seriously.
You mean, apart from the three dissenters who said that the Fourteenth Amendment should be ignored because it was something to do with Dems being Woke and all immigrants are basically traitors?
Essentially, declaring that the Constiution is whatever Trump says it is, however astonishing a position that would be to take for an honest judge.
(OK, so there was no honest judge in the dissent, but you get my point.)
Three out of nine can't do anything alone.
What this court is is what it has been since the last appointment - three who will take the GOP position no matter what, three who will take the Dem position no matter what - and three who will decide based on what the law actually is.
That's obviously not as good as having zero, zero and nine, but it's probably the best we can hope for under current conditions.
The idea that "Trump will get his way because the GOP controls SCOTUS" has been clearly shown in the latest batch of judgments to be what it always was - complete bollocks.
Trump's attempt to remove Birthright citizenship rights has been rejected by the Supreme Court.
For more interesting than rumours regarding who will get a new job when Burnham is PM
At this point, anyone arguing that SCOTUS is a tool of Trump, or some equivalent, is disqualifying themselves from being taken seriously.
You mean, apart from the three dissenters who said that the Fourteenth Amendment should be ignored because it was something to do with Dems being Woke and all immigrants are basically traitors?
Essentially, declaring that the Constiution is whatever Trump says it is, however astonishing a position that would be to take for an honest judge.
(OK, so there was no honest judge in the dissent, but you get my point.)
Three out of nine can't do anything alone.
What this court is is what it has been since the last appointment - three who will take the GOP position no matter what, three who will take the Dem position no matter what - and three who will decide based on what the law actually is.
That's obviously not as good as having zero, zero and nine, but it's probably the best we can hope for under current conditions.
The idea that "Trump will get his way because the GOP controls SCOTUS" has been clearly shown in the latest batch of judgments to be what it always was - complete bollocks.
No, because on some judgements, more have sided with the GOP position on entirely flimsy grounds. They don't kowtow all the time, but they do done of the time.
When it comes to constitutional analysis, "flimsy grounds" are very much in the eye of the beholder.
Plenty of court judgements are made on frankly ludicrous grounds for partisan reasons (and not just in the US). Roe v Wade would be a classic example.
But this isn't even arguable. Anyone born in the US is a US citizen. That's what it says in black and white and plain English.
Just as anyone is entitled to bear arms.
Are they laws we would have today? No.
Are they sensible laws? The first arguably no, the second definitely no (the Second Amendment is the craziest law ever proposed, never mind made, not forgetting the legislature of Indiana wanted to make pi=4).
Are they stuck with them because their constitution? Yes.
They’re not stuck with them. They can change the constitution. Amendments were relatively common through to the 26th in 1971. After the initial 10, there were 16 from 1792 to 1971, which is just under one a decade. But there’s only been one since 1971, which was the 27th, ratified in 1992, having been proposed in 1789.
The 26th amendment, which lowered the voting age to 18, took a mere 100 days to be passed. It’s not easy to pass an amendment, but it’s perfectly doable. If the Republicans elected a leader who was interested in bipartisanship rather than demonising his opponents as Communists, they would be in a position to make their case. However, the GOP has adopted a strategy of eking out narrow wins in the electoral college and Senate, combined with lawfare at the Supreme Court, instead.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
It saves the powers-that-be from looking at the real threats.
Russia is a threat, but not in a conventional military sense. The threat comes from its influence on our politics and civil peace from its bots and troll farms, and from cyber attacks on our infrastructure.
And from Russia's (and China's) physical attacks on undersea cables carrying communications, internet and electricity. That's one reason we need more ships for the sodding navy.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Perhaps we should invade the bastards while they are otherwise occupied and down on their knees. I am sure the Russian population would be happy to be part of Greater Finland. They must be desperate for a MaccieDs.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
It saves the powers-that-be from looking at the real threats.
Russia is a threat, but not in a conventional military sense. The threat comes from its influence on our politics and civil peace from its bots and troll farms, and from cyber attacks on our infrastructure.
And from Russia's (and China's) physical attacks on undersea cables carrying communications, internet and electricity. That's one reason we need more ships for the sodding navy.
Scrap the carriers and build something useful.
Except for the carriers being used, already in exercise to defend the Baltics and Poland.
During the Cold War, the USSR spent incredible resources to try and build systems to locate and destroy carriers. Most of that is long gone - but the fear of mobile air power is evident in a lot of their military publications.
This is why Putin bangs on about RORSAT 2.0 and spends a fortune trying to keep the Oscar class subs going.
Aaron Rupar @atrupar · 1h Trump: "I would like to congratulate President Xi, and the Great Country of China, on their massive Birthright Citizenship WIN! President DONALD J. TRUMP"
Eh???
100,000 Chinese "birth tourists" annually. Would have thought the trick is not to let pregnant Chinese (or any) women in, rather than get the SC to try to break the Constitution.
Guess what? Like most things MAGA, those numbers are made up. The Center for Immigration Studies, who are an anti-immigration thinktank, estimates 20k-26k “birth tourists” annually from all countries put together.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Perhaps we should invade the bastards while they are otherwise occupied and down on their knees. I am sure the Russian population would be happy to be part of Greater Finland. They must be desperate for a MaccieDs.
When I was in St Petersburg for the 2018 World Cup, I did visit the Finland Station to admire Lenin's train and statue of him addressing the crowds. There is a Burger King there, but I didn't see Maccy D's.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
It saves the powers-that-be from looking at the real threats.
Russia is a threat, but not in a conventional military sense. The threat comes from its influence on our politics and civil peace from its bots and troll farms, and from cyber attacks on our infrastructure.
And from Russia's (and China's) physical attacks on undersea cables carrying communications, internet and electricity. That's one reason we need more ships for the sodding navy.
Scrap the carriers and build something useful.
Except for the carriers being used, already in exercise to defend the Baltics and Poland.
During the Cold War, the USSR spent incredible resources to try and build systems to locate and destroy carriers. Most of that is long gone - but the fear of mobile air power is evident in a lot of their military publications.
This is why Putin bangs on about RORSAT 2.0 and spends a fortune trying to keep the Oscar class subs going.
Daft Idea. Ground based aircraft can reach anywhere in the Baltics or Poland, and are not handicapped by being on a large floating target.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Let me introduce you the concept of asymmetrical warfare.
Let me remind you that Russia was behind the arson on the properties of the Prime Minister.
Let me remind you on more than one occasion Russia has used chemical weapons on the streets of Britain and it it sheer luck that they didn't turn into massive casualties events.
How do new ships and tanks protect us from that?
It is security theatre on a national scale.
Because the Russian fleets keeps on trying to attack our infrastructure.
How does that protect about Arson on Starmer or spies with chemical weapons?
It's part of a broader defence policy.
After 14 years of underspending by Conservative led govts it must be a relief to Conservatives that there's now a Labour govt they can bully into increasing defence spending. Particularly as it's at the expense of Labour policies.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Let me introduce you the concept of asymmetrical warfare.
Let me remind you that Russia was behind the arson on the properties of the Prime Minister.
Let me remind you on more than one occasion Russia has used biological weapons on the streets of Britain and it it sheer luck that they didn't turn into massive casualty events.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
Let me introduce you the concept of asymmetrical warfare.
Let me remind you that Russia was behind the arson on the properties of the Prime Minister.
Let me remind you on more than one occasion Russia has used chemical weapons on the streets of Britain and it it sheer luck that they didn't turn into massive casualties events.
How do new ships and tanks protect us from that?
It is security theatre on a national scale.
Because the Russian fleets keeps on trying to attack our infrastructure.
How does that protect about Arson on Starmer or spies with chemical weapons?
It's part of a broader defence policy.
After 14 years of underspending by Conservative led govts it must be a relief to Conservatives that there's now a Labour govt they can bully into increasing defence spending. Particularly as it's at the expense of Labour policies.
Pre the election I chastised the Conservatives over defence.
Does anyone else wonder whether these Colonel Blimps know what they're talking about when they say we'll be invaded by Russia in 2030? It's bonkers! Can't they make the leap that Ukraine was invaded because Russia has a claim on it? I don't think even that batty soldier who's spent too long under the sun lamp can think they have a similar claim to the UK.
It is Scrödingers Russia: similtaneously collapsing in chaos due to fuel shortages and unable to occupy a Donbas colliery, and also a major military threat requiring every country in Europe to spend tens of Billions on boy-toys.
It saves the powers-that-be from looking at the real threats.
Russia is a threat, but not in a conventional military sense. The threat comes from its influence on our politics and civil peace from its bots and troll farms, and from cyber attacks on our infrastructure.
And from Russia's (and China's) physical attacks on undersea cables carrying communications, internet and electricity. That's one reason we need more ships for the sodding navy.
Scrap the carriers and build something useful.
Yeah, with hindsight buying two carriers looks a bit hubristic. We can't protect them, we can't crew them, and they don't have enough planes. The original rationale was to coordinate with US Navy carrier groups but President Trump has rather put the kybosh on that one.
Comments
https://x.com/afneil/status/2072014638175203377
Well who wudda thunk it?! The Starmer-Reeves defence spending plan assumes £10 billion in defence ‘efficiencies’/savings — and leaves Andy Burnham to find a further £5 billion for defence in the next Budget for the figures to add up. Starmer-Reeves — shysters til the very end.
OK, maybe not school shootings or racially motivated lynchings, but I'm not quite sure that's what Reagan would have had in mind.
But Americans are brought up with this bullshit, know basically nothing about foreign countries and love to hear how amazing they are so they fall for it every time.
Digression off the point? Me? Never!
So it has been amended 18 times, but accomplished 27 times.
@atrupar
·
1h
Trump: "I would like to congratulate President Xi, and the Great Country of China, on their massive Birthright Citizenship WIN! President DONALD J. TRUMP"
Eh???
Hard times, my friends, hard times...
sean thomas knox
@thomasknox
Getting slightly bored of dead French towns - however beautiful - that have one bar open, maybe. And they close at 7.45pm except Fridays and the Feast of Saint Hilaire when they, obviously, close earlier
https://x.com/thomasknox/status/2072009657627898186
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/bystanders-desperately-tried-save-elderly-34208730?
I’d never watch the 2011 film
The BluRay of Tinker Tailor/Smileys People is banging
Next week we go to see this
https://www.theatreroyal.co.uk/whats-on/spy-who-came-in-from-the-cold/
Absolute cream crackers.
Miliband as Chancellor is probably the only hope within the next decade of dealing with some of Britain's structural economic problems, and gaining some sustained, industrially-led growth.
Jim O' Neil, who is very far from the supposed deranged Marxists of fevered press imagination suoporting such a plan, understands very well that the image of his supposed 'incompetence' is just a function of Reeves and Starmer removing the industrial growth part of his programme, making it incoherent.
He's in fact one of the most competent of all the current crop of Labour MP's.
As the Chief Justice points out, Alito's dissent is so badly written that it is completely self-contradictory.
https://x.com/ReichlinMelnick/status/2071973337606041865
He may not have been the right fit as Labour leader, but he's certainly able and bright.
https://unherd.com/2026/06/what-burnham-shares-with-farage/?set_edition=en&tl_inbound=1&tl_groups[0]=18743&tl_period_type=3&utm_source=UnHerd+Today&utm_campaign=5379b97979-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2026_06_30_10_38&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_79fd0df946-5379b97979-35033602
So even that half-arsed DIP isn't fully funded then.
It's slim pickings for the Army, which should really be expanded to 85-90k personnel right now to permanently field a full mechanized division in Europe, and I'd be very worried if I were the Royal Navy - no real capability increase at all, just a gamble on autonomous platforms and a few cancellations. So that'll continue to be shit.
My take is the full £28bn was asked for a very good reason. This won't fix it, and isn't the end of it.
What it does is to commit funding to a few specific things (£2bn a year towards GCAP, for example), and throw the rest of the fuzzy bundle at Burnham and his new cabinet to sort out.
What impact is Restore having. In hypothetical polling Restore gets 6% of the vote of which the majority is taken from those who would otherwise vote Reform. This is comparison in same poll with last weeks voting intention.'
https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/2071888034706931852?s=20
https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/2071888042151882847?s=20
Support: 37%
Oppose: 33%'
https://x.com/YouGov/status/2071988488266744137?s=20
Not much else.
Miliband's pollcy would look a lot less bonkers in its original context, if Starmer, Reeves and McSweeney hadn't taken fright of Sunak's politicking on the subject in 2024, and then made the bizarre decision to axe half the plans.
(And no, I don't buy the "reinterpreting" nonsense. This is settled law since the amendment was enacted, and there is no even vaguely convincing rationale for abandoning stare decisis.)
You could fairly describe Roe v Wade (for example) as legislating, since it found a right within the bounds of the then existing constitution - and that to a greater or lesser extent goes for many (most ?) SC decisions.
What Thomas and Alito were attempting here was another thing again.
Or does being pro-Eu stop at Oder–Neisse?
Raise the Colours figure accused of making indecent child images
He is due in court accused of making 22 indecent category A photographs and more
https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/26240871.raise-colours-figure-accused-making-indecent-child-images/
Let me remind you that Russia was behind the arson on the properties of the Prime Minister.
Let me remind you on more than one occasion Russia has used biological weapons on the streets of Britain and it it sheer luck that they didn't turn into massive casualty events.
https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/26240871.raise-colours-figure-accused-making-indecent-child-images/
There's both an awful lot of rebuilding to do, and also figuring out how our ground forces might fight future wars, before we could contemplate spending the billions that would require. Even if we could magic up the troop numbers, the vehicles don't exist, and would take years to assemble.
In the meantime the front line European states are rebuilding their ground forces far faster than us.
It is security theatre on a national scale.
It is security theatre on a national scale.
"New tanks" don't really feature in the current DiP.
TSE's examples are evidence of Russian malign intent rather than something air defence would deal with, and of course you know that ?
If we want to go down the root of “X doesn’t protect the country from attack Y” - NHS spending doesn’t help with cyber warfare. So we don’t need to spend on…
That's amusing, I reckon there's going to be at least 20 million mourners which will be a contrast to America's 250th anniversary.
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2026/06/30/iran-prepares-for-late-supreme-leader-s-funeral_6755022_4.html?srsltid=AfmBOopWd_8Ti3q7hrJ4hW8OkyJzHAEKhiPp3Ul4S1EE4TPXz8my8jkp
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmO0akzIwbc
The 26th amendment, which lowered the voting age to 18, took a mere 100 days to be passed. It’s not easy to pass an amendment, but it’s perfectly doable. If the Republicans elected a leader who was interested in bipartisanship rather than demonising his opponents as Communists, they would be in a position to make their case. However, the GOP has adopted a strategy of eking out narrow wins in the electoral college and Senate, combined with lawfare at the Supreme Court, instead.
During the Cold War, the USSR spent incredible resources to try and build systems to locate and destroy carriers. Most of that is long gone - but the fear of mobile air power is evident in a lot of their military publications.
This is why Putin bangs on about RORSAT 2.0 and spends a fortune trying to keep the Oscar class subs going.
They've managed to embolden and strengthen the Iranian regime and that's awful for the people of Iran.
Dan Bloom
@danbloom1
·
39m
EXCL: Conservative ex-West Midlands mayor Andy Street is in the running to oversee Britain’s nationalized railways
Three sources described Street as a leading candidate in search for the first chair of Great British Railways
A dilemma; decide now or after Burnham takes power?
Particularly as it's at the expense of Labour policies.
https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/03/30/they-shall-have-wars-and-pay-for-their-presumption/
https://x.com/Polymarket/status/2072041731885789481