politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The GOP nomination race: Unless the mainstream politicians
Comments
-
You are - as the person we should not identify - a pension-lawyer and I am part of the Guinness-family? Sadly, njet!Theuniondivvie said:He got you off a criminal charge?
:troll-on-ThuD:
0 -
He said it pre election and was castigated from certain quarters but its factually accurate.taffys said:What was the gist?
Guido has this quote.
“there is a problem with some of the Muslim community in this country… We have a fifth column that we have welcomed in…”
I'm not a particularly avid Farage follower, but that strikes me as a rather significant hardening of the UKIP line.
0 -
Takes me back to my spreadsheets which correctly forecast Obama beating Hillary in 2008, and Romney beating Gingrich/Santorum in 2012...Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this is absolutely key. The national opinion polls are measuring the wrong thing - the GOP contest won't be decided by a national plebiscite, either of voters as a whole or registered GOP supporters. Instead we need to try to estimate where and when delegates will be pledged to particular candidates, which is a complex question.NickPalmer said:On topic, there's an exceptionally good predictive tool for the GOP selection here:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/11/17/the_gop_race_for_delegates_an_interactive_tool.html
I was asking yesterday which states go in for winner-takes-all, and this gives a more than full answer. Clicking on "Next state" gives you a strong feeling for how the race will unfold. As they say, the most significant facts are:
* South Carolina, the third to vote, will be very important
* Most of the early primaries are in the south, but NOT winner takes all
* Most of the later primaries are in the north, and ARE winner takes all.
The implication is that we will see the most conservative candidates making the early running and potentially knocking out the moderates, but if a moderate survives they could achieve a striking late push.0 -
Holy Moly. They really not dicking around now, are they.Scott_P said:@faisalislam: France has just invoked this solidarity clause, Article 42.7 of Lisbon Treaty in response to #ParisAttacks https://t.co/rtAjeWvPE6
To be fair, unless they get commitments now, enthusiasm for action will melt away like snow in June.0 -
Mr. Surbiton, you mean the measure ruled by the courts to be illegal?
That's the one May abolished?0 -
The Coalition abolished control orders - it was a sop to the LDs to keep them on board and part of Liberal Democrat 2010 manifesto stating that Control Orders would be abolished.surbiton said:
The Tories abolished control orders, remember , as Coper is to remind May everytime.Plato_Says said:Apparently we've only got 3 people under terror curb orders, but 400 have returned from fighting jihad in Syria and 3000 on Mi5 watchlists...
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4615749.ece0 -
And on the other hand we have May saying this latest attack by Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam....taffys said:What was the gist?
Guido has this quote.
“there is a problem with some of the Muslim community in this country… We have a fifth column that we have welcomed in…”
I'm not a particularly avid Farage follower, but that strikes me as a rather significant hardening of the UKIP line.
I guess all the nutters that blew themselves up, did so in the name of Comic Relief or something*. May needs to listen to Sajid Javid or Maajid Nawaz.
* Although one of the mothers actually said this (and again it feeds into Farage's comments) that her son didn't mean to blow himself up, he must have got a bit stressed. Which bit of walking around shooting 100's of innocent people, while wearing a suicide vest, does she think might be a bit of a clue to his intentions?0 -
Mr. Urquhart, it's the Dark Jedi! I knew it!0
-
Why are people so much concerned about border controls ? Let's say someone could be stopped from going to Paris from Brussels. But he wouldn't be if he instead decided to blow up Antwerp.antifrank said:
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.rcs1000 said:
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Would we have raised the same point if instead of Brussels , these guys came from Lyon ?0 -
Your track record isn't too shabby recently.RodCrosby said:
Takes me back to my spreadsheets which correctly forecast Obama beating Hillary in 2008, and Romney beating Gingrich/Santorum in 2012...Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this is absolutely key. The national opinion polls are measuring the wrong thing - the GOP contest won't be decided by a national plebiscite, either of voters as a whole or registered GOP supporters. Instead we need to try to estimate where and when delegates will be pledged to particular candidates, which is a complex question.NickPalmer said:On topic, there's an exceptionally good predictive tool for the GOP selection here:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/11/17/the_gop_race_for_delegates_an_interactive_tool.html
I was asking yesterday which states go in for winner-takes-all, and this gives a more than full answer. Clicking on "Next state" gives you a strong feeling for how the race will unfold. As they say, the most significant facts are:
* South Carolina, the third to vote, will be very important
* Most of the early primaries are in the south, but NOT winner takes all
* Most of the later primaries are in the north, and ARE winner takes all.
The implication is that we will see the most conservative candidates making the early running and potentially knocking out the moderates, but if a moderate survives they could achieve a striking late push.
Who is going to win ?0 -
Nods head in agreement.FrancisUrquhart said:
And on the other hand we have May saying this latest attack by Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam....taffys said:What was the gist?
Guido has this quote.
“there is a problem with some of the Muslim community in this country… We have a fifth column that we have welcomed in…”
I'm not a particularly avid Farage follower, but that strikes me as a rather significant hardening of the UKIP line.
I guess all the nutters that blew themselves up, did so in the name of Comic Relief or something. May needs to listen to Sajid Javid or Maajid Nawaz.
0 -
But those views are not a surprise. Stop the War may have deleted that piece, but its views are well known and so, within the party at least I'd have hoped, are Corbyn's. If it is a problem now, it should have been a problem before. Benn and others cannot claim surprise, Corbyn's whole appeal was based around striaght talking and consistently sticking to his views for decades.Floater said:
Perhaps because of the crass views expressed in the pulled stop the war opinion piece about Paris - which just so happened to have similar views to those that Jeremy was going to make in a speech.kle4 said:
Why would he resign if Corbyn attended a Stop the war event? If Corbyn's apparently well known and unchanging views on foreign affairs were a deal breaker surely Benn should not have joined his shadow cabinet in the first place. Corbyn is allowed to attend these things isn't he?rottenborough said:
We'll need more popcorn folks.Scrapheap_as_was said:Sounds like Benn is basically saying we should just ignore what his leader says...
norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"It was right to take the action..no immediate prospect of him being arrested" - @hilarybennmp supports drone strike killing of Jihadi John
PoliticsHome ✔ @politicshome
"There was no prospect of going into the middle of Raqqa to arrest him [Jihadi John]" says Hilary Benn #R4Today
norman smith ✔ @BBCNormanS
"I am clear when immediate threat to life it is perfectly reasonable to use lethal force" - @hilarybennmp @BBCr4today
James Tapsfield @JamesTapsfield 1m1 minute ago
Benn refuses to say he will stay on as shadow foreign sec if a Corbyn goes to Stop The War event next month #today
Cameron was right he is a danger to our national security, even more than I could have thought.0 -
Is this similar to Nato's article 5? - France could look pretty dumb if the call goes unheeded.Scott_P said:@faisalislam: France has just invoked this solidarity clause, Article 42.7 of Lisbon Treaty in response to #ParisAttacks https://t.co/rtAjeWvPE6
0 -
I believe the courts said that the number of hours were illegal.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Surbiton, you mean the measure ruled by the courts to be illegal?
That's the one May abolished?
Remember your party came in with the "civil liberties" manifesto pledge ?
Do you think the judges are sympathetic to ISIS ?0 -
Too early to say.Pulpstar said:
Your track record isn't too shabby recently.RodCrosby said:
Takes me back to my spreadsheets which correctly forecast Obama beating Hillary in 2008, and Romney beating Gingrich/Santorum in 2012...Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this is absolutely key. The national opinion polls are measuring the wrong thing - the GOP contest won't be decided by a national plebiscite, either of voters as a whole or registered GOP supporters. Instead we need to try to estimate where and when delegates will be pledged to particular candidates, which is a complex question.NickPalmer said:On topic, there's an exceptionally good predictive tool for the GOP selection here:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/11/17/the_gop_race_for_delegates_an_interactive_tool.html
I was asking yesterday which states go in for winner-takes-all, and this gives a more than full answer. Clicking on "Next state" gives you a strong feeling for how the race will unfold. As they say, the most significant facts are:
* South Carolina, the third to vote, will be very important
* Most of the early primaries are in the south, but NOT winner takes all
* Most of the later primaries are in the north, and ARE winner takes all.
The implication is that we will see the most conservative candidates making the early running and potentially knocking out the moderates, but if a moderate survives they could achieve a striking late push.
Who is going to win ?0 -
Mr. Surbiton, part-time house arrest appears as much use as a Swiss cheese chastity belt.
Also, not my party. But if you want to compare which party is softer on terrorism, I suggest you look in the red corner.0 -
SIlly comment. Judges are sympathetic to the law (or more precisely, their interpretation of it).surbiton said:
I believe the courts said that the number of hours were illegal.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Surbiton, you mean the measure ruled by the courts to be illegal?
That's the one May abolished?
Remember your party came in with the "civil liberties" manifesto pledge ?
Do you think the judges are sympathetic to ISIS ?0 -
I think the French managed it 9 times since the middle ages (at least through the only bit of Wallonia that I know)OldKingCole said:
Has it EVER been that difficult to cross between France and Belguim if one was determined to do so?watford30 said:
External borders? The Paris attackers came from Belgium.antifrank said:
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.rcs1000 said:
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
How many Parisien style massacres do you think mainland Europeans will tolerate in exchange for a continued open border policy within the Schengen area?0 -
I live in the Tory shires, where even the few Labour leaning people I know (that I know are Labour learning at least), and even lifelong non-voters have ridiculed Corbyn...but those same people have not responded negatively to his comments in the past few days. They've barely reacted at all. So I don't think enough are convinced it is a shambles, as if random labour or non voters aren't turning on him on this, his base won't have (yes, this is all anecdotal)philiph said:
UmmmmmScott_P said:And there we have it...
@PolhomeEditor: No prospect of imminent Labour coup. Senior MP says: "People outside W'minster have to become convinced it's the shambles we see up close."
We can see, hear and sense it out here in the sticks.
0 -
Off topic:
Strikes me that Charlie Sheen still has his own fate in his hands as to his expected lifespan. He should choose his drugs wisely.0 -
And http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11999927/Paris-France-terror-attacks-isil-Belgium-Molenbeek-suspects-Syria-Raqqa-bombing-live.html#update-20151117-1036
France has mobilised more than 100,000 troops and police across the country, the interior minister has said.
Anorak said:
Holy Moly. They really not dicking around now, are they.Scott_P said:@faisalislam: France has just invoked this solidarity clause, Article 42.7 of Lisbon Treaty in response to #ParisAttacks https://t.co/rtAjeWvPE6
To be fair, unless they get commitments now, enthusiasm for action will melt away like snow in June.0 -
Merkel's choice.SimonStClare said:
Is this similar to Nato's article 5? - France could look pretty dumb if the call goes unheeded.Scott_P said:@faisalislam: France has just invoked this solidarity clause, Article 42.7 of Lisbon Treaty in response to #ParisAttacks https://t.co/rtAjeWvPE6
0 -
''So I don't think enough are convinced it is a shambles, as if random labour or non voters aren't turning on him on this, his base won't have (yes, this is all anecdotal)''
On that basis, it looks like Oldham might still be safe for labour?0 -
My office is passing it's verdict on Corbyn - "a bit weird, wants getting rid of, a bit hippy"...0
-
I'm pretty sure Belgium's a Nato member too. Can Nato go to war against itself?SimonStClare said:
Is this similar to Nato's article 5? - France could look pretty dumb if the call goes unheeded.Scott_P said:@faisalislam: France has just invoked this solidarity clause, Article 42.7 of Lisbon Treaty in response to #ParisAttacks https://t.co/rtAjeWvPE6
0 -
@GerriPeev: Lord Rennard steps down from Lib Dem's ruling body, taking swipe at party and after suffering from cyber bullying: https://t.co/IyK3Ay8l5l0
-
Given the size of the majority Oldham looks safe for Labour until the end of time. Obviously there has to be a chance, but it's hard to see UKIP winning enough to snatch it I'd have thought, and supposedly the Labour candidate is a sensible one. I defer to thoser with knowledge of the area however.taffys said:''So I don't think enough are convinced it is a shambles, as if random labour or non voters aren't turning on him on this, his base won't have (yes, this is all anecdotal)''
On that basis, it looks like Oldham might still be safe for labour?
0 -
Dair, are you talking in the abstract here? To me, the lack of English Channel refugee boat sinkings and the concentration on Calais indicated that our weak point, such as it was, were the various trains and especially lorries using that point of entry. Also, although illegal migration through Calais does come with a fatality rate, I'm not sure how that compares with the fatality rate one would expect from clandestine boat crossings, which I would imagine to be higher. I guess the lack of boat crossings may be reflective of a somewhat lower risk / reward balance for get out of France compared with, for instance, getting out of Libya.Dair said:
One of the great myths about Britain today is that our island nation status somehow prevents the country being successfully infiltrated on a large scale.Cyclefree said:
How realistic is it to expect proper and effective border security at a load of Greek islands where there is one policeman and a dog and which can be accessed by anyone with a boat?philiph said:
I can easily drive from home to Essen in a day. Dover, Calais, Belgium, Holland and into Germany. The only delay is at Dover to get on the shuttle. If there were borders (and I remember some horrendous queues in the distant past), then it would add about 3 hours to the journey.antifrank said:
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.
Security of the external border of the EU schengen area is the only one that matters.
A strong border is only as strong as at its weakest point. This talk of an effective border for the Schengen area is balls, frankly.
The only figures I have been able to gauge are that Libya -> Italy boat journeys during 2015 have carried in the ball park of a 1.5-2% fatality risk to the individual per successful crossing.0 -
Completely safe for labour, postal votes from certain parts of the community will see to it. Pretty obvious who'll be voting labour at the moment.taffys said:''So I don't think enough are convinced it is a shambles, as if random labour or non voters aren't turning on him on this, his base won't have (yes, this is all anecdotal)''
On that basis, it looks like Oldham might still be safe for labour?
0 -
One of the main effects of terrorism seems to make everybody strongly reaffirm their priors.surbiton said:
Why are people so much concerned about border controls ? Let's say someone could be stopped from going to Paris from Brussels. But he wouldn't be if he instead decided to blow up Antwerp.antifrank said:
Most British people don't appreciate how convenient border-free travel is when you are surrounded by land borders. I expect that what will eventually shake out of the current crisis is a careful manning of specific external borders to the EU/Schengen zone on a shared basis - the opposite of what many Leavers expect/hope for.rcs1000 said:
I think it's worth remembering that our experience with borders is very different to most Europeans. Even before Schengen, back in the early 1980s, when my parents would take us to Italy or wherever you could drive from the UK to Rome or Berlin, and the only passport check would be at Calais. (And sometimes there wasn't even one there.)
And I this was been the case for most of the post World War 2 period. This wasn't a push by Eurocrats: this was a recognition that many European countries are small and securing long borders without significant geographical obstacles is extremely expensive. (Essentially, it is always possible for a determined person to cross the border by digging a tunnel in a field. Border crossings, then, inconvenience the innocent, while doing little to prevent the criminal.)
And because there were no real restrictions on the flow of people between the various European states, was that the economies around the borders of Luxebourg, Belgium, France, Italy etc. are very integrated. You local supermarket could be supplied by a warehouse across the border.
For this reason, I would be extremely surprised if there was a wholesale reintroduction of border controls. It would be economically expensive, with little practical benefit.
Would we have raised the same point if instead of Brussels , these guys came from Lyon ?0 -
On topic, ahem
@TSEofPB: NSFW - 500 Dick pics used to create a mosaic of Donald Trump. Via @SunPolitics http://bit.ly/1SzsUQS
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CUAqQXSWEAACkfu.jpg0 -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-politics/12000148/Islamic-State-sex-slaves-Sinjar-mass-graves-show-what-were-fighting.html
Those western imperialist colonialist Yazidis. ISIS are like a pantomime villain version of the Nazis. But, hey, let's all get outraged by that cartoon in the Mail.0 -
This is an outrage. These people have killed, multiple times, and been trained to shoot people, blow people up, make car bombs, etc. Once an animal has tasted human blood, it needs to be shot. By the same token, we cannot have mass killers wandering our streets. We just can't. And the Government say to 'keep us safe' they need mass metadata snooping powers, and have just massively upped the Spook budget. How's about getting these 400 off the streets rather than finding out what I ordered from Sainsburys?Plato_Says said:Apparently we've only got 3 people under terror curb orders, but 400 have returned from fighting jihad in Syria and 3000 on Mi5 watchlists...
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4615749.ece0 -
I've spent the last 24 hours in the Republic of China, talking to locals and some pretty influential Thais. Lots of sympathy, but generally the view is 'at least we're safe here'.stodge said:
What I believe to be important now is for the world to act as one - we already have three of the five permanent members of the Security Council involved militarily in Syria - Britain has now to be part of that UN/global effort and I would welcome Chinese involvement as well though I appreciate the logistical issues.
A UN resolution authorising military action against IS would seem to be in order but backed up by a concerted effort to achieve a political settlement in Syria (as well as Libya) as well as creating a better government in Iraq. That such a settlement process has to involve Russia, Iran and Turkey cannot be denied but a stable Syria helps them as much if not more than it helps us.
thanks a bunch
The issue, though, is I don't think Obama will ever authorise troops, which is what the world needs. Fundamentally the solution is probably we need to bung Assad a LOT of money to go quietly plus some kind of permanent indemnification from prosecution. Then we all need to get together and grind ISIS into the dust. But I doubt Obama will do it.0 -
And Rennard is gone.....0
-
Cyclefree
"If you think women don't have steel think again. We may not fight physically but we can be - and are - deadly. "
Exactly my-and the headmistresses-point0 -
Will he carry through on the threat to reveal two decades of sex scandal in the Party?Scott_P said:@GerriPeev: Lord Rennard steps down from Lib Dem's ruling body, taking swipe at party and after suffering from cyber bullying: https://t.co/IyK3Ay8l5l
0 -
Isn't that why the Brits advocated EU enlargement so stronglyRichard_Nabavi said:On Schengen, the big mistake was (a bit like the Eurozone) making it too large.
0 -
-
Oh, the irony of him complaining about being the subject of unwanted attention:Scott_P said:@GerriPeev: Lord Rennard steps down from Lib Dem's ruling body, taking swipe at party and after suffering from cyber bullying: https://t.co/IyK3Ay8l5l
"I have suffered a great deal of “cyber bullying” of the kind that we criticise other parties’ political activists for."
Hard to feel much sympathy for him having his moobs touched up by the cyber-community...0 -
@Luckyguy1983
Plato_Says"
Apparently we've only got 3 people under terror curb orders, but 400 have returned from fighting jihad in Syria and 3000 on Mi5 watchlists...
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4615749.ece
This is an outrage. These people have killed, multiple times, and been trained to shoot people, blow people up, make car bombs, etc. Once an animal has tasted human blood, it needs to be shot. By the same token, we cannot have mass killers wandering our streets. We just can't. And the Government say to 'keep us safe' they need mass metadata snooping powers, and have just massively upped the Spook budget. How's about getting these 400 off the streets rather than finding out what I ordered from Sainsburys?'
All 3000 should be electronically tagged as a minimum & if the HR brigade don't like it they can get stuffed.
0 -
Anyone particularly interested in who I am can find out after approximately 30 seconds of internet research if you're quick or 3 minutes if you're slow.
I shall probably shrug off my soubriquet in the near future and just use my real name.0 -
Really? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Kashgar_attackCharles said:
I've spent the last 24 hours in the Republic of China, talking to locals and some pretty influential Thais. Lots of sympathy, but generally the view is 'at least we're safe here'.stodge said:
What I believe to be important now is for the world to act as one - we already have three of the five permanent members of the Security Council involved militarily in Syria - Britain has now to be part of that UN/global effort and I would welcome Chinese involvement as well though I appreciate the logistical issues.
A UN resolution authorising military action against IS would seem to be in order but backed up by a concerted effort to achieve a political settlement in Syria (as well as Libya) as well as creating a better government in Iraq. That such a settlement process has to involve Russia, Iran and Turkey cannot be denied but a stable Syria helps them as much if not more than it helps us.
thanks a bunch
The issue, though, is I don't think Obama will ever authorise troops, which is what the world needs. Fundamentally the solution is probably we need to bung Assad a LOT of money to go quietly plus some kind of permanent indemnification from prosecution. Then we all need to get together and grind ISIS into the dust. But I doubt Obama will do it.
Some Uyghurs have been to fight with ISIL in Syria.0 -
Will he carry through on the threat to reveal two decades of sex scandal in the Party?
would anyone notice if he did?0 -
Oh, come off it!Dair said:
Only two of those are British leaders.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Roger, The three most famous British female leaders in history were Elizabeth I, Victoria and Thatcher. None of them are renowned for being limp-wristed pacifists.
Elizabeth I was a cousin-by-marriage. Makes her family 0 -
Make your mind up. One minute your whining about GCHQ peeping at your emails and those of potential terrorists, the next you're whinging that we don't tag enough people against whom there's insufficient evidence of any crime. You can't have it both ways chum.Luckyguy1983 said:
This is an outrage. These people have killed, multiple times, and been trained to shoot people, blow people up, make car bombs, etc. Once an animal has tasted human blood, it needs to be shot. By the same token, we cannot have mass killers wandering our streets. We just can't. And the Government say to 'keep us safe' they need mass metadata snooping powers, and have just massively upped the Spook budget. How's about getting these 400 off the streets rather than finding out what I ordered from Sainsburys?Plato_Says said:Apparently we've only got 3 people under terror curb orders, but 400 have returned from fighting jihad in Syria and 3000 on Mi5 watchlists...
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4615749.ece0 -
Interesting to compare our defense with the much lampooned French:
We spend $10 Bn more, and have
50,000 less frontline personnel
Slightly less land systems of all types
300 less aircraft
3 less aircraft carriers
8 less frigates.
6 more destroyers
Around 50 more trainer aircraft0 -
Are you signing up as a mercenary with the Peshmerga or FSA? Presume Hezbollah would be beyond the pale due to the Jezza connection.John_M said:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-politics/12000148/Islamic-State-sex-slaves-Sinjar-mass-graves-show-what-were-fighting.html
Those western imperialist colonialist Yazidis. ISIS are like a pantomime villain version of the Nazis. But, hey, let's all get outraged by that cartoon in the Mail.0 -
Mr. Pulpstar, does make one wonder where the money's going. Admittedly, a fair slice will be going on Brown's deranged carrier contracts, but even so...0
-
@JoeWatts_: MET police chief to Corbyn: 'Don't undermine my armed officers' https://t.co/hPVjky1mYL0
-
Not my strongest area so happy to be shot down (ha ha), but it strikes me (ha ha) that the UK has a lot more personnel deployed overseas, quite a few of whom are on active duty. On a per-person basis, I'd expect this to be an order or magnitude more expensive than providing croissants and vin rouge to some barracks in the Loire.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pulpstar, does make one wonder where the money's going. Admittedly, a fair slice will be going on Brown's deranged carrier contracts, but even so...
0 -
@Scott_P"
'GerriPeev: Lord Rennard steps down from Lib Dem's ruling body, taking swipe at party and after suffering from cyber bullying: https://t.co/IyK3Ay8l5l'
When can we expect the 44 idiot / out of touch Lib Dem peers that voted for him to also step down ?
0 -
Labour are very lucky to have a decent, local, young-yet-experienced, no nonsense candidate in OWR.taffys said:''So I don't think enough are convinced it is a shambles, as if random labour or non voters aren't turning on him on this, his base won't have (yes, this is all anecdotal)''
On that basis, it looks like Oldham might still be safe for labour?0 -
Pensions, British Waste of Space, various PFI schemes inspired by the crackpot Brown.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pulpstar, does make one wonder where the money's going. Admittedly, a fair slice will be going on Brown's deranged carrier contracts, but even so...
0 -
I think the odds of 6-4 for Rubio are about right ...I agree that Cruz is a serious candidate and suspect that it will be a fight between Rubio and Cruz with Rubio winning ...the problem with Cruz is that he is just too Texan , too Red State , to evangelical and too Elmore Gantry ;I just don't see those independent/centrist voters going for him ..he's too oily and divisivePulpstar said:
You two are braver than me, Cruz looks like a pickable option; and he is almost level in the polls with Rubio... meanwhile Carson and especially Trump are a mile out in front.Cromwell said:
------------------tyson said:On the American election, I cannot for the life of me understand why GOP are not picking Rubio- he is quite simply head and shoulders better than the rest.
My betting position is on both Rubio as GOP choice, and next POTUS- so obviously I have some financial interest here, and I never lose on political betting, so have face to lose as well.
What has JackW said of this? I haven't seen anything, and he usually is on the money.
Too true , Rubio is the obvious choice who can steamroll over Hillary ..the 2008 primaries have shown how vulnerable she is to a young , charismatic , Kennedy-esque minority man
I.ve bet heavily on Rubio to become president but I'm not going to panic over the continuing support for loud mouthed ignorant bully like Trump ...he's just a load of noise who's only in it for the publicity
The GOP establishment are pragmatic and they want to win ; they are not going to let a celebrity like Trump ruin their best chance of defeating the Dems in 12 yrs ...they'll find a way to get rid of an ego manic like Trump
Rubio will swim in Trump's wake and when his chance comes he will take the lead and cruise to victory ...Hillary is much more vulnerable than she appears
Carson could well be 2015s Herman Cain, but there are others.
Is Rubio REALLY 5-2 for the nomination.
I'm very hedged (And green). My latest move was to reback the Donald though...
Out of the three most credible candidates , Rubio , Cruz and Bush , I suspect Hillary will easily defeat Bush and probably Cruz , but she wont beat Rubio ..he has her number and she knows it too !
0 -
I would never say that the PIRA was anything to do with Catholicism. They used Catholicism, and took advantage of the unjust treatment of Catholics by Ulster Protestants. But what they did didn't further any of the aims of Catholicism.FrancisUrquhart said:
And on the other hand we have May saying this latest attack by Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam....taffys said:What was the gist?
Guido has this quote.
“there is a problem with some of the Muslim community in this country… We have a fifth column that we have welcomed in…”
I'm not a particularly avid Farage follower, but that strikes me as a rather significant hardening of the UKIP line.
I guess all the nutters that blew themselves up, did so in the name of Comic Relief or something*. May needs to listen to Sajid Javid or Maajid Nawaz.
* Although one of the mothers actually said this (and again it feeds into Farage's comments) that her son didn't mean to blow himself up, he must have got a bit stressed. Which bit of walking around shooting 100's of innocent people, while wearing a suicide vest, does she think might be a bit of a clue to his intentions?
Similarly, Daesh represents a warped interpretation of Islam: it is drawn from it's own tradition and not from the Islamic mainstream (or even mainstream Sunnism). *If* you accept this, then it is reasonable to argue that it is not Islam that is the problem, but militant Wahhabism0 -
More popcorn!watford30 said:
Will he carry through on the threat to reveal two decades of sex scandal in the Party?Scott_P said:@GerriPeev: Lord Rennard steps down from Lib Dem's ruling body, taking swipe at party and after suffering from cyber bullying: https://t.co/IyK3Ay8l5l
0 -
Whilst Afghanistan was neccesary...Anorak said:
Not my strongest area so happy to be shot down (ha ha), but it strikes me (ha ha) that the UK has a lot more personnel deployed overseas, quite a few of whom are on active duty. On a per-person basis, I'd expect this to be an order or magnitude more expensive than providing croissants and vin rouge to some barracks in the Loire.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pulpstar, does make one wonder where the money's going. Admittedly, a fair slice will be going on Brown's deranged carrier contracts, but even so...
You can probably trace the 'inefficient use of resources' back to a place that starts with I, and ends with Q.0 -
It really isn't what the world needs. Syria has a foreign backed insurgency. We're saying the only solution is for those same foreign powers to march in with their size 12 boots and defeat their own insurgency. Surely a more basic solution would be to withdraw support for that insurgency. I also reiterate my previous old chestnuts:Charles said:
I've spent the last 24 hours in the Republic of China, talking to locals and some pretty influential Thais. Lots of sympathy, but generally the view is 'at least we're safe here'.stodge said:
What I believe to be important now is for the world to act as one - we already have three of the five permanent members of the Security Council involved militarily in Syria - Britain has now to be part of that UN/global effort and I would welcome Chinese involvement as well though I appreciate the logistical issues.
A UN resolution authorising military action against IS would seem to be in order but backed up by a concerted effort to achieve a political settlement in Syria (as well as Libya) as well as creating a better government in Iraq. That such a settlement process has to involve Russia, Iran and Turkey cannot be denied but a stable Syria helps them as much if not more than it helps us.
thanks a bunch
The issue, though, is I don't think Obama will ever authorise troops, which is what the world needs. Fundamentally the solution is probably we need to bung Assad a LOT of money to go quietly plus some kind of permanent indemnification from prosecution. Then we all need to get together and grind ISIS into the dust. But I doubt Obama will do it.
-Where are ISIS being funded from? How is this being allowed?
-Who are they selling their oil to?
-Who is treating their injured?
-Where are they training?
-How are they getting fresh recruits?
-Where are they getting their arms and equipment from?
These questions aren't being asked, because the answers are things we don't want to hear.0 -
Only if they don't have any bulletsedmundintokyo said:
I'm pretty sure Belgium's a Nato member too. Can Nato go to war against itself?SimonStClare said:
Is this similar to Nato's article 5? - France could look pretty dumb if the call goes unheeded.Scott_P said:@faisalislam: France has just invoked this solidarity clause, Article 42.7 of Lisbon Treaty in response to #ParisAttacks https://t.co/rtAjeWvPE6
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12194799.Why_Belgium_didn_apos_t_send_the_bullets/0 -
Hmm yes 2.44 is around 6-4, not 5-2 as I said earlier.Cromwell said:
I think the odds of 6-4 for Rubio are about right ...I agree that Cruz is a serious candidate and suspect that it will be a fight between Rubio and Cruz with Rubio winning ...the problem with Cruz is that he is just too Texan , too Red State , to evangelical and too Elmore Gantry ;I just don't see those independent/centrist voters going for him ..he's too oily and divisivePulpstar said:
You two are braver than me, Cruz looks like a pickable option; and he is almost level in the polls with Rubio... meanwhile Carson and especially Trump are a mile out in front.Cromwell said:
------------------tyson said:On the American election, I cannot for the life of me understand why GOP are not picking Rubio- he is quite simply head and shoulders better than the rest.
My betting position is on both Rubio as GOP choice, and next POTUS- so obviously I have some financial interest here, and I never lose on political betting, so have face to lose as well.
What has JackW said of this? I haven't seen anything, and he usually is on the money.
Too true , Rubio is the obvious choice who can steamroll over Hillary ..the 2008 primaries have shown how vulnerable she is to a young , charismatic , Kennedy-esque minority man
I.ve bet heavily on Rubio to become president but I'm not going to panic over the continuing support for loud mouthed ignorant bully like Trump ...he's just a load of noise who's only in it for the publicity
The GOP establishment are pragmatic and they want to win ; they are not going to let a celebrity like Trump ruin their best chance of defeating the Dems in 12 yrs ...they'll find a way to get rid of an ego manic like Trump
Rubio will swim in Trump's wake and when his chance comes he will take the lead and cruise to victory ...Hillary is much more vulnerable than she appears
Carson could well be 2015s Herman Cain, but there are others.
Is Rubio REALLY 5-2 for the nomination.
I'm very hedged (And green). My latest move was to reback the Donald though...
Out of the three most credible candidates , Rubio , Cruz and Bush , I suspect Hillary will easily defeat Bush and probably Cruz , but she wont beat Rubio ..he has her number and she knows it too !
It's not a price I'm investing at !0 -
@Cyclefree
Happy times at the Hacienda, though I used to go there before it all kicked off with E.
My favourite spot in Manchester in the 80's was the Ritz. Like the Hacienda, great gigs, but less blokey, and more girls around, even on the gay nights too.0 -
Especially if any are ones where he sat on knowledge of crimes against the under-aged - for party advantage...watford30 said:
Will he carry through on the threat to reveal two decades of sex scandal in the Party?Scott_P said:@GerriPeev: Lord Rennard steps down from Lib Dem's ruling body, taking swipe at party and after suffering from cyber bullying: https://t.co/IyK3Ay8l5l
0 -
The EU clause quoted as "member states have an obligation of aid and assistance by all means in their power". I don't know whether the reading of this call should be on 'aid and assistance' for their domestic anti-terror operations, or on 'by all means in their power' being standard diplomatic speak to cover military options.SimonStClare said:
Is this similar to Nato's article 5? - France could look pretty dumb if the call goes unheeded.Scott_P said:@faisalislam: France has just invoked this solidarity clause, Article 42.7 of Lisbon Treaty in response to #ParisAttacks https://t.co/rtAjeWvPE6
0 -
So, that's the Armed Forces and the Police.Scott_P said:@JoeWatts_: MET police chief to Corbyn: 'Don't undermine my armed officers' https://t.co/hPVjky1mYL
If a gunman was running amok at a foodbank, the tax credits helpline or in A and E....0 -
We spend a lot more on R&D and cutting-edge, world-beating kit.Pulpstar said:Interesting to compare our defense with the much lampooned French:
We spend $10 Bn more, and have
50,000 less frontline personnel
Slightly less land systems of all types
300 less aircraft
3 less aircraft carriers
8 less frigates.
6 more destroyers
Around 50 more trainer aircraft
Trouble is when then can't afford to employ people to do very much with it.0 -
The same applies to me, last year I had virtually a whole thread dedicated to me, albeit most people had no idea who I was or were remotely interested.antifrank said:Anyone particularly interested in who I am can find out after approximately 30 seconds of internet research if you're quick or 3 minutes if you're slow.
I shall probably shrug off my soubriquet in the near future and just use my real name.
0 -
It's a good parallel, and the feelings of the Catholic community in Northern Ireland at the time are relevant too - it seems likely that the overwhelming majority didn't actually favour killing anyone, but actively helping the Protestant and British leadership combat the IRA was a step that many found difficult. To avoid this becoming a bigger issue, it was always important not to suggest that the IRA and the Catholic community were somehow synonymous. Suggestions such as SeanT's to close all mosques should be seen in that light - would it have been useful to close all Catholic churches during the height of the IRA attacks?Charles said:
I would never say that the PIRA was anything to do with Catholicism. They used Catholicism, and took advantage of the unjust treatment of Catholics by Ulster Protestants. But what they did didn't further any of the aims of Catholicism.FrancisUrquhart said:
And on the other hand we have May saying this latest attack by Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam....taffys said:What was the gist?
Guido has this quote.
“there is a problem with some of the Muslim community in this country… We have a fifth column that we have welcomed in…”
I'm not a particularly avid Farage follower, but that strikes me as a rather significant hardening of the UKIP line.
I guess all the nutters that blew themselves up, did so in the name of Comic Relief or something*. May needs to listen to Sajid Javid or Maajid Nawaz.
* Although one of the mothers actually said this (and again it feeds into Farage's comments) that her son didn't mean to blow himself up, he must have got a bit stressed. Which bit of walking around shooting 100's of innocent people, while wearing a suicide vest, does she think might be a bit of a clue to his intentions?
Similarly, Daesh represents a warped interpretation of Islam: it is drawn from it's own tradition and not from the Islamic mainstream (or even mainstream Sunnism). *If* you accept this, then it is reasonable to argue that it is not Islam that is the problem, but militant Wahhabism0 -
I see no contradiction whatsoever. There is a creeping (though rapidly accelerating) tendency of our authorities to continually augment their powers over the citizen (ostensibly to protect them), but do little to actually protect with the powers they already have. The killers of Lee Rigby - known to the security services. The perpetrators of 7/7 - known to the security services. The solution to these problems is by definition not more metadata.watford30 said:
Make your mind up. One minute your whining about GCHQ peeping at your emails and those of potential terrorists, the next you're whinging that we don't tag enough people against whom there's insufficient evidence of any crime. You can't have it both ways chum.Luckyguy1983 said:
This is an outrage. These people have killed, multiple times, and been trained to shoot people, blow people up, make car bombs, etc. Once an animal has tasted human blood, it needs to be shot. By the same token, we cannot have mass killers wandering our streets. We just can't. And the Government say to 'keep us safe' they need mass metadata snooping powers, and have just massively upped the Spook budget. How's about getting these 400 off the streets rather than finding out what I ordered from Sainsburys?Plato_Says said:Apparently we've only got 3 people under terror curb orders, but 400 have returned from fighting jihad in Syria and 3000 on Mi5 watchlists...
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4615749.ece0 -
But Kashgar is, in the view of the Chinese, strictly an internal matter. Nothing to see here. Please move along.GarethoftheVale2 said:
Really? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Kashgar_attackCharles said:
I've spent the last 24 hours in the Republic of China, talking to locals and some pretty influential Thais. Lots of sympathy, but generally the view is 'at least we're safe here'.stodge said:
What I believe to be important now is for the world to act as one - we already have three of the five permanent members of the Security Council involved militarily in Syria - Britain has now to be part of that UN/global effort and I would welcome Chinese involvement as well though I appreciate the logistical issues.
A UN resolution authorising military action against IS would seem to be in order but backed up by a concerted effort to achieve a political settlement in Syria (as well as Libya) as well as creating a better government in Iraq. That such a settlement process has to involve Russia, Iran and Turkey cannot be denied but a stable Syria helps them as much if not more than it helps us.
thanks a bunch
The issue, though, is I don't think Obama will ever authorise troops, which is what the world needs. Fundamentally the solution is probably we need to bung Assad a LOT of money to go quietly plus some kind of permanent indemnification from prosecution. Then we all need to get together and grind ISIS into the dust. But I doubt Obama will do it.
Some Uyghurs have been to fight with ISIL in Syria.
But fundamentally, Obama doesn't want to do it, and doesn't want to admit he called the biggest issue of his Presidency absolutely wrong. (Or is that Obamacare?)0 -
Many thanks Mr Rata. – As with all things EU, Article 42.7 has many interpretations....!Pro_Rata said:
The EU clause quoted as "member states have an obligation of aid and assistance by all means in their power". I don't know whether the reading of this call should be on 'aid and assistance' for their domestic anti-terror operations, or on 'by all means in their power' being standard diplomatic speak to cover military options.SimonStClare said:
Is this similar to Nato's article 5? - France could look pretty dumb if the call goes unheeded.Scott_P said:@faisalislam: France has just invoked this solidarity clause, Article 42.7 of Lisbon Treaty in response to #ParisAttacks https://t.co/rtAjeWvPE6
0 -
'But what they did didn't further any of the aims of Catholicism.'
Isn't it an aim of the Catholic church to return the British Isles to the 'true faith'? That church has certainly used terrorism itself in the past to that end.
More generally the IRA has always had a big strand in it that reached back through generations of rural and socially conservative Catholic resistance to British rule. That also explains why it had the tacit support of so many people in heavy Catholic areas - those supporters certainly weren't all Marxists...0 -
I'm writing a thread on that. Even more key is that the system as a whole is not proportional to the strength of the Republican Party. Moderate Republicans (in places like California & New York) have disproportionate voting power.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this is absolutely key. The national opinion polls are measuring the wrong thing - the GOP contest won't be decided by a national plebiscite, either of voters as a whole or registered GOP supporters. Instead we need to try to estimate where and when delegates will be pledged to particular candidates, which is a complex question.NickPalmer said:On topic, there's an exceptionally good predictive tool for the GOP selection here:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/11/17/the_gop_race_for_delegates_an_interactive_tool.html
I was asking yesterday which states go in for winner-takes-all, and this gives a more than full answer. Clicking on "Next state" gives you a strong feeling for how the race will unfold. As they say, the most significant facts are:
* South Carolina, the third to vote, will be very important
* Most of the early primaries are in the south, but NOT winner takes all
* Most of the later primaries are in the north, and ARE winner takes all.
The implication is that we will see the most conservative candidates making the early running and potentially knocking out the moderates, but if a moderate survives they could achieve a striking late push.0 -
OMFG:Pulpstar said:Interesting to compare our defense with the much lampooned French:
We spend $10 Bn more, and have
50,000 less frontline personnel
Slightly less land systems of all types
300 less aircraft
3 less aircraft carriers
8 less frigates.
6 more destroyers
Around 50 more trainer aircraft
Pulpie never learns!
We are an island nation that has ignored para-militaries and militias since "Peterloo" [Instead we have the [MODERATED] Met and 'Farce-Scotland']
So to the detail:
# FLP: Not much need.
# More tanks (including reserves at Boddington) then France or Germany.
# Less aircraft? Maybe when we switch to Dave-B but not now. [France would like to sell us a few A400M Euro-Turkies (as would Germany and Spain). European co-operation!]
# A/C: DeGualle is a joke and Amphibs are not carriers (excluding Ocean). France are hawking their legacy stuff to Chile.
# Frigates; Que? France has a handfull of T23 equivilants and have flushed the patrol-boats in to Second-line frigates (sans TAS). The UK has 13 Dukes and France has a benefit-system (aka DCNS).
We have:
# Bigger SSNs in bigger numbers.
# 6 T45s (whilst France and Italy have two, non-SAMPSON equivilants and are trying to eek out two more from their Frigate programme (without replacements).
# Training aircraft and - probably - more Simulators. [Tiffie-IB could make a good SEAD/COIN similae - funds willing.]
# C-17 (No thanks to Geoff Hoon).
# RBOS-EuroTanker (thanks Gormless McBruin).
# AirSeeker (see above).
# Sentinel (a decent piece of kit).
# Shadow (have not got a clue)....
Apart from the questions about T26 and MPA I think we should be ok. But then....0 -
Is a decade long trend of more op-ex, less cap-ex a factor as well, or does that not bear out?Casino_Royale said:
We spend a lot more on R&D and cutting-edge, world-beating kit.Pulpstar said:Interesting to compare our defense with the much lampooned French:
We spend $10 Bn more, and have
50,000 less frontline personnel
Slightly less land systems of all types
300 less aircraft
3 less aircraft carriers
8 less frigates.
6 more destroyers
Around 50 more trainer aircraft
Trouble is when then can't afford to employ people to do very much with it.0 -
You're right that Ireland had nothing to do with religion (other than the Brits trying to turn it into that, for their own strategic purposes.)Charles said:
I would never say that the PIRA was anything to do with Catholicism. They used Catholicism, and took advantage of the unjust treatment of Catholics by Ulster Protestants. But what they did didn't further any of the aims of Catholicism.FrancisUrquhart said:
And on the other hand we have May saying this latest attack by Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam....taffys said:What was the gist?
Guido has this quote.
“there is a problem with some of the Muslim community in this country… We have a fifth column that we have welcomed in…”
I'm not a particularly avid Farage follower, but that strikes me as a rather significant hardening of the UKIP line.
I guess all the nutters that blew themselves up, did so in the name of Comic Relief or something*. May needs to listen to Sajid Javid or Maajid Nawaz.
* Although one of the mothers actually said this (and again it feeds into Farage's comments) that her son didn't mean to blow himself up, he must have got a bit stressed. Which bit of walking around shooting 100's of innocent people, while wearing a suicide vest, does she think might be a bit of a clue to his intentions?
Similarly, Daesh represents a warped interpretation of Islam: it is drawn from it's own tradition and not from the Islamic mainstream (or even mainstream Sunnism). *If* you accept this, then it is reasonable to argue that it is not Islam that is the problem, but militant Wahhabism
The danger with the Islamic mob is that it is explicitly about religion. And the possibility that more "moderate" Muslims will have their epiphany moment, and decide ISIS's way is the one, true way, etc...0 -
SkyNet is unique....Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pulpstar, does make one wonder where the money's going. Admittedly, a fair slice will be going on Brown's deranged carrier contracts, but even so...
0 -
Does "an obligation of aid and assistance by all means in their power" Top Trump getting a vote in Westminster?Pro_Rata said:
The EU clause quoted as "member states have an obligation of aid and assistance by all means in their power". I don't know whether the reading of this call should be on 'aid and assistance' for their domestic anti-terror operations, or on 'by all means in their power' being standard diplomatic speak to cover military options.SimonStClare said:
Is this similar to Nato's article 5? - France could look pretty dumb if the call goes unheeded.Scott_P said:@faisalislam: France has just invoked this solidarity clause, Article 42.7 of Lisbon Treaty in response to #ParisAttacks https://t.co/rtAjeWvPE6
0 -
6/4 for Rubio is ludicrous. I wouldn't back him south of 5/1. He is currently battling for third, behind a TV ego and a dodgy doctor. You can say that they're there to be taken and in Carson's case, that may well be true but if so, why isn't Rubio doing better *now*? Sure, candidates have recovered from worse (McCain for one) but Rubio is not setting the world alight at the moment.Cromwell said:
I think the odds of 6-4 for Rubio are about right ...I agree that Cruz is a serious candidate and suspect that it will be a fight between Rubio and Cruz with Rubio winning ...the problem with Cruz is that he is just too Texan , too Red State , to evangelical and too Elmore Gantry ;I just don't see those independent/centrist voters going for him ..he's too oily and divisivePulpstar said:
You two are braver than me, Cruz looks like a pickable option; and he is almost level in the polls with Rubio... meanwhile Carson and especially Trump are a mile out in front.Cromwell said:
------------------
Too true , Rubio is the obvious choice who can steamroll over Hillary ..the 2008 primaries have shown how vulnerable she is to a young , charismatic , Kennedy-esque minority man
I.ve bet heavily on Rubio to become president but I'm not going to panic over the continuing support for loud mouthed ignorant bully like Trump ...he's just a load of noise who's only in it for the publicity
The GOP establishment are pragmatic and they want to win ; they are not going to let a celebrity like Trump ruin their best chance of defeating the Dems in 12 yrs ...they'll find a way to get rid of an ego manic like Trump
Rubio will swim in Trump's wake and when his chance comes he will take the lead and cruise to victory ...Hillary is much more vulnerable than she appears
Carson could well be 2015s Herman Cain, but there are others.
Is Rubio REALLY 5-2 for the nomination.
I'm very hedged (And green). My latest move was to reback the Donald though...
Out of the three most credible candidates , Rubio , Cruz and Bush , I suspect Hillary will easily defeat Bush and probably Cruz , but she wont beat Rubio ..he has her number and she knows it too !
Trump is the man to beat. He has been out front for long enough to have been tested and has not faltered much in the polls despite that. He may still self-destruct but there's only two and a half months now to Iowa, including December which doesn't really count for campaigning purposes, one debate notwithstanding. After Trump, I wouldn't give him any more chance than Cruz and quite possibly slightly less, plus the outside possibility that someone else could come through or that Carson might prove unexpectedly resilient and I don't see him as more than about a 17% shot.0 -
Bongo bongo !blackburn63 said:
The same applies to me, last year I had virtually a whole thread dedicated to me, albeit most people had no idea who I was or were remotely interested.antifrank said:Anyone particularly interested in who I am can find out after approximately 30 seconds of internet research if you're quick or 3 minutes if you're slow.
I shall probably shrug off my soubriquet in the near future and just use my real name.0 -
1. Funded by $400m from the Bank of Mosul, slavery, the sale of oil on the black market and the sale of cultural artifactsLuckyguy1983 said:
It really isn't what the world needs. Syria has a foreign backed insurgency. We're saying the only solution is for those same foreign powers to march in with their size 12 boots and defeat their own insurgency. Surely a more basic solution would be to withdraw support for that insurgency. I also reiterate my previous old chestnuts:Charles said:
I've spent the last 24 hours in the Republic of China, talking to locals and some pretty influential Thais. Lots of sympathy, but generally the view is 'at least we're safe here'.stodge said:
What I believe to be important now is for the world to act as one - we already have three of the five permanent members of the Security Council involved militarily in Syria - Britain has now to be part of that UN/global effort and I would welcome Chinese involvement as well though I appreciate the logistical issues.
A UN resolution authorising military action against IS would seem to be in order but backed up by a concerted effort to achieve a political settlement in Syria (as well as Libya) as well as creating a better government in Iraq. That such a settlement process has to involve Russia, Iran and Turkey cannot be denied but a stable Syria helps them as much if not more than it helps us.
thanks a bunch
The issue, though, is I don't think Obama will ever authorise troops, which is what the world needs. Fundamentally the solution is probably we need to bung Assad a LOT of money to go quietly plus some kind of permanent indemnification from prosecution. Then we all need to get together and grind ISIS into the dust. But I doubt Obama will do it.
-Where are ISIS being funded from? How is this being allowed?
-Who are they selling their oil to?
-Who is treating their injured?
-Where are they training?
-How are they getting fresh recruits?
-Where are they getting their arms and equipment from?
These questions aren't being asked, because the answers are things we don't want to hear.
2. Sale of oil to the black market. Unfortunately there are very evil people in the world and they don't all wave black flags
3. Injured being treated in the field / in their camps
4. In their camps
5. Press gangs, Arab militants, naive idiots from the West
6. A lot of it is captured
But I guess, if you want, you can answer "the CIA" to all of the questions instead0 -
Modesty demands a declaration that my research went no further than the BBC live stream on the Paris attacks.SimonStClare said:
Many thanks Mr Rata. – As with all things EU, Article 42.7 has many interpretations....!Pro_Rata said:
The EU clause quoted as "member states have an obligation of aid and assistance by all means in their power". I don't know whether the reading of this call should be on 'aid and assistance' for their domestic anti-terror operations, or on 'by all means in their power' being standard diplomatic speak to cover military options.SimonStClare said:
Is this similar to Nato's article 5? - France could look pretty dumb if the call goes unheeded.Scott_P said:@faisalislam: France has just invoked this solidarity clause, Article 42.7 of Lisbon Treaty in response to #ParisAttacks https://t.co/rtAjeWvPE6
0 -
I'm going to have that on my headstone, at least I got Marf some publicity!Pulpstar said:
Bongo bongo !blackburn63 said:
The same applies to me, last year I had virtually a whole thread dedicated to me, albeit most people had no idea who I was or were remotely interested.antifrank said:Anyone particularly interested in who I am can find out after approximately 30 seconds of internet research if you're quick or 3 minutes if you're slow.
I shall probably shrug off my soubriquet in the near future and just use my real name.
0 -
I was against it before, but surely the Police should be armed now...0
-
Rubio doesn't have to win Iowa or N H ...he can be a slow burn and catch afire later ...this is not a normal year as the so called two front runners are not politicians or serious candidates
Both Trump and Carson are fools gold ,a fake or imitation , not the real thing
Americans and especially Republicans , are pragmatic people , they love to win ; they'll find a way to get rid of Trump/Carson0 -
I was wondering the other day whether the much more high profile televised Republican candidates events had made voters' intentions more settled earlier this time around. Many would have known Trump, but the exposure of the other contenders might mean they are now being observed - and dismissed - by the public much earlier in the cycle?david_herdson said:Trump is the man to beat. He has been out front for long enough to have been tested and has not faltered much in the polls despite that. He may still self-destruct but there's only two and a half months now to Iowa, including December which doesn't really count for campaigning purposes, one debate notwithstanding.
0 -
You can't exonerate the Catholic community - too many turned their heads away and saw no evil*. It provided a backdrop into which the terrorists could melt away and hide. That's the problem that the Muslim community in the West faces: how to ensure that they aren't tarred as collaborators or worse. But they need to be proactive and upfront and come out and combat the evil that lurks within.NickPalmer said:
It's a good parallel, and the feelings of the Catholic community in Northern Ireland at the time are relevant too - it seems likely that the overwhelming majority didn't actually favour killing anyone, but actively helping the Protestant and British leadership combat the IRA was a step that many found difficult. To avoid this becoming a bigger issue, it was always important not to suggest that the IRA and the Catholic community were somehow synonymous. Suggestions such as SeanT's to close all mosques should be seen in that light - would it have been useful to close all Catholic churches during the height of the IRA attacks?Charles said:
I would never say that the PIRA was anything to do with Catholicism. They used Catholicism, and took advantage of the unjust treatment of Catholics by Ulster Protestants. But what they did didn't further any of the aims of Catholicism.FrancisUrquhart said:
And on the other hand we have May saying this latest attack by Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam....taffys said:What was the gist?
Guido has this quote.
“there is a problem with some of the Muslim community in this country… We have a fifth column that we have welcomed in…”
I'm not a particularly avid Farage follower, but that strikes me as a rather significant hardening of the UKIP line.
I guess all the nutters that blew themselves up, did so in the name of Comic Relief or something*. May needs to listen to Sajid Javid or Maajid Nawaz.
* Although one of the mothers actually said this (and again it feeds into Farage's comments) that her son didn't mean to blow himself up, he must have got a bit stressed. Which bit of walking around shooting 100's of innocent people, while wearing a suicide vest, does she think might be a bit of a clue to his intentions?
Similarly, Daesh represents a warped interpretation of Islam: it is drawn from it's own tradition and not from the Islamic mainstream (or even mainstream Sunnism). *If* you accept this, then it is reasonable to argue that it is not Islam that is the problem, but militant Wahhabism
To be silent is not enough.0 -
That may be the case but the IRA were not trying to create a militant Catholic state. By contrast, not only is that exactly what ISIS are after but in Afghanistan, Iran and elsewhere, there are plenty of examples across the last forty years of such ambitions succeeding, whether from below or from above.Charles said:
I would never say that the PIRA was anything to do with Catholicism. They used Catholicism, and took advantage of the unjust treatment of Catholics by Ulster Protestants. But what they did didn't further any of the aims of Catholicism.FrancisUrquhart said:
And on the other hand we have May saying this latest attack by Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam....taffys said:What was the gist?
Guido has this quote.
“there is a problem with some of the Muslim community in this country… We have a fifth column that we have welcomed in…”
I'm not a particularly avid Farage follower, but that strikes me as a rather significant hardening of the UKIP line.
I guess all the nutters that blew themselves up, did so in the name of Comic Relief or something*. May needs to listen to Sajid Javid or Maajid Nawaz.
* Although one of the mothers actually said this (and again it feeds into Farage's comments) that her son didn't mean to blow himself up, he must have got a bit stressed. Which bit of walking around shooting 100's of innocent people, while wearing a suicide vest, does she think might be a bit of a clue to his intentions?
Similarly, Daesh represents a warped interpretation of Islam: it is drawn from it's own tradition and not from the Islamic mainstream (or even mainstream Sunnism). *If* you accept this, then it is reasonable to argue that it is not Islam that is the problem, but militant Wahhabism0 -
The Times says IS get $1.8m a day from oil sales.Charles said:
1. Funded by $400m from the Bank of Mosul, slavery, the sale of oil on the black market and the sale of cultural artifactsLuckyguy1983 said:
It really isn't what the world needs. Syria has a foreign backed insurgency. We're saying the only solution is for those same foreign powers to march in with their size 12 boots and defeat their own insurgency. Surely a more basic solution would be to withdraw support for that insurgency. I also reiterate my previous old chestnuts:Charles said:
snipstodge said:
What I believe to be important now is for the world to act as one - we already have three of the five permanent members of the Security Council involved militarily in Syria - Britain has now to be part of that UN/global effort and I would welcome Chinese involvement as well though I appreciate the logistical issues.
A UN resolution authorising military action against IS would seem to be in order but backed up by a concerted effort to achieve a political settlement in Syria (as well as Libya) as well as creating a better government in Iraq. That such a settlement process has to involve Russia, Iran and Turkey cannot be denied but a stable Syria helps them as much if not more than it helps us.
-Where are ISIS being funded from? How is this being allowed?
-Who are they selling their oil to?
-Who is treating their injured?
-Where are they training?
-How are they getting fresh recruits?
-Where are they getting their arms and equipment from?
These questions aren't being asked, because the answers are things we don't want to hear.
2. Sale of oil to the black market. Unfortunately there are very evil people in the world and they don't all wave black flags
3. Injured being treated in the field / in their camps
4. In their camps
5. Press gangs, Arab militants, naive idiots from the West
6. A lot of it is captured
But I guess, if you want, you can answer "the CIA" to all of the questions instead0 -
Do you seriously expect him to still be 6-4 if he loses Iowa and NH ?Cromwell said:Rubio doesn't have to win Iowa or N H ...he can be a slow burn and catch afire later ...this is not a normal year as the so called two front runners are not politicians or serious candidates
Both Trump and Carson are fools gold ,a fake or imitation , not the real thing
Americans and especially Republicans , are pragmatic people , they love to win ; they'll find a way to get rid of Trump/Carson0 -
The manner in which Trump is being dismissed is vaguely reminiscent to me of the way Reagan was dismissed in the late 70s.
0 -
I doubt it is that high. They will have very limited pipeline export. And here on in, their trucking operations are going to be a prime target for getting blasted off the roads.Plato_Says said:The Times says IS get $1.8m a day from oil sales.
Charles said:
1. Funded by $400m from the Bank of Mosul, slavery, the sale of oil on the black market and the sale of cultural artifactsLuckyguy1983 said:
It really isn't what the world needs. Syria has a foreign backed insurgency. We're saying the only solution is for those same foreign powers to march in with their size 12 boots and defeat their own insurgency. Surely a more basic solution would be to withdraw support for that insurgency. I also reiterate my previous old chestnuts:Charles said:
snipstodge said:
What I believe to be important now is for the world to act as one - we already have three of the five permanent members of the Security Council involved militarily in Syria - Britain has now to be part of that UN/global effort and I would welcome Chinese involvement as well though I appreciate the logistical issues.
A UN resolution authorising military action against IS would seem to be in order but backed up by a concerted effort to achieve a political settlement in Syria (as well as Libya) as well as creating a better government in Iraq. That such a settlement process has to involve Russia, Iran and Turkey cannot be denied but a stable Syria helps them as much if not more than it helps us.
-Where are ISIS being funded from? How is this being allowed?
-Who are they selling their oil to?
-Who is treating their injured?
-Where are they training?
-How are they getting fresh recruits?
-Where are they getting their arms and equipment from?
These questions aren't being asked, because the answers are things we don't want to hear.
2. Sale of oil to the black market. Unfortunately there are very evil people in the world and they don't all wave black flags
3. Injured being treated in the field / in their camps
4. In their camps
5. Press gangs, Arab militants, naive idiots from the West
6. A lot of it is captured
But I guess, if you want, you can answer "the CIA" to all of the questions instead0 -
Do you think that the authors of the Terminator franchise were aware of the UK military programme when they made the films?FluffyThoughts said:
SkyNet is unique....Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pulpstar, does make one wonder where the money's going. Admittedly, a fair slice will be going on Brown's deranged carrier contracts, but even so...
0 -
Excellent! I was thinking of doing the same but I shall leave it in your more than capable hands!Tissue_Price said:I'm writing a thread on that.
0 -
You must be insane.PAW said:I was against it before, but surely the Police should be armed now...
I've watched some of the current mob train; their weapon handling skills leave a lot to be desired. Just look at some of the plods wandering around London railway stations, guns swinging, barrels pointing here, there and everywhere. I've been afraid to be on the same concourse.
The military need to be involved in a proper national training programme and the really gung ho coppers retired.0 -
No they don't. It's probably less than one chance in ten that the voters in California will have a meaningful choice by the time they get to vote. Almost certainly by then, every candidate bar one will either have withdrawn or will be an irrelevance.Tissue_Price said:
I'm writing a thread on that. Even more key is that the system as a whole is not proportional to the strength of the Republican Party. Moderate Republicans (in places like California & New York) have disproportionate voting power.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this is absolutely key. The national opinion polls are measuring the wrong thing - the GOP contest won't be decided by a national plebiscite, either of voters as a whole or registered GOP supporters. Instead we need to try to estimate where and when delegates will be pledged to particular candidates, which is a complex question.NickPalmer said:On topic, there's an exceptionally good predictive tool for the GOP selection here:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/11/17/the_gop_race_for_delegates_an_interactive_tool.html
I was asking yesterday which states go in for winner-takes-all, and this gives a more than full answer. Clicking on "Next state" gives you a strong feeling for how the race will unfold. As they say, the most significant facts are:
* South Carolina, the third to vote, will be very important
* Most of the early primaries are in the south, but NOT winner takes all
* Most of the later primaries are in the north, and ARE winner takes all.
The implication is that we will see the most conservative candidates making the early running and potentially knocking out the moderates, but if a moderate survives they could achieve a striking late push.
As ever, it's Republicans in the little state of New Hampshire who have the disproportionate power, no matter how few delegates they directly pick.0 -
Other way round.Charles said:
Do you think that the authors of the Terminator franchise were aware of the UK military programme when they made the films?FluffyThoughts said:
SkyNet is unique....Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pulpstar, does make one wonder where the money's going. Admittedly, a fair slice will be going on Brown's deranged carrier contracts, but even so...
0 -
Jeremy Corbyn is a political disaster, either incapable of understanding the feelings of British voters or fully aware of the voters’ opinions but contemptuous of those opinions. He is not fit to lead a great political party, let alone this country. He simply does not grasp the scale of the security threat now facing Western nations from Islamic terrorism, and his plea to understand the root causes of that terrorism actually indicates sympathy with murderers and a willingness to exculpate their crimes. Some of his friends are dubious to the point of lending at least moral support to terrorists.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12000240/Jeremy-Corbyns-idiocy-on-terrorism-is-ripping-Labour-apart-but-hes-not-going-anywhere.html
So, outright conflict between Labour MPs and the Labour leadership beckons. Plots, coups and assassinations ahead? The beginning of the end for Jeremy Corybn?
Actually, no. Mr Corbyn isn’t going anywhere in a hurry.0
